UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                         Einstein's Equation At 100

From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:25:37 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:22:26 -0400
Subject: Einstein's Equation At 100


Source: The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/30/opinion/30greene.html?th&emc=3Dth

September 30, 2005


NY Times, Op-Ed
That Famous Equation and You
By Brian Greene

During the summer of 1905, while fulfilling his duties in the
patent office in Bern, Switzerland, Albert Einstein was fiddling
with a tantalizing outcome of the special theory of relativity
he'd published in June. His new insight, at once simple and
startling, led him to wonder whether "the Lord might be
laughing... and leading me around by the nose."

But by September, confident in the result, Einstein wrote a
three-page supplement to the June paper, publishing perhaps the
most profound afterthought in the history of science. A hundred
years ago this month, the final equation of his short article
gave the world E =3D mc=B2.

In the century since, E =3D mc=B2 has become the most recognized
icon of the modern scientific era. Yet for all its symbolic
worth, the equation's intimate presence in everyday life goes
largely unnoticed. There is nothing you can do, not a move you
can make, not a thought you can have, that doesn't tap directly
into E =3D mc=B2. Einstein's equation is constantly at work,
providing an unseen hand that shapes the world into its familiar
form. It's an equation that tells of matter, energy and a
remarkable bridge between them.

Before E =3D mc=B2, scientists described matter using two distinct
attributes: how much the matter weighed (its mass) and how much
change the matter could exert on its environment (its energy). A
19th century physicist would say that a baseball resting on the
ground has the same mass as a baseball speeding along at 100
miles per hour. The key difference between the two balls, the
physicist would emphasize, is that the fast-moving baseball has
more energy: if sent ricocheting through a china shop, for
example, it would surely break more dishes than the ball at
rest. And once the moving ball has done its damage and stopped,
the 19th-century physicist would say that it has exhausted its
capacity for exerting change and hence contains no energy.

After E =3D mc=B2, scientists realized that this reasoning, however
sensible it once seemed, was deeply flawed. Mass and energy are
not distinct. They are the same basic stuff packaged in forms
that make them appear different. Just as solid ice can melt into
liquid water, Einstein showed, mass is a frozen form of energy
that can be converted into the more familiar energy of motion.
The amount of energy (E) produced by the conversion is given by
his formula: multiply the amount of mass converted (m) by the
speed of light squared (c=B2). Since the speed of light is a few
hundred million meters per second (fast enough to travel around
the earth seven times in a single second), c=B2 , in these
familiar units, is a huge number, about 100,000,000,000,000,000.

A little bit of mass can thus yield enormous energy. The
destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was fueled by converting
less than an ounce of matter into energy; the energy consumed by
New York City in a month is less than that contained in the
newspaper you're holding. Far from having no energy, the
baseball that has come to rest on the china shop's floor
contains enough energy to keep an average car running
continuously at 65 m.p.h. for about 5,000 years.

Before 1905, the common view of energy and matter thus resembled
a man carrying around his money in a box of solid gold. After
the man spends his last dollar, he thinks he's broke. But then
someone alerts him to his miscalculation; a substantial part of
his wealth is not what's in the box, but the box itself.
Similarly, until Einstein's insight, everyone was aware that
matter, by virtue of its motion or position, could possess
energy. What everyone missed is the enormous energetic wealth
contained in mass itself.

The standard illustrations of Einstein's equation - bombs and
power stations - have perpetuated a belief that E =3D mc=B2 has a
special association with nuclear reactions and is thus removed
from ordinary activity.

This isn't true. When you drive your car, E =3D mc=B2 is at work. As
the engine burns gasoline to produce energy in the form of
motion, it does so by converting some of the gasoline's mass
into energy, in accord with Einstein's formula. When you use
your MP3 player, E =3D mc=B2 is at work. As the player drains the
battery to produce energy in the form of sound waves, it does so
by converting some of the battery's mass into energy, as
dictated by Einstein's formula. As you read this text, E =3D mc=B2
is at work. The processes in the eye and brain, underlying
perception and thought, rely on chemical reactions that
interchange mass and energy, once again in accord with
Einstein's formula.

The point is that although E=3Dmc=B2 expresses the
interchangeability of mass and energy, it doesn't single out any
particular reaction for executing the conversion. The
distinguishing feature of nuclear reactions, compared with the
chemical reactions involved in burning gasoline or running a
battery, is that they generate less waste and thus produce more
energy - by a factor of roughly a million. And when it comes to
energy, a factor of a million justifiably commands attention.
But don't let the spectacle of E=3Dmc=B2 in nuclear reactions inure
you to its calmer but thoroughly pervasive incarnations in
everyday life.

That's the content of Einstein's discovery. Why is it true?

Einstein's derivation of E =3D mc=B2 was wholly mathematical. I know
his derivation, as does just about anyone who has taken a course
in modern physics. Nevertheless, I consider my understanding of
a result incomplete if I rely solely on the math. Instead, I've
found that thorough understanding requires a mental image - an
analogy or a story - that may sacrifice some precision but
captures the essence of the result.

Here's a story for E =3D mc=B2. Two equally strong and skilled
jousters, riding identical horses and gripping identical (blunt)
lances, head toward each other at an identical speed. As they
pass, each thrusts his lance across his breastplate toward his
opponent, slamming blunt end into blunt end. Because they're
equally matched, neither lance pushes farther than the other,
and so the referee calls it a draw.

This story contains the essence of Einstein's discovery. Let me
explain.

Einstein's first relativity paper, the one in June 1905,
shattered the idea that time elapses identically for everyone.
Instead, Einstein showed that if from your perspective someone
is moving, you will see time elapsing slower for him than it
does for you. Everything he does - sipping his coffee, turning
his head, blinking his eyes - will appear in slow motion.

This is hard to grasp because at everyday speeds the slowing is
less than one part in a trillion and is thus imperceptibly
small. Even so, using extraordinarily precise atomic clocks,
scientists have repeatedly confirmed that it happens just as
Einstein predicted. If we lived in a world where things
routinely traveled near the speed of light, the slowing of time
would be obvious.

Let's see what the slowing of time means for the joust. To do
so, think about the story not from the perspective of the
referee, but instead imagine you are one of the jousters. From
your perspective, it is your opponent - getting ever closer -
who is moving. Imagine that he is approaching at nearly the
speed of light so the slowing of all his movements - readying
his joust, tightening his face - is obvious. When he shoves his
lance toward you in slow motion, you naturally think he's no
match for your swifter thrust; you expect to win. Yet we already
know the outcome. The referee calls it a draw and no matter how
strange relativity is, it can't change a draw into a win.

After the match, you naturally wonder how your opponent's slowly
thrusted lance hit with the same force as your own. There's only
one answer. The force with which something hits depends not only
on its speed but also on its mass. That's why you don't fear
getting hit by a fast-moving Ping-Pong ball (tiny mass) but you
do fear getting hit by a fast-moving Mack truck (big mass).
Thus, the only explanation for how the slowly thrust lance hit
with the same force as your own is that it's more massive.

This is astonishing. The lances are identically constructed. Yet
you conclude that one of them - the one that from your point of
view is in motion, being carried toward you by your opponent on
his galloping horse - is more massive than the other. That's the
essence of Einstein's discovery. Energy of motion contributes to
an object's mass.

AS with the slowing of time, this is unfamiliar because at
everyday speeds the effect is imperceptibly tiny. But if, from
your viewpoint, your opponent were to approach at 99.99999999
percent of the speed of light, his lance would be about 70,000
times more massive than yours. Luckily, his thrusting speed
would be 70,000 times slower than yours, and so the resulting
force would equal your own.

Once Einstein realized that mass and energy were convertible,
getting the exact formula relating them - E =3D mc=B2 - was a fairly
basic exercise, requiring nothing more than high school algebra.
His genius was not in the math; it was in his ability to see
beyond centuries of misunderstanding and recognize that there
was a connection between mass and energy at all.

A little known fact about Einstein's September 1905 paper is
that he didn't actually write E =3D mc=B2; he wrote the
mathematically equivalent (though less euphonious) m =3D E/c=B2,
placing greater emphasis on creating mass from energy (as in the
joust) than on creating energy from mass (as in nuclear weapons
and power stations).

Over the last couple of decades, this less familiar reading of
Einstein's equation has helped physicists explain why everything
ever encountered has the mass that it does. Experiments have
shown that the subatomic particles making up matter have almost
no mass of their own. But because of their motions and
interactions inside of atoms, these particles contain
substantial energy - and it's this energy that gives matter its
heft. Take away Einstein's equation, and matter loses its mass.
You can't get much more pervasive than that.

Its singular fame notwithstanding, E =3D mc=B2 fits into the pattern
of work and discovery that Einstein pursued with relentless
passion throughout his entire life. Einstein believed that deep
truths about the workings of the universe would always be "as
simple as possible, but no simpler." And in his view, simplicity
was epitomized by unifying concepts - like matter and energy -
previously deemed separate. In 1916, Einstein simplified our
understanding even further by combining gravity with space,
time, matter and energy in his General Theory of Relativity. For
my money, this is the most beautiful scientific synthesis ever
achieved.

With these successes, Einstein's belief in unification grew ever
stronger. But the sword of his success was double-edged. It
allowed him to dream of a single theory encompassing all of
nature's laws, but led him to expect that the methods that had
worked so well for him in the past would continue to work for
him in the future.

It wasn't to be. For the better part of his last 30 years,
Einstein pursued the "unified theory," but it stubbornly
remained beyond his grasp. As the years passed, he became
increasingly isolated; mainstream physics was concerned with
prying apart the atom and paid little attention to Einstein's
grandiose quest. In a 1942 letter, Einstein described himself as
having become a "a lonely old man who is displayed now and then
as a curiosity because he doesn't wear socks."

Today, Einstein's quest for unification is no curiosity - it is
the driving force for many physicists of my generation. No one
knows how close we've gotten. Maybe the unified theory will
elude us just as it dodged Einstein last century. Or maybe the
new approaches being developed by contemporary physics will
finally prevail, giving us the ultimate explanation of the
cosmos. Without a unified theory it's hard to imagine we will
ever resolve the deepest of all mysteries - how the universe
began- so the stakes are high and the motivation strong.

But even if our science proves unable to determine the origin of
the universe, recent progress has already established beyond any
doubt that a fraction of a second after creation (however that
happened), the universe was filled with tremendous energy in the
form of wildly moving exotic particles and radiation. Within a
few minutes, this energy employed E =3D mc=B2 to transform itself
into more familiar matter - the simplest atoms - which, in the
course of about a billion years, clumped into planets and stars.

During the 13 billion years that have followed, stars have used
E =3D mc=B2 to transform their mass back into energy in the form of
heat and light; about five billion years ago, our closest star -
the sun - began to shine, and the heat and light generated was
essential to the formation of life on our planet. If prevailing
theory and observations are correct, the conversion of matter to
energy throughout the cosmos, mediated by stars, black holes and
various forms of radioactive decay, will continue unabated.

In the far, far future, essentially all matter will have
returned to energy. But because of the enormous expansion of
space, this energy will be spread so thinly that it will hardly
ever convert back to even the lightest particles of matter.
Instead, a faint mist of light will fall for eternity through an
ever colder and quieter cosmos.

The guiding hand of Einstein's E =3D mc=B2 will have finally come to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                             Last Of The Mohican

From: Carl W Feindt <waterufo.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 10:33:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:01:04 -0400
Subject: Last Of The Mohican


Hello list members,

I ve got all the info I could gather on J.V.'s 1908 British
steamer Mohican case. See:

http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=30

Think you'll find it interesting.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmber

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 10:39:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:02:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmber


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:20:16 -0400
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:52:27 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:40:56 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

<snip>

>>>Thank you, Mr. Lehmberg, for your expose of the
>>>meanness/negativity of Herr Klassh__e. Among the dastardly
>>>deeds he'd committed back in the eighties was his telephonic
>>>brow-beating of officials at the University of Nebraska's
>>>(Lincoln) adult-education center when he got word that a
>>>MUFON-related conference was to be held there. He berated
>>>the attenders as communistic/subversive, and implored the
>>>officials to cancel the conference. As true
>>>academic-freedom champions, the officials chose to defy his
>>>attack.

>>>Who knows how much other such underhandedness he managed to
>>>orchestrate against UFO researchers/witnesses? May he be
>>>reincarnated upon some other (barren) planet besides
>>>Earth.... -- O-ver and O-ut

>>Also this, which Doc Maccabee can verify or not:

>>>One time Klass tried to (indirectly) sic Bruce Maccabee's
>>>employer on him for (allegedly) using some office
>>>supplies/duty time to pursue his UFO research.<
>I don't recall any such thing. Klass certainly knew where I
>worked. I don't recall that he ever contacted my employer. Even
>if he did, it had no affect on my UFO activities or my job.
>There is no doubt that Klass attempted to interfere in the
>activities of Dr. James McDonald in the late 1960's.

Ah - Klass redeemed!  Pity... but truth will out, eh?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                 Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:05:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hall


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:54:38 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:34:11 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:59:13 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>><snip>

>>>Sleep paralysis may explain a few cases reported as abductions.
>>>That certainly should be studied and cases should be screened
>>>for it. When they are, it turns out that the sleep paralysis
>>>explanation used so sweepingly by the Clancy's of the world is
>>>rather inadequate for the great bulk of cases.

>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>took place.

What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                          Re: Pandora's Box - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:54:11 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:06:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Hall


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 11:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Kritkausky

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>From: Joe Faccenda uforth.nul
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:5 6:09 EDT
>>>Subject: Pandora's Box

><snip>

>>>Can we comprehend the enormity of the changes such a
>>>revelation would bring? are we ready to open the box?

>>>The futile attempts of ufologist over the years to extract
>>>this information shown a naivety on our part, as to what
>>>exactly our comprehension of Government is, and our own
>>>comprehension of what we are trying to achieve.

>>>Disclosure would trigger a chain event that would run right
>>>across the pillars, feeble as they are, of our society.

>>>Government collapse, world-wide financial collapse, and
>>>perhaps world-wide religious upheaval.

>>>Are we ready for just such an event?

>>To put it in a nutshell, life on this planet would be forever
>>changed in such a fundamental way that truly very few of us (and
>>I exclude myself) can really envisage what it might be like. In
>>fact, I'm not sure that there's anybody that really knows as I
>>have found the "After Contact" literature and writings on the
>>subject to be devoid of any true depth and errr imagination.

>Stuart/Joe:

>I don't think there is much debate as to whether such a
>revelation would cause a disruption, the difference of opinion
>rests in the extent of the disruption and ultimately its net
>effect on the current human paradigm. So when push comes to
>shove, we are really talking about a question of whether or not
>to introduce a change component to a system without being able
>to accurately predict the positive and negative effects that
>change will have on the system.

<snip>

On this theme I suggest that interested parties read a
compilation of articles which I edited for the Fund for UFO





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:18:52 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:49:33 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Randle


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:15:47 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:28:44 +0200
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 23:46:05 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>How does the US government manage to have the same
>>>control over crashing UFOs when such incidents can
>>>happen, unpredictably, anywhere in the world, at any
>>>time? Why do ETH believers always manage to avoid
>>>giving a sensible answer to this obvious question?

>>The idea that it would be impossible to control all UFO crahes,
>>in any part of the world, is worth consideration. For me, after
>>thinking about it, it does not sound all that impossible. The
>>first reason is that, contrary to many rumors, alleged crashes
>>have been probably in very limited numbers (and, yes, there have
>>been many false rumors of crashes). The second reason is that
>>there is no piece of land in the whole world which escapes
>>military control, by one nation or another. And I don't see any
>>government and military establishment willing to release such
>>information. Any crash of an unknown craft will fall
>>automatically under military control. The third reason is that
>>there is not one country in this world with a totally free and
>>independant press. They will keep quiet if they are asked to. If
>>a mall paper or radio does not conform, it will soon be in
>>serious trouble. Remember the call to KGFL radio in Roswell.

>>So, it is quite plausible that a few authentic crashes were
>>successfully controlled, and the information suppressed, or at
>>least severely limited, and impaired by debunking operations.
>>Still, what we see is a certain amount of independant
>>informations and testimonies coming out about some alleged
>>crashes. This is the case for Roswell and, recently, for
>>Varginha in Brazil, in spite of obvious military cover-up. In
>>short, for a UFO crash to be impossible to cover-up, it would
>>have to happen right in the middle of a big city, I imagine. In
>>any other place, it could probably be done.

>>In the case of Roswell, some testimonies have become fragile and
>>had to be discarded. But who knows why for sure? There are
>>several possibilities, from simple liers to real witnesses being
>>influenced to alter their testimony, for instance.

>But you are assuming a lot here. You take it for granted that
>those countries where the crashes occurred would want to cover
>up the fact. You assume that the military in each of these
>countries would get there first, before anyone else, and demand
>silence on the part of the civilian population, the press and
>other media. This is simply going along with Stan Friedman and
>his nonsensical 'cosmic Watergate'. Why on earth should such a
>vital scientific discovery as this be covered up at all? Can
>you name any other discovery that would be covered up in this
>way (and for six decades at that)?

I think we all are assuming a lot here. We assume that UFOs are
filling the skies, that each country in the world takes notice
of them and that cases that involve more than simple eyewitness
testimony are frequent. But what if these assumptions are
untrue. That changes the nature of the conspiracy.

If we assume that the Roswell crash was of an extraterrestrial
craft, and that the military, though good fortune was the first
of the government agencies to arrive on the scene, then we can
draw a couple of conclusions.

First, while their initial response was to announce the
recovery, within hours, that story took a backseat to the
balloon retrieval. Even though they could not control what the
aliens did, they would assume they could control the spread of
the information. More than once I have seen this in operation.
It means quite simply that those leaders who have taken control
do not worry about possible future events, but instead worry
about what they have in their hands at that time. They will
classify the material and hope for the best. If it is
compromised in other arenas, then so be it, but if not, then
they have retained control.

Second, we look at the lists of possible other crashes. Some of
them top two hundred and I have contributed to this with my
books. However, we must also scan those lists for hoaxes (Aztec,
Paradise Valley and Kalahari Desert), misidentifications
(Roswell, 1949; San Diego Meteor 1947), and single witness cases
(Cape Girardeau, 1941; Argentina 1950). We then see very few of
these events which means there is very little need for a
worldwide conspiracy to hide the facts.

Third, what if there has been but a single crash? Yes, I know
there are some other interesting cases (Ubatuba 1957; Kecksburg
1965) but there could be other explanations for them. If so,
then we have but one event that needs protecting and the problem
is significantly reduced. That means that other countries have
not had to retrieve the remains of a UFO and therefore have no
need for a cover up. (This also impacts on the tales of crash
retrieval teams roaming the world to recover the remains of
UFOs.)

Fourth, for nearly 50 years there was an iron curtain that
protected everything on the other side of it. UFO information
from that side was difficult to get and today we know that they
had actively hidden the data, just as the US has. NATO would
have been an effective means of hiding information on our side.
In other words, there really doesn't have to be a worldwide
conspiracy, just the secrecy that grew out of the cold war that
made it easy to hide secrets.

Fifth, although much of the rest of the world has had good UFO
sightings, they have been given nothing concrete to prove the
case. Given that they had eyewitness testimony, photographs that
have not withstood the assault of skeptics and little if any
other type of evidence, there isn't much they can do. Sometimes
they announced their belief in UFOs, but it always falls back on
the lack of multiple chains of evidence that would demonstrate
the reality to all but the most skeptical.

Given all that, there really doesn't have to be a worldwide
conspiracy to suppress the UFO information? just a lack of the
elements needed to prove the case to all but the most hardened.
Not a conspiracy, just a lack of proof so that even when the
leader of a country makes a comment about UFOs, it boils down to
the same problem. There is no absolutely convincing evidence.

Finally, it can be argued that the secret hasn't been kept
because we are debating it. Yes, the best elements are hidden,
if we accept the idea that Roswell was extraterrestrial, but we
do have some solid eyewitness testimony, we do have limited
documentation, and we do have some circumstantial evidence. What
we lack, obviously, is the hard physical evidence that would
underscore the importance of the rest of the evidence.

>Since we can take it that the US could not and would not manage
>to despatch their forces to every nation on earth in the event
>of a UFO crash, you now try to persuade us that these countries
>could, or would, do it themselves, and silence everyone in the
>process.

>I repeat my point that any nation would regard it as a great
>opportunity to be the first to announce the arrival of
>extraterrestrial beings on earth. Think of the tremendous boost
>to national prestige. But no, the conspiracists still insist
>that every nation would try to conceal the fact.

I'm not sure that any nation would want to announce the arrival
of the extraterrestrials, especially if it might compromise their
security, and I'm not sure that we need every nation to conceal
the facts for this control to work. Maybe it is as simple as the
number of visits and the lack of physical evidence.

>This is simply conspiracy theory gone mad.

I have to throw in with you on that. The world wide conspiracy
does not make good sense. The lack of proof positive and a low





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:22:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:56:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Randle


>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:25:24 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:48:59 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 06:45:51 -0500
>>>Subject: Memory Without Klass

>>>Ref: SDI #361...

>>>Memory Without Klass

>>>In the early 1980s, Stanton Friedman decided to immigrate to
>>>Canada from the US. Forgetting how prescient he may have been,
>>>I've heard Mr. Friedman say he did it primarily to take
>>>advantage of the superior health system.

>>>Philip Klass got wind of it, somehow, and took it upon himself
>>>to write the Canadian National Research Council a confidential
>>>letter - don't say it was ME, Oh Canada - to warn them about
>>>the undesirable element they were getting ready to allow into
>>>their country. In effect, Klass was trying to poison Mr.
>>>Friedman's Canadian well before he got there, restrict Mr.
>>>Friedman's movements, and egregiously intrude on Mr. Friedman's
>>>civil rights. The scurrilous and unrepentant _bastard_!

>>>In this just discovered letter, by Richard Dolan, Klass warned
>>>Canada with regard an "insidious threat" it faced to the
>>>security and stability of their country were they to allow
>>>Stanton Freidman, a "clutching, octopus-like snake oil salesman
>>>and uber-charlatan... a destabilizing UFO believer" (!) ... to
>>>immigrate.

>>How has this letter just surfaced, and exactly how did Richard
>>Dolan get hold of it? I must say I find it very hard to believe
>>any such letter was ever written.

>>One question: What does Stan Friedman say about it?

>>It will not surprise me in the least if fake letters and other
>>documents implicating Klass in all sorts of underhand tactics
>>suddenly appear, now that he is dead. In fact it is entirely
>>predictable. Look at Menzel & MJ-12.


>Hi Christopher!

>Richard Dolan mentioned about this letter from Philip Klass in
>his presentation at Sunday's 'Exopolitics Toronto' conference at
>the University of Toronto where Stanton Friedman, one of the
>conference speakers, was present in the audience.

>Speaking with Dolan just before his talk, I can confirm that he
>found Klass' letter to NRC's Dr. Al McNamara was found at the
>National Archives in Ottawa during Dolan's visit there this
>summer. McNamara was the scientist responsible for the "UFO
>files" after Project Magnet, one of Canada's official and
>unclassified studies on UFOs, came to an end. Project Magnet was
>headed by NcNamara's colleague, the late Dr. Peter Millman, who
>was also with NRC.

>I suspect that other Canadian researchers such as Grant Cameron,
>Chris Rutkowski, Palmiro Campagna and others (including myself)
>had seen this letter from Klass but I was surprised that
>Friedman and other researchers seemed unaware of it. This was
>not the only time that scientists, archivists, etc. had been
>"warned" in writing about certain curious UFO researchers in
>search of the truth by individuals or agencies.

Good Morning, All

This is too funny for words. Of course this is not the only time
that others have been warned, in writing, about UFO researchers.
Why, I have a letter from Stan Friedman, to my publisher,
warning them about "factual mistakes, flights of fancy, lifting
of my research much of which is unpublished." He wrote to Jim
Moseley and said, "I wrote his publisher seeking assurance
that my considerable research about crashed saucers would not be
used without credit. I had good reason for the concern."

Dick Hall didn't like all the sniping (on both sides of the
issue) and investigated the matter. The results were published
in the May/ June 1993 issue of IUR. Dick wrote, "Randle alleged
that Friedman and others [namely Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera]
apparently acting in concert, had attempted to interfere with
the publication of the book UFO Crash at Roswell by contacting
the publisher, Avon Books, making charges of plagiarism and
generally impugning Randle's character and integrity. I asked
Randle for documentation, which he provided. I asked Friedman
for an explanation, and he never replied."

Lest you believe this is just another snit between Friedman and
me, I quote from a letter dated July 25, 1989 in which an
attorney for Robert Hastings wrote to Friedman about Friedman's
attacks on Hastings. The attorney wrote, "Ms. Kumer [the
Director of Student Support Services of Central Florida
Community College] unequivocally reports that you [Friedman] had
previously informed her that Robert Hastings did not know what
he was talking about, that he did not have the 'real facts' and
that 'he was just another fraud.'"

Jim Moseley reports that while he was making the rounds of
college lectures, Friedman would often call and try to get them
to cancel his appearance and hire Friedman. When I had a
presentation scheduled in Cincinnati, he called the hosts and
asked why they had hired me and not him.

And, of course, there is his allegation in the MUFON JOURNAL in
which he accuses Don Schmitt and me of being government agents.
Jerry Clark wrote of this in July 1991, saying, "You suggest
that both Randle and Schmitt are government agents 'desperately
trying to attract attention away from the Plains [of San
Agustin] where one of the aliens was alive.'" True, in the next
paragraph you provisionally (as in 'I think') withdraw this
outrageous charge, but only after raising it, distributing it,
and planting the idea!"

So, we have Stan attacking UFO researchers, writing to their
publishers, calling those who have booked them to speak and
attempting to replace them on programs, and suggesting that they
might be government agents.

This allegation, by the way, that I'm a government agent, has
been hurled at me by others. Don Schimtt, while we still worked
together told people on at least two occasions that he believed
me to be a government agent planted on him. This strikes me as
very funny. He invited me into the investigation, then, in an
attempt to discredit me, tells others that I'm a government
agent - this while he was claiming to be my friend.

So, if Phil Klass wrote the letter, and I have no real reason to
suspect he didn't, he is in good company. Bill Moore and Jaime
Shandera spent a great deal of time and effort trying to
undermine me. Stan joined right in. And, to my surprise, so did





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                         Sakulich Interviews Jacobs

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:12:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:12:26 -0400
Subject: Sakulich Interviews Jacobs




Source: The Triangle - A Student Newspaper at
        Drexel University Philadelphia

http://tinyurl.com/9omxn

Friday, September 30, 2005


Skeptic Questions Famed UFO Enthusiast
By Aaron Sakulich

Aaron Sakulich: ... also, this is the first interview that I've
done. I think that people are getting tired of just reading,
well, this is the thing that happened, I can't explain it, here
are the options, decide for yourself. So I figured I would try
to start to get more interviews, things like that...

David Jacobs: Well, did you come with a prepared set of
questions and I'll answer...

Aaron Sakulich: Well, I did. There's a handful of them, they're
kind of out of order, not in any particular order, but, also,
I'm sure when I ask one it will raise a question in your
response. So the way that the interview is going to work... this
is a terrible printer... but the way that the... that I guess the
article will work is I'll probably be able to get a full page
for it from the design people, because I've done it for so long,
but it'll start with "last... " what is this... "last Thursday I
sat down with, you know... "who wrote one of the first UFO
related doctoral theses or, uh... doctoral theses is I guess how
you would say it...

David Jacobs: Dissertations?

Aaron Sakulich: Yes, dissertations, that's the word I was
thinking of. You also teach one of the only regularly scheduled
courses on... uh...

David Jacobs: The only regularly scheduled course on the subject
in the United States, most likely in the world.

Aaron Sakulich: Right. So the beginning will just be a general
introduction. If you have a particular picture you'd want to
use, I'll give you my email address, just send it along.

David Jacobs: Uh... okay. Well, I'm associate professor of
history at Temple, I've been here since 1975, I specialize in
20th century US history, primarily culture and popular culture.
I also of course have done most of my research in things
strange, mainly UFOs and UFO abductions. I've published 4 books
on the subject, UFOs and abductions, and God knows how many
articles. I am continuing my work, I do hypnotic regressions of
abductees, in my spare time and I continue to write on the
subject and continue to do research.

Aaron Sakulich: Sounds good. So, for your work, when you do
these, these hypnotic regressions, interviews, things like that,
I assume that the people find you somehow?

David Jacobs: I do not solicit. I try to maintain the standards
of, or the ethics of the therapeutic community. So I do not
solicit, and I do not advertise, and I do something very
different than the therapeutic community - I do not charge for
anything I do, which puts me in a very, very outside of that...

[Both talking at once. I seem to recall that I said "an
abnormality" and Dr. Jacobs laughed]

... but yes, they do find me, in a lot of different ways. I'm of
course, they seen me on television quite a bit, or word of
mouth, or articles that I write, whatever, they know who I am.
So I get solicitations, I get requests for hypnosis, virtually
every day. From around the country, and of course I can only
take people that live within... in a radius of around a hundred
miles. Because, when a person wants to find out about their
abduction experiences, and I take them on, we might have
anywhere from one to twenty, or thirty or forty sessions
together over a period of years, even. Until they want to stop.
So in other words I go on for as long as they want to, not for
as long as I want to. Of course the longer you go, the more you
know about them, about what's going on with them, the more about
the subject. My responsibility is to try to get their lives
straightened out, try to make them aware of what's going on so
that they don't have to fantasize about any number of things
that are happening to them, so that they can get a grip on it,
they can try to have emotional control over the situation,
although I can't give them physical control, I can't keep this
phenomenon from happening. Eventually they achieve that, and
they go on to live a life free from obsessing about the subject,
although not free from the subject certainly.

What people don't understand is that the abduction phenomenon
begins in infancy, with great frequency, all the way through a
person's life until they reach old age. We think it stops at
somewhere, sometime but we're not exactly sure about the time
that it stops. We do know it happens over and over and over and
over and over again, so anytime anybody writes you and says 'I
was abducted once in 1979", what they're saying is, 'I was
abducted in 1979 and I remember part of that. All the other
times that I've been abducted, I don't remember at all.' Is
what...

Aaron Sakulich: [garbled sound]

David Jacobs: ... is what they usually say. And that these are
chosen, only because their mother or their father was an
abductee. There's no particular aspect of a persons' DNA we
think that would cause them to be abducted other than the DNA
that was given to them from their mother or their father, who
was an abductee. There's nothing overtly different about these
people, it is a global phenomenon. It is not, this is extremely
important to understand, not strictly an American phenomenon. It
spans the world, it spans cultures, it spans every conceivable
kind of line you could put up. Educational, intellectual,
geographic, political, economic, social, cultural, every line,
religious, ethnic, racial, whatever it is, it cuts across these
lines. And it is extremely widespread. So we're dealing with a
very large phenomenon with a lot of people, people who are
from... people who have never quite been able to get it together,
people who have never held a job, who have dropped out of
elementary school, to people who have PhDs and are in very high
functioning positions throughout society, or other professional
degrees. They all say the same thing, it doesn't matter who they
are, they all say the same thing. And they say it in tremendous
detail. It's not like 'I was abducted, and I really liked them,
and they really liked me, and they put me back and I forgot
about it.' There's a series of procedures that are administered
to them, physical, mental and reproductive, there's a lot of
other things that happen as well. This all happens in fairly
narrow confines. If this were psychological, there wouldn't be
these confines, and they are so precise and detailed that we
know the function of instruments, we know what procedures lead
to other procedures, we know that if they're having procedure
labeled let's just say A through Z, if they're having procedure
D, that procedure E will follow thereafter, whether they know it
or not. Now, the problem here, of course, is that, you're
dealing with human memory recovered through hypnosis...

Aaron Sakulich: Right...

David Jacobs: ... administered by amateurs.

Aaron Sakulich: I think that I have that exact quote right
here... "human memories recovered through hypnosis administered
by amateurs. It is difficult to imagine a weaker form of
evidence." (from a webpage Dr. Jacobs wrote for the
International Committee on Abduction Research.)

David Jacobs: And it is hard to imagine a weaker form of
evidence, it's really at the bottom of the pile. Problem is
that, we have such an enormous pile of it, and we have more than
that. There is a physicality involved here, people are
physically missing from their normal environments. There are no
cases, there are no serious cases, of investigated abductions
where a person is not missing. The Australians like to bring
forward a case that happened 15 years ago, or longer, the Marine
Putty case, where she said she was being abducted, and she was
sitting in a car with a researcher, and the researcher had his
eyes on her, and she wasn't abducted, therefore, they have said,
well, you see, abductions happen when the person is really
there. Well, Marine Putty obviously isn't an abductee. Because
we have thousands, that's not hyperbole, of other cases, where
people are... that [Marine Putty] was the exception that proves
the rule, in a sense, where people are...

Aaron Sakulich: It's the black swan, the one that proves that...

David Jacobs: It proves that Marine Putty was not an abductee is
what it proves. And that people have strange minds, and there's
a lot of strange people out there. And people who are
delusional, who think they are being abducted, who are not. I've
had people who talked to me that were schizophrenic that think
they're being abducted and are not. It's rare, believe me, that
is rare. Most people don't know what's going on. Most people
know that they have lived a life where strange events have
happened. When I think of myself, my family, other people I know
who are not abductees, basically, strange things do not happen.
They don't have periods of an hour or two hours or three hours
of missing time, where they don't know where they were during
that time and no one else saw them during that time. They have
that only if they've had a stroke, or a TIA, or there's a brain
malfunction, and that's going to show up in an MRI generally
speaking, not always, but often, if it's happening to them for
that long. There's going to be a problem. There's going to be a
medically obvious reason, a tumor, something is going to be
wrong, neurologically. Now, this happens over and over again,
and I've had people that have gone to neurologists, and they've
had MRIs, and they've had neurological workups, and everything
is fine. And everything is fine in every other aspect of their
lives, except that they have these missing time experiences,
they are traveling in a car, they pull the car over to the side
of the road, there's a UFO waiting for them, they don't remember
anything after that. Or they're 'traveling on the Astral Plane',
they go out and they're traveling somewhere and they can see
everything, including how dirty their gutters are, on the roof
of their house. Which would be an odd thing to remember when
you're on the Astral Plane, you know what I mean?

Aaron Sakulich: I'd be "hey, look at me, I'm on the Astral
Plane! Wooo!"

David Jacobs: Right, stuff like that, you wouldn't pay attention
to a clogged gutter. [laughs] That's an actual case. And people
tend to see deceased relatives who come back to say goodbye to
them, even though the deceased relative died ten years ago and
they can't imagine why they're coming back to say goodbye now.
Or tell them everything is okay, or they see religious figures,
angels, devils, you know, this sort of thing, and they have all
of these sort of things, and yet they're perfectly normal.
They're concerned about, what is this, what is going on , what
is happening with me, and often times they sort of go to New Age
organizations, they go to some therapists, they go to their
ministers, they get diagnoses of what it is, their minister says
'it's demonic possession', therapists will say "well, it's
sexual abuse in childhood, or it's temporal lobe instability,
there's a million of these explanations for it. The latest one
now is sleep paralysis. It's sort of the explanation du jour,
that's going around, which of course totally ignores about maybe
half, if not maybe 60% of all the abductions we have that take
place during the day, when the person isn't asleep, is driving
or whatever it is. As my colleague Budd Hopkins likes to point
out, the first 20 years of our knowledge of the abduction
phenomenon and all the explanations that came forward, we didn't
have a single case of an abduction that took place when the
person was sleeping. Now it's all the rage, books are coming out
about it, in Harvard University in print, or, it's false memory
syndrome. The amount of explanations for this is so long it's
literally staggering. Your jaw flies open when you hear all the
explanations for this. And there can only be one explanation for
this, the correct explanation, because it's so complicated and
so precise, that only one thing will cause this kind of
precision. That means that all the explanations for it, that
'this is not happening', all the explanations for this except
for one will be wrong. But debunkers never, ever question other
arguments, they never debate among themselves, it's a very
bizarre group of people who dedicate their lives to trying to
disprove this, it's a strange group, it's a far stranger group
than abductees are, who come from everywhere and everything, who
are university professors, I'll have you know, and physicians,
and psychiatrists and psychologists themselves, and attorneys,
and elementary school teachers, and...

Aaron Sakulich: I got an email from an elementary school teacher
one time, "oh no, you're wrong I know that they're there,
because they abducted me." I guess it was right after her
husband died, and I couldn't tell if there really had been
something, or if she was really upset about her husband dying,
or if...

David Jacobs: That's possible, you can't rule that out.

Aaron Sakulich: And I have no background in psychology, so it's
my best guess, but...

David Jacobs: Right. And that's typical of what people say, but
you really can't tell, every one has to be investigated. There's
a questionnaire on my website, and they fill it out and they
expect me to give them a diagnosis as to whether they're an
abductee or not.

Aaron Sakulich: Well you answered yes to 18 questions,
therefore...

David Jacobs: Yeah, the way I look at it is, sometimes it's a
sledgehammer between the eyes, obviously, this person is an
abductee. You see how he's answering the questions, so you say
it, but ethically you can't. You can't say anything. All you can
say is that we can't really tell what has happened to you until
it has been competently investigated by a person who knows both
the abduction phenomenon and the problems of hypnosis, and then
you can tell, and that's the best I can do. So the fact is that
you don't know what happened to that woman, she might be an
abductee, but remember that if she is this has happened over the
course of her life. It wasn't just that one time, that you know
is going to be wrong.

Aaron Sakulich: When you talk about the problem of hypnosis,
which you just mentioned, I remember during your lecture at the
free library, you had a picture of an alien wearing like a
sweatshirt, or a hood or something like that, and you said that
was an example of confabulation. I assume you're alluding to
that when you say things like "hypnosis performed by amateurs".
Do you believe that, obviously you do or you wouldn't be doing
it, that the good parts of hypnosis outweigh the risks, as long
as you're sure of it, and what are those risks?

David Jacobs: Let me just say that everybody in hypnosis, in
abduction hypnosis, is an amateur. There are no professionals.
My colleague Budd Hopkins and I are as close to professionals as
you can get, and we're not professionals. We have trained
hypnotists and psychologists and psychiatrists how to do
hypnosis for abduction, because everybody can do hypnosis. You
can do hypnosis. It takes place in the person you are
hypnotizing' mind. If they want to be hypnotized, they will, and
what you say can be skilled, can be unskilled, but whatever it
is, you can still hypnotize. If they want to be.

Aaron Sakulich: Right. Is it like they show on TV, with the
laying down, and the calm soothing voice, and the pocket watch
going back and forth?

David Jacobs: No, that they don't do. But it's usually just
relaxation techniques. But the fact is that, people tend to say
things that are not true in hypnosis, all the time. And you've
got to be very careful. It took me a long time... it didn't take
me a long time to learn that, it took me a long time to separate
out the wheat from the chaff. There are ways to do that. A
competent hypnotist will do things like ask purposefully
misleading questions that sound right, but aren't, things that
we've never seen in the abduction phenomenon. And ask that
question in a leading way, to see if they...

Aaron Sakulich: "Oh, so there's a gorilla standing in the corner
of the room, what's he doing?"

David Jacobs: Or say something like, well, you know, people have
reported that there's always an alien dressed as a gorilla that
stands in the middle of the room, in every abduction we see that
gorilla. What's he doing?

Aaron Sakulich: And if the guy says, no, there's no gorilla
there, that lends credence to what he is saying?

David Jacobs: Yeah, exactly, if they're suggestive. And if they
say, yes, that gorilla is there, everything that they say
afterwards, you have to be either disbelief or you have to be
super careful with. Because they just said yes to something that
was not true. 99.9% of the time, they say no, I don't see any
guy in a gorilla suit. Then you ask things like, as you're
laying on the table and you look up, can you see where the
ceiling meets the walls, at the corner, something like that. And
they'll say, no, it's curved, there's no corner. That's a direct
misleading question, and I am doing it for a reason. There's a
lot of them. There's a million of them that we can ask. If they
say something I've never heard before, I put it on the back
burner and wait for confirmation.

Aaron Sakulich: And if more and more of them start showing up,
you can...

David Jacobs: That are unaware of that testimony. Then there's
this whole world of...  we've built up a sort of a story, a
database, an outline of what happens during an abduction, and
dose it fit this outline that's been put together with hundreds
and hundreds and hundreds of... it's like the MMPI, the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory, what you do is see how people
with a certain problem and illness answer these questions. Then
you have normal people answer these questions and see how they
stack up against it. With this phenomenon, it's similar to that,
we've tried to see if fits or not, and if it doesn't, put it on
the back burner and wait for more reports. There are a lot of
things that over the years, and I've been doing this for over 20
years, 19 years, whatever, that did not fit in at all in the
beginning. As the years went on, I realized that I was wrong.

Aaron Sakulich: Do you have any specific examples? Things that
somebody said that you went, well that can't be right and then
more and more people said it.

David Jacobs: Right. Well, for example, almost everything. I
started out doing this research just based on the research that
Budd Hopkins had done with a researcher in New York, he is a
pioneer, one of the great researchers. I'd read some other
books, but my knowledge of the subject as I look back on it, I
started research into UFOs in the 1960s, about 1965, but I
didn't start doing research into abductions until the early
1980s, and I didn't start doing my own hypnosis until 1986. But,
our knowledge of it in 1986 was rudimentary to say the least.
Our sense was that people are abducted, they are given physical
examinations, and they are released. That there's some sort of a
study going on here, it's an experiment, they're learning about
us, that whole model didn't hold up. Yes, they were giving
physical examinations, but for very different reasons. We didn't
know anything about this subject other than that people are
getting abducted, they're getting their clothes removed, put on
a table, and then things are happening to them. Other than that,
we just didn't know at all. My colleague Budd Hopkins in the
early 1980s discovered the reproductive aspect of it, although
it had been there before, but we never confirmed it, we didn't
really know it. He discovered that people were shown odd looking
babies from time to time, that looked like crosses between
humans and aliens. So when I began to look at this, I decided to
start fresh, and start from zero, all bets were off, I didn't
know what was true and wasn't true. I couldn't figure out what
the hell was happening. I figured I'd just go slowly to one, and
then to two, and let's just see what happens in an abduction
event from the time that a person is aware it is happening to
them until it is not happening to them. And when I began to do
that, began to realize that people say things that are not true,
which was a great gift given to me by the very first person that
I worked with, who in their very first session told me things
that turned out not to be true, that I discovered only through a
fluke. The gods were with me, because my tape recorder did not
work properly, and I had not understood that what she whispered
in this session would not be picked up by the tape recorder, and
so after several months of working with her, we re-did the first
session and it came out very different than what I'd originally
heard, and I was shocked to my very core. Because at that
moment, at that instant, I realized that I did not have the
slightest idea what I was doing. I had believed her when she
told me things that were wrong. It's not because she was lying,
she though they were true, but they weren't. At that point I
realized right away that I had to go back to the starting board
and develop a set of controls like we already talked about. Most
people don't know that, they take everything...

Aaron Sakulich: They assume that you take everything you're told
you go "eh, that's got to be right."

David Jacobs: And that's a fatal error, and it leads to all
sorts of things, religious things, all sorts of things, so I was
far more careful than I had ever been, than I should have been,
that I figured I'd err on the side of conservatism than on the
side of acceptance. I probably should have used the word
skepticism rather than the word conservatism. So over the years,
I began to build up this information that matched and matched
and matched until a general sort of picture emerged, and I
understood that this phenomenon was falling into a sort of
pattern that we hadn't yet realized, and that the more I delved
into it, the more the whole concept of this being a study, or a
learning situation, or an experiment, was not holding although
even then in those days, the late 1980s early 1990s, I couldn't
even talk about it without saying "they're experimenting on us."
It was so ingrained in me and in my colleagues that it turned
out not to be true. It was wrong. It was evidence-free.

Aaron Sakulich: Evidence free. I remember that phrase from your
lecture at the free library.

David Jacobs: Oh, it's a great phrase to use, because it sums it
up perfectly. I continued on and developed more and more
information, and I realized that everything that was happening
in this phenomenon was logical, rational, was pointed to a
reason. It wasn't something that was so strange and so alien we
could not understand it. It wasn't something that was beyond our
mental abilities because it was so advanced we couldn't
understand it. I realized that everything that was going on was
in the realm of comprehension. I couldn't understand it. Other
people couldn't. That it was technical in some way. I was able
to discover things that I stumbled on completely by accident.
The, 'Oh! That's what it is!' sort of phenomenon. For instance,
early on, the abduction reports of Betty and Barney Hill and
others, people would say they'd lay them on a table and they'd
run their fingers down their backbone. I could never figure out
what that was, or sense what it was. An examination of the
spine, bony growths, how a person is developing, they'd spend
particular attention on the coccyx, the tailbone, and go back up
it again, and so forth. And I couldn't figure out, what is that?
And one day I'm reading a book on how to conduct neurological
exams... .

Aaron Sakulich: A little light reading for down the shore.

David Jacobs: Yeah, there was this examination of the
sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system that just went
right down the spine, and I realized, oh, that's what they're
doing, it's not a growth or development thing, it's a
neurological thing. And that's what it is, we can tell. A person
who was a neurologist would figure that out right away, but me,
I'm an historian, I just stumbled on it. So everything turns out
to be rational, reasonable, and logical, and usually not what we
expected. People have accused us of, well, it's under hypnosis,
people are suggestible, vulnerable, we're putting things in
their mind. And the reality is that it's the exact opposite. The
reality of it is that they tell us things that we resist
listening to or believing, things we've never even thought of
before, and then force us, as the force of information and
evidence comes, force us to believe that it is happening,
through just the evidence that we've been given. It really is
ther opposite, almost everything that I've heard I've resisted,
I don't like that, I don't want that, you know, and in fact it
turns out to be true, from what we can tell. And what you have
to understand here, this is little digression for you here,
Aaron, just to make life more difficult, people are claiming
that they're being abducted by little gray men from another
world, or whatever, in order to claim something like that, and
it's not happening, there's got to be a serious problems with
you. In order to claim that you're being kidnapped by denizens
of another world on a routine basis, brought on board their
spaceship, and it's not happening, doesn't suggest a quirky
personality. It doesn't suggest he just got mistaken one time.
It suggests a serious thought processing problem.

Aaron Sakulich: A severe mental issue of some sort.

David Jacobs: A sever mental... this is not just scratching your
arm because you think a junebug is biting you, as in the Georgia
junebug mass hysteria event. This is massive delusion,
complicated, long delusion, and if that is happening to you, it
is going to affect everything in your life. It can't be limited
to just that tiny, limited pathway. It's going to affect what
you eat in the morning, it's going to affect all of your...

[End of side one of my microcasette tape.]

Aaron Sakulich: There we go.

David Jacobs: These are going to affect your whole mentality.
You're going to be nuts, to put it in the scientific vernacular.
And these people are not nuts. That's one of the odd things
about it. These people are perfectly sane. Well... there are
people who are insane, and say these things, but I don't work
with them. Because I am not competent to work with people who
have serious mental problems. And I don't want to, because
there's nothing I can learn from them. The fact is, though, that
these people are not insane. They have taken tests, and they
have taken MMPIs, and they have gone through a battery of
whatever, and they're not. They're able to carry on high-
functioning lives and have families and kids and no-body
suspects, etcetera etcetera, it's not as though they're covering
it up in a way nobody would suspect. Sometimes that does happen.
This is a situation in which they are perfectly sane. And they
are exquisitely aware of the fact that what they are telling me
is completely crazy. They know that. They are well aware of
that. They require anonymity, they don't want anyone to know
they're with me, they don't want anyone to find out their names,
they are aware of the enormous downside of talking to me about
this. There is no upside. This is a no upside phenomenon, this
is all downsides. It destroys their work situation, if they're
working for somebody, everything is destroyed. But they are not
crazy. Let's just say that they are not crazy and that
everything is normal, and yet they are seeing these things, and
this is happening to them at all times. We've dealt with
hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people, and they are all
saying the same thing. None of them are crazy, none of them have
serious mental problems- and this [alien abduction] is not
happening. What are you left with, then, if this phenomenon is
not happening, and these people are saying it is and they are
not suffering from mental delusions? When you put it in that
way, you start to suddenly float around in this never-never land
of cognition, mentality, of a world of maybe collective
unconscious... right now, sleep paralysis, well, it's not really
happening, but...

Aaron Sakulich: They're mistaking something else that really is
happening.

David Jacobs: Yeah, they are mistaking something else, but when
they do that... see... I don't want to get into this, but all
debunkers make one or all three of three mistakes: they don't
know the data, they distort the data, or they ignore the data.
They all do that. There are no exceptions to that, Aaron. There
are no exceptions to this. This is the way it has developed, and
this is the way that it is. With sleep paralysis, they ignore
all of the events that happen during the daytime when the person
is not asleep. They also ignore... if the abduction phenomenon
goes from A to Z, say, and there's Aprime and Asuper and this
and that and forms of B and forms of C and it goes to Z. What
they do, they take A. And in the first part of A, people get a
sense of floating, and that there's a presence in their room,
and they might even see what some people think is a light. I've
solved the abduction phenomenon! They ignore all the others,
they ignore B through Z. Just ignore it. Or they'll say that's
just caused by popular culture and hypnosis; they've been
affected by popular culture and bad hypnosis. There's no
evidence for that. They just say that.

Aaron Sakulich: Do you find that the... I guess the word I want
isn't popularity, but the... presence of facts about alien
abductions, things like that, in TV shows and movies, you can go
down to Kmart and get a backpack shaped like one of those alien
light bulb-shaped heads, with the big eyes, do you feel that
that taints, pollutes, or somehow effects your research? If
you've been doing this for 20 years, you must have seen
something. I think when the X-Files came on TV was the beginning
of it.

David Jacobs: Actually, you have to go back a little bit
further.

Aaron Sakulich: Well, I can't go back that much further. [note-
I was 11 when the X-Files came on TV.]

David Jacobs: It really started around 1987.

Aaron Sakulich: So have you seen any difference in the work you
did before 1987 and the work after people and culture became
aware of it?

David Jacobs: What I have seen is change over time that has no
relation to popular culture whatsoever. I've seen a change in
the phenomenon. I've not seen any osmosis of popular culture
into it. When people come to me, they know two things: I'm aware
of the problems of hypnosis, I'm aware that people can be lead,
they all know leading, they all know they don't want to be lead
by me. And I can understand that too. That's the least of the
problems of hypnosis, is leading. People don't understand that
there are many more subtle problems to doing hypnosis with
abductees than just leading. You can deal with that. But they
know that. They also know that they don't want to pick up stuff
from the popular culture and parrot it back to me as if it were
true. Those are the two things they're all aware of. They don't
want that to happen, they're all on guard about that. The fact
is, in popular culture, the real knowledge of the abduction
phenomenon is still very low.

Aaron Sakulich: Only for nerds and TV junkies like me.

David Jacobs: It's still extremely low, even then. When I watch
things, there's a bunch of new alien shows on for some reason or
another...

Aaron Sakulich: Yeah, there's like four.

David Jacobs. Probably because of War of the Worlds, but,
though, the first one was Speilbergs' Taken a 13-part show on
the Sci-fi channel that was... in my opinion, had some good
points and some bad points, and on balance it was awful. And
they had some abduction stuff too, and every once in a while,
they'll get some tiny little concept that happens in the
abduction phenomenon right. All the rest of the time when
they're talking about them being abducted, it has no relation to
what we know. That's the stuff that would be showing up, and we
don't see that showing up. Now, I have to say that people who I
deal with are screened fairly carefully as best I can. I talk
with them, I have them fill out my questionnaire, and I only
accept the ones who I think are the ones that have had a series
of abductions and fit the model and all that. So I don't work
with people who are not abductees. I try not to work with people
that are not abductees. To the best of my knowledge. I can't
really tell until I sit down with them and do some research. But
I work with the ones that have a potentiality there that the
other ones don't. We just haven't seen that. It would be
interesting to see how that works, how that would work, how it
would fit in to these scenarios if we didn't have that
screening, if people said things that didn't fit that scenario.
Of course, I'm on guard for it. I've done things in hypnosis,
I've taken to doing things, just to see if it will have any
effect, of telling people 'what you're telling me really does
sound like a dream, it really does sound like sleep paralysis
and like a dream. THIS IS A DREAM." Then I'll do my introduction
and relax them, and see if the last words they heard, me
commanding them that this is a dream, affects it. And it has no
effect whatsoever. Absolutely none! Zero! Couldn't care less. Or
I'll say, 'I think this is just a remembrance of a previous
thing that might or might not have happened, it doesn't sound
like it actually happened to you.' No effect whatsoever! 'You
know, I don't want to hear anything bad, I don't want you to
tell me anything bad... .'

Aaron Sakulich: 'Just tell me the good stuff.'

David Jacobs: Just fun, good stuff, how kind they are, how good
they are, and it doesn't do any good. Nothing I say will affect
them in that commanding way. But the problem with hypnosis is
not that. The problem is that they will say things that are
wrong. And if you don't catch it right then and there, what you
can do is believe that it is true... there's a case that...

[At this point, a portion of the tape is 'off the record'. We're
discussing something only obliquely related to abductions. Just
a couple of old girls dishing on the neighbors. I'm new to
giving interviews, so I've erred on the side of taking too much
out rather than too little. ]

Aaron Sakulich: Could you talk a little about where you believe
your research has led you?

David Jacobs: Well, what people began to describe early on, even
before I began to do my own hypnosis, was that they'd see these
weird looking babies, that were sort of half-human, half-alien.
Some looked quite human, some looked quite alien. They'd see
them as toddlers, as little kids, and eventually we uncovered
many many accounts of seeing older kids, adolescents, young
adults, and as adults. And we would see them therefore in
different roles onboard the ship; helping with abductions, doing
this or doing that, depending on their age. And one of the great
questions we always had was, if this is happening, and this is a
capital I, if this is happening, why is it happening? What's the
point here? It didn't seem to be a study or experiment, it
seemed to be more of a program. It was almost assembly-line
fashion. People being abducted over and over again, seeing these
things that happened. It really was industrial, almost. And it
was happening around the world, so you knew right away that
there was a lot of time and energy being put into this program.
As a program, it is therefore goal-directed. It has a reason,
and it started at sometime. You figure if it's goal directed,
there's a beginning, a middle and an end. If the goal is getting
resources, the end will be when they use up all the resources.
There's got to be a beginning, a middle and an end to most
programs. And this one seemed to have that. And from time to
time, people would have these experiences, and the first time I
heard it I said "forget it", but I heard it enough times to take
note. They'd be shown a screen, and on the screen would be, for
example, and American style picnic. Bunch of people standing
around, barbecue going, some people playing ball, throwing a
ball back and forth, they'd see it on this screen. Maybe there's
other abductees with them, that are seeing this too. In their
minds, they hear somebody speaking to them, who says "can you
tell the difference between us and you?" And the people will
look at the screen, see these people standing around like
everything's fine, and they'll say "no, I can't. Everybody looks
the same to me, what are you talking about?" They're puzzled
that this question is even being asked, because the screen shows
just regular people. And the voice will go "see, isn't that
wonderful? Isn't that great? Soon we will all be together. We'll
all be living together, here, essentially, you can't tell the
difference, and we'll just be here, and it'll all be wonderful."
I began to hear that so many times that I began to realize that
these hybrids, the ones who look more human than anything else,
and who look like 'us', as they are (and there's a reason for
this, and I've sort of discovered how they do this) this might
be an integration program into this society for reasons we
cannot understand. If we can understand these reasons, we will
have solved the UFO and abduction mysteries, hands-down. But we
don't have those reasons yet. I would like to have that
reasoning before I write my next book, but it doesn't look like
I'm going to get it. In 1949, Enrico Fermi posited what he
called the Fermi Paradox. At lunch, in an informal manner, with
some other physicists he was sitting with, apparently, they were
talking about life on other planets. At the time, no-one knew
anything about UFOs. They were talking about what aliens would
do if aliens were living in our proximity, and they used humans
as a model. What we did was came out of Africa, and we spread
around the world. We colonized the world, basically. Eventually,
this will happen to humans, we'll expand to other planets, and
we'll colonize those planets. If there are aliens out there that
are very much more advanced than us, we would be seeing
colonizations going on. We haven't seen that. If there are
aliens, where are they? This is what we'd expect to see. That's
the theory.

The fact is that we can't tell how much life there is out there.
If there's us, then there's probably a whole lot of other life.
If the UFO phenomenon is real, that makes two, if there's two
there's two trillion. You can make a legitimate argument for
one: us. But it's a dumb argument, a stupid argument, and all
science is now showing that it's impossible, because they're
finding other planets. If they're finding other planets, even if
they're gas giants, they're going to find other ones, smaller
ones, ones like earth, and there's going to be billions and
billions of them. I can't say that for an absolute fact, but the
chances are extremely high.

Aaron Sakulich: Once we get ourselves some better telescopes.

David Jacobs: Right. It's all technology. We can see the gas
giants in various ways. But the fact is that this might indeed
be a fulfillment of Fermi's paradox. This might be a
colonization program of sorts. We might be seeing something that
Fermi predicted, although he didn't know what he was talking
about. But we might be involved in something like that. There's
the "you can't get here from there" argument that all scientists
get involved with, distances are so great, even at the speed of
light blah blah blah blah. It doesn't matter. The question is,
are they here or are they not? How they got here is an
engineering question, a physics question, an astronomy question.
It's something for the future. Are they here or not? That's the
question we have to answer. It's not "we can't figure out how
they got here, so they can't be here." The only thing you can do
is go on the evidence we have now. That evidence shows that they
are here now, in my opinion. It's a sledgehammer between the
eyes. It's not a subtle body of evidence. This is not subtle.
This is not soemthign you have to tease out, 'oh, I think they
might be here.' This is massive, this is overwhelming. It's mind
boggling, once you get into the evidence. Most scientists will
not get into the eviedence, they think this is a nonsense
subject and there's no sense in wasting any time on it. Most
scientists just will not give it the time of day. Even if that
time is relative, at the speed of light.

Aaron Sakulich: (groans a little.)

David Jacobs: The fact is that you cannot get here from there,
therefore they can't be here is a non sequitur. It's based on
ignorance. It's an ignorant argument. So, when you go to the
real question, are they here or are they not here, you're in a
different realm altogether, it's very different. But scientists
don't think about those things. The SETI community, for example
tries to distance itself from the UFOs, because the SETI
community, which is the fringe of astronomy, they're all
considered fringe people within the conservative astronomical
world, they try to say "well, we might be off to the edge, but
we're not crazy like those UFO people." It puts this whole thing
off to the side, it's marginalized, you see it on television all
of the time, it's not just a popular culture issue, it has a
huge public history. I teach a course on it, and it's mostly
public history, studies that were done by the air force and the
scientific communities...

Aaron Sakulich: [The air force] had to keep the communists from
having an advantage on us.

David Jacobs: Yeah, it got involved in the cold war, and that
really destroyed the UFO phenomenon for science. The cold war
really did it. They could never get off on the right foot after
the cold war, that this was somehow endangering American
national security, because the Soviet Union could use bogus UFO
reports to attack the country, and there were all sorts of other
reasons why the Soviet Union got involved in this. We thought
the Soviets were involved with this, anyway. The fact is that
this is a phenomenon that is happening, it is a global
phenomenon, it's not going to stop, it might even be
accelerating now for what we know, everything is the same as it
was before, only more so, and yet, we are swimming in evidence.
We have evidence all over the place. You have people like SETI
or cosmologists that are people that are into planetary studies,
who have nop evidence of life in outer space at all. Their
knowledge of life in outer space is well below the zero range.
They have found no evidence, at all, of evidence in outer space,
other than markings on an asteroid, which is in debate. So their
knowledge is zero. And here we are sitting with all this
anecdotal evidence recovered through hypnosis, but we're seeing
a picture that is astonishing, a world that is just incredible.
A world that is so consistent, regardless of who the person is
or where that person was born, or the upbringing of that person,
that at least sociologically, you can look at this subject from
that point of view, thousands of people seeing all these odd
things, that match, you'd think it would interest social





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                        UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:15:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:15:50 -0400
Subject: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies




Source: The Tallahassee Democrat - Tallahassee, Florida

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/12778642.htm

Fri, Sep. 30, 2005


UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies

Experts believe object was meteor
The Associated Press

Miami - Experts believe a meteor was visible along a large
section of the Florida skyline Thursday night, although NASA
officials have not confirmed what the intensely bright, fast
object exactly was.

The glowing orb was spotted around 7 p.m.; some who saw it
called county and state officials to ensure that it wasn't a
crashing aircraft.

"This one could've been from a baseball- to a basketball-sized
chunk of space rock that slammed into our Earth's atmosphere at
a very high speed," Jack Horkheimer, director of the planetarium
at the Miami Museum of Science, told The Miami Herald.

National Weather Service meteorologist Barry Baxter said he
isn't sure if the object, which he believes was a meteor, was
over Atlantic Ocean waters or the Florida peninsula.

Bob Cooper, 48, of Dania Beach was in his backyard throwing a
Frisbee to his dog when the object - which he described as a
flaming ball - caught his eye.

"All of a sudden this thing shot from my right," Cooper told the
South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "And it was super fast, so you know
it was in a hurry. It turned from orange to the-center-of-the-
sun yellow then it disintegrated."

Residents from the state's Space Coast region all the way to
South Florida reported seeing the object, officials said.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:26:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:18:17 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:32:28 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:16:01 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:11:52 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>...is it reasonable to presume that said UFO in trouble
>would avoid crashing in built-up areas, if it had any remaining
>control at all... just to avoid the good citizens below who
>would try to catch him and cut off his head?

Alfred:

It all depends on where the UFO would crash. That is, if it were
in New York City, it would probably go unnoticed.

In London, the populace would provide bandages and merthiolate
for the hapless aliens.

In the foothills of Kentucky, they'd get their bums shot off.

In Russia, they'd be put on trial (for some bogus reason).





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02 - Dickenson

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:37:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:22:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02 - Dickenson


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:50:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

>>Source: Eye Magazine - Toronto
>>http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_09.29.05/op/wanderingeye.html

>Do I remember a case on a UFO documentary a number of years
>ago now, in which a dead man, in circumstances suggesting he
>might have been an abductee, was discovered atop a huge pile
>of coal, with clothing on but arranged in ways suggesting whoever
>dressed him didn't know how clothing works?

>I believe there were activities prior to this, in that area,
>involving UFO craft in close proximity, but can't remember the
>details.

Hi Eleanor,

I remember something on that - searches might pay off.

1) It was a UK incident

2) Was featured as mystery murder, then just mystery

3) The man's body had chemical or heat scorch marks or some such

4) think he was a European? ex-refugee or some - maybe (from
WWII?)

5) he had a wife? who'd been waiting up for him and maybe
reported him missing

6) something strange about the police evidence - officer who was
called admitted later he'd seen or heard something weird in the
area previous to murder call-out

7) people had been collecting/delivering coal only shortly
before the body was found but no earlier trace of him and no
later sign of how come he came to be "dumped"

8) no criminal activity suggested/claimed/proven

Hope to know more later





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

               Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:39:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:43:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Reynolds


>From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:04:37 -0400
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:55:44 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>Pavel:

>>I don't know where you got the impression that my post was
>>positing Jesus as a Space Brother.

>>My point was that accounts of his resurrection, in the Gospels,
>>mimic some of the abduction (not contactee) accounts extant.

>>And to quote St. Paul (Corinthians) is interesting since he
>>seemed to have had a contactee/abductee kind of experience on
>>the road to Damascus.

>Rich,

>In a temporal and type sense, I'd put it the other way:

>some of the abduction accounts may mimic gospel and other
>biblical events. The closest and most meaningful of these
>mimicries or correspondences that I know of is the experience of
>Betty Andreasson. When she says after one of them: everything
>fits, everything is one, she seems to be describing the sort of
>thing that Christian mystics have felt. She is a self-described
>Christian.

>I'm very open to the reality of both abduction and contact
>experiences, but what the nature of that reality may be is yet
>to be determined, if ever.

<snip>

Pavel:

It seems that the abduction phenomenon has occurred in many
contexts over the years.

Socrates supposedly had a qausi-experience, and Malcolm X
more recently.

Jesus' resurrection was transcribed, as was Ezekiel's episode,
and other accounts in such a way that one can find parallels
with Will Bueche's account, even John Velez' less than
comforting experience.

My point was and remains that the episodes strike some
commentators as interdimensionable; that is, those bringing
about the experience are neither here nor there but traverse
space (maybe time) independent of the prosaic means we
all usually use and understand.

The experience is rife with quantum elements, the whole





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                    More On Bangkok Flying Saucer Report

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:55:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:48:09 -0400
Subject: More On Bangkok Flying Saucer Report


Flying Saucer 'Faantong' (Bangkok suburb), Professor 'Taht
Phanom' says UFO for sure

Here is my description of the first event as seen on television:

Again, watching Thai television today saw a news report w/photo
of a "jahn binh" or UFO. The photo was fuzzy, natch. It showed
three orbs on the edge of an oval of a whitish-yellow color and
tinge areas of red above and below.

The description given below is essentially the same.

I find the second event much more interesting. The marks on the
ground consist of 92 right-only 'footprints' extending 300
meters and 2 meters apart. These depressions had a rusty red
residue which, when touched, would not wash off in soap and
water. Each 'footprint' was 30 centimeters in length.

There is some confabulation in the article. The 'footprints' may
have been seen in Petchburi, a town in north central Thailand.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                  1st Edition Of Exopolitics Journal Online

From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:47:17 -1000
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:52:04 -0400
Subject: 1st Edition Of Exopolitics Journal Online

Aloha List,

I'm delighted to announce another exopolitics milestone. Now we
have the first Exopolitics Journal online at:

www.exopoliticsjournal.com

I will be especially interested to hear feedback on my own
effort to outline the evolution of exopolitics in the opening
article. Also, there is the first part of an interview with
Clifford Stone which is very revealing in outlining some of the
mechanisms used by a 'shadow military' within the regular
military to recruit personnel for covert projects involving ETVs
and EBEs.

What follows is the press release describing some of the themes
in the various articles and reviews.

Enjoy

Michael Salla


-----

Press Release: The 1st Edition of the Exopolitics Journal is Now
Available Online


For those searching for quality information presented not only
by diligent researchers, but by 'contactees', government  and
military 'whistleblowers' and other exceptional individuals, the
Exopolitics Journal will become a thought provoking and reliable
resource.  Sponsored and fully funded by the Exopolitics
Institute of Hawaii, the Exopolitics Journal is offered free to
the public in a printable outline pdf format at:

http://www.ExopoliticsJournal.com

This month's inaugural issue features Part 1 of a two part
interview with Sgt. Clifford Stone (ret), who openly discusses
his US Army assignments on UFO crash retrieval teams.  Hall
McKenzie has contributed an article on Exopolitics and religion,
examining the role of extraterrestrials in different religious
traditions spanning back thousands of years.  Another article by
Donald Ware discusses the covert government acclimation program
using a process of 'plausible deniability' to prepare the public
for the extraterrestrial reality.

Exopolitics Institute founder Dr Michael Salla presents an
overview of the history of how the extraterrestrial phenomena
has been managed, and contactee Eric Julien discusses
information he received during his extraterrestrial contacts -
about the science of extraterrestrials.  Also included in this
edition are book reviews for "Top Secret/Majic: by Stanton
Friedman and "The Body Snatchers" by Nick Renfern and more.

Just one of the numerous projects sponsored by the Exopolitics
Institute, the Exopolitics Journal will be published quarterly
with original articles and interviews featured.  Yet in order to
continue to bring quality information to the public and supply
resources to those working within this field of study, the
Institute needs your support.

The Exopolitics Institute is a solely membership sponsored
organization committed to public awareness.  One of its many
goals is to promote peaceful cooperation with the
extraterrestrials that evidence suggests are aligned with the
advancement of global peace, human empowerment and human
sovereignty.

Please visit the Exopolitics Institute website at:
http://www.ExopoliticsInstitute.com .

Discover what we are all about and download your free copy of
the Exopolitics Journal. Then, if you would like to further
support the Journal or the Institute=B9s many projects and goals,
become a member or sponsor.  Membership comes with many
benefits, but perhaps the most satisfying one is knowing that
you are helping to build a foundation for Exopolitical awareness
and understanding made available to all people everywhere.

United, we can make a difference and gain the understanding to
shape a truly extraordinary future.


In Peace,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                         Re: Pandora's Box - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:37:55 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:59:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Miller


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 11:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Kritkausky

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>From: Joe Faccenda uforth.nul
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:5 6:09 EDT
>>>Subject: Pandora's Box

><snip>

>Stuart/Joe:

>I don't think there is much debate as to whether such a
>revelation would cause a disruption, the difference of opinion
>rests in the extent of the disruption and ultimately its net
>effect on the current human paradigm. So when push comes to
>shove, we are really talking about a question of whether or
>not to introduce a change component to a system without being
>able to accurately predict the positive and negative effects
>that change will have on the system.

Absolutely correct. But what is a little bothersome is what I
consider to be the unrealistic attitude of, it seems, many here
who don't seem accept that they're going to be much disturbed.

The other problem, as Stan mentioned in another reply, is
"context". How it happens and why will largely determine Human
response. Even the way ET looks will have an impact. For
example, humanoids descending from a craft, while less scary,
would likely make a more profound spiritual impact than a
reptoid with 5 heads.

If you were to ask people what institutions might be affected,
one of the first words out of their mouths is "religion". I used
to think that religion might be crushed but now I'm not so sure.
I think mainstream religion will take it in its stride and those
that are a little "further out" will adapt it to suit their own
needs.

But... what if it is revealed, after contact, that Jesus was an
ET? Then we move into a completely different scenario
altogether.

>I think there is an important aspect to this that you are not
>considering, or at least you did not address it. That missing
>aspect comes in the form of an assessment. What is the current
>health of the system that will be changed?

>I think we would all agree that such a public disclosure would
>not be akin to tossing an apple into Eden. I am a advocate for
>the practice of "not messing with a good thing". In fact, I
>would have misgivings about disturbing a functional system,
>even if it was operating at mediocrity. Neither of these is
>synonymous with our current situation. Human population is
>increasing at an unhealthy rate and the social dysfunction
>within that population is increasing as well. The growing
>demands for limited resources is resulting in an escalation of
>tension between counties and cultures. Add to that, religious
>fundamentalism seems to be in vogue. Finally, where "mutually
>assured destruction" used to serve as a deterrent to war, we
>now have a movement that has it as a goal. There is a big
>difference between introducing change(as an uncertainty) into
>a system that is operating at a level of imbalance or
>dysfunction, then there is in incorporating it into a
>balanced functioning system.

You are arguably too much in the immediacy. Since when have we
ever been a balanced system? It just seems worse now but pro
rata, it was just as bad 200 years ago or 1,000 years ago.
Coupled with that were different mindsets which would have made
the acceptance of ET reality an even more difficult hurdle to
clamber over than it would be now.

You express a nervousness about ET contact and the effect it
will have, given our current situation as you see it. It would
be asinine to disagree with you. Intuitively, I feel the
reaction will not be clear cut and will be weighed with both
positives and negatives. For instance, I think it is feasible
that we might start to kill each other in smaller numbers but I
also feel that there will be multifarious personal responses
which, if they became commonly assumed, could lead to anarchy.

>One could say that humanity's biggest problem is its inability
>to see itself as humanity. Instead, we choose to view
>ourselves as members of social groups like Christians,
>Democrats or Jews.

You are teetering here on the Conspiracy/New Age border. On the
one hand the "Illuminati" will keep us like this in order to
hang on to political power and on the other, if we could all
live as one big family, life would be a lot more... etc. If you
removed all political systems and national borders, there would
still be immense differences. You cannot remove religion or skin
colour and while these factors should be irrelevant, we'd still
group together. Remove Human Nature and you might crack it. Good
luck!

>My friend Howard Bloom wrote, "Nothing can unite a
>people quite like the threat of an outside force on that
>people". I see this with my son and daughter who are more
>than willing to hit,scratch and fight with each other, but if
>someone from outside the family threatens to do such a thing >
to one of them, they unite rather quickly to protect each
>other. If contact has been made, it would probably not pose
>such a threat, but it may prompt us to have an epiphany in
>which we realize we are individual humans that make up that
>which is humanity. We will know others are watching our
>interactions, advances, atrocities and achievements. This may
>be beneficial or perhaps it causes us to have a melt down. I >
think you roll the dice.

I am a pessimist when it comes to the concept of self-generated
human salvation. We simply cannot turn ourselves, by ourselves,
into a socially cohesive unit that respects others and looks to
other means to resolve disputes instead of killing. Our only
hope would be some major international catastrophe and even
then, it may come down to every man for himself.

But then I'm making assumptions here; that ET is disinterested
in us because we're savages. That is a very commonly held belief
but it's not a sequitor - unless you subscribe to the "Space
Brothers" scenario.

It is fairly obvious that this is a subject that needs a working
model, allowing for all the possible different permutations. I
bet there's one somewhere in the Pentagon. At this stage I think
we have to abandon the specifics and talk in generalities and I
think that means even forgetting about whether contact is
aggressive or peaceful as the reactions are likely to be similar
but with different consequences.

On that basis, while I think we'll be scared witless, it's one
challenge I'd like to take on, even allowing for the gamble. If
we get it right, we will have achieved salvation and if we get
it wrong, well, damnation might be a better option than the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer

From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:51:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:00:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 09:38:02 +0100
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>One might as well attribute the phenomena to
>>the action of malicious goblins.

>Which basically is what the 'alien abductors' brigade are
>doing.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:12:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:10:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 09:36:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:03:15 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:25:51 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

<snip>

>>I'm suspect he will, Mr. Harney, but as an ardent
>>klasskurtxian in your own right, I suspect that it is the lens
>>_you_ use that sees it as you obviously do.

>But as you will see elsewhere, Clark refuses to explain what he
>means.

Oh - I think you have performed your usually distortion on that.
Refusal is hardly accurate... I would have thought that it was
more a reaction to the tedium of trying to share information
with a person who is constitutionally unable to process it.
Maybe Mr. Clark will take the time to upbraid you... again.

>>A little intellectual squeegeeing, legitimate balance, and
>>karmic evenhandedness would fix you right up, I'm sure. Dig it,
>>Klass _still_ 'lives'.

>Have you actually read the Fortean Times obituary?

No Sir... is it required? I suspected Mr. Clark's, I'll bet too
kind, assessment as a balanced commentator was _abundantly_
adequate. It was enough for me. Some secondary references are
adequate to the task, Mr. Rimmer. Don't pretend the reading is
necessary - it's not.

If he reported it was dewy-eyed or some such - it very likely
was - and from both sides of the _balanced_ aisle, I add.
Please e-mail me a copy here at UpDates and I'll review it
'line' by 'line' for you... 'K?

As it was, was it a eulogy castigating Klass for serial meanness
and rampant sociopathy and crippling the rising and advancing of
the human spirit with ruined ethics, convenient morals, and
right-wing dirty tricks? No?

I suspect the review will be less than positive, then. As I
wrote earlier, I know ufologists, ufologists are friends of
mine. Klass was no ufologist. He shall not be remembered as





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:15:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:32:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 09:36:39 +0100
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:49:58 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:25:51 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>I have the Fortean Times obituary of Phil Klass to hand and I
>>>can't find anything "romantic" or "profoundly silly" about it.

>>Why am I not surprised?

>Why am I not surprised that, as usual, you refuse to answer a
>simple question?

Perhaps because, with you, it's like trying to milk a steer?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

              1980 Todmorden West Yorkshire Case [was: Toronto

From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:33:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:35:49 -0400
Subject: 1980 Todmorden West Yorkshire Case [was: Toronto


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:50:17 -0400
>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

>>Source: Eye Magazine - Toronto
>>http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_09.29.05/op/wanderingeye.htm

>>09.29.05

>>Wandering Eye

>>U OF T -- Outside Convocation Hall, ...

><snip>

>>Still, not everyone views abduction as a major threat. Paul
>>Hellyer says he is unaware of anyone dying at the hands of
>>extraterrestrials.

>Do I remember a case on a UFO documentary a number of years
>ago now, in which a dead man, in circumstances suggesting he
>might have been an abductee, was discovered atop a huge pile
>of coal, with clothing on but arranged in ways suggesting
>whoever dressed him didn't know how clothing works?

>I believe there were activities prior to this, in that area,
>involving UFO craft in close proximity, but can't remember
>the details.


Hi Eleanor, List

I presume that have in mind the discovery of Zigmund Jan
Adamski's body on a coal tip in Todmorden, West Yorkshire on 11
June 1980. (I'm not sure about the spelling of his first name,
which various from source to source - Jenny Randles refers to
"Zigmund", Mantle refers to "Zygmund" and Blundell refers to
"Zygmunt").

Several authors have sought to link the discovery of his body to
UFO sightings in the area.

This incident is discussed on a number of websites, including at
the link below:

http://tinyurl.com/ahuyk


A rather more skeptical discussion can be found at the end of
Magonia Supplement Number 36, which is in the Updates archive at
the link below:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/aug/m19-002.shtml

That discussion notes the following:

"Remember Zigmund Adamski, who was found dead on a coal tip in
Todmorden in 1980? At the Exeter conference one of the attendees
had one explanation for it. Apparently some of Adamski's former
work mates discovered he had been responsible for atrocities
during World War Two; to scare him they locked him up (in a
mine-related building?). When he tried escaping he fell over and
killed himself. To cover their prank that back-fired, they
dumped his body and kept silent. Like most rumours this needs to
be taken at more than face value but it does sound more
reasonable than a botched alien abduction."


The two longest discussions I've noted of the relevant events in
books that are:

29 pages - Randles, Jenny and Hough, Peter in their "Death By
Supernatural Causes?" (1988) at pages 8 (in the Introduction),
114-141 (Chapter 5 generally) of the Grafton paperback edition.

21 pages - Randles, Jenny in her "The Pennine UFO Mystery" (1983)
at pages 15-23, 25-26, 25-26 (in Chapter 1), 87-88, 91-92, 93-94
(in Chapter 7), 123 (in Chapter 10), 194-195 (in Chapter 14) of
the Granada paperback edition.


Since I've noted relatively few references for this event in my
draft Chronology, I might as well cut and paste them all below
in case they are of interest to you (particularly since several
of the discussions of this incident are in the context of wider
discussions of deaths allegedly caused by UFOs):

Baker, Alan in his "Sci-Fi Channel: True Life Encounters: UFO
Sightings" (1997) at pages 127-130 (in Chapter 4) of the Orion
softcover edition.

Baker, Alan in his "Destination Earth" (1998) at pages 5-7 (in
the Introduction) of the Blandford softcover edition.

Blundell, Nigel in his "World's Most Amazing UFO Visits" (1996)
at pages 163-164 of the Select softcover edition.

Blundell, Nigel and Boar, Roger in their "The World's Greatest
UFO Mysteries" (1986) at pages 50-52 (in the chapter entitled
"Encounters of the Closest Kind") of the Octopus hardback
edition (with the same page numbering in the Hamlyn softcover
edition).

Cawthorne, Nigel in his "The World's Greatest Alien Abductions"
(1999) at pages 87-88 (in the chapter entitled "Abductions UK")
of the Hamlyn softcover edition.

Cawthorne, Nigel in "The World's Greatest Alien Abduction
Mysteries" (2001) at pages 113-114 (in the chapter entitled
"Abductions UK") of the Chancellor Press softcover edition.

Christopher, Paul in his "Alien Intervention" (1998) at page 21
(in Chapter 1) of the Huntington House softcover edition.

Mantle, Philip and Nagaitis, Carl in their "Without Consent"
(1994) at page 141 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Is it
all in the mind?", sub-section entitled "PC Alan Godfrey") of
the Ringpull hardback edition.

Owens, Andy in "Supernatural England" (2002) (edited by Betty
Puttick) at pages 241-246 (in the chapter entitled "Yorkshire",
in a section entitled "Close Encounters of a Deadly Kind")) of
the Countryside Books softcover edition.

Randles, Jenny and Hough, Peter in their "Death By Supernatural
Causes?" (1988) at pages 8 (in the Introduction), 114-141
(Chapter 5 generally) of the Grafton paperback edition.

Randles, Jenny in her "The UFO Conspiracy" (1987) at pages
153-154 (in Chapter 25) of the Barnes & Noble hardback edition.

Randles, Jenny in her "The Pennine UFO Mystery" (1983) at pages
15-23, 25-26, 25-26 (in Chapter 1), 87-88, 91-92, 93-94 (in
Chapter 7), 123 (in Chapter 10), 194-195 (in Chapter 14) of the
Granada paperback edition.


These references also discuss various alleged UFO sightings in
the area prior to the discovery of Mr Adamski's body (as well as
other theories concerning his death).

Probably the most famous incident in that area occured very
shortly thereafter - the alleged close encounter of Police
Constable ("PC") Alan Godfrey (stationed in Todmorden, West
Yorkshire) on 28 November 1980, during which he reportedly
interacted with a human-like figure called "Joseph", some robots
and a dog early in the morning (near the end of his night
shift). I'll stop short of including references for that
incident, since it is rather well known and discussed in a
rather long list of books.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                          Re: Pandora's Box - Jones

From: Sean Jones <tedric.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:50:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:38:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Jones


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:39:08 -0300
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

<snip>

I was talking about Pandora's box one say to someone. I remarked once
opened there is no going back. He said to me,

"Yes, but you can control just how much you open it and what you
let out".

Read into that what you will.

--





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

             Field Research & Images [was: Armstrong & Aldrin's

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:40:31 -0400
Subject: Field Research & Images [was: Armstrong & Aldrin's


>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:29:38 +0200
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:52:01 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>As I always say, we need some field research.

>>Look at TAPS and their ghost research. Can anyone say that the
>>state of the art in UFO field research cannot exceed the quality
>>of TAPS ghost investigations? If not, maybe we should all go
>>into ghost hunting instead. Plus the SciFi channel seems to have
>>gotten them alot of nice equipment and nice digs.

>Field research, of what sort? I presume you don't mean something
>as simple as a Sky-watch? or something as different as what the
>Cseti group used to do with bright lights and meditation? Or how
>about what they did in Florida where they went to a regular
>sighting spot on the beach and took photos? How would your
>'field research' differ? and to achieve what results different
>than those achieved by these other folk?

Ha! No, I mean stereo imagery and spectra as a minimum from one
site. Prefer two sites. Prefer continuous night operation.
Prefer automated data collection. Would like to build up
instrument collection to get precursor signals (VLF EMF?, VLF
sound?) Also, prefer mobile sites (get baseline observations and
then be able to go to flap areas). Prefer to use sychronized
telescopic computer tracking systems which amateur satellite
observers use to video satellites.

Photos alone aren't going to do it. Stereo imagery is a start to
get distance and spectra (with a good spectra database) can be
used to quickly rule out prosaic things.

The goal is to be able to follow (I.E. use the ranging data to
follow it to orbital altitude.) the damn thing either from space
to ground or visa versa thus proving that at least ONE UFO is
from space.

I think the problem with most folk who do UFO field research is
that they just want to prove they actually SAW something. We
know there are UFOs out there, but the problem is not trying to
prove to anyone that you really saw something. It is to show
they are alien (or super-secret human technology I suppose). You
can't do this with a nice photo shoot. You need some high speed
telescopic stereo video.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                     Re: Apollo 11 UFO Encounter - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:28:06 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:42:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 UFO Encounter - Smith


>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:29:01 -0400
>Subject: Re: Apollo 11 UFO Encounter

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:01:33 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Apollo 11 UFO Encounter

>>The later Apollo mission footage I would imagine (having not
>>seen the film clip they showed) had to have something "ringlike"
>>in it to make sense for the program so I bet its the old Apollo
>>16 'UFO" film footage which has been shown to be the Apollo
>>module EVA floodlight. That would be just like TV to show
>>something that was explained in lieu of non-existent footage.

>>If it was just a photo then there are lots of booster photos
>>they could use and simulate it to be a film by zooming in and
>>panning.

>So you are saying that Aldrin does not accurately remember
>what he saw back then?

No, I bet he remembers fine.

>I thought I heard him specifically speak about this in some of
>his narratives where he supported the fact the object was never
>identified. I would think he would have quizzed various NASA
>people regarding this before making the statement on film.

I am sure he asked about it and I am sure it could not be
absolutely identified.

>BTW, did they lose the floodlight on the Apollo 16? What they
>showed didn't look like it was attached to the Apollo.

No! I know of no lost floodlights. Instrument booms were
jettisoned and sub-satellites deployed though.

>Dave, did you happen to notice the number of rings on what they
>showed? Just wondering if this matches up with the floodlight
>mentioned.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:44:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:43:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 09:36:39 +0100
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:49:58 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:25:51 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>I have the Fortean Times obituary of Phil Klass to hand and I
>>>can't find anything "romantic" or "profoundly silly" about it.

>>Why am I not surprised?

>Why am I not surprised that, as usual, you refuse to answer a
>simple question?

Patient and gentle Listfolk:

One doesn't know which adjective better applies here:
disingenuous or childish. Ufologically literate Listfolk will be
familiar with my extended writings on Klass's, er, distinctive
approach to the UFO heresy, which I have zero intention of
reiterating here, especially when it's to so little purpose as
(and what could be less purpose than?) the edification of
pelicanists. One can only suppose that the Johns have lots of
time on their hands these days; either that, or they've chosen,
for inscrutable avian ends, to behave even more frivolously than
usual.

Another adjective comes to mind: hilarious. Listfolk with decent
memories will recall how, shortly after Uncle Phil died early in
August, I predicted that the obit in Magonia would be
hagiographic. Furious, indignant pelican squawking, wing-
flapping, and red-faced denial followed. They had barely
recovered their composure when the hagiographic, breathlessly
uncritical, and tellingly selective obit in Fortean Times was
published. Furious, indignant pelican squawking, wing-flapping,
and red-faced defense of the hagiographic, breathlessly
uncritical, and tellingly selective obit followed, or will in
another posting or two. Anybody care to place a small bet on how
slobbering the Magonia obit will be?

The Fortean Times obit is as it is because it expresses FT's
strange antipathy to UFOs and to American ufologists. (I have
lost track of the number of slaggings I've received in its
pages, and I am far from alone.) Reading it, one has no clue why
Klass had such a miserable reputation among American UFO
researchers and investigators (not to mention among many
skeptics as well, for example Marcello Truzzi, Dennis Rawlins,
Jim Lippard, Gordon Stein, and others). We can only infer the
usual unspoken Ameriphobic subtext, to wit: What would you
expect, after all, of those uncultured colonials? Only such
uncouth souls could fail to fall under the spell of the saintly
Lord Pelican's profound wit and wisdom. We are to believe, I
guess, that this was one of those rare instances in which a
provincial was able to lay claim to the deepest secrets of
feathered truth.

Having any number of more productive things to do with my life,
knowing from long, tedious experience how long pelicanists can
spin out nothing at all, I refuse to entertain further
discussion with the Johns and, lest I be distracted from
actually consequential matters, plan to delete e-mails from them
on the topic. I don't mean _all_ topics, of course; just this
one, which is simply too boring to be the good, dirty fun of
pelican-baiting which from time to time I allow myself, often to
my subsequent chagrin, to indulge.

On the other hand, if there is any Listperson who is honestly
unfamiliar with, and curious about, my Klass writings, who
really does not know why the FT obit is so absurdly misleading
and selective, he or she is free to contact me off-line for some
citations. I will also have an obit in the soon-to-be-released
next issue of International UFO Reporter. I hope it is my last
word on Klass, who has already taken up too much of my - indeed,
all of our - time. Besides, even a fanatical and unpleasant man





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:44:53 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Allan


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:15:52 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:11:52 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>I would generally agree except that populated centers account
>>for less than 1% of the earth's surface. Chances of a UFO
>>crashing in a populated center are less than 1 in 100.

>Gee, last time I checked much of the world's skies were
>monitored by radar and since the early 1960s' by spy satellites.

>The data from these systems is born classified.

>Every country would want to recover stuff coming down from the
>sky whether it is somebody's spy satellite, one's own satellites
>or reentering rockets, foreign spy planes or a flying saucer.
>They ought to be worth quite a bit on the open world clandestine
>market.

>In addition I know of no country that wants its citizens to owe
>their allegiance to the planet instead of that country.

>May I remind Listers that 166 Americans were in recon planes
>that were shot down or captured without public admission until
>not many years ago. There were also a number of Soviet planes
>that we destroyed or captured... in silence.

>But then perhaps CDA can read all the stuff under the White-out
>on the NSA UFO documents and the blackout in the CIA UFO
>documents. I can't.

>There is a cosmic Watergate.. like it or not.

You just cannot or will not understand that the whited out NSA
docs and the blacked out CIA docs do not in any way advance your
'Cosmic Watergate' thesis. Why should I or anyone else conclude
that these censored portions are evidence of ET visits to earth?
This has been pointed out to you several times, but you blithely
ignore it, and continue to display these censored documents as
evidence of the CW at your lectures, in your books, papers
etc. ad nauseam.

I do not have to read any of this censored stuff to be 99.9 per
cent certain that they have nothing whatever to do with
extraterrestrial visits, contain zilch of interest to science
and are merely to do with code deciphering and other boring
matters relating to intelligence methods the authorities want
to conceal. One day they will be published in full. When they
are, I predict you will be bitterly disappointed. You can then
claim there are lots of other classified papers (e.g. the Ike
Library's zillions of papers) still lying about which remain
under wraps. If and when these too are finally declassified,
you can still point to numerous others. And so on and so on.

Finally, you can always regurgitate MJ-12.

There is no Cosmic Watergate and never has been. It is the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                          Re: Pandora's Box - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:33:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:23:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Hatch


>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:39:50 +0200
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

<snip>

>BTW, the French government is now discretly reactivating
 >an official group of UFO studies.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                   Re: Einstein's Equation At 100 - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 06:01:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:25:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Einstein's Equation At 100 - Hatch


>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:25:37 +0200
>Subject: Einstein's Equation At 100

>Source: The New York Times

>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/30/opinion/30greene.html?th&emc=th

>September 30, 2005

>NY Times, Op-Ed
>That Famous Equation and You By Brian Greene

>During the summer of 1905, while fulfilling his duties in the
>patent office in Bern, Switzerland, Albert Einstein was fiddling
>with a tantalizing outcome of the special theory of relativity
>he'd published in June. His new insight, at once simple and
>startling, led him to wonder whether "the Lord might be
>laughing... and leading me around by the nose."


Hello Diana: (and Brian Greene if you are looking in)

That is one of the best articles I have read in a good long
time.

As a teen, one of the most astounding things I ever heard, (not
sure if I believed it even then) was that a tank of gasoline,
and the oxygen to burn it, weighs very slightly more than the
sum total of the end products (exhaust).

The infinitesimal difference was equivalent to the energy given
off of course, but who would have guessed?

I didn't know that A.E. wrote his famous equation in terms of
mass rather than energy, thanks for that.

Such an admirable man, and still humble enough to give the
zaniest crackpot his ear.   To think that only accidents of
history prevented him from being another of the millions of
Hitler's victims.

My one small caveat is something people often overlook.
Sometimes you will hear somebody say something like "There's
more energy in my fingernail than all the oil in Texas" or the
like.  Technically correct by E=MC^2, but the energy is
unavailable to us in any practical sense unless the person has
plutonium fingernails.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

               Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:22:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:28:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Lehmberg


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:54:38 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:34:11 +0000
>>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:59:13 +0100
>>>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>><snip>

>>>>Sleep paralysis may explain a few cases reported as abductions.
>>>>That certainly should be studied and cases should be screened
>>>>for it. When they are, it turns out that the sleep paralysis
>>>>explanation used so sweepingly by the Clancy's of the world is
>>>>rather inadequate for the great bulk of cases.

>>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>>took place.

>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
>data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
>case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
>suggesting that I am a naif.


I think it's duplicitous poseurs posture, Sir, like asking a
duck to stop quacking, or a true naif to admit his own





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:16:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:29:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hatch


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>Sleep paralysis may explain a few cases reported as abductions.
>>>>That certainly should be studied and cases should be screened
>>>>for it. When they are, it turns out that the sleep paralysis
>>>>explanation used so sweepingly by the Clancy's of the world is
>>>>rather inadequate for the great bulk of cases.

>>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>>took place.

>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
suggesting that I am a naif.

Hi Dick:

Not to hijack your important point above, but I have to add a
question. Is anybody here suggesting that Barney and Betty Hill
suffered from simultaneous sleep paralysis or anything like
that?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                    Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:52:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:32:42 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia - Hamilton


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:41:26 +0100
>Subject: Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia

>>From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul>
>>To: UFO Updates List <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:10:11 -0300
>>Subject: Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia

>>>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:18:17 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia

>>>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:13:23 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: UFOs Gravity & Inertia

><snip>

>>Again, Bill, I'm no expert but I wonder if such a process could
>>really seperate, so to speak, a craft from inertia. I think the
>>property of inertia is an inherent one that couldn't be gotten
>>rid of through cavitation or supercavitation.

><snip>

>>But I'd like some input from others who know more about
>>aerodynamics and cavitation/supercavitation because, to be
>>honest, Bill, I don't know for sure if there is such a
>>connection between motion in fluids and motion in gases.

>Eugene,

>You've got to be right: inertia can't be separated from a mass
>simply by by altering its surface conditions; they only lessen
>effects of atmospheric or fluid drag.

I think my analogy has been misunderstood. In some new physics
theories the source of inertia is the Zero-Point field and in
others its a superfluid ether and is not inherent in matter. In
fact in Machian theories it was never inherent in matter itself.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                          Re: Pandora's Box - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:54:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:34:34 -0400
Subject: Re:  Pandora's Box - Hatch


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:54:11 +0000
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

<snip>

Oh heck, I might as well toss in my 2 cents worth.

Lets say irrefutable evidence or proof comes in that we have
been visited by alien craft etc.

I agree it would be a three day wonder, maybe 2 weeks of
madness. After that, I see things a little differently than some
here.

Sure, governments and their militaries, would go into a frenzy.
Scientists would have field day once the inevitable bashing
stopped, and these effects, though long lived, would start to
trail off.

Without proof, I would bet a dollar or two that the great
unwashed would be back to their sports and celebrity magazines
before very long.

Clergymen would work these discoveries into their sermons, only
to see the same faithful they always had, still nodding their
heads in semi-slumber.

Capitalists would capitalize on the news, only to learn that
fads die a terrible death.

Ufologists will crow "we told you so" only to hear "so did we"
from their antagonists.

Several new brands of breakfast cereal will appear, only to
vanish again, but more quietly.

The Middle East will remain an intractable mess.

A few contactees will disappear for 2 weeks, and reappear having
reinvented themselves as 'spiritual guides'.

Fuel prices will continue their rise, occasionally dipping, only
to find new peaks.

People you remember as being young, will appear older. Familiar
old names will sadly appear in the obituaries.

I will discover that most of the listings in my database were
crap.

Messages to the 'space aliens' will remain unanswered.

Chocolate bars will shrink in size, increase in price, or more
likely both.

Enrollment in science courses will increase sharply, maybe the
one real benefit.

In short, another big bump on the road, I'm not minimizing that.

Civilization did not fall apart after the discovery that we
share a common ancestry with the great apes. We survived
uncounted wars, famines, epidemics, even Prohibition, (Lord help
us).

Over half the world believes in life elsewhere. So finally there
is some proof?

Give it 2 months (more like 3 weeks?) The news-racks will be
full of the latest Brittney Spears clone, Brad (whatzisname) and
Jennifer (who-cares) and things are right back on track.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 11:05:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:37:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:22:15 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:25:24 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:48:59 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 06:45:51 -0500
>>>>Subject: Memory Without Klass


Hi, Kevin,

>So, if Phil Klass wrote the letter, and I have no real reason to
>suspect he didn't, he is in good company. Bill Moore and Jaime
>Shandera spent a great deal of time and effort trying to
>undermine me. Stan joined right in. And, to my surprise, so did
>Don Schmitt. Is it any wonder that we have trouble with our
>credibility in the real world?

Without in any way defending the misdeeds you so wittily recount
(and they are, of course, indefensible), I quarrel only with
your last sentence. These sound not like sins unique to
ufologists but to human failings that show up in all walks of
life and conflict. We have a tendency in our field to judge
ourselves uniquely iniquitous, when in fact we're just all too
much like human beings. And in any event, I doubt that all but a
tiny handful of those who disdain ufologists have ever heard of





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

              Academic Throws Light On 40-Year-Old UFO Mystery

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:42:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:42:13 -0400
Subject: Academic Throws Light On 40-Year-Old UFO Mystery




Source: The Age - Melbourne, Australia

http://tinyurl.com/74l77

October 2, 2005

[Picture at site]


Academic Throws Light On 40-Year-Old UFO Mystery

Just what did flash out of the sky and into the lives of
hundreds that April day? Stephen Cauchi reports.

A CAnberra academic is investigating one of Australia's most
compelling UFO mysteries, a sighting by hundreds of people in
the Melbourne suburb of Westall on April 6, 1966.

More than 200 students and staff from two schools watched as the
object landed in a nearby paddock, lifted off and vanished.

Shane Ryan, an English lecturer at the University of Canberra,
is interviewing dozens of witnesses for a book he hopes to
publish on the 40th anniversary of the sighting.

Mr Ryan, 38, was alerted to the events in the 1980s by a
housemate who was there. Unlike most UFO sightings, the Westall
object had a large number of credible witnesses. It was viewed
in daylight and attracted a forceful response from police and
the RAAF.

"It had these rather interesting elements which indicated to me
that, unlike some other so-called UFO stories, there was some
substance to this," he told The Sunday Age.

"I knew the 40th anniversary was coming up next year, so I
thought it was timely to do some research on it."

Mr Ryan has interviewed about 30 witnesses, mostly former staff
and students from the Westall secondary and primary schools. He
has tried obtaining police and RAAF reports, but so far with
little luck. The story was covered then by Channel Nine, The Age
and local newspapers.

On the UFO, everyone seems to agree, Mr Ryan says. It was a low-
flying, silver/grey shining object, either of classical flying
saucer shape or close to it, "a cup turned upside down on a
saucer". The students were familiar with light aircraft because
the schools were close to Moorabbin Airport. Although the UFO
was of similar size, "everyone said straight away that they knew
it was not a plane", Mr Ryan said, nor a weather balloon.

The object was in view for up to 20 minutes, and many saw it
descend. Most agree it landed behind pine trees at the Grange
Reserve. Dozens of students ran across what was then an open
paddock to the reserve to investigate, but the object had lifted
off and vanished.

Other details are sketchier. The UFO appears to have left a
circle of scorched grass; others say several circles were left
in paddocks bordering Grange Reserve.

Many witnesses, not all, report seeing aircraft, up to five,
trailing the UFO. Some say it made no sound, others say it did.

Many reported that police/air force/military personnel inspected
the site; some (not all) say the authorities burnt the site. The
Dandenong Journal, for which the story was front-page news two
weeks in a row, reported that "students and staff have been
instructed to 'talk to no-one' about the incident".
Nevertheless, one teacher, Andrew Greenwood, gave the paper a
detailed account.

"It was silvery-grey and seemed to thicken at times," he said.
"The thickening was similar to when a disc is turned a little to
show the underside."

One of the closest witnesses was a boy whose family leased land
at Grange Reserve for horses.

Shaun Matthews (not a student at Westall) was on holidays and
spending time on the land.

"I saw the thing come across the horizon and drop down behind
the pine trees," he told The Sunday Age this week. "I couldn't
tell you what it was. It certainly wasn't a light aircraft or
anything of the like =85

"I saw the thing drop down behind the pine trees and saw it
leave again. I couldn't tell you how long it was there for, it
was such a long time ago."

Mr Matthews, 51 and now living in Greenvale, said the object
"went up and off very very rapidly".

"I went over and there was a circle in the clearing. It looked
like it had been cooked or boiled, not burnt as I remember," he
said. "A heap of kids from Westall primary and high school came
charging through to see what had happened =97 'look at this, look
at that, we saw it as well', that sort of thing. It was a bit of
a talking point for a couple of days."

Mr Matthews said the object, about the size of "two family
cars", passed him at a distance of about "four football fields".
"It was silvery, but it had a sort-of purple hue to it, very
bright, but not bright enough that you couldn't look at it," he
said.

"I saw that it dropped down behind the trees, and I thought,
'hello, hang on'. A minute or so later, it went straight up,
just gone."

He said police and other officials interviewed his mother. But
he cannot remember them burning the landing site, as others have
alleged. And he did not see any light aircraft trailing the
object, as others did.

"The way this thing moved there is no way it could have been a
weather balloon or a light aircraft," he said.

"A helicopter? No way =97 no noise, wrong shape, and it didn't
move like it. It came out of the distance, stopped, and then
just dropped.

"It didn't just sort of cruise and then slightly descend at an
angle. It just stopped, dropped, and then went straight up."

The Victorian UFO Research Society investigated the incident.
VUFORS secretary Tony Cook said Westall remained one of
Australia's major unexplained UFO cases.

The top one was the case of Frederick Valentich, a 20-year-old
Melbourne pilot whose light plane disappeared while flying over
Bass Strait in 1978.

In the last minutes of radio communication, Valentich reported
seeing a UFO hovering above his plane. He and his craft were
never recovered.

"It's pretty well documented," Mr Cook said. "That's probably
the most important one because it involves the disappearance of
a person."

Mr Cook said the society's stance on UFOs was that, "there are
people out there seeing unusual things in the sky at times and
they can't be explained. But it's a very big leap to go from
unexplained things in the sky to extraterrestrials."

Most witnesses, including Mr Matthews, say the UFO was not an
aircraft or helicopter. But Westall is only six kilometres from
Moorabbin Airport, and the object was roughly headed in that
direction, travelling north to south.

"It sounds to me like some sort of experimental craft, very much
Earth-based," Steve Roberts, of Australian Skeptics, said.

"It is an interesting event with lots of witnesses and what we
now call a crop circle.

"Accounts are confused. Some have the object landing and taking
off again, others say 'a paddock over which the object seemed to
hover'."

As well, "if there was a whole swag of officials investigating
it, there must be an official report in RAAF archives
somewhere".

But Mr Ryan said that no one at the RAAF knew of the incident.

But given the history of the case =97 the way students and staff
were told to keep quiet from the start =97 that was not
surprising, he said.

"As I got a little bit older, I got a little more interested in
the social and historical aspects of the story, how something
like this could have happened and how it reflected society at
the time, and how authorities responded to it," he said.

"There's been a layer of secrecy that was very, very prominent
in this story from the beginning."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

              Black Vault's Work On US History Channel Tonight

From: John Greenewald <john.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:07:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:27:44 -0400
Subject: Black Vault's Work On US History Channel Tonight


For those of you who missed it, the most recent shows I worked
on for The History Channel will be airing tomorrow, October 2nd.

I was credited as the Coordinating Producer of both, and also
the writer of UFO Hunters.  My supervisor, Jeffrey Willerth,
long time friend and partner in The Black Vault TV Series.

Tune and, and let me know what you think!

The first, UFO Hunters:

UFO Hunters.
Airs on Sunday, October 2 at 3:00pm ET

They look to the stars, to Earth, and within the human body.
They are the UFO research elite that seeks answers to the
mysteries of the UFO phenomenon. Their determination, attitude,
and methodologies stand strong against ridicule and disbelief.
In the end, UFO hunters exhibit scientific evidence that pushes
the boundary of modern-day thinking. At annual conferences, they
share findings and are often stunned by the commonality of their
cases. Follow UFO hunters as they search for UFOs and
investigate crash sites. Their hunts for physical evidence of
UFOs and alien life forms sometimes end up as global wild goose
chases, but there are other times, when what they find is just
too intriguing....and might just prove that it is possible that
we are not alone in the universe.  TVPG


and the second, UFOs and the White House:

UFOs and the White House.
Airs on Sunday, October 2 at 6:00pm ET

Did you know that the office of President of the United States
has had a direct involvement with UFOs for over 50 years? Since
WWII, every Chief Executive has publicly discussed, issued, or
received documents from the White House pertaining to
"Unidentified Flying Objects". Many of these documents have
never been seen on television before and some of the stories
surrounding these UFO-presidential encounters are broadcast for
the first time. Find out which administrations had to defend our





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - McGonagle

From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:29:10 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - McGonagle


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:18:52 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

Hello Kevin, List,

I haven't had a great deal of time to take an active part on
this List recently, but I have been keeping one eye on this
thread.

>Third, what if there has been but a single crash? Yes, I know
>there are some other interesting cases (Ubatuba 1957; Kecksburg
>1965) but there could be other explanations for them. If so,
>then we have but one event that needs protecting and the problem
>is significantly reduced. That means that other countries have
>not had to retrieve the remains of a UFO and therefore have no
>need for a cover up. (This also impacts on the tales of crash
>retrieval teams roaming the world to recover the remains of
>UFOs.)

I would argue "what if there has never been any crash, including
Roswell?". You appear to be willing to concede that those listed
above may have other possible explanations, but seem to disallow
the possibility of other explanations for Roswell?

>Fourth, for nearly 50 years there was an iron curtain that
>protected everything on the other side of it. UFO information
>from that side was difficult to get and today we know that they
>had actively hidden the data, just as the US has. NATO would
>have been an effective means of hiding information on our side.

If press reports are to be believed, there is a significant risk
of a black-market trade in ex-soviet nuclear material. If such
material can get on to the black market, I would expect that any
knowledge of captured alien technology would also be accessible
in the same way?

<snip>

>Fifth, although much of the rest of the world has had good UFO
>sightings, they have been given nothing concrete to prove the
>case. Given that they had eyewitness testimony, photographs that
>have not withstood the assault of skeptics and little if any
>other type of evidence, there isn't much they can do. Sometimes
>they announced their belief in UFOs, but it always falls back on
>the lack of multiple chains of evidence that would demonstrate
>the reality to all but the most skeptical.

Is the USA any different in this respect?

<snip>

>I have to throw in with you on that. The world wide conspiracy
>does not make good sense. The lack of proof positive and a low
>number of true visits might simply accomplish the same thing.

I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to those
that would claim that the USA uses it's financial clout and
military might to intimidate other states into not disclosing
anything relating to UFOs, that the same tactics do not appear
to be working in relation to Iran's nuclear development
programme. Why should they have more success when it comes to
UFOs?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

             Re: 1980 Todmorden West Yorkshire Case - McGonagle

From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:50:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:31:58 -0400
Subject: Re: 1980 Todmorden West Yorkshire Case - McGonagle


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:37:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

>>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:50:17 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

Hello Eleanor, Ray, List,

>>>Source: Eye Magazine - Toronto
>>>http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_09.29.05/op/wanderingeye.html

>>Do I remember a case on a UFO documentary a number of years
>>ago now, in which a dead man, in circumstances suggesting he
>>might have been an abductee, was discovered atop a huge pile
>>of coal, with clothing on but arranged in ways suggesting whoever
>>dressed him didn't know how clothing works?

Ray is correct. This sounds like the Zygmund Adamski case (a
search on his name should produce some links).

Adamski disappeared in June 1980 after leaving home near Leeds
to buy potatoes from a local shop, and his body was discovered 5
days later and more than 20 miles away in a small town called
Todmorden. His body was found on top of a heap of coal in a coal
yard, with no obvious explanation as to how it got there.  His
shirt was missing, he had some minor injuries, including what
appeared to be a chemical burn to the back of his head and neck
area.

Jenny Randles was closely involved with the investigation, but
has pointed out to me that any link between the case and UFOs is
only circumstantial, and very tennuous. It does appear in "Death
by Supernatural Causes" (Randles/Hough, 1988).

I have been in dialogue with a relative of the victim recently.
He is still very disturbed by the case, and rejects any idea
that it is related to UFOs, in fact, he finds this association
very upsetting.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 11:54:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:34:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg


>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:22:15 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:25:24 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:48:59 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 06:45:51 -0500
>>>>Subject: Memory Without Klass

>>>>Ref: SDI #361...


Dr. Randle;

In a seeming attempt, Sir, to provide consistency to balance in
the discussion, you manage only to compare healthy worm-free
apples with a moldy skunk cabbage, imo. You essay about the
expected and even traditional infighting between democrats and
compare it with attacks from the other side of the aisle used to
deny civil rights, preclude a right to know, philosophically
hamstring a credulous humanity, and otherwise drive quality
people to suicide.

It's the truthseeking side to the argument that can be expected
to be fractious; it's the klasskurtxian side that is all lock-
step and parroting identical talking points... I'd bet _they_
don't call around behind each other's back and torpedo each
others conferences... there's enough denialist swag there for
all of 'them'. The mainstream pays them off handsomely, I'd
surmise. Hell, they have their own publishing offices, don't
they?

That said, Sir, with regard to the 'practice'... I'm not making
my living on the lecture circuit and book sales so I hesitate...
...given I haven't walked in another man's shoes. When I aim to
torpedo somebody... and it happened in the Army... I'd let 'em
know it was coming. I think I can be shown to loath a sucker
punch... and I don't snark around behind the scenes and try to
turn people from others. Uh-uh.

Moreover, I'm willing to bet that Mr. Friedman was a tad more
forthright with you than a Mr. Klass may have been, in any
case... and was a tad more forthright, also, in your contention
with him? ...Don't know that... but would be surprised if it
wasn't so. Be that as it may, Friedman should not be mentioned
inthe same breath with Klass, and you get a hexbolt through the
particle separator to so suggest.

Finally -- it's not ufologists squabbling between themselves
that keeps UFOs dodgy... it's the status quo of a jealous
culture without 'sack' accomplishing that. You guys (all of us)
are just bumping into each other in a fog that THEY provide.


All respect to you both, whom I hold in high regard.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                     Alien Abduction Claims In Yorkshire

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:39:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:39:07 -0400
Subject: Alien Abduction Claims In Yorkshire





Source: BBC News - Inside Out - Yorkshire & Lincolnshire:

http://tinyurl.com/9yxem

Monday 3rd February, 2003

[Pictures at site]

Alien Abduction Claims In Yorkshire

A mysterious disappearance, a body with strange burns and an
inexplicable substance that baffled scientists.

Inside Out investigates the presence of paranormal activity in
the death of a Yorkshire miner.

Zigmund Adamski, a 56 year old miner, went missing from his home
in Tingley, near Wakefield in June 1980. He had gone out to do
some shopping.

To Zigmund�s colleagues at Lofthouse Colliery, it was a complete
mystery.


Grim discovery

Five days after he disappeared, Zigmund�s body was discovered 20
miles from his home at a coal yard in Todmorden.

Zigmund�s body was lying on top of a pile of coal. He was
wearing a suit but his shirt, watch and wallet were missing.

On the back of his head, neck and shoulders were mysterious
burns which attracted lots of attention. Baffled

James Turnbull, the coroner who dealt with Zigmund�s death, says
it�s the biggest mystery of his career.

The coroner was baffled because although Zigmund had been
missing for five days, he only had one day�s growth of beard.

He says, "The question of where he was before he died and what
led to his death just could not be answered."

James also said a strange ointment that appeared to have been
used on Zigmund�s burns could not be identified by forensic
scientists.

Exhaustive checks failed to reveal any record of Zigmund having
been treated at any hospital during his missing five days.

It was at this point that questions began occurring, regarding
the origin of this inexplicable ointment and who applied it to
Zigmund.


Alien abduction

It was not just the usual investigators, the police and
coroners, who were attracted to this case.

One of the most famous UFOlogists of all time, also called
Adamski offered his own amazing theories on the tragedy.

He believed aliens from outer space abducted the Yorkshire miner
by mistake.

The speculation of an extraterrestrial encounter was fuelled by
the policeman who originally found Zigmund�s body, Alan Godfrey.

Six months after finding Zigmund�s body, Alan was again on duty
in Todmorden at 5 am.

He claims he also encounter a UFO, which made headlines all over
the world.

Alan says, "I wish I'd never seen the UFO, particularly because
of the effects on my children."

"It's not easy having a policeman as a father but when he's a
policeman who saw a UFO its even worse."

This was a huge turning point in Alan Godfrey�s life. He left
the police force and has a new role as a speaker at charity
fundraising events.


Verdict

In the past 20 years there has been many claimed sightings in
the Pennine hills around Todmorden.

It�s regarded as the Britain�s UFO hotspot. But serious UFO
watchers dismiss most of these Pennine sighting as just lights
in the sky.

The corner is equally unconvinced about the presence of
paranormal activity.

Although he still has a raft of unanswered questions regarding
Zigmund�s death, James is opting for an earthly rather than
alien explanation at present.

But he does say, "In fifty years time, if we discover aliens
have been visiting us and we didn't know about it, then that
might give an answer."

But after all these years, Alan Godfrey still has no doubts,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:01:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:40:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>Sleep paralysis may explain a few cases reported as abductions.
>>>>That certainly should be studied and cases should be screened
>>>>for it. When they are, it turns out that the sleep paralysis
>>>>explanation used so sweepingly by the Clancy's of the world is
>>>>rather inadequate for the great bulk of cases.

>>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>>took place.

>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
>data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
>case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
>suggesting that I am a naif.

What D-A-T-A? What research? And what evidence to confirm that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                  Re: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:11:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:41:08 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies - Hall


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:15:50 -0400

>Source: The Tallahassee Democrat - Tallahassee, Florida

>http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/12778642.htm

>Fri, Sep. 30, 2005

>UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies

>Experts believe object was meteor
>The Associated Press

>Miami - Experts believe a meteor was visible along a large
>section of the Florida skyline Thursday night, although NASA
>officials have not confirmed what the intensely bright, fast
>object exactly was.

>The glowing orb was spotted around 7 p.m.; some who saw it
>called county and state officials to ensure that it wasn't a
>crashing aircraft.

>"This one could've been from a baseball- to a basketball-sized
>chunk of space rock that slammed into our Earth's atmosphere at
>a very high speed," Jack Horkheimer, director of the planetarium
>at the Miami Museum of Science, told The Miami Herald.

>National Weather Service meteorologist Barry Baxter said he
>isn't sure if the object, which he believes was a meteor, was
>over Atlantic Ocean waters or the Florida peninsula.

>Bob Cooper, 48, of Dania Beach was in his backyard throwing a
>Frisbee to his dog when the object - which he described as a
>flaming ball - caught his eye.

>"All of a sudden this thing shot from my right," Cooper told the
>South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "And it was super fast, so you know
>it was in a hurry. It turned from orange to the-center-of-the-
>sun yellow then it disintegrated."

>Residents from the state's Space Coast region all the way to
>South Florida reported seeing the object, officials said.

>A meteor is a momentary flash of light produced when a space
>object penetrates Earth's atmosphere.

And a fireball meteor is a long-lasting, larger piece of debris
that can be seen for 5, 10, maybe 15 seconds and is so bright
that it typically is observed from several states (usually a
tip-off for a fireball).

>NASA will determine what direction the object was traveling,
>officials said.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:25:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:42:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:04:03 EDT
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:36:22 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>So what are you saying? That _all_ abduction reports are the
>>result of unknown and possibly extraterrestrial forces? No-one
>>seems to have any trouble with the idea that many UFO reports
>>have mundane explanations, so why the reluctance to accept this
>>in the case of abduction reports.

>>As for wanting specific cases, I paraphrase the reply that you
>>usually give to anyone who asks for details of cases you are
>>writing about - basically, work it out for yourself, why should
>>I do all the hard work.

>>OK?

>It's _not_ "OK." If you don't have say, a Betty-Barney Hill-type
>abduction case, that can be explained as sleep paralysis or some
>such then you're just wasting our time. Do you have such a
>"mundane explanation" Hill-type case abduction? Or are all you
>have are some dream-like single-witness bedroom experiences?
>Let's see such a case laid out, that shouldn't be "hard work" if
>you know of such a case. Let's see it. You haven't even
>mentioned any specific cases.

No, of course not, because that is what I was asking for - an
'explained' abduction case, in the same way that there are
'explained' UFO cases.

Of course, you neatly side-step this by proclaiming:

>By the way I don't buy the "many UFO reports have mundane
>explanations" propaganda. Very few _properly screened_ UFO
>cases, as in those put through a competent Hynek Screening, ever
>turn out to be IFO's or have "mundane explanation." Many so-
>called IFO's are falsely categorized as such and turn out to be
>UFO's after analysis and investigation. Most so-called "UFO"
>sightings are not in fact "UFO" sightings at all, but are in an
>indeterminate status neither UFO or IFO, where not even the
>witnesses have called them "UFO's" just strange lights or
>objects in the sky, and it's the reporting agencies that have
>wrongly slapped the "UFO" label on them.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:34:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:44:42 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:15:52 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:11:52 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>But then perhaps CDA can read all the stuff under the White-out
>>on the NSA UFO documents and the blackout in the CIA UFO
>>documents. I can't.

<snip>

>You just cannot or will not understand that the whited out NSA
>docs and the blacked out CIA docs do not in any way advance your
>'Cosmic Watergate' thesis. Why should I or anyone else conclude
>that these censored portions are evidence of ET visits to earth?

<snip>

>I do not have to read any of this censored stuff to be 99.9 per
>cent certain that they have nothing whatever to do with
>extraterrestrial visits, contain zilch of interest to science
>and are merely to do with code deciphering and other boring
>matters relating to intelligence methods the authorities want
>to conceal.

As I originally pointed out I can tell what is in the deleted
portions of the NSA UFO documents. They are _not_ I repeat _not_
intercepts of encrypted communications but "in the clear" Soviet
military messages reporting UFO or unidentified sightings (there
is not enough info in any of them to tell if even a single
actual UFO was sighted). There is _no_ "code deciphering"
involved, no "codes," just in the clear messages. NSA deleted
the dates and locations of each incident, leaving in only the
sketchy details of the sightings only. Dates and locations are
what have been deleted. Got that now?

The fact these are "clear text" messages (and possibly radio
voice transcripts though I doubt it from the way the messages
are worded) that are _not_ encrypted means they are low-level
relatively unimportant messages. If they had been important
messages the Soviets and Soviet bloc countries would have sent
them with some form of encryption, the level of encryption
indicating importance and sensitiveness. Not a single one of the
NSA UFO-sighting report intercepts seems to have been encrypted
by the Soviet bloc senders (possibly some messages are Chinese).

This indicates to me that the NSA has a huge collection of
_encrypted_ UFO sighting reports it has intercepted from a
variety of countries around the world including our own allies,
plus "in the clear" UFO reports intercepted from our allies
(which NSA does not want to tip off that we are intercepting
them), all of which the NSA has never even searched for. There
are probably thousands of such intercepts.

Now if some country, say Russia, had captured an ET spaceship,
any messages sent concerning it would be of the highest level of
security classification requiring the greatest level of crypto
security, like one-time-pad type encryption multiply applied.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 22:25:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:52:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Rimmer


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:22:09 -0500
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explaine

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>>>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>>>took place.

>>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
>>data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
>>case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
>>suggesting that I am a naif.

>I think it's duplicitous poseurs posture, Sir, like asking a
>duck to stop quacking, or a true naif to admit his own
>suffocating credulity.

I am always flattered, dear Alfred, by your inability to allow
any posting of mine, however meagre its content, to pass without





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Dickenson

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:50:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:53:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Dickenson


>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:59:02 +0200
>Subject: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>LAJAS, Puerto Rico (AP) -- People in this sleepy hamlet are so
>sure they have been receiving other-worldly visitors, they want
>to build a UFO landing strip to welcome them.

Hi Diana, not sure if these attract tourist dollars - maybe
they'd best check with mayor of Ar=E8s - "The world's first
landing field for UFOs was installed in Ar=E8s, [Bordeaux region]
France on 15th August 1976." -

http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/sep2001/msg00005.html

Cheers





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:03:07 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:55:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:44:47 -0500
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 09:36:39 +0100
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:49:58 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>Patient and gentle Listfolk:

>One doesn't know which adjective better applies here:
>disingenuous or childish. Ufologically literate Listfolk will be
>familiar with my extended writings on Klass's, er, distinctive
>approach to the UFO heresy, which I have zero intention of
>reiterating here, especially when it's to so little purpose as
>(and what could be less purpose than?) the edification of
>pelicanists. One can only suppose that the Johns have lots of
>time on their hands these days; either that, or they've chosen,
>for inscrutable avian ends, to behave even more frivolously than
>usual.

>Another adjective comes to mind: hilarious. Listfolk with decent
>memories will recall how, shortly after Uncle Phil died early in
>August, I predicted that the obit in Magonia would be
>hagiographic. Furious, indignant pelican squawking, wing-
>flapping, and red-faced denial followed. They had barely
>recovered their composure when the hagiographic, breathlessly
>uncritical, and tellingly selective obit in Fortean Times was
>published. Furious, indignant pelican squawking, wing-flapping,
>and red-faced defense of the hagiographic, breathlessly
>uncritical, and tellingly selective obit followed, or will in
>another posting or two. Anybody care to place a small bet on how
>slobbering the Magonia obit will be?

It looks like you haven't received your copy of Magonia 89 yet,
which contains the Klass obit. Other American readers seem to
have got it, as they are all happily renewing their
subscriptions. Have a good look through your incoming mail
(check particularly the round container on the floor in the
corner of your office) and if it hasn't arrived I'll post
another copy, being careful to wipe the slobber off it first.

Incidentally can you tell me the address of the Fortean Times
which published the "hagiographic, breathlessly uncritical and
tellingly selective" obituary of Phil Klass? The one I have,
which is published from London, doesn't seem to contain it at
all.

The obituary I have read includes the comment "His
interpretation of individual cases were not always spot-on, and
as time went on he became increasingly and aggressively touchy
when his solutions to cases were questioned, even when those who
shared his generally sceptical outlook queried details or
proffered alternative scenarios", most of the rest of it is a
simple outline of his career.

I'll grant you it does not actually state that he had cloven
hooves or ate babies for breakfast.

>The Fortean Times obit is as it is because it expresses FT's
>strange antipathy to UFOs and to American ufologists. (I have
>lost track of the number of slaggings I've received in its
>pages, and I am far from alone.) Reading it, one has no clue why
>Klass had such a miserable reputation among American UFO
>researchers and investigators (not to mention among many
>skeptics as well, for example Marcello Truzzi, Dennis Rawlins,
>Jim Lippard, Gordon Stein, and others). We can only infer the
>usual unspoken Ameriphobic subtext, to wit: What would you
>expect, after all, of those uncultured colonials? Only such
>uncouth souls could fail to fall under the spell of the saintly
>Lord Pelican's profound wit and wisdom. We are to believe, I
>guess, that this was one of those rare instances in which a
>provincial was able to lay claim to the deepest secrets of
>feathered truth.

One again, Jerry's strange belief that British Forteans and
ufologists are part of some great Anti-American conspiracy seems
to be colouring his view! There are of course a number of
American ufologists, some of them contributors to this list, who
take a more measured view, closer to that of Magonia and FT,
rather than to Jerry's extremist attitude.

I do understand, though, that there are a number of personal
issues between Clark and Klass which may have contributed
towards Jerry's embittered outbursts.

>Having any number of more productive things to do with my life,
>knowing from long, tedious experience how long pelicanists can
>spin out nothing at all, I refuse to entertain further
>discussion with the Johns and, lest I be distracted from
>actually consequential matters, plan to delete e-mails from them
>on the topic. I don't mean _all_ topics, of course; just this
>one, which is simply too boring to be the good, dirty fun of
>pelican-baiting which from time to time I allow myself, often to
>my subsequent chagrin, to indulge.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                           South African UFO Case?

From: Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos <ballesterolmos.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 00:58:28 +0200 (CEST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:59:47 -0400
Subject: South African UFO Case?


In November 1988 a UFO was observed by multitudes over Pretoria
(South Africa). On November 26th, the "Pretoria News" journal
reported that it had been the flight of a two stratospheric
balloons launched by the French NASA (CNES) a few days before.

Source is: <http://stratocat.iespana.es/ovnis/za881100.htm>

If there is any local UFO researcher from South Africa in this
list, I would appreciate receiving -privately- some scans (or
xerox copies by mail) of local press information, specially if
there was any photograph taken by press reps, public or
scientists.


Thank you very much and best regards,

Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                    Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Cohen

From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:04:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:02:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Cohen


>From: Dave Stone <dlstone63.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:07:11 -0700
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:40:47 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

><snip>

>>Because I'm not totally familiar with all the reported astronaut
>>sightings, I'd like confirmation from others that what Dave says
>>about the this particular UFO encounter never being spoken about
>>by Aldrin before is accurate.

><snip>

>After doing some more digging, I discovered that Aldrin, Collins
>and Armstrong did report the object in their technical
>debriefing after they returned to earth. And Aldrin apparently
>discussed this incident in his book "Return to Earth":

>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/astronaut2.html

>What is interesting is Armstrong's description of the object at
>the debriefing as having "two connected rings". The object
>displayed during the Science Channel program did have two
>connected rings.


Yes Dave,

Very interesting about the rings. A match is a match. Do you
care if I forward your comments to Brad Sparks. He sent me a
note saying he had poured through thousands of records and
didn't find data on this one.

I think this shows it is possible he may not be quite as
accurate as he thinks he is. He is a very sincere researcher
but, in my lifetime, I've learned you have to leave room for
error. Nobody is perfect. When you think you're perfect, that's





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Hayakawa

From: Norio Hayakawa <Area51watch.nul>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:05:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Hayakawa


Phil Klass does not deserve such a vitriolic treatment as was
given recently in the posts here.

I have the highest respect for Phil, who, for more than 35
years, dedicated his life to Aviation Week & Space Technology,
the nation's premier aviation weekly.

Phil was truly a gentleman and a scholar.

He was a very friendly, kind and warm-hearted individual. I had
a chance to meet and talk with him during one of his many
casual, unannounced attendances at past "UFO conferences",
simply as an attendee.

He selflessly took the time to avail himself and mingled among
the attendees at such conferences.

He truly was a courageous man, knowing that many (if not most)
of those attendees at such gatherings were decidely "pro-UFO"
people and were highly antagonistic to his well-known
skepticism. But when one actually met him and talked to him he
impressed everyone with his congeniality, politeness and his
humor.

He listened to people's "testimonies" with patience.

He also offered his alternative explanations to such accounts as
recounted by such "witnesses".

I have read several of his well-written books and I concur
totally with his assessment that from an empirical point of
view, we have yet to come up with any single piece of solid,
tangible, irrefutable physical evidence whatsoever to
substantiate the claims of those who adamantly state that we
have been or are being visted by space aliens in alien
spacecraft.


That is the bottom line.

I am not saying that the "UFO phenomenon" doesn't exist or that
the "UFO phenomenon" is unreal. Reality is a relative term.
There is no universal definition of reality.

To me, the topics of "UFOs", "aliens" and "alien abductions" are
bettered suited under the category of "faith", "beliefs" or
"religious experiences" rather than under "nuts-and-bolts"
empirical science.

I personally believe in God. I personally believe in angels. I
personally believe that demons exist. Yes, I believe in the
Bible in its entirety.

However, I have never and never will ever attempt to prove to
anyone that they exist. It is simply my religious belief.

Phil Klass indeed brought to "ufology" a much needed "healthy
skepticism" when it comes to proving the phenomenon through
empirical methodology, the only existing standard by which to
evaluate the existence of any physical phenomenon.

Though villified by the majority in the so-called "UFO
community", (an insignificant portion of the general populace),
he deserves to be defended, especially after the barrages of
unjust condemnation as was seen here recently.

We will sorely miss Phil, a true "Klass act".





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Frison

From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 01:14:50 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:06:32 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Frison


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:18:52 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:15:47 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>Given all that, there really doesn't have to be a worldwide
>conspiracy to suppress the UFO information? just a lack of the
>elements needed to prove the case to all but the most hardened.
>Not a conspiracy, just a lack of proof so that even when the
>leader of a country makes a comment about UFOs, it boils down to
>the same problem. There is no absolutely convincing evidence.

>Finally, it can be argued that the secret hasn't been kept
>because we are debating it. Yes, the best elements are hidden,
>if we accept the idea that Roswell was extraterrestrial, but we
>do have some solid eyewitness testimony, we do have limited
>documentation, and we do have some circumstantial evidence. What
>we lack, obviously, is the hard physical evidence that would
>underscore the importance of the rest of the evidence.

<snip>

>I'm not sure that any nation would want to announce the arrival
>of the extraterrestrials, especially if it might compromise their
>security, and I'm not sure that we need every nation to conceal
>the facts for this control to work. Maybe it is as simple as the
>number of visits and the lack of physical evidence.

>>This is simply conspiracy theory gone mad.

>I have to throw in with you on that. The world wide conspiracy
>does not make good sense. The lack of proof positive and a low
>number of true visits might simply accomplish the same thing.

Kevin's post reflects my own long time position on this. First,
let me say I have never been a fan of 'UFO crashes.' Not to say
I'm not open to them but that I lean about eighty percent away
from the idea. I believe there possibly may have been a very few
- possibly Roswell, Shag Harbour (which I see as more of a UFO
entering the water), maybe a small number of others. There are
unanswered questions and some things that point to crashes
having occured, so I'm open to the idea. But I have big
reservations while I _allow_ for the possibility! For instance,
if another civilization is here, it just _may_ want to give us a
little prod now and then for whatever reason - staging a crash
and throwing in some already deceased representatives of their
kind (some humans voluntarily sign up for 'organ donor', i.e.
donate their bodies for a cause in the event of their deaths) -
so who can rule out a mock 'UFO crash'? As to stuff like MJ-12
documents and everything that goes with it, well, I don't put
any stock in that. That's not to say governments haven't lied or
don't have some nice juicy stuff that they can contribute to the
evidence pile. (Maybe even the elusive 'proof positive.')

Kevin's explanation of the lack of any real conspiracy - it
being due to a low number of true anomalies present despite the
large number of reports, and lack of proof positive - fits in
with my views that a high percentage of unrecognized IFO reports
are resulting in distorted 'pattern stamps' in our data, that we
still have a way to go before we can claim we've solved this
mystery, and that we've not amassed incontrovertible evidence
yet.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                        Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 12:12:34 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:08:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:33:24 -0700
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais

>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:39:50 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

><snip>

>>BTW, the French government is now discretly reactivating
>>an official group of UFO studies.

>Can you give any details? How did you learn about this,
>and what is known?


Hello Larry and all,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

               Investigator Has 'Visit' After Activity Report

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:13:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 11:13:44 -0400
Subject: Investigator Has 'Visit' After Activity Report




Source: ProFindSearch.Com

http://www.profindsearch.com/news/2005/10/02/PFS1234.htm

30.09.2005

[Pictures at site]


UFO Investigator Receives 'Visitor' After Reporting Strange
Activity

Barb Campbell of UFO-Connection is one of the few people that
actually takes the trouble to investigate the many UFO reports
she receives. It is perhaps one of these reports that may
account for some strange activity in the last 24 hours.

Her site published a report dated the 31st of August 2005
concerning sightings outside of Moricetown, British Columbia
(see below):

I sort of drew what happened with the sighting that night. I
can't remember the name of the mountain, but my sister believes
the old Indian name for the area is Grizzly's Pass? It's located
west of Moricetown along Highway 16 and off the reserve.
Moricetown gets their water from Glacier Creek via the
Moricetown Water Treatment Plant and you have to go through my
parent's property to get to that. One of my sisters built that
new plant which is standing now.

Anyway, I marked where the US war planes travel (according to my
dad) and where the two sightings were that night. The night was
partially clear with dark clouds. It was a tad lighter on the
opposite side of the mountain allowing us to see the dark cloud
formations against the night sky. A dark cloud formation hung
just on top of the mountain's peak and that's where the strobing
lights disappeared. It never came out the other side of the
cloud.

This is also the location of where I used to live in a trailer
less than a half mile from the mountain's base. This was where
midnight turned to day through my bedroom window back in 1993.
My husband and I must have been like a couple of deer staring
into headlights. He had phoned someone that night and was told
it was probably meteor showers. However, that would have been
impossible. We were deep in the bush at the base of the
mountain. There was approx 80 - 100 feet between the bedroom
window and very tall thick forest. Something had to have come
down low and directly near us to have shone that brightly. A
meteor shower would not have affected us in the slightest and
would have gone completely un-noticed.

The Military flights have been very regular near the mountain,
usually around 5pm, but on the 12th of September this changed.
"one of my sisters was waiting with her camera to take a photo
of that US military jet. But it never appeared around 5pm so
after a while she went back home. At 7:30pm the jet appeared.
Only this time, it dove down and flew telephone pole height over
the ranch. My mom and other sister were able to see a seal on
the jet with USA in black letters underneath the seal. It then
climbed back up into the air, did a u-turn and then disappeared
behind the mountain!"

Checks have been made to see if there are any military
operations being carried out in the area, but "Search and rescue
in Comox and the armed forces P.R. person in Ottawa both have no
knowledge of any low level military stuff going on in the
northwest" and "Both the US and Canadian Air Forces claim to
have no knowledge of any such activity in the area."

Clearly something unusual is going on and yesterday (at around
3pm) Barb had a helicopter flying around her home in Maidstone
Saskatchewan Canada. She took a number of photos of the
helicopter as it left (see below), but in the second photo
listed, not only the helicopter appears in the sky, but a number
of other objects as well. If you click on the second image you
will be able to see a much larger version. If you zoom in on
this you will find at least 6 unusual objects in the sky. We
have looked at this closely and they do not appear to be
helicopters!

At the moment we have no idea what those other objects are, but
they seem to be connected in some way with the Helicopter. Is
the Helicopter providing some kind of escort for UFO's? Is there
some ET base on the mountain which is responsible for the
flashing lights and Military plane activity?

Strangely enough, the appearance of the Helicopter coincided
with a meeting she had earlier with a man who may provide some
answers to this (and many other unusual events). Unfortunately,
we can not say too much about this at the moment, as the
information is believed to be "explosive".

For those who believe that the U.S. government is covering up
UFO sightings and Alien contact, they may find the following
link of interest: Canadian UFO Researcher Blocked by U. S.
Homeland Security





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:13:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 14:21:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Clark


>From: Norio Hayakawa <Area51watch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>We will sorely miss Phil, a true "Klass act".

Yeah, right, and cheese is plentiful on the moon.

For a perspective on a Klass act in action from the point of
view of a hard-core skeptic, see:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

               Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:14:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 14:24:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 22:25:20 +0100
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:22:09 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explaine

>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

<snip>

>>>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
>>>data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
>>>case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
>>>suggesting that I am a naif.

>>I think it's duplicitous poseurs posture, Sir, like asking a
>>duck to stop quacking, or a true naif to admit his own
>>suffocating credulity.

>I am always flattered, dear Alfred, by your inability to allow
>any posting of mine, however meagre its content,

Note the ironic admission, fellow Listers...

>to pass without
>an exposition of one of your characteristic lucubrations.

How convenient for both of us then, Sir, as you are one to bring
out the absolute best in me, and I can take some small
satisfaction in same. But flattered? I suspect not.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 2

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:25:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 14:25:45 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone


>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:18:52 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>I have to throw in with you on that. The world wide conspiracy
>>does not make good sense. The lack of proof positive and a low
>>number of true visits might simply accomplish the same thing.

>I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to those
>that would claim that the USA uses it's financial clout and
>military might to intimidate other states into not disclosing
>anything relating to UFOs, that the same tactics do not appear
>to be working in relation to Iran's nuclear development
>programme. Why should they have more success when it comes to
>UFOs?

I dunno, it works with North Korea, Russia, China and even Cuba.

We've thrown so much money, altered trading and subsidized to
death these countries that engage in overt acts of human cruelty
and suppression.

Whenever they want more money they start beating their swords
and we just toss in more loot.

Iran will do the same. The U.S. hasn't given in to their demands
yet. Also, Iran is more afraid of Israel than us.

You can toss money and intimidate. It's called global policy.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                   Biggest UFO Conference In Recent Years

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:02:27 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 09:37:53 -0400
Subject: Biggest UFO Conference In Recent Years

Dear Folks:

For those of you who yet don't know - and specially for those
of you who live nearby - the biggest UFO conference held in
Europe in the last years is about to happen in Calabria, Italy,
supported by the University of Cosenza.

It will be the I Simposio Internazionale Di Esobiologia,
Ufologia Ed Esopolitica or First International Simposium of
Exobiology, Ufology and exopolitics, organized by Italy=B4s
National UFO Centre (CUN).

See details at:

http://www.cun-italia.net/documenti/calabria/programma2.htm


Best regards.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:52:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 09:48:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Lehmberg


>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>Phil Klass does not deserve such a vitriolic treatment as was
>given recently in the posts here.

<snip>

>That is the bottom line.

All respect to you, Sir. We have never spoken or communicated in
any way. But know, that to this point? At best there can only be
agreement to disagreement. "That" is nowhere _near_ the bottom
line.

>I am not saying that the "UFO phenomenon" doesn't exist or that
>the "UFO phenomenon" is unreal. Reality is a relative term.
>There is no universal definition of reality.

Mr. Klass, I suspect, would have thought you a dismissible fool
for even _considering_ such a thing, while you and _I_ would,
ironically, agree.

>To me, the topics of "UFOs", "aliens" and "alien abductions" are
>bettered suited under the category of "faith", "beliefs" or
>"religious experiences" rather than under "nuts-and-bolts"
>empirical science.

Then with all respect, good SIR! You have _not_ been paying
attention, you have _not_ done the minimal research, you have
_not_ read the seminal works, and you are awash in an insidious
and ironic _faith_ all you own. And this... "_this_" from the
"Nuts and Bolts," Mr. Hayakawa!

Hall, Kasher, Sturrock, Haines, McDonald, Clark, Cohen,
Friedman, Jacobs, Mack, et sig freaking al... my most suffering
and _beyond_ baragrugous ZOT...

>I personally believe in God. I personally believe in angels. I
>personally believe that demons exist. Yes, I believe in the
>Bible in its entirety.

You wouldn't consider, though, imposing any of that on me. That
has never even entered your mind am I right? You wouldn't
discount me or make me pay in any way in any way disrespect me
in public, or private poison my well before I got there...
nothing like that, I am confident

>However, I have never and never will ever attempt to prove to
>anyone that they exist. It is simply my religious belief.
>

Why then, Sir, make that testimony here at all?

>Phil Klass indeed brought to "ufology" a much needed "healthy
>skepticism"

No, Sir! A backstepping paradigm of unbrave denialism,
deliberate obfuscation, scurrilously unethical activity and
_decidedly_ unhealthy!

>when it comes to proving the phenomenon through
>empirical methodology, the only existing standard by which to
>evaluate the existence of any physical phenomenon.

Then I think our cultural 'mainstream' should actually get off
it's Klass saddled _ass_ and actually _do_ some of that...
"...empirical methodology, the only existing standard by which
to evaluate the existence of any physical phenomenon..." Pretty
pompous and not a little dissembling, only, Mr. Hayakawa.

>Though villified by the majority in the so-called "UFO
>community", (an insignificant portion of the general populace),

Let's just see how "significant" all this _does_ get... shall we?

>he deserves to be defended, especially after the barrages of
>unjust condemnation as was seen here recently.

There is nothing more petulantly sad than the uninformed
defending the indefensible...

>We will sorely miss Phil, a true "Klass act".

Ummmm - no, with all respect to you, Sir. No. You are
_egregiously_ mistaken. And I would hope, presumably, innocently
so.  Why - I'd sooner celebrate the unifying memory of Vlad





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                 Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 16:35:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 09:49:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained - Hall


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:01:25 +0100
>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:42:32 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:41:44 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Claims Explained

>>>>>Sleep paralysis may explain a few cases reported as abductions.
>>>>>That certainly should be studied and cases should be screened
>>>>>for it. When they are, it turns out that the sleep paralysis
>>>>>explanation used so sweepingly by the Clancy's of the world is
>>>>>rather inadequate for the great bulk of cases.

>>>I hope you are not making this sweeping claim simply because
>>>many abductees allege that they were awake when their abduction
>>>took place.

>>What sweeping claim am I making, John? Repeat, I am citing
>>data. That's D-A-T-A. The findings of research show it to be the
>>case. Dispute my data if you can, but don't simply posture by
>>suggesting that I am a naif.

>What D-A-T-A? What research? And what evidence to confirm that
>the abductee was wide awake?

That which I and my colleagues have performed and reported
extensively in the literature. It's called field research, John.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02 - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 17:55:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 09:57:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02 - Shough


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:37:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

>>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:50:17 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Toronto Symposium Report #02

>>>Source: Eye Magazine - Toronto

>>http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_09.29.05/op/wanderingeye.html

>>Do I remember a case on a UFO documentary a number of years
>>ago now, in which a dead man, in circumstances suggesting he
>>might have been an abductee, was discovered atop a huge pile
>>of coal, with clothing on but arranged in ways suggesting whoever
>>dressed him didn't know how clothing works?

>>I believe there were activities prior to this, in that area,
>>involving UFO craft in close proximity, but can't remember the
>>details.

>I remember something on that - searches might pay off.

>1) It was a UK incident

It was the Todmorden case discussed by Jenny Randles, I think in
her book The Pennine UFO Mystery, back in about 1980 or so (?),





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                         Re: Pandora's Box - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 18:09:36 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:04:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Miller


>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 12:12:34 +0200
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:33:24 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais

>>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:39:50 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>><snip>

>>>BTW, the French government is now discretly reactivating
>>>an official group of UFO studies.

>>Can you give any details? How did you learn about this,
>>and what is known?


>Hello Larry and all,

>I learned this from a well informed source, without much
>detail.

>It should be announced very soon officially in a press
>release.


Larry,

Gildas is absolutely correct about this. As I understand it,
Jean-Jacques Velasco has retired and a new commission headed up
by Yves Sillard is being launched.

Below is an English translation (a very poor one) from a Dutch
site announcing the news.

http://www.volkskrant.com/weblog/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=3D227

The French space travel agency CNES aims a commission at that
Ufo-waarnemingen will map, communicates to the Flemish newspaper
underground railway. THE CNES, collect the French equivalent of
the nasa for a long time Ufo-meldingen in a large file. These
are analysed experts from involved sectors. It answers also for
the communication policy, publication of periodic reports and
access to Ufo-archieven. A new commission under the guidance of
Yves Sillar, old the director-general of the agency, must send
now all these activities and check. _ beside own expert in the
commission member of the police force, gendarmerie, power,
M=E9t=E9o-Franse and other research worker seat oneself

Below is a NATO profile of the gentleman concerned.

Yves Sillard

http://www.nato.int/cv/is/asg-sa/sillar-e.htm

And here is the transcript of a radio interview Mr. Sillard gave
to Radio France International on the 29th. September

Version originale, en Fran=E7ais:

http://www.rr0.org/Documents/Articles/2005-09-25_RFI_Sillard.html

English version courtesy of Google:

http://tinyurl.com/aemyv

Mon information vient a moi de mon bon ami, Christian Mace qui a
par ailleurs eu apercevoir de fascination de ses propres juste
il y a quelques jours.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                    Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Stone

From: Dave Stone <dlstone63.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:48:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:05:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Stone


>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:04:41 -0400
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>From: Dave Stone <dlstone63.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:07:11 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:40:47 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>><snip>

>>>Because I'm not totally familiar with all the reported astronaut
>>>sightings, I'd like confirmation from others that what Dave says
>>>about the this particular UFO encounter never being spoken about
>>>by Aldrin before is accurate.

>><snip>

>>After doing some more digging, I discovered that Aldrin, Collins
>>and Armstrong did report the object in their technical
>>debriefing after they returned to earth. And Aldrin apparently
>>discussed this incident in his book "Return to Earth":

>>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/astronaut2.html

>>What is interesting is Armstrong's description of the object at
>>the debriefing as having "two connected rings". The object
>>displayed during the Science Channel program did have two
>>connected rings.

>Yes Dave,

>Very interesting about the rings. A match is a match. Do you
>care if I forward your comments to Brad Sparks. He sent me a
>note saying he had poured through thousands of records and
>didn't find data on this one.

<snip>

Not a problem. To get the above geocities.com link just do a
Google search with the following keywords: Aldrin S-IVB UFO.

For more on the Apollo 11 debriefing:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/jan/m13-008.shtml

The actual Houston-Apollo 11 voice transcription (search on 6000):






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                    Fireball Over Britain March 24 1955?

From: Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos <ballesterolmos.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 19:54:47 +0200 (CEST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:08:09 -0400
Subject: Fireball Over Britain March 24 1955?


There was a bright fireball sighted from Britain on March 24,
1955, as reported by Arthur Constance in The Inexplicable Sky,
(Citadel, New York, 1956), pages 237 to 254.

I am addressing British UFO researchers here to ask if there was
any photograph taken of this fireball. In the affirmative, I
will appreciate receiving -privately- any further information
about it.


Thanks and best regards,

Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos
Apartado de Correos 12140
46080 Valencia
Spain





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Gehrman

From: Edward Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:09:30 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Gehrman


>From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul>
>To: UFO Updates List <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 01:14:50 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>... we
>still have a way to go before we can claim we've solved this
>mystery, and that we've not amassed incontrovertible evidence
>yet.

Hi Eugene,

There's plenty of "incontrovertible evidence", just a lack of
open-minded folks to study it. Have you read my crash site
report yet?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                         Re: Pandora's Box - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:19:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:11:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Aldrich


>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 12:12:34 +0200
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:33:24 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais

>>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:39:50 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>><snip>

>>>BTW, the French government is now discretly reactivating
>>>an official group of UFO studies.

>>Can you give any details? How did you learn about this,
>>and what is known?

>Hello Larry and all,

>I learned this from a well informed source, without much detail.
>It should be announced very soon officially in a press release.


It would be good to know where in which agency the investigation
is to be lodged.

A few of my questions about French official UFO investigations:

So few official military reports have come out. At Chicago when
we asked J. J. Velasco to discuss some, he fell back on the
ancient 1951 L'Orange incident. I am given to understand that
now that we have circulated a copy of the official L'Orange
report, the military is somewhat upset that this got out. What
is the problem with making these old reports public?

Why have so few French military sightings or sightings from the
French Air Force investigations come to light?

In 1954 a number of reports from French colonies and especially
from French colonial officials appeared in the press. Were such
reports submitted officially to Paris? What is the status of UFO
reporting from Franophone nations and overseas community? Do
former colonies submit reports to Paris?

What about French naval reports? Did the Hydrographic Office
keep track of such reports and reports at sea?

Are there files in Meteorological Offices as there were in the UK?

VSD had one detailed report of UFOs over a nuclear facility and
indications that such reports have been made at military nuclear





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - McGonagle

From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:11:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:12:33 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - McGonagle


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:25:41 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

Hello Greg, List,

>>I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to those
>>that would claim that the USA uses it's financial clout and
>>military might to intimidate other states into not disclosing
>>anything relating to UFOs, that the same tactics do not appear
>>to be working in relation to Iran's nuclear development
>>programme. Why should they have more success when it comes to
>>UFOs?

>I dunno, it works with North Korea, Russia, China and even Cuba.

<snip>

I hope to avoid this thread developing into a party-political
platform, but just taking your remark above, I think you missed
the point - China and Russia are certainly already nuclear
powers, the US policies have failed to prevent either from
developing the technology. North Korea backed down I suspect
because it expected China to back it. When China failed to do so
(partly due to domestic concerns, but also no doubt to pressure
from the USA and other countries), they had little choice. As
far as I know, Cuba has never had a nuclear production programme
of it's own, relying on support from Russia if the need arose.

In addition to Iran, you can also add Pakistan and India to the
list of countries that decided to ignore USA pressure and
developed their own nuclear capability. For a full list of
nuclear capable states, visit:

http://www.thebulletin.org/nuclear_weapons_data/index.htm

The USA has resisted the spread of nuclear technology since
WWII, and only allowed the UK access to it after they thought we
had developed it independently (according to one account, the UK
only pretended to have developed the technology in order to gain
access to US research).

As I pointed out, in spite of US resistance, financial and
military power, several states have developed nuclear weapons
technology. This flies in the face of those who suggest that the
USA suppresses information about UFOs from foreign states through
intimidation.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 18:09:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:15:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Friedman


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:50:58 +0100
>Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:59:02 +0200
>>Subject: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>>LAJAS, Puerto Rico (AP) -- People in this sleepy hamlet are so
>>sure they have been receiving other-worldly visitors, they want
>>to build a UFO landing strip to welcome them.

>Hi Diana, not sure if these attract tourist dollars - maybe
>they'd best check with mayor of Ar=E8s - "The world's first
>landing field for UFOs was installed in Ares, [Bordeaux region]
>France on 15th August 1976." -

>http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/sep2001/msg00005.html


Sorry but St. Paul Alberta dedicated a UFO Landing site in 1967
in honor of Canada's 100th anniversary. Paul Hellyer was there
and noted it in his Toronto lecture. I have seen it.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 18:27:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:18:56 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Friedman


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:34:14 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:15:52 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:11:52 EDT
>>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>>But then perhaps CDA can read all the stuff under the White-out
>>>on the NSA UFO documents and the blackout in the CIA UFO
>>>documents. I can't.

><snip>

>>You just cannot or will not understand that the whited out NSA
>>docs and the blacked out CIA docs do not in any way advance your
>>'Cosmic Watergate' thesis. Why should I or anyone else conclude
>>that these censored portions are evidence of ET visits to earth?

><snip>

>>I do not have to read any of this censored stuff to be 99.9 per
>>cent certain that they have nothing whatever to do with
>>extraterrestrial visits, contain zilch of interest to science
>>and are merely to do with code deciphering and other boring
>>matters relating to intelligence methods the authorities want
>>to conceal.

>As I originally pointed out I can tell what is in the deleted
>portions of the NSA UFO documents. They are _not_ I repeat _not_
>intercepts of encrypted communications but "in the clear" Soviet
>military messages reporting UFO or unidentified sightings (there
>is not enough info in any of them to tell if even a single
>actual UFO was sighted). There is _no_ "code deciphering"
>involved, no "codes," just in the clear messages. NSA deleted
>the dates and locations of each incident, leaving in only the
>sketchy details of the sightings only. Dates and locations are
>what have been deleted. Got that now?

>The fact these are "clear text" messages (and possibly radio
>voice transcripts though I doubt it from the way the messages
>are worded) that are _not_ encrypted means they are low-level
>relatively unimportant messages. If they had been important
>messages the Soviets and Soviet bloc countries would have sent
>them with some form of encryption, the level of encryption
>indicating importance and sensitiveness. Not a single one of the
>NSA UFO-sighting report intercepts seems to have been encrypted
>by the Soviet bloc senders (possibly some messages are Chinese).

>This indicates to me that the NSA has a huge collection of
>_encrypted_ UFO sighting reports it has intercepted from a
>variety of countries around the world including our own allies,
>plus "in the clear" UFO reports intercepted from our allies
>(which NSA does not want to tip off that we are intercepting
>them), all of which the NSA has never even searched for. There
>are probably thousands of such intercepts.

>Now if some country, say Russia, had captured an ET spaceship,
>any messages sent concerning it would be of the highest level of
>security classification requiring the greatest level of crypto
>security, like one-time-pad type encryption multiply applied.
>These messages the NSA would not be able to "break." The NSA
>would not then have any intercepted messages telling of a
>recovery of an ET spaceship, even if such an event occurred,
>because NSA would not be able to read them to know what they
>reported. NSA has warehouses full of unbreakable messages.

I don't disagree with Brad's views about uncrypted messages.
Clearly, however, he is in error in saying that all that has
been deleted is dates and locations. Better than 90% of each of
the 156 NSA UFO documents has been whited out. Surely that is
not all dates and locations, or sources and methods info as
claimed..

Furthermore, we must take note of the fact that the CIA found
only 18 NSA UFO documents which they listed by dates only in
their list of 57 other agency documents provided to CAUS. The
NSA found almost 9 times as many (156).

In addition they found 23 CIA UFO documents which the CIA had
supposedly not found.

It took me 2 years to get 9 of these which were press abstracts
of Eastern European Newspaper articles about UFOs which the
Soviets had the day they were published. It took me three more
years upon appeal to get 4 highly redacted CIA UFO documents
from this batch.The rest were withheld.In short, don't trust NSA
and CIA to talk to each other, or to be truthful about what they
find.

Similarly the FBI initially denied having a file on me even
though they had done three security clearances on me and later
admitted (after I sent a response from the CIA giving an FBI
file number and the fact that the FBI had made a negative name
check request on me) that they had a file on me which was
classified and whose size and classification were also





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 16:37:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:13:39 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies - Hatch


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:11:08 +0000
>Subject: Re: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies

>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies
>>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:15:50 -0400

>>Source: The Tallahassee Democrat - Tallahassee, Florida
>>http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/12778642.htm
>>Fri, Sep. 30, 2005

>>UFO Lights Up Florida's Skies Experts believe object was meteor
>>The Associated Press

>>Miami - Experts believe a meteor was visible along a large
>>section of the Florida skyline Thursday night, although NASA
>>officials have not confirmed what the intensely bright, fast
>>object exactly was.

>>The glowing orb was spotted around 7 p.m.; some who saw it
>>called county and state officials to ensure that it wasn't a
>>crashing aircraft.

>>"This one could've been from a baseball- to a basketball-sized
>>chunk of space rock that slammed into our Earth's atmosphere at
>>very high speed," Jack Horkheimer, director of the planetarium
>>at the Miami Museum of Science, told The Miami Herald.

<snip>

>>A meteor is a momentary flash of light produced when a space
>>object penetrates Earth's atmosphere.

>And a fireball meteor is a long-lasting, larger piece of debris
that can be seen for 5, 10, maybe 15 seconds and is so bright
that it typically is observed from several states (usually a
tip-off for a fireball).

>Why do newspapers label obvious fireball meteors as UFOs?
>Ignorance, I suppose.


Hi Dick:

Ignorance maybe, could also be a way of spicing up a snoozer.

This is exactly the sort of event I do NOT catalog.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                           Desert Glass An Enigma

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 17:08:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:26:31 -0400
Subject: Desert Glass An Enigma


Did it come from the moon?
Did it come from the depths of a volcano?
Or did a meteorite strike the earth?


Source: Aramco World Magazine

http://tinyurl.com/8gnwv

September/October 1979

pp. 2-5

Desert Glass: An Enigma
written by John W. Olsen with James R. Underwood

John W. Olsen is a Ph.D. candidate in Old World prehistory at
the University of California and James R. Underwood heads the
Dept. of Geology at Kansas State University.

In December 1932, an Egyptian Desert Survey expedition led by
P.A. Clayton was sent southwest from Cairo to study the
previously unexplored regions of the Egyptian Sand Sea, north of
a broad plateau, the Gilf Kebir. On December 29 of that year,
members of the expedition discovered, scattered about on the
desert, transparent to translucent pieces of a pale yellow-green
vitreous substance that has since become known as Libyan Desert
glass.

Located in the Great Erg, or Sand Sea, on the Egyptian-Libyan
frontier, the area where the glass is found measures roughly 80
miles north and south by 30 miles east and west in the corridors
between a series of dunes (*saifs*) that rise abruptly above
sharply contrasting weathered debris that overlies bedrock of
the Nubian Sandstone deposited during the Early Cretaceous Epoch
some 100 million years ago.

Although the glass was used for tools by Pleistocene man, and
may have been discovered as early as 1846 by explorers, the
inaccessibility of the region and the harshness of the terrain
precluded any further investigation until Clayton went back in
1934 with L.J. Spencer, then Keeper of Minerals in the British
Museum. And it was not until 1971, when a joint University of
Texas-University of Libya team explored the western extremity of
the area, that modern science had a look. Indeed, the terrain is
so remote and inhospitable, that when the American-Libyan team
neared the site of the glass deposits, they discovered an
Egyptian plane, intact, with the remains of nine passengers
scattered about, lying where they died of thirst several days
after they landed, lost and out of fuel, more than three years
earlier.

The glass has generated intense interest among scientists
because its origin remains an enigma. Was it produced by the
encounter of an extraterrestrial body with earth? Science isn't
sure and, in fact, has come up with at least 10 theories to
explain its origin.

Many researchers consider Libyan Desert glass to be a form of
tektite (from the Greek *tektos*, meaning molten), a natural
black, dark green, or dark brown glassy stone, resembling the
volcanic glass obsidian, that may possibly be of
extraterrestrial or meteoritic origin. Tektites, which occur in
four large associations of distinctly different ages throughout
the world known as *strewn fields*, are similar to Libyan Desert
glass in that both substances are composed chiefly of silica
(SiOv2-silicon dioxide); the silica content of tektites ranges
from 68-80 percent whereas that of Libyan Desert glass is
approximately 98 percent. Both tektites and Libyan Desert glass
are characterized by etched, pitted surfaces, which in the case
of some of the silica glass may have been obscured by the
scouring action of the fierce Saharan winds.

Tektites, first scientifically reported in 1788, have been the
subject of investigation since that time. In 1844, for example,
Charles Darwin, the great naturalist, described a specimen he
was given in Australia while on the famous globe-circling voyage
of *H.M.S. Beagle* from 1831-1836.

Undoubtedly of natural origin, tektites have been interpreted by
various investigators as: (1) ejecta from terrestrial volcanoes,
(2) meteorites, (3) ejecta from lunar volcanoes, (4) glassy
material produced by lightning striking the earth, (5) glassy
material produced by lightning discharge into the dusty, hot
gases of a volanco's eruptive cloud, (6) the product of
desiccating siliceous gels, (7) glassy debris from a disrupted
planetary body with a glassy surface layer, (8) material
produced by forest fires, (9) glassy material produced by
meteorite impact on earth, or (10) similar material resulting
from meteorite impact on the moon. It was even argued by some,
for a time, that tektites had been produced by human activities
such as furnace operations or as a by-product in the manufacture
of glass.

The shape of tektites is varied; they may resemble buttons,
teardrops, dumb-bells, rods, spheres, or disks. Some are blocky
and layered. Although commonly about an inch in diameter, they
range up to a maximum diameter of almost 12 inches and weigh as
much as 28 pounds. Many tektites show the effects of surface
etching and pitting - interpreted by most specialists as having
developed through chemical action during burial on the earth's
surface. Some tektites, especially those from Australia, show a
distinctive surface sculpture almost certainly produced by
aerodynamic ablation as the glassy object hurtled through the
earth's atmosphere. It was this characteristic of some tektites
that drew special attention to them as the pace of the U.S.
space program to reach the moon quickened. Tektites provided a
model for the design of heat shields with which to protect
spacecraft returning to earth through the atmosphere. Suddenly
these curious objects of heretofore relatively minor interest
were center stage, because they had already journeyed through
the earth's atmosphere, and many were readily available for
study.

The chemical composition of tektites is similar to that of
crustal rocks of the earth, and the discovery in some tektites
of rare minerals produced only by extremely high pressure has
led many to believe that tektites are a form of glass,
*impactite*, produced by meteorite impact. This view was further
enhanced by the discovery in some tektites of small spheres
(spherules) of nickel-iron, the material of which many
meteorites are composed.

Specialists were divided, however, on whether tektites were
produced by impact on earth and were consequently splashed into
their strewn fields, or whether the impact events occurred on
the moon with some of the ejecta reaching lunar escape velocity
and reaching earth as a form of meteorite. The hypothesis of
lunar origin of tektites was dealt a severe blow by the failure
of samples returned from the moon by the Apollo missions to
contain any tektite-like material or plausible tektite parent
material.

Some large terrestrial impact craters have been identified as
being of the correct age and location to be the parent craters
for some of the tektite-strewn fields, but for some strewn
fields no parent craters have thus far been identified. Based on
aerodynamic arguments however, some investigators feel that
tektites cannot have a terrestrial origin and be distributed as
they are in strewn fields. They further maintain that tektites
can only have come from certain lunar volcanoes that are
believed to have erupted material at lunar escape velocity in
the directions necessary to result in impact with the earth. And
so the debate continues.

Is Libyan Desert glass a tektite? Although it usually is
discussed in the same context as tektites and is considered by
some investigators to be a variety of tektite, there exist some
very distinct differences. Libyan Desert glass has a uniformly
higher silica content than tektites, and it shows no evidence of
aerodynamic sculpturing. Many of the fragments are tabular and
layered, which is characteristic of only one kind of tektite,
the so-called Muong-Nong tektites of southeast Asia. Libyan
Desert glass never occurs in such distinctive shapes as dumb-
bells, rods, spheres, disks, and teardrops as do tektites, and
the color of the glass is rarely as dark as the color of typical
tektites. In fact, some of the glass is quite colorless. It
ranges in size from tiny flakes 0.01mm in diameter up to pieces
the size of a person's head and weighing over 16 pounds. Both
tektites and Libyan Desert glass are harder than the steel in a
knife blade, but no harder than the mineral quartz. Fragments of
Libyan Desert glass are somewhat lighter weight than tektites of
equal size. Both tektites and Libyan Desert glass may contain
bubbles; those in the glass tend either to be elliptical,
indicating deformation of the bubble during flow, or elongated
and pointed, suggesting deformation of original pore space in
material that barely melted.

Analyses of both major and trace elements of the glass and of
the Nubian Sandstone upon which it rests, together with the
stratification visible in numerous pieces, have revealed that
the Nubian Sandstone is a suitable parent material for Libyan
Desert glass and suggest that the glass could be of impact
origin. What is not yet understood is the mechanism that
produced, momentarily, heat intense enough to melt surface rock
or weathered debris. For the quartz-rich Nubian Sandstone, the
melting temperature would be about 200F.

Although nickel-iron spherules have not been identified in the
glass, it is still possible that it was formed by the impact of
a stony meteorite (or aerolite). There are, for instance, two
small craters in the desert glass area, and although there is no
evidence relating the craters to the glass, it would be an
unusual coincidence to find such rare material as Libyan Desert
glass so close to such relatively rare structures as astroblemes
(deeply eroded impact features) without some relationship.

Virgil Barnes has suggested that perhaps the glass was produced
by the heat wave of a passing comet or by the intense heat
generated by an exploding comet - neither of which would
necessarily disrupt the surface rocks. Afterwards, the molten
silica glass may have flowed into low areas, puddled and cooled-
-thus forming Libyan Desert glass. Later, it may have been
broken up by weathering and then moved, either by running water,
in an earlier, wetter climatic period, or by humans in
prehistoric times.

On the other hand, most Libyan Desert glass is much more dense
and homogeneous than the well described porous and impure
"impact" glass (impactite) found in such craters as Henbury in
central Australia, Wabar in the Rub'al-Khali of Saudi Arabia, or
the nuclear test craters in Nevada.

The absence of an extremely large impact crater in the vicinity
of the Libyan Desert glass, moreover, is not highly relevant.
The glass has been reliably dated (by fission-track methods), as
28.5 million years old. That's so long ago that any impact
crater may have been covered by shifting sands or erased by
erosion. Opponents of the cometary or meteoritic origin of
Libyan Desert glass say it is highly improbable that such large,
homogeneous pieces of glass could be formed and freed of
volatiles within the earth's atmosphere by any process of simple
fusion of sand, while supporters contend that the chemical
composition of Libyan Desert glass so closely resembles the
Nubian Sandstone - upon which it rests - that the probability of
finding two so similar yet unrelated materials together is
extremely remote.

Obviously, the origin of Libyan Desert glass is unresolved and
remains a topic of intense discussion among tektite specialists.
But most scientists do agree that ancient man used the glass at
a time when the Sahara's climate was quite different.

For nearly 10,000 years, the Sahara, of which the Great Erg or
Sand Sea is a part, has been a hot, forbidding land,
unattractive in most regions to human habitation.

But 50,000 years ago, what is today the Sand Sea may have
closely resembled the Mediterranean environment of modern Greece
and was thus more habitable. As a result, in the latter phase of
the Palaeolithic (or Old Stone Age) there appeared the Aterian
culture, named after an archaeological site in eastern Algeria.

Appearing about 30,000 years ago and persisting until perhaps
18,000 years ago, the Aterian people were apparently the first
to recognize Libyan Desert glass and make use of its special
properties. Like many types of glass, that from the Libyan
Desert flakes conchoidally. That is, by striking the material a
glancing blow with another rock, or baton of wood or bone,
flakes may be removed in a predictable fashion so as to produce
a variety of efficient cutting edges. The Aterian people used
this property of Libyan Desert glass to their advantage and
produced an array of skillfully-flaked implements (See page 4,
top). After their expeditions in the 1930's, Clayton and Spencer
said that at least 10 percent of the Libyan Desert glass flakes
recovered exhibited some sign of human workmanship and Virgil
Barnes and James Underwood, who visited the Libyan Desert glass
strewn field in 1971, reported that the largest specimen
collected during their expedition - a tabular cobble weighing
nearly two pounds - shows percussion marks that suggest the
piece may have been used as a pounding tool. Flakes of Libyan
Desert glass have also been found in localized concentrations
suggesting the manufacture of implements on the spot. Other
fragments of the glass have been located some 140 miles from the
known field - and in a few instances on the top of the *saif*
dunes, suggesting transport by man.

On the basis of the above evidence it is logical to conclude
that by Aterian times, Libyan Desert glass was used for the
manufacture of lithic tools. But there is still an enigma:
although Libyan Desert glass has been dated as 28.5 million
years old, there is no evidence that man used it *before*
Aterian times even though much older Nubian Sandstone handaxes
have been found.

One plausible solution to this problem, offered by Virgil
Barnes, is that the area that is now the Sand Sea may have been
covered by thick deposits of sand prior to the climatic
perturbation of the late Pleistocene age that could have whipped
the sand into *saif* dunes, thus exposing the Libyan Desert
glass below.

On the other hand, the highly polished and faceted surface of
many of the exposed Libyan Desert glass fragments indicates that
*some* of them have been exposed to the abrasive actions of wind
and sand for a good deal longer than 30,000 years. As Kenneth
Oakley has pointed out in *Nature*, "...it is important to bear
in mind that the glass was already corroded by sand-blast
*before* it was worked into the [Aterian] bifaced points."

Naturally, it is possible that the Libyan Desert glass lay on
the surface for some 26 million years or so before the arrival
of humans on the scene and was then covered for a short period
up to about 30,000 years ago when the Aterian people began to
utilize the material. Nevertheless, it remains an important task
for archeologists working in this region to investigate the
possibility of pre-Aterian occurrences of Libyan Desert glass
artifacts.

Since the time of the Aterian's utilization of the substance,
humans have found no practical use for Libyan Desert glass.

From a scientific viewpoint, however, its existence continues to
provoke intense curiosity regarding the formation of such unique
material. Fundamental questions relating to the nature of Libyan
Desert glass have yet to be adequately resolved. Can it be
considered a true tektite? How did Libyan Desert glass come to
be formed in such large, relatively homogeneous masses? Why the
striking similarity between the silica glass and the Nubian
Sandstone upon which it rests? Coincidence? Perhaps; perhaps
not. One hopes that continued diligent research will provide us
with answers to these questions and perhaps shed light upon the
origin of other tektites as well.

Image here:

http://tinyurl.com/8o6bt





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:31:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Aldrich


>From: Norio Hayakawa <Area51watch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>Phil Klass does not deserve such a vitriolic treatment as was
>given recently in the posts here.

>I have the highest respect for Phil, who, for more than 35
>years, dedicated his life to Aviation Week & Space Technology,
>the nation's premier aviation weekly.

>Phil was truly a gentleman and a scholar.

>He was a very friendly, kind and warm-hearted individual. I had
>a chance to meet and talk with him during one of his many
>casual, unannounced attendances at past "UFO conferences",
>simply as an attendee.

>He selflessly took the time to avail himself and mingled among
>the attendees at such conferences.

>He truly was a courageous man, knowing that many (if not most)
>of those attendees at such gatherings were decidely "pro-UFO"
>people and were highly antagonistic to his well-known
>skepticism. But when one actually met him and talked to him he
>impressed everyone with his congeniality, politeness and his
>humor.

>He listened to people's "testimonies" with patience.

>He also offered his alternative explanations to such accounts as
>recounted by such "witnesses".

>I have read several of his well-written books and I concur
>totally with his assessment that from an empirical point of
>view, we have yet to come up with any single piece of solid,
>tangible, irrefutable physical evidence whatsoever to
>substantiate the claims of those who adamantly state that we
>have been or are being visted by space aliens in alien
>spacecraft.

>That is the bottom line.

>I am not saying that the "UFO phenomenon" doesn't exist or that
>the "UFO phenomenon" is unreal. Reality is a relative term.
>There is no universal definition of reality.

>To me, the topics of "UFOs", "aliens" and "alien abductions" are
>bettered suited under the category of "faith", "beliefs" or
>"religious experiences" rather than under "nuts-and-bolts"
>empirical science.

>I personally believe in God. I personally believe in angels. I
>personally believe that demons exist. Yes, I believe in the
>Bible in its entirety.

>However, I have never and never will ever attempt to prove to
>anyone that they exist. It is simply my religious belief.

>Phil Klass indeed brought to "ufology" a much needed "healthy
>skepticism" when it comes to proving the phenomenon through
>empirical methodology, the only existing standard by which to
>evaluate the existence of any physical phenomenon.

>Though villified by the majority in the so-called "UFO
>community", (an insignificant portion of the general populace),
>he deserves to be defended, especially after the barrages of
>unjust condemnation as was seen here recently.

>We will sorely miss Phil, a true "Klass act".


Hmmm, I wonder if there aren't two Phil Klasses. Seems the above
hardly applies to the one with whom I had contact.

I also think that one should read McCarthy's dissertation on
McDonald before making such statements.

Project 1947 is a closed UFO E-mail list. One day I started
getting letters from Klass making demands on me and its members
for the top ten cases which convinced people that UFOs
represented ET. (What are the top ten cases that convinced
scientists that ball lightning exist? Of course, there are no
such cases.)

I told Phil he seemed like someone who could not abide anyone
discussing UFOs anywhere. He was like a vigilante riding the
range and finding some few people sitting around a campfire
dicussing something he did not approve. His actions were to
throw water on the campfire and tell those sitting around it to
disperse.

However, when some countered his argument that there must be ten
UFO cases which demonstrated UFOs existed with the idea the
there were evidence among unexplained cases which seemed to
contain patterns which could be studied such as EME. Klass
countered that EME especially the stopping and restarting of
vehicle engines was mystical clap trap.

When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
a device which did stop car engines and the common phenomenon
known among vehicle maintenance people as "dieseling", he just
avoided any comment by saying he didn't have the time and
producing a new series of demands.

I never have theorized that UFOs are ET or anything else, but
have said they appear to deserve further study and far more
scientific attention than they have recieved thus far.

When someone challenges me on a whole range of things, I am not
going to let them off the hook, I challenged Klass on a number
of things including an article in Aviation Week. Again he evaded
answering. Tit for tat, I just put his demands at the bottom of
my ]in box and waited for to surface again, then placed it at
the bottom of my in box. You have to give to get, I don't
believe it one-sided relationships.

When we placed, the Condon report on the Project 1947 website,
we asked CISCOP for permission to quote from their publication.
They denied us the use. I never want to hear again about how
they don't get the equal time they deserve. Klass was more
forthcoming and did grant such permission to use his article and
an earlier article on plasma, meteors and UFOs which is very
interesting. He was very gracious on this point.

As to the scientific basis for theories in his first book, it
doesn't exist. Although he was a hero to science writers and
aviation columnists, experts on atmospheric electricity did not
support his pseudo-scientific explanations. His first book
contended that UFO witnesses reported what they saw, but they
didn't understand what they reported were of atomspheric
electrical phenomena. Now even granting that Klass had hit on
some unique explanations for UFO reports, it would mean that the
phenomena then deserved further study. But no, that was not
Klass proposed, rather this was a way to consign the subject to
the scrap heap.

Early in the Condon Committee's deliberations, the opposite
happened. Klass got no support from the atmospheric electricity
experts assembled by the committee nor from Low. Blue Book,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:37:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO


>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:29:38 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:52:01 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>As I always say, we need some field research.

>>Field research, of what sort? I presume you don't mean something
>>as simple as a Sky-watch? or something as different as what the
>>Cseti group used to do with bright lights and meditation? Or how
>>about what they did in Florida where they went to a regular
>>sighting spot on the beach and took photos?
CSETI went once to an area where the Gulf Breeze Research
Team had had literally dozens of sightings. CSETI portrayed
the event which they saw as unique... but it was one in a series
that began before and continued after....



>>>How would your
>>>'field research' differ? and to achieve what results different
>>>than those achieved by these other folk?

>Ha! No, I mean stereo imagery and spectra as a minimum from one
>site. Prefer two sites. Prefer continuous night operation.
>Prefer automated data collection. Would like to build up
>instrument collection to get precursor signals (VLF EMF?, VLF
>sound?) Also, prefer mobile sites (get baseline observations and
>then be able to go to flap areas). Prefer to use sychronized
>telescopic computer tracking systems which amateur satellite
>observers use to video satellites.

>Photos alone aren't going to do it. Stereo imagery is a start to
>get distance and spectra (with a good spectra database) can be
>used to quickly rule out prosaic things.

>The goal is to be able to follow (I.E. use the ranging data to
>follow it to orbital altitude.) the damn thing either from space
>to ground or visa versa thus proving that at least ONE UFO is
>from space.

>I think the problem with most folk who do UFO field research is
>that they just want to prove they actually SAW something. We
>know there are UFOs out there, but the problem is not trying to
>prove to anyone that you really saw something. It is to show
>they are alien (or super-secret human technology I suppose). You
>can't do this with a nice photo shoot. You need some high speed
>telescopic stereo video.

>Of course, if it just appears/disappears, you get nowhere.
>Pretty pictures get you nowhere. Even _one_ stereo photo is
>worth alot.

Only if the camera lenses are at least several feet apart
(capable of resolving distances out to a few thousand feet). Ed
Walters is the only person I know who has ever obtained stereo
photos with a camera capable of clearly distinguishing between a
distance less than 100 ft (hoax distance) and a distance of
several hundred to over 1000 ft (not a likely hoax distance,
depending upon the context of the sighting.)

The above prescription for an insrumented skywatch is correct
but, from the point of view of one of the few ufologists with
experience in instrumented skywatch type of research, I would
have to say it is of wishful thinking unless the finding is
almost "unlimited."

If the funding is available it may be worth carrying out a
skywatch in a "hotspot" area. One never knows until one tries.

The Gulf Breeze "phenomenon" between Nov. 1990 and July 1992
(this is post Ed-Walters famous sightings) was so frequent
("Bubba" sightings) that the Gulf Breeze Research Team (GBRT)
went out almost every night (only cold Feb. weather stopped
them; they were near Pensacola Florida where it DOES get cold).
They started watching from after sunset to midnight or later in
November, 1990 and continued for several years. The high rate
red Bubba sightings started in Nov. 1990 (there were a few
scattered bubba-type sightings earlier than this) and continued
until July 4, 1992. The GBRTcontinued watching for another year
or so. This is because it was not realized for a long time that
July 4 was the end of Bubba sightings.

The GBRT was a "casually instrumented" but very sophisticated or
"savvy" group of people when it came to recording Bubba
sightings. They used home video cameras and still cameras, of
course, and they had multiple witnesses (usually 4 - 10, but on
occasion several dozen and once about 100). As the months went
by after Nov 1990. they improved instrumentation and technique.
They became adept at photographing the "impossible", using
telescopic lenses, tripods, time exposures, video with and
without zoom, etc. At my suggestion several of them placed a
diffraction grating into their cameras. In one case (Feb. 1992)
they got a spectrum of red "Bubba." Several times they had
several groups of people with large separations and correlated
sightings allowing for accurate triangulation to get distance
and altitude.

All of the above was the setting for the real instrumented push
that occurred in the spring and summer of 1992. This never-
reported (in detail) research effort involved some Canadian
scientists who were privately funded to construct an
instrumented van and to take it to GBreeze. I was invited to go
along and to supply a large sensitive telescope (f/11, 2000 mm,
low light TV and video recording on a pan head Mitchell camera
tripod with a home video camera boresighted with the telescope
to act as a 'tracking gate."). I would estimate that the total
cost of the instrumentation that allowed for EM measurement and
recording from low frequency (Hz) to microwave frequencies, plus
image intensified visible, infrared, and spectrographic video
recording, magnetic field, electrostatic field, etc. plus the
van was on the order of 50-60K$. We built up this van during the
spring when GB was hot! (In May there were over a dozen Bubba
sightings). We arrived in GB in the first week of August, 1992,
not realizing that Bubba had flown the coop. We did have an
amusing sighting resolved by the telescope I supplied (a
military airplane throwing out flares), but no Bubba.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:51:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:38:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Maccabee


>From: Norio Hayakawa <Area51watch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass


>Phil Klass does not deserve such a vitriolic treatment as was
>given recently in the posts here.

>I have the highest respect for Phil, who, for more than 35
>years, dedicated his life to Aviation Week & Space Technology,
>the nation's premier aviation weekly.

>Phil was truly a gentleman and a scholar.

snip

>He listened to people's "testimonies" with patience.

>He also offered his alternative explanations to such accounts as
>recounted by such "witnesses".

>I have read several of his well-written books and I concur
>totally with his assessment that from an empirical point of
>view, we have yet to come up with any single piece of solid,
>tangible, irrefutable physical evidence whatsoever to
>substantiate the claims of those who adamantly state that we
>have been or are being visted by space aliens in alien
>spacecraft.


>That is the bottom line.

Sorry, but the bottom line is that he presented in his writings
"explanations" that were wrong or made no sense in the context
of the sightings. His propensity for proposing faulty
explanations is illustrated in my paper "Prosaic Explanations:
the Failure of UFO Skepticism"

http://brumac.8k.com/prosaic1.html

<snip>

>Phil Klass indeed brought to "ufology" a much needed "healthy
>skepticism" when it comes to proving the phenomenon through
>empirical methodology, the only existing standard by which to
>evaluate the existence of any physical phenomenon.

>Though villified by the majority in the so-called "UFO
>community", (an insignificant portion of the general populace),
>he deserves to be defended, especially after the barrages of
>unjust condemnation as was seen here recently.

>We will sorely miss Phil, a true "Klass act".

Phil brought skepticism. But not necessarily "healthy
skepticism. He personified the debunker who obeys the rule "any
explanation in a storm" or Maccabee's First Rule for Debunkers:
any explanation is better than none. (The epitome of the
application of this rule is in his "explanation" of the color-
changing, flashing light film of David Crockett obtained during
the "formerly famous" (who remembers now?) New Zealand sightings
of Dec 31, 1978 wherein Phil published his explanation that
Crockett filmed the red flashing beacon light as reflected from





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Einstein's Equation At 100 - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:24:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:35:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Einstein's Equation At 100 - Maccabee


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 06:01:52 -0700
>Subject: Re: Einstein's Equation At 100

>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:25:37 +0200
>>Subject: Einstein's Equation At 100

>>NY Times, Op-Ed
>>That Famous Equation and You By Brian Greene

>>During the summer of 1905, while fulfilling his duties in the
>>patent office in Bern, Switzerland, Albert Einstein was fiddling
>>with a tantalizing outcome of the special theory of relativity
>>he'd published in June. His new insight, at once simple and
>>startling, led him to wonder whether "the Lord might be
>>laughing... and leading me around by the nose."

>I didn't know that A.E. wrote his famous equation in terms of
>mass rather than energy, thanks for that.

>Such an admirable man, and still humble enough to give the
>zaniest crackpot his ear.  To think that only accidents of
>history prevented him from being another of the millions of
>Hitler's victims.

>My one small caveat is something people often overlook.
>Sometimes you will hear somebody say something like "There's >>
>more energy in my fingernail than all the oil in Texas" or the
>like. Technically correct by E=MC^2, but the energy is
>unavailable to us in any practical sense unless the person has
>plutonium fingernails.

I recall that when I was about 10 years old and wanted to be a
scientist I had a picture of Einstein on the wall at the head of
my bed and I had carefully copied E = MC^2 onto a piece of paper
and posted that next to the picture of Einstein. I didn't know
what it meant but I knew it was important. I also knew it was
connected with atomic bombs.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                          The End Of The Beginning

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:16:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:50:54 -0400
Subject: The End Of The Beginning


Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss

Source: Science Frontiers - No. 161

http://www.science-frontiers.com

Sep-Oct 2005

p. 2


ASTRONOMY

The end of the beginning

At least once a year we select the Big Bang as a bloated
paradigm worth trying to puncture. Our darts and those of others
always seem to glance harmlessly off cosmological orthodoxy.

Much to our surprise and delight, the July 2, 2005, issue of
*New Scientist* launched an armor-piercing rocket at the Big
Bang that may inflict some damage.

"This isn't science," says Eric Lerner, who is president of
Lawrenceville Plasma Physics in West Orange, New Jersey. "Big
Bang predictions are consistently wrong and are being fixed
after the event." So much so, that today's "standard model" of
cosmology has become an ugly mishmash comprising the basic Big
Bang theory, inflation and a generous helping of dark matter and
dark energy.

Lerner is not alone in his doubts for he spoke at the first
*Crisis-in-Cosmology Conference* in June 2005, held in Portugal.

There, the consensus was that the Big Bang fails to explain
certain crucial observations and that the universe is a lot
weirder than anyone imagined. In particular dark matter was
denigrated as a band-aid applied to save the Big Bang but which,
in fact, serves only to cover up deep theoretical deficiencies.

Of the many Big-Bang deficiencies, three in particular are in
the spotting scope of the *New Scientist* article.

(1) Some stars in galaxies are older than the widely accepted 13.7-
billion-year age of the universe, hinting that there may never have
been a Big Bang.

(2) In tightly condensed globular clusters, the standard model
assures us that dark matter is absent, but the motions of stars
in the clusters tell us that it must be there, because gravity
alone is insufficient to explain observations.

(3) The map of the cosmic microwave background, contrary to
centuries-old cosmological assumptions, suggests that the universe
is *not* uniform in all directions. In fact, microwave patterns tend
to line up in the same direction that J. Magueijo dubs the "axis of
evil."

Clearly, the Big Bang, even with its layer of band-aids, does
not model the real universe well.

(Chown, Marcus; "End of the Beginning," *New Scientist*, p. 30,
July 2, 2005)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 11:10:15 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:52:18 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Bourdais


>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:18:52 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>Hello Kevin, List,

<snip>

>I would argue "what if there has never been any crash,
>including  Roswell?". You appear to be willing to concede
>that those listed above may have other possible
>explanations, but seem to disallow  the possibility of
>other explanations for Roswell?

Yes, why don't we accept, at last, that Marcel and Cavitt spent
the whole day in the field collecting balsa wood sticks? And
that Cavitt failed to explain it to Marcel, and the next morning
to Col. Blanchard?

<snip>

>I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to
>those that would claim that the USA uses it's financial
>clout and military might to intimidate other states into
>not disclosing anything relating to UFOs, that the same
>tactics do not appear to be working in relation to Iran's
>nuclear development programme. Why should they have more
>success when it comes  to UFOs?

So, the proof that the United States don't have UFO secrets is





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                We Saw A Disc In The Sky... Our Jaws Dropped

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:59:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:59:20 -0400
Subject: We Saw A Disc In The Sky... Our Jaws Dropped




Source: The Yorkshire Post - Leeds, UK

http://tinyurl.com/e2s9p

03 October 2005


'We Saw A Disc In The Sky... Our Jaws Dropped'
by Chris Bond

Recent reports claim that UFO-spotting is in crisis. But as
Chris Bond discovered at the Great British UFO Show at the
weekend, there is more to the phenomenon than meets the eye.


There were far more people queuing for Leeds Rhinos tickets
outside than attended the Great British UFO Show.

Not that the 120 or so who filled Leeds Rugby Supporters Club
for this inaugural event were remotely bothered.

These ufologists, as they are known, made their way to
Headingley from all over the country where they listened to
talks by paranormal experts and a man who claims to have been
abducted by aliens.

If you believe recent newspaper reports these are difficult
times for UFO enthusiasts. Only last month, the Cumbrian branch
of the British UFO Hunters reported no sightings so far this
year, compared to 40 last year and 60 the year before that.

It seems the idea of little green men from Mars and inter-
galactic visitors from Alfa-Centuri may have lost its lustre.

Russel Callaghan, who organised the event, and runs a UFO
website www.ufodata.co.uk disagrees.

"The UFO subject is alive and well," he says. "There are
hundreds and hundreds of websites dedicated to the subject so I
don't think the interest is waning, it's still there you just
have to look for it in different areas.

"Websites now make it so much easier for groups to pool
information and internet forums have taken over from UFO
meetings," he says.

The whole notion of flying saucers and extra-terrestrial beings
has always sailed close to the wind in terms of credibility,
though.

It is deemed perfectly acceptable to watch films like Close
Encounters of the Third Kind or War of the Worlds and believe in
the possibility of alien life, but mention you are a UFO-spotter
and you'll probably be met with the kind of response that
greeted Copernicus when he suggested the world was round.

Callaghan, who lives in Kippax, near Castleford, admits there
are a few oddballs but insists they are outweighed by more
serious-minded ufologists.

"Yes there's a few kooks out there, we know that, but we've got
doctors, we've got professors, nuclear physicists, people with
PhDs, pilots and policeman and they're not afraid to come
forward," he says.

"All the pundits tell us that 95 per cent of what goes on can be
explained and fair enough, accepted, but that still leaves a
small portion that were unknown aircraft or don't have a logical
explanation.

"We're not saying that aliens are landing in fields all over the
place and maybe it's not ever happened, but something is
happening that makes people believe that this subject is founded
on reality."

Callaghan himself has been fascinated by UFOs ever since he
spotted something hovering over Bradford in 1980.

"I was working at the time as a bus conductor, I was only a
teenager and the driver and myself were a little bit early one
day and we parked up at Odsal Top.

"It was October time and it was about quarter-to-four, it wasn't
dark but the sun had gone in and we were stood having a ciggie
and we were looking out towards Emley Moor and in front of us a
thousand feet up in the sky was a silver spinning disc, there
was no sound and both our jaws just dropped.

"We both said 'what the hell's that?' It was only there for
about eight seconds and it took off and that was me convinced. I
had seen something that I couldn't explain."

He has experienced other UFO sightings since but says there is a
general lack of interest among today's media.

"All you ever see in the TV clips is the out of focus ball of
light in the sky and there's far better evidence out there than
that, but why this footage, which does exist, isn't taken up I
don't know.

"I think we've grown out of mass hysteria these days and I think
if one actually landed tomorrow it might make the six o'clock
news but I don't think the impact would be fantastic and I'm not
sure people would be that shocked."

But Callaghan believes sightings should be taken more seriously.

"We've all seen satellites before and you know when an aircraft
is going over and we're all aware of what's going on in the
skies and what's normal and what isn't.

"Satellites in the sky look like moving stars they move in a
straight line, it's the things that don't move in straight lines
that are interesting."

Rob Whitehead, of the Lancashire Aerial Phenomena Investigation
Society (Lapis), also disagrees that UFO enthusiasts are a dying
breed.

"The grassroots are thriving and there's at least a dozen
conferences a year around the country so people are still
interested without a doubt."

He admits that interest generated by TV shows like the X-Files
has levelled off but believes there will be a resurgence in the
future.

"It's been going on for thousands of years, stuff was reported
in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece and the Bible talks about
heavenly objects that some people have interpreted as sightings,
so it won't go away."

Whitehead, a graphic designer by trade, became hooked as a
youngster after spotting a UFO while walking along the Durham
coastline.

"I was out with a few friends walking along the cliffs one day
with my metal detector and I suddenly noticed a black cigar-
shaped object quite low and it seemed to follow the coastline as
we watched it. The following day in the local paper there was a
headline on the front page 'UFO sightings across the North-East'
and that got me into it."

He readily admits that most sightings can be explained as either
atmospheric phenomena, mis-identified airplanes or temperature
inversions, but says it is the remaining fraction that
tantalises people.

"Everybody loves a mystery and once you have seen something
unusual it stays with you."

One of the guest speakers at the weekend UFO show was Jason
Andrews who, apart from an overload of "bling", could pass as
any normal 22-year-old. His claims, though, are anything but
ordinary.

Andrews says he's a multiple alien abductee and calls himself a
"walk-in" also known as a wanderer =96 an extraterrestrial soul
that has been incarnated in a human body.

"I have been getting abduction experiences since I can
remember," he says. "There was the obvious abduction which is
laying in bed, they come for me and then it progressed to them
teaching me how to astrally project, showing me things, telling
me things about the possible future."

Such as? "Such as I'm not going to tell you."

He goes on: "Imagine being a child and you're laying in bed at
night and then these beings come along and they take you away,
so you're obviously scared of that because it's the unknown and
everyone's scared of the unknown at first.

"I tried screaming out and tried moving even though I was
paralysed and every time I screamed nothing came out, no one
ever came to my aid."

Andrews, who is training to be an HGV driver, says initially he
thought the aliens were teaching him things like telepathy,
healing and astral projection, but realised they were simply
helping him to remember the past.

Despite being terrified initially he says he gradually learned
to trust the aliens and still claims to have abduction
experiences nearly every night when he is taken to different
places.

At this point his story, if it

hasn't already, begins to lose credibility.

"I can remember every single existence I've ever had. This is
only my second life as a human, as far as dying goes I have
never died and neither have you because nobody and nothing can
ever die, everything is energy in one form or another and you
can never completely destroy it, all it can do is change its
form. Which when I say I can remember previous existences it's
just remembering previous forms which everyone is capable of
doing."

He insists he is here to help and hopes if he can teach others
what he has learned then it can spread the galactic word.

"I know what I am and I know everything in my head is real, if
other people chose not to believe that, then that's fine."

Callaghan, who invited him to speak, defends Andrews and others
who have come forward.

"It takes a lot of bottle to get up on a stage and talk about
alien abductions to a room full of people and if you listen to
the abduction stories you feel there is something happening. I
mean it might turn out to be over the counter medicines that
trigger something, but these people are having real
experiences," he says.

It seems that UFOs and little green men haven't disappeared off
the radar just yet and you never know, one day they might just





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                     AUFORN Public Meeting Oct 7th 2005

From: Diane Harrison <auforn.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:08:55 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 12:03:30 -0400
Subject: AUFORN Public Meeting Oct 7th 2005


AUFORN Public Meeting Oct 7th 2005

Queensland

Springwood Community Center
Location: Cinderella Drive, Springwood.
Start Time: 7.30 p.m
Cost: $7.00

Seating is limited so please email or call to make a booking.

For more details contact Robert: 07 55487205 -
0427164677
or email auforn.nul
or ufologist.nul

We have a great night organized for you this coming Friday.

Topics: UFOs around Australia & UFOs around the World
- Mexico footage Nevada Conference 2005


Along with our special guest speaker.

Author of the book

"The Psychic Child"
Susan Van De Luecht

Susan will talk about her book and her experience with a family
with a supernatural inheritance/psychic powers. Its going to be
an interesting evening.

Introduction:
This book is based on a true story. It deals with supernatural
inheritance or psychic powers passed on to each successive
generation. The events described actually happened and are told
by the people involved.

Encounters with dark forces, supernatural protection, and even
futuristic dreams have occurred, which, even now, seem so
bizarre that one could only imagine them to be science fiction.

Many people have claimed to be endowed with the gift of what has
been called the 'third eye' or 'second sight' or a 'sixth
sense'. It has been claimed that clairvoyants are able to
transcend the normal channels of their senses and catch a
glimpse of the future.

There are many ways that psychic powers work, for instance
through dreams, visions, mediums, or even an aroma associated
with a particular event. They are able to move objects through
telekinesis, or communicate through telepathy (to read minds and
convey thoughts), precognition (perceiving an event before it
happens) and retro-cognition (the ability to see past events).


Regards Diane Harrison

The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Skywatch Director
http://www.auforn.com

Isubscribe to:
http://www.isubscribe.com.au/title_info.cfm?prodID=15021

P.O Box 738
Beaudesert, 4285
Australia.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                    UFOEAS Conference Gold Coast & Sydney

From: Robert Frola <ufologist.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 05:45:48 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 12:06:19 -0400
Subject: UFOEAS Conference Gold Coast & Sydney


AUFORN Australian UFO Researcher List


AUFORN & UFOESA CONFERENCE GOLD COAST & SYDNEY

Hi Everyone

I would like to thank everyone who attended or participated in
Queenslands AUFORN conference and the AUFORN combined UFOESA
conference in Sydney.

Gold Coast:

What a wonderful time we all had, the audiences excelled our
expectations, we thought maybe around 50 to 60 but it exceeded
the 120 mark which meant we had to be moved during the day to
the auditorium of the Robina Town community center with seating
set for 150. To Adan & staff thank you for all your help.

In Sydney:

To the UFOESA team & Peter Khoury I have to say it was a
pleasure working with you all and to Peter you excelled in
everything you did and thank you for a great event. The arrival
of a limo at the airport was a WOW "the speakers want to know if
they can come back in 3 weeks time". A thank you must go to
Peters mate who loaned us the Limo it was a great way to travel
around Sydney and I'm sure the speakers felt rather star struck.

The audience in Sydney also excelled in numbers to over 150 with
the room set for 200. To the staff at Lidcombe Workmen's Club
who went out of their way to accommodate everyone, thank you.

The Audiences:

Since arriving in Australia speakers Freddy Silva - Alfred Weber
- Michael Horn - have spoken to over 550 people this is great
going - information - information and networking. To Duncan
Roads of Nexus thank you for the opportunity of hosting these 3
great speakers it was much appreciated we had a great time
sharing ideas and networking.

Next year:

UFOESA & AUFORN will work towards bringing you another exciting





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                        Are There UFOs In The NC Sky?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:17:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 19:17:44 -0400
Subject: Are There UFOs In The NC Sky?




Source: WWAY-TV - Wilmington, North Carolina

http://www.wwaytv3.com/Global/story.asp?S=3341654&nav=menu70_7

July 27, 2005


Are There UFOs In The NC Sky?

By Jack Madison
jmadison.nul

It's part of the human curiosity. Many of us wonder ... are we
alone?

A Gallup poll shows that 72 percent of Americans believe there
is life on other planets. And one in five of us believe aliens
have been in contact with human beings. Our own curiosity made
us want to find out what evidence, if any, there is of alien
spacecraft flying over North Carolina's skies. And why do people
believe in, and explore, life from beyond. That quest took us to
the central part of the state.

At a farm, in an undisclosed location, west of High Point in
Davidson County, independent UFO researchers like Alan Caviness
look to the sky, looking for signs of life. Life unlike anything
we know. We sat down with Caviness to talk about his
experiences.

"Earth has always been visited. We've never been alone. I think
this is a gradual awakening that we're all in the middle of. And
I believe I'm a part of that. And so are many other people."

Using digital cameras, Caviness takes pictures, hundreds of
them, and video. He says the cameras pick up objects unseen to
the naked eye. Caviness said, "We do know that our cameras can
pick up in the near infrared part the light spectrum, which is
beyond human visibility."

Caviness says some UFO's can be seen without high technology-if
the aliens on board want you to see them. He and other believers
in High Point say the space crafts only come here from the
middle of March through early August. "These UFO's are
conducting some kind of annual operations. We know that because
we just don't see anything in the winter months when it's
coldest. March 11, out of 400 photographs, we got six UFO's. So,
we know that they're back."

In one account, Caviness and a companion saw two UFO's
approaching. They took these pictures. Then, whatever it was,
was gone. "We looked up, and they had to be right over our heads
because they were approaching us, and there were just not
visible. But they clearly showed up in the photos."

Caviness does not just believe these unidentified flying objects
are alien crafts, but that aliens are part of human life. He
said, "There are a lot more people being abducted by these UFO's
then you would ever dream."

People like Alan Caviness himself. "I know I've been abducted
before."

Once, he says, he heard a strange clicking noise in open air. On
the way from his mailbox to his home, something happened.
Caviness recounted, "I walked to my front door-about 30 feet
over short grass-and I no longer had my house key, my car key,
in my hand. I think I was taken and returned, minus my keys.
These things are happening."

Like many who claim to be abducted by aliens, Caviness says he
doesn't remember anything. After entering his home, he found a
scar on his chest, a hole through his shirt. He claims, within
hours, the scar was gone. He also claims what many other so-
called 'experiencers' do; sleep paralysis before and after an
abduction. He said, "They can't move their arms and legs, and
sometimes they feel a presence in the room, but they can't look
over to see it."

And there are countless others who swear they have seen
something not from this world. There are web sites dedicated to
UFO sightings, filled with accounts from southeastern North
Carolina. In Carolina Beach; "I was a little startled to see
several fairly bright lights in the sky..."

Holden Beach; "..one of several red lights emitted a beam."

Chadbourn; "We thought it was a military aircraft, but my
husband built aircraft, and said that is not one of ours,
including those at area 51."

Dr. Bob Brown teaches courses in pseudo science at UNCW. We
showed him the Caviness collection of pictures and video. As he
mulled over the still pictures, he remarked, "This could be a
piece of fabric that someone had taken or cardboard. That looks
like to me that could be an automobile tire that's been played
with."

Brown says it's not that these aren't unidentified flying
objects, but that in itself does not make them extraterrestrial.
He said, "If it's a UFO, it's not an alien spaceship."

Dr. Brown says those who claim to see ships from out of this
world aren't out of their minds. Often though, he says, they see
what they want to believe. Brown said, "Not only are they not a
little crazy, but they are essentially within the normal range
on most personality dimensions."

Brown admits the unknown is exactly that; unknown. Anything is
possible. Nothing, for him, is confirmed. He said, "These things
could exist? In the case of the alien spaceships, of course.
But, we need verifiable evidence."

Alan Caviness says he knows what he's seeing. "If I'm
hallucinating, then so is my camera."

He says it's time for the science community to acknowledge
there's something out there so that we, the human race, can
learn, not about aliens as much as about ourselves. He said,
"These beings understand what human thought is. We don't. They
also understand what life actually is. We don't. They understand
what our existence here on earth is all about. We don't. There's
a lot we don't understand. That's why we need to explore this





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 3

                    12 Things that Science Can't Explain

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:01:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:01:36 -0400
Subject: 12 Things that Science Can't Explain




Source: The Remote Viewer - The RV E-Zine

http://tinyurl.com/duv3y


12 Things that Science Can't Explain... But That Happen Anyway

Dr. Claude Swanson
Author or The Synchronized Universe

A new book, The Synchronized Universe, reveals that the tapestry
of modern science is showing a few tatters...There are many
things modern science cannot explain, and yet they occur anyway.
This includes phenomena in the "hard sciences" as well as in the
paranormal. These effects are now being proven in the
laboratory, even though they defy present scientific theory.
These unfolding mysteries point the way to a new, deeper
science, a science which no longer denies spirit and
consciousness, but acknowledges and embraces them.

In the past three decades scientific evidence has accumulated
showing that the present scientific paradigm is broken. In the
hard sciences:

1. DARK MATTER of an unknown form makes up most of the matter of
the universe. This matter is not predicted by the standard
physics models. The so-called "Theory of Everything" does not
predict and does not understand what this substance is.

2. THE LAW OF GRAVITY appears to be seriously broken.
Experiments by Saxl and Allais found that Foucault pendulums
veer off in strange directions during solar eclipses.
Interplanetary NASA satellites are showing persistent errors in
trajectory. Neither of these is explained or predicted by the
standard theory of gravity known as Einstein's General
Relativity.

3. COLD FUSION. The Cold Fusion phenomenon violates physics as
we understand it, and yet it has been duplicated in various
forms in over 500 laboratories around the world. Recent studies
by the Electric Power Research Institute, a large non-profit
research organization funded by the nation's power companies,
found that Cold Fusion works. A recent Navy study also verified
the reality of Cold Fusion, and the original MIT study which
supposedly disproved Cold Fusion has been found to have doctored
its data. Present day physics has no explanation for how it
works, but it does work.

4. CHARGE CLUSTERS. Under certain conditions, billions of
electrons can "stick together" in close proximity, despite the
law of electromagnetism that like charges repel. Charge clusters
are small, one millionth of a meter in diameter, and are
composed of tens or hundreds of billions of electrons. They
should fly apart at enormous speed, but they do not. This
indicates that our laws of electromagnetism are missing
something important.

5. COSMOLOGY. Quasars, which are supposed to be the most distant
astronomical objects in the sky, are often found connected to
nearby galaxies by jets of gas. This suggests that they may not
be as far away as previously thought, and their red shifts are
due to some other, more unusual physics which is not yet fully
understood.

6. SPEED OF LIGHT, once thought unbreakable, has been exceeded
in several recent experiments. Our notion of what is possible in
terms of propagation speed has been changing as a result.
Certain phenomena, such as solar disturbances on the sun which
take more than eight minutes to be visible on the earth, are
registered instantaneously on the acupuncture points of
instrumented subjects. Acupuncture points apparently respond to
solar events by some other force which travels through space at
a much higher speed than light.

This covers just a few of the more glaring anomalies in the
"hard sciences." Evidence has also accumulated in the laboratory
that many paranormal effects are real, and can be verified and
studied scientifically. Among these are the following:

7. ESP. Large-scale experiments by the Princeton PEAR Lab as
well as other laboratories have proven that ESP is a real,
statistically verifiable scientific phenomenon. Thousands of
experiments have been conducted with dozens of subjects, which
demonstrate that this form of communication is real, and that it
does not weaken measurably with distance. This makes it unlike
any known physical force.

8. PSYCHOKINESIS, OR MIND OVER MATTER. The ability to exert
psychic force over objects at a distance has also been
demonstrated in large-scale experiments. Even over distances of
thousands of miles, the behavior of certain machines, called
REGs for Random Event Generators, have been altered by the
intention, or the psychic force of a distant person. The odds
that these effects are real, and not due to chance, is now
measured in billions to one. In other words, this phenomenon is
real.

9. REMOTE VIEWING. The American military conducted a secret
remote viewing program for almost two decades. It was supported
because it worked, and evidence of its success has now become
public. The remote viewers have demonstrated that it is possible
to view "targets" which are remote in space and time. In many
cases details which were unavailable any other way were acquired
by the viewers. Rigorous statistical experiments have confirmed
that remote viewing has accuracy far above chance, and
represents a real phenomenon which defies present science.

10. TIME AND PROPHECY. One unusual aspect of ESP, Remote Viewing
and Psychokinesis is that "time" doesn't seem to matter. One can
exert an influence or acquire information in the past and in the
future, almost as easily as in the present. In conventional
physics, the order of events is very important, but in the realm
of psychic phenomena there seems to be a flexibility to move in
time that defies current physics.

11. OUT-OF-BODY EXPERIENCE. Experiments have been performed
which show that, during some out-of-body experiences, the
"astral body" or center of consciousness of the individual can
be detected at remote locations. When individuals go "out of
body" and focus their consciousness at another location,
physical disturbances have been measured at that remote
location. These include anomalous light, electrical, magnetic
and other physical forces which indicate the "astral body"
sometimes has physically measurable properties.

12. GHOSTS. Modern scientific ghost hunters use magnetic,
electrical, optical and thermal sensors when they survey
supposedly haunted sites. In hundreds of cases, technically
trained researchers have found measurable physical anomalies
when ghosts are said to be present. Although some people have
claimed to see ghosts, and many have reported anomalous cold
spots and described a strange chill on their skin, modern ghost
hunters have shown that unusual magnetic fields and strong
voltages also occur in these same haunted locations. Unusual
orbs have been photographed at the same time that magnetic and
electrical disturbances are measured. None of these can be
explained by conventional science.

Source: SynchronizedUniverse.com






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                          Secrecy News -- 10/03/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 11:55:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:26:35 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 10/03/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 94
October 3, 2005


**      CONGRESS PUSHES BACK ON "SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION"
**      THE FRANKLIN/AIPAC CASE AND THE PRESS
**      SSCI MARKUP OF 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT
**      COURT ORDERS RELEASE OF ABU GHRAIB IMAGES
**      SELECTED CRS REPORTS


CONGRESS PUSHES BACK ON "SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION"

In a rare defense of public access to government information,
Congress has instructed the Department of Homeland Security to
clarify and tighten its procedures for generating so-called
"sensitive security information" (SSI), to reduce subjective
factors in marking documents as SSI, and to provide Congress
with the titles of all documents that are so designated.

SSI refers generally to transportation security information that
is exempt by law from public disclosure. It includes airport
security plans, vulnerability assessments, and related airline
security data, but also undefined "other" information that may
be considered too sensitive for public release.

"Because of insufficient management controls, information that
should be in the public domain may be unnecessarily withheld
from public scrutiny," members of Congress wrote in the new
conference report on the 2006 Homeland Security Appropriations
Act.

The congressional conferees directed DHS to "promulgate guidance
that includes common but extensive examples of SSI" so as to
"eliminate judgment ... in the application of the SSI marking."

See the report language here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/dhs-ssi.html

SSI has been a source of controversy because it has been invoked
in seemingly arbitrary ways to deflect public requests for
information.

For examples of some SSI disputes and for further background,
see my article "The Secrets of Flight" in Slate, November 18,
2004:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109922/

SSI is only one of several dozen types of controls on
unclassified information, and not the most common. Because they
are mostly informal and discretionary, such controls are also
more susceptible to abuse than the comparatively rigorous
classification system.

Lately, the Centers for Disease Control has been criticized for
withholding data needed for flu vaccine production and for
adopting aggressive controls on "sensitive but unclassified"
information.

See "CDC locks up flu data" by Rebecca Carr, Cox News, in the
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, October 3:

  http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/1005/03natcdc.htm
  l


THE FRANKLIN/AIPAC CASE AND THE PRESS

The recent indictment of two former employees of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) for mishandling
classified information is an abrupt departure from established
practice because it treats members of the public as if they were
cleared government employees who are obliged to protect
classified secrets.

For the same reason, it poses an extraordinary challenge to the
ability of the press to report on national security affairs.

"Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman repeatedly sought and received
sensitive information, both classified and unclassified, and
then passed it on to others in order to advance their policy
agenda and professional standing," said U.S. attorney Paul
McNulty at a press conference announcing their indictment (along
with former defense official Larry Franklin, who will reportedly
plead guilty).

"But," writes Eli Lake in The New Republic, "if it's illegal for
Rosen and Weissman to seek and receive 'classified information,'
then many investigative journalists are also criminals."

"While most administrations have tried to crack down on leaks,
they have almost always shied away from going after those who
receive them--until now."

"At a time when a growing amount of information is being
classified, the prosecution of Rosen and Weissman threatens to
have a chilling effect--not on the ability of foreign agents to
influence U.S. policy, but on the ability of the American public
to understand it," writes Lake.

See "Low Clearance" by Eli J. Lake, The New Republic, October 10
(subscription required):

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i051010&s=lake101005

See also "Israeli lobby spy case suggests new push to keep leaks
from reporters" by John Byrne, Raw Story, September 30:

http://rawstory.com/admin/dbscripts/printstory.php?story=1250


SSCI MARKUP OF 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT

The authority of the Director of National Intelligence over U.S.
intelligence policy would be further consolidated under the 2006
intelligence authorization act as marked up by the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence.

Among other notable provisions, the new bill would assign
authority to the DNI to manage access to human intelligence
information (sec. 403), previously a function of the Director of
Central Intelligence.

The bill would authorize defense intelligence officers to
conduct intelligence "assessment contacts" within the United
States without disclosing their own identity (sec. 431).

The bill would exempt "operational files" of the Defense
Intelligence Agency from the Freedom of Information Act (sec.
434). Such an exemption was rejected by a less compliant
Congress when it was first requested by DIA in 2000.

The 2006 intelligence authorization act, S. 1803, as marked up
by the Senate Intelligence Committee, is available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s1803.html


COURT ORDERS RELEASE OF ABU GHRAIB IMAGES

In a decision full of ruminative commentary on the pitfalls of
unchecked secrecy, a federal judge last week ruled that
photographic images of abuses committed by American military
personnel at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq are not exempt from the
Freedom of Information Act.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein decided in favor of the ACLU, which
had sought the images, and against the Department of Defense,
which opposed their release.

"Suppression of information is the surest way to cause its
significance to grow and persist," the judge opined. "Clarity
and openness are the best antidotes, either to dispel criticism
if not merited or, if merited, to correct such errors as may be
found."

"The fight to extend freedom has never been easy, and we are
once again challenged, in Iraq and Afghanistan, by terrorists
who engage in violence to intimidate our will and to force us to
retreat. Our struggle to prevail must be without sacrificing the
transparency and accountability of government and military
officials. These are the values FOIA was intended to advance,
and they are at the very heart of the values for which we fight
in Afghanistan and Iraq."

The 50 page ruling includes discussions of the Glomar response
(i.e. neither confirming nor denying the existence of requested
information), the consequences of unwarranted secrecy, and the
state of FOIA law. A copy of the decision, which is likely to be
appealed, is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aclu092905.pdf


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some recent reports of the Congressional Research Service
obtained by Secrecy News include the following:

"The Middle East Peace Talks," updated September 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/IB91137.pdf

"Air Force Aerial Refueling," updated September 19, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RS20941.pdf

"Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist
Organizations: Expiring Amendments in Brief," August 16, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RS22222.pdf

"Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist
Organizations: Sunset Amendments," August 11, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33035.pdf

"Free Mail for Troops Overseas," July 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22203.pdf

"Detainees at Guantanamo Bay," updated July 20, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22173.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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                        New French Official UFO Study

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:23:47 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:34:15 -0400
Subject: New French Official UFO Study


List,

There is a bit of a strange mystery here which I do not
understand. Errol is not able to throw any light on it either.

My post on the changes within France regarding the newly
proposed UFO study was sent to UpDates on the evening of Sunday
October 2nd and posted on the List on Monday, October 3rd.

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/oct/m03-005.shtml

Prior to that, I had never made any public comment about this
subject matter and so no one knew of my interest.

However, on the morning of Monday 3rd., when I turned my
computer on and before my UpDates post had appeared, there was
what appeared to be a reply to my post from none other than
Jacques Vallee. That message had in fact been sent to Brad
Sparks and Larry Hatch and myself were copied in.

My point is, I do not understand why Jacques Vallee would have
presumed to have copied me in on this when I cannot see how he
would have been aware of my interest. Don't misunderstand - I'm
certainly not complaining and am indeed extremely flattered. But
I don't understand it.

On further thought, it is arguable that what is written is
actually a reply to my post as it seems to repeat the same sort
of information I forwarded. Nevertheless, it doesn't resolve the
main issue.

Are you able to throw any light on this Brad?


This is Jacques mail:

---

Actually this has been brewing for over a year. On Sept.22 the
CNES announced that the project was being re-activated under the
direction of Yves Sillard.

Here is his background:

Mr. Sillard was born on 5 January 1936 in Coutances, France. He
joined the Flight Test Centre in 1960 as Ingenieur de l'Armement
after studying at the Institut Polytechnique and the Ecole
Sup=E9rieure d'Aerotechnique. In 1964 he took charge of the
Concorde programme in the French Civil Aviation General
Secretariat. The following year he was made responsible for the
construction of the Guyana Space Centre and then for the
development of the Ariane rocket programme, and finally became
general manager of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES)
from 1976 to 1982.

=46rom 1982 to 1988 he was Chairman and Manager of the Institut
Fran=E7ais pour l'Exploitation de la Mer. He then became Delegate
General for Armaments (1989-1993), then Chairman and General
Manager of the "Defense Conseil International" group of
France(1994-1997). From April 1997 until his appointment to NATO
he was the official representative for space policy attached to
the Ministry of Defence. Mr. Sillard holds an Air Force pilot's
licence, with 1200 flying hours.

In connection with this reorganization, Jean-Jacques Velasco is
no longer with GEPAN-SEPRA, and a new manager is being brought
in.


All the best,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:38:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:37:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Kaeser


>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Norio Hayakawa <Area51watch.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:47:01 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>Phil Klass does not deserve such a vitriolic treatment as was
>>given recently in the posts here.

>>I have the highest respect for Phil, who, for more than 35
>>years, dedicated his life to Aviation Week & Space Technology,
>>the nation's premier aviation weekly.

>>Phil was truly a gentleman and a scholar.

<snip>

>Hmmm, I wonder if there aren't two Phil Klasses. Seems the above
>hardly applies to the one with whom I had contact.

>I also think that one should read McCarthy's dissertation on
>McDonald before making such statements.

>Project 1947 is a closed UFO E-mail list. One day I started
>getting letters from Klass making demands on me and its members
>for the top ten cases which convinced people that UFOs
>represented ET. (What are the top ten cases that convinced
>scientists that ball lightning exist? Of course, there are no
>such cases.)

I would agree that it seems like we're discussing two different
people. Phil Klass was unable to accept the concept of UFOs
being alien craft and expressed complete skepticism whenever the
subject was brought up. In many cases, he seemed to "shoot from
the hip" without any actual research, which left him scrambling
for clarifications or substitute explanations.

If a UFO researcher were to waffle and generate un-supported
theories that "sound good", skeptical scientists would tear them
apart. But it would seem that the skeptical community only holds
"believers" accountable, and skeptics are given a free ride.

When I wrote a comment (a number of years ago) about Phil's
having to retract his initial explanation after he later found
that it was flawed, he requested that I name _five_ such
occurances. I think he felt that this put me on the defensive
and left me in a position of having to prove my case, but it
also seemd to imply that he could only remember _four_
reversals. Once can perhaps understand a single incident in
which a theory is too quickly formed, based on little more than
faith and belief. But he didn't seem to learn from this mistake





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:10:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:41:23 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Allan


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:34:14 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>I do not have to read any of this censored stuff to be 99.9 per
>>cent certain that they have nothing whatever to do with
>>extraterrestrial visits, contain zilch of interest to science
>>and are merely to do with code deciphering and other boring
>>matters relating to intelligence methods the authorities want
>>to conceal.

>As I originally pointed out I can tell what is in the deleted
>portions of the NSA UFO documents. They are _not_ I repeat _not_
>intercepts of encrypted communications but "in the clear" Soviet
>military messages reporting UFO or unidentified sightings (there
>is not enough info in any of them to tell if even a single
>actual UFO was sighted). There is _no_ "code deciphering"
>involved, no "codes," just in the clear messages. NSA deleted
>the dates and locations of each incident, leaving in only the
>sketchy details of the sightings only. Dates and locations are
>what have been deleted. Got that now?

If that is all that has been deleted why does Stan Friedman
continually display these NSA documents as proof of a "Cosmic
Watergate"? Does he know of your findings? Does he accept them?

By the way, do you have an idea why they should still be
censored after between 25 and 40 years?

>The fact these are "clear text" messages (and possibly radio
>voice transcripts though I doubt it from the way the messages
>are worded) that are _not_ encrypted means they are low-level
>relatively unimportant messages. If they had been important
>messages the Soviets and Soviet bloc countries would have sent
>them with some form of encryption, the level of encryption
>indicating importance and sensitiveness. Not a single one of the
>NSA UFO-sighting report intercepts seems to have been encrypted
>by the Soviet bloc senders (possibly some messages are Chinese).

>This indicates to me that the NSA has a huge collection of
>_encrypted_ UFO sighting reports it has intercepted from a
>variety of countries around the world including our own allies,
>plus "in the clear" UFO reports intercepted from our allies
>(which NSA does not want to tip off that we are intercepting
>them), all of which the NSA has never even searched for. There
>are probably thousands of such intercepts.

>Now if some country, say Russia, had captured an ET spaceship,
>any messages sent concerning it would be of the highest level of
>security classification requiring the greatest level of crypto
>security, like one-time-pad type encryption multiply applied.
>These messages the NSA would not be able to "break." The NSA
>would not then have any intercepted messages telling of a
>recovery of an ET spaceship, even if such an event occurred,
>because NSA would not be able to read them to know what they
>reported. NSA has warehouses full of unbreakable messages.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:14:59 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:51:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>Only if the camera lenses are at least several feet apart
>(capable of resolving distances out to a few thousand feet). Ed
>Walters is the only person I know who has ever obtained stereo
>photos with a camera capable of clearly distinguishing between a
>distance less than 100 ft (hoax distance) and a distance of
>several hundred to over 1000 ft (not a likely hoax distance,
>depending upon the context of the sighting.)

>The above prescription for an insrumented skywatch is correct
>but, from the point of view of one of the few ufologists with
>experience in instrumented skywatch type of research, I would
>have to say it is of wishful thinking unless the finding is
>almost "unlimited."

Please expand your remarks. I do not understand about the
"wishful thinking" aspect. What do you mean "unless the finding
is almost unlimited"? Do you mean UFO distance is unlimited? Of
did you mean "funding" unlimited? If you mean funding, I
disagree. I think that using triangulation instead of
traditional stereo distance estimation should be very cheap and
more accurate if you have a good baseline.

>The GBRT was a "casually instrumented" but very sophisticated or
>"savvy" group of people when it came to recording Bubba
>sightings. They used home video cameras and still cameras, of
>course, and they had multiple witnesses (usually 4 - 10, but on
>occasion several dozen and once about 100). As the months went
>by after Nov 1990. they improved instrumentation and technique.
>They became adept at photographing the "impossible", using
>telescopic lenses, tripods, time exposures, video with and
>without zoom, etc.

Sounds laudable, but unless they were filming with timetags and
simulataneously, with good camera position/angles what we would
get would be the same old thing of _more_ UFO pictures. We
_know_ there are UFOs. Who are we trying to convince? It is the
next step of what they are (tied to where do they come from)
that we must be working on.

>At my suggestion several of them placed a
>diffraction grating into their cameras. In one case (Feb. 1992)
>they got a spectrum of red "Bubba."

Good. And did the spectrum match anything? Did the group
generate baseline spectrum for known objects? Is there a
database?

>Several times they had
>several groups of people with large separations and correlated
>sightings allowing for accurate triangulation to get distance
>and altitude.

That's helpful, but, of course, just the first phase. If they
got even three data points to draw a trajectory then we have a
major finding. For instance, one low level altitude, one
moderate and one above the stratosphere. If the UFO is just
going to fly by at a fixed altitude then that does not provide
much data to answer the question if it comes from space or not.
It would provide other data, but just not what I think is the
key question. We must depend on a certain fraction of UFO
sightings (maybe small) in which one "takes off" or one appears
from a distance and moves to closer proximity. Only these will
provide data that they are coming from or going to space.

Of course, equipment that could measure gravity waves or EMF
(radio/magnetic/electric) or sound provide good data, but it
really doesn't prove the point of origin. These provide some
potentially nice precursors or tell-tales to indicate a non-
prosaic UFO is in the area, but it doesn't help us determine
what the UFO is. And we can't count on the government to tell
us.

Lets say we, after 100's of UFO sightings, were finally able to
come up with the absolute UFO signature which all UFO generate
and which are measurable by way of sensors. This would still not
tell us what UFOs are. It would just help us to filter out all
the prosaic stuff (remove the noise) and allow us to focus on
the "real thang".

A field installation would have to monitor continuously and
would be triggered by the "signature" to taken data in high
stream mode. Or better, the facility would always be recording,
but would overwrite the stored data if the trigger signal was
not seen.

Until we get this signature, we need to record everything
(unfortunately) and weed through it (hopefully with substantial
help from computer algorithms). I am sure of meteors (from high
to low"er" altitude) would show up in such a dataset, but
hopefully with spectral measurements, these can be weeded out.
Satellites and most aircraft would be relatively easy to weed
out (our criteria-going into space or coming from space- is
stringent enough to eliminate most of these.

>... summer of 1992. This never-
>reported (in detail) research effort involved some Canadian
>scientists who were privately funded to construct an
>instrumented van and to take it to GBreeze. I was invited to go
>along and to supply a large sensitive telescope (f/11, 2000 mm,
>low light TV and video recording on a pan head Mitchell camera
>tripod with a home video camera boresighted with the telescope
>to act as a 'tracking gate."). I would estimate that the total
>cost of the instrumentation that allowed for EM measurement and
>recording from low frequency (Hz) to microwave frequencies, plus
>image intensified visible, infrared, and spectrographic video
>recording, magnetic field, electrostatic field, etc. plus the
>van was on the order of 50-60K$.

I don't think LF would cut it, you need ELF based on Stanford's
work.

Its great that they assembled this equipment. Can you let us
know who these folk were?

>Point: A lot of $$ were spent to no avail. To really mount an
>assault on the UFO problem is going to require a lot more
>funding and continuous effort.

But what became of the van and equipment? Surely it has been
used alot since? Amortized over time (10-20yrs), the cost seems
relatively small. The main cost should be scientist pay. I would
think that to justify the assembly of the equipment they must





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                      New Entry At SKEPTIC Bibliography

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:32:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:00:32 -0400
Subject: New Entry At SKEPTIC Bibliography


Source: SKEPTIC Bibliography

http://www.csicop.org/bib/692


Abducted: How People Come to
Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens
Susan Clancy

http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/CLAABD.html

2005, Harvard University Press; 192p. psychology, religion, UFO

Reviewed by Rob Hardy
robhardy.nul

Susan Clancy, a psychologist, explains alien abductions in a
skeptical manner.

However, Clancy also shows respect for the abductees she
investigated, appreciating their viewpoints and explaining
without condescension how such ideas came to be.

The book will convert few abductees from their belief system
(and Clancy shows why such a belief system is so satisfying and
firmly held), but it goes far to show that they are not stupid
or psychotic and they are not just seeking publicity.

Abductees have first hand experiences of abduction that
registered in their minds as surely as last night's dinner. That
doesn't mean that the memories are of things that physically
happened; the memories seem to come from sleep paralysis. In
about 5% of such cases, there are sensations of extraordinary
sights and sounds, levitation, and even alien intrusion.

The objection is often made that if sleep paralysis and false
memories are the cause of such reports, then there would be no
consistency of the reports. Clancy's response is succinct:
"Abduction reports are _not _ consistent with one another." But
why would someone want to foster memories that are so obviously
painful? "The contact these people have had with aliens doesn't
just feel real - it feels transformative."

The abductees reported that their abductions were the most
traumatic experiences in their lives, but also the most
positive.

Clancy even demonstrates that Saint Teresa's account of her
encounter with an angel is very close to accounts abductees give
of their own encounters. She shows that abductees get the same
benefits of meaning, reassurance, and spirituality that
believers in ordinary religions do.

Clancy writes with wit and with genuine sympathy and
understanding of her subjects, and readers will find them far
less strange than they had initially seemed.




Visit the full bibliography at:
http://www.csicop.org/bibliography/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                   Re: The End Of The Beginning - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:11:15 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:02:29 -0400
Subject: Re: The End Of The Beginning - Balaskas


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:16:01 -0700
>Subject: The End Of The Beginning

<snip>

>Source: Science Frontiers - No. 161

>http://www.science-frontiers.com

>Sep-Oct 2005

<snip>

>"This isn't science," says Eric Lerner, who is president of
>Lawrenceville Plasma Physics in West Orange, New Jersey. "Big
>Bang predictions are consistently wrong and are being fixed
>after the event." So much so, that today's "standard model" of
>cosmology has become an ugly mishmash comprising the basic Big
>Bang theory, inflation and a generous helping of dark matter and
>dark energy.

>Lerner is not alone in his doubts for he spoke at the first
>'Crisis-in-Cosmology Conference' in June 2005, held in Portugal.

>There, the consensus was that the Big Bang fails to explain
>certain crucial observations and that the universe is a lot
>weirder than anyone imagined. In particular dark matter was
>denigrated as a band-aid applied to save the Big Bang but which,
>in fact, serves only to cover up deep theoretical deficiencies.

>Of the many Big-Bang deficiencies, three in particular are in
>the spotting scope of the 'New Scientist' article.

<snip>


Hi Everyone!

Everything we know about the universe, including answers about
UFOs and ETs is through "Special Revelation" (eg. knowledge
obtained directly from God or "higher" beings which have been
recorded in holy books and which include cosmologies that remain
unchanged after withstanding the test of time and generations of
critical academic scrutany) and "General Revelation" (eg. facts
or observations interpreted in light of our current human
knowledge and beliefs or "science", which is not an absolute
authority since science changes or evolves with time). The
reason why these two revelations are not in total harmony is
largely because of what we want to belief and what we refuse to
accept.

From the many scientific articles I have read and the many
talks I have attended by scientists during the past few years,
it is has been clear that the "Big Bang" is not a theory in
crisis but a theory that is hopelessly dead. The reason we still
find it in our textbooks or mentioned in popular articles is
simply because we are still searching for something better to
replace it and because we refuse to examine the evidence in
Special Revelation. Science is not always what scientists do,
otherwise we would not continue to teach other outdated concepts
such as the Newtonian theory of gravity that invokes fictious
"forces", the mechanism for which we have failed to discover or
understand.

>Clearly, the Big Bang, even with its layer of band-aids, does
>not model the real universe well.

<snip>

While working on the "Incompleteness Theorem" at Princeton
University (an institution which has recently provided very
compelling evidence that the human mind does effect matter),
Albert Einstein (who is credited with the equation E=mc2 but in
fact "borrowed" it without credit from another colleague) said
the following:

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are
not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer
to reality."

Once we set aside all of our biases, preconceptions and beliefs -
and this includes ufologists - we won't be as stubborn as other
fellow scientists that will not even entertain certain ideas and
reject outright everything associated with them. As Paul Hellyer,
who was once Canada's Minister of Defense, pointed out at the
'Exopolitics Toronto' symposium here recently, there were just
too many names of credible people and actual places and too many
dates of real events to summarily dismiss Corso's book outright.
Based on what Hellyer was already aware of about UFOs and the
findings from further inquiries he made about Corso's book with
people he trusted that were in positions to know the truth, he
confirmed what he suspected about the ET presence here.

If ufologists would behave less than our more stubborn scientist
friends who rely on their own biases, preconceptions and beliefs
to come to there conclusions, we may find that the truth we have
been searching for (including the reveleations in Corso's book?)
was staring us in our face all along but had refused to accept





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

              Re: Fireball Over Britain March 24 1955? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:52:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:04:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Fireball Over Britain March 24 1955? - Hatch


>From: Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos <ballesterolmos.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul, euroufo.nul
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 19:54:47 +0200 (CEST)
>Subject: Fireball Over Britain March 24 1955?

>There was a bright fireball sighted from Britain on March 24,
>1955, as reported by Arthur Constance in The Inexplicable Sky,
>(Citadel, New York, 1956), pages 237 to 254.

>I am addressing British UFO researchers here to ask if there
>was any photograph taken of this fireball. In the affirmative, I
>will appreciate receiving -privately- any further information
>about it.


Hi VJ:

I don't usually include fireballs here, but I had this one.

#4619: 1955/03/24 19:10h d=45m 05:40W 50:05N 3333 WEU GBI ENG
LANDS END>>GLASGOW:1000s/OBS:FBL ZIGZAGS >N ACRS BRITAIN/45min:
JETS CHASE..
/r195 FLYING SAUCER REVIEW: (UK)  Volume 1 Issue 2

The very second issue of FSR!  What made it interesting
was the perceived zig-zag trajectory, long duration and
possible jets chasing.

I don't recall any photos, but they don't seem at all
unlikely.  Coordinates above are for Lands End in Cornwall
where the FBL was first seen.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:05:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:29:38 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:52:01 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>>As I always say, we need some field research.

Field research can only cover a tiny fraction of the volume of
space above the earth's surface and is limited by terrain
obstacles, the earth's horizon, pollution and weather limiting
optical visibility. It's hopeless. The AF abandoned such limited
plans in the 50's and downgraded the nearly useless accumulation
of anecdotal reports. We haven't learned from the AF.

However Peter Davenport's Passive Radar plan would use the
ubiquitous radio-tv broadcast and cell phone radio transmissions
as radar filling virtually the entire volume of space above a
continent out to a few thousand miles. The technique is being
used to track meteors a hundred miles up. All it requires is the
computing equipment and receivers to process data fast.

Objects tracked with Passive Radar that have unconventional
speeds and trajectories can be tracked optically and with other
instruments tied in to the Passive Radar system, just like the
unmanned camera traps used by wildlife photographers.

<snip>

>>The goal is to be able to follow (I.E. use the ranging data to
>>follow it to orbital altitude.) the damn thing either from space
>>to ground or visa versa thus proving that at least ONE UFO is
>>from space.

There are quite a number of triangulation cases in the Blue Book
files including some with phototheodolites where the objects
were triangulated at extremely high altitudes on the borders of
space traveling at high speeds. In some cases the objects
apparently reached escape velocity on trajectories heading away
from earth.

I have cataloged a number of such cases in my Comprehensive
Catalog of 1,500 Blue Book Unknowns which is available online,
though in earlier versions which may not have all the details
subsequently derived or calculated.

On Jan. 31, 1949, thousands of witnesses across several states
observed a green fireball which Lincoln LaPax was able to
triangulate from interviews with more than 100 of the witnesses,
using surveyor's transits and stopwatch timed reenactments. The
object traveled at about 25,000 tp 50,000 mph along a nearly
horizontal 143-mile long path at an altitude of about 60,000 to
40,000 feet.

On April 27, 1950, missile tracking theodilite camera teams
photographed four UFO's triangulated at 150,000 foot altitude
traveling at high speed.

On Dec. 16, 1953, the world's leading aircraft designer Clarence
"Kelly" Johnson and an independent team of his top Lockheed test
pilots, flight engineers and Cal Tech trained aerodynamicist
aboard an aircraft sighted a large 200-foot object hovering for
five minutes at about 15,000 feet then took off in a shallow
climb. Johnson on the ground with his wife used binoculars and
did not know of the observations by his aircraft team. The two
groups of witnesses provided data enabling triangulation,
showing the object accelerated at about 130 g's to an altitude
of at least 90 miles over the pacific when it disappeared due to
distance.

On Jan. 1, 1954, dozens of witnesses in New Jersey sighted
maneuvering objects along a baseline of 12 miles, many using
binoculars, which enabled Hynek to triangulate the UFOs'
hovering altitude at about 4 miles, then their sudden extremely
high speed departure at 90,000 mph (his numbers).

On Oct. 7, 1958, the Defense Dept's chief R&D official, John R.
Townsend, and a Capitol airline pilot independently sighted a
hovering or slow-moving object. Their independent data gathered
by AF investigators provide triangulation at right angles
showing that the 500-600-foot metallic Saturn-shaped object
hovered at about 3,000 feet (for 10 seconds according to
Townsend). It then suddenly took off at a steep angle
accelerating at about 80 g's to a terminal velocity of roughly
72,000 mph at about 200 miles altitude after about 40 seconds.

There are _many_ other triangulation cases of less than
aerospace velocities and altitudes in the BB files, including
world renowned meteoriticist-astronomer Lincoln LaPaz's personal
multiple sighting of a supersonic highly maneuverable 200-foot
white ellipsoid, numerous sightings made by the Army's real-time
UFO triangulation network, plus the AF's Holloman-White Sands
UFO triangulation network which later incorporated Project
Twinkle.

>>Of course, if it just appears/disappears, you get nowhere.
>>Pretty pictures get you nowhere. Even _one_ stereo photo is
>>worth alot.

>Only if the camera lenses are at least several feet apart
>(capable of resolving distances out to a few thousand feet). Ed
>Walters is the only person I know who has ever obtained stereo
>photos with a camera capable of clearly distinguishing between a
>distance less than 100 ft (hoax distance) and a distance of
>several hundred to over 1000 ft (not a likely hoax distance,
>depending upon the context of the sighting.)

Paul Trent took a stereo pair of UFO photos in 1950 where he
stepped 5 feet to the right to take the second shot. You and I
have been stereo triangulating the Trent photos for decades now
Bruce. The Trent photos may not triangulate out to "several
hundred" feet but certainly up to around 100 feet, and down to a
few feet where the hyperfocal distance would blur the images.
This is the "hoax distance" range and the stereo data eliminate
a hoax object nearby. The stereo data by the way are in all 3
dimensions, X, Y and Z, not just laterally, because Trent was on
uneven ground and is about a half foot lower in the second shot,
if I recall correctly. The third or depth/distance dimension is
defined by the interactive images effects of angular size as
well as the stereoscopic effects on the other axes.

>The above prescription for an insrumented skywatch is correct
>but, from the point of view of one of the few ufologists with





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 20:45:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:06:44 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks


>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:11:57 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:25:41 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>>I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to those
>>>that would claim that the USA uses it's financial clout and
>>>military might to intimidate other states into not disclosing
>>>anything relating to UFOs, that the same tactics do not appear
>>>to be working in relation to Iran's nuclear development
>>>programme. Why should they have more success when it comes to
>>>UFOs?

>>I dunno, it works with North Korea, Russia, China and even Cuba.

<snip>

>As I pointed out, in spite of US resistance, financial and
>military power, several states have developed nuclear weapons
>technology. This flies in the face of those who suggest that the
>USA suppresses information about UFOs from foreign states through
>intimidation.

You're mixing two different tactics together. You are saying
that US resistance and intimidation does not work too well. Yet
you seem to think that intimidation is the same thing as
suppressing and withholding information. But clearly the
suppression of information such as nuclear secrets works pretty
well. Few nations have succeeded in obtaining US nuclear
secrets. Most nations that have developed nuclear weapons
capability have done it on their own by independent invention
without the need for US secrets.

How many nuclear nations have released their nuclear secrets to
the public? Any at all? I don't think a single one has. Why is
that? Apparently it's not in their interest to release secrets
and that fact has little or nothing to do with US pressure or
intimidation or wishes (as see for example how some adversary





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                       Re: Japanese A-Bomb? - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:05:01 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:08:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Japanese A-Bomb? - Balaskas


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:22:00 -0300
>Subject: Japanese A-Bomb?

<snip>

>In keeping with some of the oddities that have shown up recently
>on this list re Japan's secret war activites, I recently watched
>a History Channel [Canada] program of an American History
>Channel Documentary with an interesting story; that being that
>Japan had been very close to having their own A-bomb and
>exploded a non-transportable device on a barge in a bay in North
>Korea at about the same time period that the U.S. was bombing
>Nagasaki.

>Here's the URL for History USA and the DVD.

>http://tinyurl.com/bvgkw

<snip>


Hi Don!

I watched caught this incredible documentary twice on the
History Channel while visiting my family in Ottawa this summer.
Interestingly, this was around the same time of the 60th
anniversary of the A-bomb (with Uranium mined and refined in
Canada) that the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima which many consider
an unnecessary and immoral act...

In case you did not see this Guardian news story about how the
Germans too also detonated an A-bomb of their own before the end
of WWII (I noticed it today on rense.com), here it is below.

http://tinyurl.com/cvugl

You may recall hearing on this History Channel documentary that
the Japanese were consdiering using a submarine to deliver and
detonate their A-bomb in San Francisco Bay. Maybe this happened
too (see URL below)!.

http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/usa4.html

If such major incidents can be kept secret for so long, then one





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                           Locals Look for Aliens

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:28:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:28:46 -0400
Subject: Locals Look for Aliens




Source: The Cornell Daily Sun - Cornell University,
        Ithaca, New York

http://tinyurl.com/aqqd3

October 03, 2005


Locals Look for Aliens

by Nandita Garud
Sun Contributor

Images of Ithaca are on their way to Messier 13, a cluster of
stars where aliens may possibly live.

Larry Klaes, a lifelong amateur astronomer and freelance writer,
gave a seminar on Friday evening at the Cornell Observatory to
offer evidence in support of the existence of aliens.

According to Klaes, many attempts have been made to contact
aliens, such as a three-minute message with images of Ithaca
relayed in 1974 to Messier 13, 24,000 light years away.

=93I=92m trying to introduce science in a fun way to society,=94 Klaes
said. In an hour-long in-depth talk on aliens, Klaes tried to
dispel popular myths about aliens and discuss the plausibility
of life existing on another planet.

=93The media doesn=92t really depict how scientists view aliens.
Aliens are not going to look like humans with funny noses,=94 he
said.

Klaes stressed that aliens, should they exist, are most likely
quite unrecognizable from anything living on earth.

Klaes drew many parallels between Earth and other planets and
moons to illustrate why aliens may exist. Even though there are
many extreme physical conditions characterizing other planets,
such as 900=B0C temperatures on Venus and thick sheets of ice
covering Europa =97 one of Jupiter=92s many moons =97 there still
remains a real possibility of organisms thriving under such
conditions.

=93Can organisms actually exist in water depths of more than two
miles with no sunlight? Yes, it happens on Earth,=94 Klaes said.

According to Klaes, there is a wide variety of organisms of
Earth living in extreme environments, lending support to the
possibility that aliens may exist in harsh environments on other
planets.

The talk, organized by the Cornell Astronomical Society (CAS),
attracted an audience of students, professors and even children.

=93It=92s really interesting that there is a possibility that life
on other planets can exist,=94 said Jennifer Bailard =9209, a member
of CAS.

Klaes has been trying to bring space explorations to the
attention of general public for some years now. This year was
the second time he has given this talk on aliens.

=93Cornell needs to do a better job of spreading the knowledge.
Cornell has so many of the top scientists in the world, but the
[general public] knows so little about them. I=92d like to see it
get out there,=94 he said.

=93There are stereotypes about aliens generated by the media, such
as inaccurate science-fiction shows. It=92s all this nonsense that
I want to dispel,=94 he added.

David Eisler =9207 said of the talk, =93It was very informative and
very interesting. This kind of seminar enables science to be





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                     University Of Glamorgan Talking ET

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:34:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:34:12 -0400
Subject: University Of Glamorgan Talking ET




Source: Weblogs - The University of Glamorgan - Wales

http://difference.weblog.glam.ac.uk/posts/2005/09/30/talking-et

September 30, 2005 13:31


Talking ET

Publicity for our BSc Astrobiology continues unabated. I�ve
received further calls and emails from as far afield as Spain,
France and Australia, and have a scheduled spot tomorrow evening
on, among all things, TalkSport Radio

By the way, during this recent flurry of web publicity for CASE
I came across this Wikipedia entry for the University, which not
only mentions our Astrobiology degree, but also links to our
CASE web site

Currently working on a Top 20 list of science fictional myths
which appear to have factoid status in the public imagination.
You know the kind of thing: alien abductions, UFOs, Moon hoaxes,
and so on.

Any contributions would be gladly accepted. Within reason.

posted by markbrake, category of "Science Communication"

---


markbrake

Email: mbrake.nul
URI: http://case.glam.ac.uk/CASE/StaffPages/MarkBrake/MB.html

Mark runs CASE: the University of Glamorgan�s Centre for
Astronomy and Science Education. He is, it says here, the
Professor of Science Communication at CASE!

CASE is a group of around a dozen staff known globally for
innovative cross-curricular degrees, such as the BSc in Science
and Science Fiction (the first degree of its kind in worldwide),
BSc Astronomy & Space, and the imminent BSc Astrobiology!

Much of Marks�s work involves the communication of science;
helping to run SETPOINT Wales, sitting on the NASA Astrobiology
Science Communication Board, working with the world�s first
Science Fiction Museum and Hall of Fame in Seattle, or making





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                Movie Puts Paul Allen In An Alien Environment

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:38:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:38:35 -0400
Subject: Movie Puts Paul Allen In An Alien Environment




Source: The Seattle Post-Inteligencer - Seattle, Washington

http://tinyurl.com/a9xl6

Monday, October 3, 2005


Business - The Insider

Movie Puts Paul Allen In An Alien Environment

The rich are very different from you and me, it has been said.

But who imagined that America's third-wealthiest man, Mercer
Island resident Paul Allen, was so different as to be the front
man for aliens bent on conquering Earth?

Perhaps only Alex Mayer, the Seward Park-based creator of "Paul
Alien," a new movie that he said proves Allen is collaborating
with 2-foot-tall aliens known as Skoolabugs, from the planet
Zorkon.

"In a rare interview, media-shy Paul Allen admits that he plans
to turn Seattle's South Lake Union neighborhood into an
intergalactic launch pad," Mayer says on his direct-to-DVD
movie's Web site, www.paulalien.com.

The movie, a mock documentary, will be available soon through
Amazon.com.

Mayer, 39, a freelance graphic designer and the publisher of the
free monthly "Belltown Messenger," said he got the idea for the
film when "its name just popped into my head."

He said he doesn't know whether Allen has seen the spoof or, if
so, what he thought of it.

Allen didn't respond to a request for comment.

"The best response would be that he gets upset and I get
publicity out of it," Mayer said. "If you're an independent
filmmaker without a marketing budget, you need to get attention
somehow."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:15:32 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:43:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>As I always say, we need some field research.

>Field research can only cover a tiny fraction of the volume of
>space above the earth's surface and is limited by terrain
>obstacles, the earth's horizon, pollution and weather limiting
>optical visibility. It's hopeless. The AF abandoned such limited
>plans in the 50's and downgraded the nearly useless accumulation
>of anecdotal reports. We haven't learned from the AF.

Right. It does cover a small volume. But it is not hopeless. The
AF has the great benefit of vast taxpayer dollars to buy nice
DSP, DMSP and other satellites to observe the planet. They also
have lots of nice radar systems normally for use of tracking
satellites and missiles. They don't really need optical tracking
systems, but also have those for satellite observations. So you
are right that having giant expensive systems are the smart way
to go, but these data come at a price, namely the government can
edit them to their heart's content.

>However Peter Davenport's Passive Radar plan would use the
>ubiquitous radio-tv broadcast and cell phone radio transmissions
>as radar filling virtually the entire volume of space above a
>continent out to a few thousand miles. The technique is being
>used to track meteors a hundred miles up. All it requires is the
>computing equipment and receivers to process data fast.

Theoretically it can work, but it has many problems which are
not easily answered. The devil is in the details.

I think that when you look at the resolution at 1000's of miles
you will find it doesn't seem so applicable as you would like.
You are detecting ion trails, not the object, thus you must
assume the object you want to track (a non-prosaic UFO) will
generate such trails. If they don't generate sonic booms then
perhaps ion trails are also up to question. Also, these cell
phone towers don't like to shoot much signal into space since
they have few customers in orbit yet. Also, you have ionspheric
effects to worry about and given our wretched signal propagation
recently (sunspots), I think I would prefer optical observations
through "chemtrails".

Also, you assume the non-prosaic UFOs are nice enough to be
radar opaque. This has not been shown to be the case in various
field research sightings (it seems to be an option - a UFO value
package add-on includes radar stealth??) Even if an active radar
signal is not bounced off such a craft, the thing may be such
that no RF signal is affected by its presence. So, passive radar
requires alot of faith that what you are looking for will give
you the data you want. The same DOES NOT apply to optical
observations since the main reason we are all so enthralled by
UFOs is that they ARE visible.

Another reason passive radar will not take off is the very
limiting (on the public) fear of the government and especially
military to have "cheap" non-trackable (how can you target such
a system with your on-board anti-radar missiles?) radar systems
allowing terrorist groups (and foreign powers) the great benefit
of tracking military targets and allowing them to fire missiles
at such. No, it is very likely that if passive radar does get
some momentum, it will be bought out by the military or
otherwise crushed before deployment. Especially if the non-
prosaic UFOs are "ours".

>Objects tracked with Passive Radar that have
>unconventional speeds and trajectories can be tracked
>optically and with other instruments tied in to the
>Passive Radar system, just like the unmanned camera
>traps used by wildlife photographers.

Yes, but the same is true for optical observations only. Again,
you assume that the trigger is valid. I am not so sanguine. I
bet non-prosaic UFOs are too canny to be so easily tracked.

The thing is that we can wait for the passive radar (which my
bets are will not come, unless regulated by the government) or
use "hobbyist" state-of-the-art satellite tracking equipment
today. What is cheaper? Clearly passive radar is not ubiquitous
so will be expensive. The optical satellite equipment can be
bought at the mall (some mods needed of course).

>>>The goal is to be able to follow (I.E. use the ranging data to
>>>follow it to orbital altitude.) the damn thing either from space
>>>to ground or visa versa thus proving that at least ONE UFO is
>>>from space.

>There are quite a number of triangulation cases in the Blue Book
>files including some with phototheodolites where the objects
>were triangulated at extremely high altitudes on the borders of
>space traveling at high speeds. In some cases the objects
>apparently reached escape velocity on trajectories heading away
>from earth.

Thanks. These are interesting, if old.

>On Jan. 31, 1949, thousands of witnesses across several states
>observed a green fireball which Lincoln LaPax was able to
>triangulate from interviews with more than 100 of the witnesses,
>using surveyor's transits and stopwatch timed reenactments. The
>object traveled at about 25,000 tp 50,000 mph along a nearly
>horizontal 143-mile long path at an altitude of about 60,000 to
>40,000 feet.

Meteor?

>On April 27, 1950, missile tracking theodilite camera teams
>photographed four UFO's triangulated at 150,000 foot altitude
>traveling at high speed.

Meteor?

>On Dec. 16, 1953, the world's leading aircraft designer Clarence
>"Kelly" Johnson and an independent team of his top Lockheed test
>pilots, flight engineers and Cal Tech trained aerodynamicist
>aboard an aircraft sighted a large 200-foot object hovering for
>five minutes at about 15,000 feet then took off in a shallow
>climb. Johnson on the ground with his wife used binoculars and
>did not know of the observations by his aircraft team. The two
>groups of witnesses provided data enabling triangulation,
>showing the object accelerated at about 130 g's to an altitude
>of at least 90 miles over the pacific when it disappeared due to
>distance.

Now this is an good report. I wonder how much error was in the
triangulation. This is the kind of sighting that I am looking
for. Was is written off because it had no photos or what? It had
good witnesses. I would think this report would have been enough
to cause a more alarming conclusion to the Blue Book report.

>On Jan. 1, 1954, dozens of witnesses in New Jersey sighted
>maneuvering objects along a baseline of 12 miles, many using
>binoculars, which enabled Hynek to triangulate the UFOs'
>hovering altitude at about 4 miles, then their sudden extremely
>high speed departure at 90,000 mph (his numbers).

Well, I guess I was omitting the high speed departure or complex
high speed manuevers from my field research objective because I
am asking if it comes from or goes off planet, not if it behaves
in a way that cannot be man-made. Because in that case, it could
be some odd ball-lightning, plasma, electric effect, in which
case g-forces make little difference. A concern is the behavior
of high alitutde sprites and elves and how to differentiate them
from non-prosaic UFOs. I guess spectra could be used.

>On Oct. 7, 1958, the Defense Dept's chief R&D official, John R.
>Townsend, and a Capitol airline pilot independently sighted a
>hovering or slow-moving object. Their independent data gathered
>by AF investigators provide triangulation at right angles
>showing that the 500-600-foot metallic Saturn-shaped object
>hovered at about 3,000 feet (for 10 seconds according to
>Townsend). It then suddenly took off at a steep angle
>accelerating at about 80 g's to a terminal velocity of roughly
>72,000 mph at about 200 miles altitude after about 40 seconds.

Another good report. Wonder how Blue Book could be so
lackidaisical in their findings? No photos? What the hell did
they need?

>There are _many_ other triangulation cases of less than
>aerospace velocities and altitudes in the BB files, including
>world renowned meteoriticist-astronomer Lincoln LaPaz's personal
>multiple sighting of a supersonic highly maneuverable 200-foot
>white ellipsoid, numerous sightings made by the Army's real-time
>UFO triangulation network, plus the AF's Holloman-White Sands
>UFO triangulation network which later incorporated Project
>Twinkle.

Good stuff!

>Paul Trent took a stereo pair of UFO photos in 1950 where he
>stepped 5 feet to the right to take the second shot. You and I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                             UFO ROUNDUP Delayed

From: John Hayes <John.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 17:03:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:49:08 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP Delayed


Important Announcenent

The next issue of the bulletin will be delayed.

Joseph Trainor, the editor of UFO Roundup is moving from his
current home in Duluth, Minnesota and heading back east,
probably to one of the New England states.

As long as Joe's aging computer survives the trip he hopes to be
back online within a week or two and will continue with the
bulletin.

Best wishes,

John


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

Home to UFO Roundup, Encounters With Aliens On This Day,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI
Magazine plus archives of Humanoid Sighting Reports
(Albert Rosales), Filer's Files, UFO News UK and more...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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 > Oct > Oct 4

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:00:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:50:48 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 20:45:06 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:11:57 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 11:25:41 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:10:10 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>>>I agree with that. I would also like to add in response to those
>>>>that would claim that the USA uses it's financial clout and
>>>>military might to intimidate other states into not disclosing
>>>>anything relating to UFOs, that the same tactics do not appear
>>>>to be working in relation to Iran's nuclear development
>>>>programme. Why should they have more success when it comes to
>>>>UFOs?

>>>I dunno, it works with North Korea, Russia, China and even Cuba.

><snip>

>>As I pointed out, in spite of US resistance, financial and
>>military power, several states have developed nuclear weapons
>>technology. This flies in the face of those who suggest that the
>>USA suppresses information about UFOs from foreign states through
>>intimidation.

>You're mixing two different tactics together. You are saying
>that US resistance and intimidation does not work too well. Yet
>you seem to think that intimidation is the same thing as
>suppressing and withholding information. But clearly the
>suppression of information such as nuclear secrets works >pretty
>well. Few nations have succeeded in obtaining US nuclear
>secrets. Most nations that have developed nuclear weapons
>capability have done it on their own by independent invention
>without the need for US secrets.

>How many nuclear nations have released their nuclear secrets >to
>the public? Any at all? I don't think a single one has. Why is
>that? Apparently it's not in their interest to release secrets
>and that fact has little or nothing to do with US pressure or
>intimidation or wishes (as see for example how some adversary
>nuclear nations that the US has little or no power over share
>their nuclear secrets with other adversary nations but don't
>release anything to the public). Same goes for UFO's. Doesn't
>need any heavy- handed US "intimidation" for other nations to
>keep their own secrets secret - assuming they have secrets.

Agreed Brad.

The reason I started this thread was because I've had more
communication and insight into the workings of government,
intelligence, private industry.

It is so complex in some places and so simple in others it can
make one's head spin.

Often the simplest thing is blown out of proportion and in other
cases the most complex is ignored.

We're thinking the U.S. has some secret tactical group that
oversees all UFO stuff globally. Plausible deniability reigns
here. It may not just be the government offices we're aware of
but sub contractors, much like those used by the government.

Often private industry can do the better job especially if
they're to get a lion's share of the goodies. I'm surprised at
how much leverage corporations have in other countries that our
own government doesn't. Money and a strong arm go a long way.

That network is complex enough. A cursory glance at contracting
shows that.

Regarding 'crashes' there may or may not be that many that even
the men behind the curtain are aware of. The surface of our
world is covered by mostly water. No telling how many artifacts
are buried under centuries or millenia of silt and water. I
asked a Navy pal about it and of course it shivered his timbers
and he told me something surprising in his response. Something
I'd never heard before regarding what the powers would cover up.

He said if there was a discovery that had
military/security/moral implications it would be hushed up.

Moral?

That rang the chimes. Now why would moral implications have to
do with covering up a discovery?

If the discovery invalidated the belief system that supports the
military industrial complex it would be hushed up. That's a big
amount of hushing up. No telling what the swabbies have
discovered and put in a warehouse.

Religious people make money and can't have that tree shaken I
guess.

It's been said that there's no way foreign powers would keep a
UFO secret if they could glean and make a profit off the
technology. Sounds reasonable to me, but reason is the last
thing you'll find in UFOlogy as any UFOlogist can tell you and
that's on both sides of the fence. Only good detective skills
gather the solid data whether pro or con.

Let's suppose the technology gleaned isn't efficacious for the
proprietary domination we're accustomed to. Let's say we humans
are a bit sharper at finding out how things work and the
technologies behind these artifacts is simple and easily copied.
Not saying it is, just suppose some of it is. Once out in the
public arena I'm sure a bunch of fellas at any garage or lab
named Bubba and Junior might whip up their own versions of these
contraptions and have their own hover devices or death beams.

Can't have that!

Can't have crackheads and terrorists running around with that
kind of technology. We're in it bad enough as it is. Which is
why we don't have our flying cars and portable laser guns.

We can only suppose here and look for data to support or
invalidate it.

I had to explore this because I found myself making a major
mistake which was assuming and convicting. Common sense says no
one could possibly cover up all the UFO data but that was a
generalization on my part and I can admit a mistake and look at
the issue again.

There's tons of UFO data that the public has the hasn't been
covered up. Keeping a secret is a tough thing to do but it can
be done.

Intimidation? For sure! I have three UFO cases that would end
this debate right here and now except the witnesses, photos,
artifacts are not going to see the light of day because those
who were at the scene, as was I, will_not_talk. Even though if
they did they would be rich from books and royalties. These
people will not talk. They're not living high on the hog either
by any means and they could be living the life of Riley if they
came forward but no_freaking_way will they talk. I was told by
them they were told not to talk and these are people I've known
for three decades and broken bread with. Saw their kids born and
we faced many dangers together.

Yet if you brought up any other topic that raised their ire
these same people would fight to the last. Yet the UFO issue is
a no-no to them.

I think basic fears are what's keeping some of the best evidence
pro and con from reaching the public.

I'll stick with what I originally posted and be more precise
this time with that you can have a global cover up of some of
the best info.

What we really need is to emphasize on the physical evidence to
bring to light and mark that trail to that physical evidence as
that too will shed light on why any physical evidence is not
accessible to us.

One thing I won't do is only emphasize the ETH stuff. That would
cloud any look at other explanations like private/experimental
craft that I've already run into but since that story doesn't
have little green men people aren't interested save the aircraft
afficianados.

There's lots of secrets. Some can be kept quiet and some not.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 10:20:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:54:45 -0400
Subject: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen


10 Years of Scientific Research of the Hessdalen Phenomena

By Bj=F8rn Gitle Hauge, Assistant professor,
Ostfold University College,
Norway

Courtesy of Renzo Cabassi, Italian Committee for
Project Hessdalen

For full text, please click on paper here:

http://www.anomalia.org/2005_hauge.pdf

452 kB

Abstract
The author has been a member of the Hessdalen project research
team for the last decade, and he has participated in the
development of the Hessdalen interactive observatory, also
called the "blue box". The author has a master degree in
electronics and specializes in electromagnetic transmission. He
has a long experience with radar and radio transmission from the
Royal Norwegian Navy. Assistant professor Erling Strand, the
founder of the Hessdalen project, conducted together with the
author the first international congress of the Hessdalen
phenomena in 1994. This congress attracted scientists from all
over the world and boosted the  scientific research in
Hessdalen. Statements from the congress indicated that
explanation of the phenomena could lead to new concepts in
physics.

This congress also started the collaboration between =D8stfold
University College in Norway and CNR in Italy. Together with Dr.
Stelio Montebugnoli the author started the EMBLA project, with
the purpose of studying the  electromagnetic radiation and
behaviour of the Hessdalen phenomena in 1999. The author has
participated in a number of investigations in Hessdalen, the
last with the Italian Committee for Project Hessdalen winter
mission in 2004. Since 1998 automatic surveillance of the valley
has been done by the Hessdalen interactive observatory. Despite
of 24-hour surveillance and well manned and equipped research
campaigns in the EMBLA project, no mayor breakthrough has been
done. Spectacular pictures and video recordings have been
obtained, but correlation with other scientific measurements is
hard to find. No "fingerprint" of electromagnetic radiation from
the phenomena has been obtained which can identify an  unknown
light source as the real Hessdalen phenomena. The research has
so far demonstrated that the Hessdalen phenomena is difficult to
investigate, and explanations hard to find. Despite of this, the
EMBLA/CIPH team has  gained significant experience in this kind
of scientific study and it is possibly the most competent team





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:56:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: James Smith
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>Of course, if it just appears/disappears, you get nowhere.
>Pretty pictures get you nowhere. Even _one_ stereo photo is
>worth alot.

James:

As you know, I am in agreement with you and I am quite miffed as
to this allergy Ufology seems to have for the scientific method.
At first. I thought it was based on a fear of  discovery that
might contradict past assertions or current theory.  However, I
now feel it's more of a matter of getting sidetracked.  This is
understandable, as the field is heavily populated with fantastic
stories, intriguing documentation, and interesting exopolitical
posturing.  However, following this path can often draw a
researcher or enthusiast deep into a wilderness of abstractions
where they become lost as to their original destination.

Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
documented proof of such a finding?  If so, I would think a
relevant question to ask oneself before committing the time,
energy and money to a specific research opportunity, might be as
follows: Could the information gained from pursuing this
particular avenue of research potentially facilitate(or help to}
the achievement of the goal as stated above?  The truth is, I
cannot think of many scenarios where researching events that
have already taken place, could provide such evidence.

I have an addition to the wish-list of instruments we might
find of use in such a field lab:

http://vision.gel.ulaval.ca/en/Projects/Id_177/Projet.php







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                                   Boylan!

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:46:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:46:28 -0400
Subject: Boylan!




[FYI Only - not for discussion.

 For more on Boylan see:

 The UFO UpDates Archive search results at:

 http://tinyurl.com/8udn4 --ebk]

------

From: William Hamilton <astroxplorer.nul>
To: <Skyopen.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:33:13 -0700
Subject: [SO] Boylan - High Commander?


If you ever needed it, here is Proof Positive that Boylan has
flipped out and fancies himself a star visitor from the High
Council - does that make him a High Commander as portrayed by
John Lithgow in Third Rock From the Sun? Somebody needs to get
this guy some help fast before he ends up talking to a real
counselor.....

-----

Sent Oct. 02, 2005

Report on the Formal Hearing (Sept. 29, 2005) on Reported Cabal
Violations of Universal Laws by Richard Boylan, Ph.D.

Dear Friends and Star Kids,

What you are about to read concerns an event which took place on
Thursday, September 29, (2005), one of the most historic dates
in modern human history. While previously much of the detail of
this event had to be kept confidential to prevent Cabal
sabatoge, now the entire story can be revealed.

A month ago I sent out a bulletin entitled "Star Visitors' Plan
to hold the Cabal accountable for violations of Universal Laws".
In that message I reported how the Star Nations have long been
monitoring Earth, and have watched with concern when global
threats arose to such proportions as to threaten human
survivability as a free species. That report recounted how the
Star Nations conducted a previous Formal Hearing in 1937, to
deal with the then-threat of the Cabal in its Nazi-Stalinist-
Fascist incarnation, but that the Cabal objected successfully
that there was no representation from Earth on the High Council
of the Star Nations, and so thus cosmic law did not allow the
Star Nations to intervene under those circumstance.

That report also told of how "the Star Nations have not lost
sight of the grave danger the Cabal represent to the
survivability of the human race. The Star Nations have also been
tracking the growing numbers of monstrous abuses of Earth and
human rights by the Cabal. And so, the Star Nations have
determined that it is time for a new Hearing." (See that
earlier bulletin below.) That new Formal Hearing on Reported
Cabal Violations of Universal Laws took place on Thursday, Sept.
29, 2005.

This time the outcome was different.

This time Earth was represented on the Star Nations High Council
by a Councillor of Earth. This time an updated report of Cabal
violations was presented by a Star Visitor Watcher, at a Hearing
at which the Councillor of Earth, a Witness for Earth, and a
Witness for the Star Nations also participated. Members of the
High Council of the Star Nations were also in attendance, not
visible on this dimension, but their energy signatures were
readily detectible. The charges which the Watcher presented
against the Cabal included their multiple serious and heinous
violations of the 11 (cosmic) Universal Laws, as well as human
laws and the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. (See the 11 Universal Laws on:

http://www.star-knowledge.net/eleven.htm

The Watcher brought up various instances of Cabal violations of
the Universal Law of Free Will, particularly across the life of
former mind-control slave, Wendi Powers.

The Councillor of Earth presented Cabal violations of the
following Universal Laws: Law of Free Will (citing the hundreds
of victims of intimidation and coercion he has interviewed), Law
of Change (citing Cabal obstruction of Earth's progress), Law of
Movement and Balance (citing the emotional, mental and spiritual
imbalances caused by Cabal torture and information suppression),
Law of Innocence, Truth and Family (citing especially the
wholesale Cabal sexual and psychological abuse of children to
turn them into mind-control sex and psychic slaves and
intelligence couriers, and the wholesale Cabal disinformation
campaigns), Law of Life (citing Cabal murders and harvesting the
life energies of ritual victims), and the Law of Love (citing
wholesale perversions and MILABS gang-rapes of kidnapped
civilian victims during faked "alien abductions").

The Witness for Earth concurred that the charges against the
Cabal were consistent with her information and experience. The
Witness for the Star Nations also concurred, and added his
observation about how the Earth being (Mother Earth) has
suffered environmentally at Cabal hands.

In the interest of the kind of transparency which dawning Fifth
World society shall be known by, the identities of the Hearing
participants are hereby revealed, as agreed to by the parties
involved.

The Watcher is Byrd, a Star Visitor consciousness who has co-
incarnated into the body-mind space of Wendi Powers, and takes
turns being the forefront personality/speaker. Byrd also
provides communication link to his adoptive race, the Zeta, who
thus at times utilize the Wendi vehicle to speak on their own.
Byrd's Mentor, a Reptoid Star Visitor, also on occasion uses
Wendi's body to communicate through. Ms. Powers is a Star Seed
human computer technician residing in Nashville, TN.
blackfootturtle.nul

The Earth member of the High Council of the Star Nations, the
Councillor of Earth, is Dr. Richard Boylan. In a previous
incarnation he was a Star Visitor member of the High Council,
but, in view of Earth's devolving plight, chose to incarnate
this time as a human (a Star Seed human) in order to be fully of
Earth and authentically provide representation for Earth on High
Council. He was reappointed to High Council, this time as
Earth's representative, about a year ago. He lives in
Sacramento, CA. drboylan.nul

The Witness for Earth is Marja Roberts, a Star Seed human who
lives in New York. marjaa.nul

The Witness for Star Nations is Frank Feliccia, a Star Seed
human artist in Nashville, TN. hotgridl.nul

The Councillor of Earth requested of Star Nations an expedited
decision, in view of the desperate situation on Earth. It did
not take long for High Council to render a verdict. Within a few
minutes the Zeta reported that High Council had accepted all the
charges. The Cabal stood convicted of multiple counts of
violations of Universal Laws.

Following the Hearing the Cabal tried to present some flimsy
Objections to the High Council. The Councillor of Earth was
designated to respond to them. He dealt with these hypocritical
Objections in a lengthy legal brief presented to High Council,
who on Saturday (Oct. 1) promptly dismissed the Objections as
without merit, and ordered their Decision reactivated for being
carried out.

What is the practical consequence of this Cabal conviction?

As I wrote a month ago, "If they are in violation, and the
collective High Council agrees on these things, then 'action can
be taken to handle the energy pattern of Cabal members as not
being the same as other humans,' as one Star Visitor put it. In
other words, the Cabal will be treated differently than other
humans. Very differently. If convicted, the Cabal will not have
any interactions with the Star Visitors, and will be screened
from any technical assistance the Star Nations offer other
humans. Other substantial consequences will also ensue, which
will not be spelled out at this time. Suffice to say, a
substantial part of what the Cabal have built their power base
on will be removed.

"One Star Visitor has told me that the consequences of the
Cabal's conviction will mean "a whole new ball game" as to how
things will soon start going on Earth.

"The news of the Star Nations holding the Cabal accountable soon
is shared with you so that you may understand that we have
concerned allies "out there", who are far from indifferent to
the terrible plight of Earth being and her beloved children, us
humans, at this time. And that the Star Nations are anxious,
within the parameters of the cosmic laws of Supreme Source, to
do what they can to remove a major obstacle to humanity's having
a viable future." The Zeta have now, for example, begun a new
practice of presenting their reports noting the negative deeds
and energy signatures (of the Cabal) in contrast to the positive
deeds and energy signatures of regular humans: sort of Black
Hats versus White Hats reports (to borrow an old cowboy-movies
metaphor.)

It is my view that the result of the Star Visitors being now
legally able to deal with the Cabal with proper discrimination
is that this will result in the gradual and accelerating
dismantling of the Cabal's empire. It is my expectation that
signs of Cabal devolution should become apparent within the next
two years, if not sooner. I do not think it prudent to go into
further details at this point, but am confident that the reader
can use his/her own acumen to foresee how this can take place.

What will Earth be like after the Cabal are gone? There will be
no more obstacle to our task of ushering in the long-prophecied
Fifth World, a cosmic, just, non-materialistic, peaceable,
"extended-family" society. Such a Fifth World will incorporate
the soon-to-be-liberated benefits of such elements as clean non-
petroleum energy, psychotronic healing machines, ZPE-powered
hydroponic food-growing machines, gravity-shielded superfast
airliners and sea freighters, and the immense store of
spiritual, metaphysical and scientific knowledge that the Star
Visitors wish to have publicly shared with the people of Earth.

But the Zeta also point out that the Cabal will not go down
without a fight, and that, following this legal conviction, will
accelerate their actions in a desperate attempt to consolidate
power and neutralize perceived adversaries. Prudent humans will
need to be mindful of such a climate of desperation, and
circumvent situations of danger. As one Star Visitor put it:
"The war has begun."


---

From: "Richard Boylan PhD" <drboylan.nul>
Date: Tue Aug 30, 2005 2:21 pm
Subject: Most Important: Star Visitors' Plan to hold the Cabal
         accountable for violations of universal laws


Most Important: Star Visitors' Plan to hold the Cabal
accountable for violations of universal laws

Friends and Star Kids,

The Star Nations have observed the machinations of the Cabal
(geoplutocratic "elite") for a long time. A very long time. Some
humans, who imagine that the Star Visitors are sort of like
guardian angels, wonder why the Visitors do not swoop down and
stop the Cabal from continuing their abuses. But in general, the
cosmic Laws established by Supreme Source do not permit
gratuitous interference by outside civilizations in the
development of civilization on another planet, (such as Earth).
This has prevented the Star Nations from stepping in just
whenever major segments of Earth society went down morally wrong
paths.

But in the 1930s it became obvious to the Star Nations that the
way things on Earth were headed, the then-leaders of the Cabal
were pushing events towards an unprecedented, totally-monstrous,
global fascist totalitarian regime. Remember your history: In
Germany, Hitler had taken over and installed a Nazi state, with
aims at world conquest. In Russia, Stalin was in charge as a
brutal dictator, who also sought vast territorial expansion. In
Italy, Mussolini exercised brutal dictatorial power not only
over his own country but in northern Africa as well.
Generalissimo Franco set up an oppressive fascistic regime in
Spain. Meanwhile, on the other side of the globe, the Japanese
War Generals invaded China, Manchuria, etc. and set out to
create a Greater East Asia Empire by force. Furthermore, Hitler
welded Italy and Japan into an "Axis" military alliance. Hitler
then forged an alliance with Stalin, while also helping Franco
to establish a dictatorship in Spain and forged ties together
with Franco.

With the United States inactivated by an isolationist political
stance, it looked like an alliance of fascist dictators was
going to take over the world.

In 1937 the Star Nations set up a formal Hearing on human rights
violations. Charges against these Cabal dictators were presented
to the High Council of the Star Nations by a Watcher [Star
Visitor observer stationed on Earth]. Then the High Council
ruled that the Cabal were in violation of the Law of Free Will,
(a principal cosmic law) (1). But the Cabal said that there was
no human on the High Council, so therefore they (Cabal) did not
have proper representation. Because Humans were not represented,
how could any charges be heard or even considered? This was
correct by the cosmic Laws. And so the Star Nations were not
able to intervene against the Cabal under those circumstances.

Shortly following this 1937 Hearing's disastrous stalemate, an
Elder Councillor of the High Council of the Star Nations
determined to reincarnate as a completely human being and grow
up on Earth, and thus to be in a position to serve at the next
Hearing as the previously-missing Human Representative on the
High Council of the Star Nations.

Meanwhile the Cabal dictators of the 1930s came and went, dying
off and replaced by more sophisticated fascists. Many of these
are in pin-striped suits, elected or hereditary heads of state,
officers of international planning councils, and international
financiers. Their iron fists are often masked by the velvet
glove of cultural sophistication and powerful connections behind
the scene. Their power has been vastly increased by utilizing
mind-control techniques refined from Nazi research, as well as
anti-gravity and directed-energy technology back-engineered from
recovered Star Visitor craft. The modern-day Cabal are well
along in their plans to utterly rule the world, and to reach out
into space for additional conquest there.

The Star Nations have not lost sight of the grave danger the
Cabal represent to the survivability of the human race. The Star
Nations have also been tracking the growing numbers of monstrous
abuses of Earth and human rights by the Cabal. And so, the Star
Nations have determined that it is time for a new Hearing.

A Formal Hearing on Reported Cabal Violations of Universal Laws
(2) is scheduled to take place before the year is out! Only this
time the Cabal will not evade answerability for their misdeeds
because of non-representation. For the High Council Elder who
reincarnated as a human is fully grown now, and stands ready to
serve as the human representative, as the Councillor of Earth.

Once again, at this Hearing charges will be presented to the
Councillor of Earth in front of the entire High Council. The
charges will consist of rights violations that the Star Nations
have observed. These charges concern whether the Cabal were in
violation of the Law of Free Will in their treatment of fellow
humans.

[snip]Lend your thought energy or prayer that the Hearing
holding of the Cabal accountable may go well, as it unfolds
later on this year, with consequences into the following years.

In the light,

Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.

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

Footnotes

1. See: http://www.star-knowledge.net/TOC.htm

2. Idem.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Become A Member Of Skywatch-International, Click Below
http://www.skywatch-international.org/skywatch_membership_application.pdf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit The Skywatch-International Web Site
http://www.skywatch-international.org/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:12:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:49:11 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:00:31 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 20:45:06 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>Regarding 'crashes' there may or may not be that many that even
>the men behind the curtain are aware of. The surface of our
>world is covered by mostly water. No telling how many artifacts
>are buried under centuries or millenia of silt and water. I
>asked a Navy pal about it and of course it shivered his timbers
>and he told me something surprising in his response. Something
>I'd never heard before regarding what the powers would cover up.

>He said if there was a discovery that had
>military/security/moral implications it would be hushed up.

>Moral?

>That rang the chimes. Now why would moral implications have to
>do with covering up a discovery?

>If the discovery invalidated the belief system that supports the
>military industrial complex it would be hushed up. That's a big
>amount of hushing up. No telling what the swabbies have
>discovered and put in a warehouse.

>Religious people make money and can't have that tree shaken I
>guess.

<snip>

Greg (and others):

This is insensate! Just because a Navy pal says something
dooesn't mean it's ex cathedra.

Moral implications? The military does not and never has used
morality as a criterion for action or procedure. That's
nonsense.

Some individuals in the military may act within ethical and/or
moral parameters but that's not a policy of the military
establishment.

And the idea that some people are sitting on mountains of
irrefutable UFO evidence or happenings but won't talk about it
begs incredulity.

Being in the military or having been doesn't provide an
impimatur for truth. Military types are just as prone to
exaggerate (moreso maybe) than the general population about





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:50:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>Of course, if it just appears/disappears, you get nowhere.
>>Pretty pictures get you nowhere. Even _one_ stereo photo is
>>worth alot.

>James:

>As you know, I am in agreement with you and I am quite miffed as
>to this allergy Ufology seems to have for the scientific method.
>At first. I thought it was based on a fear of discovery that
>might contradict past assertions or current theory. However, I
>now feel it's more of a matter of getting sidetracked. This is
>understandable, as the field is heavily populated with fantastic
>stories, intriguing documentation, and interesting exopolitical
>posturing. However, following this path can often draw a
>researcher or enthusiast deep into a wilderness of abstractions
>where they become lost as to their original destination.

>Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
>phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
>documented proof of such a finding? If so, I would think a
>relevant question to ask oneself before committing the time,
>energy and money to a specific research opportunity, might be as
>follows: Could the information gained from pursuing this
>particular avenue of research potentially facilitate(or help to}
>the achievement of the goal as stated above? The truth is, I
>cannot think of many scenarios where researching events that
>have already taken place, could provide such evidence.

Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                 Re: New French Official UFO Study - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:45:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:53:17 -0400
Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study - Sparks


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:23:47 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: New French Official UFO Study

>List,

>There is a bit of a strange mystery here which I do not
>understand. Errol is not able to throw any light on it either.

>My post on the changes within France regarding the newly
>proposed UFO study was sent to UpDates on the evening of Sunday
>October 2nd and posted on the List on Monday, October 3rd.

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/oct/m03-005.shtml

>Prior to that, I had never made any public comment about this
>subject matter and so no one knew of my interest.

>However, on the morning of Monday 3rd., when I turned my
>computer on and before my UpDates post had appeared, there was
>what appeared to be a reply to my post from none other than
>Jacques Vallee. That message had in fact been sent to Brad
>Sparks and Larry Hatch and myself were copied in.

>My point is, I do not understand why Jacques Vallee would have
>presumed to have copied me in on this when I cannot see how he
>would have been aware of my interest. Don't misunderstand - I'm
>certainly not complaining and am indeed extremely flattered. But
>I don't understand it.

>On further thought, it is arguable that what is written is
>actually a reply to my post as it seems to repeat the same sort
>of information I forwarded. Nevertheless, it doesn't resolve the
>main issue.

>Are you able to throw any light on this Brad?

<snip>

There is no mystery here. Your name and email were on the thread
back to Sept 28 that Gildas responded to with the news on the
new French official study in his Sept 30 post. And so was Larry
Hatch.

As I understand it, based on info I have been sent from various
sources, a Steering Committee for Unidentified Aerospace
Phenomena, or in French, Comit=E9 de pilotage sur les Ph=E9nom=E8nes
A=E9rospatiaux Non-identifi=E9s (PAN) of the French national space
agency, CNES, was recently formed by order of the recently
appointed (Feb. 19, 2003) new CNES Director Yannick d'Escatha.
D'Escatha appointed Yves Sillard, the former CNES Director, to
be President of the PAN Steering Committee.

The first meeting of the PAN Steering Committee was held on Sept
22, 2005. Sillard was interviewed about it on Radio France
International (RFI) on Sept 29, 2005. Sillard said that an
"audit" of the now defunct SEPRA UFO study in 2001-2 (could this
be the 1999 COMETA Report after review?) had recommended
continued UFO study with moderate funding.

Sillard said that as head of the PAN Steering Committee he would
have a policy of transparency, info would be provided on a
website, etc. He said there were many aircraft cases (200) on





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                     New Unified Theory Of The Universe

From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:19:51 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:57:32 -0400
Subject: New Unified Theory Of The Universe


Various discussions over time with Colsweb led to publication of
this page 5th October 2005.

Discussions of the ExtraCosmos God, recycles of the Universe and
theoretical proof of the existence of its Creator.

for text and graphics;

http://tinyurl.com/7n2ug

Text extracts.

The Chaotic Balance Seesaw Theory

Each side of the zero or perception/balance pivot there would
be logic one side in balance with illogic the other side.
Examples; (1) If nothing happens for a long enough time then
something will happen to achieve balance (2) For each action
there is an equal and opposite reaction [Newton] which may not
be locally and may not be at the same time.


The 3 Perceived Realities At Earth Point Theory

Which are Super Reality (Heaven), Our Normal Reality plus the
Opposing balancing Reality (Hell). Existence equals the
completeness (chaotic balance) of the three forces (Realities).
E = OF*F*F


Other Possible Realities

Visualize a large cube composed of 27 small cubes. Our Reality
at the center, Heaven above, and Hell below. The type and number
of perceived realities is governed by where you are in the
Universe and the number of previous cycles of the Universe
perceived at the spherical overlaps. The realities perceived
would be in chaotic balance.


The Universe Creation Cycle

Big Bang, expansion, now creation of black holes to super Black
Hole, Time wait to next Big Bang. Because of the length of time
the Universe is in being the corresponding Black Hole state has
to chaotically balance. Because nothing much happens during the
black hole state for such a long time then the big bang occurs
and creation as chaotic balance to that. The process repeats
with each cycle producing a Reality which may or may not overlap
previous ones due to lumping at the Big Bang.


Possible Creation And Recreation Points In The Universe

The probable point of the present Universe creation may be where
there is 'nothing much' surrounded by the oldest Galaxies. The
probable point of the next Universe creation may be the first
black hole which would move as further black holes occur and are
swallowed.


The Recycling Universe

(27 times 2) minus one plus God. Number of realities increases
to 27 then decreases back to God. Chaotic balance occurs each
side of center line between God and the 27th cycle. The God
indicated here may have a creator himself who is outside the
Universe and we ourselves may be God to beings upon Atoms or
parts thereof.

So above, so below.

Please note that colsweb neither agrees nor disagrees with the
above theories which were discussed with him via various
sources. Actual truth on these matters seems immaterial when we





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

             Re: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen -

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:11:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:59:20 -0400
Subject: Re: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen -


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 10:20:27 -0700
>Subject: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen

<snip>

>No "fingerprint" of electromagnetic radiation from the phenomena
>has been obtained which can identify an unknown light source as
>the real Hessdalen phenomena.

Interesting. Over here in the advanced electronic harassment
arena, we find that the powerful mind/body/object-moving attacks
penetrate top quality electromagnetic shielding as if it weren't
there. We find that sometimes there are electromagnetic signals
associated with the attacks, other times not (similar situation
to EM activity during ghost manifestations.)

We find that on occasion, shielding makes the attacks worse.

One target of e-harassment actually bought the MRI-room
shielding material from a hospital undergoing renovation, and
had the room reconstructed and certified by a professional EM
signal detective.

But staying in this room sometimes seems to help, yet at other
times, it provides no help at all.

What all this adds up to, as I see it, is there are signal types
which affect both living things and objects which are advanced





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                                    Reed!

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:06:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:06:23 -0400
Subject: Reed!




Source: ABC-TV News - USA

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=3D1183995

Oct 4, 2005


UFO-Spotters Tell Tales Of The Extra-Terrestrial Reuters

By Jude Webber
Reuters

LIMA, Peru (Reuters) - One minute Jonathan Reed was hiking with
his golden retriever in a forest in Seattle. The next, his pet
was being torn apart by a "gray" =97 an alien being with an
elongated head, smelling of rotting fruit.

A scene from a sci-fi film? No, maintains Reed, a former child-
developmental psychologist who says he took the alien home and
lived with it for nine days in which it communicated via
telepathy and was able to pull thoughts from his mind.

Reed and others =97 including Uruguayan Rafael Ulloa who says
aliens in spaceships spirited away people from New York's twin
towers in the September 11, 2001, attacks =97 gather in Lima this
week for a world extra-terrestrial congress.

Peru has long been a mecca for mystics and there have been
abundant reports of flying saucers, especially over the southern
town of Chilca. Some locals reckon aliens imbued mud springs
there with special curative and fertility powers.

The congress, organized by the Alfa y Omega group that believes
a fleet of UFOs will fly to Earth at the end of the world and
Christ could use one for his second coming, during its October
6-9 run will pore over photos and grainy films of bright flashes
and spooky shapes they say point to alien life forms.

Retired U.S. air force Lt. Col Donald Ware, 69, told a news
conference on Tuesday his first contact with aliens was in 1953,
when he saw seven spacecraft flying over Washington, D.C.

He spotted no signs of extra-terrestrial life during his
service, but said he had seen alien craft eight times since
retiring in 1982.

'DETECTING THE VISITORS'

Seeing isn't always believing. Wendelle Stevens, a retired U.S.
Air Force colonel, said he believed in aliens after having
investigated 100 cases, despite never having seen any himself.

Stevens, thought to have the largest archive of photographs of
alleged UFOs in the world, says he worked from 1947-49 in Alaska
with B-29 planes fitted with special scientific instruments to
"detect the visitors."

His work there began the year the U.S. military is believed by
some to have hushed up two purported crashes of alien spacecraft
within a month. The Air Force denies the stories.

Stevens, who said he did not believe in aliens before his work,
said it was his job to debrief the crews of the B-29s and
recounted how "the radio frequency spectrum went completely
haywire =85 and the temperature in the airplane increased. (The
crew) looked out and there's a disc next door," he said.

He said the crew shot photographs with four different types of
camera, but the military suppressed the pictures. No Air Force
spokespersons could immediately comment on his remarks.

One of the most unusual testimonies comes from Reed on his 1996
experience with the alien he came to call Freddie.

Reed, who says he has a bracelet belonging to the extra-
terrestrial, said Freddie had skin "almost like that of a pig."
It breathed and had red blood, but did not speak. Tests showed
he had 46 chromosomes, like humans, but 9 were different and
resembled those of dolphins and sea turtles, Reed added.

Aliens enthusiasts and UFO spotters are used to raised eyebrows,
ridicule and worse. Reed says he was shot after his alien
encounter and blames a "government faction which doesn't want
this information out."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:38:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:12:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Rudiak


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:15:32 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>On Jan. 31, 1949, thousands of witnesses across several states
>>observed a green fireball which Lincoln LaPax was able to
>>triangulate from interviews with more than 100 of the witnesses,
>>using surveyor's transits and stopwatch timed reenactments. The
>>object traveled at about 25,000 tp 50,000 mph along a nearly
>>horizontal 143-mile long path at an altitude of about 60,000 to
>>40,000 feet.

>Meteor?

Maybe at 40-60 miles. But a meteor at 40,000-60,000 feet
traveling 25,000-50,000 mph? No way.

The green fireballs had a number of other anomalous
characteristics that clearly distinguished them from ordinary
meteors. They flew at low altitudes but never made a sound, they
typically flew in straight (usually horizontal) rather than
arced trajectories, they were sometimes seen to change
directions, they were geographically concentrated in the
northern New Mexico region (with a propensity to fly directly
over sensitive nuclear installations like Los Alamos or Sandia
Base), they turned on and off like a light switch, they had a
lime green color, and they never left any fragments behind
despite extensive searches by La Paz with aid from the military
(the whole point of triangulating their trajectories to begin
with.)

For a primer on the green fireball phenomenon, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Fireballs

>>On April 27, 1950, missile tracking theodilite camera teams
>>photographed four UFO's triangulated at 150,000 foot altitude
>>traveling at high speed.

>Meteor?

Four meteors in formation with no trails? I personally doubt it.
But see Bruce Maccabee's detailed account and judge for
yourself:

http://brumac.8k.com/WhiteSandsProof/WhiteSandsProof.html

>>On Dec. 16, 1953, the world's leading aircraft designer Clarence
>>"Kelly" Johnson and an independent team of his top Lockheed test
>>pilots, flight engineers and Cal Tech trained aerodynamicist
>>aboard an aircraft sighted a large 200-foot object hovering for
>>five minutes at about 15,000 feet then took off in a shallow
>>climb. Johnson on the ground with his wife used binoculars and
>>did not know of the observations by his aircraft team. The two
>>groups of witnesses provided data enabling triangulation,
>>showing the object accelerated at about 130 g's to an altitude
>>of at least 90 miles over the pacific when it disappeared due to
>>distance.

>Now this is an good report. I wonder how much error was in the
>triangulation. This is the kind of sighting that I am looking
>for. Was is written off because it had no photos or what? It had
>good witnesses. I would think this report would have been enough
>to cause a more alarming conclusion to the Blue Book report.

One would think. This sighting has similarities to the one by
aeronautical engineer Paul Hill on July 16, 1952, described in
detail in his book, "Unconventional Flying Objects.". Two amber
lights rapidly approached from the horizon, then rapidly circled
each other overhead. Hill was able to triangulate the altitude
at 15,000 to 18,000 feet with an object size of 13 to 20 feet in
diameter. The centripetal acceleration he calculated to be 122
g's, with the uncertainties he rounded down to 100 g's. (pp. 44-
49)

In another sighting by Hill from 1962 of a huge, dirigible
shaped UFO, Hill calculated an estimated linear acceleration of
100 g's and a last seen departure speed of around 9000 mph. (pp.
174-176)

You'll notice that the around 100 g's acceleration figure keeps
popping in these various calculations.

>>On Jan. 1, 1954, dozens of witnesses in New Jersey sighted
>>maneuvering objects along a baseline of 12 miles, many using
>>binoculars, which enabled Hynek to triangulate the UFOs'
>>hovering altitude at about 4 miles, then their sudden extremely
>>high speed departure at 90,000 mph (his numbers).

>Well, I guess I was omitting the high speed departure or complex
>high speed manuevers from my field research objective because I
>am asking if it comes from or goes off planet, not if it behaves
>in a way that cannot be man-made. Because in that case, it could
>be some odd ball-lightning, plasma, electric effect, in which
>case g-forces make little difference. A concern is the behavior
>of high alitutde sprites and elves and how to differentiate them
>from non-prosaic UFOs. I guess spectra could be used.

I'm not familiar with this particular case, but sprites and
elves (basically high altitude electrical discharges much like
lightning) are highly diffuse, not discrete electrical
phenomena. Ball lightning is discrete, but I've never heard of
it exhibiting high acceleration and velocity.

>>On Oct. 7, 1958, the Defense Dept's chief R&D official, John R.
>>Townsend, and a Capitol airline pilot independently sighted a
>>hovering or slow-moving object. Their independent data gathered
>>by AF investigators provide triangulation at right angles
>>showing that the 500-600-foot metallic Saturn-shaped object
>>hovered at about 3,000 feet (for 10 seconds according to
>>Townsend). It then suddenly took off at a steep angle
>>accelerating at about 80 g's to a terminal velocity of roughly
>>72,000 mph at about 200 miles altitude after about 40 seconds.

Again, note the ~100 g's acceleration. Another report where
acceleration worked out to about 80 g's is the famous Charles
Moore sighting of April 24, 1949. The object climbed about 25
miles in 10 seconds, which works out to about 80 g's. The speed
when it faded out worked out to about 25,000 mph.

Yet another instance of around 80 g's came in a case from June
24, 1950. A rocket-shaped object was seen by numerous witnesses
speeding over southern California and central and northern
Nevada, leaving behind a huge spiral trail visible for several
hundred miles. One witness near Reno, Nevada, said the object
made three circles, estimated at about 10 miles in diameter, in
only about a minute. Again this works out to roughly 80 g's
centripetal acceleration. I describe this case in detail on my
website:

http://www.roswellproof.com/UFO_CalNev_1950.html

>Another good report. Wonder how Blue Book could be so
>lackidaisical in their findings? No photos? What the hell did
>they need?

Orders from the top to properly investigate instead of covering
up or debunking.

>>There are _many_ other triangulation cases of less than
>>aerospace velocities and altitudes in the BB files, including
>>world renowned meteoriticist-astronomer Lincoln LaPaz's personal
>>multiple sighting of a supersonic highly maneuverable 200-foot
>>white ellipsoid, numerous sightings made by the Army's real-time
>>UFO triangulation network, plus the AF's Holloman-White Sands
>>UFO triangulation network which later incorporated Project
>>Twinkle.

>>Paul Trent took a stereo pair of UFO photos in 1950 where he
>>stepped 5 feet to the right to take the second shot. You and I
>>have been stereo triangulating the Trent photos for decades now
>>Bruce.

Unfortunately, the object was moving, so this isn't really a
true stereoscopic pair taken simultaneously, which could be used
to triangulate distance and size.

>Wow! You guys need some more stereo photos!!! Shouldn't have to
>use the same old ones over such a long period!!!

Stereo photos are a poor man's radar system for determining
range and size. Human stereo vision with the eyes separated by
only 6 cm can still gauge distance out to about 200 to 300
meters. Two good cameras or video cameras separated by a meter
or so and properly calibrated should be able to gauge distance
to at least a mile or more. (Greater separations would increase
the range, but would also become increasingly cumbersome.) Even
if the object is well beyond this range, you still learn a lot
because one can still use the large distance to distinguish
between something like a near hoax model and a true distant and
large object. A lower limit to size and distance can also be
set.

Ideally I would like to see a standardized portable instrument
with good quality stereo cameras for basic ranging and size
determination coupled with a high resolution camera with at
least a 10x zoom lens for closeups plus a high resolution
digitial video camera for recording dynamic behavior. Additional
desirable instrumentation would be GPS for exact position and
some sophisticated sensors and optics to automatically overlay
azimuth and elevation information for reconstructing the
trajectory and other information such as velocities and
accelerations.

Or maybe there are some old stereo phototheodolites lying around





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                       Re: Japanese A-Bomb? - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:45:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:18:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Japanese A-Bomb? - Aldrich


>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 21:05:01 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>Subject: Re: Japanese A-Bomb?

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:22:00 -0300
>>Subject: Japanese A-Bomb?

><snip>

>>In keeping with some of the oddities that have shown up recently
>>on this list re Japan's secret war activites, I recently watched
>>a History Channel [Canada] program of an American History
>>Channel Documentary with an interesting story; that being that
>>Japan had been very close to having their own A-bomb and
>>exploded a non-transportable device on a barge in a bay in North
>>Korea at about the same time period that the U.S. was bombing
>>Nagasaki.

>>Here's the URL for History USA and the DVD.

>>http://tinyurl.com/bvgkw

><snip>

>I watched caught this incredible documentary twice on the
>History Channel while visiting my family in Ottawa this summer.
>Interestingly, this was around the same time of the 60th
>anniversary of the A-bomb (with Uranium mined and refined in
>Canada) that the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima which many consider
>an unnecessary and immoral act...

>In case you did not see this Guardian news story about how the
>Germans too also detonated an A-bomb of their own before the end
>of WWII (I noticed it today on rense.com), here it is below.

>http://tinyurl.com/cvugl

>You may recall hearing on this History Channel documentary that
>the Japanese were consdiering using a submarine to deliver and
>detonate their A-bomb in San Francisco Bay. Maybe this happened
>too (see URL below)!.

>http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/usa4.html

>If such major incidents can be kept secret for so long, then one
>wonders just how much more there is to know about flying saucers
>which also go back to the same era.


The Japanese had two atomic bomb projects, Army and Navy. Talk
about inter-service rivalry!

Richard Greenwell had done some research on the topic and
was quite knowledgeable. We discussed this several times.

The Germans apparently had plans to marry their atomic bomb
with a delivery system.

From about Nov 1944 to Jan 1945 what I term "a Nazi secret
weapons flap" existed. Both the media and the military were
under its spell. The Germans talked about soon using an atom
bomb which was picked up in the New York Times.

After the War, LTC Seashore, at Wright Field apparently headed
Project Abstract. The context indicates that it was an
investigation of Nazi intention on the use of and delivery
systems for an atomic bomb. I suspect that Seashore's September
1947 trip to Europe was part of his investigation. During his
trip he hand carried the request from Wright Field for CIC,
Europe and/or USAF, Europe intelligence units to find and again
interview the Horton Brothers and their associates about their
designs as a possible origin of UFOs. (A previous intelligence
report in June 1947 prior to Arnold and not yet found stated
that the Soviets were were constructing long range Horton
aircraft in eastern Siberia. At the rate of construction they
would have a huge fleet of over 1000 by the 1952. (A Russian
informant told me that the factories and air fields identified
in the US intel documents, were only working on construction and
upgrading of the ME-262 and nothing as exotic as Horton
aircraft.))

In any case, I think that both Abstract and SIGN might have had
intersections in certain areas, especially prior to August 1948
when there was still factions at SIGN and AF intelligence who
thought the Soviets might have had a major aviation break
through.

Thus far neither FOIAs nor conversations with USAF historians
have revealed any further information about Project Abstract.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Smith

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:59:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:24:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip - Smith


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 18:09:56 -0300
>Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:50:58 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>>>From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:59:02 +0200
>>>Subject: Puerto Rico UFO Landing Strip

>>>LAJAS, Puerto Rico (AP) -- People in this sleepy hamlet are so
>>>sure they have been receiving other-worldly visitors, they want
>>>to build a UFO landing strip to welcome them.

>>Hi Diana, not sure if these attract tourist dollars - maybe
>>they'd best check with mayor of Ar=E8s - "The world's first
>>landing field for UFOs was installed in Ares, [Bordeaux region]
>>France on 15th August 1976." -

>Sorry but St. Paul Alberta dedicated a UFO Landing site in 1967
>in honor of Canada's 100th anniversary. Paul Hellyer was there
>and noted it in his Toronto lecture. I have seen it.

Hi Stanton,

That's good to know.

Someone probably should keep an intermittent eye on these places
- just in case.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                     What Was That UFO Seen In NorthCot

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:16:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:16:56 -0400
Subject: What Was That UFO Seen In NorthCot




Source: Minda News - Davao City, Philippines

http://www.mindanews.com/2005/10/04nws-UFO.htm

04 October 2005

What was that unidentified flying object seen in NorthCot?

By Williamor A. Magbanua
MindaNews

KIDAPAWAN CITY -- Thousands of residents in the towns of M=92lang,
Midsayap, Pikit and Alamada and Kidapawan City craned their
necks Monday night to witness what many believe was an
unidentified flying object (UFO).

Vice mayor Joselito Pi=F1ol of M=92lang personally saw the flying
object while on his way home from his farm in Barangay Dugong.

Pi=F1ol told the Notre Dame Broadcasting Corporation (NDBC) radio
stations DXND and DXMS that the object was flying for almost 45
minutes.

The vice mayor described the flying object as a vertical line,
almost a meter long, looking like a wiper for a four-wheel drive
vehicle. "I thought this was only seen in our place but I was
amazed when my friends in other towns of the province called me
and informed the same object flying in their respective areas,"
Pi=F1ol said.

The vice mayor said he was convinced the flying object was not a
spy plane, satellite or light reflection.

"Kung spy plane ina, malipong na ang driver ana e. Kaganina pa
nga nagabalik-balik kag pasirko-sirko Sa ire ang flying object
na, gani imposible nga plane, satellite o reflection sang suga
lang ina," (If that were a spy plane, the pilot would have been
dizzy. The object was moving around several times. It is not





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                              Believe It Or Not

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:22:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:22:19 -0400
Subject: Believe It Or Not




Source: The Canowindra News - Canowindra, New South Wales,
        Australia

http://tinyurl.com/9dbqj

5 October 2005


Believe It Or Not

You couldn't be sceptical about their generosity.

The Australian Skeptics presented The Age of Fishes Museum with
a very welcome financial present last month of $10,000.

The Australian Skeptics Inc. is a group that investigates the
paranormal and pseudo-science from a responsible scientific
viewpoint.

Most people are familiar with the more popular subjects that it
investigates such as astrology, fortune telling, UFOs and crop
circles, but it also investigates topics like fundamentalism,
Feng Shui, subluxations and vitamin supplements.

Proof and scientific evidence is what it wants to see, explained
Barry Williams, one of several Skeptics representatives visiting
the museum last month, and support of science, like their gift
to the Museum, is a natural continuation of their aims.

The Association has contributed to the Age of Fishes Museum
before, with this latest gift specifically for a new display
detailing the uniqueness of the Canowindra fish fossils.

The story of the Age of Fishes was important to the theory of
evolution, Mr Williams said, because of the Canowindra Grossi
was able to breathe air through lungs.

"With displays like this, we can support evolution, science and
proof," Mr Williams said,

"This is a lovely example, like our support of the Chinese
Feathered Dinosaurs exhibition at the Australian Museum only a
few years ago, of evolution, because birds evolved form
dinosaurs.

Palaeontologist Alex Richie, the man behind the major Canowindra
fossil excavation in 1993, said the donation would kickstart
plans behind the display, and was another step forward in the
dream behind the creation of one of only two museum specialising
in fish fossils in the world.

Dr Richie said the Museum was unable to rely on major financial
support from the Australian Museum, or government funding, such
as that enjoyed by the Western Plains Zoo at Dubbo.

While admitting the project is not at the stage he would like to
see it, he agreed that the search for secure, longterm support
was crucial to the eventual dream behind the Age of Fishes.

"This museum, as an attraction, has the potential to bring more
people here for a long time.

"The trick is to encourage them to stay here overnight, which
would be of even more benefit to the local community.

"Next March will be the 50th year of since the fossils were
first uncovered. Wouldn't it be great to see even more progress
made before we mark that date."

"Now that we have some money, we can start working on creating
the display. The first step will involve an artistic creation."

For Age of Fishes Museum manager Fiona Ferguson, the generous
gift came only a week after another $1,000 donation, from a
Sydney based company, Gwynvill Pty Ltd, which has strong
interest in the Cabonne Shire.

Ms Ferguson said the financial situation of the museum was
looking positive, making its first substantial profit in its





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 07:26:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:30:42 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Lehmberg


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:12:15 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:00:31 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 20:45:06 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>Regarding 'crashes' there may or may not be that many that even
>>the men behind the curtain are aware of. The surface of our
>>world is covered by mostly water. No telling how many artifacts
>>are buried under centuries or millenia of silt and water. I
>>asked a Navy pal about it and of course it shivered his timbers
>>and he told me something surprising in his response. Something
>>I'd never heard before regarding what the powers would cover up.

>>He said if there was a discovery that had
>>military/security/moral implications it would be hushed up.

>>Moral?

>>That rang the chimes. Now why would moral implications have to
>>do with covering up a discovery?

>>If the discovery invalidated the belief system that supports the
>>military industrial complex it would be hushed up. That's a big
>>amount of hushing up. No telling what the swabbies have
>>discovered and put in a warehouse.

>>Religious people make money and can't have that tree shaken I
>>guess.

><snip>

>Greg (and others):

>This is insensate!

Go Rich! Feel the hyperbole flowing through you... bask in the
richness of its... insensate? ...reaches...<g>. Besides, in this
time of illegitimate government, creeping theocracy and blooming
fascism our common culture includes "a predatory, insensate
society in which innocence and decency can prove fatal" (Peter
S. Prescott). What hides in _there_?

>Just because a Navy pal says something
>doesn't mean it's ex cathedra.

I don't know from Navy pals but on career military persons
alternate facets get inordinately rubbed and polished...
providing a reflection of something generally not seen on
civilians (?) ...a sense of teamwork, a pragmatism, a goal
orientation... a warrior spirit. Not better perhaps... but a
little more focused perhaps? Threat to life and limb will do
that.

These Military are not _incapable_ of lying, to be sure... there
are just as many serial sociopaths there as anywhere... more I
suspect... but I submit that there is an honor and morality
there not found elsewhere...

For example... there is much discussion (or was when I was on
active duty) regarding when an order by a superior officer shall
_not_ be obeyed. Where's a similar ideal in the corporate world?

>Moral implications? The military does not and never has used
>morality as a criterion for action or procedure. That's
>nonsense.

Bottom line... the military will do what it must to accomplish
the mission, secure the objective, adapt and overcome... but to
say that it does not use a morality or ethics to guide its
actions paints an erred portrait.

As close to the bone as a military blade is expected to get, it
is a _focus_ of 'moral' and 'ethical' questions, actually, and
is examined as no corporate entity is ever examined. "Abu Garib"
et al got out (gets out) is because guys on the ground took
pictures...

Didn't it puzzle you why they were taking 'pictures' of all
things... posing for them, even? It was a moral/ethical
authority who got those charming snapshots passed along so the
rest of us could be appropriately outraged and be otherwise
alerted to the grievous activities of an illegitimate
administration busily prosecuting for ways to 'legally' torture
human beings and then let junior troops take the fall for it
when it blew up in there faces. ...Bush misusing Excalibur and
so damaging that blade... I digress.

The point is, I suppose, that professional persons, persons with
something to lose (?), of any stripe have a potentiality for the
'ex cathedra' the protected don't generally know, and maybe even
the pope won't have _that_ kind of authority, or shouldn't... or
where has _he_ been ufologically these past ten centuries?

>Some individuals in the military may act within ethical and/or
>moral parameters but that's not a policy of the military
>establishment.

Well, actually there _are_ and it _is_, Rich. As the Senior
Training and Counseling Officer of the Army's only Warrant
Officer Candidate School I contributed to and administered the
design just such a program of instruction... blocks of it. Most
if not all Service schools have these instruction blocks in
their academies and schools... and the failure to adhere to same
has been the downfall of many. Soldiers, especially officers,
have a responsibility to refrain from dodgy ethics and morals
his civilian equivalent only has to pay lip service to, has been
my experience.

>And the idea that some people are sitting on mountains of
>irrefutable UFO evidence or happenings but won't talk about it
>begs incredulity.

Still you'd be the first to admit that knowledge is power and
shared knowledge must be a delusion of same. That doesn't beg
credulity too, does it, and if not, why not?

>Being in the military or having been doesn't provide an
>impimatur for truth.

No, but it provides a format for same in clearer command lines
and a published standard operating procedure Civilians don't
know. Even "General Orders" have been interpreted to support
this for the lowest ranking troops. Whatever a military involves
itself in it wants to be successful, that is to say, survive. It
can get very pragmatic about that, and truth supports the
paradigm. Exposed then in training to whats accepted as ethical,
a military person may be more prone to be same. History
indicates that they find a way to report on themselves when
things go wrong... Ever hear of "Mi Lai" ... now Abu Garib...

>Military types are just as prone to
>exaggerate (moreso maybe)

I'd allow "just as", at best. "Moreso" is not indicated for the
reasons stated above. I wonder why you would thing so.

>than the general population about
>knowledge and activity that is much less than what they purport
>it to be.

Huh? Just kidding. I know where you were going with that. Still,
much 'more' is likely given the evidence everywhere else (Six
levels of same?). A ruling elite has quite a bit to lose to an
alien alternative... I suspect. Don't dis the military, dude, we
know too many ways to kill you. lol!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                            Re: Reed! - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 07:32:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:36:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Reed! - Lehmberg


>Source: ABC-TV News - USA

>http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=1183995

>Oct 4, 2005

>UFO-Spotters Tell Tales Of The Extra-Terrestrial Reuters

>By Jude Webber
>Reuters

>LIMA, Peru (Reuters) - One minute Jonathan Reed was hiking with
>his golden retriever in a forest in Seattle. The next, his pet
>was being torn apart by a "gray" - an alien being with an
>elongated head, smelling of rotting fruit.

What is the provenance of this I wonder?

...a dime will get you a freakin' dollar that a scurvy
klasskurtxian leaked this so it could be discredited, again, and
so then sully the macrocosm with the microcosm. False arguments
all around... Reed is an example of what goes on in ufology,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 05:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:38:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>As I always say, we need some field research.

>Field research can only cover a tiny fraction of the volume of
>space above the earth's surface and is limited by terrain
>obstacles, the earth's horizon, pollution and weather limiting
>optical visibility. It's hopeless. The AF abandoned such limited
>plans in the 50's and downgraded the nearly useless accumulation
>of anecdotal reports. We haven't learned from the AF.

I can tell you with a high degree of confidence that such
efforts are certainly not hopeless and in fact in terms of
potential for discovery, the merits of this approach cannot be
equaled... IMO. This opinion is not based merely on speculation,
but results from experience. This experience includes both my
own personal data collection and that done by a respected
research group affiliated with an organization mentioned in a
recent post on this subject.

I know of two sites in Phoenix that would merit a visit by such
a lab. In fact, there is an interesting characteristic shared by
both sites that may suggest a long history of anomalous
phenomenon at these locations. Both sites contain prolific
displays of ancient rock art (petroglyphs) dated as old as 8000-
10,000 years. The images portrayed in these ancient accounts are
strikingly similar to phenomenon that has been reported/filmed
today.

http://tinyurl.com/bxrhn
http://tinyurl.com/5qxgx

Examples: While installing a surveillance system at the site in
North Phoenix on Sept 11th, 2005, I took this video of lights over
the site in South Phoenix. This happens to be at approximately
the coordinates estimated by Bill Hamilton for the 97 Phoenix
Lights.

On Jan 26th, an event that could have provided key data about
the nature of this phenomenon occurred at the N. Phoenix site.

http://tinyurl.com/ddnaj

I think everyone would agree that the information/data collected
by a professionally designed, properly equipped and well
positioned mobile field observatory is preferable to that which
can be salvaged from the remnants of a past-tense sighting. In
fact, it's debateable as to whether the later could even produce
the proof necessary to support such claims. This does not mean
that effort and research invested elsewhere constitutes
senseless toil or that information gained as a result of such
labor is without practical utility. The work has validity and
usefulness. It just seems to me, some effort should be committed
to this method if success is truly a goal here.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 05:42:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:40:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Hamilton


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:38:39 -0700
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:15:32 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>>>On Jan. 31, 1949, thousands of witnesses across several states
>>>observed a green fireball which Lincoln LaPax was able to
>>>triangulate from interviews with more than 100 of the witnesses,
>>>using surveyor's transits and stopwatch timed reenactments. The
>>>object traveled at about 25,000 tp 50,000 mph along a nearly
>>>horizontal 143-mile long path at an altitude of about 60,000 to
>>>40,000 feet.

>>Meteor?

>Maybe at 40-60 miles. But a meteor at 40,000-60,000 feet
>traveling 25,000-50,000 mph? No way.

>The green fireballs had a number of other anomalous
>characteristics that clearly distinguished them from ordinary
>meteors. They flew at low altitudes but never made a sound, they
>typically flew in straight (usually horizontal) rather than
>arced trajectories, they were sometimes seen to change
>directions, they were geographically concentrated in the
>northern New Mexico region (with a propensity to fly directly
>over sensitive nuclear installations like Los Alamos or Sandia
>Base), they turned on and off like a light switch, they had a
>lime green color, and they never left any fragments behind
>despite extensive searches by La Paz with aid from the military
>(the whole point of triangulating their trajectories to begin
>with.)

>For a primer on the green fireball phenomenon, see:

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Fireballs


<snip>

If the kelly green fireball I saw a few years ago that shot out





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

             Re: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen -

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:29:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:44:48 -0400
Subject: Re: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen -


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 10:20:27 -0700
>Subject: 10 Years Of Scientific Research On Hessdalen

>10 Years of Scientific Research of the Hessdalen Phenomena

>The author has been a member of the Hessdalen project research
>team for the last decade, and he has participated in the
>development of the Hessdalen interactive observatory, also
>called the "blue box". The author has a master degree in
>electronics and specializes in electromagnetic transmission.

>Since 1998 automatic surveillance of the valley
>has been done by the Hessdalen interactive observatory. Despite
>of 24-hour surveillance and well manned and equipped research
>campaigns in the EMBLA project, no major breakthrough has been
>done.

Okay, here we have a case intensive UFO field research such as I
was discussing with lots of funding and lots of instruments for
over 7 years and even then "No major breakthrough..." has been
found!

I would like to think they are clever enough to compose
the instruments and assemble them into a facility
and methodogy based on scientific methods (since
most seem involed in academic research). But even so
they get _zip_ results.

Now I think its fair to say that the Hessdalen phenomena,
although UFOs in the technical sense, may only be a small subset
of the UFO phenonema thus it there may still be hope that the
space travelling UFOs could be detected with appropriate
instrumentation. No one said all non- prosaic UFOs behaving
would be from the same cause and the Hessdalen ones may be
"terrestrially" oriented types (tectonic electric effects, ball
lightning, or even ghosts, but not spacefaring vehicles).

>Spectacular pictures and video recordings have been
>obtained, but correlation with other scientific measurements is
>hard to find. No "fingerprint" of electromagnetic radiation from
>the phenomena has been obtained which can identify an unknown
>light source as the real Hessdalen phenomena.

This is very disappointing too. Again, hopefully, the Hessdalen
light is non-representative of most "non-prosaic" UFOs. Its
basic behavior of hanging around one area seems to indicate this
to be the case. Typical UFOs don't seem to do this generally
(except for the standard "Spooksville" ghost light locations),
but ghosts and "natural" phenomena seem to.

>The research has
>so far demonstrated that the Hessdalen phenomena is difficult to
>investigate, and explanations hard to find. Despite of this, the
>EMBLA/CIPH team has gained significant experience in this kind
>of scientific study and it is possibly the most competent team
>to carry out such expeditions in the world.

Yes, they seem to be and hats off to them!

>The key to the
>solution lies in scientific knowledge and economic resources,
>and this solution may show us the way to a new storing
>mechanism for energy.

Interesting. Yes, this was the angle I thought would be useful





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                 Re: New French Official UFO Study - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:41:40 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:46:36 -0400
Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study - Miller


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:45:44 EDT
>Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:23:47 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: New French Official UFO Study

><snip>

>There is no mystery here. Your name and email were on the
>thread back to Sept 28 that Gildas responded to with the news
>on the new French official study in his Sept 30 post. And so >
was Larry Hatch.

Thanks Brad. I did consider this but discounted it on the basis
that I thought everyone in that thread would have been copied.

Anyway, mystery over.

Two further points on French Ufology. While on holiday there in
August, I was "instructed" to visit Rennes-le-Chateau and was
intrigued to find in the inevitable book shop what seemed like a
reasonable variety of Ufological newstand magazines. While the
content wasn't exactly gripping, I was nevertheless quite
jealous of the fact that France is able to support at least one
publication while we in the UK currently have nothing.

And while not wishing to conflict with A.J. Gevaerd's claim that
the upcoming conference in Italy is the biggest in Europe, the
one taking place at Chalons en Champagne from the 14th to 16th
October is simply immense with around 40 speakers at least,
including Budd Hopkins and Max Burns. There is a despairing
story behind Max's appearance, the conference flyers claim that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:52:45 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:48:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:38:39 -0700
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:15:32 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

Thanks for the green fireball info.

And I agree that the sprites and elves phenomena do not explain
many UFO sightings. Some do seem diffuse, but I think some can
be discrete, although I don't see how ground observers can view
them easily. I mean to say by all this that they are a recently
discovered (little understood) phenomena which indicates that
_other_ such electrical phenomena may exist. Since these
phenemena _do_ move from cloud level to ionosphere (?), they may
seem to be going into space.

Ball lightning may explain a number of sightings, but it too is
a very little understood phenomena. It at least has the
potential of very fast acceleration and speed (since it has low
mass).

You make a good point about the accelerations and that data
could be used to indicate a non-prosaic UFO but it would not
really help explain what it is or where it comes from. Would it?

About the excellent unexplained Blue Book sightings reports,
didn't they release all these unexplained sightings in their
report? If so, then by their very existence, they demand a
certain statement such as "these reports indicate objects





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:47:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:49:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Reynolds


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

<snip>

>Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not
>going to get any substantial funding for instrumentated UFO
>detection and tracking projects without past data of solid UFO
>cases demonstrating the need and the performance characteristics
>of UFOs. Scientific method does not disparage analysis of past
>events.

Brad Sparks is exactly right, as usual.

Archeology, history, psychology, astronomy, et cetera, all deal
with past events.

Cold cases do the same for law enforcement.

While new UFO events should be pursued diligently, past episodes
may contain information that explains everything but was missed
the first time around because of incompetence, primitive





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:09:44 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:51:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
>>phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
>>documented proof of such a finding?

>>The truth is, I cannot think of many scenarios where
>>researching events that  have already taken place, could
>>provide such evidence.

>Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not
>going to get any substantial funding for instrumentated UFO
>detection and tracking projects without past data of solid UFO
>cases demonstrating the need and the performance characteristics
>of UFOs. Scientific method does not disparage analysis of past
>events.

I doubt funding of UFOs per se is possible at all unless couched
in prosaic terms and relating to unknown (but prosaic)
phenomena. Past events could be used to back up this kind of
need for research.

But you are right, if you are lucky enough to find some
Hollywood type to fund field work, then past cases are an
essential element to the rationale.

Past events provide clues as to likely useful instrumentation.
Past events can help in the design of the required resolution
and sensitivity and range and speed (slew rate) and quality of
the instrumentation and  method of using the instrumentation.

One can look at each case and ask, "if we had such and such
instrumentation instead of eyes and maybe a camera in the UFO
case, what could have been accomplished?"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                        Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:23:55 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:00:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Bourdais


>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:19:21 -0400
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 12:12:34 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>It would be good to know where in which agency the
>investigation is to be lodged.

>A few of my questions about French official UFO
>investigations:

<snip>

Jan and all,

I am sorry but I am going to disappoint you, because I have few
or no answers to your questions. Actually, I don't even know the
people who could possibly answer them.

I do have a bit of documentation on testimonies about UFO
sightings over the former nuclear missile launch site of the
Plateau d'Albion. It is a series of six articles which were
published in the regional newspaper "La Provence" in 2000. These
are not official accounts, just private testimonies.

Since you refer to the last special issue of VSD, four of them
appear as small illustrations in the article signed by Richard
Nolane (page 9). I sent them to the editor Bernard Thouanel at
his request, and I will send them to you if you are interested
(either as readable image files, or as paper copies at the
address you will give me). As for the contents of the article,
please ask Thouanel and Nolane.

As a general comment on this question of eventual undisclosed
French files on UFOs, my opinion is that, yes, there are some,
probably. Like in all the countries in the world, most likely.
However, in that context, the United States seem to have a very
outstanding position: on one hand, a great amout of information,
presumably, but on the other hand a persistant official denial
of the mere existence of UFOs. So, there is a widening gap,
compared with the situation in a growing number of smaller
countries which, while detaining probably some secret files,
have at least begun a policy of official recognition of the the
UFO reality.

In short, there is a problem of "attitude and of magnitude"
regarding the UFO problem in the USA. And probably, BTW, in a
few other big countries such as Russia and China. For my part, I
try to be realist and I understand that solving this global
problem will take time. Maybe the reactivation ot the French
commission will help a bit.

I am not going to be able to answer other questions until
next Monday because I am going to the conference in
Calabria.

See the program at the CUN website:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:36:41 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:02:10 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Friedman


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:10:40 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:34:14 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up


>What you are saying is exactly what I wrote. There is zilch in
>these intercepted messages to indicate ETs are visiting the
>earth. Yet STF pins his "Cosmic Watergate" thesis mainly on
>these censored messages.

The censored NSA UFO messages could easily have been realeased
ages ago by censoring the dates and locations. Obviously there
was much more to them.(More than 90% of the pages).

Please note saying there is a Cosmic Watergate is not the same
as saying some UFOs are alien spacecraft.

Do note Bolender's memo.

Do note the fact that CIA UFO documents were also very heavily
censored.

Where are the rest of the TOP SECRET+ UFO messages found by the
NSA but generated by the CIA and withheld by the CIA?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 5

                Re: New French Official UFO Study - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:39:22 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:04:34 -0400
Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study - Bourdais


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:45:44 EDT
>Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:23:47 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: New French Official UFO Study

<snip>

>The first meeting of the PAN Steering Committee was held on Sept
>22, 2005. Sillard was interviewed about it on Radio France
>International (RFI) on Sept 29, 2005. Sillard said that an
>"audit" of the now defunct SEPRA UFO study in 2001-2 (could this
>be the 1999 COMETA Report after review?) had recommended
>continued UFO study with moderate funding.

Brad,

I think your information is correct, except for this last point.
The audit was made by engineer Francois Louange, Director of the
company "Fleximage". He is a specialist of image analysis who
had already worked for GEPAN and SEPRA. As for the COMETA
report, I keep thinking that it probably helped, behind doors,
the present evolution of the situation. But that's just a
personal opinion.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                 UFOs Cause Electrical Interference In Peru

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:36:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 06:29:05 -0400
Subject: UFOs Cause Electrical Interference In Peru


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 5, 2005


Source: Panamericana Noticias
Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2005

Peru: Residents Of Puente Piedra And Ventanilla See UFOs;
Electrical Interference

Residents of the Puente Piedra and Ventanilla districts were
witnesses to an unusual event: two unidentified flying objects
were reported in both areas. A camera crew from Panamericana
Noticias recorded this event.

The [objects] appeared in the firmament over one of the many
settlements along the Chillon River between Puente Piedra and
Ventanilla on Friday [September 30] at 10:00 pm.

They were two powerful lights that could not be mistaken with
airplanes, helicopters or aerostats. They descended with such
swiftness toward the town that they absorbed energy from several
light posts, causing them to go off.

"Those were UFOs and they caused the blackout and interference
with artifacts," opined Mario Zegarra.

The area is a chosen location where these strange lights appear
constantly. Justo is a gorge near an old mineshaft and the San
Diego lagoon. But whay has a new UFO sighting wave unleashed
itself just as the earth is shaking in various parts of the
country?

"They tend to appear when disasters approach [...]. They are
warning us of these tragedies," Zegarra added.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

              'Entity' Photographed Near Mexican Power Station

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:03:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 06:57:16 -0400
Subject: 'Entity' Photographed Near Mexican Power Station


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 5, 2005


Source: Diario Hoy Extramex
Date: October 5, 2005

Mexico: Alleged Alien Entity Photographed Near Power Station

Mr. Arturo Calcaneo Zapata has informed Prof. Ana Luisa Cid that
the watchmen of a thermoelectrical power station in Altamira,
Tamaulipas managed to capture an alleged alien entity on
videotape, employing the power plant's security cameras.

The likely dates for this incident are variously given as
September 25 and 26 of this year.

Mr. Calcaneo undertook his own research into the matter and
managed to obtain the news item that appeared in the local
newspaper "Hoy Extramex" dated September 28, 2005, in which the
photographic evidence is shown.

This is the text as it appeared on the paper's headlines:

EXTRATERRESTRIALS INVADE ALTAMIRA -- widespread panic has been
unleashed in Altamira after a strange creature was videotaped in
the section containing the energy-producing turbines of that
city's thermoelectric plant, spreading once more the theory that
there is an extraterrestrial base in the area, presumably with
designs on invading the territory.

There are two major thermoelectric stations in Altamira:
Altamira III and IV in agreement with the Federal Electric
Commission. At this time the exact location in which the events
occurred has not been confirmed.

According to Arturo Calcaneo, this newspaper also published a
report provided by fishermen who claimed having cast their nets
in the open sea  and saw, to their astonishment, how they did
not sink and remained floating on the water's surface.
Frightened, they reached into the water and managed to touch an
object that could not be seen with the naked eye.

I hope to provide you with more information on this subject.
Best regards from Mexico,


Sincerely,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                          Filer's Files #41 - 2005

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:34:18 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:10:58 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #41 - 2005


Filer's Files #41 -- 2005

George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern

Vice President of Skywatch International

October 5, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com

UFO over Los Angeles

Filer's Files this week discusses: Report astronaut saw alien
bodies, Canadian Minister of Defense says ET is visiting us.Find
missing girl..

Reports of sightings from California, Florida, Georgia,
Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and
Wisconsin. Sightings were reported in Australia, Canada, France,
Germany, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and the UK.

Astronaut saw alien bodies

Clark C. McClelland, former ScO, Space Shuttle Fleet, Kennedy
Space Center, Florida (1958-1992) writes, "Every generation has
the obligation to free men's minds for a look at new
worlds=E2=80=A6.to look out from a higher plateau than the last
generation." Astronaut Lt. Col. Ellison Onizuka USAF. Prior to
the fateful launch of the space shuttle Challenger on January
28, 1986, I had the honor and pleasure of sharing conversations
with several members of that crew.

During one of many pre-mission preps for the Challenger mission,
I came upon Lt. Col. Ellison Onizuka in the Vehicle Assembly
Building (VAB) at launch complex 39. Many astronauts at the KSC
knew of my interest in the study of possible ET intelligence.
Another evening while off-site, I once again accidentally came
upon Ellison. He asked if I could give him an opinion regarding
a topic that was sparking his curiosity. Ellison had a great
interest in ET life and asked me my belief concerning aliens,
and if I believed they have been here on earth? His question
caught me by surprise. As we walked slowly, I briefly related
what I knew regarding the Roswell case. Onizuka asked me if my
surname had any connection with McClellan Air Force Base in
California? I said not as far as I was aware. I asked him why?

Ellison said he had a surprising experience along with other
USAF pilots while on military training duty at McClellan AFB,
about eight or nine years prior to his astronaut training. He
and this group were at this base for specialized training when
they were directed to report to a viewing room. As they were
seated, the room darkened and a movie began without the usual
official introduction by a USAF officer. They were all startled
when a view of a facility similar to a medical examination room
appeared on the screen and small bodies were observed lying on
slabs. He heard several excited comments by the other officers
seated near him. The small, strange looking creatures were
humanoid in shape, and appeared similar to those described by
alleged witnesses at the well-known Roswell site in the
Southwest USA in 1947. They all had large heads, large eyes,
slight torsos, arms, and legs. They did not appear to be of
earthly origin. Ellison then said, " Clark, my God, these highly
trained officers and I were shocked by what we saw. We were not
made privy to what we would see until it happened. We were all
caught off guard. Perhaps it was a test of our psyche to
determine our overall reaction. Well, we were all caught by
surprise ". Thanks to Clark C. McClelland and Skywatch
International

Editor's Note: Several Air Force officers have told me they also
saw this movie.

Deputy Prime Minister says ET is here

On September 25, 2005, the former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister
under Trudeau, and former Canadian Minister for National Defense
Paul Hellyer gave a speech in Toronto at an event titled:
"Exopolitics Toronto. Paul Hellyer described his time as
Minister for Defense from 1963-1967 where the occasional UFO
sighting report crossed his desk. He claims to never have had
time for what he considered to be a "flight of fancy", but
nevertheless retained an interest in the UFO phenomenon. While
Minister for Defense, he was guest of honor at the opening of
the world's first UFO landing pad at Alberta, Canada in 1967. He
thought it an innovative idea from a progressive Canadian
community willing to pay for his helicopter ride, but did not
give much thought to UFOs as having serious policy implications.

He also describes a private UFO sighting he later had with
family and guests, but once again attributed it to a 'flight of
fancy.' Hellyer's position on UFOs dramatically changed after
watching the late Peter Jennings documentary special, "Seeing is
Believing" in February 2005. Hellyer decided to read Philip
Corso's, "The Day After Roswell." Corso named real people,
institutions and events. Hellyer decided to confirm whether
Corso's book was real or a "work of fiction".

He contacted a retired United States Air Force General and spoke
to him directly to verify Corso's claims. The unnamed General
simply said: "every word is true and more". UFOs and the
extraterrestrials are interplanetary visitors have been here
since at least 1947." Finally convinced that the UFO phenomenon
was real Hellyer decided to come forward and speak at
Exopolitics Toronto about some of the "most profoundly important
policy questions that must be addressed." (for speech go to:
www.checktheevidence.com/video/ ). Michael Salla, PhD
http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-38.htm

California UFO disc photo

LOS ANGELES -- This image was detected after being uploaded from
the camera to the computer. Interestingly, there was no
indication of anything in the sky during the time the photograph
was taken on September 24, 2005. Thanks to Timothy and Skywatch-
International Web Site http://www.skywatch-international.org/

Editor's Note: A Minotaur Missile was launched on September 24,
2005, at 7:25 PM, from Vandenberg Air Force Base ten minutes
after this photo was taken. Jeff Rense felt the photo looked
like a missile launch. .

Florida meteor lights up

MIAMI - Experts believe a meteor was visible along a large
section of the Florida coast skyline Thursday night, September
30, 2005 although NASA officials have not confirmed what the
intensely bright, fast object exactly was. The glowing orb was
spotted around 7 p.m.; some who saw it called county and state
officials to ensure that it wasn't a crashing aircraft.
Residents from the state's Space Coast region all the way to
South Florida reported seeing the object, officials said. A
meteor is a momentary flash of light produced when a space
object penetrates Earth's atmosphere.

Illinois red lights

CHICAGO SUBURBS -- Dozens of people called local radio and TV
stations reporting two mysterious red lights over several
southern Chicago suburbs on September 30, 2005, including Tinley
Park where they were seen last year on more than one occasion.
One caller said they appeared to stop at one point. Apparently,
they were moving south to north. The sightings were reported
around 11:00 P.M.

ORLAND PARK -- Brian Vike received several reports from the area
as well.

TINLEY PARK -- NUFORC also reports it has received a number of
reports from the Tinley Park, IL, area of three red lights seen
hovering in the night sky. We just received a somewhat bizarre
telephoned query from a law enforcement 9-1-1 center, which
refused to identify itself (!), but which reported cryptically
that their center had received a number of reports about the
anomalous objects. Something very similar occurred in the same
area on August 21st and October 31st of 2004. Those cases were
extensively investigated by Mr. Sam Maranto, who is a MUFON FI
in that area. Based on his analysis of a number of videos of the
objects, which were made available to him, he concluded that the
objects seen last year were unexplainable in terms of any
terrestrial object or event that he could think of. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com


Georgia MUFON Skywatch sighting

BRASSTOWN BALD (BTB) -- On August 13, 2005, Georgia MUFON
Director Mark Ausmus was holding a Skywatch atop the highest
point in Georgia at 4,784 feet. BTB is located 82 miles NNW of
Atlanta. Walter T. Sheets, writes, "I arrived on BTB at about 10
PM and met with Mark and four of his MUFON staff. This local
surveillance began from the large parking and picnic area atop
the mountain. There were crystal clear dark skies overhead, and
calm winds at 60 degrees. The post-peak Perseid meteor activity
was consistent and rather "busy" at times. At 3:57 PM, this
writer turned toward the east to scan and a bright light was
approaching from the NNE appearing to be traveling generally
south. This light made an obvious swerving motion which seemed
to make it bigger and brighter closer, as veering toward our
location. It is estimated that this light was about 20 or so
degrees above the horizon.  The writer quickly trained 7 X 50
binoculars on the light and alerted the other members of the
party.

Upon viewing with magnification, the light appeared to be a TINY
PEARL-LIKE GLOWING ORB that was proceeding quickly on a
generally N to S course, it's movements being several rapid
"swerves" upward and then leveling off, then repeating
this......swerving upward and leveling off, as it traveled N to
S. The light was "snake-like", especially in the first few
seconds. As the ORB continued past, it seemed to get smaller and
dimmer and veered away. This continued until the ORB vanished
among the LOW background of stars This ORB was also very low
down toward the horizon and seemed to be traveling MUCH faster
than any satellite. Thanks to Walter Sheets-GUFOG

Michigan bright light at top of the trees

GOODRICH -- There was a bright light from the top of the trees
in the wooded area near our subdivision on September 27, 2005,
at 9:PM. A couple noticed the light from the window. It somehow
caught my eye because I was not looking out the window
originally.

The light was too bright to be a star, but it seemed to be a
white color. Slowly the light descended into the trees so that
it no longer could be seen. There was also another light in the
distance that slowly hovered in the sky. This light or craft had
different colored lights, like blue, green, red, yellow and they
sort of flashed or changed color constantly for an hour or so..
This craft eventually could not be seen as it descended down
into the trees/wooded area. There is a lake in that area as
well.

Thanks to Brian Vike.

Minnesota bright light splits into six

WEST CENTRAL MINNESOTA --. It started as a single, bright white
light in the western sky on September 14, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. It
grew bigger fifteen minutes later and split into six lights,
like a triangle within a triangle. I grabbed the camera and went
outside. I got two shots in a row before it burst, sending all
six lights in various directions and out of sight. Just gone and
beyond fast! As if it was never there, it went that fast. 7:50
p.m. God knows I've seen a lot of them and I have photographed
close to a hundred, all various shapes and sizes and different
maneuvers. Then, became six lights in the shape of a triangle
within a triangle. Then the six burst off in different
directions.

A woman and her friend who live about 6 miles west of me called
me to tell me, "She and her friend were overlooking their lake
and noticed a big white light low in the west." The light grew
larger and was alarming. She said, "It was as big as a full moon
when it split into smaller Blue-green, red-magenta, and amber
lights." They were frightened, but the lights went separate ways
and all was back to normal. The photos are c. Anna-n-Moss 2005.
To view photos:
http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D32
12

North Carolina

There was continuing orb activity in central North Carolina on
September 22, 2005. The Carolina Group Research Project field
team again photographed orb images. Photographs taken around
power lines once again suggest that orbs are attracted to them.
Some of these orb photos as well as lights, and UFOs are
available in a free CD by obtaining a subscription to these
files. Thanks to Alan Caviness

Ohio -- UFOs continue to be filmed

AKRON -- I would like to send you the video, I have 5 different
days with activity from the September 22 to 27, 2005. I talked
to George Ritter and he suggested I leave my camcorder recording
and it worked, I filmed one yesterday afternoon, one last night
and one this evening about 5:00. Here are stills from the one
this afternoon, it looked like a glowing white light with colors
around it. It had a floating quality about it. I will send out
the videos. Thanks to Amy McCrary

FOSTORIA -- George Ritter in good weather takes video almost
daily of unusual UFOs in his country setting. He has encouraged
Amy who lives about fifty miles away to do the same.

They are both picking up high speed UFOs. This image is a still
from his video taken on September 25, 2005. Notice a similar
image taken at an Air Show in England of a US B-2 bomber. Thanks
to George Ritter


Nevada huge disc

FALLON -- The witness and his sister started to return to their
car at dusk on the east side of Lake Laotian saw a huge object
with red pulsating red lights on it's side and a large red light
on its top. It was flying across the desert at a very slow rate
of speed, no sound could be heard. This was a huge disk less
than and eighth of a mile from us. It could be clearly seen as
it moved slowly just above the high voltage towers that ran
along the dirt road where we were parked. We watched it move
across the tops of the few houses for about five minutes. I'm
not sure what happened to it, but it seems to have just gone
into the mountain or perhaps into the lake itself, I'm not sure.
This whole sighting lasted about thirty minutes and we waited
for about another half hour to see if it would appear again.

A week later we went out to the same place hoping to see it
again. There was no UFO but we watched a car driving from house
to house parking around the back of nine houses for a few
minutes then going on to the next place. When he got to the
tenth and last house he set up a bright green light and placed
it in the front yard of the last house. It lit up the entire
place and I could not for the life of me figure out what the
heck he was doing or what the light was. He left the light in
this front yard and got back into his car and drove over to the
last house on the right which is where the UFO seemed to
disappear and he got out of his car and produced a huge red
light which glowed so bright I at first thought he had set fire
to the house. Both lights glowed for about 1/2 hour or so and
then went out. We left soon after the lights went out and never
saw anything more. All this took place in April 2003 and to this
day I still wonder if I really did see what I thought I saw. If
you go out to this same place today you will find it all but
deserted, and the houses empty like a ghost town. I would like
to know what happened to all the people but another part of me
doesn't really want to know. Thanks to Toni R.


LAS VEGAS -- It would really be hard for me to tell of my
experiences, for I have some almost every day with the craft. I
know it's a bold statement but it's true.

You were in the military. Have you heard references to spinning
tops? That is mainly what I see, although I have seen quite a
few different types of craft. They continuously monitor me and
know where I am at all times. I'm not really sure why they run
surveillance on me. I have seen allot! I think you will like my
photos. Let me know what you think. Thanks to Scott

Wisconsin triangular

COLFAX --On September 18, 2005, I looked out my window and saw
this object that I have seen now for many days. Each night it
crosses the sky slowly about 10:30 p.m. Last night, I looked out
the window and again I saw an object with flashing lights 45
degrees off the horizon. The main object seemed to be flashing
multi colored lights, and its form at least initially was
difficult to determine. Arcs of light radiated from this object
into other areas of the sky, with a smaller reddish object
flashing off to the right. Around the flashing red object,
bright spirals of light were visible as well as intermittent
arcs of light that went between that object and the main object.
Some of the light forms appeared as if someone had a sparkler on
the fourth of July and was waving it in the air in circles.

I have been nursing my dog Boo all week who suddenly came down
with a rapid onset of cancer after my previous sighting
alongside the Red Cedar River. I was outside town about four
miles, when an object slowly followed my car, and I flashed my
lights. I noticed almost a haze in front of it, and it appeared
to be a triangular shape, but it also appeared to split, the
back end of the triangle seemed to separate from the front. The
object would blur like things are blurred behind a jet engine by
the release heat. It followed me, and I pulled over several
times, watching this object. I flashed my car lights
intermittently as it hovered and flew slowly. This was no plane,
believe me. Thanks to Brian Vike


Australia photos

ADELAID -- On October 1, 2005, this photo was taken by Kathy.
She says others will follow..

Thanks to Kathy


GRANGE RESERVE -- Stephen Cauchi reports. A Canberra academic,
Shaun Ryan, visited Westal and is investigating one of
Australia's most compelling UFO mysteries, a sighting by
hundreds of people in the Melbourne suburb on April 6, 1966.
More than 200 students and staff from two schools watched as the
object landed in a nearby paddock, lifted off and vanished.
Shane Ryan, an English lecturer at the University of Canberra,
is interviewing dozens of witnesses for a book he hopes to
publish on the 40th anniversary of the sighting.

Mr. Ryan, 38, was alerted to the events in the 1980s by a
housemate who was there. Unlike most UFO sightings, the Westall
object had a large number of credible witnesses. It was viewed
in daylight and attracted a forceful response from police and
the RAAF. "It had these rather interesting elements, there was
some substance to this," he told The Sunday Age. Mr. Ryan has
interviewed about 30 witnesses, mostly former staff and
students. The story was covered then by Channel Nine, The Age
and local newspapers.

On the UFO, everyone seems to agree, Mr Ryan says. It was a low-
flying, silver/gray shining object, either of classical flying
saucer shape or close to it, "a cup turned upside down on a
saucer". "Everyone said straight away that they knew it was not
a plane". The object was in view for up to 20 minutes, and many
saw it descend. Most agree it landed behind pine trees at the
Grange Reserve. Dozens of students ran across to investigate,
but the object had lifted off and vanished but left a circle of
scorched grass. The police and military personnel inspected the
site; some (not all) say the authorities burnt the site. The
Dandenong Journal, claims "students and staff have been
instructed to 'talk to no-one' about the incident". Snip Photo
by Craig Sillitoe Thanks to
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/academic-throws-light-on-
40yearold-ufo-mystery/2005/10/01/1127804696941.html

Canada sightings

TORONTO -- Paul Shishis writes, I would like to report a
multiple sighting of white and dark objects on Sunday, September
25,2005 at lunch break from the Exopolitics/Disclosure
Conference held at Convocation Hall, at the University of
Toronto. I observed brilliant white colored objects about a mile
away to the north. I first pointed out the objects to one
person. Then he, too, could see them as well as about 20 or more
witnesses gathering. These witnesses who had camera with them,
started to photograph these strange white objects.

Fortunately, a cameraman from the Discovery Channel filmed them,
as I raced to get his tripod for proper filming. He had filmed
them for a couple of minutes. One of the white objects was
actually shown on Discovery Channel [Daily Planet] with Mr.Paul
Hellyer. Thanks to Paul Michael Shishis

MCBRIDE BC -- The witness was half an hour east of McBride
traveling on Highway 16 when the sky on his left side flashed a
bright blue, pink, orange and green on September 25, 2005. The
flashes lasted 10 to 15 seconds per color with the colors
blending into one another. Square kilometers of the sky had been
lit up. He grabbed his video camera and began filming.

Upon reaching McBride he discovered that the power had gone out.
An emergency light appeared to be glowing inside a building he
figured was a school. The town was completely desolate without
another vehicle or person around. It would be another two hours
before he would meet up with another vehicle. He was very, very
scared. At home when he viewed his video the flashes did not
appear on the film.

Thanks to Barb Campbell

Northwest Saskatchewan UFO Research Center (NWSURC www.ufo-
connection.com

France UFO photographed

COGOLIN -- This Thursday September 29, 2005, on my terrace
beside Saint-Tropez at 6 PM, the witness noticed lenticular
clouds in the shape of a flying saucer so he took photographs
with his digital camera. I, then, uploaded the photographs to my
computer (PC), and to my amazement, I discovered this blackish
object in the sky about the middle of the photograph. I am
perplexed. Thanks to Christian Mac=C3=A9 and UFO Casebook
http://www.ufocasebook.com/cogolin.html

Mexico multiple photos of UFO

CHAPALA JALISCO -- On September 11, 2004, at about 3:30 PM, a
family went to dinner, and then relaxed next to the pool at the
Real Chapala Hotel. The witness states," I saw an object with a
shape like a saucer with an American-ball inside." I said, "Look
a UFO!" It moved up and down near the surface of the lake with
an exhaust coming from the object. It would suddenly go down to
the surface of the lake and navigate on the water. It maneuvered
for fifty minutes then disappeared. We took multiple photos.
Thanks to Brian Vike
http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D21
02

Germany unknown object
FRANKFURT -- On September 18, 2005, we had a trip in to the
nearest Forrest and I've made some shots from Frankfurt. Today,
when I took a look at the images, I found a kind of spot or
something which I can't explain, you can see it in front of the
cloud in the middle left over the Maintower. Photos can be
viewed at:

Puerto Rico may build UFO airport

LAJAS -- Mayor Marcos Irizarry's is supporting the building of a
UFO landing strip to welcome extraterrestrials that are
frequently seen over the area. A green sign in southwestern
Puerto Rico proudly displays a silhouette of a flying saucer and
two words: "Extraterrestrial Route," for Route 303.

Mr. Rios at ET Highway. Thanks to China Daily

Lajas support for the idea has provoked outrage among islanders
who complained it would be a waste of money. Mayor Irizarry
quickly clarified that his municipal government would not invest
in the project but would help Reynaldo Rios get the proper
building permits to attract tourists to his small town. The
majority of the people in the town have seen UFOs and other
strange phenomenon. "It's a very mysterious place," said
Irizarry, who says he once saw red lights zigzagging above the
hills. Francisco Negron, the farmer who put up the sign and
allows UFO watchers to gather at his ranch, volunteered his
property for the landing strip. They estimate the project could
cost up to $100,000. They claim they heard a boom and saw the
hill go up in flames when a UFO crashed on the hill in 1997..
The mayor hopes that UFO enthusiasts will flock to Lajas.
Hundreds of visitors have already come to check out the
Extraterrestrial Route since the new sign went up, Irizarry
said.

Lajas is unique because of its numerous UFO sightings and Laguna
Cartagena National Wildlife Refuge and lagoon that is known for
bird watching.

Besides UFOs, 127 different types of birds have been observed as
well as balls of light coming and going into the water. At 10:30
PM, on May 30, 1987, a large red buzzing ball of light was seen
descending into the lagoon. At 2:AM on May 31st, people in the
area were awakened by a blinding white light and saw a huge disc
shaped object with brilliant lights circle slowly over the
water, as if looking for something. The following afternoon at
1:55 a huge underground explosion followed by a tremor shook the
area. Cracks opened in the ground and cobalt blue smoke issued
from them.

As if an earthquake followed by blue smoke wasn't jarring
enough, residents whose houses bordered the lagoon were forcibly
evacuated by members of the U.S. military in grey HUMVEE's and
tan four-wheel drive vehicles sporting radar-like rotating
antennae on their tops. As they were being herded away from
their homes, residents saw men in what appeared to be
decontamination suits sweeping the ground with long-handled
devices reminiscent of metal detectors and taking samples of
water, plants, mud and grass. The next day a helicopter lowered
an instrument package into the lagoon. For the next several days
witnesses saw a strange flying dumbbell come in from over the
sea and hover over the lagoon. It was a metallic cylinder with
large balls of greenish-white light on the ends and a beacon-
like red and blue light on its underside. During the next
several days reports of UFO activity in the area increased
dramatically, but also a large four engine commercial jet made a
low pass over the lagoon.

Lajas is also unique in having its main highway designated as an
Extraterrestrial Route. To add to the mystery the U.S. military
has set up an aerostat tethered blimp with a radar system on the
edge of town. A similar blimp is at Cudjoe Key near Key West,
Florida. The military says the radar is to detect low-flying
drug smuggling planes.

The aerostat is a large fabric envelope filled with helium. It
can rise up to 15,000 feet while tethered by a single cable,
which has a maximum breaking strength of 26,000 pounds. For
security and safety reasons, the air space around Air Force
aerostats is restricted for a radius of at least two statute
miles and an altitude up to 15,000 feet. The smallest aerostat
is about twice the size of the Goodyear Blimp. The 275,000 cubic
foot, aerodynamically shaped balloon measures 175 feet long by
58 feet across the hull, with a tip-to-tip tail span of 81 feet.
The aerostat system lifts a 1,200 pound payload to operating
altitude for low-level radar coverage. Many people believe the
true purpose of the radars are to detect UFOs rather than drug
runners. It is likely both drug runners and UFOs are detected.

Reports of multiple sightings of UFO's, bigfoot-like creatures,
entity encounters, abductions, grass circles, and animal
mutilations have been reported in the area.

GUAYNABO -- About 7:06 AM, on October 1, 2005,

I saw a cigar shaped UFO traveling south that was the size of a
commercial jet. I thought it could've been an airplane, but
there were no wings. The craft was of a polished silver when the
sun's light was reflected. The sighting lasted 15 to 20 seconds
before I lost sight of the craft when it crossed through huge
cumulus clouds. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com

U. K. objects seen on various nights

IVINGHOE BEACON -- It was a cloudless blue sky, a silver sphere
was seen flying very high, heading west on July 9, 2005 at 7:20
p.m. The craft was witnessed by my husband and I for twenty
seconds.

DUNSTABLE -- The following day at 10:30 PM, my husband, twenty
year old daughter and myself observed a bright orange orb fly
silently and smoothly over our house. I got the video camera and
filmed for about a minute. It seemed to slow down for a few
seconds.

In mid August 2005, 9:30 PM, another bright orange orb/light was
spotted. It got smaller then disappeared.

Late August around the 28th from the back garden at 9 PM, I saw
a bright orange orb/light flew over the house, and out of sight.

On September 10, 2005 at 9:20 PM, looking out of the
conservatory door both of us saw a bright orange/orb approaching
from the west, it veered to the left and disappeared. Thanks to
Brian Vike, Director www.hbccufo.com

LOUGHTON, ESSEX -- My Husband and neighbors saw three strange
like orange orbs on September 10, 2005, around 8:30/ 8.45 PM. My
husband shouted "look at them 3 strange orange orb lights in the
sky" we ran to the front of our property and called our
neighbors out to look. My husband has a digital camera with
quite a good zoom so he ran in to get it. The orb shaped objects
were in a triangle formation and then they broke away and two of
them followed the 1st one quite closely. They seemed to hover
without any sound whatsoever. We stood in complete amazement.
The pictures show a "jelly fish" like UFOs. Thanks Brian
Vike.www.hbccufo.com


UK B-2 and UFO airshow

RAF FAIRFORD AIRSHOW -- Anthony J. Hicks took a video of the B-2
Spirit doing a fly-by at the Royal International Air Tattoo
(RIAT) at RAF Fairford that he forwarded to Brian Vike. A couple
RAF Tornado aircraft also are flying in formation. When Anthony
took the video he did not see the cigar shaped object fly just
behind the formation on July 21, 2002. Thanks to c. 2005 Anthony
J. Hicks and Brian Vike. Notice the similarity to George
Ritter's Fostoria, Ohio cigar shaped craft above.

Video clip - Video: RIAT Airshow 2002 Highlights B-2 Spirit Fly-
By And Unknown Video clip can be viewed at:

http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D3285

Please stop-by Anthony J. Hicks website as the gentleman has
some fantastic video footage of military aircraft. His site is a
must see: http://anthonyjhicks.com/

Missing Child

I was asked to carry the picture of missing North Carolina
children. Many children are missing after the Katrina Hurricane.

BRITTANY DENYSE DIETZEL

Missing Since: 7/13/05

Age Now: 14

Missing from:
JACKSONVILLE, NC

 24-Hour Hotline
1-800-THE-LOST (1-800-843-5678) National Center for Missing & Exploited=
 Children

National Center for Missing & Exploited Children
http://www.missingkids.com/


UFO Defense Tactics: Weather Shield to Chemtrails by A.K.
Johnstone.

"Finally a book that answers the hard questions about UFOs"
according to French Amazon; Science Daily.com designates UFO
Defense Tactics a collectible. Chosen as one of ten best UFO
books in 2002 by Anomalous Book List, it is available at
amazon.com, barnes&noble.com, Sales.nul or 1-800-
938-1114. I personally highly recommend this book. George Filer

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 see http://www.mufon.com/. To ask
questions contact MUFONHQ.nul

Filer's Files is copyrighted 2005 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.

Subscribe to Filer's Files to receive CD


So you won't miss a single breaking news story or the increased
evidence for UFO and life in the universe. Help solve the
mysteries of the universe. We have 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 participation but we need everyone's help not just a
few. 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. Be sure
to ask for the CD, Send check or money order to: George Filer,
222 Jackson Road,

Medford, NJ 08055.

You can also go to:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                        Oval-Shaped Objects Over Peru

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:53:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:14:12 -0400
Subject: Oval-Shaped Objects Over Peru


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 5, 2005


Source: www.astroufo.tripod.com.pe
Date: 10.05.05

Peru: "We Saw Them In The Sky"

"They were two oval-shaped objects. They flashed, but at a given
moment we were able to see them clearly, and they were
definitely neither airplanes nor anything remotely similar. We
saw them in the sky."

Those were the words of Isabel Tafur, a local resident. Her
eyewitness testimony was corroborated by the custodians of
public school 2081, who were able to specify the time of the
sighting and offered details on it, despite having been several
kilometers away from the event.

Electrical devices failed along a section of the La Ensenada
Highway due to a phenomenon known as static, said some parties
consulted on this matter. It is known that the areas were
sightings may next take place could be Chilca, Chancay, Huaral,
Huacho, La Molina and Cieneguilla, whre hundreds of UFO
sightings and recordings have taken place in recent years.

A similar situation involving "flying saucers" also occurs in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                     UFOs Reported Over Lurigancho Peru

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 13:01:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:16:53 -0400
Subject: UFOs Reported Over Lurigancho Peru


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 5, 2005

SOURCE: www.astroufo.tripod.com.pe  DATE: 10.05.05

PERU: UFOs ALSO REPORTED IN LURIGANCHO

Residents of the very end of Wiesse Avenue in the town of San
Juan de Lurigancho have also seen UFOs in recent days. These
witnesses indicated that the saucers remined motionless for
several minutes before taking off toward Chosica.

With regard to this subject, and purely coincidentally, the 2nd
World Congress on Ufology, Extraterrestrial Life and Man in
Space is being held in Lima on October 7, 8 and 9 at which
Russian cosmonauts Gennay Padalka, Anatoli Berezoboi and Marina
Popovich will be present, discussing their experiences aboard
the MIR Space Station. Also appearing are Antonio Cordova of the
Asociacion Alfa y Omega, Miguel Azcueta, former mayor of Villa
El Salvador, and retired USAF colonels Donald M. Ware and
Wendelle Stevens.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                    Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Cohen

From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:17:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 08:09:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Cohen


Re:

>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:04:41 -0400
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Cohen

-----

Copy of a couple of e-mails exchanged off-line that explain 1) why
I made the comment I did in my accidental posting of

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/oct/m02-014.shtml

and 2) why Dave and I think Aldrin's comment on the Science
Channel's "First to the Moon" and the UFO video shown might be
significant.

>Jan,

>I may mail a portion of this to the List to explain what happened
>and why.

>- - - - -

>At 01:56 PM 10/2/2005, Jan Aldrich wrote:

>Hi Jerry,

>>Who is Dave Stone, and how does his research trump Brad going
>>back to the original transcripts? Brad and regularly disagree about
>>UFO research, but I would say he is one of the most thorough
>>researcher going....He unlike so many others does go back to
>>original sources, something greatly lacking in ufology.

>>Regards,

>>Jan

>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

>My answer to Jan:

>Humbly,

>Nobody's "trumping" anyone. Yes you are 100% correct about
>what you said, but...
>nobody's perfect, myself included. The note I sent was to Dave
>alone and wasn't meant to be posted. It was accidentally sent at
>11 PM on a Saturday eve. after a really grinding week. My choice
>of words was poor in trying to express what I was really trying
>to say. As soon as I saw that it wound up on-line I immediately
>sent Brad a note of apology. I'm sure he may possibly be angry
>with me right now, but no malice was really intended.

>When I saw it posted I immediately knew it would create a small
>incident. I am in the process of digging out facts on that
>Apollo 11 case for myself. I believe anyone can reserve the
>right to look at all the evidence more than once, no matter how
>positive we are that something has been settled. After seeing
>what Aldrin had to say regarding the Apollo 11 UFO in the "First
>to the Moon" documentary on the Science Channel, and the video
>of the UFO, I felt it was definitely worth taking another
>serious look at it. Dave did too. We both posted at the same
>time. Then, we began exchanging letters to pull some information
>together before posting to the list.


>Dave had written to me he was extremely disappointed people
>didn't appear to be considering what he posted. I got the
>feeling he was afraid to challenge Brad's view on this. I said
>to him that we have some homework to do to see if it was
>possible Brad may have missed something regarding this case. I
>was trying to give Dave some inspiration to forge ahead with it
>but I used a really bad choice of words. For that I'm sorry. It
>was late at night and I wasn't composing
>a post to the List. (jc 10/5/2005: Brad, again I'm sorry.)


>Just prior to that, Brad had sent me a note. His note spurred my
>comment.

>- - - - -

>>OFF LIST

>>Hi Jerry,

>>You should not be labeling this bogus Apollo 11 story (on your
>>website) as "verified fact." As far as I know it's a bunch of garbage,
>>based on story themes taken from Apollo 13 (where the astronauts
>>were in danger) and Apollo 12 (where there was an unexplained
>>sighting for over a day on the way to the moon). I investigated the
>>alleged Apollo UFO incidents back in the 70's and read something
>>like 150,000 pages of Apollo air-ground communication transcripts
>>(have you ever tried reading 150,000 pages?? it's no walk in the
>>park), reviewed numerous documents and reports, conducted
>>extensive analyses of mission parameters, and recently (2003-4)
>>re-reviewed my early work to update it, etc. There were only two
>>genuinely unexplained incidents in all of the Apollo missions, one of
>>which was not even seen by astronauts but videotaped and
>>discovered only after landing, and this latest hogwash which I never
>>heard of before was not among the two incidents.

>>Brad

>- - - - -

>I thought I noticed something wrong right away and wrote Brad a note
>to say so. (He's welcome to post what I wrote if he would like.) I just
>discovered the astronauts _had_ mentioned their sighting at their
>debriefing when they came back from the Apollo 11 flight. If that is
>definitely the case, it may not be just "garbage based on themes from
>the Apollo 13." To me, that fact right there makes this worth my looking
>at it. From what Brad wrote (above), I'm also wondering exactly what
>happened on Apollo 12 and whether the film they showed was possibly
>taken from that mission. (He said "where there was an unexplained
>sighting for over a day on the way to the moon.")

>I've looked at the video of the UFO in that documentary and I find it to
>be highly interesting and have a lot of questions about it and I know
>Dave most likely does as well. I''ve been trying to get time to sit down,
>get it all together and post it. Some other work I do has been getting
>in the way but we've made some progress. (jc 10/5/2005: I was also
>wondering whether anyone had seen this video before and whether
>they had made any attempts to analyze it. The video shown wasn't
>from the Apollo 11 mission.)

>BTW, a person can have gone though 10,000,000,000,000 etc.
>documents but this doesn't mean that it is not possible something
>may have been missed in the process. As a matter of fact, the
>more you've read through, the easier it is to have missed something
>just by the law of averages. Brad was very adamant about how
>positive he was that this was nothing. But if you turn off all possibility
>of looking at something a second or third time, who knows what you
>could be missing. That was all I meant about the "perfect" part even
>if my choice of words expressing it was really off.

>I absolutely respect Brad's work (10/5/2005: I have a lot of it on my
>web-site) but, there are no God's in this UFO business; excellent
>researchers, yes, but sometimes being positive about something
>can throw us off. I know it's happened to me. Any one of us can
>make a mistake or miss something, and it's no big deal. What's
>important is keeping our minds open if new data were to come in
>on an old case. It's also important no one be worshiped as perfect,
>no matter how excellent a job they've done all along. (and I most
>certainly include myself right at the top of that list, or that dumb
>note wouldn't have wound up been posted in the first place.)

>- - - -

>Note I sent Errol as soon as I saw the UFO UpDates address on
>the mailed letter I had meant for Dave: (Dave's original letter was
>forwarded to me from UFO UpDates. My reply sent it back to Errol.)

>>Errol,

>>I just accidentally sent you a post that was meant strictly for Dave
>>Stone.

>>Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Stone

>>I'd deeply appreciate it if you wouldn't post that to the world. I was
>>going to send Dave's response to Brad for his comments but that
>>part I could post. I have to read what's on your board first so that it
>>all makes sense.

>>Duh!

>>Thanks, Jerry

>- - -

>Errol must have missed my note. He's always been a total
>gentleman when it's come to "holding a post" because I pressed
>the button too fast.

>So please forgive that post. It wasn't exactly what I was trying to
>say. If you could explain this to others quietly, I'd appreciate it. Dave
>and I are both trying to gather whatever information we can that may
>prove useful. Then we need to figure out how to post it all in a
>respectful manner and, if people think it makes some sense,
>perhaps they'll give it a little more thought.

>I have a whole bunch of questions about this UFO incident. I didn't
>go out of my way to look for this astronaut case because it definitely
>is _not_ one of my strong areas, but I think I see something we may
>have missed here. If I can figure out the right questions to ask, we'll
>find out if I'm nuts or not. (jc 10/5/2005: If I am we simply move onward.
>to something else.)

>Eating some humble pie, but still digging through the rubble,

>Jerry





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:56:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 08:15:25 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 07:26:54 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:12:15 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>Military types are just as prone to
>>exaggerate (moreso maybe)

>I'd allow "just as", at best. "Moreso" is not indicated for the
>reasons stated above. I wonder why you would thing so.

>>than the general population about
>>knowledge and activity that is much less than what they purport
>>it to be.

>Huh? Just kidding. I know where you were going with that. Still,
>much 'more' is likely given the evidence everywhere else (Six
>levels of same?). A ruling elite has quite a bit to lose to an
>alien alternative... I suspect. Don't dis the military, dude, we
>know too many ways to kill you. lol!

Alfred:

I thought you might respond...

Being an exemplary military guy yourself, with a Bronze Star,
you still take an objective view.

My reply to Greg Boone's post was about how the military policy
makers (the military establishment) operates without a moral
code to give them bearings.

The whole UFO cover-up denotes that, and the My Lai and Abu
Ghraib scandals tell us how military higher-ups handle things,
until the grunts come forth and expose their mendacity.

Morality doesn't factor into why the military lies about UFOs.
That the military thinks such a disclosure would sink
established religion is hogwash.

Moreover, I want to make it clear that I'm not bashing those who
are in or have been in the military, not even those whom Greg
says won't talk about their UFO evidence or experience(s).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:06:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:08:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:15:32 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:41:14 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>>On April 27, 1950, missile tracking theodilite camera teams
>>photographed four UFO's triangulated at 150,000 foot altitude
>>traveling at high speed.

>Meteor?

Estimated at 30 ft in diameter.

You can read the "rest of the story" at:

http://brumac.8k.com/WhiteSandsProof/WhiteSandsProof.html

<snip>

>Wow! You guys need some more stereo photos!!! Shouldn't have to
>use the same old ones over such a long period!!!

Even old ones are better than none. But this gives and idea of
the "best data" available since sightings are sporadic and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:53:35 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 08:12:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Balaskas


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:52:45 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:38:39 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>Thanks for the green fireball info.

>And I agree that the sprites and elves phenomena do not explain
>many UFO sightings. Some do seem diffuse, but I think some can
>be discrete, although I don't see how ground observers can view
>them easily. I mean to say by all this that they are a recently
>discovered (little understood) phenomena which indicates that
>_other_ such electrical phenomena may exist. Since these
>phenemena _do_ move from cloud level to ionosphere (?), they may
>seem to be going into space.


Hi James and David!

Although Red Sprites, Blue Jets and Elves were reported by
observers on or near the surface of the Earth (eg. farmers,
pilots, etc.) for decades, it was not until they were captured
on a video taken from the Space Shuttle that scientists
identified them as new, previously unknown electrical phenomena.

Although the light intensity of these can be as bright as the
aurora, the sky must be transparent and very dark and the eyes
of the observer must be dark adapted if one hopes to see them
visually. As for Red Sprites, Blue Jets or Elves being mistaken
for UFOs, this is highly unlikely since they are a short lived
phenomena in the order of a few milliseconds. They can and have
been captured on video though.

Below are two video clips of a Sprite and a Jet rising quickly
above the Earth towards space as seen from orbit.

http://elf.gi.alaska.edu/movies/wf3541.mpg

http://elf.gi.alaska.edu/movies/output.mpg

As for fireballs (meteoroids burning and breaking up in the
Earth's upper atmosphere) that seemed to pulse like the one Bill
Hamilton witnessed over the Pacific Ocean sometime in or about
1977, when one looks at the long exposures of bright meteor
trails on film, the trails are often lumpy. This suggests that
these fireballs too were pulsating probably from bright flashes
of the small explosions as the meteoroid was breaking up or
because of an uneven rate of burning of the various volatile
materials the meteoroid is made. Some elements and compounds
give off greenish light when burned.

Like Elves, even bright daylight fireballs of long duration (such
as the massive meteoroid (or small asteroid?) of August 10, 1972
which entered the Earth's atmosphere over the U.S. at a very
shallow angle and came very low over the surface of the Earth
before skipping back into space over Canada) are rarely mistaken
for UFOs (unless they are tracked and are observed making it all





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:07:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:14:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:14:59 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:25:07 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>The above prescription for an insrumented skywatch is correct
>>but, from the point of view of one of the few ufologists with
>>experience in instrumented skywatch type of research, I would
>>have to say it is of wishful thinking unless the finding is
>>almost "unlimited."

Oops. Typo. "unless the _funding_ is almost 'unlimited'."

>Please expand your remarks. I do not understand about the
>"wishful thinking" aspect. What do you mean "unless the finding
>is almost unlimited"? Do you mean UFO distance is unlimited? Of
>did you mean "funding" unlimited? If you mean funding, I
>disagree. I think that using triangulation instead of
>traditional stereo distance estimation should be very cheap and
>more accurate if you have a good baseline.

The funding being "unlimited" would mean that one could maintain
a long duration skywatch while paying someone a living wage to
do do it. Sure triangulation is cheap. What is expensive is
having someone or som "instrumented machine" available at
amoment's notice to do the triangulation. In the case of the
Gulf Breeze Research Team (GBRT) effort during the period Nov.
1990 through the summer of 1992, the "funding" was provided by
the volunteers who all had day jobs, of course. These people
were sufficient to mount a 5/7 skywatch (5 hrs per day typical
for 7 days a week) as long as the sightings were occurring in
their neighborhood. If repeated sightings had suddenly popped up
in any area more than 50 miles from where they lived they
probably would not have been able to maintain askywatch and , of
course, if the distance had been a hundred miles to sightings,
probably none of the GBRT would have responded.

>>The GBRT was a "casually instrumented" but very sophisticated or
>>"savvy" group of people when it came to recording Bubba
>>sightings. They used home video cameras and still cameras, of
>>course, and they had multiple witnesses (usually 4 - 10, but on
>>occasion several dozen and once about 100). As the months went
>>by after Nov 1990. they improved instrumentation and technique.
>>They became adept at photographing the "impossible", using
>>telescopic lenses, tripods, time exposures, video with and
>>without zoom, etc.

>Sounds laudable, but unless they were filming with timetags and
>simulataneously, with good camera position/angles what we would
>get would be the same old thing of _more_ UFO pictures.

They in fact did have "time tags" in the video cameras and
recorded verbal descriptions of the appearances of the lights as
well as what the video itself showed. In one important case in
Sept 1991 (if I recall correctly) you can watch the video of a
ring of lights moving through the sky. The video is not
"excellent" but you can see the ring faintly and you can hear
the verbal description and watch it "flipover" as it travels
along. Also, a lady standing near the videographer is looking
throguh binoculars and she says, "Let's see if it blocks the
stars as it travels" or something like that. One cannot see the
stars in the video (lost in the video noise). She then is heard
saying something like this (I forget the exact wording, but I
can replay the video and find out): "Yup, its blocking out stars
as it travels along."

True, this didn't tell us what the UFO WAS, but it did indicate
an opaque body associated with the lighted ring. Perhaps it they
had had a low light sensitive large telescope on that night they
could have recorded the stars being blocked and may one could
infer a shape from the blockage. (Unfortunately there was no
triangulation that night so the distance and altitude not known,
but it was nearly overhead when it passed by.)

>We _know_ there are UFOs. Who are we trying to convince? It is the
>next step of what they are (tied to where do they come from)
t>hat we must be working on.

This is exactly the reason for "unlimited funding' (or at least
large funding). What would it have taken to acomplish an
identification in this case? Perhaps a combination of radar
(distance, if there is a radar reflection)? Large telescope?
Electromagnetic sensors? Gravitational sensor? Here you are
talking big bux.

How about hiring an airplane to fly around the Gulf Breeze skies
very night? The GBRT was criticized for not hiring an airplane.
Their response: sorry, we can afford to pay once for a camera or
video camera, but we can't afford to pay for a 5/7 airplane
watch. (Radar was also proposed, but no one wanted to fork over
for a shipboard or other type of civilian radar.)


>>At my suggestion several of them placed a
>.>diffraction grating into their cameras. In one case (Feb. 1992) >
>>they got a spectrum of red "Bubba."

>Good. And did the spectrum match anything? Did the group
>generate baseline spectrum for known objects? Is there a
>database?

This was an experment directed at answering the question: is
"red Bubba" merely a red road flare hanging from a balloon (or
motorised blimp or some other support mechanism). This question
had arisen in early 1991 as the red Bubba sightings continued.
Rejection of the flare hypothesis had been based on things like
the danger in doing such a thing over a populated area (flying
an incendiary device that could fall on a house, etc.) and the
fact that no residue had ever been found. Also " "red Bubba" had
the characteristic of suddenly turning white and flashing very
brilliantly at a high rate before dimming and then either
continuing as red or fading out. A typical road flare does not
do that. But, anyway, in Feb. 1992 the GBRT "got it all
together" and were fortunate to have a diffraction grating in a
camera when Bubba went by. A photo was taken. Then to complete
the experiment, with the same film and diffraction grating in
the camera they took a picture of a red road flare at a distance
of a mile or so (their estimated distance to Bubba). So we had
the Bubba and flare comparison on one piece of film. Analysis of
thespectrum showed that they differed. Of course they were both
predominantly red, but Bubba had more blue and green and the
flare had more green than blue (if I recall correctly). I should
point out that the videotape of the sighting recorded the voices
of the witnesses who immediately detected a difference in color
when they saw the flare about half an hour after seeing the
Bubba.

>>Several times they had
>>several groups of people with large separations and correlated
>>sightings allowing for accurate triangulation to get distance
>>and altitude.

>That's helpful, but, of course, just the first phase. If they
>got even three data points to draw a trajectory then we have a
>major finding. For instance, one low level altitude, one
>moderate and one above the stratosphere.

There were a couple of sightings for which there were separated
groups of witnesses and videography and photography that allowed
correlations that produced trajectories. The trajectories or
tracks of the Bubba were against or across the wind (another
reason to question the "flare-balloon" hypothesis). There were
no triatulations resulting in a high altitude. Altitudes were on
the order of a few thousand feet.

>If the UFO is just
>going to fly by at a fixed altitude then that does not provide
>much data to answer the question if it comes from space or not.
>It would provide other data, but just not what I think is the
>key question. We must depend on a certain fraction of UFO
>sightings (maybe small) in which one "takes off" or one appears
>from a distance and moves to closer proximity. Only these will
>provide data that they are coming from or going to space.

What you have written here provides further reason for large
funding: it requires at least two intrumented sites with some
separation (mile or more) to allow for accurate distance measure
up to many miles. Alternatively perhaps a combination of RF and
laser radar. And these have to be available wherever and
whenever sightings are occurring.

>Of course, equipment that could measure gravity waves or EMF
>(radio/magnetic/electric) or sound provide good data, but it
>really doesn't prove the point of origin. These provide some
>potentially nice precursors or tell-tales to indicate a non-
>prosaic UFO is in the area, but it doesn't help us determine
>what the UFO is. And we can't count on the government to tell
>us.

I suppose one could answer the question: what do we need to be
able to identify the UFO or determine where it is coming from.
Then add up the expenses for equipment and for operation and
transportation.

>Lets say we, after 100's of UFO sightings, were finally able to
>come up with the absolute UFO signature which all UFO generate
>and which are measurable by way of sensors. This would still not
>tell us what UFOs are. It would just help us to filter out all
>the prosaic stuff (remove the noise) and allow us to focus on
>the "real thang".

>A field installation would have to monitor continuously and
>would be triggered by the "signature" to taken data in high
>stream mode. Or better, the facility would always be recording,
>but would overwrite the stored data if the trigger signal was
>not seen.

>Until we get this signature, we need to record everything
>(unfortunately) and weed through it (hopefully with substantial
>help from computer algorithms). I am sure of meteors (from high
>to low"er" altitude) would show up in such a dataset, but >
>hopefully with spectral measurements, these can be weeded out.
>Satellites and most aircraft would be relatively easy to weed
>out (our criteria-going into space or coming from space- is
>stringent enough to eliminate most of these.

I hear the sound of the cash register.....

>>... summer of 1992. This never-
>>reported (in detail) research effort involved some Canadian
>>scientists who were privately funded to construct an
>>instrumented van and to take it to GBreeze. I was invited to go
>>along and to supply a large sensitive telescope (f/11, 2000 mm,
>>low light TV and video recording on a pan head Mitchell camera
>>tripod with a home video camera boresighted with the telescope
>>to act as a 'tracking gate."). I would estimate that the total
>>cost of the instrumentation that allowed for EM measurement and
>>recording from low frequency (Hz) to microwave frequencies, plus
>>image intensified visible, infrared, and spectrographic video
>>recording, magnetic field, electrostatic field, etc. plus the
>>van was on the order of 50-60K$.

>I don't think LF would cut it, you need ELF based on Stanford's
>work.

They may have had an ELF sensor also, I don't remember
everything they had.

>Its great that they assembled this equipment. Can you let us
>know who these folk were?

Assembled by George Hathaway of Ontario

>>Point: A lot of $$ were spent to no avail. To really mount an
>>assault on the UFO problem is going to require a lot more
>>funding and continuous effort.

>But what became of the van and equipment? Surely it has been
>used alot since?

After leaving Gulf Breeze it went to Marfa Tx to look at the
"Marfa Lights" Don't recall whether or not they had any luck
there. Subsequently, since there was no funding to maintain it
operation and no other UFO hotspot at the time (late 1992), it
was disassembled and the part scattered or stored or whatever.
George told me a few years later, when I decided to check on the
telescope I had assembled, that he had rebuilt the the telescope
mount but that everything was either in storage or was being
used in laboratoy research (un-UFO-related).

>Amortized over time (10-20yrs), the cost seems
>relatively small. The main cost should be scientist pay. I would
>think that to justify the assembly of the equipment they must
>have used it at numerous hot spots in Canada and the US. Was it
>too costly to pay the researchers? Or did the sponsoring group
>drop them and take back the equipment? Or was the equipment
l>eased thus could only be kept during the brief Gulf Breeze time
>period?

This equipment was owned but there wasn't funding to keep it in
the van and ready to go. Other experiments needed some of the
equipment so, since there was no $$$ to buy more equipment
(duplicate what is in the van), the van equipment was
"cannibalized."


Find an angel with a 10-20 year attention span, capable of
keeping things in a state of standby, with "burst funding"





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:17:27 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:36:41 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>Where are the rest of the TOP SECRET+ UFO messages found by the
>NSA but generated by the CIA and withheld by the CIA?

>For that matter where are the Navy's UFO files?

Stan hits the nail right on the head! Where are the Navy's UFO files?

The Navy has been involved in the UFO mess from day one, and
before. (I keep finding Navy detritus all over the place: in
Roswell, the Arnold sighting, and other episodes that you
readers can locate by a Google Scholar search where a plethora
of Navy projects show up with a UFO connection.)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                 Re: New French Official UFO Study - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:23:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:29:22 -0400
Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study - Sparks


>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:39:22 +0200
>Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:45:44 EDT
>>Subject: Re: New French Official UFO Study

>>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:23:47 +0100 (BST)
>>>Subject: New French Official UFO Study

<snip>

>>The first meeting of the PAN Steering Committee was held on Sept
>>22, 2005. Sillard was interviewed about it on Radio France
>>International (RFI) on Sept 29, 2005. Sillard said that an
>>"audit" of the now defunct SEPRA UFO study in 2001-2 (could this
>>be the 1999 COMETA Report after review?) had recommended
>>continued UFO study with moderate funding.

>Brad,

>I think your information is correct, except for this last point.
>The audit was made by engineer Francois Louange, Director of the
>company "Fleximage". He is a specialist of image analysis who





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                              Re: Reed! - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 14:41:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:34:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Reed! - Myers


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:06:23 -0400
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Reed!

>Source: ABC-TV News - USA

>http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=3D1183995

>Oct 4, 2005

>UFO-Spotters Tell Tales Of The Extra-Terrestrial Reuters

>By Jude Webber
>Reuters

>LIMA, Peru (Reuters) - One minute Jonathan Reed was hiking with
>his golden retriever in a forest in Seattle. The next, his pet
>was being torn apart by a "gray" =97 an alien being with an
>elongated head, smelling of rotting fruit.

>A scene from a sci-fi film? No, maintains Reed, a former child-
>developmental psychologist who says he took the alien home and
>lived with it for nine days in which it communicated via
>telepathy and was able to pull thoughts from his mind.


No surprise that 'Dr.Reed' is still operating somewhere in the
world and we can thank those past supporters of his, who in
spite of all evidence and common sense to the contrary continue
to faithfully believe this absurd alien adventure and/or
continue to capitalize on it personally and financially.

Let's thank all those folks who helped 'Dr.Reed' rise from his
humble beginnings to the UFO hoax star he is today:  Art Bell,
Dan Iaria, Dan McEvoy, Jaime Maussan, and Daniel Munoz among
others.  And don't forget those presently promoting 'Dr.Reed',
such as Don Ware.

UFOlogy is its own worst enemy.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:37:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Friedman


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:09:44 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
>>>phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
>>>documented proof of such a finding?

>>>The truth is, I cannot think of many scenarios where
>>>researching events that  have already taken place, could
>>>provide such evidence.

>>Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not
>>going to get any substantial funding for instrumentated UFO
>>detection and tracking projects without past data of solid UFO
>>cases demonstrating the need and the performance characteristics
>>of UFOs. Scientific method does not disparage analysis of past
>>events.

>I doubt funding of UFOs per se is possible at all unless couched
>in prosaic terms and relating to unknown (but prosaic)
>phenomena. Past events could be used to back up this kind of
>need for research.

>But you are right, if you are lucky enough to find some
>Hollywood type to fund field work, then past cases are an
>essential element to the rationale.

>Past events provide clues as to likely useful instrumentation.
>Past events can help in the design of the required resolution
>and sensitivity and range and speed (slew rate) and quality of
>the instrumentation and  method of using the instrumentation.

>One can look at each case and ask, "if we had such and such
>instrumentation instead of eyes and maybe a camera in the UFO
>case, what could have been accomplished?"

>But maybe Rob means that ufology has gathered alot of UFO
>witness data and analyzed some of it and it has not been able to
>come up with an "answer".  So field research is needed to
>test hypotheses that the past UFO reports/analyses have
>provided.

Aren't we forgetting that governments around the world have
already established three excellent systems for obtaining very
solid evidence that some UFOs have an ET origin?

1. Ground radar used to monitor the skies and able to measure
velocity and direction and probably acceleration of Uncorrelated
Targets.They call it Air or Aerospace Defense systems such as
the Joint Canadian-American NORAD.

2. Sophisticated aircraft carring airborne radar, cameras, other
devices for measuring velocitires, accelerations, EM and other
signatures. These can be vectored towards UNKNOWNS established
by System 1.They can pursue and monitor.

3. A large variety of military and intelligence Community
listening posts on the ground and Satellites in the skies such
as the recently revealed POPPY satellites which monitored
electronic emissions from Soviet ships.

The total cost of establishing systems 1,2,3 is certainly at
least in the tens of billions of dollars. The operating costs of
the NRO, NSA, etc and their Soviet Chines, Brazilian, Israeli
etc satellites is certainly in the billions of dollars per year
range. Please note that all this data is born classified.

NOTE CDA this data is not released, is not a matter of public
record, includes all kinds of sources and methods
information.....

I see no hope of competing with these systems in terms of
hardware and manpower. Many years ago a request for all reports
of uncorrelated targets noted by NORAD or ADC in a particular 6
month period received the response of "please send a certified
check for over $100,000, to cover search fees."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:28:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:39:43 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Sparks


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:36:41 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 18:10:40 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:34:14 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:26:33 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>What you are saying is exactly what I wrote. There is zilch in
>>these intercepted messages to indicate ETs are visiting the
>>earth. Yet STF pins his "Cosmic Watergate" thesis mainly on
>>these censored messages.

>The censored NSA UFO messages could easily have been realeased
>ages ago by censoring the dates and locations. Obviously there
>was much more to them.(More than 90% of the pages).

Instead of making proclamations without investigation, why not
look at a representative sampling of some of these NSA UFO
reports intercepted from Soviet bloc and Chinese/Asian areas?
There is no basis for saying or implying that "More than 90%"
UFO-related material is deleted, that this must be "much more"
than merely UFO sighting "dates and locations." Or else this is
semantic game-playing.

I cannot find a single NSA intercept with "More than 90%" UFO
report text deleted and even if I did it would not affect the
overall average I estimate of only roughly 30% to 50% UFO
subject text that I find sanitized, and most of this is teletype
addressing, intercept site identifications (plus NON-UFO
reporting that is deleted) not UFO-related message text.

Non-UFO subject material is _whited_ out whereas material
pertinent to FOIA request and sanitized is _blacked_ out. You
can read actual DoD FOIA regulations explaining the difference
in procedure.

Let's look at a randomly selected example of an NSA UFO sighting
report intercept. This is from the NSA website in its UFO COMINT
collection E about half way down on p. 110 of this collection of
dozens of released documents. Note first off that the messages
are routinely headed "TOP SECRET UMBRA" yet most if not all of
them say in their message bodies that the NSA message is
classified and compartmented as only "SECRET
SPOKE" "in its entirety."

---------
TOP SECRET UMBRA [lined through]

CATEGORY = 400            M = 92

MESSAGE = 03740570

LH #0014 348 0647
ZNY MMNSH
ZKZK PP [blacked out] DE
[teletype address blacked out]
[ditto]
[ditto]
[about 1-1/2 lines blacked out probably internal NSA message
distribution list and date-time group]
ZEM
SECRET SPOKE [lined through] [probable internal NSA codeword
blacked out] (WNINTEL) [lined through] SECTION EIGHT [means
Warning-Intelligence Sources and Methods are in Section 8 only]
[1/3 line blacked out] THIS MESSAGE IS CLASSIFIED SECRET
SPOKE IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
HAS BEEN PROVIDED [1-1/2 lines blacked out explaining the
interagency distribution] THIS MESSAGE IS CLASSIFIED
SECRET SPOKE IN ITS ENTIRETY.

[about 6-12 lines whited out of evidently non-UFO content in
Sections 1-5 of the message]

              6. RADAR TRACKING OF
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO): 1038-1056. FOUR
UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED OVER [location blacked
out] AND [location blacked out]. ALT 79,000- 83,000 FT.

[several lines whited out including the Section 8 with WNINTEL
noticed material, evidently non-UFO subjects are in 7 and 8]
---------


Notice that "UFO" has to be explained and introduced as a term
"UFO" in Section 6 of the message so UFO has clearly not been
discussed earlier in the message, in Sections 1-5. Got that?

Before anyone goes off half-cocked about "TOP SECRET UMBRA" it
was _not_ I repeat _not_ the "highest classification" of the NSA
or some such rot you usually read in mindless UFO literature. In
fact it was _one_ of the _lowest_ levels of NSA's
compartmentation system as witness the routine contradiction of
the TOP SECRET UMBRA header with the lower SECRET SPOKE, since
it really did not matter to the NSA, which waxed rather careless
here, for the reason that UMBRA and SPOKE were NSA's interagency
and external liaison compartments for sending sanitized material
outside the NSA to other agencies, so it didn't matter much to
NSA whether it went out as TS/UMBRA or S/SPOKE.

This is material that NSA has already "cleaned up" for non-NSA
use by the DIA, CIA, White House, Congress and sometimes the
Courts. It's already downgraded material. Whenever you see TOP
SECRET UMBRA and SECRET SPOKE you know this is bowdlerized for
non-NSA use, removing all sensitive cryptanalysis data. The
"good stuff" is kept within NSA and only rarely shared outside
the agency and then under extreme compartmented access rules and
caveats, etc. These NSA UFO intercepts are the lowest of the low
level product.

NSA like most agencies seem very inconsistent in what they do or
do not delete, probably because multiple reviewers are not
closely coordinating with each other on the tedious business of
sanitizing documents for FOIA release, and they just don't give
a damn whether they are consistent or not. Some NSA UFO report
intercepts leave in the DIA in the external distribution
paragraph (and probably CIA and NMCC as well, etc.) where others
seem to have DIA blacked out. Obviously there is nothing
sinister or supersecret about this, it's just annoying for
historical researchers trying to trace the history of NSA's
activities and operations.

Some messages may have "FM DIRNSA" (From Director of NSA)
blacked out but left in on others, in this inconsistent
application of whatever policy on sanitization. ("FM DIRNSA" is
not literally from the NSA Director but is the shorthand for
"NSA HQ" and it could be any staff member at any level sending
or re-sending a message to new distribution list recipients or
replying to a question from an NSA unit in the field.)

As for percentages, in the example above, there is just over 2
lines of text on the UFO report of which about 1/2 line is
blacked, for a percentage deletion of less than 25%. Only by





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:43:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO


>>>Of course, if it just appears/disappears, you get nowhere.
>>>Pretty pictures get you nowhere. Even _one_ stereo photo is
>>>worth alot.

>>James:

>>As you know, I am in agreement with you and I am quite miffed as
>>to this allergy Ufology seems to have for the scientific method.
>>At first. I thought it was based on a fear of discovery that
>>might contradict past assertions or current theory. However, I
>>now feel it's more of a matter of getting sidetracked. This is
>>understandable, as the field is heavily populated with fantastic
>>stories, intriguing documentation, and interesting exopolitical
>>posturing. However, following this path can often draw a
>>researcher or enthusiast deep into a wilderness of abstractions
>>where they become lost as to their original destination.

>>Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
>>phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
>>documented proof of such a finding? If so, I would think a
>>relevant question to ask oneself before committing the time,
>>energy and money to a specific research opportunity, might be as
>>follows: Could the information gained from pursuing this
>>particular avenue of research potentially facilitate(or help to}
>>the achievement of the goal as stated above? The truth is, I
>>cannot think of many scenarios where researching events that
>>have already taken place, could provide such evidence.

>Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not
>going to get any substantial funding for instrumentated UFO
>detection and tracking projects without past data of solid UFO
>cases demonstrating the need and the performance characteristics
>of UFOs. Scientific method does not disparage analysis of past
>events.

Brad:

I agree with your statements above. Research of past events does
have merit and in fact should probably constitute the majority
of work done in this field. This is simply due to the fact that
not everyone would have the experience or opportunity to man
what would surely be a very limited number of field lab
locations. (very limited = 0 in our case) Similarly, Astronomers
spend little time actually at the Observatory. However, the
field of Astronomy is always looking to see farther, see more
and increase the granularity of their data. This motivation is
noticeably abscent (or at least misdirected) from Ufology. A
scientific approach with the potential to increase the
granularity of data in this field is readily accessible...
implementation is all that is missing here. Believe me, I am not
suggesting the implementation of one at the exclusion of the
other, because it is that exact scenario that exists in the
"now" which I see as detrimental.

I personally don't have a desire to obtain proof of ETI as a
source of UFO Phenomenon. My goals are more local, but may
indeed involve the same source. In addition, I am by no means an
expert in this field and in fact prior to a year and a half ago,
my only prior interaction/exposure to Ufology consisted of
occasional offerings of sarcastic commentary/mockery in science
discussion forums or in my company cafeteria or lab. This is
just a critique from someone relatively new to this field who
has had exposure to the methodologies used for research and
discovery.by other scientific disciplines

I have come to like/respect many of the people doing research in
this field and I enjoy my interactions with them. Subsequently,
I don't necessarily enjoy the jokes or unfair treatment offered
by media or colleagues regarding Ufology. IMO the implementation
of a Field Research approach has the potential to obtain the
data desired, while also serving to put a more scientific face
on a field that has certain segments which operate under
"different" (kindest possible terminology) less structured
guidlines.

Note: I omitted a link that was referenced as an example in my





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                         Microsoft's UFO Competition

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:52:56 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:44:55 -0400
Subject: Microsoft's UFO Competition


Microsoft's Space Race competition, which invited people to
fake a UFO photo, is now over. Here's a link to the winning
photos:

http://www.msnspacerace.co.uk/

Here's a link to Microsoft's press release:

http://advertising.msn.co.uk/Home/Article.aspx?pageid=171&linkid=1007

Conspiracy theorists had a field day with this, on the basis
that the competition was run by Microsoft, the star prize was
donated by NASA, both competition judges (I was one) had a
Ministry of Defence background, and the PR company was called
Thin Martian:

http://www.thinmartian.com/newdirections.php

Some people genuinely believed this was an official attempt to
gain personal information about ufologists, to get hold of
genuine UFO photographs held privately, or to discredit ufology
by trivialising it. Nothing could be further from the truth.
This wasn't an official venture but a commercial one.

Perhaps all this is encouraging, in a way. It shows that ufology
is not dead, as some have claimed, but is again part of the
Zeitgeist. Witness the fact that The 4400, Invasion, Surface and
Threshold are running simultaneously.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                             They're Here Maybe

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:10:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:10:03 -0400
Subject: They're Here Maybe




Source: Now Magazine - Toronto

http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2005-10-06/news_story8.php

October 6 - 12, 2005


They're Here, Maybe

UFO buffs say soil samples and video prove ETs walk among us
By Stephen Humphrey

A clump of people stand and point, talking excitedly on the
steps of U of T's Convocation Hall, training their eyes on the
space above a pale yellow building to the north, where tiny
things flit about. I see little white dots moving erratically
against clouds. I can only confirm that they are white dots.

"Anyone want to see a UFO?" says a man to the other people on
the steps.

"Have you ever seen a UFO?" asks a guy to my right. Unless I did
just now, I haven't. He tells me he witnessed the Phoenix
Lights.

While the Con Hall Dots are likely not a landmark event in UFO
history, the Phoenix Lights certainly are. On March 13, 1997, a
gargantuan, triangular craft was seen, photographed and
videotaped by hundreds of citizens.

Something bigger than a breadbox was at cruising altitude over
Phoenix for three hours, and got noticed. It's one of the most
corroborated sightings ever. Later there were attempts by the
military to explain they were flares. This is usual. Picture one
of those TV specials where you have an air force colonel
insisting, "Not a shred of evidence."

Sometimes evidence =96 if it so be =96 comes in little piles. Here
at Exopolitics Toronto: A Symposium On UFO Disclosure And
Planetary Directions, held at U of T on September 25, nuclear
physicist and veteran ufologist Stanton Friedman (the original
civilian investigator of the Roswell incident) shows a slide of
two differently coloured soil samples.

"This was thrown in just to show you that there is physical
evidence," says Fredericton-based Friedman, midway through his
lecture. "That's soil, on the left, where the saucer was seen
just above the ground, and normal soil from a few feet away."

Nothing can grow in the landing-site dirt, and it won't absorb
moisture. The sample is from Missouri's Center for Physical
Trace Research, which boasts 3,000 trace collections from 19
countries.

The matter has gone beyond evidence for a number of folks.
"Researchers proved the reality of extraterrestrials 100 times
over beyond any reasonable doubt," fumes keynote speaker Stephen
Bassett in his end-of-day presentation. "It's done, it's proven.
Is it necessary to prove it over and over again?"

Bassett, despite a science education, conducts no research and
identifies himself as an an "exopolitical activist." His cause
is "the 58-year-old imposed truth embargo regarding an
extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race and planet
Earth." Bassett has an officially registered lobby to petition
Congress for open hearings and ran for Congress himself on an
exopolitical ticket in 2000.

"Disclosure" is the new power word. It identifies a galvanizing
moment of exo-activism. In May 2001, physician Steven Greer, an
emergency room director from Virginia and founder of CSETI (The
Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence, not to be
confused with the California-based SETI Institute), trooped into
the Washington Press Club with 20-some individuals who
identified themselves as insiders from military, government and
corporate circles and testified to their involvement in covert
UFO activity =96 recovering crashed saucers, handling reverse-
engineered alien tech and meeting ETs themselves.

Greer's Disclosure Project claims to have upwards of 300 such
witnesses, whose testimony has been captured on video. Greer,
who spoke at OISE in Toronto in May, makes bold claims: ETs
visit on a regular basis and are in regular contact with
branches of government so secret that even sitting presidents
are denied access.

He claims outright that anti-gravity, super-deadly scaler
weapons and zero-point energy exist, full-blown, in secret and
are being withheld by military, industrial and fossil-fuel
interests. "We have not needed fossil fuel, internal combustion
engines, gas, coal, nuclear as a power source since before I was
born," he says.

The linking of alien tech with social justice grips the
imagination of many exo-activists, including symposium co-
organizer Victor Viggiani. "Put this in your article: 28,000
African children a day die of malaria. If we can develop a
technology because of ET contact, if they were to share the
technologies with us, and the government knows about this, the
government is letting those children die."

Ted Loder, a Virginia-based scientist and team member of the
Disclosure Project and Space Energy Access Systems, even claims
he is attempting to reverse engineer alien tech to understand
how it functions. "We've come a long way in understanding some
of these technologies," he says. So far they have "proof of
principle," but nothing ready for rollout.

But Friedman, who's personally sure governments have recovered
saucer wreckage, is skeptical about any government's
UFO-readiness. "There's a big difference between saying aliens
are using more advanced technology than we have and saying the
government has developed free energy that would solve all the
world's energy problems if they weren't keeping a lid on it."
Friedman likens the difficulty of reproducing stuff so advanced
to asking Columbus to reverse engineer a nuclear submarine in
the 15th century.

While Paul Hellyer's act of disclosure is extraordinary
considering he was a former minister of defence, he does not
claim first-hand knowledge of extraterrestrial machines,
although he recalls UFO reports coming to his desk when he was
minister.

An outspoken man even while in office, Hellyer writes and
lectures about his economic ideas. His knowledge of UFOs comes
mostly second-hand, from books like The Day After Roswell =96
although, impressively, he had the cachet to look up the
military men listed in the book to get the straight goods. He
admits such matters didn't cross his mind when he was in office.
"I was too busy trying to streamline the armed forces, improve
morale and save taxpayers' money."

Aside from dedicating a UFO landing pad in St. Paul, Alberta,
during the 67 Centennial, Hellyer's involvement was nil. He did,
however, seem genuinely impressed by the testimony of pilots and
colonels, and the implications of UFO secrecy. "The time has
come to lift the veil of secrecy and let the truth emerge, so
that there can be a real and informed debate about the most
important problem facing our planet today." This got him a
standing ovation.

The day ends with a press conference right after, in room 23.
Hellyer doesn't have much more to say about ETs, but his views
on the inside workings of government tell a lot about why a
veteran politican would buy the notion of an ET cover-up. He
recalls Harper's editor Lewis Lapham's theory of two
governments, the permanent and the provisional, with the work of
those elected always being undone by permanent appointees.

"In effect, permanent government runs things," he says. "We say





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                    'The Greatest Discovery Of All Time'

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:13:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:13:43 -0400
Subject: 'The Greatest Discovery Of All Time'




Source: The Daily Telegraph - London, UK

http://tinyurl.com/dlcu2

05/10/2005


'The Greatest Discovery Of All Time'

The chances are there's life out there, but any messages could
be thousands of years old and indecipherable. Roger Highfield
reports


Aliens are probably common. Because there are billions of
trillions of stars in the cosmos, many astronomers think it
would be highly improbable for Earth to be the only rock to
harbour life.

Whether ET is intelligent is still hotly debated. But no one
doubts that the receipt of a signal from another civilisation
would be Earth-shattering. "It would surely be the greatest
discovery of all time, eclipsing the findings of Newton, Dawin
and Einstein combined," says Prof Paul Davies, a British
cosmologist from the Australian Centre for Astrobiology at
Macquarie University.

"The knowledge that we are not alone would affect people's
psyche, and totally transform our world view," he said during a
visit to Britain last week. "The mere fact alone would be
disruptive. But imagine if we got some serious information from
ET. Then all bets are off about what our future would be."

Prof Davies is among the handful of scientists charged with
thinking through the implications of what to do in the event of
"first contact" with an alien, sitting on one of a clutch of
committees led by Dr Seth Shostak of the Seti (Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute in California.

The hunt for ET's transmissions has proceeded in fits and starts
since 1959, when Cornell University physicists suggested that
extraterrestrial civilisations would find it easier to reach out
across the galaxy with radio waves than pay a visit. Today,
perhaps the best known is being conducted by the Arecibo radio
telescope in Puerto Rico.

Millions of people have signed up for the Seti.nul programme,
downloading a screen saver that analyses Arecibo data for the
University of California at Berkeley.

And a major new alien hunt facility is under construction: the
Allen Telescope Array at the Hat Creek Observatory some 290
miles northeast of San Francisco. The first 42 of a huge array
of 350 small radio dishes are about to go into operation next
month, opening a new ear on the cosmos.

Prof Davies has now become the chairman of the International
Academy of Aeronautics' Post-detection Committee, which includes
his colleague Carol Oliver and the Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin
Rees. "Cynics say it is the best committee to be on because you
don't have to do anything unless ET calls," said Prof Davies.
"That is not entirely true because I intend to spruce up the
protocol and have a few fire drills."

Some years ago, international astronomical societies agreed on
what they call a "Declaration of principles concerning
activities following the detection of extraterrestrial
intelligence", The first step, it says, is to "verify that the
most plausible explanation for the evidence is the existence of
extraterrestrial intelligence rather than some other natural
phenomenon or anthropogenic phenomenon".

Unlike the events shown in the film Contact (in which Jodie
Foster portrays the celebrated Seti researcher Dr Jill Tarter),
"there will be no Eureka moment," according to Dr Shostak.
Instead, there will follow a painstaking process of checking and
verification to discern a hello from the crackle of cosmic radio
waves.

There have been many false alarms. In 1977, the "Wow signal" was
picked up by researchers at Ohio State University, and so named
after a professor scribbled the exclamation next to a printout
of the signal. No one has heard it since.

Another set of rapid pulsing signals caused great excitement,
until they were shown to come from a hitherto unrecognised class
of super-dense rotating neutron stars now known as pulsars.
Other emanations have been traced to automatic garage doors,
satellites and a host of other gadgets. And, of course, there
are hoaxes.

Prof Davies points out that, if a signal is shown to be
authentically alien, it is most likely from a civilisation that
is stupendously advanced compared with our own: by the time we
receive it, it is highly likely that the transmitting
civilisation will be millions of years in advance of us - if it
still survives, of course.

To date, unfortunately "there has been nothing to set the pulse
racing". But if he does suffer palpitations, the protocol says
that the team that discovered the signal should telegram the
International Astronomical Union and the secretary-general of
the UN (as well as their own government). The International
Telecommunications Union in Switzerland should also be alerted;
it has the power to stop transmissions and would be asked to
clear the frequency band that the aliens were using.

The discoverer, the protocol says, should make the announcement
"promptly, openly and widely through scientific channels and
public media". Dr Shostak emphasises there will be no "X-Files-
style cover-up", or pressure from authorities to classify the
discovery. But, of course, there will be endless hand wringing
over how to manage the announcement and what to do about leaks
to the media.

Then comes the question of whether to reply to ET. In April
1989, the trustees of the International Academy of Astronautics
approved a protocol that declared finally: "No response to a
signal or other evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence should
be sent until appropriate international consultations have taken
place.''

One problem is that it is doubtful a response can be drafted in
advance. The nature and wording would depend on the possible
meaning of the incoming message. "It could be an e-mail between
stars that was never intended for us," said Prof Davies. Indeed,
there is much debate about whether an alien culture with
different histories and physical forms will have the same
description of reality at all.

Perhaps ET could invent radio technology without ever developing
the concept of an atom. But it does seem likely she would use
mathematics to advertise her intelligence, given that it is a
universal language. This much was recognised long ago. In the
early 19th century, the mathematician Karl Friedrich Gauss
suggested etching giant geometric figures in the snow of Siberia
as a way of attracting the attention of Martians.

There is, of course, a chance, that an incoming message may be
sent in response to messages extraterrestrials have already
received from Earth. Some of our radio and television from the
Thirties and Forties is just now reaching some of the nearer
stars. What would aliens make of news of Neville Chamberlain's
return from his Munich meeting with Adolf Hitler?

The problem is, however, that these signals have only travelled
around 80 light years, too little for even the most optimistic
Seti sage to raise the chance of meeting up with another
civilisation. We may have to wait millennia for a reply, and
Prof Davies speculates that it would probably come from an
"information processor" that will blur the distinctions we make
today between living organisms and artificial non-living
machines.

But we should not limit our horizons to radio transmissions
alone. Nasa has already shown the way in this respect: elaborate
messages have been put on spacecraft such as the Voyagers now
leaving the solar system, including a record with Earthly sights
and sounds, such as music from Bach to Chuck Berry.

A laser beam could also be used to send a message. Indeed, our
cells may carry one, too, Prof Davies speculates. DNA is mostly
"junk", but what if it contains a message from an ancient alien
civilisation? "We must not close our minds to communication by
quite different means," he said.

Seti is "a glorious but almost certainly hopeless quest", he
admits. But that does not mean it is a waste of time: Seti has
many important spin-offs, not least those that will come from
forcing scientists to grapple with huge issues of what counts as





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                     Human Chosen For Alien Contact Poem

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:18:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:18:44 -0400
Subject: Human Chosen For Alien Contact Poem




Source: The Guardian - Manchest, UK

http://tinyurl.com/a97os

Thursday October 6, 2005


Poem About Being Human Chosen For Alien Contact
by
Michelle Pauli


It is hard to imagine what an extraterrestrial life form might
think if confronted with the words "you're human / they are
human / we are human / let's try to be human / dance!"

Will they break out into an impromptu jig? Or simply wonder what
all this "human" nonsense is about anyway?

Evidently, enough people want to find out. Adrian Mitchell's
poem Human Beings, from which the lines above are taken, has
been voted the poem that most people would like to see launched
into space.

They were responding to a poll conducted by the Poetry Society
for this year's Poetry Day. Just under a thousand people voted
and Mitchell's poem, from his 2004 collection The Shadow Knows,
garnered 30% of the vote.

It was one of eight contemporary poems suggested by the Poetry
Society, although visitors to the website could also vote for a
poem of their choosing. Andrew Motion, the poet laureate,
nominated The Star by George Herbert, Stephen Fry recommended
Robert Frost's Accidentally on Purpose, while the poet Ian
McMillan proposed the opening of Basil Bunting's Briggflatts.

Human Beings will be displayed at the National Space Centre in
Leicester, and the Poetry Society has said that it will continue
"to investigate ways to launch the poem into space". So don't
expect any sightings of boogying aliens just yet.

Adrian Mitchell, who has been writing poetry since the late 60s,
and describes himself on his website as "the shadow poet
laureate", said, "I'm very excited that so many people have
voted for my poem. Human Beings is a poem for peace. It is about
the joy of being human, but that doesn't mean that it's against
animals or alien beings. When it goes into space and it's read
by aliens, I'd hate for them to think that it's anti alternative
life forms."

"If the Martians can translate this and interpret it, it will
give them an interesting view of human nature!" added the
astronomer and presenter Sir Patrick Moore.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                       How To Foil An Alien Abduction

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:13:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:13:45 -0400
Subject: How To Foil An Alien Abduction




Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine - USA

http://tinyurl.com/8mf9o

June 10, 2003


How To Foil An Alien Abduction

You're driving along a dark, deserted road when suddenly a UFO
appears overhead in front of you. You pull over just as a beam
of light radiates from the craft, and you can see five gray-
colored aliens descending in the beam. You get out of your car
for a closer look. Uh-oh! The aliens are rapidly moving toward
you, and you think that you're going to be abducted. What should
you do?

Do not panic.
The extraterrestrial biological entity (EBE) may sense your fear
and act rashly.

Control your thoughts.
Do not think of anything violent or upsetting--the EBE may have
the ability to read your mind. Try to avoid mental images of
abduction (boarding the saucer, body probes, etc.). Such images
may encourage the alien to take you.

Resist verbally.
Firmly tell the EBE to leave you alone. If you're desperate, try
and sell it a life insurance policy--that usually repels humans,
and it may also work on EBEs.

Resist mentally.
Picture yourself enveloped in a protective shield of white light
or in a safe place. Picture the EBE handcuffed and behind bars
or being audited by the IRS. Telepathic EBEs may get the
message.

Resist physically.
Physical resistance should be used only as a last resort. Go for
the EBE's eyes (if it has any). You will not know what its
other, more sensitive areas are.


Based on THe Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook: Travel, by
Joshua Piven and David Borgenicht, c.2001 By Book Soup
Publishing. Used with permission of Chronicle Books, LLC





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                           Alien Bible Translated!

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:23:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:23:42 -0400
Subject: Alien Bible Translated!




Source: Weekly World News

http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/aliens/61249

10/05/2005

Alien Bible Translated!

CARPE DIEM: Their bible instructs alien acolytes on the basics
of worship, including the use of something called "the remote."

By Holly Elise
Religion Correspondent
Boston, Mass.

Weekly World News sources have confirmed that a professor at
Webster University - the birthplace of the world-famous English
dictionary - is in possession of a book that was printed on
another world. What's more, the thick volume isn't a cookbook.

"It's an alien bible," said 41- year-old linguistics professor,
Dr. Emmanuel Johnson, whose skill with foreign languages has
earned him the nickname "Magic." "And wait till you hear who
their god is!"

The book was discovered by construction workers who were on
their lunch break at the 'Big Dig', the city's new interstate
tunnel. While the workers watched TV, the foreman was crushing
soda cans against his massive forehead. When he ran out of them,
he looked for something else to prove he was a hardhead as well
as a hardhat. That was when he saw a large container half-buried
in the earth. He dug it out, struck it hard against his brow and
passed out. The vessel was unharmed but one of the workers
spotted strange writing on the outside. Dr. Johnson was summoned
along with paramedics.

"The first thing I noticed was that the markings were not the
petroglyphs of Native Americans," Dr. Johnson said. "There were
numbers and mathematical signs. One of them almost looked like
the letters UPN and NBC. If I didn't know better I'd have sworn
they were a TV schedule."

The professor looked around the site before he left. "I found
other remnants of an alien presence," he said, "including
luggage and what looked like a door with a little diagram. I
suspect that what the 'Big Dig' crew had found was the remains
of an alien outpost or motel on ancient earth."

Back in his library, Dr. Johnson opened the container.

"Being whacked against the foreman's head had loosened the top,"
Dr. Johnson said. "It popped right off. I began to wonder if, in
fact, that was how the aliens opened containers on their world.
If so, they must have suffered brain damage over time."

Inside, Dr. Johnson found a small, thick book. The cover
illustration showed a constellation that bore the unmistakable
likeness of Oprah Winfrey. Stunned, he opened the book, which
consisted of multicolored, cloth-like materials. The writing
glowed when the professor looked at it.

"It was an illuminated manuscript," Dr. Johnson explained. "I
was immediately able to translate the title, which is called
Their Eyes Are Watching Me. The book was comprised of two
sections: A Sacred Alien Testament: Written and a Sacred Alien
Testament: Oral."

"The Written Testament is the shorter of the two. Apparently,
the aliens didn't like to read much," said Dr. Johnson. "The
text explains that Oprahs exist on many worlds. There are
probably colonies of them throughout the universe, possibly a
Planet of the Oprahs. They all spring from the Oprah who wrote
the alien bible. It is likely that Earth's own Ms. Winfrey is
descended from these beings.

"The Oral Testament actually speaks to the reader," Dr. Johnson
revealed. "Naturally, it talks in the authoritative but
reassuring voice of Oprah.

"It begins with a section called 'Syndication,' which encourages
aliens to do good deeds on other worlds, including the Earth,"
Dr. Johnson continued. "We suspect that the alien visitors who
owned this bible were missionaries, members of Oprah's 'The
Angel Connection.' It instructs acolytes on the basics of
worship, including the use of something called 'the remote.'

"Then there's a section called 'The Boutique' where you can
obtain items like loungewear for worship, mugs for sacred
beverages and caps to show your devotion to the 'Big O' as she
is also called. This is followed by 'The Books of Oprah' which
are a collection of stories and poems she likes. Most of these
were written by an angel named Maya. Next there's a chapter
called 'Ooooo' which is all about the do's and don'ts of sex.
Finally, there's a very thin section on dealing with 'loss' -
weight loss. The foundation of the diet is the consumption of
something called 'stedman graham crackers.' This chapter
contains erasures which suggest that it was once much, much
thicker. "We have only begun to delve into the volume, which is
extremely complex."

Dr. Johnson intends to continue his studies of the alien bible
and the other artifacts from the Big Dig.

"All I can say is I hope the aliens return to Earth," he told
Weekly World News. "They'd be impressed at how much Oprah has
influenced our own culture!"





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                          Crop Circles In Cervantes

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:29:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:29:32 -0400
Subject: Crop Circles In Cervantes




Source: Central Midlands & Costal Advocate - Moora, Western Australia

http://tinyurl.com/82beb

Thursday, 6 October 2005


Crop Circles In Cervantes
Thursday, 6 October 2005

Video footage of bright balls of light forming a crop circle
will be shown to Western Australians during a series of seminars
on the connection between crop circle formation and contact with
alien intelligence.

The seminars, to be delivered by two of world's leading crop
circle and alien contact researchers, Janet Ossebaard and Mary
Rodwell, are the first of their kind in Australia.

Ms Ossebaard, director for the Dutch Centre for Crop Circle
Studies (DCCCS), author and producer of award winning
documentaries on the subject, said crop circles remain an
unexplained enigma.

"What we do know is that crop circles have been reported in many
countries all over the world and found in mediums such as wheat,
barley, canola, grass, corn/maize, trees, ice, rice paddies and
linseed," Ms Ossebaard said.

"We also know they are formed in just a few seconds as a result
of light, sound and magnetism interacting with plants to form
amazing geometric patterns."

"What we don=82t know for certain is who is making them and why."

Ms Ossebaard said contrary to common belief scientists have
found people haven't made the majority of circles.

Many are claimed each year, but only very few are actually man-
made.

In reference to herself, she said that after 11 years of
researching the phenomenon and personal encounters with the
circle makers, she believed crop circles are being formed by an
unknown intelligence with a message for humankind to 'wake-up'.

Ms Ossebaard said she believed crop circles are being formed to
raise our consciousness and to help us evolve emotionally and
spiritually.

"The type of experiences people have after being in crop circles
range from spontaneous healing for chronic ailments through to
heightened psychic abilities," she said.

She said her findings aligned with the extensive work conducted
by world-acclaimed extraterrestrial contact researcher and
Principal of ACERN (Australian Close Encounter Resource Network)
Ms Mary Rodwell.

Ms Rodwell said the connection between crop circles and alien
intelligence did not surprise her.

"Crop circles may be linked to communication at some deep level
of our psyche and be a form of universal language that is
changing us on many levels," said Ms Rodwell.

Ms Rodwell said people with contact experiences become more
psychically and spiritually aware and start operating on a
multi-dimensional band of reality.

"Unbeknown to many people who have contact with alien
intelligence, after contact they exhibit healing abilities and
start drawing and producing unusual scripts, symbols and images
that strongly resemble crop circles," said Ms Rodwell.

Cervantes resident Tony Lambert said he became interested in
crop circles several years ago, which is why he wanted to
sponsor the event.

"Much of the crop formation has been done in the United Kingdom
but hopefully people will bring along their stories of this
phenomenon in Australia," Mr Lambert said.

The Crop Circles and Contact series of seminars is being
sponsored by Cervantes Lodge and will take place in Busselton,
Bunbury, Mandurah, Perth, Gingin, Cervantes, Geraldton and
Kalbarri from 18 to 27 October.

The seminar in Cervantes is on the 26 October at 6:30pm on 26
October. Tickets are $20 and available at the door.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                    Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:02:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:38:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO - Smith


>From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:17:33 -0400
>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

>Copy of a couple of e-mails exchanged off-line that explain
>1) why I made the comment I did in my accidental posting of
>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/oct/m02-014.shtml
>and 2) why Dave and I think Aldrin's comment on the Science
>Channel's "First to the Moon" and the UFO video shown might be
>significant.

<snip>

Nice of you to clarify your position, Jerry. Brad does alot of
good research/work and I have often been surprised at his
abilities to pore through countless pages. I would not have the
patience to do it, preferring to scan them in and doing keywork
searches. Of course there has to be _some_ error rate via
reading or scanning, but at least he has looked at the pages
which most folk have not.

I think the whole issue of the Apollo 11 UFO is that there was
no film or video taken of it, thus its hard to explain what it
is. They had their own theories as their debrief transcript
shows. In the end, it goes no where.

Regarding the film or video that was shown of an additional
ringed "UFO", I have been unable to find it in the Apollo 15 or
17 TV or on-board film. I have looked through some Apollo
12,13,14,16 onboard film and not found it either. I do not have
all of these films though.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 6

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:20:39 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:40:15 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:45 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:36:41 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>Where are the rest of the TOP SECRET+ UFO messages found by
>>the NSA but generated by the CIA and withheld by the CIA?

>>For that matter where are the Navy's UFO files?

>Stan hits the nail right on the head! Where are the Navy's UFO files?
>The Navy has been involved in the UFO mess from day one

<snip>

>Ufologists have let the Navy fly under the radar. Why indeed?


Rich, Stan,

Navies enjoy a special set of circumstances when it comes to UFO
events which have occurred while the vessel was at sea. They
have automatic containment. Even the ships logs are necessarily
hard to access and even then are bereft of detail and laconic in
their  reports.

If a significant UFO or USO event takes place while the vessel
is at sea a large number of the crew would or might be witness
to it. Certainly in this day and age where it might be
considered a threat the fire direction team would be in the loop
as would the crew on watch. Suppose they do see this phenomenon,
what happens then? If it's deemed to be a national security
issue as per whatever SOP is in force at the time, then the crew
is bound by their security clearances and oaths to secrecy which
can be directly enforced due to the closed nature of of
shipboard life.

The event might have a better chance of surviving if it happens
at the latter part of a cruise. Naval operations in most
countries can last from a few weeks to 6 months or more. If the
event happened early in the tour it would likely lose its
significance over the next several months. Consider the time
lost after the cruise when the ship ties up in port. The
families re-unite with the crew, they spend days making up for
lost time and getting back into shore life. It's unlikely that
the first thing that crew members would bring up at home is some
anomalous event that happened at sea several months previously,
and when they do it's at that point only a curiosity and perhaps
second hand information. Later on it will pop up as a war story.
Trying then to get verification of this anomaly from ships logs
has a zero chance of occurring. It's not necessarily the event
itself that might be of issue but all of the other details in
the ship's logs that the public are not allowed access to.

Air force pilots can have an encounter and shortly after confide
in someone while it's still fresh in their minds as is true of
army personnel-another area where there seems to be a scarcity
of reports in my estimation. But the navy has all of their eggs
in one basket. A crew member reports a UFO and where does it go?
First to the defense mechanism aboard ship to be filtered as to
its threat potential. The watch officer is notified as well and
he/she in turn will advise the captain if deemed necessary. If
it just turns into another of those curious events that is not a
threat, there is no attempt at communication with shore for
their edification or advise on how to proceed as would be the
case if there was time during some prosaic threat to the vessel.
The incident is noted and a laconic note is made in the ship's
log. They are notable for their brevity. Example: At 0800 hours,
sighted enemy vessel off Dutchy Head. Engaged and sank same.
Rescued survivors.

Next entry: Engineer advises of hot bearing in starboard engine.

Engine shut down and port engine reduced in revs while repairs
made. Repairs completed-resumed normal revs..or words to that
effect.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:55:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:45:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0300
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:09:44 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>Aren't we forgetting that governments around the world have
>already established three excellent systems for obtaining very
>solid evidence that some UFOs have an ET origin?

No. Most of us know about these systems. Their interesting
bolide reports come to mind. And DMSP images we can order. Be
nice to get DSP ones, but they are not likely to share.

>I see no hope of competing with these systems in terms of
>hardware and manpower.

Who's competing? Our goal should not be to
monitor everywhere (unlike the military who wants to
protect us from invasion/Russians/Chinese/etc). We just
need a few semi- automated data collection stations.

Amateur satellite observers already have these set up to
track/video satellites with telescopes. With two you get
triangulation (which they do not typically do). Of course,
satellites usally have known orbits, unlike UFOs, but it seems a
simple software problem to have a wide field of view computer
camera (and I mean standard quality) to view light motions and
feed that data to the tracking telescope for it to slew into
action. I while ago I gave links on some Japanese software to do
this and I think that with a better camera, such a system may be
adequate for triangulation. It was completely automated.

>Many years ago a request for all
>reports of uncorrelated targets noted by NORAD or ADC
>in a particular 6 month period received the response of "please
>send a certified check for over $100,000, to cover search fees."

That's funny! But I believe it! Probably most the cost is spent
on doctoring...I mean cleaning up the data.

>I think it may be easier to pry this data loose than to
>duplicate all the systems.

We don't need to duplicate their systems since their gold plated
system requirements and required coverage and sensitivities far
exceed anything that is needed for a research study.

Also, if you do "pry" the data out, you will always have the
problem of believing the data. Will they give you data that has
been tampered with, doctored, falsified? We can never be sure.
If they gave you data that showed an alien-ETH type UFO, then
you can be impressed because there is no reason for them to
divulge such data since they have not done so up to this day.

But if they give you lots of data which is muck (radar
ghosts,inversions, bird flocks) and which you can NEVER
correlate since the data is not available to do so, then what is





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Gonzalez

From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:33:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:46:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Gonzalez


>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

<snip>

>When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
>a device which did stop car engines





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:34:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:50:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:07:34 -0400
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:14:59 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>I think that using triangulation instead of
>>traditional stereo distance estimation should be very cheap and
>>more accurate if you have a good baseline.

>The funding being "unlimited" would mean that one could maintain
>a long duration skywatch while paying someone a living wage to
>do do it. Sure triangulation is cheap. What is expensive is
>having someone or som "instrumented machine" available at
>amoment's notice to do the triangulation.

I guess we must disagree with each other. Automated systems
using today's ubiquitous computer technology (not gold plated
military types) are cheap. I personally do not WANT people to be
involved for various reasons (jiggling the camera, human error,
smoke blowing into the lens, and even the far fetched human-
machine PK interactions I have read about as performed by
respectible universities and institutions).

>What would it have taken to acomplish an
>identification in this case? Perhaps a combination of radar
>(distance, if there is a radar reflection)? Large telescope?
>Electromagnetic sensors? Gravitational sensor? Here you are
>talking big bux.

Yes, I agree good equipment along these lines cost alot. Those
are nice "growth" items, especially if you can find a sponsor
(like the SciFi channel!)

>How about hiring an airplane to fly around the Gulf Breeze skies
>very night? The GBRT was criticized for not hiring an airplane.
>Their response: sorry, we can afford to pay once for a camera or
>video camera, but we can't afford to pay for a 5/7 airplane
>watch.

I have wondered what the effectiveness would be of using a
remotely piloted hobbyist helicopter with installed video
camera. Sure these cost more than most people want to pay, but
it would be far cheaper than hiring an airplane. The main
problem is altitude and range I suspect.

>(Radar was also proposed, but no one wanted to fork over
>for a shipboard or other type of civilian radar.)

Always the problem with radar.

>> And did the spectrum match anything?

>This was an experment directed at answering the question: is
>"red Bubba" merely a red road flare hanging from a balloon (or
>motorised blimp or some other support mechanism).

>But, anyway, in Feb. 1992 the GBRT "got it all
>together" and were fortunate to have a diffraction grating in a
>camera when Bubba went by. .....

> So we had the Bubba and flare comparison on one piece of
>film. Analysis of thespectrum showed that they differed. Of
>course they were both predominantly red, but Bubba had more
>blue and green and the flare had more green than blue (if I
>recall correctly).

Am I missing something about spectral analysis but can't one
determine the composition of the emitting light this way? I
mean, Xenon would have one set of spectral lines and Argon
another set and would be additive if both were present. Emitted
and absorbed lines can be matched this way. So if the Bubba
spectra did not match the "flare", was the next step, if any,
taken at figuring out what combination of gases/incandescent
elements/plasmas could generate this Bubba spectra?

>>If the UFO is just
>>going to fly by at a fixed altitude then that does not provide
>>much data to answer the question if it comes from space or not.
>>It would provide other data, but just not what I think is the
>>key question. We must depend on a certain fraction of UFO
>>sightings (maybe small) in which one "takes off" or one appears
>>from a distance and moves to closer proximity. Only these will
>>provide data that they are coming from or going to space.

>What you have written here provides further reason for large
>funding: it requires at least two intrumented sites with some
>separation (mile or more) to allow for accurate distance measure
>up to many miles. Alternatively perhaps a combination of RF and
>laser radar.

Yes, but the large funding requirement I disagree with given
today's computers.

>And these have to be available wherever and
>whenever sightings are occurring.

That is a problem. We rely mostly on witness reports to identify
flap areas. These areas are typically not permenently
"flapping". Still, it MAY be safe to assume a random
distribution of UFOs so perhaps placement of an automated
facility (or more than one) randomly may be adequate, at least
initially. Its funny that some folk have tried to attract UFOs
in various ways, but I doubt that can be counted on (even lasers
in the sky may attract more police than UFOs). Human observers
would lose patience quickly after a few hours of NO UFOs, but
machines can work indefinitely (except for the hopefully
infrequent Windows blue screen) with no complaints. Ideally,
such a location would be out of the main aircraft flight
corridors.

>>Of course, equipment that could measure gravity waves or EMF
>>(radio/magnetic/electric) or sound provide good data, but it
>>really doesn't prove the point of origin.

>I suppose one could answer the question: what do we need to be
>able to identify the UFO or determine where it is coming from.
>Then add up the expenses for equipment and for operation and
>transportation.

Yep, but aim at automation using ubiquitous equipment

>About the Canadian UFO field lab

>This equipment was owned but there wasn't funding to keep it in
>the van and ready to go. Other experiments needed some of the
>equipment so, since there was no $$$ to buy more equipment
>(duplicate what is in the van), the van equipment was
>"cannibalized."

Too bad.

>Find an angel with a 10-20 year attention span, capable of
>keeping things in a state of standby, with "burst funding"
>available (thousands of dollars?) to ship an especially
>instrumented package(or drive a van) to a promising sighting
>area and then to maintain the skywatch at some rate (5/7 ?) for
>weeks or months until there is some 'joy'.

Considering how much all ufologists spend out of their own
pockets during their lives for their research, I think a more





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                   Re: French 1950 Landing Case - Gonzalez

From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:36:10 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:53:02 -0400
Subject: Re: French 1950 Landing Case - Gonzalez


>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:39:36 +0200
>Subject: French 1950 Landing Case

>In the last issue of the Journal of UFO History, Richard Hall
>included a short note about a "French 1950 Landing Case,
>Humanoid Beings Emerged"

<snip>

>Richard, can you give us the date of that "Point de Vue"
>article, and the name of its author?

Richard, now that the situation is clarified and your copyrights





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:02:56 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:20:39 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:45 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:36:41 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>><snip>

>>>Where are the rest of the TOP SECRET+ UFO messages found by
>>>the NSA but generated by the CIA and withheld by the CIA?

>>>For that matter where are the Navy's UFO files?

>>Stan hits the nail right on the head! Where are the Navy's UFO
>files?

>>The Navy has been involved in the UFO mess from day one

><snip>

>>Ufologists have let the Navy fly under the radar. Why indeed?

>Rich, Stan,

>Navies enjoy a special set of circumstances when it comes to UFO
>events which have occurred while the vessel was at sea. They
>have automatic containment. Even the ships logs are necessarily
>hard to access and even then are bereft of detail and laconic in
>their  reports.

<snip>

Well, Don, Stan, and others...

Here's something... if you Google Project Churchy, you'll find a
slew of sites that deal with Navy operations.

One site that shows balloon experiments over the years by the
Navy will provide a Forbidden note, But if you eliminate some of
the paramaters thusly:

http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/Data/

you'll get access to a slew of PDF files that document various
Navy projects that impact, perhaps, the UFO phenomenon.

For instance, continuing to seek substantiation of the
Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle that Zamora saw in 1964, I
discovered some intriguing papers - one that was asked to be
deleted by its author because it scanned badly but which was
quite interesting and another about the death of a Russian
balloon-naut during a test, and one more about two-man platforms
that were tested in the U.S. Southwest circa 1963/1964.

There are papers which will supplement and/or help Nick
Redfern's thesis about balloons attached to airplanes or
helicopters and tested in the U.S. Southwest also.

Now Rudiak, Clark, and certainly Dick Hall will say to me,
provide the papers - document your comments.

I ask that those who want a clue to how some Navy experiments
and projects might have been misunderstood as UFO sightings and
some even were UFO oriented seek out the papers for their
particular interest if any.

The listing, as you can see, is vast, and for me to pick and
choose those that might interest someone would be presumptuous
at best.

My interest - the Socorro episode - is fulfilled, in part, by
perusing the papers found. Others who wish to determine if a
particular sighting was a real UFO or a Navy experiment
misperceived should also be satisfied by a scrutiny of the
papers at the site listed.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                          Secrecy News -- 10/06/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:08:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:29:09 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 10/06/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 95
October 6, 2005


**      SENATE VOTES TO PROHIBIT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES
**      SSCI REPORT ON 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT
**      OPEN SOURCES GET CLOSED AT CIA
**      SELECTED CRS REPORTS
**      SABO ON SSI
**      SECURITY CONTROLS ON FOREIGN SCIENTISTS
**      HANS BETHE IN WAR AND PEACE


SENATE VOTES TO PROHIBIT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES

Defying a White House veto threat, a large majority of the
United States Senate voted in favor of an amendment offered by
Sen. John McCain that would establish uniform standards for the
interrogation of detainees held by the Department of Defense and
prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" of prisoners in
U.S. custody.

In spite of White House opposition, the amendment won the
support of 90 Senators. It was also endorsed in letters from 29
former high-ranking military leaders and former Secretary of
State Colin Powell that were entered into the congressional
record.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), one of the nine Senators who
opposed the measure, explained his position: "I think there is a
place in our operations against individuals involved in the war
on terrorism where we deal with them as they deal with us."

See the October 5 Senate floor debate here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/mccain100505.html


SSCI REPORT ON 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT

The newly released Senate Intelligence Committee report on the
2006 intelligence authorization act presents several initiatives
that would alter the landscape of both foreign and domestic
intelligence collection. See Senate Report 109-142:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/srpt109-142.html

The Committee noted in passing that "Improper classification of
information -- the disclosure of which would not harm national
security -- prevents the public from considering national issues
in light of all publicly available facts." It did not provide
any examples of such information. The Committee further
"strongly recommend[ed]" that the Director of National
Intelligence "examine the guidelines and rules for
classification, and, as necessary, propose standards for the
modernization and simplification of the classification system."

Dissenting views appended to the report exposed some of the
tensions that have divided the Committee.

Committee Democrats harshly criticized the failure to complete
an investigation of pre-war intelligence on Iraq. "The
Committee's delinquency in addressing an issue that it
unanimously voted to address over a year and a half ago has
diminished the Committee's credibility as an effective overseer
of the Intelligence Community," they wrote.

They also noted the Committee's failure to examine the handling
of detainees. "Despite repeated attempts to initiate a detailed
review of fundamental legal and operational questions
surrounding the detention, interrogation and rendition of
individuals held in U.S. custody, the Committee majority has
refused to conduct such an investigation."


OPEN SOURCES GET CLOSED AT CIA

The CIA this month will establish a new unit devoted to analysis
of "open source" intelligence, referring to unclassified
information that is openly and legally collected, Time magazine
reported on August 15.

But at the CIA, even open source material is often treated as
secret.

Last week, the CIA denied a request for a copy of a compilation
of published statements made by Osama bin Laden between 1994 and
2004 on grounds that release of the material would compromise
"intelligence sources and methods" (FOIA exemption b(3)) and
that the material was obtained on a privileged basis (exemption
b(4)). See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/09/cia092705.pdf

But as it happens, the same material will be published next
month under the title "Messages to the World: The Statements of
Osama bin Laden" edited by Bruce Lawrence and published by Verso
(www.versobooks.com).

"Over the last ten years, bin Laden has issued a series of
carefully tailored public statements, from interviews with
Western and Arabic journalists to faxes and video recordings.
These texts supply evidence crucial to an understanding of the
bizarre mix of Quranic scholarship, CIA training, punctual
interventions in Gulf politics and messianic anti-imperialism
that has formed the programmatic core of Al Qaeda," according to
the publisher's announcement.

"In bringing together the various statements issued under bin
Laden's name since 1994, this volume forms part of a growing
discourse that seeks to demythologize the terrorist network.
Newly translated from the Arabic, annotated with a critical
introduction by Islamic scholar Bruce Lawrence, this collection
places the statements in their religious, historical and
political context."

Meanwhile, "In a move mirroring the recruitment process at the
Central Intelligence Agency," an Al Qaeda website is openly
soliciting applicants who can serve as researchers and
linguists, according to a report in the London-based Al Sharq al
Awsat. See "Al Qaeda Website Openly Hiring New Recruits" by
Mohammed Al Shafey, October 3:

 http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=1987

Open Source Solutions (www.oss.net), a proponent of open source
intelligence, reported that Dr. James Billington, the Librarian
of Congress, had rejected an invitation from the Director of
National Intelligence to serve as the first Director of the new
Open Source Agency.


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Reports of the Congressional Research Service recently obtained
by Secrecy News include the following:

"The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan and Enhanced Base Security Since
9/11," October 3, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

"Strategic Mobility Innovation: Options and Oversight Issues,"
April 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32887.pdf


SABO ON SSI

The successful enactment of new limitations on the use of the
"sensitive security information" control marking stems from an
initiative by Rep. Martin Olav Sabo (D-MN), who raised the issue
in the House last spring.

See this May 10 news release on the Sabo amendment which led to
the conference agreement to tighten controls on SSI in the 2006
Homeland Security Appropriations bill (SN, 10/03/05):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/05/sabo051005.html


SECURITY CONTROLS ON FOREIGN SCIENTISTS

For many foreign scientists and engineers, new post-9/11
security controls have created "the perception -- and too often
the reality -- that the United States was becoming an
unwelcoming and increasingly hostile destination," according to
a new White Paper from the Commission on Scientific
Communication and National Security.

"The White Paper explains the importance to the United States
scientific and technical base -- and to U.S. national security
and economic vitality -- of ensuring that foreign students,
scholars, researchers, and technical professionals are able to
visit the United States. It outlines problems that have been
experienced with visa approval and border security processes as
a result of post-9/11 reforms and makes a number of
recommendations for improvement." See:

http://www.csis.org/hs/051005_whitepaper.pdf


HANS BETHE IN WAR AND PEACE

The October issue of Physics Today is devoted to the
achievements of the late physicist Hans Bethe.

In one article, Richard Garwin and Kurt Gottfried recall Bethe
as a scientist-activist.

"Hans Bethe spent a lifetime enhancing the security of his
adopted homeland--initially designing its nuclear bombs, but
ultimately warning presidents and the public to guard against
the hazards of such bombs."

See "Hans in War and Peace" by Richard L. Garwin and Kurt
Gottfried, Physics Today, October 2005:

http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-58/iss-10/p52.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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:09:28 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:45:06 -0400
Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Balaskas


>Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine - USA

>http://tinyurl.com/8mf9o

>June 10, 2003

>How To Foil An Alien Abduction

>You're driving along a dark, deserted road when suddenly a UFO
>appears overhead in front of you. You pull over just as a beam
>of light radiates from the craft, and you can see five gray-
>colored aliens descending in the beam. You get out of your car
>for a closer look. Uh-oh! The aliens are rapidly moving toward
>you, and you think that you're going to be abducted. What should
>you do?

>Do not panic.

<snip>

>Control your thoughts.

<snip>

>Resist verbally.

<snip>

>Resist mentally.

<snip>

>Resist physically.


Hi Everyone!

All the above techniques have been tried in the past with little
or no success in thwarting "alien" abduction attempts. Having a
shotgun may be a better way (eg. The 1955 Kelly-Hopkinsville UFO
alien encounter), but many who have been on this list back in
1997 may remember a technique that was said to always works (see
URL below).


http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1997/aug/d18-003.shtml

FLORIDA TODAY Space Online

For August 17, 1997

Spiritual warfare? Some look to Bible for answers to alien
abductions

By Rita Elkins
FLORIDA TODAY

<snip>

"It makes you wonder: If these beings are extra-terrestrial at
all, why would they respond to that name?" Jordan asks. "We
think we found the answer in the Bible, in Mark 16:17 where
Jesus said, 'In my name, they shall cast out demons.' That seems
to be exactly what we came across."

Three major researchers told Jordan, off the record, that they
had similar cases. But "they were afraid for their credibility,"
he says. "They felt they already had put their credentials out
far enough dealing with extra-terrestrials."

Other "so-called researchers (are) sitting on this information,"
Jordan says. "There's something wrong there. They're just as bad
as the people they say have conspiracies in other ways."

<snip>

Of course, to avoid being abducted, I suspect one needs to do
more than simply believe in Jesus - after all, demons do too. By
asserting to the "aliens" the truth that we are a brother or
sister in Christ (rather than just reciting this as some "magic"
anti-abdcution formula), the aliens will know not to mess with
us since we are under the protection of a superior power in the
universe, God Himself.

If the aliens, demons or whatever these highly intelligent
beings are, all react and respond in this unexpected way during
their failed abduction attempts whenever the name of Jesus is
invoked and UFO/abduction researchers have kept this incredible
fact to themselves, then they have not only done a great
disservice to the public but are actually part of the continuing
UFO cover-up too.

So, do we continue to resist verbally, mentally and physically
or is there indeed a better way to avoid being abducted that
should be made known to all, even at the risk of ridicule by our
more skeptical or non-believing colleagues. If what was written
in this Florida Today article from 1997 is correct, then we may





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:56:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0300
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:09:44 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>Past events provide clues as to likely useful instrumentation.
>>Past events can help in the design of the required resolution
>>and sensitivity and range and speed (slew rate) and quality of
>>the instrumentation and method of using the instrumentation.

>>One can look at each case and ask, "if we had such and such
>>instrumentation instead of eyes and maybe a camera in the UFO
>>case, what could have been accomplished?"

>>But maybe Rob means that ufology has gathered alot of UFO
>>witness data and analyzed some of it and it has not been able to
>>come up with an "answer". So field research is needed to
>>test hypotheses that the past UFO reports/analyses have
>>provided.

>Aren't we forgetting that governments around the world have
>already est ablished three excellent systems for obtaining very
>solid evidence that some UFOs have an ET origin?

>1. Ground radar used to monitor the skies and able to measure
>velocity and direction and probably acceleration of Uncorrelated
>Targets.They call it Air or Aerospace Defense systems such as
>the Joint Canadian-American NORAD.

>2. Sophisticated aircraft carring airborne radar, cameras, other
>devices for measuring velocitires, accelerations, EM and other
>signatures. These can be vectored towards UNKNOWNS established
>by System 1.They can pursue and monitor.

>3. A large variety of military and intelligence Community
>listening posts on the ground and Satellites in the skies such
>as the recently revealed POPPY satellites which monitored
>electronic emissions from Soviet ships.


Stanton:

Your examples and figures above are specifications and budgets
for a global monitoring network. In these largest possible
terms, I agree with all that you say. However, the data in
question is that which occurs as an anomaly within a large
system. One need not spend billions to monitor an entire sytem
if one is lucky enough to observe it locally. Moreover, the data
will be more diverse and granular. Perhaps a more accurate
comparison could be made with weather anomalies such as
tornadoes. In such a case, billions in satellite and Doppler
radar would be nice, but the best data to be collected is from
local measurements taken on site.

Obviously, there is merit to your(and others) efforts to shake
this information from this rather well established bureaucratic
tree of information. This should continue, but decades of
shaking has failed to produce the release of this fruit that
lies securely attached in a snarl of the highest branches of
government. In addition, data collected from the fruit that has
fallen is conflicting and certainly not Gospel by any stretch.
When your past crops have been infected with disinformation and
inaccuracies, can you pick out one from the infected bunch and
proclaim it to be the uninfected fruit? Personally, I think that
data stream has been polluted and I will always consider the
past before I determine whether to drink from that source.

I'm sure you have a theory as to the source of the legitimate
UFO phenomenon. What is missing is the quality data to support
this assertion. This data is presenting itself for brief periods
in certain instances around the globe. I am not advocating a
billion dollar global monitoring network that attempts to
capture this data from the largest possible area. Such a system
is obviously impractical. I'm saying that this field should
capitalize on its strengths, which is access to a data set of
current and past reports, taking advantage of the research from
them. The resulting reports that are generated from the
appearance by an anomaly should not just be archived, but
utilized especially in terms of spacial trends. I happen to
reside near a site in which I am contributing to a research
effort geared more toward studying environmental anomalies. In
doing so, opportunities as described above have presented
themselves on several occasions and I am merely mentioning it
here. We have had most of the instruments mentioned in this
thread(ELF, GAMA, IR, Microwave instruments) and have recorded
anomalous activity. I would be happy to share this off-list if
there is interest.

While this type of instrumentation is certainly expensive, it is
not to an extent that makes it impractical. I've personally
p;purchased a Parabolic Sound amplifier/recorder, Night Vision,
2 35mm cameras (one spectral), a 24 hr surveillance system with
advanced notification and a telescope with imaging capabilities
for under $500 from our local Police Auctions. I guess one drug
dealer's misfortune is another researchers shopping spree. Add
another three or four more expensive pieces of equipment for
around $7000(excluding laptop) or so and you have a quality
monitoring station. In addition, there are people interested in
this subject who are willing to donate time and instruments. For
example, we were having severe problems with battery drains in
instruments left or used at the site. This was a curiosity that
was causing some headaches. We had the idea to try and turn this
headache into a functional data set. As a result, we have a
person who is donating/designing three small portable electric
power monitors. They are simple instruments consisting of power
supplies with some electronics that measures the level of
available power from the power supply every 15 seconds or so and
sends that info via signal to a receiver near by. Now we should
be able to potentially correlate any power drains to
fluctuations in other data





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:11:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:59:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 16:26:32 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>>From: James Smith
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:55:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>>Subject: Re: Armstrong & Aldrin's UFO

<snip>

>>>As you know, I am in agreement with you and I am quite miffed as
>>>to this allergy Ufology seems to have for the scientific method.

<snip>

>>>Is the goal of Ufology to positively identify the source of this
>>>phenomenon and obtain the evidence necessary to provide
>>>documented proof of such a finding? If so, I would think a
>>>relevant question to ask oneself before committing the time,
>>>energy and money to a specific research opportunity, might be as
>>>follows: Could the information gained from pursuing this
>>>particular avenue of research potentially facilitate(or help to}
>>>the achievement of the goal as stated above? The truth is, I
>>>cannot think of many scenarios where researching events that
>>>have already taken place, could provide such evidence.

>>Instead of disparaging past events, consider that you're not
>>going to get any substantial funding for instrumentated UFO
>>detection and tracking projects without past data of solid UFO
>>cases demonstrating the need and the performance characteristics
>>of UFOs. Scientific method does not disparage analysis of past
>>events.

>Brad:

>I agree with your statements above. Research of past events does
>have merit and in fact should probably constitute the majority
>of work done in this field. This is simply due to the fact that
>not everyone would have the experience or opportunity to man
>what would surely be a very limited number of field lab
>locations. (very limited = 0 in our case) Similarly, Astronomers
>spend little time actually at the Observatory. However, the
>field of Astronomy is always looking to see farther, see more
>and increase the granularity of their data. This motivation is
>noticeably abscent (or at least misdirected) from Ufology. A
>scientific approach with the potential to increase the
>granularity of data in this field is readily accessible...
>implementation is all that is missing here. Believe me, I am not
>suggesting the implementation of one at the exclusion of the
>other, because it is that exact scenario that exists in the
>"now" which I see as detrimental.

<snip>

>...IMO the implementation
>of a Field Research approach has the potential to obtain the
>data desired, while also serving to put a more scientific face
>on a field that has certain segments which operate under
>"different" (kindest possible terminology) less structured
>guidlines.

I have to agree with Stan Friedman here in his post on this
thread. The US government has billions of dollars of sensors and
satellite systems providing global coverage of the entire earth,
including oceans and ice caps, out to space on a 24/7 basis. No
limited UFO "field lab" can possibly match that kind of all-
encomapssing coverage. It has been tried before and simply does
not result in spectacular scientific breakthrough data. At best
it proves that an unconventional object or phenomenon had been
tracked having unconventional performance and/or configuration.

We already have plenty of that kind of data from the Army's
UFO tracking network at the Site B National Nuclear Stockpile
nuclear weapons depot at Camp Hood, Killeen, Texas, in 1949,
from the AF's Holloman AFB-White Sands missile tracking network
put on UFO alert and then extended with the Project Twinkle
special monitoring contract in 1950-1, from the Colorado Project's
hushed up discovery of 16 unexplained UFO cases that correlated
with the Smithsonian's meteor tracking camera photos in 1965-7
(which was suppressed from the Condon Report though discoverable
by analysis of the data that was left in, as I did), from Harley
Rutledge's UFO sighting network in the early 70's, from Ray
Stanford's Project Starlight instrumentation station in the late 70's.

The AF has been at this for almost 60 years now. The AF realized
early on that anecdotes were next to worthless. Hence on July 28,
1952, the AF adopted a semi-secret policy (some of it spilled out in
the press but not the whole explanation and secret development) to
henceforth deemphasize or reject non-technical anecdotal sighting
reports and to emphasize instrument data instead.

This is why Blue Book baffled UFO researchers for so many years
with its lackadaisical attitude to most UFO reports -- it was an
explicit policy enacted on a specific date for a specific reason
which the AF was not going to share or explain despite some of
the reasoning having already leaked out or been partially revealed
(e.g., by Gen Samford at his famous press conference on July 29,
1952). There were TOP SECRET development plans behind it all.

There was a broader shift in all of AF's "intelligence methodology"
based on a SECRET compartmented MIT study, beyond just UFO
intelligence, which stressed the need to stop wasting intelligence
analysis resources on anecdotes in any area (not just on the UFO
subject) and on "pattern analysis" of garbage data, but instead
focus on instrument data. The AF realized that ground stations
just were not enough, not enough coverage of the earth.

A typical UFO is about 30 feet (10 meters) in size according to
Vallee's research. For it to be photographed with at least a Full
Moon in angular size so enough detail can be resolved to have a
chance to identify it or solidly categorize it as unexplained it will
have to come within about 1/2 mile of the UFO "field lab." Some
UFOs are larger but it does not extend of the volume of space
covered by more than by a few miles and the average will remain
the same.

Sometimes scientists contribute their own misunderstandings to
the mess. A number of astronomers kept urging the AF to put
diffraction gratings on cameras to try to get spectra of UFOs.
These astronomers mistakenly failed to grasp the fact that gratings
work on tiny point sources or small angular sized objects such as
stars and distant galaxies but do not work on large extended
objects because the whole extended image is diffracted thus
smearing any spectra or spectral lines. The AF Photographic
Reconnaissance Lab tested diffraction gratings in June-July 1952
and discovered the smearing effect rendering gratings useless.
Yet because of pressure from ill-informed astronomers the AF
went ahead with the "Videon spectra camera" fiasco in 1953-4,
which was really a PR gimmick to assure the public the AF was
doing something "scientific" on UFOs (the real TOP SECRET
work not being subject for discussion or disclosure).

If a UFO would just hold perfectly still at a great distance so its
pinpoint of light can be diffracted into a spectrum why then
everything would work great! But if it stayed perfectly still and
was so far away it was just a star-like pinpoint how would we
even know it was a UFO in the first place?

Also a spectrum doesn't tell you squat unless there are any
emission or absorption lines to be detected. If I recall
correctly a spectrum was obtained on a green fireball circa 1950
and Bruce Maccabee got a spectrum at Gulf Breeze in the 80's and
in both cases they were continuous emissions, no lines. (Bruce
correct me if I'm wrong.)

Hence a "UFO field lab" can only really cover about 1 cubic mile
of volume. Whereas the earth has about 400 billion cubic miles
of volume out to 2,000 miles altitude. At random your "UFO field
lab" has only 1 chance in 400 billion of catching a UFO. UFO
"hot spots" develop occasionally as for example New Mexico from
1947 to 1952 but since then there have been very few repetitions
that can be documented or none where there is an indisputable
record that the area was a true "hot spot" rather than merely an
area where UFO activity was higher than random, just not high
enough to justify continually running a "field lab."

The best bet outside of the US government sensor systems is
Peter Davenport's Passive Radar system which could use radio-tv
broadcasts radio waves and cell phone tower transmissions to
cover virtually an entire volume of space out to possibly 2,000
miles if I understand the plan correctly. One station could thus
cover a volume of space of about 25 billion cubic miles or about
6% of the near-earth region as I have defined it (up to 2,000
miles altitude). The fact that some or all UFOs can use stealth
concealment applies to both the visual and radio parts of the EM
spectrum and yet we still have UFOs that are radar tracked and
seen and photographed optically.

As for the question that was raised about what trackings of UFOs
entering the earth vicinity or leaving into space can possibly
tell us consider that Stanford astronomer Peter Sturrock has
found an interesting concentration of UFO incidents possibly
emanating from (or going towards) 21 hours Right Ascension
(Jacques Vallee and I have both critiqued this result on various





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: French 1950 Landing Case - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:01:44 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:17:24 -0400
Subject: Re: French 1950 Landing Case - Hall


>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>,
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:36:10 +0200
>Subject: Re: French 1950 Landing Case

>>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:39:36 +0200
>>Subject: French 1950 Landing Case

>>In the last issue of the Journal of UFO History, Richard Hall
>>included a short note about a "French 1950 Landing Case,
>>Humanoid Beings Emerged"

>>Richard, can you give us the date of that "Point de Vue"
>>article, and the name of its author?

>Richard, now that the situation is clarified and your copyrights
>have been preserved, would you please answer my original
>question?


Luis,

I published all the information I had on the case, from a file
card prepared by the members of Civiliam Saucer Investigation of
New York (Isabel Davis, Ted Bloecher, Lex Mebane) 50+ years ago.

If as some people seem to be suggesting the case turned out to
be a hoax, I request that someone submit a letter to the editor
that I can print to correct the record in the Journal of UFO
History.

However, it needs to be more than someone's personal opinion.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                  Australian UFO Sightings May To July 2005

From: Glennys Mackay <glenmack60.nul>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:28:27 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:43:38 -0400
Subject: Australian UFO Sightings May To July 2005


[Net delayed delivery --ebk]

Greetings,

I thought you may like some updates of sightings here in
Australia, May - July 2005.

This collection has been put together of recent sightings from
various Australian UFO Groups and with their permission I am
forwarding on this report to you..

Thanks to Queensland UFO Research, Brisbane Australia.


Regards.
Rev. Glennys Mackay J.P.
National Director MUFON,

-----

Australian UFO Sightings

May - July 2005

Heidelberg West - Preston, Victoria
Circa 1974, 10:30 pm - 12pm
The witness and two friends were riding their mini-bikes around
various football ovals near Darebin Creek, Heidelberg West and
Preston, opposite Northland Shopping Centre. The weather was
fine and still with a bright near full moon and thin transparent
cloud. When they stopped riding at about 10:30 p.m. they noticed
what appeared to be a large star sized light to the east, above
the Housing Commission flats on Liberty Parade. He thought to
himself that it did appear to be an unusually bright star so
near the horizon.

They went for another ride and when they returned, the light had
moved to the left, using the roof of the flats as a reference
point. The light appeared to be yellowish and larger. He
mentioned this to his friends and they took mental note as well.
After yet another ride, they returned to find that the light was
getting noticeably bigger and brighter, as though coming toward
them. They joked and said, "Its probably a UFO." He thought that
it might have been a helicopter, but for the strange lack of
noise.

By this time, the light was shining on the football ovals and
they panicked. They raced their bikes into nearby long grass and
hid behind adjacent trees. The light was rectangular in shape,
and vertically positioned about 150 to 200 feet above the
ground. While still hoping that the light was from a helicopter,
but being acutely aware that there was still no noise, he
watched it travel horizontally at about 35 km/h in a westerly
direction, over Darebin Creek, and then it appeared to gently
rise up and over the Northland Shopping Centre. They finally
lost sight of it about midnight as it descended from sight
behind the shopping centre. Once they felt sure that it had
gone, they jumped onto their bikes and rode home in a state of
shock. Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin,
Victoria

Perfect Circle Over Ingle Farm, South Australia
December 31, 2000. 9.30pm.5 minutes duration.
"The objects didn't move for a short time. It was like they were
having a meeting. Then no1 took off to the right followed by no
2 -then 3, 4 and 5 moved slowly in different directions. ThenI
couldn't see them. The lights were clear as day but when they
vanishedI think it was due to the cloud. This is why it was hard
to tell the distance. WhenI saw these objects,I felt hypnotised.
I have never seen anything like that in my life. It was kind of
wonderful and peaceful.It was like staring at a picture.I wishI
took a photo of this sighting."
Source: Australian International Flying Saucer Research Inc.
Adelaide, South Australia.

Unusual CraftsOver Wild Horse Plains, South Australia
December 18, 2004. 3.45am
(the followingis an excerpt from a larger report) "We were on
our way back from Hawker after spending two days looking for
fossils.It wasabout 3.45amwhen Robert and Istopped offat
PtWakefield to fuel up. We travelled down the road stopping at
Wild Horse Plains tocheck out the stars saying it would be nice
to see something strange to top off a good trip, when there was
a streak of light behind us in the next paddock. At first we
thought it was a car coming up from behind, then it appeared
again this time in a sporadic motion as bright as the moon.

It seemed to move at rapid rate, now in the paddock right along
side of us shifting direction, now coming straight at us in a
bright flickering glowinglight which came within 100mtrs before
darting off ina north west direction at a rapid pace but still
close to ground level. After seeing the strange light we thought
we better get back out onto Pt Wakefield Rd to head
home.Travelling down the road furtherwe both saw with amazement
what looked like a craft of some sortabout 1000 metres away on
the left hand side. We were both dumbfounded.

From that distanceit seemed to be at least 3 stories high, white
and shaped like a large hamburger.On the bottom appeared to be a
bright red dome with a glowaround it. Aquarter of the way up
from the bottom of the craftwere flashing lights that went right
around the craft and seemed to be recessed into it. Thelights
were the size of normal household windows and theyflashed on and
off in sequence. Theyranged in colours fromyellow, red, white,
orange, green and blue.On top of the craft appeared to bebright
metallic fluorescent-blue building blocks, staggered to
different heights right across the top.It was like looking at a
circus carousel or the main big top.

Directly across the other side of the roadon the right hand side
paddock atabout 800mtrs was another craft, a lot smaller and
completely different. At this stage it became a bit overwhelming
and our hearts started beating quite fast. This second craft
wasthe shape of a bright white candle flame which seemed to have
soft and undefined edges, you could say even a glow. Directly
below the craft was a dome orball of bright orange-red light
with an aura surrounding it. Between half and three quarters the
way down the main body of the craft was a ring surrounding the
entire craftlike the ring around Saturn. It was quite wide with
a bright yellow-white mixtureagain aura-like or some type of
energy field. Itwasalso at house level and both were moving in
the same direction at the sametime in a unified formation.

Still travelling down Pt Wakefield Rd and doing our sanity
check, wekept an eager eye on both sides of the car whileboth
craft followed at the same pace in a parallel motion, not
getting any closer but not movingaway either. Robert and I knew
that there was a farmhouse and a patch of thick scrubland ahead.
Knowing the rough distance between both craft we speculated the
objectsshould disappear behind upcomingfarms and dense tree
lines at alternate times.With a sense of relief they did just
that. It was now 5am.

The objects reappeared not long after, still at the same
distance, still parallel and heading in the same direction. We
both knew there was a road coming up on the left hand side
heading to Mallala. As we approached it,to our amazement with
the heckles standing up on our back, the biggest and brightest
of the craftcrossed over the road and with it a glow that
equalledthe brightest neon sign with flashing lights.At that
moment we both got spooked, planted the foot yet still couldn't
shake the craft.

We knew this was something extraordinary that we were seeing
butthe disturbing thing was that the objectsseemed to be
followingour every movement. We knew we were about to turn off
to head into Two Wells and on a collision course with the bigger
craft becausewe would have to cross it's path when heading down
the Gawler to Two Wells Rd. Once we were heading to our
destination both craftdisappeared so we pulled over for a breath
of fresh air andgo overwhat had happenedthe last30 klms."
Source: Australian International Flying Saucer Research Inc.
Adelaide, South Australia.

Basket-shaped Object Over Cowandilla, Adelaide,
South Australia
January 24, 2005. 9.10pm 4 minutes duration.
"The white light was flashing every 5 cm from our view of the
sky.The craft was later spotted at 10pmmoving north, this
timethe light was not flashing it just stayed on and didn'tturn
off. The craft rotated 360 degrees. Ourtwo dogs were getting
weird runninground in small circles and barking."
Source: Australian International Flying Saucer Research Inc.
Adelaide, South Australia.

Airshow Sighting, Avalon, Victoria
March 10, 2005. 12pm Midday
The observer reports that he was at the Avalon 'Airshow 2005' in
March, when he captured on videotape, frames of what appear to
be objects buzzing an F16 Falcon, which had flown at about
midday or just after, and an FA18 Hornet that had flown about
one hour later. The objects appear as white orbs in the frames
of the video, particularly in those involving the FA18 Hornet.
The strange thing about these pieces of footage is that he had
not noticed anything unusual until about four weeks after the
air show, even though he had watched the video numerous times at
his home. On one Saturday afternoon he was showing it to
friends, and that's when he noticed the objects.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria.

Silent Star-like Objects, Wyangala, NSW
March 12, 2005. 10pm
The reporting observer was fishing with one other on the
Wyangala Dam, which is relatively near Cowra, when they noticed
the activities of an unusual formation of bright white lights in
the clear north-western sky, at an elevation of about 45 degrees
above the horizon. What appeared to be four bright star-like
objects silently travelling vertically past a stationary star,
were giving the illusion of the stationary star falling between
the formation of four brighter stars. The four could be seen for
a good twenty seconds before disappearing from sight in the
north-western sky.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria.

Yellow Lights In A Rectangle, McDowall, Brisbane
April 3, 2005. 6pm
A man was looking north when he saw a pale star from which six
yellow lights emerged. They remained contained within a
rectangular shape as he watched them for 15 seconds, then they
shot away into the south-west.
Source: UFO Research Queensland Inc, Brisbane, Queensland.

Circular Object Over Water, Deception Bay, Queensland
Reported April 4, 2005. Occurred a few years ago.
A young woman was looking out her window at the water when she
saw a bright orange light that lit up the water. Then she saw a
circular object appear lifting up from the water which had an
opening similar to a door. She was unsure whether it had
appeared from under the water or was hovering just above the
water. It then took off and faded off into the distance.
Source: UFO Research Queensland Inc, Brisbane, Queensland.

Looping Objects, Holland Park, Brisbane
Reported April 4, 2005. Occurred 29.3.05. 11.45am
A woman was sitting with her husband and baby at the Moonlight
Noodle Bar and was looking at a plane in the sky. She then saw a
star-like object that was dark grey like ?black balloons? in a
bunch. It seemed to change shape and when she looked more
closely at it, it appeared to be more saucer-shaped. There were
about 20 smaller objects scattered around a central object. They
did loops around each other before receding into the distance.
Source: UFO Research Queensland Inc, Brisbane, Queensland.

Multicoloured Flashing Beacon, Dunkeld, Victoria
April 10, 2005.10:30pm
On a fine, calm, dry, clear night, while the reporting observer
was standing outside of her front door, watching the night sky
as she does on a regular basis, her attention was caught by
something that initially confused, and then excited her. She
felt that she was watching something that she had never seen
before.

It appeared to be a small, almost stationary but possibly
revolving on the spot, multicoloured flashing beacon in the
western sky, at an elevation of about 45 degrees above the
horizon, and about the relative size of Venus. She indicated
that she believes that this was not an aircraft, and estimated
that it was at least five kilometres distant.

During the hour that she watched it, it flashed blue, red, and
white, as it appeared to move very slowly over a large tree,
toward a large shed to the left of the tree, a relative distance
of about two inches at arm's length, and then it suddenly
vanished. She indicates that both her husband and son also saw
this object. Since this sighting, she has had at least five
similar sightings, and on each occasion, the weather was very
clear and the object always vanished at the same location before
12:00 p.m. midnight.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria.

4 Pairs Of Lights, Ingle Farm, South Australia
April 23, 2005. 10:40pm
When he first saw the bright orange objects in the fine clear
night sky, at an elevation of about 25 to 30 degrees above the
horizon' the reporting observer noticed that there were four
pairs in total. They were flying silently from the north to the
south, at a distance of approximately 500 metres, and were about
100 to 200 metres above the ground. Each appeared to be about
the size of a car, and eye shaped.

He went and got his wife soon after he first saw the objects,
and the two of them could not believe what we were watching.
They also phoned their neighbours and got them out to see the
strange objects. Later, he got his camera and took some
photographs of the objects.

One object from the first pair flew off by itself, and the
remaining seven went into a formation. He estimated that the
formation moved to about one kilometre away. The whole event
lasted for approximately ten minutes and the objects just got
duller and duller until they could no longer be seen. They did
not appear to fly away, just slowly dim out.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria.

Triangle With 3 Big Spheres, Marsden, Queensland
April 25, 2005. 10.10pm
A man was walking home from the shop when he reached the i/s of
Bourke St and Chambers Flat Rd and saw a large triangle in the
sky above him. It had three big spheres underneath it and three
lights with big grids under each light. The object made no noise
and blocked out the sky and moonlight as it passed overhead. The
lights were a creamy-yellow with low luminosity. The witness
estimated the object was about 1000? (300m) overhead and he
could see lights from the ground glowing underneath the object
as it moved away. He estimated that he observed it for 3
seconds.
Source: UFO Research Queensland Inc, Brisbane, Queensland.

Shiny Object, Maleny, Queensland
May 1, 2005. 4pm
A man was at the look-out at Maleny looking towards the
Glasshouse Mountains when he saw an object come in from the
ocean at high speed. It was shiny, but not dark, and moved at
the speed of a Cessna airplane. It moved across the sky in front
of the mountains and when it came to a particular spot it took
off vertically into the sky and disappeared.
Source: UFO Research Queensland Inc, Brisbane, Queensland.

11 Weaving Circular Lights, Ferntree Gully, Victoria
May 13, 2005. 10pm
While at the corner of Edina Road and Wattletree Road, Ferntree
Gully, the observer's attention was caught by the unusual
movements of eleven bright orange-yellow lights in the southern
sky, at an elevation of about 25 degrees above the horizon. The
night was fine and mild, and there was little or no cloud in the
sky. He was excited and intrigued at seeing something that he
could neither identify nor explain.

Each of the circular lights was about four times the size of one
of the largest stars, and while he initially thought that they
might have been aircraft, their silent movements were unlike
those of any aircraft he had seen before. They seemed to be
travelling with the speed of an airliner, one behind the other,
weaving around almost like the movement of a snake.

When the line split into a set of five lights, and another of
six, he unsuccessfully attempted to use his mobile camera phone
to photograph the six, and in doing so lost track of the five.

As he watched, the remaining six continued to move from the
south toward him, and changed into a rectangular or diamond
shaped formation immediately above him.

From this point, they moved in a roughly north-easterly
direction until reaching the mountain ranges, at which point
they commenced gaining altitude, and continued to recede until
between five to ten minutes had elapsed from first sighting,
when they could no longer be seen.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, South Australia

9 Bright Yellow Lights, Ferntree Gully, Victoria
May 13, 2005. 10:45pm
The reporting observer and her son, who was in the passenger
seat, were heading home from a friend's place when they both
noticed nine bright yellow lights in the clear northern sky.

At first they thought that the lights were on a mountain, but
she then realised that their observation point was not close
enough to the mountain for this to be the case.

She pulled her vehicle over near the Clyde Street, Burwood
Highway intersection, and they stood in the cold atmosphere and
watched the lights for about ten minutes. The lights were moving
in the northern sky where they gradually, one by one, faded and
disappeared. Initially, they were much brighter than the stars,
and there was no noise to suggest that there were any
helicopters or planes in the vicinity.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria

Orangey-Yellow Light Over Sale, Victoria
May 14, 2005. 9:45pm
The reporting observer indicates that during the night he saw
something that was unlike anything he had seen before. He lives
in Sale, Victoria where, at about 21:45 hours on

Saturday the 14th of May, he had just taken his dog outside
before going to bed, and noticed a strange orangey yellow light
off to the north. The light looked like a star, but was the
wrong colour, and much too big. A white shooting star shot
across the sky going from the east to the west, but he did not
watch it for long, as the yellow light was so unusual. It was
moving rapidly toward Sale, in a southerly direction.

Without knowing the actual size of the light/ object, he could
not determine its altitude for sure, but his best guess was
about 10,000 feet. He also estimated that its speed was in the
order of hundreds of miles per hour, and noticed that no noise
could be heard. As the light got closer to Sale, it slowed until
it stopped to the south of his house (over the main part of
Sale), and then started to rise slowly.

He called his girlfriend out and they watched it as it climbed
and slowly moved back to the north, until it disappeared from
sight. It did not follow the curvature of the earth as it
travelled north. It just seemed to get higher and further away.
As a holder of a current private pilot's licence who has flown
light aircraft, helicopters, gliders, hang gliders and
ultralights, and has been involved in one way or another with
the RAAF since 1978, having worked on Mirage fighters, he is
prepared to say that this was no aircraft that he has ever seen
before.

Additionally, he also once lived next to the Williamtown RAAF
Base in NSW where the F18 Hornets are based, and two weeks ago
FIlls were based here in Sale. Encountering this unusual light
was truly a bizarre experience for him.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria

Cigar-shaped Object, Mulgrave, Victoria.
May 19, 2005. 4:45pm
While at work in Mulgrave, on a fine clear afternoon, the
observer clearly saw in the northern sky what he described as a
cigar shaped object/streak moving quickly further northward.
After about 15 minutes, he could no longer see the object. While
he did not think that the object was a cloud, as there was
little wind, and the object was moving quickly, he is keen to
know if anyone else reported seeing this object.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria

Orange Light Over Prospect, Tasmania.
May 23, 2005. 6:20pm
While observing the slightly clouded north-eastern sky, the
reporting observer and one other noticed a very bright orange
light, which appeared to be larger than the stars, and moving
rapidly across the sky from the northeast to the southwest,
probably five times faster than an aircraft. They first thought
that it might have been a satellite burning up, but it was below
the cloud level, moving very fast, with no smoke trail, and
producing no noise. Within one or two minutes, it had travelled
straight toward the southwest until lost from sight.
Source: Victorian UFO Research Society, Moorabin, Victoria

2 Orange Lights, Ipswich, Queensland
June 3, 2005. 10pm
A woman and her two adult children were about to get into their
car when they saw two brilliant orange lights, barely moving in
the sky. They observed them for about 5 minutes, then the lights
stopped and moved quickly away. When they reached their
destination in Rosewood the witnesses saw a stationery red light
with a tail. About the size of a walnut at arm?s length, it
hovered for 10 minutes before moving away quickly, disappearing
in a few seconds.

Police Report And Orange LightsOver Wonthaggi June 19, 2005.
approx 9:20pm While relaxing at home after a family trip,as
usual I was checking for phone messages and monitoring the
emergency services on my radio (being a member myself). All of a
sudden it came over the radio, that police on patrol had sighted
three extremely bright orange lights in a straight-line
formation, moving parallel with the coastline at Kilcunda, about
half a kilometre out to sea, heading towards Wonthaggi.

At this stage, the conversation between the police patrol and
the base station was becoming quite hurried and excited, with
the exchange of words of description, location, and speed of the
objects etc. ... I immediately went outside to the front porch
with my wife and two children to observe the sky.

Three intensely bright orange lights were travelling towards us
from Kilcunda, at an altitude of 1,500 to 2,000 feet, just below
the level of the cloud base. The three lights could only be
described as like car headlights on high beam, on a highway
whilst driving at night at approximately one kilometre away, or
closer. There were no actual beams of light, and no features
could be discerned, except for the lights. Their estimated speed
was approximately 200 kilometres per hour. The night was cold
and a low cloud base apparent, with absolutely no wind, and no
sound could be heard as they passed directly overhead.

Had it not been brought to my attention, I would not have
realised that they were present. Approximately thirty seconds
later, a fourth light, similar to the others appeared, following
behind them. The total duration of the sighting from start to
finish was approximately two minutes, and all of these objects
disappeared into the clouds over the Cape Patterson area.

These lights were witnessed by several emergency service
workers, and members of the public.I have been informed that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Microsoft's UFO Competition - Cammack

From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:25:16 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:46:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Microsoft's UFO Competition - Cammack


>From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:52:56 +0100
>Subject: Microsoft's UFO Competition

>Microsoft's Space Race competition, which invited people to
>fake a UFO photo, is now over. Here's a link to the winning
>photos:

>http://www.msnspacerace.co.uk/

<snip>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:28:00 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:22:12 -0400
Subject: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down


I think this is going to cause a few problems in some quarters.

Raymond Czechowski, the man charged with the death of Dr. John
Mack in September 2004 while driving a car and under the
influence of alcohol was today sentenced at Wood Green Crown
Court in north London to 15 months imprisonment. He has also
been disqualified fom driving for 3 years and will have to take
an extended driving test in order to get his licence back.

Americans need to understand that prison sentences in the UK are
generally more lenient than in the States but nevertheless, this
does seem to be a somewhat soft term. I think I am correct in
saying that he would be elegible for parole after serving just a
third of his time in prison, which makes the whole thing even
more ridiculous.

However long a sentence this man does or doesn't serve is not
going to bring Dr. Mack back but one has to ask what kind of
example this sets to the rest of the community. While I'm
completely ignorant of what mitigating circumstances were
presented to the court on Mr. Czeckowski's behalf, I am sure
that he presented a tragic figure etc. etc.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:04:09 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:36:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:49:25 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>...One need not spend billions to monitor an entire sytem
>if one is lucky enough to observe it locally. Moreover, the data
>will be more diverse and granular. ...

>Obviously, there is merit to your(and others) efforts to shake
>this information from this rather well established bureaucratic
>tree of information. ...Personally, I think that
>data stream has been polluted and I will always consider the
>past before I determine whether to drink from that source.

>What is missing is the quality data to support
>this assertion. ...I am not advocating a
>billion dollar global monitoring network that attempts to
>capture this data from the largest possible area. Such a system
>is obviously impractical.

I agree with you generally except that I do not know about
enhanced granularity. I like to think in terms of enhanced
fidelity. By granularity do you mean seeing more different
_kinds_ of measurements?

It is somewhat alarming to note the resistance in actually doing
UFO field research. There must have been some calculations
(internalized or not) that it is just not worth the effort. This
kind of defeatism is disturbing and essentially sounds the death
knell of the whole UFO field as a serious scientific endeavour.
Depending on "secret" data, government doled-out at that, is
hopeless in my opinion.

>... we were having severe problems with battery drains in
>instruments left or used at the site. This was a curiosity that
>was causing some headaches. We had the idea to try and turn this
>headache into a functional data set. As a result, we have a
>person who is donating/designing three small portable electric
>power monitors. They are simple instruments consisting of power
>supplies with some electronics that measures the level of
>available power from the power supply every 15 seconds or so and
>sends that info via signal to a receiver near by. Now we should
>be able to potentially correlate any power drains to
>fluctuations in other data streams.

It is interesting that this battery draining effect seems to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Reed

From: Reed Hall <tanaleaf.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:38:00 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:41:52 -0400
Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Reed


>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:09:28 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:45:06 -0400
>Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Balaskas

<snip>

>Hi Everyone!

>All the above techniques have been tried in the past with little
>or no success in thwarting "alien" abduction attempts. Having a
>shotgun may be a better way (eg. The 1955 Kelly-Hopkinsville UFO
>alien encounter), but many who have been on this List back in
>1997 may remember a technique that was said to always works (see
>URL below).


>http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1997/aug/d18-003.shtml

>FLORIDA TODAY Space Online

>For August 17, 1997

>Spiritual warfare? Some look to Bible for answers to alien
>abductions

>By Rita Elkins
>FLORIDA TODAY

<snip>

>"It makes you wonder: If these beings are extra-terrestrial at
>all, why would they respond to that name?" Jordan asks. "We
>think we found the answer in the Bible, in Mark 16:17 where
>Jesus said, 'In my name, they shall cast out demons.' That seems
>to be exactly what we came across."

>Three major researchers told Jordan, off the record, that they
>had similar cases. But "they were afraid for their credibility,"
>he says. "They felt they already had put their credentials out
>far enough dealing with extra-terrestrials."

>Other "so-called researchers (are) sitting on this information,"
>Jordan says. "There's something wrong there. They're just as bad
>as the people they say have conspiracies in other ways."

<snip>

>Of course, to avoid being abducted, I suspect one needs to do
>more than simply believe in Jesus - after all, demons do too. By
>asserting to the "aliens" the truth that we are a brother or
>sister in Christ (rather than just reciting this as some "magic"
>anti-abdcution formula), the aliens will know not to mess with
>us since we are under the protection of a superior power in the
>universe, God Himself.

>If the aliens, demons or whatever these highly intelligent
>beings are, all react and respond in this unexpected way during
>their failed abduction attempts whenever the name of Jesus is
>invoked and UFO/abduction researchers have kept this incredible
>fact to themselves, then they have not only done a great
>disservice to the public but are actually part of the continuing
>UFO cover-up too.

>So, do we continue to resist verbally, mentally and physically
>or is there indeed a better way to avoid being abducted that
>should be made known to all, even at the risk of ridicule by our
>more skeptical or non-believing colleagues. If what was written
>in this Florida Today article from 1997 is correct, then we may
>have finally discovered the identity of the more mischievous
>"alien" abductors - a truth that will set us free!

>Nick Balaskas

David Jacobs has pretty effectively debunked this notion that
it's possible to thwart impending abductions and ward off the
abductors by prayer, or by invoking the name of Jesus, or the
like.  Jacobs has discussed cases he's investigated in which an
abductee will recall the beginning of an abduction event (for
instance, the sudden appearance of small grey entities), in
response to which the abductee begins to pray, to invoke Jesus,
or to otherwise appeal to divine protection, at which point the
entities do indeed seem to depart.

However, upon further investigation (e.g., deeper probing of the
abductee's repressed memory under hypnosis), it becomes evident
that the abductee initially recalled only the beginning (the
arrival of the abductors) and the ending (their subsequent
departure) of a complete and un-thwarted abduction event. Their
prayer (or calling upon Jesus or what-have-you) had no effect
whatsoever, and a full abduction event proceeded; the abductee,
recalling only the beginning and ending of the event, was left
with the impression that the aliens had been rebuked and
repelled by the name of Jesus, when in fact nothing of the sort
had occurred, and a complete abduction event had transpired





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:44:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:46:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:11:32 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>I have to agree with Stan Friedman here in his post on this
>thread. The US government has billions of dollars of sensors and
>satellite systems providing global coverage of the entire earth,
>including oceans and ice caps, out to space on a 24/7 basis.
>No limited UFO "field lab" can possibly match that kind of all-
>encomapssing coverage.

Why should it try to? We are not building a defense network! If
we were just getting one UFO every ten years in the atmosphere,
then I would agree that one lousy site is stupid, but I am under
the impression that the rate is much much higher.

>It has been tried before and simply does
>not result in spectacular scientific breakthrough data.

Limited UFO filed labs have generated data of interest but have
been reported publicly yet. Project Hessdalen intensive
localized field research is focused on likely only one subset of
UFOs, probably the types most of us are not interested in.

>At best
>it proves that an unconventional object or phenomenon had been
>tracked having unconventional performance and/or configuration.

>We already have plenty of that kind of data from the Army's
>UFO tracking network at the Site B National Nuclear Stockpile
>nuclear weapons depot at Camp Hood, Killeen, Texas, in 1949,
>from the AF's Holloman AFB-White Sands missile tracking network
>put on UFO alert and then extended with the Project Twinkle
>special monitoring contract in 1950-1, from the Colorado Project's
>hushed up discovery of 16 unexplained UFO cases that correlated
>with the Smithsonian's meteor tracking camera photos in 1965-7
>(which was suppressed from the Condon Report though discoverable
>by analysis of the data that was left in, as I did), from Harley
>Rutledge's UFO sighting network in the early 70's, from Ray
>Stanford's Project Starlight instrumentation station in the late 70's.

Good data (albeit old)! No doubt about it! What killed it? Are
you telling me that showing that UFOs come from and go to space
on a consistent basis would not be meaningful to the UFO
community at least and definitely to the public?

>The AF has been at this for almost 60 years now. The AF realized
>early on that anecdotes were next to worthless. Hence on July 28,
>1952, the AF adopted a semi-secret policy (some of it spilled out in
>the press but not the whole explanation and secret development) to
>henceforth deemphasize or reject non-technical anecdotal sighting
>reports and to emphasize instrument data instead.

Good. Anecdotes _are_ of limited value. They are just canaries
in the mine.

>This is why Blue Book baffled UFO researchers for so many years
>with its lackadaisical attitude to most UFO reports -- it was an
>explicit policy enacted on a specific date for a specific reason
>which the AF was not going to share or explain despite some of
>the reasoning having already leaked out or been partially revealed
>(e.g., by Gen Samford at his famous press conference on July 29,
>1952). There were TOP SECRET development plans behind it all.

Okay, so _their_ data would not be available. Typical.

>There was a broader shift in all of AF's "intelligence methodology"
>based on a SECRET compartmented MIT study, beyond just UFO
>intelligence, which stressed the need to stop wasting intelligence
>analysis resources on anecdotes in any area (not just on the UFO
>subject) and on "pattern analysis" of garbage data, but instead
>focus on instrument data. The AF realized that ground stations
>just were not enough, not enough coverage of the earth.

Fine for listening in on enemy communications, ship movements,
etc. No problem! UFOs really don't even enter into it.

>A typical UFO is about 30 feet (10 meters) in size according to
>Vallee's research. For it to be photographed with at least a Full
>Moon in angular size so enough detail can be resolved to have a
>chance to identify it or solidly categorize it as unexplained it will
>have to come within about 1/2 mile of the UFO "field lab." Some
>UFOs are larger but it does not extend of the volume of space
>covered by more than by a few miles and the average will remain
>the same.

Not really. You must ask yourself if you even HAVE to resolve it
to the level you want. Actually, you don't (unless that is the
goal of the field lab). A bare bones system would have two or
three automated cameras looking straight up (with no great
resolving power but which can at least pick up nocturnal lights,
some of which may be UFOs). The three sites image data can be
examined using triagulation to determine which lights go from
low altitude to space-like altitude. If the UFO was behaving
like an aircraft or satellite, then the field lab can't tell.
But for UFOs that go to or come from space, then triangulation
should make that obvious. Of course, nicer cameras (more
sensitivity/resolution) would be better. It depends on how much
to spend and computing power.

>Sometimes scientists contribute their own misunderstandings to
>the mess. A number of astronomers kept urging the AF to put
>diffraction gratings on cameras to try to get spectra of UFOs.
>These astronomers mistakenly failed to grasp the fact that gratings
>work on tiny point sources or small angular sized objects such as
>stars and distant galaxies but do not work on large extended
>objects because the whole extended image is diffracted thus
>smearing any spectra or spectral lines.

Ha! That's true!

>The AF Photographic
>Reconnaissance Lab tested diffraction gratings in June-July 1952
>and discovered the smearing effect rendering gratings useless.
>Yet because of pressure from ill-informed astronomers the AF
>went ahead with the "Videon spectra camera" fiasco in 1953-4,
>which was really a PR gimmick to assure the public the AF was
>doing something "scientific" on UFOs (the real TOP SECRET
>work not being subject for discussion or disclosure).

Lame.

>If a UFO would just hold perfectly still at a great distance so its
>pinpoint of light can be diffracted into a spectrum why then
>everything would work great! But if it stayed perfectly still and
>was so far away it was just a star-like pinpoint how would we
>even know it was a UFO in the first place?

The key here is to be able to use the telescope to home in on
the "UFO". This costs a little more, but would essentially be
tied to the lower resolution automated camera. The automated
camera would have alot of targets usually (depending on the
threshold the user defines as a "UFO", and whether the airspace
above the camera is in a major flight corridor or whether the
space above has alot of satellite action). But for every frame,
once a "UFO" meets/crosses the threshold (brightness), then that
data can be sent to the telescopic tracker. With a fast enough
slew rate and tight feedback between the sighting camera and
telescopic control, it should be possible to aim the diffraction
grating adequately or just resolve the object better. Of course,
logic must be built in to stop the slewing from moving all over
the place when multiple targets are seen.

>Also a spectrum doesn't tell you squat unless there are any
>emission or absorption lines to be detected. If I recall
>correctly a spectrum was obtained on a green fireball circa 1950
>and Bruce Maccabee got a spectrum at Gulf Breeze in the 80's and
>in both cases they were continuous emissions, no lines. (Bruce
>correct me if I'm wrong.)

True. But even _that_ is a good signature even though it tells
little about the operation or origin or composition.....

>Hence a "UFO field lab" can only really cover about 1 cubic mile
>of volume. Whereas the earth has about 400 billion cubic miles
>of volume out to 2,000 miles altitude. At random your "UFO field
>lab" has only 1 chance in 400 billion of catching a UFO. UFO
>"hot spots" develop occasionally as for example New Mexico from
>1947 to 1952 but since then there have been very few repetitions
>that can be documented or none where there is an indisputable
>record that the area was a true "hot spot" rather than merely an
>area where UFO activity was higher than random, just not high
>enough to justify continually running a "field lab."

And I thought I was a pessimist! So you are telling me that I
can only look up into the sky 1 mile! How come I can see
satellites at 200-500 miles? And I can see a jet aircraft (at
altitude) tens of miles away? Sorry Brad, but your figures and
rationale are faulty. But perhaps they can be useful to
discourage any unvetted data from being generated in the field.

>The best bet outside of the US government sensor systems is
>Peter Davenport's Passive Radar system which could use radio-tv
>broadcasts radio waves and cell phone tower transmissions to
>cover virtually an entire volume of space out to possibly 2,000
>miles if I understand the plan correctly. One station could thus
>cover a volume of space of about 25 billion cubic miles or about
>6% of the near-earth region as I have defined it (up to 2,000
>miles altitude).

The volume of space covered is pure conjecture, although it may
be able to reach the ionosphere.

This passive radar system sounds nice, but as I have pointed out
before, has many problems and limitations. I think the chances
of it being implemented are at least 100000 to 1 (simply based
on national security limitations).

>The fact that some or all UFOs can use stealth
>concealment applies to both the visual and radio parts of the EM
>spectrum and yet we still have UFOs that are radar tracked and
>seen and photographed optically.

Yes, but if a UFO is only seen using radar, how can we say it
really was there? At least if you see the damn thing, you can
feel a little better about its reality. Radar UFOs may be flukes
of the mechanism or inversions or bee swarms or atmospheric
oddities. Tracking a radar UFO as it goes into space does tend
to indicate it may not be these things, but optical confirmation
is required for it to mean something.

>As for the question that was raised about what trackings of UFOs
>entering the earth vicinity or leaving into space can possibly
>tell us consider that Stanford astronomer Peter Sturrock has
>found an interesting concentration of UFO incidents possibly
>emanating from (or going towards) 21 hours Right Ascension
>(Jacques Vallee and I have both critiqued this result on various
>grounds but let's assume for the moment the result is valid.).
>Perhaps the analysis of specific sighting reports can give us





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:04:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 18:00:30 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:20:39 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>Here's something... if you Google Project Churchy, you'll find
>a slew of sites that deal with Navy operations.

>One site that shows balloon experiments over the years by the
>Navy will provide a Forbidden note, But if you eliminate some
>of the paramaters thusly:

>http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/Data/

>you'll get access to a slew of PDF files that document various
>Navy projects that impact, perhaps, the UFO phenomenon.

Or, in other words, balloons are commonly mistaken for UFOs.
What an original concept. Unfortunately, Rich is over 50 years
late with this idea. Balloons as the official explanation date
clear back to the Kenneth Arnold and Roswell era. In 1951, yet
another story came out that Naval balloons probably accounted
for all UFO sightings. How little things change.

>For instance, continuing to seek substantiation of the
>Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle that Zamora saw in 1964, I
>discovered some intriguing papers - one that was asked to be
>deleted by its author because it scanned badly but which was
>quite interesting and another about the death of a Russian
>balloon-naut during a test, and one more about two-man
>platforms that were tested in the U.S. Southwest circa
>1963/1964.

And how does any of this explain the specifics of Socorro?

>There are papers which will supplement and/or help Nick
>Redfern's thesis about balloons attached to airplanes or
>helicopters and tested in the U.S. Southwest also.

In June/July 1947? Or 20 years later? Is this another one of
those time travel explanations, like the Air Force's crash
dummies from the future to explain Roswell bodies?

>Now Rudiak, Clark, and certainly Dick Hall will say to me,
>provide the papers - document your comments.

Yes indeed, those awful Rudiaks, Clarks, Halls, etc. will demand
you back up your usual handwaving with something of actual
substance.

>I ask that those who want a clue to how some Navy experiments
>and projects might have been misunderstood as UFO sightings
>and some even were UFO oriented seek out the papers for their
>particular interest if any.

>The listing, as you can see, is vast, and for me to pick and
>choose those that might interest someone would be presumptuous
>at best.

Rich Reynolds usual dodge. The truth is supposedly out there,
but everybody else is supposed to find it for him. God forbid he
should actually be specific about anything.

>My interest - the Socorro episode - is fulfilled, in part, by
>perusing the papers found. Others who wish to determine if a
>particular sighting was a real UFO or a Navy experiment
>misperceived should also be satisfied by a scrutiny of the
>papers at the site listed.

Reynolds seems to be unclear on the concept of documentation.
When writing a paper, you don't reference an entire library and
tell the readers to search it. You reference specific books and
journal articles within it that supposedly support your
hypothesis.

Comprehende? No, probably not.

Oh dear, I've probably offended old Rich yet again with this
post and he'll write another nasty blog on his web site
attacking me. That seems to be about as specific with his
"research" that he ever gets.

>There are a plethora of Navy projects that need investigation:
>Banshee and Surveyor, among others.

Since it is scientifically impossible for a "balloon" of any
kind to account for the Socorro sighting (for many reasons
already pointed out by the Rudiaks, Hatches, Maccabees, etc. but
which others just don't get), I don't know why any rational
person would waste their time on another of Reynold's pointless
fishing expeditions.

Has anybody else noticed that Reynold's and his rrrgroup are
always promising solutions manana for classic UFO cases, but





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 7

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:37:51 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 18:11:26 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:20:39 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>Well, Don, Stan, and others...

>Here's something... if you Google Project Churchy, you'll find
>a slew of sites that deal with Navy operations.

>One site that shows balloon experiments over the years by the
>Navy will provide a Forbidden note, But if you eliminate some of
>the paramaters thusly:

I believ the thread was about the scarcity of reported Navy UFO
reports.

>http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/Data/
>you'll get access to a slew of PDF files that document various
>Navy projects that impact, perhaps, the UFO phenomenon.

>For instance, continuing to seek substantiation of the
>Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle that Zamora saw in 1964, I
>discovered some intriguing papers - one that was asked to be
>deleted by its author because it scanned badly but which was
>quite interesting and another about the death of a Russian
>balloon-naut during a test, and one more about two-man platforms
>that were tested in the U.S. Southwest circa 1963/1964.

>My interest - the Socorro episode - is fulfilled, in part, by
>perusing the papers found. Others who wish to determine if a
>particular sighting was a real UFO or a Navy experiment
>misperceived should also be satisfied by a scrutiny of the
>papers at the site listed.

Your inability to come to grips with the physics of the Socorro
case is your undoing,Rich. Give it up. It will never fly anymore
than a 270 cubic foot envelope [that being the approximate size
of an automobile at the time] being able to carry aloft a couple
of smaller adults plus the cabin.

Work with this. 1,000 cubic feet to lift a bare 60 pounds off
the ground. Add on the rest of the weight. You can do the rest.

You are going to end up with a gas lifting vehicle of about 70
feet in diameter. That's a far cry and ridiculous stretch of a
car sized object reported by Zamora.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

               Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Groff

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:34:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:47:03 -0400
Subject: Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Groff


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:28:00 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down

>I think this is going to cause a few problems in some quarters.

>Raymond Czechowski, the man charged with the death of Dr. John
>Mack in September 2004 while driving a car and under the
>influence of alcohol was today sentenced at Wood Green Crown
>Court in north London to 15 months imprisonment. He has also
>been disqualified fom driving for 3 years and will have to take
>an extended driving test in order to get his licence back.

>Americans need to understand that prison sentences in the UK are
>generally more lenient than in the States but nevertheless, this
>does seem to be a somewhat soft term. I think I am correct in
>saying that he would be elegible for parole after serving just a
>third of his time in prison, which makes the whole thing even
>more ridiculous.

Sometimes sentences here (if any) can also be too lenient.

A friend of mine was killed by a drunk driver who was going the
wrong way on a freeway off-ramp. She was killed instantly. The





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:37:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:50:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:44:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:11:32 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>I have to agree with Stan Friedman here in his post on this
>>thread. The US government has billions of dollars of sensors and
>>satellite systems providing global coverage of the entire earth,
>>including oceans and ice caps, out to space on a 24/7 basis.
>>No limited UFO "field lab" can possibly match that kind of all-
>>encomapssing coverage.

<snip>

>>There was a broader shift in all of AF's "intelligence methodology"
>>based on a SECRET compartmented MIT study, beyond just UFO
>>intelligence, which stressed the need to stop wasting intelligence
>>analysis resources on anecdotes in any area (not just on the UFO
>>subject) and on "pattern analysis" of garbage data, but instead
>>focus on instrument data. The AF realized that ground stations
>>just were not enough, not enough coverage of the earth.

>Fine for listening in on enemy communications, ship movements,
>etc. No problem! UFOs really don't even enter into it.

That is not what the AF thought, that UFO's "really don't even
enter into it." The AF considered it fully applicable to the UFO
problem and developed its anti-anecdotes policy based on the MIT
study, which was repeatedly given briefings on UFO's, by Ruppelt
and Col. Adams.

>>A typical UFO is about 30 feet (10 meters) in size according to
>>Vallee's research. For it to be photographed with at least a Full
>>Moon in angular size so enough detail can be resolved to have a
>>chance to identify it or solidly categorize it as unexplained it will
>>have to come within about 1/2 mile of the UFO "field lab." Some
>>UFOs are larger but it does not extend of the volume of space
>>covered by more than by a few miles and the average will remain
>>the same.

>Not really. You must ask yourself if you even HAVE to resolve it
>to the level you want. Actually, you don't (unless that is the
>goal of the field lab). A bare bones system would have two or
>three automated cameras looking straight up (with no great
>resolving power but which can at least pick up nocturnal lights,
>some of which may be UFOs). The three sites image data can be
>examined using triagulation to determine which lights go from
>low altitude to space-like altitude. If the UFO was behaving
>like an aircraft or satellite, then the field lab can't tell.
>But for UFOs that go to or come from space, then triangulation
>should make that obvious. Of course, nicer cameras (more
>sensitivity/resolution) would be better. It depends on how much
>to spend and computing power.

You're ignoring the realities of past UFO detection and tracking
networks that I listed, most of which were optical/photographic.
At acknowledged UFO "hot spots" such as New Mexico in 1947-52
there were hundreds of genuine unexplained UFO sightings by
visual observers and radars yet the networks only caught several
of them. That's on the order of 1% of a high UFO occurrence
rate. Today we have a low UFO occurrence rate, meaning no flaps
no "hot spots." Where would you put a UFO "field lab"? Anywhere
some Area 51 nutball told you was a "hot spot"? That's a
prescription for bitter disappointment.

<snip>

>>Hence a "UFO field lab" can only really cover about 1 cubic mile
>>of volume. Whereas the earth has about 400 billion cubic miles
>>of volume out to 2,000 miles altitude. At random your "UFO field
>>lab" has only 1 chance in 400 billion of catching a UFO. UFO
>>"hot spots" develop occasionally as for example New Mexico from
>>1947 to 1952 but since then there have been very few repetitions
>>that can be documented or none where there is an indisputable
>>record that the area was a true "hot spot" rather than merely an
>>area where UFO activity was higher than random, just not high
>>enough to justify continually running a "field lab."

>And I thought I was a pessimist! So you are telling me that I
>can only look up into the sky 1 mile! How come I can see
>satellites at 200-500 miles? And I can see a jet aircraft (at
>altitude) tens of miles away?

You _know_ they're satellites and aircraft already, you don't
need Full Moon angular size to tell what they are. They "behave"
and conform to conventional profiles. To prove something is a
real UFO you have to have enough resolution to reliably
distinguish an unconventional shape or three-dimensional data to
prove an unconventional maneuvering or high-speed or high-
altitude performance. Radar is automatically 3-D data. Optics
and cameras are basically 2-D. Only if you can develop a system
that will perform accurate real-time stereo triangulations of
optical targets will you have something comparable to the
simplicity of a radar. Until that time radar will be superior
for a ground site. And a Passive Radar system that can reach
2,000 miles will be superior to any ground radar limited by
horizon line-of-sight to say 100-200 miles, especially since it
can "peek" down below the horizon (since broadcast radio waves
fill virtually every space above ground now and it doesn't take
much to receive and amplify an over-the-horizon signal bounce).

The Passive Radar can drive a telescopic camera to zero in on
actual unconventional targets. But without the Passive Radar the
telescopic cameras will not be able to distinguish fireflies
from a few hundred feet away from meteors hundreds of miles
away.

<snip>

>>The best bet outside of the US government sensor systems is
>>Peter Davenport's Passive Radar system which could use radio-tv
>>broadcasts radio waves and cell phone tower transmissions to
>>cover virtually an entire volume of space out to possibly 2,000
>>miles if I understand the plan correctly. One station could thus
>>cover a volume of space of about 25 billion cubic miles or about
>>6% of the near-earth region as I have defined it (up to 2,000
>>miles altitude).

>The volume of space covered is pure conjecture, although it may
>be able to reach the ionosphere.

Meteor trackers apparently do it.

>This passive radar system sounds nice, but as I have pointed out
>before, has many problems and limitations. I think the chances
>of it being implemented are at least 100000 to 1 (simply based
>on national security limitations).

Are they going to shut down all the 50,000 watt radio and tv
trabsmitters and the cell phone transmitters because of
"national security"?? The radio waves are out there bouncing off
various objects and all we have to do is have the receivers and
the signal processing computing power to distinguish the Doppler
shifting of high-speed or high-altitude maneuvering objects and
filter out normal aircraft, etc. Anyone can receive these
signals and do wahtever. I don't see how "national security" can
stop it anymore than it can stop what goes out over the
Internet.

Frankly the idea that terrorists are going to spend years trying
to make sense out of a mass of flight data from a Passive Radar
system for some obscure purpose seems absurd to me. We're only
looking for a few unconventional trajectories - they would be
looking at literally millions of flight data points and for
what? The data won't identify flight numbers. Terrorists would





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

               Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 19:16:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:52:12 -0400
Subject: Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Boone


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:28:00 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down

>I think this is going to cause a few problems in some quarters.

>Raymond Czechowski, the man charged with the death of Dr. >John
>Mack in September 2004 while driving a car and under the
>influence of alcohol was today sentenced at Wood Green >Crown
>Court in north London to 15 months imprisonment. He has also
>been disqualified fom driving for 3 years and will have to take
>an extended driving test in order to get his licence back.

<snip>

>If the Crown is unhappy with the sentence handed down, they >are
>able to appeal against it, to get it raised. I have no idea if
>they plan to do this, though I suspect not.


Rage!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:36:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:54:14 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:04:30 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>Since it is scientifically impossible for a "balloon" of any
>kind to account for the Socorro sighting (for many reasons
>already pointed out by the Rudiaks, Hatches, Maccabees, etc. but
>which others just don't get), I don't know why any rational
>person would waste their time on another of Reynold's pointless
>fishing expeditions.

>Has anybody else noticed that Reynold's and his rrrgroup are
>always promising solutions manana for classic UFO cases, but
>somehow manana never comes? If Reynold's has a winning hand,
>then he should show it. All else is bluff.

David:

I hope you don't read and interpret other things as wrongly as
you've read and interpreted my post here.

I offered the site for those who might want to check sightings
against the documentation found there.

Some might enjoy the papers by J.Allen Hynek about astronomy and
balloons.

Bluff? Where's the bluff?

I made no point other than I found some papers that might be
helpful in my scrutiny of the Socorro episode. I don't think
balloons acccount for Zamora's sighting but there are peripheral
Navt projects which might.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:55:52 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:37:51 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no basis in fact.

Don:

Those familiar with the work of Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell
know that myth is the real truth.

That aside, the Socorro craft has not been adequately
identified, despite David Rudiak's insistence otherwise.

Pursuing my folly is not a felony or sin. Providing the Navy
database was only to show Listers that there are sites where
they might find an explanation for sightings overlooked because
they were Navy caused or Navy hidden.

Since the Zamora sighting is still an open question -- for some
anyway, it seems prudent or interesting perhaps to check it out
thoroughly, unless one thinks that it has already been
thoroughly vetted.

That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the eye





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                   Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 21:01:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 07:58:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Maccabee


>rom: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>T>o: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:34:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:07:34 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>> And did the spectrum match anything?

>This was an experment directed at answering the question: is
>"red Bubba" merely a red road flare hanging from a balloon (or
>motorised blimp or some other support mechanism).

>But, anyway, in Feb. 1992 the GBRT "got it all
>together" and were fortunate to have a diffraction grating in a
>camera when Bubba went by. .....

>So we had the Bubba and flare comparison on one piece of
>film. Analysis of thespectrum showed that they differed. Of
>course they were both predominantly red, but Bubba had more
>blue and green and the flare had more green than blue (if I
>recall correctly).

Am I missing something about spectral analysis but can't one
determine the composition of the emitting light this way? I
mean, Xenon would have one set of spectral lines and Argon
another set and would be additive if both were present. Emitted
and absorbed lines can be matched this way. So if the Bubba
spectra did not match the "flare", was the next step, if any,
taken at figuring out what combination of gases/incandescent
elements/plasmas could generate this Bubba spectra?

You can see my report on the "spectrum sighting" and the
spectrum itself at:

http://brumac.8k.com/GulfBreeze/Bubba/GBBUBBA.html.

Scroll down past 1990 and 1991 sightings (including
triangulation and infrared film photos) to the section labelled
"A UFO is a UFO and a Flare is a Flare"

Clearly one could take a "next step" and try to figure out what
would be the composition of a light source that would have tht
spectrum. I presume some pyrotechnic composition could do it,
but I would have no way of finding out. The literature did
provide an "official Navy" spectrum of a red flare and,
remarkably, it agreed with the spectrum of the flare in Gulf
Breeze, but not the spectrum of Bubba.

Of course, if there is a "pyromaniac" out there who can create
pyrotechnic compositions other than the standard red flare
composition (red comes from strontium) perhaps that person can





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

               Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 06:18:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 09:44:08 -0400
Subject: Re: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down - Hatch


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:28:00 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: John Mack Case Sentence Handed Down

>Raymond Czechowski, the man charged with the death of Dr.
>John Mack in September 2004 while driving a car and under the
>influence of alcohol was today sentenced at Wood Green Crown
>Court in north London to 15 months imprisonment. He has also
>been disqualified fom driving for 3 years and will have to take
>an extended driving test in order to get his licence back.

<snip>

Hello all

I don't know much about British law, except that it is almost
universally respected. The US legal system is modeled after it,
much to our betterment in the states.

I don't have any details of the proceedings, but feel confident
they took everything into consideration.

Nobody would suppose that Czechowski intended Mack any harm for
one thing. Its possible he was distracted, trying to get from
one bar to another before they all closed maybe. 15 months in a
British Gaol is no walk in the park. It doesn't sound
excessively harsh nor lenient to me, all things considered.

Regardless, the thought of hurting or killing somebody scares
enough sense into me that I do most of my pub-crawling at home.
There are no saloons within easy walking distance from here. The
Oldsmobile shuts down when the bar opens, period.

If I write something idiotic or off the wall at times (Saturdays
usually), including this, its because my personal home pub on
Jeter Street has a computer. I beg your forgiveness while I
indulge, more or less safely.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:18:48 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:37:51 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no basis in
>>fact.

>Don:

>Those familiar with the work of Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell
>know that myth is the real truth.

<snip>

>Since the Zamora sighting is still an open question -- for
>some anyway, it seems prudent or interesting perhaps to check
>it out thoroughly, unless one thinks that it has already been
>thoroughly vetted.

It has been thoroughly vetted where the balloon theory is
concerned. That's my point.

>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the eye
>disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass prescrption, shows
>that the episode needs more than it has received.

Wishful thinking. So he lost his glasses while he was running.
He'd already seen the craft and the "two little men" before
that-hence the description-then bumped into his own car while
running away from some blast of exhaust as the thing took off. I
wear glasses but could still fly my plane from Halifax to
Vancouver without them if it came to it. I doubt his
prescription for the glasses was very strong if he was still
working as a police officer. And there's nothing to stop you
from finding out what "eye desease" [nice attempt there at
diversion-sounds much worse than say "near sighted"] that Lonnie
had.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:37:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:12:56 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the eye
>>disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass prescrption, shows
>>that the episode needs more than it has received.

>Wishful thinking. So he lost his glasses while he was running.
>He'd already seen the craft and the "two little men" before
>that-hence the description-then bumped into his own car while
>running away from some blast of exhaust as the thing took off. I
>wear glasses but could still fly my plane from Halifax to
>Vancouver without them if it came to it. I doubt his
>prescription for the glasses was very strong if he was still
>working as a police officer. And there's nothing to stop you
>from finding out what "eye desease" [nice attempt there at
>diversion-sounds much worse than say "near sighted"] that Lonnie
>had.

>Where's the aftermath of this Hughes Owen craft, BTW? If it
>worked then why haven't we seen the finished version?

Don:

So you think the eyeglass prescription isn't important, and you
infer that Zamora's "eye disease" may be just "near-
sightedness."

I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology is
nowadays.

If my conjecture that the thing Zamora saw was a Hughes test
vehicle seems loopy, what do think Zamora saw?

I have some of the Hughes/Raven/military stuff online, as some
visitors to our RRRGroup web-site and RRRGroup blog know.

It's not definitive I admit, but that's why I'm still perusing
various databases to firm up the conjecture.

Let me have my folly. Who am I hurting by this?

I may be tilting at windmills but others have committed worse
ufological crimes.

(And that Navy database isn't just for balloons, but there was a
nice submission by Allen Hynek that predates the 1966 swamp gas
debacle which some might find interesting.)

I know that attacking, even as stupidly as I might be doing, a
shibboleth like the Socorro landing, brings opprobrium here, so





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                           Egads Carbondale Again

From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:25:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:58:58 -0400
Subject: Egads Carbondale Again


[Non-Subscriber Post]

To all,

I thought you might be interested in this update on my
continuing woes with BUFO - Burlington UFO and Paranormal Radio
of Wisconsin - a.k.a. Mary Sutherland regarding her attempted
resuscitation of the long-dead 1974 Carbondale incident.

Regards,

Matt Graeber

-----

An Open Letter From Matt Graeber To Magonia Readers

(Just where do we presently stand in the silt pond at Carbondale?)

As Magonia readers may recall, the Magonia Supplement No.55 was
a special issue devoted to a long article concerning my field
investigation of an alleged UFO crash at Carbondale, Pa. back in
1974. I had written the story concerning the investigation and
my memories and reflections on the incident because, after a 29
year lapse of interest in the matter (as it was merely a hoax),
I was shocked to discover that the case had been "resurrected"
and posted on the internet as a viable UFO incident and cover-
up.

Indeed, a cover-up case that rivaled and surpassed the Roswell
incident in both ufological and historical significance,
according to BUFO's Mary Sutherland, Ronald Hannivig and Frank
Scassellati.

In fact, when I happened to use my PC's search engine and typed
in "carbondale,pa. ufo crash", in April of 2004, I was
absolutely stunned to see all the websites and links on the
subject; and how the story had become quite distorted and filled
with conspiratorial inuendo and claims. Indeed, according to the
many posts, the Carbondale UFO crash was a real event, and the
hoax railroad lantern that sparked the entire 44 hour long
fiasco back in '74 was now considered to be the hoax and the
primary evidence of the alleged cover-up too.

Naturally, there were a number of copycat sites (about 40), that
had mistakenly dated the incident, while others had errantly
placed it in Carbondale, New Jersey instead of Pennsylvania.
Then of course, there was the matter of wading through all the
differing website accounts and finally setting my focus on one
group that really seemed to have the story all mixed up.

As it turned out, that group was BUFO (Burlington UFO and
Paranormal Radio, of Burlington Wisconsin), consisting of it's
owner/operator Mary Sutherland (a self-promoting internet
impresario), and her two UFO field investigators, Ron Hannivig
of Simpson, Pa. and Frank Scassellati of Jesup, Pa. (Both of
which are nearby communities of Carbondale).

I decided to contact this group because they had been posting
"pleas" for eyewitnesses to come forward with "any" information
one might have on the incident. I foolishly thought they were
actually interested in the "evaluatiuon" of eyewitness accounts
on the matter - but, quickly learned that what they really were
interested in was the "corroberation" of their own beiliefs on
the incident's reality, and statements to bolster their
suspicions and arguments on the dreadful cover-up of the
incident by police, military,various governmental authorities
and two of the original three UFO investigators who had
allegedly knuckled-under to police demands of them.(that would
be Douglas Dains and I).

Over a period of about a year, my contacts with Mary Sutherland,
led to the realization that BUFO was not at all a UFO
investigative research organization in the traditional sense of
the word but, rather an internet rumor mill, and purveyor of
malicious charges and unbridled ufoology. Furthermore, the
thrust of the entire BUFO inquiry into the alleged UFO crash
cover-up at Carbondale had two very obvious goals in mind.

The first being to establish BUFO as the lone authority on the
matter, and secondly, to create an aura of mystery and renewed
interest surrounding the long-dead incident. Indeed, an interest
that would establish it as another Roswell-like annual UFO
convention industry... sponsored of course, by Mary Sutherland of
BUFO. (As it is common knowledge that both the Roswell and
Azrec, NM UFO festival/tourist and museum inductries have become
rather lucrative enterprises).

So,while Pennsylvania's Ron Hannivig (a self-proclaimed
imvestigative journalist at large, albeit of the unaccredited
variety), and Frank Scassellati (an amateur UFO investigator and
poetic paranormalist), had apparently long-desired to make the
words Carbondale and Roswell synonymous. While Wisconsin's Mary
Sutherland wants people to 'think' Roswell/Carbondale too - and
obviously has a plan in mind to achieve that
synonymous/$ynonymou$ (take your pick) objective.

But, before we go any further with this discourse, it might be
advantageous of me to explain what ufoology is, because the word
will appear quite often in this article.. ufoology is the mental
state of ufological thinking and reverie that permits the UFO
investigator or reasearcher to make "quantum leaps" of illocical
assumption concerning the significance of the cases they are
working on.(e.g., Ron Hannivig believes that the Carbondale UFO
crash is the most significant happening of the 20th. and 21st.
centuries).

So, according to the intellectual and objective researching
skills of an individual (or the lack thereof), it is entirely
possible that one man's or women's ufology may actually be
another person's ufoology, and vice versa. Thus, further fueling
the time-worn heated controversy between the UFO phenonmenon's
berlievers, proponents, its skeptics and the much hated
debunkers.

However, in the case of BUFO, we find that "Bufoology" goes a
step further and not only makes illogical assumptions..they
actually "alter" the evidence and some of the witnesseses
testimony to back up those Bufological assumptions and outlandish
conspiratorial claims concerning the alleged cover-up of a
downed flying saucer at Carbondale.

A recent example of this is Mary Sutherland's posting of a
photograph of a lantern that an eyewitness at Carbondale had
shown Mary during her recent visit to Pennsylvania's Lackwanna
Cunnty (where Mary filned a documentary on the incident). Mary
Sutherland says, "P L E A S E, let's not be RIDiculous"- and
goes on to explain that if this lantern were tossed into a pond
its flame would be immediately extinguished.

Mrs.Sutherland argues futher, that a flame needs oxygen to burn
so, this type of lantern (i.e, a kerosene lantern), couldn't
possibly have been the source of the light that was observed
beneath the pond's surface back in 1974 as was proposed by the
police authorities and UFO investigators at the scene.

The problenm with Mary Sutherland's Bufological claim is that the
lantern in the photo is a battery-powered lamp, as was the one
which three teenage pranksters tossed into the pond 31 years
earkier. A perfectly obvious fact since the lantern in Mary's
photograph is fittied with two small bulbs that protruded from
its bottom and it also contaimed a six-volt battery.

Moreover, that sort of specific information concering the
lantern has been a matter of public record since 1974. The
lantern's heavy duty six-volt battery was mentioned in numerous
newspaper accounts, periodicals, UFO group journals/newsletters
and UFO group reports that were sent to the Carbondale Police
Department and the Carbondale Historical Society too.

I even supplied Mary with similar information in an essay/report
I sent her back in 2004-and she promised to post that essay on
her website (so as to offer her readership a "fair and balanced"
accounting of the incident)...Mary never followed through on
that promise in spite of my numerous requests of her on the
matter.

Moreover, on the same website page that Mary Sutherland makes
this claim about the lantern having a flame (thereby, implying
that the official explanation of the case being a hoax is
entirely in error). On the left side of Mary's post is a news
article concerning an interview by a staff writer (Ms Lisa
Schencker) of the Scranton Times Tribune - in which the lantern
is identified as a battery-powered device from information
gleaned from that newspaper's own archival accounts of the 1974
incident.

So, its really quite difficult to believe that Mary Sutherland
and her pair of ace saucer-sleuths simply made a mistake about
the lantern being a "ridiculos explanation" for the UFO crash
and proof of its cover-up.

But you see, a person casually perusing the net and reading
Mary's distorted and incorrect version of the "Lantern Cover-
up", would probably leave the site with the impression that Mary
had indeed exposed an official cover-up of a genuine UFO
incident and had in fact, debunked the debunkers... when in fact,
no debunkers were present at the scene, just three UFO-proponent
field investigators, the Carbondale Police Department and quite
a number of local civilian volunteers.

Then, there is the problem of Mary's identifying one of her own
UFO field investigators as an eyewitness at the pond who saw the
light moving about beneath the water's surface. But her
investigator, Frank Scassellati has denied being there at the
time, and told Mr. Rick Fisher, in a taped interview, that when he
finally did arrive on the scene (a day later), the crowds were
so large he couldn't get close enough to see very much at all.

The plot thickens, as Ms. Dawn Race who was alleged to have been
a child at the time eyewitness to the military's covert removal
of the ill-fated UFO from the pond has decided to ask Mary
Sutherland to remove here name from all BUFO websites because of
shall we say... certain "embellishments and distortions"
regarding Ms. Race's actual testimony.

So too, Mr. Rick Fisher of Paranormal, Pa. has also requesterd
that his name be removed from BUFO websites and links due to a
series of similar distortions of fact concerning his very
limited involvement with the group. To date neither Ms. Race's or
Mr. Fisher's requests have been honored by Mary Sutherland.

Then, of course, there is the completely false claims, charges
and accusations leveled against the integrity, professionalism
and character of retired dective lieutenant Francis X. Dottle,
of the Carbondale police department, who was the acting police
chief during the 1974 incident. On BUFO sites he's said to have
failed to warn the citizens of Carbondale about a high radiation
level reading at the pond. He is also identified as the person
who tossed the cover-up lantern into the pond for the volunteerr
scuba diver (Mark Stamey), to retrieve.

Dottle is, according to BUFO, the man who supressed photographic
evidence, imposed matrial law on the community and threatened
UFO investigators at the scene. In fact, BUFO posts proclaim
that Dottle was not then (in 1974) and is not now a friend of
the people of Carbondale. Moreover, Dottle is credited with
saying that he will take the secret (of the cover-up) with him
to the grave but, then again, the volunteer scuba diver said
that too according to BUFO.

Interestingly, much of BUFO's arguments on the Carbondale matter
are merely reverberations of the totally baseless rants of the
deceased Robert D.Barry of the long-defunct 20th Century UFO
Bureau. Mr. Barry was at the scene in 1974 proclaiming that UFOs
were actually piloted by fallen angels and benevolent angels
too.

But, Barry would later change his tune, and say that a Soviet
missile had "probably" splashed down into in the pond. (BUFO
borrowed heavily from this yarn to create their own 'spin-off'
version of the story after Barry's death).

Moreover, in another brash BUFO post, Carbondale is said to be
a community of "dysfunctional" human beings but, Mary Sutherland
more recently attempts to soften the insult by explaining the
community's not coming forth with "thousands" of eyewitness
accounts of the UFO crash because the '74 incident was "so
shocking and traumatic" it had caused the citizens to suffer
from a sort of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder which has
obviously gone undiagnosed and untreated for 31 years.

But, thanks to Mary Sutherland's amatuer community-wide
psychiatric diagnostics, we now better understand the situation
with these many silent and somewhat dysfuctional Carbondaleans
or, as Mary says, "Carbond-aliens". Just as we also now better
understand how there 'must' be quite a Bigfoot presence in that
part of Pennsylvania - since Mary noticed on highway signs that
Pennsylvania has a Susqueh-anna River, a Susqueh-anna Township
and a Susqueh-anna County too.

So, accoeding to Mary's investigative logic, (a.k.a. rampant
Bufoology), the word "Susquehanna" is somehow a rootword for
Sasquatch-anna. Thus, 'proving' her point about Bigfoot probably
being active along the notheastern Pennsylvania corridor. So, I
guess that Sasquatch-anna is a female Bigfoot, and I wonder if
there's a lot of other Bigfeet running about in Saskatch-ewan
too? Perhaps Mary will bring that up in another of her highly
educational BUFO posts at a later date?

I contacted the Susquehanna County library and asked the
librarian Ms Elwitt, and her research assistant (Jean Pierce),
about the origin of the word Susquehanna. Both informed me that
the native american word "Hanna" means river or stream, and the
the various translations further describe the Susquehanna River
as Long reach river, crooked stream and several other names such
as muddy stream, etc.

The Susquehanna is indeed a long reach river extending from New
York state, winding its way through Pennsylvani and finally
joining with the Chesapeak Bay at Harve de Grace, Maryland. A
distance of 444 miles. The river is also very crooked and flows
in both easterly and westerly directions at times during its
snake-like journey south. But, there is no mention of
"Sasquatch" in the archives of the library concerning a link
between Bigfoot and the word Susquehanna.

Additionally, Mary feels that the many UFO crash eyewitness
accounts she's already heard on the Carbondale incident contain
contradictory information because the military people who
removed the UFO from the pond used "decoy" trucks to confuse the
eyewitnesses and cause their stories to be inconsistant.
(Actually, there wasn't a military presence in Carbondale at the
time of the incident).

But, I feel that since BUFO has posted such an array of highly-
questionanble speculative accounts on the alleged incident,
(along with their pleas for witnesses to come forward). The so-
called newly discoverd eyewitnesses accounts of the incident are
are just about as confused and inconsistant on the matter as the
folks at BUFO appear to be.

To date, BUFO has attempted to link the 1974 incident to a UFO
crash, a UFO soft-landing on the pobd's surface, a Soviet
missile crash, a portion of a Soviet missile crash, a submerged
object that dodged poilce bullets which were fired at it, a
radioactive something or another laying on the pond's floor,
unspecified paranormal activity around and within the pond
itself, a portal or gateway into another dimension that may have
opened up and of course, the cover-up lantern.

Beyond this there is Mary's journalistic investigator Ron
Hannivig's proposal that the submerged UFO was under the water
dredging the pond's silty bottom for hibernating toad specimens.

Thus far, no one at BUFO has mentioned the distinct possibility
that "Carbi" the Carbondale silt pond monster may have been
splash'n about on the night in question - but, who knows, the
story may yet be revealed! (Magonia reader's are advised to
ignore the rumors that Carbi is actually a thirty-one year old
mutant toad caused by the radiation in the pond which the
police, Douglas Dains (Dr. Hynek's representative at the scene),
and I are alleged to hve covered-up.

If one listens to Mary's audio interview with a new eyewitness
named 'Joe', of Carbondale; one finds that ol' Joe has a
completely different account of the well-publicized 44 hour long
1974 incident- and actually extends the timeline of events to
about a week. He also reports seeing armed military personnel at
the pond and adds the erection of a tarp (curtain/wall)
completely around the large pond to conceal the military's
recovery efforts from the public's prying eyes.

He even goes so far as the say the three teenage boys tossed the
lantern into the pond "after" the military had completed their
secretive recovery operations. When in fact, the boys started
all the events of the incident when they first tossed the
railroad lantern into the pond on the night of November 9th.
1974. So, according to Joe the UFO actually crashed into the
pond about four days earlier.(i.e., approximately on the 5th of
November 1974 but, apparently nobody saw that).

Yet, the press, the police authorites, the three original UFO
investigators and the hoaxers who first reported the alleged UFO
crash _all_ agree that the first report of something being in
the pond, came from the teens themselves on the night of
November 9th.

An additional fatal flaw with Joe's story is that he claims to
have witnessed the brightly "glowing cover-up lantern" being
extracted from the pond on the afternoon of the 11th of
November. That's quite astounding, since everyone else at the
pond reported the lantern was unlit and inoperable at the
time it was recovered from the pond. (except for a very dim,
short-lived orange tinge of one bulb's filament as water rushed
from the lantern's cannister-like body).

Mary Sutherland and her pair of saucer-sleuths at Carbondale are
well aware of all these facts yet, Mary posts Joe's story and
proclaims him to be a credibile witness. In her telephone
interview however, Mary asks no pointed questions of Joe... she
does just about as much talking as he does - instead of listening
and evaluating his words. There is absolutely no hint of
investigative inquiry, just complete acceptance of the yarn, and
next to immediate posting of it on the internet at Mary's
websites.

Well, I guess by this time one might be wondering why a 63 year
old UFO proponent researcher and seasoned field investigator
would bother to sit down and write this expose on pure Bufological
nonsense. The reason is really quite simple, I believe that Mrs.
Sutherland is indeed the 'Veracity-Challenged' self-promoter
that others had attempted to warn the public about back in her
home town of Burlington, Wisconsin not too long ago.

At that time, Mary Sutherland was boasting that quite a bit of
UFO and paranormal activity was going on around her UFO and
Paranormal gift shoppe in Burlington. A rival and seemingly less
far out UFO group challenged that claim and hired a privite
detective to keep an eye on Mary's shoppe for about a week.

When the private eye's report came back to UFO Wisconsin, it
turned out that the investigator hadn't observed anything
unusual during his surveillance, and the Burlington police
department hadn't a single UFO report or Paranormal incident
claim on file for the entire period of Mary's numerous alleged
incidents.

Mary, shocked to learn that she was being 'stalked' in turn,
filed a complaint with the Burlington police department. When
confronted with the contadictory detective and poilce reports
data regarding her claims of UFO activity in her immediate
neighborhood (by a reporter from the Milwaukee Sentinental
Journal), Mary explained that the 'seemimgly' contradictory
reports by saying that people would not call the police with UFO
or paranaormal reports when they had her nearby UFO/Paranormal
center to notify about such occurrences.

So, according to Bufological wisdom in this post 9-11 world, if
one sees strange looking aircraft in the skies or, unusaul
things going on in the community one shouldn't bother alerting
the state or local police, the FBI, the CIA, NORAD, the
strategic air command, the pentagon, the department of homeland
security or, the nearest air national guard unit. No, just pick
up the phone and call Mary Sutherland... it makes perfect sense to
do so 'cause she operates an online UFO/Parnormal center and
neighborhood gift shoppe too.

If one should care to further evaluate this story, I suggest
perusing Mary Sutherland's many UFO websites and links listed at
"carbondale,pa ufo crash" using one's search engine. One may
also read Frank Scassellati's poems and paranormal musings by
simply typing in his name or, that of Ronald Hannivig's too.
Then, there is the postings of Rick Fisher at:

paranormalpa.com

as well as my (long story) essay at:

"carbondale,pa. ufo crash" just scroll down to "ms.55"

But, perhaps the most revealing read of all would be that of Ms
Dawn Race's thoughts on her experience with BUFO's Mary
Sutherland. Ms Race's remarkrs appear at Rick Fisher's
paranormalpa.com site.

In closing, I'd like to respectfully remind everyone that being
open-minded is not the same thing as being empty-headed. Please
remeber too, that there's two sides (or, more) to every story-
 so I do encourage you to see what Mary, Ron and Frank have to
say about the perfectly dreadful cover-up going on at
Carbondale, Pennsylvania.

Keep on watch'n the skies.. and the pond! -- Matt Graeber
                                             Sept 18th. 2005

DISCLAIMER: The author of this open letter to Magonia readers





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                          Astronomers & Navigators

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:33:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:14:40 -0400
Subject: Astronomers & Navigators


Hello List,

For about two centuries amateur and professional astronomers,
plus navigators of all kinds, were reporting well observed and
reasonably documented sightings of unidentified objects flying
in the sky, at all altitudes, even reaching to outer space.

Most seen by astronomers were during observations of Sun or Moon
- which is expected, since there's a light, contrasting
background to show up any intervening objects. Navigators
reports are mostly from mariners, who can need to take various
sightings either through the night, dawn, mid-day or dusk. Early
last century pilots and air-navigators joined in reporting such
sightings.

Strikingly, all this changed some years ago (some say after
1947?). The new regime is to suppress - using powers of the
State - any such reports from qualified observers (any brave
astronomer or navigator speaking up risks losing their
livelihood). And, more strikingly, the corporate media have,
during same period, pursued a campaign of vilification and
ridicule of professional sightings - acting hand in hand with
governments to completely wipe-out what was, for generations, an
accepted and acceptable routine of straight factual reporting of
UFOs.

It's clear that, by cock-up or conspiracy, this is now main
"government policy" - especially in USA, UK and other more (or
less) repressive regimes.

The way forward seems to be a confidential internal collection
of reports (internal = no publicity of names etc), which is
suggested because that is what civil and maybe military pilots
have been forced to do. [They have issues of safety driving
them.]

Anyone got friends in astronomy?

Cheers





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                  Driver In Dr John Mack Accident Sentenced

From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:18:56 -0400
Subject: Driver In Dr John Mack Accident Sentenced


http://johnemackinstitute.org/center/center_news.asp?id=3D296

Driver In Dr John Mack Accident Sentenced

7 October 2005

Sentencing of the automobile driver who struck and killed
Harvard professor of psychiatry John E. Mack, M.D. on the night
of September 27, 2004, took place earlier today in London at the
Wood Green Crown Court.

Raymond Czechowski, 52, of Elstree, England, had earlier entered
a plea of guilty "by careless driving whilst under the influence
of alcohol".

Dr. Mack's family wrote to the Crown Court asking for leniency.
"Although this was a tragic event for our family, we feel Mr.
Czechowski's behavior was neither malicious nor intentional, and
we have no ill will toward him since we learned of the
circumstances of the collision," the letter said. "We have had
several talks as a family over the past year, and especially
during these past few weeks as we anticipate the time for
sentencing, and we all believe John Mack would not want Mr.
Czechowski to go to jail. As for ourselves, our grief will not
be lessened by knowing that he is incarcerated -- in fact, we
would wish that he not be."

In pronouncing sentence today, Judge Linda Stern told Czechowki
that she had considered "the most generous letter written by the
family of Professor Mack," but noted that a message must be sent
that "you shouldn't drive with alcohol in your blood." Mr.
Czechowski=92s blood/alcohol level recorded at the time of the
accident was 97mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood. The legal limit
in the UK is 80mg.

Mr. Czechowski was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and was
disqualified from driving for 3 years. The Judge also ordered
that before Mr. Czechowski was allowed to return to driving he
must take an extended driving test. Because of time already
spent in custody, Mr Czechowski will serve 6 months of the 15
month sentence.




Information from the family of John E. Mack, M.D. and the
Associated Press was used in preparation of this report.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:20:34 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:36:47 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:04:30 -0700
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>Since it is scientifically impossible for a "balloon" of any
>>kind to account for the Socorro sighting (for many reasons
>>already pointed out by the Rudiaks, Hatches, Maccabees, etc. but
>>which others just don't get), I don't know why any rational
>>person would waste their time on another of Reynold's pointless
>>fishing expeditions.

>>Has anybody else noticed that Reynold's and his rrrgroup are
>>always promising solutions manana for classic UFO cases, but
>>somehow manana never comes? If Reynold's has a winning hand,
>>then he should show it. All else is bluff.

>I hope you don't read and interpret other things as wrongly as
>you've read and interpreted my post here.

Since you never seem to have anything to say of substance, there
is nothing to wrongly interpret.

>I offered the site for those who might want to check sightings
>against the documentation found there.

You clearly tried to tie in Socorro with Naval balloon projects.

>Some might enjoy the papers by J.Allen Hynek about astronomy and
>balloons.

Again you change subjects. You were claiming there was material
in there that solved Socorro. Where is it?

You've pulled this nonsense more than once, directing people to
an archive, claiming solutions were there, and telling them to
go search it for themselves because you didn't want to
"prejudice" them by naming specific papers. What rubbish!

>Bluff? Where's the bluff?

Where are the specific papers?

>I made no point other than I found some papers that might be
>helpful in my scrutiny of the Socorro episode.

What are they? Time to show your hand.

>I don't think balloons acccount for Zamora's sighting

More doubletalk.

>but there are peripheral Navt projects which might.

Such as? Again name the specific articles and tell everybody how
a particular project would account for all the details of the
Socorro sighting. If you can't do that, then you've got NOTHING.
Hence your bluffing (a nicer word then bullshitting).

>Take it easy fellow. You'll blow a gasket getting so worked up
>about my shenanigans.

How about cutting out the shenanigans instead? If you truly want
reasonable discussions, a good place to start would be to stop
your many personal attacks on your website. But you probably
won't do that, will you Rich? As you told Paul Kimball, the way





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 8

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:50:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:24:15 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:37:51 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:36:48 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>><snip>

>>>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no basis in
>>>fact.

>>Don:

>>Those familiar with the work of Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell
>>know that myth is the real truth.

Gee, how profound. That really adds to our understanding of the Socorro case.

><snip>

>>Since the Zamora sighting is still an open question -- for
>>some anyway, it seems prudent or interesting perhaps to check
>>it out thoroughly, unless one thinks that it has already been
>>thoroughly vetted.

>It has been thoroughly vetted where the balloon theory is
>concerned. That's my point.

>>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the eye
>>disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass prescrption, shows
>>that the episode needs more than it has received.

I have dealt with this, and detail the results again below.
Zamora losing his glasses for a short time does nothing to
change the anomalous characteristics of the craft and overall
sighting.

>Wishful thinking. So he lost his glasses while he was running.
>He'd already seen the craft and the "two little men" before
>that-hence the description-then bumped into his own car while
>running away from some blast of exhaust as the thing took off. I
>wear glasses but could still fly my plane from Halifax to
>Vancouver without them if it came to it. I doubt his
>prescription for the glasses was very strong if he was still
>working as a police officer. And there's nothing to stop you
>from finding out what "eye desease" [nice attempt there at
>diversion-sounds much worse than say "near sighted"] that Lonnie
>had.

Spot on Don. Reynolds and his merry band have been writing this
rubbish about me and Lonnie Zamora's eyesight for months. As
usual what it reveals is they have no idea what they are talking
about.

First of all, as you say, police officers are required to have
good eyesight, even without glasses. When I checked, the
standard for police departments is 20/20 or better corrected and
20/100 or better uncorrected (i.e. without glasses). Police
officers are expected to be able to function well even if they
lose their glasses (for obvious reasons). I'm a low myope
(slightly nearsighted). 20/100 is about my eyesight without
correction and I can drive just fine. I have no problem seeing
the big stuff like other cars, pedestrians, etc. What suffers is
my ability to read the small lettering on street signs. Hence
the requirement that drivers be 20/40 or better.

Myopia (near-sightedness), hyperopia (far-sightedness) and
astigmatism are not "eye diseases". True vision threatening "eye
diseases" at Zamora's age are quite rare. Had he had one, he
wouldn't have passed his police physical. He wouldn't have been
a traffic cop. End of story.

As you point out, none of the critical parts of Zamora's story
were affected by him _temporarily_ losing his glasses. First
let's recount the basic sequence of events.

1. Saw craft and small beings from a distance: Had his glasses
on

2. Approached with car. Got out and approached craft at a
distance of only 50-100 feet. Saw large (2-1/2 to 3 feet)
insignia on craft: Had his glasses on.

3. Craft blasts off. Zamora runs back up hill to his car
glancing back over his shoulder: Had his glasses on

4. Zamora bumps into car and loses glasses.

5. Zamora runs across dirt road and dives down. No glasses

6. Zamora looks back and sees craft rise, go silent, and start
to depart. No glasses

7. Zamora runs back to car to call in and retrieves glasses.
Watches vehicle start departure while doing this.

8. Zamora goes in car and calls in. Watches rest of departure
and craft fade out in the distance. Also sees craft in a steep
climb as it cleared mountains in distance Had his glasses on.

The really critical times were:

1. Zamora seeing the beings from a distance and seeing they were
shorter than the brush they were standing next to. This was used
to determine they were under 5 feet tall. Zamora had his glasses
on. Similarly Zamora could judge the size of the craft, and even
from a distance could see it was about the size of a small car.

2. Seeing the size and shape of the craft and the insignia close
up. Zamora had his glasses on. Even without his glasses, he
would still be able to easily make both out even if he was
reduced to 20/100. Further, the craft left physical impressions
on the ground from its landing pads which could be used to
independently corroborate Zamora's size estimate.

3. The craft going from roaring blastoff to dead silence once it
got out of ravine. Obviously glasses and eyesight have nothing
to do with detecting this. The dead silent, rapid departure was
one of the important anomalous characteristics of the sighting.
What small human craft can do this?

4. The craft starting its departure, seeming to clear nearby
dynamite shack. This is the only details of import where Zamora
didn't have his glasses on, but even if his eyesight was only
20/100, it still wouldn't have affected his ability to make this
out.

5. Vehicle fading out and climbing in distance. Zamora had his
glasses on.

Thus nothing of import was affected by Zamora temporarily losing
his glasses. Zamora seeing the object fade in the distance (with
his glasses on) gives a rough estimate of how far away it would
have been when it disappeared. I did experiments to determine
just how far the craft would have been when it faded out,
simulating different atmospheric haze conditions and the effects
of sun glare vs. no glare. The results I got, assuming Zamora
was only 20/20 with his glasses, was a fadeout distance of about
2.5 to 6 miles. The low end represents poorer seeing conditions
of high atmospheric haze and low contrast plus sun glare on his
glass lenses. (These results I communicated to Brad Sparks and
Ray Stanford in email.)

(If Zamora had 20/15 vision, as about half the adult population
has, then 25% could be added to the fadeout distances, i.e.
about 3.0 to 7.5 miles.)

Zamora estimated six miles comparing it to geographic landmarks.
Thus Zamora was right in the ballpark with the experimental
results.

Now the main point. The fadeout distance plus the total
departure time provide an estimate of maximum departure speed.
Even using very conservative assumptions about the total time of
departure after the vehicle cleared the ravine and went silent
(based on reconstruction of events from Zamora's testimony), it
probably would not have exceeded 30 seconds to fadeout.

Thus even at the low end, the craft would still have covered 2.5
miles in half a minute or 5 miles in a minute, for an _average_
departure speed of 300 miles/hour. If the craft had had constant
acceleration, then the _maximum_ speed would have been twice
this or 600 miles/hour. Remember, these are the most
conservative estimates of speed.

With less conservative numbers (e.g. 6 mile fadeout, maybe 20
second departure), the departure speed could easily have been
double or triple this, or supersonic. These high speeds are just
one reason among many that a "balloon" explanation of any kind
literally will not fly. I also don't know of any conventional
propulsion system other than jets or rockets that could
accelerate a craft to such speeds, and neither of these is
silent.

The only human, _high-speed_ aircraft with VTOL capabilities
that I know of is a Harrier jet. These are decidedly non-oval-
shaped, have things like wings, and are noisy as hell. Need I
also mention that they are made by the British and the first one
didn't fly until 1966?

>Where's the aftermath of this Hughes Owen craft, BTW? If it
>worked then why haven't we seen the finished version?

Even if there were such a craft, it could not explain important





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 14:52:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:11:40 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Rudiak


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:36:47 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>>I don't think balloons acccount for Zamora's sighting

>More doubletalk.

>>but there are peripheral Navy projects which might.

>Such as? Again name the specific articles and tell everybody how
>a particular project would account for all the details of the
>Socorro sighting. If you can't do that, then you've got NOTHING.
>Hence your bluffing (a nicer word then bullshitting).

>>Take it easy fellow. You'll blow a gasket getting so worked up
>>about my shenanigans.

>How about cutting out the shenanigans instead? If you truly want
>reasonable discussions, a good place to start would be to stop
>your many personal attacks on your website. But you probably
>won't do that, will you Rich? As you told Paul Kimball, the way
>to get your blogs read is to keep them "spicy." I doubt somebody
>like you would willingly give up the "spice".

David:

I've made no attacks on you at our blog-site (or elsewhere). In
fact I've written that you have provided creative and diligent
information about Roswell, Socorro, and other UFO related
matters.

I suggest you go to our blog and see who wrote what about you.

And my Socorro tie-in to the Navy database was incidental.

I pointed to the database to show that the Navy has engaged in
research and projects that might impact the UFO enigma, and some
here might find such connections by looking at the material
first hand.

I'm not looking to make you happy, David, nor am I about to
unspice our blog-site for you.

You do your thing, and I'll do mine. We've both received
crticism; you from other ufologists and media and me from you
and other ufologists. That's the way of things in the UFO
community.

You seem to have assumed ownership of the Socorro landing and
anyone who steps into your territory will get their head blown
off.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:51:46 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:09:29 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:37:49 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the
>>>eye disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass prescrption,
>>>shows that the episode needs more than it has received.

>>Wishful thinking. So he lost his glasses while he was
>>running. He'd already seen the craft and the "two little
>>men" before that-hence the description-then bumped into his
>>own car while running away from some blast of exhaust as the
>>thing took off. I wear glasses but could still fly my plane
>>from Halifax to Vancouver without them if it came to it. I
>>doubt his prescription for the glasses was very strong if he
>>was still working as a police officer. And there's nothing
>>to stop you from finding out what "eye desease" [nice attempt
>>there at diversion - sounds much worse than say "near sighted"]
>>that Lonnie had.

>>Where's the aftermath of this Hughes Owen craft, BTW? If it
>>worked then why haven't we seen the finished version?

>So you think the eyeglass prescription isn't important, and
>you infer that Zamora's "eye disease" may be just
>"near-sightedness."

Rich,

Are you inferring it may not? Why do you and others insist on
making it appear that, because he was wearing glasses, he was
blind without them? Usually glasses are minor correction options.
I know this is a standard lawyer's ploy, questioning witness
eyesight when it comes to the fact that they wear glasses and so
forth. But ask yourself, as I did, why he would still be on the
force if his eyesight was so bad? Full sighted individuals often
screw up where witnessing events are concerned. It's experience
that counts. He saw the object, the small occupants and _then_
he lost his glasses... not his memory. But we always hear about
how he lost his glasses afterward. What difference does that
make? Read the man's testimony.

>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology is
>nowadays.

What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at it long enough to
make that charge.

We just learn to live with your cavalier theories with no real
substance. But don't put yourself down.

>If my conjecture that the thing Zamora saw was a Hughes test
>vehicle seems loopy,

Loopy's a good word in some respects. Don't you think I've been
involved in the aviation field long enough to see just how silly
these johnny-come-lately theories are? Theres no extrapolation
of the Hughes/Ravetechnology from past to present. There would
be no reason to keep it secret.

>what do you think Zamora saw?

I think Zamora saw what he said he saw. Right now it stands as a
UFO for the lack of a better term.

>I have some of the Hughes/Raven/military stuff online, as some
>visitors to our RRRGroup web-site and RRRGroup blog know.
>It's not definitive I admit, but that's why I'm still perusing
>various databases to firm up the conjecture.

Good luck. But use steel bands to hold the theory together, not
rubber.

<snip>

>I know that attacking, even as stupidly as I might be doing, a
>shibboleth like the Socorro landing, brings opprobrium here,
>so I accept the disdain.

You're making assumptions about my loyalty to the Socorro
episode. I'm not married to the Socorro sighting. Solve it, I
don't care. But it has to agree and explain all areas of the of
the sighting.

>But it's a lousy way to debate, even if
>the matter seems to be closed. (I emphasise the word seems.)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                        A Curious Story About Socorro

From: Jay Nelson <jnelson.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 17:30:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:19:27 -0400
Subject: A Curious Story About Socorro


Listerians,

Amid such daunting intellects (not to mention opinions), I've
long hesitated to post anything. But I notice the Socorro
sighting of Officer Lonny Zamora is being discussed yet again,
so I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

Some time ago, I read a strange little book called Flying
Saucers - Key to Creation? by a fellow who called himself
"George A. Eastland". Despite the New Age flavor to the title,
the writer actually sounded like an old aeronautical engineer
who'd been around, seen a few things, and thought hard about
them.

Amid his speculations, he tells a strange tale to illustrate the
point that things are not always as they seem. He said he once
met a biker, named Tea-Mex, in a bar who told him he'd built a
UFO. Tea-Mex said that some years previously he'd been working
as an aviation machinist in central New Mexico, and he and his
buddies got involved in building an engine from Popular
Mechanics and extensively modifying it.

One thing led to another; to make a long story short, when they
were done, they had basically a flying jet-powered gyroscope,
consisting of a vertically-mounted engine built with parts
purlioned from their worksite inside a small two-man craft.
There's a lot of detail in the book - even illustrations on
napkins. He even explained the "glyph" as a logo on the aluminum
aircraft skin they were using that they attempted to paint over.

The craft supposedly looked like a lima bean on toothpicks, and
was very hard to fly, but they took it up a few times. On the
last attempt, they flew into a headwind and came down hard. As
they got out but before they could remove their helmets, they
noticed a cop racing towards them, so they took off again and
managed to get away. They abandoned the project after that as
too dangerous. And having pilfered the parts, they couldn't
patent their creation, so they tore it down. The engine is
supposedly still sitting in somebody's garage somewhere here in
New Mexico.

Mr. Eastland does not mention Socorro or Zamora by name, but it
could be none other than that celebrated case. If it is a hoax,
I do find it peculiar that he wouldn't mention those little
details - unless maybe Eastland and Tea-Mex were the same
person...

The story sounds quite believable to me. But since this is at
best a second-hand bar-room confession, it doesn't count as
evidence, much less proof of anything. There's no way to check
it but I thought it was an interesting enough yarn to pass on
and ask if anyone's ever heard anything like this before.

Much more information can be found on my webpage:

http://www.weirdload.com/nm-ufo.html#zamora





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Kimball

From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 20:36:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 13:10:20 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Kimball


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:36:47 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

I have no desire to get involved in this, other than to point
out an inaccuracy in David Rudiak's reply:

<snip>

>As you told Paul Kimball, the way to get your blogs read is
>to keep them "spicy." I doubt somebody like you would willingly
>give up the "spice".

This is false. David Rudiak is no doubt referring to a blog post
I made some time ago wherein I stated that the RRR guys like to
"keep it spicy" at their blog. This was my opinion, however, as
anyone who read the post would have been aware. It was _not_
something that Rich Reynolds told me, and it was certainly _not_
something that Rich Reynolds told me to do in order to get one's
blog read.

David Rudiak has misrepresented what I wrote so that he can





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                   Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

From: Joe Faccenda uforth.nul
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 20:52:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 13:16:37 -0400
Subject: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]


While some of you glare and stomp around the Socorro case. I
have just put up a photo I came across that shows an egg shaped
craft with 'legs' you can see it at:

http://www.uforth.com/egg.htm

I wonder if this was the type of craft that Zamora saw?

Also for interest a fellow ufologist (Jim Morris from UFOCA) had
another look at the famous 1870 cigar ufo photo taken at Mount
Washington, and enlarged it and was surprised to see a
'Swastika' design on the main body of the craft.

You can see it at:

http://www.uforth.com/historical.htm






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                   Re: Astronomers & Navigators - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos.nul>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 22:08:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 13:17:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Astronomers & Navigators - Balaskas


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:33:09 +0100
>Subject: Astronomers & Navigators

<snip>

>Most seen by astronomers were during observations of Sun or Moon
>- which is expected, since there's a light, contrasting
>background to show up any intervening objects. Navigators
>reports are mostly from mariners, who can need to take various
>sightings either through the night, dawn, mid-day or dusk. Early
>last century pilots and air-navigators joined in reporting such
>sightings.

>Strikingly, all this changed some years ago (some say after
>1947?). The new regime is to suppress - using powers of the
>State - any such reports from qualified observers (any brave
>astronomer or navigator speaking up risks losing their
>livelihood).

<snip>


Hi Ray!

Astronomer Dr. Peter Brown and his team of researchers at
University of Western Ontario in London, Canada, don't seem to
be aware of such a post-1947 policy to suppress reports of UFOs
detected in space or entering our atmosphere from the public or
have any concerns about losing their jobs from what they do.

They use radar and optical data collected from multiple
observing sites to detect and record thousands of meteoritic
events, and the occasional non-meteoritic event too, every day.
Check out their web site below for examples and further details.

http://aquarid.physics.uwo.ca/about.htm

It is my experience from talking with space scientists over the
years that they are very interested in reports of unusual UFOs,
especially those observed visually or detected with scientific
instruments in the Earth's upper atmophere or in space. Many
have even shared their personal UFO sightings at meetings with
colleagues or public lectures.

The sporadic nature of the UFO phenomenon is particularly
frustrating to scientists who wish to study UFOs but thanks to
certain research projects like Brown's radar/optical tracking of
meteors, they do manage to make a few non-meteor observations





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                          Why Are Aliens So Boring?

From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 13:28:40 -0400
Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?


All:

In today's National Post, one of Canada's two national
newspapers, eminent columnist/journalist Robert Fulford
(see his bio at:

http://www.robertfulford.com/resume.html

he is a member of the Order of Canada) tackled the subject of
ET, specifically alleged alien abductions. I don't think you can
access the full article on-line, unless you are a Post
subscriber, so here it is:

-----

The National Post, Saturday, 8 October 2005, p. A19:

Why Are Aliens So Boring?

The folklore of the 20th-century produced nothing more absurd,
yet nothing more persistent, than the belief that creatures from
other worlds habitually visit Earth, kidnap a few humans and
then return them, apparently unhurt, to their homes. The alleged
human victims later describe their experiences in what scholars
of alienography call 'abductee narratives'. These sound like
tales told by idiots, but no one who cares about the popular
imagination can be entirely indifferent to them.

Abductees report that some aliens say they are bringing world
peace and others announce that their mission is war. But a
strikingly high percentage appear to be carrying out a peculiar
assignment, raiding the reproductive systems of their victims to
collect DNA. 'My eggs were taken,' one typical abductee
reported, and another said, 'sperm was sucked from my penis by a
machine.'

Why? Extraterrestrials must be far smarter than we are (they
travel distances our scientists can barely imagine) so anyone
even mildly curious will wonder what they want with a
substandard planet's genetic material. That in turn suggest
another question to Susan A. Clancy, a Harvard psychologist and
the author of Abducted: How People Come to Believe They Were
Kidnapped by Aliens (Harvard University Press), the latest book
on this phenomenon. Having interviewed dozens of abductees, and
found them likeable and honest, Clancy writes about them with
compassionate but sceptical understanding. She's not like the
late John Mack, a psychiatrist at the Harvard medical school,
who scandalized his colleagues by deciding that abductions
actually took place. Clancy believes her subjects only in the
sense that she believes they think they are telling the truth.

And she doesn't abandon her sense of humour. She asks why
mentally superior aliens haven't anything better to do than hang
around North America stealing our genes. 'Why are these genius
aliens so dim?' she asks. 'After fifty years of abducting us,
why are they still taking the same bits and pieces? Don't they
have freezers?'

And why are aliens so boring? They often speak to abductees but
they never say anything interesting. As Clancy has noted, not
one of them sounds as engaging as an average human child. They
recall those dead people who speak from the spirit world through
table-tappers and similar mystics. The record shows that these
communicants have never uttered even one interesting sentence.
Most conversations consist of 'I saw your Uncle Leonard.' 'How
is he?' 'Fine, sends his best.'

The reason is the same in both cases. The conversations are
fictional and both abductees and spiritualists suffer from
stunted imaginations. They are capable of one delirious flight
of fancy, nothing more.

Clancy discovered that abductees share certain characteristics.
They are not crazy, but they score high on a schizotypy test,
which doesn't mean they are schizophrenic but suggest they have
a weakness for fantasy and for thinking related to magic. Most
of them believed in flying saucers before they were abducted.

In her view the aliens are entirely human creations, expressing
fairly ordinary emotional needs. Most of us don't want to be
alone and many of us yearn to believe there's something bigger
than out there - and that it cares about us. Also, we want to
feel special. 'Being abducted by aliens is a culturally shaped
manifestation of a universal human need.' Abductees express
these feelings by believing in a convenient story that can never
be proved and therefore never disproved. They may also be
terrified (and thus made to feel vulnerable) by recent
discoveries in genetics and reproductive technology.

Clancy devotes careful attention to the mother and father of the
abductee community, a New Hampshire social worker named Betty
Hill and her postal worker husband, Barney. Believing they were
abducted in 1961, they began hypnotherapy a few years later.
That's how Barney deeply affected American mass culture by
giving credibility to the little guys with big heads and
wraparound eyes who have since appeared in everything from Close
Encounters of the Third Kind to The X-Files.

Asked under hypnosis to draw an alien, Barney came up with a
sketch that launched a thousand myths. In fact, he was
reproducing a face he had seen 12 days earlier on a TV show, The
Outer Limits. But by the time anyone figured that out the aliens
Clancy calls 'macrocephalic space-waifs' had become permanently
lodged in mass culture. As Clancy says, 'Betty and Barney Hill
got their ideas from books, movies and TV. From then on, people
got their ideas from books, movies, TV, and Betty and Barney
Hill.

-----

This is posted at my blog, at:

http://tinyurl.com/dms8n

For the aggrieved (and I'm sure there will be many), you can e-mail
Mr. Fulford at robertfulford.nul (his e-mail address is posted
at the end of all his columns, so I'm not betraying any confidential
information here).

My response to Mr. Fulford, sent by e-mail this afternoon, was as
follows:

-----

"Dear Mr. Fulford,

As a regular reader of The National Post, and an admirer or your
work both there and elsewhere, I was intrigued to see you
address, in today's paper, the UFO phenomenon.

As usual, your column was well-written, and eminently readable.
However, I feel obliged to point out that your overall
conclusion - unstated, but clear - that the UFO phenomenon is
(a) solely tied to the "aliens-are-here" theory, and that (b) it
is a bit wacky as a result, ignores the substantial evidence
that UFOs represent an objective, and as yet unexplained,
reality, worthy of serious scientific, historical and
journalistic attention and study. Indeed, until the late 1960's,
they were a topic of not infrequent question and answer
exchanges in the Canadian House of Commons (where future
Manitoba premier and Governor General Edward Schreyer was one of
the many MPs who had questions to ask), and were investigated by
the Royal Canadian Air Force and the RCMP, before being turned
over to the National Research Council.

Unfortunately, the serious study of the UFO phenomenon has
been in decline since the late 1960's, for two reasons, neither
of which has to do with the merit of the subject. The first relates
to the Condon Report. For more information, please see my blog
post, "The Condon Effect in Canada," at:

http://tinyurl.com/7cvok

The second factor has been the rise of what I have termed
"Roswellism," i.e. conspiracy theory run amok. I have addressed
this problem, which, unlike the Condon Effect, is an internal
problem amongst UFO researchers, with columns at:

http://tinyurl.com/be2t6

http://tinyurl.com/dfzhv

I would encourage you to take a quick look at these three
columns, which will show, I think, that there is a serious side
to the UFO phenomenon, and that it is worth further study.

At the moment, I am writing and directing a documentary for
Space: The Imagination Station, about the phenomenon. Best
Evidence: The Top 10 UFO Cases, will hit the airwaves sometime
in the Spring of 2006. I will send you a DVD copy at that time.
The goals of the documentary are to demonstrate that:

1. There is a need to take the UFO phenomenon seriously;

2. There is a need to focus on the evidence, and the best cases;

3. There is a need to entertain ALL theories that can be
validated scientifically. These include the Extraterrestrial
Hypothesis, but also include time travel (TDH, or Temporal
Displacement Hypothesis) and the Extra-dimensional Hypothesis
(or EDH).

Please note that these are not "pie-in-the-sky" theories, but
rather represent the cutting edge of modern scientific research.
See:

http://tinyurl.com/7epuz

The technology to make any of these three theories a reality is
well beyond our capabilities. But, as Dr. Kaku notes, it is not
impossible.

The goal is to create a film that will approach the subject from
this point of view, in an entertaining manner, that will provide
viewers with a quick synopses of the best evidence that the UFO
phenomenon is an objective reality, and should be taken
seriously (thereby achieving #1 and #2, above).

At the end of the film, however, the experts will be asked to
make sense of it all, and provide some possible explanations. It
is here that the ETH, EDH and TDH will be briefly explained, and
the viewers encouraged to open their minds to the serious,
scientific possibilities of other realities - as well as to
recognize that none of them have been proved, and that the
possibility still exists that UFOs can be explained relatively
mundane, terrestrial answers, whether as a result of further
investigation, or perhaps natural phenomena or government
experiments of which we are not yet aware.

The selection of cases was limited by the following criteria:

i. Must have multiple witnesses (i.e. corroboration) =E2=80=93 this
could take the form of a single person who has a sighting that
is corroborated by radar, for example, or by communication from
an aircraft to ground control;

ii. Anonymous witness testimony is not acceptable;

iii. The objects must have been observed at some point in the
air (they are =E2=80=9Cunidentified FLYING objects=E2=80=9D after all).

It may surprise you to learn that there are many cases that meet
these criteria.

I hope you will give the "other side of the truth," i.e. the
Best Evidence documentary, the same consideration that you have
just given Susan Clancy's recent book.

There are, after all, always two sides to every story, and an
objective analysis demands that both sides be considered, and
weighed, before a conclusion can be reached.

As I said at the start, always a pleasure to read your columns.

Best regards,

Paul A. Kimball, LL.B
President
Redstar Films Limited"

-----

This response can be found at my blog, at:

http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/10/dear-mr-fulford.html






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:24:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:24:58 -0400
Subject: International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy




Source: ITAR-TASS News Agency - Moscow, Russia

http://www.tass.ru/eng/level2.html?NewsID=3D2499775&PageNum=3D0

09.10.2005


International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy

ROME, October 9 (Itar-Tass) -- The First International UFO
Symposium organized by the Italian National UFO Center is
underway in the country=92s southern town of Cosenza, Calabria
province.

Famous American film director and producer Steven Spielberg, the
author of the featured =93E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial=94 (1982) movie
said in a TV interview to the symposium participants that he was
not so sure of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations
as he was twenty years ago.

Speaking about the main idea of his new film =93War of the Worlds=94
(2005) (Spielberg=92s movie version of H.G. Wells=92 novel), he said
that his film was of current interest, especially taking account
the nowadays=92 natural calamities =96 earthquakes, tsunamis,
hurricanes and floods, as well as acts of terrorism, which
exercise the strongest psychological effect on population.

Guests and participants in the two-day symposium familiarized
themselves with an exhibition of books and magazines on UFO and
UFO-related themes from different countries.

More than 40 specialists in astronomy, exobiology, writer-
fantasts, representatives of official organizations from Russia,
Britain, Belgium and France made their reports at the symposium.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 9

                Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up] -

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:29:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up] -


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:51:46 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:37:49 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the
>>>>eye disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass prescrption,
>>>>shows that the episode needs more than it has received.

<snip>

>Rich,

>Are you inferring it may not? Why do you and others insist on
>making it appear that, because he was wearing glasses, he was
>blind without them? Usually glasses are minor correction options.
> know this is a standard lawyer's ploy, questioning witness
>eyesight when it comes to the fact that they wear glasses and so
>forth. But ask yourself, as I did, why he would still be on the
>force if his eyesight was so bad? Full sighted individuals often
>screw up where witnessing events are concerned. It's experience
>that counts. He saw the object, the small occupants and _then_
>he lost his glasses... not his memory. But we always hear about
>how he lost his glasses afterward. What difference does that
>make? Read the man's testimony.

>>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology is
>>nowadays.
>>What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at it long enough to
>make that charge.

<snip>

>>what do you think Zamora saw?

>I think Zamora saw what he said he saw. Right now it stands as a
>UFO for the lack of a better term.

<snip>

>...so far I'm using fact, not theory. What's wrong with that?
>And it will never be closed until it's solved.


Don:

The eyglass thing may seem minor, but when investigating UFOs or
anything else, even the smallest item should be looked at or
into.

That Rudiak, an optometrist, and you dismiss Zamora's eye
condition, conjecturing that his eye-sight had to be okay since
he was an acting police officer, presumes more than it should

That is not good investigation.

As for being around not long enough to use the word cavalier, I
suggest you check our blog where you'll see my NICAP application
from the 50s and other materials from the 60s, plus images of
stuff I saved from the late 40s which indicates I'm no kid
frothing at the mouth without some UFO experience.

I sat in on the Hynek swamp gas press conference for The Detroit
News so I bet I'm longer in the UFO tooth than you and Rudiak
combined.

Does that make me a bona fide ufologist? Perhaps not, but it
does allow me to observe that some "investigations: of UFOs have





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                    Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:55:39 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:31:27 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Ledger


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:50:09 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>><snip>

>>>>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no
>>>>basis in fact.

And might I add that after 41 years of development there is
still no evidence of this type of small craft in the US-or
anyone else's-inventory. Why spend so much on the development of
helicopters of all shapes and sizes if you have this type of
vehicle with VTOL capability, married to , silent, high speed
"dash" capability. The best that they have come up with are UAVs
a copy of model airplanes, loaded with computer software that
are in the opening stages of infesting your airspace in the US.
It amazes me when "researchers" play the "secret government
technology" card whenever the rest of their argument falls
apart. In this case the technology would have had to have been
developed before 1964, and it just plain wasn't. The upshot is,
it's a bogus argument which needs proving by those presenting
the argument. So far Rich, you haven't done that.

Dave Rudiak has again vetted the glasses nonsense supporting
what I said about their importance to the actual sighting and
the aftermath, so there's no point in my attempting to improve
on the succinct and obvious.

So Lonnie's eyesight was corrected for the important phases of
the sighting-other than when his face was in the dirt- and the
balloon theory is a fairy tale. There was no earthbound,
propulsive technology of the time to account for the craft*. The
case still stands unsolved.

>>>Those familiar with the work of Carl Jung and Joseph
>>>Campbell know that myth is the real truth.

Where's the science there, Rich? There's a field that gets far
more credit than it deserves.

Don Ledger

* Let's not forget the stability issues involved with a
rotorless craft propelled by jets or rocketry with the C of G
above the propulsive force and not hanging below it as in
helicopters. They are inherently unstable and the human pilot
cannot keep up with their tendency to fall around the C of G.
Even high speed, highly maneuverable winged fighters have to
have computers looking after stability to keep them airborne.
The common f-18A has 5 OBCs to keep it from falling out of the
sky. The F117A has 7. This is the newer, lightweight computer
systems of the late 70s and early 80s,90s and 100's not the
basement filling computers of the early 60s which would have had





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:33:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:37:26 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:44:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>...Regarding Military data collection
>>Fine for listening in on enemy communications, ship movements,
>>etc. No problem! UFOs really don't even enter into it.

>That is not what the AF thought, that UFO's "really don't even
>enter into it." The AF considered it fully applicable to the UFO
>problem and developed its anti-anecdotes policy based on the MIT
>study, which was repeatedly given briefings on UFOs, by Ruppelt
>and Col. Adams.

Of course such data _could_ be used to track "UFOs", but the
primary reason is to track military targets of human origin.

>You're ignoring the realities of past UFO detection and tracking
>networks that I listed, most of which were optical/photographic.

I am not ignoring them exactly. I acknowledge them and would
certainly examine their results and methods to understand their
limits and lessons learned.

>At acknowledged UFO "hot spots" such as New Mexico in 1947-52
>there were hundreds of genuine unexplained UFO sightings by
>visual observers and radars yet the networks only caught several
>of them. That's on the order of 1% of a high UFO occurrence
>rate. Today we have a low UFO occurrence rate, meaning no flaps
>no "hot spots." Where would you put a UFO "field lab"? Anywhere
>some Area 51 nutball told you was a "hot spot"? That's a
>prescription for bitter disappointment.

No, Area 51 would not be high on my list. However, I am sure
some mini-flap areas could be found by examining witness
reports. Automated stations don't need the same patience as
manned sites. And "bitter disappointment" is not that bad too.
Even empty data sets _are_ data. If I can generate a baseline
rate of UFO frequency over one site, that is data, although not
too exciting. A number of folk have reported frequent sightings
over areas but have had few UFO field researchers investigate.
Maybe its easier to read Filer's Files.

>>And I thought I was a pessimist! So you are telling me that I
>>can only look up into the sky 1 mile! How come I can see
>>satellites at 200-500 miles? And I can see a jet aircraft (at
>>altitude) tens of miles away?

>You _know_ they're satellites and aircraft already, you don't
>need Full Moon angular size to tell what they are. They "behave"
>and conform to conventional profiles.

I only mentiuoned them to show that we can see pretty far with
our eyes and sensitive cameras can see even better. Yes, these
"typical" dots conform to normal profiles, but (and I am usually
referring to night sightings, I have not figured out how to use
the automated systems for daylight sightings yet) if the
triangulation data for the "white dots" show unconventional
behavior (and hopefully the kind I want, namely, going low to
space altitude), then we don't even _need_ crisp detailed
closeups of the thing.

>To prove something is a
>real UFO you have to have enough resolution to reliably
>distinguish an unconventional shape or three-dimensional data to
>prove an unconventional maneuvering or high-speed or high-
>altitude performance.

I think we differ in this. All one needs is adequate
triangulation resolution to define the flight path of the
object. If the flight path matches an aircraft or satellite
behavior, then all we can say is that it _might_ be an aircraft
or satellite (it could simply be a UFO behaving like these too).
The problem we have is that even with the high optical
resolution you desire, the UFO could mimic appearing like a a
satellite or aircraft.

So, if UFOs choose to always "go dark"(optically and radar)
 when doing their
zoom into space or fancy manuevers, then we will never
have any hope to gather any data to resolve the issue.
Based on witness reports and past sightings, it seems that
there is at least a possibility that UFOs don't give a
damn if they are seen or not seen, so there is a statistical
chance of observing one going through its behavior.

>Radar is automatically 3-D data. Optics
>and cameras are basically 2-D. Only if you can develop a system
>that will perform accurate real-time stereo triangulations of
>optical targets will you have something comparable to the
>simplicity of a radar. Until that time radar will be superior
>for a ground site.

I agree radar has nice features, but simple it is not. Your
challenge is a valid one and one that I shall pursue. I think
you overestimate the difficulty of the stereo triangulation
method using today's available hardware/software given the rapid
technology development state of home computers and operating
systems.

>And a Passive Radar system that can reach
>2,000 miles will be superior to any ground radar limited by
>horizon line-of-sight to say 100-200 miles, especially since it
>can "peek" down below the horizon (since broadcast radio waves
>fill virtually every space above ground now and it doesn't take
>much to receive and amplify an over-the-horizon signal bounce).

Its all very nice of course, but you will need very large
supplies of cash and experts to build this system.

>The Passive Radar can drive a telescopic camera to zero in on
>actual unconventional targets. But without the Passive Radar the
>telescopic cameras will not be able to distinguish fireflies
>from a few hundred feet away from meteors hundreds of miles
>away.

The automated triangulation system driving the telescopic system
would seem adequate to this challenge. Of course, my telescope
will not be trying to read the numbers on the vehicle, just
gathering pinpoint spectra

How you can guess at passive radar's accuracy is beyond my
understanding! It seems pretty fuzzy to me and fraught with
distortion.

...volume that passive radar covers...
>>The volume of space covered is pure conjecture, although it may
>>be able to reach the ionosphere.

>Meteor trackers apparently do it.

Yes, in very special locations and conditions. And with lots of
governmental controls you can bet.

>>This passive radar system sounds nice, but as I have pointed out
>>before, has many problems and limitations. I think the chances
>>of it being implemented are at least 100000 to 1 (simply based
>>on national security limitations).

>Are they going to shut down all the 50,000 watt radio and tv
>trabsmitters and the cell phone transmitters because of
>"national security"??

No, just have the government it buy out or gain some regulatory
control (Patroit Act addendum) of the commercial passive radar
system. At the worse, "good" ole harassment and intimidation.

>The radio waves are out there bouncing off
>various objects and all we have to do is have the receivers and
>the signal processing computing power to distinguish the Doppler
>shifting of high-speed or high-altitude maneuvering objects and
>filter out normal aircraft, etc. Anyone can receive these
>signals and do wahtever. I don't see how "national security" can
>stop it anymore than it can stop what goes out over the
>Internet.

If the passive radar system you are talking about can be made
from Radio Shack components, then I would agree that you are
likely correct that it would be hard to stop its dissemination.
However, I feel that the complexities of the system are very
underestimated. Extensive work must be done to make this kind of
system commercial for the application you want.

>Frankly the idea that terrorists are going to spend years trying
>to make sense out of a mass of flight data from a Passive Radar
>system for some obscure purpose seems absurd to me.

I agree terrorists in the US don't need this system. All they
need is shoulder fired missile at ANY US aircraft to create
terror.

If this system works to see our Stealth (which I have read that
it can) or even non-Stealth aircraft, then the terrorists
(i.e. in Iraq or Iran or North Korea or other Muslim countries or
even China) would not need to sort out "masses of data". Just have
to look for incoming vehicles to blast which they could not normally





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:15:23 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:42:52 -0400
Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Hall


>From: Jay Nelson <jnelson.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 17:30:41 -0600
>Subject: A Curious Story About Socorro

>Listerians,

>Amid such daunting intellects (not to mention opinions), I've
>long hesitated to post anything. But I notice the Socorro
>sighting of Officer Lonny Zamora is being discussed yet again,
>so I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

>Some time ago, I read a strange little book called Flying
>Saucers - Key to Creation? by a fellow who called himself
>"George A. Eastland". Despite the New Age flavor to the title,
>the writer actually sounded like an old aeronautical engineer
>who'd been around, seen a few things, and thought hard about
>them.

>Amid his speculations, he tells a strange tale to illustrate the
>point that things are not always as they seem. He said he once
>met a biker, named Tea-Mex, in a bar who told him he'd built a
>UFO. Tea-Mex said that some years previously he'd been working
>as an aviation machinist in central New Mexico, and he and his
>buddies got involved in building an engine from Popular
>Mechanics and extensively modifying it.

>One thing led to another; to make a long story short, when they
>were done, they had basically a flying jet-powered gyroscope,
>consisting of a vertically-mounted engine built with parts
>purlioned from their worksite inside a small two-man craft.
>There's a lot of detail in the book - even illustrations on
>napkins. He even explained the "glyph" as a logo on the aluminum
>aircraft skin they were using that they attempted to paint over.

<snip>


This is a re-cycled yarn. I suggest you check the archives...and
be more selective in your reading habits.


 - Dick


[It appears he has been Dick - see:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                             Re: Socorro - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 13:48:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:54:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Boone


<snip>

I too have a Socorro/Lonny Zamora story.

One of my relatives told me about this case when I was around
nine or ten years old.

She either went to school with or knew Officer Zamora
personally.

I was just starting to dig into UFOs and was debating with my
cousins who were ribbing me about UFOs and she came into the
living room and told us all about it.

Put quite a shock on my cousins as their own mother sided with
me.

Her account was that Officer Zamora was of sound character and
had stood up for her when they were younger. His account was
well known amongst her family and friends of New Mexico and my
uncle was stationed at Roswell when they met and married years
earlier. He won't talk about it but she did.

There were many, many stories of strange goings on far before
Roswell occured. She emphasized that Officer Zamora wouldn't
have made up a story like that and that people who knew him
stood by him.  She went on in detail about what happened to him
I know from either Zamora himself or from a close friend or
relative.

In those days people knew one another. Word spread quickly about
anything from common place events like marriages to the unusual.

It was a kick to have her tell her side of that story and others
of what happened in New Mexico where she was born and raised.
Many things I thought no one knew until years later when I heard
the same stories on UFO documentaries from the spanish folk who
were there especially during Roswell.

All in all, Officer Zamora was loved and respected from what I
gathered from her so his character isn't in question, just the
mystery of what he actually encountered.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 14:06:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:56:24 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:37:49 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 10:39:40 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:45:50 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>


>I know that attacking, even as stupidly as I might be doing, a
>shibboleth like the Socorro landing, brings opprobrium here, so
>I accept the disdain. But it's a lousy way to debate, even if
>the matter seems to be closed. (I emphasise the word seems.)


>Rich Reynolds

Don't run, we are your friends!

Come right back here and use more big $10 words to invalidate
opposing opinions right this instant!

If a decorated naval officer says it's so and a man of fine
character at that, I'm with him.

The U.S. Navy is responsible for a realm far greater than the
land based operations. They use technologies that are nothing
short of something from 'Star Trek'. I worked for years with a
dozen or so naval officers and engineers who ventured into
Ufology and they did a brilliant job. They all concur. The Navy
handles sea, land, air, and now space as many of our astronauts
were naval officers and scientists.

There are wonders aplenty and undiscovered in the briney deep
and the Navy is hard at it. They bust their tails encountering
mysteries and dangers only we sci-fi guys can whip up.

Are there unusual archaeological discoveries the public is
unaware of? Sure are! They're not advertised because no one
wants some gung ho diver types digging up some lethal artifact
and selling it to some psycho on Ebay.

The oceans are vastly unexplored and is an environment that goes
from one extreme to another. I recall in high school a bend I
had on become a marine biologist. I ate those books and even got
a letter from then Capt. Jacques Cousteau when I badgered him
about what being an marine explorer was about. I was helped
there as one of the local college professors was a good friend
of his. He told me then that less than 1% of the oceans had been
explored and that the life forms and artifacts were yet to be
discovered.

I even had a sub commander pal of mine who was on a team that
discovered man made structures far out on the sea shelf where
there shouldn't have been. They were of what appeared to be of
Native American construct and it was easy for me to place their
origin as I'm part Native American. Didn't make sense they were
there but they were. Says people were here in N. America far
earlier than had previously been established and not only that
but the ocean levels were dramatically lower for quite some time
than previously thought.

The Navy knows it's stuff buddy-boy and as for their UFO data I
can only say it won't be listed under UFO.

Try some other acronyms.

Good thing the first UFO books I read as a kid were from
Ivan T. Sanderson.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                         Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 13:38:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:05:37 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 20:36:38 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:36:47 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>I have no desire to get involved in this, other than to point
>out an inaccuracy in David Rudiak's reply:

><snip>

>>As you told Paul Kimball, the way to get your blogs read is
>>to keep them "spicy." I doubt somebody like you would willingly
>>give up the "spice".

>This is false. David Rudiak is no doubt referring to a blog post
>I made some time ago wherein I stated that the RRR guys like to
>"keep it spicy" at their blog. This was my opinion, however, as
>anyone who read the post would have been aware. It was _not_
>something that Rich Reynolds told me, and it was certainly _not_
>something that Rich Reynolds told me to do in order to get one's
>blog read.

>David Rudiak has misrepresented what I wrote so that he can
>score a cheap debating point off of Rich Reynolds. I don't have
>a dog in this hunt, other than to set the record straight.

>Paul Kimball


Odd, but just to set the record straight, you wrote the
following in your blog of July 11, 2005:

http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_redstarfilms_archive.html

"In honour of my pal Rich Reynolds (www.rrrgroup.blogspot.com),
who has recently been trying to convince me that the key to
blogging is to keep it spicy (or something like that - all I
really recall is him nattering on about "the medium" being 'the
message,'"

I think somebody could reasonably interpret your statement to
mean that Reynolds told you to keep your blogs spicy, no? Did
I really "misrepresent" what you wrote to "score a cheap
debating point?"

Also Rich Reynolds does indeed like to use the word "spicy" to
describe blogs or articles of an attack, ridiculing, insulting,
provocative, debunking, and/or tabloid nature, as you can see if
you read the following RR blogs:


Oct. 2, 2005:
http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

"If UFO mavens want a spicy overview of ufology, they can find
it inside the British UFO community." ("Spice" here being
equated to the usual snotty Brit UFO debunkery)

July 8, 2005:
http://tinyurl.com/cqwcc

"Sakulich appeals to them, not as a journalist, per se, but as a
spicy commentator or columnist." (Sakulich is a college student
who writes snide UFO debunkery articles for his college
newspaper.)

The fact that Reynolds and his group issue a constant barrage of
derogatory remarks about many UFO researchers is patently
obvious to anybody who can read or think. (Then after
deliberately baiting people, he hypocritically claims he wants
reasoned discussion.)

Reynolds and his RRRgroup try to portray themselves as the
Second Coming of Ufology, here to save Ufology from itself and
all those old, narrow-minded, biased Ufologists who supposedly
run it. But they don't seem to know much about the subject and
seem blissfully unaware of even basic scientific principles
needed in analyzing cases (Socorro being just one example). The
extent of their "research" seems to be Google searches,
psychobabble analyses, and wild, wing-flapping speculation. I
have yet to see them contribute one damn thing of any merit to
the field.

Sorry, but I don't see how Reynold's ignorant, disingenuous,
self-serving, tabloid "Ufology" is going to solve anything.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                   Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:18:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:07:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Fleming


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
>Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?


>"Why Are Aliens So Boring?"

Perhaps they don't realize their purpose in the universe is to
entertain humans. Silly aliens.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos.nul>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 21:35:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:11:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Balaskas


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
>Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?

<snip>

>The National Post, Saturday, 8 October 2005, p. A19:

>Why Are Aliens So Boring?

<snip>

>Clancy devotes careful attention to the mother and father of the
>abductee community, a New Hampshire social worker named Betty
>Hill and her postal worker husband, Barney. Believing they were
>abducted in 1961, they began hypnotherapy a few years later.
>That's how Barney deeply affected American mass culture by
>giving credibility to the little guys with big heads and
>wraparound eyes who have since appeared in everything from Close
>Encounters of the Third Kind to The X-Files.

>Asked under hypnosis to draw an alien, Barney came up with a
>sketch that launched a thousand myths. In fact, he was
>reproducing a face he had seen 12 days earlier on a TV show, The
>Outer Limits. But by the time anyone figured that out the aliens
>Clancy calls 'macrocephalic space-waifs' had become permanently
>lodged in mass culture. As Clancy says, 'Betty and Barney Hill
>got their ideas from books, movies and TV. From then on, people
>got their ideas from books, movies, TV, and Betty and Barney
>Hill.


Hi Paul!

The seemingly very reasonable and logical deduction above made
by CSICOP and now promoted as the truth by Harvard psychologist
Susan Clancy that Barney Hill's drawing of the aliens which
abducted him was directly influenced by the 'The Outer Limits'
episide 'The Bellero Shield' is negated by one overlooked but
very important fact - Barney's eyes remained shut during the
entire abduction episode and he never saw the aliens from up
close!

Robert Fulford, the journalist that wrote this article, claims
that Clancy devoted careful attention to this classic abduction
case. Not only is this not evident to me but instead reveals
Fulford's personal biases regarding abductions by accepting
Clancy's views over the more distinguished Harvard researcher
into abductions, the late Professor, Dr. John Mack.

The un-critical thinking and biases evident in this particular





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                   Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Bueche

From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 20:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:14:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Bueche


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
>Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?


>The National Post, Saturday, 8 October 2005, p. A19:

>Why Are Aliens So Boring?

<snip>


There is one part of Fulford's column worth noting, and here it
is:

"[Aliens] appear to be carrying out a peculiar assignment,
raiding the reproductive systems of their victims to collect
DNA. ...Why? ...anyone even mildly curious will wonder what they
want with a substandard planet's genetic material."

Fulford reveals everything right there.

His quote is disturbingly similar to one of my favorite
skeptical quotes from a few years ago: "I would wonder why they
would waste their time on a small planet by an insignificant
star." The latter quote is from San Francisco University
psychologist Barry L. Beyerstein (chair of the British Columbia
Society of Skeptics).

The pair of these quotes together says a lot about skeptics'
view of humanity.

Life may be a great deal more precious than these cynics





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:46:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:51:46 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>That David Rudiak, an optometrist, hasn't checked into the
>>>eye disease of Lonnie Zamora or his eye glass
>>>prescrption, shows that the episode needs more than it
>>>has received.

><snip>

>>Are you inferring it may not? Why do you and others insist
>>on making it appear that, because he was wearing glasses, he
>>was blind without them? Usually glasses are minor correction
>>options. know this is a standard lawyer's ploy, questioning
>>witness eyesight when it comes to the fact that they wear
>>glasses and so forth. But ask yourself, as I did, why he
>>would still be on the force if his eyesight was so bad? Full
>>sighted individuals often screw up where witnessing events
>>are concerned. It's experience that counts. He saw the
>>object, the small occupants and _then_ he lost his
>>glasses... not his memory. But we always hear about how he
>>lost his glasses afterward. What difference does that make?
>>Read the man's testimony.

>>>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology
>>>is nowadays. What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at
>>>it long enough to
>>make that charge.

><snip>

>>>what do you think Zamora saw?

>>I think Zamora saw what he said he saw. Right now it stands
>>as a UFO for the lack of a better term.

><snip>

>>...so far I'm using fact, not theory. What's wrong with
>>that? And it will never be closed until it's solved.

>Don:

>The eyglass thing may seem minor, but when investigating UFOs
>or anything else, even the smallest item should be looked at
>or into.

>That Rudiak, an optometrist, and you dismiss Zamora's eye
>condition, conjecturing that his eye-sight had to be okay
>since he was an acting police officer, presumes more than it
>should

This is malarky, Rich. You're just wasting time. You read all of
the rest that Dave sent, re the timeline and when Lonnie did have
his glasses on, and all you can come up with is weak nonsense.

>That is not good investigation.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                        UFOs Have A Flare About Them

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:44:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:44:48 -0400
Subject: UFOs Have A Flare About Them




Source: The Daily Southtown - Tinley Park, Ilinois - USA

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dsnews/091nd4.htm

Sunday, October 9, 2005


UFOs Have A Flare About Them

Witnesses postulate a new theory about those mysterious red
lights

Sunday, October 9, 2005

By Lauren FitzPatrick Staff writer

Unidentified flying red objects spotted recently over Tinley
Park and Orland Park have stirred up UFO investigating
communities everywhere.

National UFO Web sites are all over the red beauties. The latest
news cited on the home page of the Seattle-based National UFO
Reporting Center reads, "Late Friday night, Sept. 30, 2005, our
offices began receiving reports of several peculiar red lights,
seen in the night sky above Tinley Park and Orland, Ill."

Those peculiar pulses of red light floated over Southland skies
last weekend, around 11:15 Friday night and again at 1 a.m.
Saturday, eerily similar to ones that showed up last year on
mild weekend nights in August and October. Hundreds of
Southlanders saw the lights last weekend, too =97 and found them
just as puzzling as their predecessors.

But a small circle of friends in Tinley Park believe they've
debunked the mystery of the glowing red floaters.

Dave Palagi was sitting with his wife around a fire in their
friends' back yard Sept. 30, enjoying a lovely, clear night when
they all saw the oddity explained.

"We could clearly see the red lights themselves were flares, and
each was suspended by two balloons," he said.

"An occasional ash could be seen dropping. Another member of the
party then saw a third balloon, farther to the north and much
higher. We were watching them actually rising =97 lazily drifting
along and going up."

Palagi figured the balloons were launched around 175th Street
and 84th Avenue, not far from Wally and Maureen Bekta's home in
the 8200 block of Queen Victoria Lane where the group sat.

Maureen Bekta also saw lights and the "balloon-type thing on top
of the two that were lower and closer.

"It was low enough that we felt like it was a prank," she said.
The balloons themselves were dark-colored =97 "you could just see
the outline."

"Aha!" Palagi said, "This is how they did it. It was just such a
revelation after seeing these things last year."

The naysayers

It's been anyone's guess what the lights are, since everyone
seems to know what they're not.

A Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman said she checked
into the lights last year, too. If they weren't planes or
helicopters, the FAA wouldn't track them.

"We don't track lights," Elizabeth Isham Cory said.

Tinley Park police, who received some calls last weekend, denied
reports of flares.

"From all the reports we've ever received, they're not flares
with some helium balloons or anything like this," Tinley Park
police Cmdr. Tom Boling said.

Boling said his department would not investigate the lights
unless "there's some reckless conduct that would endanger
someone."

"We just don't know what's causing these red lights to appear in
the sky," he said.

The National Weather Service also was stumped.

But an astronomer at Chicago's Adler Planetarium, who concluded
the lights weren't meteors or comets or satellites, said they
did appear to be man-made.

Dr. Mark Hammergren watched several tapes of last year's lights
at the request of a local Mutual UFO Network chapter.

"One thing that makes me very suspicious is that these sightings
all have occurred on weekends =97 (that) suggests that there's
some human activity connected with it," he said. "I would love
to believe this, but I'm not going to base my career and spend
my time on something that's cooked up by some hoaxers."

There exists a "standard" UFO hoax that uses a candle and a
plastic dry cleaning bag to fashion a sort of glowing hot air
balloon, but these lights are too brilliantly red to be ordinary
flames, Hammergren said.

He likes the road flare theory.

Flying flares

Automotive flares typically are red, and burn brightly enough to
be clearly visible from great distances, easily a quarter of a
mile and up, said Bob Defonte of Orion Safety products, the
largest of a handful of domestic flare manufacturing companies.

And they can burn 15, 20 =97 even up to 30 minutes, he said.
They're inexpensive and readily available, too. Wal-Mart sells a
pack of three 15-minute flares for less than $5, Defonte said.
While half-hour burners are slightly harder for the civilian
customer to find =97 they're commonly used by state troopers and
railroad workers, he said.

Getting ahold of flares is the easy part, Defonte said.
Launching them into the sky would be harder, considering a 30-
minute flare measures 16 inches in length and weighs just under
a pound.

It would take two helium balloons about 2 or 3 feet in diameter
to lift that kind of weight, said Marshall Brain, a man of
science and the founder of HowStuffWorks.com.

"It strikes me as possible, but profoundly dangerous," Brain
said. The thing is, he said, flares are really hot and don't
stop until they burn out on their own.

Someone connecting burning flares to a balloon-type propeller
would have to consider heat, and neither Palagi nor Bekta could
tell what linked the light to its source.

UFO fans hang on

UFO investigators said they're not ready to call these sightings
a hoax =97 not yet, anyway.

Peter B. Davenport, the National UFO Reporting Center's founder,
said balloons couldn't account for the complex paths the lights
followed across the sky.

"(They) were actually maneuvering in a seemingly complex
fashion," Davenport said. "How would a person arrange to have
that happen, I wonder."

And what about the danger?

"How many people do you know who would be willing to launch
high-temperature flares over a populated area?" Davenport
wondered. "What happens if a flare cuts its tether and falls
onto the local petroleum refinery, chemical plant, filling
station, paint warehouse, school auditorium roof, etc.?"

And Chicago-based UFO investigator Dr. Mark Rodeghier said he
needs more information to make any kind of judgment.

"I'm certainly open to the idea that the cause of these
sightings is man made, not alien, but I'm not convinced I've
heard any theory that makes any sense," he said. "Something has
to be flying or holding the lights in a huge formation well over
1,000 feet across."

Proper investigations would require going up in a helicopter the
next time the lights appear, shining a powerful spotlight onto
them from the ground or viewing them with a powerful telescope
that also would record what it took in, he said.

But his Center for UFO Studies lacks those kinds of resources
and must rely on eyewitness videotapes and interviews.

So he will join others like Hammergren who continue to watch the
skies and analyze what they see, hoping for the best.

After all, said Hammergren, who believed in UFOs as a child:
"You never know when something might come out of it.

"I'm an astronomer; I'd like nothing more than to see an alien





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                     Quest for E.T. Comes To UC Berkeley

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:49:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:49:32 -0400
Subject: Quest for E.T. Comes To UC Berkeley




Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California - USA

http://tinyurl.com/9oguf

Friday, October 7, 2005


Quest for E.T. Comes To UC Berkeley

Weekend conference to focus on building supertelescopes

Keay Davidson
Chronicle Science Writer

A free public discussion on the future of astronomy and the
search for extraterrestrial life is scheduled for this evening
at UC Berkeley.

The topic will be discussed by three scientists, including
Berkeley astronomer Geoffrey Marcy, a famed discoverer of
planets that orbit other stars. The public session, "Other
Worlds: From Imagination to Image: The Great Challenge of
Building Supertelescopes in Search of Extraterrestrial Life,"
starts at 8 p.m. at Zellerbach Auditorium.

The session is part of a conference called "Amazing Light:
Visions for Discovery" that has attracted numerous scientific
celebrities, including Nobel Prize winners, who plan to discuss
"foundational questions in physics and cosmology." The rest of
the conference is open only to registrants, many of whom are
paying up to $500 apiece to attend.

The conference is held partly in honor of the 90th birthday of
Charles H. Townes, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist at Berkeley,
as well as in recognition of the 100th anniversary of Albert
Einstein's publication of his earliest scientific papers on the
theory of relativity.

The conference, which started Thursday and concludes Saturday,
is partly funded by the John Templeton Foundation, which funds
research on topics including science and its relationship to
religion.

The foundation also annually awards $1 million to a person who
"deepens the world's understanding of God." Townes, best known
for inventing the "maser" and for paving the path to development





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                     Dr. Melvin Redfern On Experiencers

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:55:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:55:27 -0400
Subject: Dr. Melvin Redfern On Experiencers




Source: Alternate Perceptions Magazine - Waynesboro, Tennessee


Issue #94

October 2005

An Interview with Dr. Melvin Redfern
by Brent Raynes

Dr. Melvin Redfern, a retired psychotherapist living with his
wife in Chucky, Tennessee, shares with us in this most
interesting phone interview of August 15, 2005, his views on the
place of psychotherapy in ufology and also shares his own
personal and unusual UFO and paranormal experiences. His website
is:

http://community.webtv.net/ETUFOGROUP/UFOEasternTennesse

His email address is: DrRedfern.nul

Dr. Redfern welcomes emails from our readers.

Editor: You just had an ebook entitled Assessment and Treatment
of UFO Witnesses and Experiencers, which has become available
from a group over in London, England, thanks to a Paul and Karin
Holloway, whose website is: www.Experiencers.net.

You state that it=92s primarily focused at psychotherapists,
hypnotists, and social workers, but that really anyone
interested in the UFO field should find it interesting. So
please share with us some details as to what this book is about
and what you hope that it will accomplish.

Dr. Redfern: I think that since there is very little if any
treatment going on in traditional mental health centers, these
are chapters dealing with assessment and treatment of claims
that most people in the mental heath field would not even be
allowed to treat. I say that because of the prejudice that
exists. In other words, they don=92t mind treating somebody, but
as far as the investigation part of it I think that=92s my
contribution with this book. Teaching therapists how to do a
diagnostic or cognitive interview, as we call it, as opposed to
a therapeutic session.

In other words, if you went to a traditional mental health
center or professional and talked about seeing a UFO and having
been an experiencer or an abductee they would immediately assess
you for psychopathology or mental illness and you would probably
end up being referred to their psychiatrist, being medicated, or
possibly hospitalized. You=92d be given all sorts of diagnoses,
and none of them would be describing having adjustment reactions
to being a UFO witness or an experiencer.

So basically I wasn=92t trying to whine about the absence of
adequate treatment, but to help therapists who are in a private
practice, where they=92re able to do what they want to, as far as
focus, to know how to identify and help these individuals.

Editor: Right, because a lot of your traditional mental health
therapists first off are working under the assumption that they
know what the cause is, so they=92re treating what they believe
the symptoms are suggesting. They=92re assuming they need
medication.

Dr. Redfern: Many would be diagnosed with some kind of psychotic
experience where you are experiencing delusions. It gets really
nasty. There=92s very few places--in fact, none that I=92m aware
of--that would allow a person to get the kind of treatment that I
feel they need.

Editor: Since your primary focus is on assessment and treatment
and the book is primarily focused at mental health
practitioners, would you care to describe some about your own
background and how you came to be involved in this area of
controversial study?

Dr. Redfern: I=92m 64 years old and retired from a career as a
psychologist. I have a Ph.D in psychology, a doctorate in
clinical hypnotherapy, and a Masters of Arts degree in
rehabilitation counseling, and a Master of Education degree. I=92m
a Reiki Master and Teacher. It means that I=92m able to initiate
anybody through all the four stages of Reiki which is an
oriental hands on type healing. I=92m trained in pranic healing
with Dr. Betty Scott, who is a professor at the University of
Missouri, and prana is the word for energy, or universal life
force, in India.

I spent most of my career working in traditional mental health
centers and hospitals and had a private practice that was also
involved with hypnosis. In treating people and documenting UFO
experiences you=92re not really allowed to do hypnosis in most
places that I=92ve ever worked. One time I wrote a progress note
saying how I had helped someone using hypnosis and the person
paying the bill, the insurance company representative said, =93Oh,
we don=92t pay for psychotherapy.=94 I said, =93Well, that odd because
Milton Erickson (who is deceased now) was the first medical
doctor to bring hypnosis into the field of psychiatry. A highly
respected man,=94 and this person said, =93Who is Milton Erickson?=94
I just kind of rolled my eyes up toward the ceiling and decided
I think I=92ll just talk about progress notes with a focus on
stress control and something I could be paid for. In other
words, there=92s a great deal of prejudice out there for doing a
variety of things.

Editor: Right, and then the people who have broken the mold,
like Dr. John Mack, who was a Harvard psychiatrist, received a
great deal of flack.

Dr. Redfern: God rest his soul. For those people who don=92t know,
he was killed when hit by an automobile in London some months
ago. He basically had to make some compromises with the Harvard
Medical School and had to focus at Cambridge Hospital with
treating people with paranormal experiences involving UFOs, and
the reason I say he had to make compromises with Harvard Medical
School is that it was all right as long as it was under the
umbrella of psychiatry and the clients there would be paying for
their treatments through insurance or out of their pocket. In
fact, I=92m originally from the Boston area. I retired here about
three years ago to Tennessee. Anyway, I was thrilled that I was
so close to Dr. Mack, so I called Cambridge Hospital and asked
if I could meet him or sit down and have a cup of coffee with
fellow experiencers and witnesses of UFOs, and they wanted to
know if I had health insurance. I said, =93Certainly, but why on
earth would you want my health insurance? That would be labeling
me a patient, and if you=92re going to give me a battery of
psychological exams then these are the same tests that I
administer.=94

I mean this is crazy. He did a fine job, but it had to be put
under the category of psychiatry, and my feeling is that there
has got to be a better way to do this.

Editor: Overall would you say that it=92s an advantage or a
disadvantage to being both an investigator and an experiencer?

Dr. Redfern: Well I would say that it requires the focus on the
client and not let my experiences lead to suggestions that
wouldn=92t have been initiated by the client. In psychology and
psychiatry there=92s a concept called transference and another one
called counter-transference.

Transference is when the client says things that stir up some
unfinished business in my life and then I can=92t be objective
because I=92m still festering with something. Counter-transference
is usually where I brought up something that the client
responded to that wouldn=92t even have been addressed if I hadn=92t
initiated it. We have to be very careful.

I had some training at a law enforcement academy in Texas a few
years ago with an investigator of forensic hypnosis. This was
using hypnosis to help victims of crimes identify their
perpetrators--to identify things such as licence plate numbers
and things like that. There are only a few states that allow
that to be brought up in court and it has to be videotaped and
available to the lawyers for the defendant where they can have
rebuttals to it. There was an awful situation of a murderer that
got off scott free because the videotape was invalid. That is,
the hypnotist said, =93Do you remember the numbers of the license
plate?=94 And the defense attorney for the accused said, =93A
license plate has numbers and letters, and if you ask what were
the numbers then you=92re leading the witness.=94 And would you
believe that because of that one thing this person got off?

It=92s hard enough for most people to have the courage to even
talk about these things and here we are on the buckle of the
Bible Belt and a lot of folks that I=92ve talked to down here
don=92t feel safe talking to any of their clergy--feel that they=92re
dabbling in things that are Satanic and shouldn=92t be talked
about, and so if they can=92t talk to their clergy and people in
the mental health field and they don=92t want to go around talking
with their co-workers and neighbors for fear of being ridiculed.
What happens is you end up just shutting down and keeping all of
this to yourself, and all of that leads to other very unpleasant
emotional problems.

It would be similar to a rape victim not feeling free to tell
their story, even to the police. Incest survivors have the same
problem. A lot of them have repressed or pushed way back in
their subconscious the experience. On the average, most incest
survivors don=92t even consciously recall the experiences until
their mid-thirties. It=92s a very complicated thing to develop
trust with people.

I=92ve had a single session with people that just needed to speak
the unspeakable, all the things they hoped to go to their grave
with, and then I never saw them again, and they thought that was
psychotherapy. That=92s only the beginning. You=92re dealing with a
description of what happened. That=92s part of the cognitive
interview. That would be like being an alcoholic who just wants
to talk about his experiences drinking and never mind a program
of recovery.

There=92s a tendency for some of these folks to be made famous,
you might say, stars of TV and radio shows, but they never get
past describing what happened. They haven=92t reached a point of
crossing over and making sense of it enough to have some
normality in their lives.

Another forgotten group...Well, maybe not so much these
days...I=92m a veteran of the =9160s and you just didn=92t talk about
your experiences. Nobody wanted to hear them. You were in an
unpopular conflict. Someone asked me recently, =93How do you feel
about all of these flags out on people=92s houses?=94 I said, =93It
makes me angry. Nobody flew flags for us in the =9160s.=94

Editor: Yeah, it was a whole different atmosphere.

Dr. Redfern: So the point I=92m trying to make is these
people--myself included--had nobody to talk to, and you might say
=93Well, you certainly had rights to medical treatment and VA
hospitals.=94 But what if you wanted to talk things that bordered
on things like war crimes. A psychiatrist writes something down.
How do you know where that=92s going to end up? In other words,
it=92s a possibility that you might end up in federal prison. The
VA realized they weren=92t getting the Vietnam era veterans to
come to them so they wised up and they set up things called out
reach centers, and there was no paper trail.

In my experience I was in Brighton, in a part of Boston, and I
saw this helicopter on a building sign, and it said, =93Operation
Out Reach Vietnam Era Veterans Center.=94 I walked in there and
they said, =93We don=92t need your name or anything, but there=92s a
group meeting tonight and you=92re welcomed to come.,=94 and I went
to the group.

Usually in psychotherapy you take a long, long time developing
trust. They said, =93This is Mel. Mel, would you tell the group
what your worst experience was?=94 (Laughs) I thought what about
trust and all that, but I said it, and I talked about it every
week for a year, and then my nightmares stopped, and everyone
else in the group did the same thing. They spoke of things they
weren=92t telling anybody (else). And this was pure therapy. There
was no sign in sheet. There was nothing that came back to haunt
me from it.

So what I=92m getting at is that there=92s a lot of people who are
similar to witnesses of UFO phenomena=97experiencers--who know what
it=92s like not to be able to speak of their experience, or tell
their story without being condemned.

So that=92s kind of a theme of the book also. How to change that
around.

I had been involved with MUFON for a number of years and then I
thought that in the area I live it=92s not quite the same as the
clients that many people in MUFON work with. So I=92m helping in
the formation of a new group which will be called the
ETUFOGROUP.

Guess what it stands for? Instead of E.T. it=92s Eastern Tennessee
UFO Group. Thought that was a nice play on words. It=92ll just be
a place where people can tell stories with pot luck dinners. I=92d
like to break bread with the people and look them in the eye,
and hear their stories. I get bored stiff really going from web
page to web page and chat groups with people I=92ll never ever
meet.

Editor: Get back to grass roots!

Dr. Redfern: Yeah, get back to grass roots and getting a
humanistic quality to something that=92s really rather dry with
forms, and then I wonder =93Gee, where are all these forms going?=94
They end up maybe in a black hole and I=92ve never read any
articles on how they=92ve done research on all the thousands of
investigations that we=92ve done. I thought it was a lot of work
for nothing and I=92d rather sit down and be on somebody=92s porch
and just talk about what happened.

There is some use with all of my training, mainly with what we
call mood congruency. Affect is a psychiatrist=92s term for
feeling. Your affect is where you=92re angry or sad, or whatever.
If you=92re talking to somebody that has a flat affect, that means
they don=92t show any emotions that=92s fitting the situation
they=92re talking about. In other words, if they talk about being
an abductee and it sounds like they=92re reading a weather report
you start wondering. You make a mental note. Something is
incongruent. It didn=92t fit. So rather than try and separate
those people that are genuine and not genuine, the personal
feeling is that the jury is still out about what this all means.
Then there are people who are very depressed who have flat out
affect. That=92s one of the signs of post traumatic stress
disorder, where you don=92t have any strong emotional feelings.
You certainly wouldn=92t talk to a veteran and say, =93Well, you
were never really in combat if you don=92t have any strong
feelings.=94 In other words, they=92ve been repressed or buried so
far back they don=92t feel anything.

Body language has been studied quite a bit.

Editor: Yeah, they say a lot of what we communicate is not
really--the important things aren=92t a lot of times verbal.
They=92re body language and things like that.

Dr. Redfern: And as a hypnotherapist there=92s something called
ideomotor responses where you might ask a person to levitate a
finger that=92s designated as an affirmative answer, when it=92s a
negative answer, or I don=92t know or I prefer not to say. There=92s
ways to notice the movement of the fingers whether or not it=92s
the subconscious truly doing this. You can have arm levitations
the same way.

To show you how odd things are, I worked with a woman who wasn=92t
even into hypnosis. She just had a heavy gentleman sitting on
the couch and needing stress therapy, so she asked him to feel
like he was light as a feather and that he was just going to
float, and son-of-a-gun he floated right off the couch. Several
feet off the couch. This was a person who had no formal training
as a hypnotherapist. He just took that suggestion of floating
and actually had a capability of doing that.

Editor: He paranormally levitated?

Dr. Redfern: Yeah.

Editor: Did you see this?

Dr. Redfern: No, it was just told to me by a colleague. But you
see she doesn=92t tell that story to everybody. Otherwise, she
wouldn=92t be working.

Editor: Can you share any instance or instances where being an
experiencer yourself actually helped? Where it perhaps gave you
a useful insider=92s insight into a situation or something?

Dr. Redfern: Well, one of the experiences that I have had
throughout my life and repeatedly are scoop marks. If you=92ve
ever been to a dermatologist and they do a biopsy it looks a
little like a spoon. They just give you a shot and dig out
whatever part of the skin looks diseased and send it off to be
analyzed. But I=92ve had scoop marks. Usually five of them. They=92d
start let=92s say 3 millimeters and get progressively smaller,
down to the size of a pencil mark. They would usually occur on
my ankles.

Editor: Did you have any memories associated with the scoop
marks?

Dr. Redfern: Maybe six months ago I had the last event of the
scoop marks, but they usually happen at least 2 or 3 times a
year. I don=92t know what it means.

Editor: Do you feel that paranormal experiences should be kept
separate from UFO experiences?

Dr. Redfern: I feel they should not be kept separate. I think
there=92s an overlap with a lot of it.

Editor: Many of the people who have described encounters with
craft or entities often seem to describe a kind of telepathic
contact more than say verbal communication.

Dr. Redfern: And most of us that have animals, especially dogs,
know what cross species telepathy is about. All I have to do is
basically think about taking my dogs for a walk and they=92re
already up and ready to go. I haven=92t even called them.

As far as the paranormal, I have a little anecdote to tell you.
I worked with some clients who were mentally retarded and I had
seen this one particular fella probably for 15 years. It seemed
like all he wanted was to hurry up and wind up the session so he
could run out and have a cigarette. And one day he said, like he
had absolute normal intellectual functioning... In other words,
his speech was like that of a normal person, and that threw me
for a loop, and he said, =93Mel, when you drive home tonight I
want you to be especially careful.=94 Well, I started to peel out,
like I normally did after I was done working in this workshop,
and I thought, =93What if he knows something I don=92t?=94 And I said
I think that just for the heck of it I=92ll slow down just a tad,
instead of having a heavy foot on the accelerator, and the car
in front of me got broadsided by a truck going through a stop
light and the driver was hanging out of the car dead. That
retarded man saved my life because if I had gone a little faster
that would have been me.

It=92s interesting that I have a wife who is a Native American.
Her family origin is Abenaki. So there=92s a lot of Native
American spirituality that I got introduced to when we were
married, and one of the things that she did was get rid of
negative energy in the house by saging.

Anyway she was saging the house. We were living on Cape Cod at
the time. And there was some entity that wasn=92t able to slip
back into the other dimension. Another interesting sign is when
animals see things that we don=92t. Our dog, at the time, we=92d
notice his eyes following something we couldn=92t see, and then
once and awhile we=92d see something run behind a picture. It was
so fast you could hardly see it. Or behind a baseboard. And it
was just kind of a curiosity, and then one day my wife called me
on my way home from work saying she was cleaning the kitchen
area and found a creature that was part bat, part bird, part
mouse. It had the face of a mouse, but it had the beak of a
bird, it had talons, it had bat wings, it had a furry body, and
between you and me and the lamp post there ain=92t no such thing.
(Laughs)

So she called me, all upset, and put it in a towel, and by the
time I got home there was some disintegration. There was no
blood. All of a sudden I had this intense rage and I was
thinking, =93You filthy blankedly blank. How dare you enter our
home.=94 And I took it outside and poured lighter fluid on it and
set it on fire. A friend of mine said, =93You mean you didn=92t take
a picture?=94

No I didn=92t. I=92ve never seen anything like that before or since.

Editor: So at that point your emotions over road the scientist
in you?

Dr. Redfern: I believe there was an inability of this creature
to cross into another dimension that it wanted to go to, and the
sage prevented it. I can=92t say that for certain.

Editor: So she had saged prior to it getting stuck in the
kitchen area?

Dr. Redfern: That=92s right. We had other unusual experiences in
that house. One of them was down cellar. My wife was doing some
washing and things started moving off of shelves. Glass objects
were just gently lowering themselves maybe 4 or 5 feet onto the
concrete floor, and nothing got broken. Very strange.

A very good friend of hers recently died. He became mentally ill
in the last couple of years. Began stalking her, and after he
died my wife felt this pressure on her. She couldn=92t move, and I
thought =93That=92s strange.=94 And then it happened to both of us. It
was like some energy was pushing down... and we were not even
able to speak to each other. We were just inches away from each
other and we couldn=92t even communicate, and it happened three
times. So my wife talked to her mother who is very psychic about
these things and she said, =93You need to tell your friend Jack to
go into the Light and leave you alone.=94 And we haven=92t had that
happen since.

My feeling of being a channel for healing I think is directly
tied in with experiences I=92ve had with contact, E.T.=92s and
abductions, and in the book I listed about 80 separate healings
of people, and they were actually happening, these contacts, as
far back at age 6.

But when I was in Texas taking this course with the Law
Enforcement Academy in forensic hypnosis there were about 30 of
us there. A couple of lawyers, two of us were psychotherapists,
and the rest were police detectives (and) sheriffs. The odd
thing was that it was like I was in the group back in Boston for
veterans because they were all suffering post traumatic stress
disorder from killing people. So whenever we had a break or
lunch it seemed like somebody would always come up and want to
talk about their experiences of having killed somebody and how
they weren=92t able to resolve it. So one particular person said,
=93Would you come over to my motel and I=92d like to tape record it
and have a lot of witnesses and I=92d like to tell you about
killing a man ten years previous.=94

This particular police detective I used an unusual induction of
a fairy tale of Jack and the Beanstalk. I asked him to pretend
that he was climbing this beanstalk, went through the clouds,
and then he would be able to step off and there was a wall that
had a big wooden door that he would swing open--had a path that
went through a garden with beautiful flowers, and then there was
a stone bench, and on the bench sat the man that he killed. I
said, =93Why don=92t you go over there and sit next to him and tell
him what you=92ve been through for the last ten years.=94 And then I
suggested that a couple of angels showed up and escorted this
man into the light, and then suggested that the person go back
down the path to the beanstalk and back into the motel room.

And then I said, =93What was it like?=94 He said, =93The guy wasn=92t
there.=94 And after all that I just thought, =93Ahhh.=94 Then he said,
=93But I saw the angels and they walked right through me and I
feel totally healed.=94

So I was just so elated and I went back to my motel, and
unbeknownst to me there were about 80 construction workers that
showed up while I was gone. I was up on the fourth floor and had
to go through this group of drunken men that were scuffling with
each other and drunk. But you know nobody hurt me, and the
strangest thing happened. It was like I was losing my hearing.
All of a sudden, with every step I took, everything got softer
and softer until there was no sound at all, and then I went into
my room and got into my bed clothes and sat up against the
headboard and I was just thinking what a wonderful experience it
was for that detective who had such an inner healing if you
will. The room was dark and all of a sudden five balls of light,
about the size of basketballs, appeared. Three on the top, two
on the bottom. All of this was at the end of my bed, and they
were jiggling up and down, and I thought, =93Gee, this reminds me
of when I was a kid going to movies with sing a longs with the
bouncing ball over the words,=94 and all of a sudden I just felt
kind of elated. I couldn=92t stop laughing. They just seemed to be
having a good time, telepathically laughing with me. And then,
as quickly as they appeared, they disappeared, and then a red
orb the size of the other white ones showed up on the right and
then it blinked off and I was asking questions like =93Are you
angels? Is this red one my spirit guide? Or is this you Jesus?
Or mom, or dad, or my brother?=94 I just wondered things like that
and I noticed this light kept coming back on and it would blink
off, and then I realized that every time the answer was negative
it blinked off. Whenever the answer was positive it blinked on.
I must have talked for hours literally talking but no talking
back from the orb. It would just blink on and blink off, and
then I fell asleep. I got up in the morning, had breakfast with
another person from this training group, and he said, =93How did
you sleep last night with all those lights?=94 I thought, =93My
goodness, I=92m not alone.=94 And he said, =9380 people got arrested
on your floor. There were helicopters everywhere. The police
raided the place. They were all taken out. How could you sleep
with all of that screaming, yelling, and the helicopters?=94

I didn=92t hear a thing, and my sense of it was when I started
walking down the hall I think I got abducted.

There was a MUFON field investigator back in Massachusetts that
did a (presentation) with slides where a graphics artist had
drawn what people had described. I almost fell off my chair when
there was a little girl looking up at her ceiling, and guess
what she saw. Five white orbs. Three on the top, two on the
bottom. Exactly the ones that I saw.

And it seemed as though every day after that there was some kind
of physical healing that went on. I seem to be drawn to people
that had similar experiences. Many of them were extremely
dramatic. There was a blind woman that I had her vision
restored. There was a woman with cancer that had two tumors. One
on her neck and one on her shoulder, and she had had a bilateral
mastectomy and her tumors became necrotic, which means they
died. When they operated on her they just removed these little
black tumors that had died, and the doctor said, =93What have you
got to say about this? One in a thousand dies for unknown
reasons, and you=92ve had two.=94 She said, =93Well, I talked to my
cells.=94 He said, =93I don=92t care what you do. Do more of it!=94 At
the time, I was doing some volunteer work with a Catholic
counseling center and so I said, =93Well, since they made you a
mentor for these other women at the Boston Hospital, why don=92t
you gather these people that you=92re the mentor for and we=92ll
make a group.=94 The group went on for years and there were eight
children that showed up and we had a husband that showed up. It
was one of the most rewarding experiences that I=92ve had.

Editor: So you would try and give them positive images and
suggestions? Or did Reiki?

Dr. Redfern: I basically taught them how to do Reiki on each
other. The odd thing was that it was at the end of the day and I
was in the directors office writing my progress notes and there
was some dark force that didn=92t appear to like what was going on





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

               Redfern Autographed Uncorrected Proofs For Sale

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:16:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:06:43 -0400
Subject: Redfern Autographed Uncorrected Proofs For Sale


I have 6 - Nick Redfern - Autographed Uncorrected Proofs for sale
at:

http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/books/

5 copies of "Body Snatchers in The Desert"
1 copy of "Three Men Seeking Monsters"

$11.00 USD Inside the USA & Canada (includes shipping)
$14.00 USD Outside the USA & Canada (includes shipping)

All are autographed and are first come first served.

I will accept Check, Money Order or Payment via PayPal.

PayPal and Money Order purchases will be shipped immediately
Purchases by check will be shipped when check clears the bank.

To order your copy go to http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/books/

If you have any questions just email me
terrygroff.nul






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                   Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:08:54 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:55:39 -0300
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:50:09 -0700
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no
>>>>>basis in fact.

>And might I add that after 41 years of development there is
>still no evidence of this type of small craft in the US-or
>anyone else's-inventory. Why spend so much on the development of
>helicopters of all shapes and sizes if you have this type of
>vehicle with VTOL capability, married to , silent, high speed
>"dash" capability. The best that they have come up with are UAVs
>a copy of model airplanes, loaded with computer software that
>are in the opening stages of infesting your airspace in the US.
>It amazes me when "researchers" play the "secret government
>technology" card whenever the rest of their argument falls
>apart. In this case the technology would have had to have been
>developed before 1964, and it just plain wasn't. The upshot is,
>it's a bogus argument which needs proving by those presenting
>the argument. So far Rich, you haven't done that.

<snip>

>Dave Rudiak has again vetted the glasses nonsense supporting
>what I said about their importance to the actual sighting and
>the aftermath, so there's no point in my attempting to improve
>on the succinct and obvious.

>So Lonnie's eyesight was corrected for the important phases of
>the sighting-other than when his face was in the dirt- and the
>balloon theory is a fairy tale. There was no earthbound,
>propulsive technology of the time to account for the craft*. The
>case still stands unsolved.

<snip>

>* Let's not forget the stability issues involved with a
>rotorless craft propelled by jets or rocketry with the C of G
>above the propulsive force and not hanging below it as in
>helicopters. They are inherently unstable and the human pilot
>cannot keep up with their tendency to fall around the C of G.
>Even high speed, highly maneuverable winged fighters have to
>have computers looking after stability to keep them airborne.
>The common f-18A has 5 OBCs to keep it from falling out of the
>sky. The F117A has 7. This is the newer, lightweight computer
>systems of the late 70s and early 80s,90s and 100's not the
>basement filling computers of the early 60s which would have had
>to be crammed into this little, wingless, even more unstable,
>auto sized machine along with the occupants, the engine,
>instruments the fuel and seats etc.

Don:

You're a wonderful guy but have it all wrong; well, partially
wrong.

First off Rudiak didn't vet anything. He surmised, which he can
do because he's an eye specialist. But still it's just
supposition. We have no idea what Zamora's eye situation was in
1964, and that's poor investigation no matter how much you guys
try to fudge the isssue.

As for the no-such-aircraft-has-come-into-being argument, you
have to concede from the Socorro incident that the vehicle
Zamora saw failed apparently or seemed to, causing its occupants
to be checking it out.

Therefore the vehicle didn't go further into production or use,
perhaps.

Also, where are those radiation findings, if any? Other
witnesses? Did anyone check into them, thoroughly?

The departure of the vehicle was unlike most other flying saucer
departures, which are invariably noiseless.

The occupants were not grays it seems, and their uniforms were
Earthlike.

The insignia was hardly alien.

The Socorro incident, as you concede,  is open to further
investigation.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: Socorro - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:43:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:10:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Reynolds


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 14:06:32 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 09:37:49 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>The Navy knows it's stuff buddy-boy and as for their UFO data I
>can only say it won't be listed under UFO.

Greg:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                   Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:52:49 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:13:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Ledger


>From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 20:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring?

>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
>>Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?

>>The National Post, Saturday, 8 October 2005, p. A19:

>>Why Are Aliens So Boring?

><snip>

>There is one part of Fulford's column worth noting, and here it is:

>"[Aliens] appear to be carrying out a peculiar assignment,
>raiding the reproductive systems of their victims to collect
>DNA. ...Why? ...anyone even mildly curious will wonder what they
>want with a substandard planet's genetic material."

>Fulford reveals everything right there.

<snip>

>"I would wonder why they
>would waste their time on a small planet by an insignificant
>star." The latter quote is from San Francisco University
>psychologist Barry L. Beyerstein (chair of the British Columbia
>Society of Skeptics). The pair of these quotes together says a
>lot about skeptics' view of humanity. Life may be a great deal
>more precious than these cynics believe.

Hi Will,

I would change the word precious to commonplace but desirable in
any form. Like yourself, I don't understand where the sage
reporters of the world have any evidence for the comparison in
the first place. The oft heard and read comments that Earth is a
cesspool and most likely undesirable to all alien species is so
much nonsense in my opinion. I can't see how any civilization
could have fought it's way up from the primordial soup to
intelligent species capable of space travel and have remained
benign - or extremely tolerant in nature. I think that this
comes from thousands or millions of years of evolution
culminating in space travel. Territorial imperatives fall by the
wayside once the home planet becomes a distant memory. Religion
and religious leaders are no longer needed to set various
factions at one another's throats and control the masses for
their own gain. Right there you have eliminated the two major
reasons for war.

>And that some forms of life may want to connect with other life
>may be entirely natural, and to be expected.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:17:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

>>>>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology
>>>>is nowadays. What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at
>>>>it long enough to
>>>make that charge.

>><snip>

>This is malarky, Rich. You're just wasting time. You read all of
>the rest that Dave sent, re the timeline and when Lonnie did have
>his glasses on, and all you can come up with is weak nonsense.

>>That is not good investigation.

>I don't think you are in any position to claim that!

Don:

I see that your response conveniently leaves out the rundown of
my UFO experience.

Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

What position does one have to be in for them to be able to
question anything ufological?

Are there rules that prohibit questioning, by neophytes and
others?

Who makes up those rules?

While you think I'm wasting time, others do not I surmise. The





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

                     Re: Memory Without Klass - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:20:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Aldrich


>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:33:07 +0200
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

><snip>

>>When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
>>a device which did stop car engines

>Jan, can you tell me the references of such a claim I have never
>heard before?


After about three weeks with various computer problems, I have
access to most of my files, but not the old E-mail files. So I
can't give you the specific url.

The device was produced by a British firm, the car had to run
over a strip with the electrical components in it. The device
didn't just stop the car, it wrecked the engine. Not exactly the
EME associated with UFOs, but neither is it a mystical device
Klass claimed. Once the effect has been established obviously
something more close to UFO EMEs could be engineered.

See also:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1259138,00.html

(Murray Bott found an incident in which RF with engine function
stopped blimp motor near large radio transmitter.)

Roos, John G. "Arresting Development: Non-Lethal Vehicle-
Stopping Device for the Army's Peacekeeping Bag of Tricks."
Armed Forces Journal International, vol. 138, no. 10, May 2001,
p. 24.

http://tinyurl.com/ch8oy

watch or for url wrap.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 10

              Re: International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:58:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:22:11 -0400
Subject: Re: International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>Date: Sunday, October 09, 2005 8:24 PM
>Subject: International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy

>Source: ITAR-TASS News Agency - Moscow, Russia

>http://www.tass.ru/eng/level2.html?NewsID=2499775&PageNum=0

>09.10.2005

>International UFO Symposium Underway In Italy

>ROME, October 9 (Itar-Tass) -- The First International UFO
>Symposium organized by the Italian National UFO Center is
>underway in the country's southern town of Cosenza, Calabria
>province.

<snip>

I've just returned from this conference, which was an
interesting mixture of SETI and ufology.

It received extensive and positive media coverage, including
features in some of the Italian national newspapers such as la
Stampa and il Tempo.

This is another important success for Centro Ufologico Nazionale
(CUN) and their President, Roberto Pinotti.

I'm sure that detailed reviews will be posted online in due





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Koi

From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 19:15:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:49:31 -0400
Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Koi


>From: Reed Hall <tanaleaf.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:38:00 -0600
>Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:09:28 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 07:45:06 -0400
>>Subject: Re: How To Foil An Alien Abduction - Balaskas

><snip>

>>Hi Everyone!

>>All the above techniques have been tried in the past with
>>little or no success in thwarting "alien" abduction attempts.
>>Having a shotgun may be a better way (eg. The 1955
>>Kelly-Hopkinsville UFO alien encounter), but many who
>>have been on this List back in 1997 may remember a
>>technique that was said to always works (see URL below).

>>http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1997/aug/d18-003.shtml

>>FLORIDA TODAY Space Online

>>For August 17, 1997

>>Spiritual warfare? Some look to Bible for answers to alien
>>abductions

>>By Rita Elkins
>>FLORIDA TODAY

><snip>

>>"It makes you wonder: If these beings are extra-terrestrial at
>>all, why would they respond to that name?" Jordan asks. "We
>>think we found the answer in the Bible, in Mark 16:17 where
>>Jesus said, 'In my name, they shall cast out demons.' That
>>seems to be exactly what we came across."

>>Three major researchers told Jordan, off the record, that they
>>had similar cases. But "they were afraid for their
>>credibility," he says. "They felt they already had put their
>>credentials out far enough dealing with extra-terrestrials."

>>Other "so-called researchers (are) sitting on this
>>information," Jordan says. "There's something wrong there.
>>They're just as bad as the people they say have conspiracies
>>in other ways."

><snip>

>>Of course, to avoid being abducted, I suspect one needs to do
>>more than simply believe in Jesus - after all, demons do too.
>>By asserting to the "aliens" the truth that we are a brother or
>>sister in Christ (rather than just reciting this as some
>>"magic" anti-abdcution formula), the aliens will know not to
>>mess with us since we are under the protection of a superior
>>power in the universe, God Himself.

>>If the aliens, demons or whatever these highly intelligent
>>beings are, all react and respond in this unexpected way during
>>their failed abduction attempts whenever the name of Jesus is
>>invoked and UFO/abduction researchers have kept this incredible
>>fact to themselves, then they have not only done a great
>>disservice to the public but are actually part of the
>>continuing UFO cover-up too.

>>So, do we continue to resist verbally, mentally and physically
>>or is there indeed a better way to avoid being abducted that
>>should be made known to all, even at the risk of ridicule by
>>our more skeptical or non-believing colleagues. If what was
>>written in this Florida Today article from 1997 is correct,
>>then we may have finally discovered the identity of the more
>>mischievous "alien" abductors - a truth that will set us free!

>>Nick Balaskas

>David Jacobs has pretty effectively debunked this notion that
>it's possible to thwart impending abductions and ward off the
>abductors by prayer, or by invoking the name of Jesus, or the
>like.  Jacobs has discussed cases he's investigated in which an
>abductee will recall the beginning of an abduction event (for
>instance, the sudden appearance of small grey entities), in
>response to which the abductee begins to pray, to invoke Jesus,
>or to otherwise appeal to divine protection, at which point the
>entities do indeed seem to depart.

>However, upon further investigation (e.g., deeper probing of
>the abductee's repressed memory under hypnosis), it becomes
>evident that the abductee initially recalled only the beginning
>(the arrival of the abductors) and the ending (their subsequent
>departure) of a complete and un-thwarted abduction event. Their
>prayer (or calling upon Jesus or what-have-you) had no effect
>whatsoever, and a full abduction event proceeded; the abductee,
>recalling only the beginning and ending of the event, was left
>with the impression that the aliens had been rebuked and
>repelled by the name of Jesus, when in fact nothing of the sort
>had occurred, and a complete abduction event had transpired
>between the (now-missing) time of the abductors' arrival and
>their (much-later) departure.


Hi Reed, List,

Without wishing to express any views on the matter, I thought
you might be interested in some references to further
discussions of warding off abductions by prayer.  References
I've noted include the following:

1. "Appeal to spiritual personages" discussed by Druffel, Ann in
"The Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters" (2001) (edited
by Ronald Story) at page 492(in an entry entitled "resistance
techniques against alien abduction") of the New American Library
softcover edition, at page 481 of the pdf edition (with the same
page numbering in the Microsoft Word edition).  (Also discussed
by Druffel, Ann in "The Mammoth Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial
Encounters" (2001) (edited by Ronald Story) at page 591 (in an
entry entitled "resistance techniques against alien abduction")
of the Robinson softcover edition.)

2. "Abductions halted in Jesus's name" discussed by Ron Rhodes
in his "Alien Obsession: What Lies Behind Abductions, Sightings
and the Attraction to the Paranormal" (1998) at pages 169-171
(in Chapter 11) of the Harvest House softcover edition.

3. List of faith based actions (and risk factors) presented by
Missler, Chuck and Mark Eastman in their "Alien Encounters: The
Secret behind the UFO Phenomenon" (1997) at pages 329-332 (in
the first Appendix) of the Koinonia House softcover edition.

4.  Advice against taking concerns about abductions to the
clergy given by LaVigne, Michelle in her "The Alien Abduction
Survival Guide" (1995) at pages 29-30 (in Chapter 4) of the Wild
Flower Press softback edition.

Of course, most of the discussions about preventing/stopping
alien abductions do not relate to the use of prayer. Discussions
that I've read range from the comments on the use of medication
and/or psychiatric treatment, to a wide range of other
techniques. Such other techniques include physical struggle or
mental struggle with the "abductors", faith, visualisation
techniques, the use of "repellents" (including iron objects,
small electrical applicances and herbs) to the use of recording
devices/sensors.

I've outlined below the main sources of discussion of other
methods that I'm aware of.

The most comprehensive collection of relevant discussions that
I've read so far is in Ann Druffel's book "How to defend your
against alien abductions" (1998). See the reviews of that book
on
Amazon at:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0609802631

It is worth noting that Ann Druffel has summarised her views in:

(a) "The Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters"
(2001)(edited by Ronald Story) at pages 491-493 (in an entry
entitled "resistance techniques against alien abduction") of the
New American Library softcover edition, at pages 480-481 of the
pdf edition (with the same page numbering in the Microsoft Word
edition).

(b) in "The Mammoth Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters"
(2001) (edited by Ronald Story) at pages 591-592 (in an entry
entitled "resistance techniques against alien abduction") of the
Robinson softcover edition.

Another book which discusses surviving alien abductions (but
generally by discussing how to adopt a positive attitude, rather
than preventing the experiencs) is Michelle LaVigne's "The Alien
Abduction Survival Guide" (1995). See reviews on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0970263015/

Other discussions in books that I've noted include: (a) David
Coomer in his "The UFO Investigator's Guide" (1999) at pages 52-
53 (in Chapter 4) of the Blandford softback edition.

(b) Charles F Emmons in his "At The Threshold: UFOs, Science and
the New Age" (1997) at pages 178-179 (in Chapter 9) of the Wild
Flower Press softcover edition.

Material currently on the Internet on this subject appears to be
relatively limited. I think the most substantive discussions
I've seen of different techniques is at the website below
(which, as the author of that website acknowledges) is largely
based on the
book by Ann Druffel mentioned above:

http://www.abductions-alien.org/ch03.html

For one particular viewpoint and item, see:

http://www.stopabductions.com/

For a comment expressing doubt about claims made for some
prevention techniques, see:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

               Re: Dr. Melvin Redfern On Experiencers - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:18:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:51:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Dr. Melvin Redfern On Experiencers - Boone


>Source: Alternate Perceptions Magazine - Waynesboro, Tennessee


>Issue #94

>October 2005

>An Interview with Dr. Melvin Redfern
>by Brent Raynes

>Dr. Melvin Redfern, a retired psychotherapist living with his
>wife in Chucky, Tennessee, shares with us in this most
>interesting phone interview of August 15, 2005, his views on the
>place of psychotherapy in ufology and also shares his own
>personal and unusual UFO and paranormal experiences. His website
>is:

>http://community.webtv.net/ETUFOGROUP/UFOEasternTennesse

<snip>

Out-freaking-standing!

This is the light in the darkness we all should be looking for.

Dr. Redfern has outlined so much that I've encountered myselft
in seeking help for experiencers.

It's something I've said for years when asking them why they
wouldn't come forward.

Fear of the psychiatriac monsters.

Believe you me, I've got enough subjects had they come forward
and testify would turn this planet upside down but they know for
a fact the horrid repercussions of doing so to their persons.

I was sitting here a few days ago grieving about the loss of Dr.
Mack and then went into fury at the lenient sentence his
murderer. Now Dr. Redfern comes along to save the day.

Heed his words well folks.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                   Re: Astronomers & Navigators - Roberson

From: Seth Roberson <blackfeather05.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:31:06 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:58:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Astronomers & Navigators - Roberson


>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 22:08:23 -0400
>Subject: Re: Astronomers & Navigators

>>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 16:33:09 +0100
>>Subject: Astronomers & Navigators

<snip>

>Hi Ray!

>Astronomer Dr. Peter Brown and his team of researchers at
>University of Western Ontario in London, Canada, don't seem to
>be aware of such a post-1947 policy to suppress reports of UFOs
>detected in space or entering our atmosphere from the public or
>have any concerns about losing their jobs from what they do.

>They use radar and optical data collected from multiple
>observing sites to detect and record thousands of meteoritic
>events, and the occasional non-meteoritic event too, every day.
>Check out their web site below for examples and further details.

>http://aquarid.physics.uwo.ca/about.htm

>It is my experience from talking with space scientists over the
>years that they are very interested in reports of unusual UFOs,
>especially those observed visually or detected with scientific
>instruments in the Earth's upper atmophere or in space. Many
>have even shared their personal UFO sightings at meetings with
>colleagues or public lectures.

>The sporadic nature of the UFO phenomenon is particularly
>frustrating to scientists who wish to study UFOs but thanks to
>certain research projects like Brown's radar/optical tracking of
>meteors, they do manage to make a few non-meteor observations
>that could lead to fruitful studies by ufologists.

<snip>

Hello List,

Nick thanks for the advice, although it wasn't directed to me
personally.

After about 5 mins exploring the U. of W. Ontario website I came
across this video of a lightning strike in the Non-Meteor Events
page:

http://tinyurl.com/7b4cs

You will notice a small dark object appears right after the
lightning strike that appears to make a quick 90 degree turn
before it races out of view.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                             Re: Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:06:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Hall


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

>>>>>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology
>>>>>is nowadays. What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at
>>>>>it long enough to
>>>>make that charge.

>>This is malarky, Rich. You're just wasting time. You read all of
>>the rest that Dave sent, re the timeline and when Lonnie did have
>>his glasses on, and all you can come up with is weak nonsense.

>>>That is not good investigation.

>>I don't think you are in any position to claim that!

>Don:

>I see that your response conveniently leaves out the rundown of
>my UFO experience.

>Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
>question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
>the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

>What position does one have to be in for them to be able to
>question anything ufological?

>Are there rules that prohibit questioning, by neophytes and
>others?

>Who makes up those rules?

>While you think I'm wasting time, others do not I surmise. The
>Socorro episode is not a done deal. It's still open to scrutiny,
>or should be.

Rich,

I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
around strewing red herrings all over the place when he
obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
you keep spewing in that regard).

There is nothing at all wrong about raising questions on any
historical case or reinvestigating it, but any rational person
who wasn't simply grinding axes and spicing blogs would first
study the literature thoroughly. You obviously have not done so.
Nor apparently have you read Maj. Hector Quintanilla's account





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                          Homemade Flying Machines

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:31:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:10:13 -0400
Subject: Homemade Flying Machines


Wow! Look At These Homemade Flying Machines!

http://kai.iks-jena.de/bigb/mav.html

I love model aircraft making. This site, in German showcases
lots of homemade state-of-the-art craft as well as military
craft and concept craft.

I've run into my share of homemade craft that people were flying
around that others thought were UFOs.

Any guy with  a garage and some parts and a day off can really
put people into a spin.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:11:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Rudiak


>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:33:07 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>><snip>

>>>When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
>>>a device which did stop car engines

>>Jan, can you tell me the references of such a claim I have never
>>heard before?

>After about three weeks with various computer problems, I have
>access to most of my files, but not the old E-mail files. So I
>can't give you the specific url.

>The device was produced by a British firm, the car had to run
>over a strip with the electrical components in it. The device
>didn't just stop the car, it wrecked the engine. Not exactly the
>EME associated with UFOs, but neither is it a mystical device
>Klass claimed. Once the effect has been established obviously
>something more close to UFO EMEs could be engineered.

>See also:

>http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1259138,00.html

>(Murray Bott found an incident in which RF with engine function
>stopped blimp motor near large radio transmitter.)

>Roos, John G. "Arresting Development: Non-Lethal Vehicle-
>Stopping Device for the Army's Peacekeeping Bag of Tricks."
>Armed Forces Journal International, vol. 138, no. 10, May 2001,
>p. 24.

>http://tinyurl.com/ch8oy

The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board also put out a lengthy
white paper in 1997 (or maybe 1999) outlining their vision for
the 21st century American Air Force. Most of it was about laser
and space-based weapons systems. However, it also mentioned the
existence of high-power microwave weapons capable of stalling
internal combustion engines (making the vehicles easy targets
for subsequent bombing), also capable of scrambing aviation
electronics and causing power blackouts. These are all
electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
dozens of cases of car stallings.)

The AFSAB paper was on the Net for a while, but was subsequently





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                DMT Users See Insects From Parallel Universe?

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:37:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:29:29 -0400
Subject: DMT Users See Insects From Parallel Universe?


Why Do DMT Users See Insects From A Parallel Universe?

http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/pc/dmtinsect.html

Why Do DMT Users See Insects From A Parallel Universe?
by Cliff Pickover
Reality Carnival

People using DMT often see insectlike beings from another
universe.

The molecule DMT (N,N-Dimethyltryptamine) is a psychoactive
chemical that causes intense visions and can induce its users to
quickly enter a completely different environment that some have
likened to an alien or parallel universe. The transition from
our world to theirs occurs with no cessation of consciousness or
quality of awareness.

Why do so many people using DMT see insects? The DMT insect race
comprises larval beings, alien space insects, praying-mantis
entities and so forth. Why so many visions of insects? Something
in the insect seems to be alien to the habits, morals, and
psychology of this world, as if it has come from some other
planet, more monstrous, more energetic, more insensate, more
atrocious, more infernal than our own. - Maurice Masterlinck,
Belgian playwright, 1862-1949


Examples of DMT Insect Reports

It is a mental Mecca, an excellent reference point for all other
psychedelics. Those around me looked like alien space insects. I
realized they were all part of it, too.

The wasp came to me this time, stung me while I was senseless.
Insects are the blind keepers of secrets on this earth.

Oh dear lapidary insect friends...

Rex's heart, his emotional center, was consumed by feasting
alien insects during his first high dose, and he was certain he
was dying.

I came immediately upon the source, which was a DNA scarab, a
construct, an insect of impossible dimensions, miles in diameter
and circumference.

Inside were very tiny creatures. I can't decide if they were
living or mechanical, but they moved like slow insects.
Visually, they looked a lot like ants.

You can find many more examples of DMT insectoids using Google.
Let me know if you come across other examples of particular
interest.

Visit The Praying Mantis Reports

This is an informal collection of tales regarding the strangest
of possibilities - encounters with praying-mantis like entities
which occur after ingesting enteogenic compounds. Why is this so
common? Nobody seems to mention spiders or grasshoppers, always
mantids!

For more information on DMT, click here:

http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/pc/dmt.html

For my science fiction novel, The Lobotomy Club, which features
praying-mantis entities from a parallel universe - induced by
brain surgery - click here:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                     UFO Taped By Security Cam In Mexico

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:34:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:34:29 -0400
Subject: UFO Taped By Security Cam In Mexico





Source: Frank Warren's Blog

http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/2005/10/ufologist-santiago-yturria.html

Monday, October 10, 2005

[Pictures at site]

Ufologist Santiago Yturria Investigates The Ramos Arizpe UFO
Sighting - Captured On Video!

Amazing UFO Taped By Security Cam In Mexico

By Santiago Yturria
kronoman.nul

On Monday October 3, local neighbors of Ramos Arizpe, a
community located near Saltillo, Coahuila got aware that a
suspicious bright light was doing erratic movements in the sky
and at the same time increasing it's size in a strange way. The
time was about 3:00 AM.

In a few minutes the unusual light turned into an oval shaped
object with an intense brightness with a blue glow around. The
mysterious object was moving fast in zig zag and performing a
strange behavior. At this moment the witnesses realized this was
a UFO and became worried.

Some of them called the police reporting the incident and
requesting to investigate the unusual phenomena.

The reports were turned to the Direcci=F3n de Seguridad Publica de
Ramos Arizpe wich is the public security corporation and the 069
operator Mayra Gallegos Mu=F1iz confirmed the calls and sent a
patrol unit to investigate the incident. Meanwhile the Security
Cam Center located the mysterious object as it appeared on
camera No. 1 who located the UFO north of Ramos Arizpe. The
security cam operators were able to get the bright object in
focus using the camera in infrared mode while recording the
images. They confirmed the UFO was indeed over that area.

A Strange Metamorphosis
By this time the unknown object got closer and increased it's
size exhibiting an oval shape with intense white luminosity and
a blue glow around. No sound was heard at anytime. In a matter
of seconds the UFO began performing some kind of strange
metamorphosis while pulsating and a dark red kind of core
appeared at the center. The UFO continues expanding itself
increasing in size along with it's core wich changed to blue.
All these features were captured by the security camera while
the surprised operators continued recording the images and
reporting the very unusual event to the Security Central.

As the UFO continues expanding it's size suddenly turned itself
into a huge oval ring saturating the security monitor screen.
The UFO's centerthat presented a core at first was now a hole.
The UFO shape described an ellipse composed by several bands or
rings and a hole in the center where the stars were now visible.
Sometimes at it's maximun size those rings or bands became
translucent giving the impression of a huge dimensional gate of
some kind.

As the UFO reached certain expansion it immediately began
decreasing it's size in a backward proccess exhibiting the prior
shapes till adopting the white oval form with the blue and
purple glow around. The UFO repeated this rare morphing proccess
several times being recorded by the security cam all the time.
The video lasted 20 minutes till the UFO reduced it's size
dissapearing.

An atmosphere of confusion and disconcert remained in the
Security Cam Center.

The Incident Made The News
As the incident caused commotion among the people and the
Security Center personnel the Ramos Arizpe=B4s Mayor Ernesto Saro
was called an went to the Public Security Center to watch the
video and receive thereport. In an improvised meeting Mayor
Ernesto Saro as well as DirectorHomero Dur=E1n presented the video
to the local media representativeswhere reporters of the local
newspaper and tv station asked if this was a real UFO.

Mayor Ernesto Saro acknowledged the incident and declared this
was indeed a UFO, a strange disconcerting flying object that
caused alarm among the neighbors. Mayor Saro added that in
absence of more solid information about the nature and origin of
the phenomena they would have to wait until the investigation
brings more elements to establish what happened that night.

I received a call from local INFO 7 newscast asking me if I
could review the footage and make an evaluation for them because
they were going to follow the story for several days. I agreed
and received a copy of the footage for study and evaluation.
They interviewed me as well as a local astronomer and we both
concluded this was a UFO.

Conclusion
This is one of those cases in wich an important evidence is
provided because it comes from an official source, that is the
Ramos Arizpe's Public Security Corporation, therefore any
suspicion or hint of a hoax is discarded. The object was there
and the security cam caught it's presence.

The UFO performed movements and changes discarding the
posibility of a star, planet or meteor. That was a clear night
without clouds therefore this was not a ball lightning
phenomena.

The local airport was questioned if their radar detected the
unknown object and they declared there were not unknown objects
detected by the radar that night but added that according to the
images described this object was flying at low altitude not
possible for radar detection. It was confirmed this object was
not a blimp, wheater ballon or any known aircraft.

The Ramos Arizpe UFO case is important and well documented, with
multiple witnesses involving the police department, the Security
Cam Center and the Ramos Arizpe's Mayor. The media took notice
of the incident and presented the story with seriousness and
interest.

I must say that the Ramos Arizpe UFO footage is one of the most
rare and impressive videos that I have seen. The unique features
that the UFO exhibited performing a very unusual sequence of





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:38:01 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:40:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:55:39 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:50:09 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>>>Your Hughes/Raven/Socorro vehicle is a myth with no
>>>>>>basis in fact.

>>And might I add that after 41 years of development there is
>>still no evidence of this type of small craft in the US-or
>>anyone else's-inventory. Why spend so much on the development of
>>helicopters of all shapes and sizes if you have this type of
>>vehicle with VTOL capability, married to , silent, high speed
>>"dash" capability. The best that they have come up with are UAVs
>>a copy of model airplanes, loaded with computer software that
>>are in the opening stages of infesting your airspace in the US.
>>It amazes me when "researchers" play the "secret government
>>technology" card whenever the rest of their argument falls
>>apart. In this case the technology would have had to have been
>>developed before 1964, and it just plain wasn't. The upshot is,
>>it's a bogus argument which needs proving by those presenting
>>the argument. So far Rich, you haven't done that.


><snip>

>>Dave Rudiak has again vetted the glasses nonsense supporting
>>what I said about their importance to the actual sighting and
>>the aftermath, so there's no point in my attempting to improve
>>on the succinct and obvious.

>>So Lonnie's eyesight was corrected for the important phases of
>>the sighting-other than when his face was in the dirt- and the
>>balloon theory is a fairy tale. There was no earthbound,
>>propulsive technology of the time to account for the craft*. The
>>case still stands unsolved.

<snip>

>Don:

>You're a wonderful guy but have it all wrong; well, partially
>wrong.

I can't argue with your 'wonderful guy' assessment of me, but I
have it all "partially" wrong? You haven't done enough research.

>First off Rudiak didn't vet anything. He surmised, which he can
>do because he's an eye specialist. But still it's just
>supposition. We have no idea what Zamora's eye situation was in
>1964, and that's poor investigation no matter how much you guys
>try to fudge the isssue.

I'm not fudging anything. I'm stating facts and your are arguing
conjecture. By your reasoning, Lonnie was running around armed
with a handgun with the right to blaze away with it if the
situation called for it. He spent his days-thousands of them-as
a policeman doing his duty, wearing glasses. He drove a police
cruiser, on the highways and byways with all of the other people
while wearing his glasses. He did this apparently while-as
you've claimed-he had faulty eyesight, even though he was
wearing his glasses. Then for some reason when he reports a UFO
you bring his eyesight into question.

>As for the no-such-aircraft-has-come-into-being argument, you
>have to concede from the Socorro incident that the vehicle
>Zamora saw failed apparently or seemed to, causing its occupants
>to be checking it out.

Yeah, so what. maybe it just landed and that day "they" wanted
that particular sample of bush.

>Therefore the vehicle didn't go further into production or use,
>perhaps.

More likely it never existed as some industrial product to begin
with.

>Also, where are those radiation findings, if any? Other
>witnesses? Did anyone check into them, thoroughly?

If you are looking for UFO sightings to make sense and all of
them to fall into a prescribed category, you are in for an
upset.

>The departure of the vehicle was unlike most other flying
saucer departures, which are invariably noiseless.

That's not true.

>The occupants were not grays it seems, and their uniforms were
>Earthlike. Again you are categorizing your UFO sightings. Maybe
>the occupants noted at some point that Earth man suits were
>alien space manlike.

Really Rich, none of the last three are pertinent

>The insignia was hardly alien.

Now there is a region that is subject to interpretation.

>The Socorro incident, as you concede, is open to further
>investigation. That's my point, which you apparently choose to
>dismiss or ignore.

Your point continues to be that he wore glasses and was
therefore, blind. I did dismiss or ignore the fact that Lonnie
ore glasses. I read the reports, the books, considered what he
did for a living and the character assessments of the man, the
timeline and I ruled out his wearing glasses as a none issue.

There's no proof that his wearing glasses in any way abrogated
his interpretation of the sighting or skewed his testimony.

Lonnie had his glasses on during the most important parts of the
sighting. You've been told that more than a few times. You
choose to ignore this. The condition of Lonnie's eyesight had
nothing to do with it. You know it and I know it.

You are just wasting time with insupportable arguments. As for
dismissing or ignoring, who am I going to listen to, your
definition of what constitutes importance re eyesight or
David's, the expert here.

Dave aside, I'm going with my own common sense here. You, do not
seem to be using common sense.

If you want so desperately to solve the Socorro [curiously my
spell checker wants to relace Socorro with Saucer] sighting then
you have to do better than this nonexistent poor eyesight





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                     Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:17:49 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:43:31 -0400
Subject: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill


Stan Friedman wrote:

Kathy Marden has given me permission to post her response to
that terrible Fulford column

Stan Friedman

-----

From: Kathy Marde <Kmarden.nul >
To: robertfulford.nul
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 4:41 PM
Subject: Betty and Barney Hill

Dear Mr. Fulford,

The following is a quote from Betty Hill posted by Lan Fleming
on September 25, 1996:


"Lan, to this day, I have no idea what the 'Outer Limits'
programs were about. I never saw them. I never saw "Twilight
Zone." I never watched that type of program, so I don't know
what was shown on them. Neither did Barney. At that time, he
never would have had the opportunity, since he worked nights."


It has been posted on the Internet that the "Outer Limits" show
aired on February 14, 1964, a Friday night. Barney and Betty did
not watch science fiction programs (They preferred news and talk
shows.) and Barney worked Monday through Friday nights at the
South Postal Annex in Boston as a City Carrier, according to his
employment record. Dr. Simon questioned Barney in deep hypnotic
regression regarding the "Twilight Zone." Barney stated that he
had never watched it but heard that it was "weird."

I have not viewed the show in question but have read that the
aliens depicted on "Outer Limits" did not resemble the aliens
that artist David Baker painted while Betty and Barney were in
deep hypnosis. Betty and Barney's aliens can be found on pages
97 and 98 of A Common Sense Approach to UFOs by Betty Hill. It
can be purchased by mailed a check in the amount of $18.00 US
currency to the Eunice B. Hill Revocable Trust, PO Box 93, East
Kingston, NH 03827.

I should also be noted that there was credible evidence to
suggest that Betty and Barney experienced a close encounter with
a UFO (too close) and a period of missing time.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                           UFO Flies Over Bolivia

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:06:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:48:14 -0400
Subject: UFO Flies Over Bolivia


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 9, 2005
======

Source: La Patria Newspaper
Date: 10.09.05

UFO Flies Over Bolivia

An unidentified flying object (UFO) flew over the skies of Oruro
early morning yesterday for approximately an hour. It was
recorded by citizen Gustavo Ponce, who at first did not believe
what he was seeing.

The time was approximately 01:30 hours in the morning when Ponce
was heading for bed. At that time he saw a yellowish light in
the sky that drew his attention, prompting him to reach for his
binoculars to look at it more carefully.

"It was a very strange and shiny figure that could be seen
through the binoculars. I went ahead and took out my camcorder
to videotape the UFO in the sky. As the camera zoomed toward the
object, I could how it was breaking down into a shape resembling
a jellyfish or something like it. It was very strange."

He added that the object was flying over the eastern part of the
city and that it was the first time he had ever seen such an
object, having never had previous visual contact with a UFO.

LA PATRIA visited Ponce's home to see the images captured by his
camcorder, attesting to the fact that the shining object broke
down into a full circumference, adopting the shape of a
jellyfish.

This is not the first time that a citizen has reported such
objects. It is know that some reports of UFOs seen in the sky
were told at a certain time, but they were not given credence by
the public at large, since there is considerable skepticism
toward the subject of UFOs and extraterrestrials.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                    Spicy Blogs [The Global UFO Cover-Up]

From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:42:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:51:26 -0400
Subject: Spicy Blogs [The Global UFO Cover-Up]


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 13:38:05 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 20:36:38 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>>As you told Paul Kimball, the way to get your blogs read is
>>>to keep them "spicy." I doubt somebody like you would willingly
>>>give up the "spice".

>>This is false. David Rudiak is no doubt referring to a blog post
>>I made some time ago wherein I stated that the RRR guys like to
>>"keep it spicy" at their blog. This was my opinion, however, as
>>anyone who read the post would have been aware. It was _not_
>>something that Rich Reynolds told me, and it was certainly _not_
>>something that Rich Reynolds told me to do in order to get one's
>>blog read.

>>David Rudiak has misrepresented what I wrote so that he can
>>score a cheap debating point off of Rich Reynolds. I don't have
>>a dog in this hunt, other than to set the record straight.

>Odd, but just to set the record straight, you wrote the
>following in your blog of July 11, 2005:

>http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_redstarfilms_archive.html

>"In honour of my pal Rich Reynolds (www.rrrgroup.blogspot.com),
>who has recently been trying to convince me that the key to
>blogging is to keep it spicy (or something like that - all I
>really recall is him nattering on about "the medium" being 'the
>message,'"

Hmm... it seems that both David and I were wrong here. It
appears that a few months ago I did write that RRR were trying
to convince me that the key to blogging was to keep it spicy
(not what I recalled, but obviously what I wrote). However,
nowhere in there will you find that they said this because they
thought it was a way to get a blog read, which is where David
erred - he extrapolated from what I wrote something that just
isn't there.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                   Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Kimball

From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:03:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:52:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Are Aliens So Boring? - Kimball


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 00:28:37 EDT
>Subject: Why Are Aliens So Boring?

<snip>

>For the aggrieved (and I'm sure there will be many), you can e-mail
>Mr. Fulford at robertfulford.nul (his e-mail address is posted
>at the end of all his columns, so I'm not betraying any confidential
>information here).

Sorry - that should have read:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:18:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:55:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 18:37:26 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:44:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>...Regarding Military data collection
>>>Fine for listening in on enemy communications, ship movements,
>>>etc. No problem! UFOs really don't even enter into it.

>>That is not what the AF thought, that UFOs "really don't even
>>enter into it." The AF considered it fully applicable to the UFO
>>problem and developed its anti-anecdotes policy based on the MIT
>>study, which was repeatedly given briefings on UFOs, by Ruppelt
>>and Col. Adams.

>Of course such data _could_ be used to track "UFOs", but the
>primary reason is to track military targets of human origin.

That isn't the development history which was dual-use two-
tracked from the very inception, for both UFOs and "military
targets." Obviously one was better for attracting and
maintaining funding appropriations than the other.

>>At acknowledged UFO "hot spots" such as New Mexico in 1947-52
>>there were hundreds of genuine unexplained UFO sightings by
>>visual observers and radars yet the networks only caught several
>>of them. That's on the order of 1% of a high UFO occurrence
>>rate. Today we have a low UFO occurrence rate, meaning no flaps
>>no "hot spots." Where would you put a UFO "field lab"? Anywhere
>>some Area 51 nutball told you was a "hot spot"? That's a
>>prescription for bitter disappointment.

I should have added that a 1% detection rate applied to a low
UFO occurrence rate as we have today is essentially zero. Zero
UFO detections likely from a UFO "field lab."

>No, Area 51 would not be high on my list. However, I am sure
>some mini-flap areas could be found by examining witness
>reports.

I am just as sure that mini-flap areas cannot be found by the
usual Area 51-type of witness reports, assuming that any true
"mini-flaps" are even taking place. This is the prescription for
pointless responses to numerous hair-trigger false alerts every
time it "seems" initially there is a localized mini-flap
somewhere. The Colorado Project spent a lot of useless time
running around on such alerts from its so-called Early Warning
Network.

<snip>

>>>And I thought I was a pessimist! So you are telling me that I
>>>can only look up into the sky 1 mile! How come I can see
>>>satellites at 200-500 miles? And I can see a jet aircraft (at
>>>altitude) tens of miles away?

>>You _know_ they're satellites and aircraft already, you don't
>>need Full Moon angular size to tell what they are. They "behave"
>>and conform to conventional profiles.

<snip>

>I am usually
>referring to night sightings, I have not figured out how to use
>the automated systems for daylight sightings yet)....

That's a major defect right there.

>>To prove something is a
>>real UFO you have to have enough resolution to reliably
>>distinguish an unconventional shape or three-dimensional data to
>>prove an unconventional maneuvering or high-speed or high-
>>altitude performance.

>I think we differ in this. All one needs is adequate
>triangulation resolution to define the flight path of the
>object. If the flight path matches an aircraft or satellite
>behavior, then all we can say is that it _might_ be an aircraft
>or satellite (it could simply be a UFO behaving like these too).

Even with NORAD and its vast resources with FAA and military
flight plan data NORAD still cannot be sure of the identity of
every single radar blip appearing like an aircraft or satellite.
I don't see how that realization changes the situation from
before.

>The problem we have is that even with the high optical
>resolution you desire, the UFO could mimic appearing like a a
>satellite or aircraft.

Again, how would we ever have been able to distinguish a UFO
from a non-UFO under the previous methodologies? If you are
trying to suggest that that nullifies the requirement I stated
for a minimum Full Moon angular size in order to capture enough
photographic or video resolution to have a good chance (I didn't
say 100% perfect ability) to distinguish a UFO from a non-UFO
then I would say that you are wrong.

To put some arbitrary numbers on this for purposes of argument
and illustration only, let's say that a Full Moon angular size
enables a 75% capture rate in telling UFOs from non-UFOs
(including both false positives and false negatives) and a laxer
standard you are suggesting of "any pinpoint" qualifies, which
let's say has only a 5% accuracy rate. You can quibble and argue
all you want that the 5% really is two times better, and is 10%,
or whatever, but it is still an extremely high error rate which
will impress absolutely nobody, certainly not hardbitten
scientists.

>>Radar is automatically 3-D data. Optics
>>and cameras are basically 2-D. Only if you can develop a system
>>that will perform accurate real-time stereo triangulations of
>>optical targets will you have something comparable to the
>>simplicity of a radar. Until that time radar will be superior
>>for a ground site.

>I agree radar has nice features, but simple it is not. Your
>challenge is a valid one and one that I shall pursue. I think
>you overestimate the difficulty of the stereo triangulation
>method using today's available hardware/software given the rapid
>technology development state of home computers and operating
>systems.

How is your optical stereo triangulation system going to distinguish
two _unrelated_ targets that are mistakenly taken as one target
at outlandish distances and velocities? How is it going to tell the
difference between multiple UFOs and mistakenly "triangulating"
"one" UFO when in fact it has separately locked on to _two_ UFOs
at the same time and attributing a great distance and velocity that
does not exist or apply? What will it do when one UFO in a group
of UFOs decides to maneuver and dance around while some of the
UFOs maintain aircraft-like trajectories, other UFOs dance less
wildly, and all sorts of acrobatics in between?

With radar it's simply a question of recording the data and
sorting it all out later. With optical real-time triangulation
if the system mistakenly locks on to two targets and treats them
erroneously as one, that mistake cannot be rectified later by
data analysis, unless you get really lucky. Humans guiding the
system in real- time could make quick judgments about what is
what but then you lose your advantages of an automated system
taking away the drudgery of continuous human surveillance.

With a large Full Moon angular size requirement an automated
system could eliminate virtually all ordinary aircraft (and
balloon, bird, and star/planet) profiles. With "any pinpoint" an
automated system could not, for the reasons I gave above,
prevent locking on to multiple targets and treating them as a
single target at great distance with great velocities. What
happens to the hundreds of "pinpoints" of lights in the night
sky including stars and planets?

Do you simply have the automated system reject anything
dimmer than the brightest planet Venus, magnitude -4 or so?
Then the sensitivity of the system is all but lost. Program all of
the bright stars and planets into the system to be automatically
rejected (though some may be useful to calibrate pointing angles)?
How many stars will have to be programmed in for automatic
filtering out? How will meteors (fast-moving pinpoints of light)
be handled? Eliminate anything above a certain velocity, say
25,000 mph? That way all UFOs traveling above 25,000 mph will
be eliminated by the automated system too along with meteors.

What if a single large angular size UFO consists of multiple
extremely bright "pinpoints" of light on its exterior? What does
the automated system "lock on" to and how do we know which light
was which for the system's triangulation? What if the lights
flash off and on? What does the automated system "lock on" to
and how does it maintain object-continuity and consistency?
We're not dealing with an unusual UFO situation but a fairly
common UFO configuration such as the "Christmas-tree lights" UFO
in the famous Exeter case.

Just try going through a few dozen actual UFO Unknowns in my
Blue Book Unknowns Catalog available online. Don't make me have
to work out the decision trees and show the near impossibility
of developing a system that must accept "pinpoints" of light,
instead of a more reasonable and experience-based practical
limitation of Full Moon angular size (which is a quantitative
way of saying Close Encounters Only and rejecting most Nocturnal
Lights cases).

All this just because the wisdom of a Full Moon angular size
requirement to distinguish UFOs from IFO's is "challenged." Far
easier it seems to me to tie an automated optical stereo
triangulation system into the Passive Radar system. Or even just
a telescopic camera system that points toward an unconventional
target picked up by the Passive Radar. Then you won't need a
Full Moon angular size if Passive Radar has already shown an
unconventional performance and pointed the camera at the target
direction. If Passive Radar detects a high speed target at
extremely low altitude and the camera picks up a pinpoint of
light at the exact coordinates then you don't need a Full Moon
to tell that it is a UFO, for example. But if all the data you
have is optical and you don't have radar then you need a Full
Moon to see enough to tell if it is an IFO or not, in most
cases.

>>And a Passive Radar system that can reach
>>2,000 miles will be superior to any ground radar limited by
>>horizon line-of-sight to say 100-200 miles, especially since it
>>can "peek" down below the horizon (since broadcast radio waves
>>fill virtually every space above ground now and it doesn't take
>>much to receive and amplify an over-the-horizon signal bounce).

>Its all very nice of course, but you will need very large
>supplies of cash and experts to build this system.

No more, or not much more, than the meteor trackers who work on
a relatively shoestring budget (for scientific projects).

A Passive Radar could develop in stages of detection capability
based on levels of processing power required, with the more
maneuverable or complicated UFO target tracking capability
reserved for when more computing power can be bought. Until then
all 25,000 mph targets traveling at less than 50,000 feet
altitude are pretty obviously highly likely to be UFOs and not
any supersecret weapons system or anything else, and easy to
distinguish. Targets traveling only say 1,000 mph but highly
maneuverable will be more difficult to distinguish from a high-
speed fighter and will require more computing power. Etc. etc.

<snip>

>How you can guess at passive radar's accuracy is beyond my
>understanding! It seems pretty fuzzy to me and fraught with
>distortion.

Distortion?? From what?? Turn your own question on "accuracy"
onto your automated UFO "field lab" as I have done above. What
is "fuzzy" about a Doppler shift velocity? Either it is there or
it isn't. Either the wavefront arrival times at two or more
receivers provide stereo triangulation by wavefront
interferometry or they don't. Nothing "fuzzy" about it or
"fraught with distortion."

It's as "accurate" as your own measurement of the wave
characteristics of the radio or tv or cell phone transmitter you
are using which bounces of your target, providing a Doppler
shift velocity of a radially moving target and intereferometry
of angles and 3-D locations giving all velocity components as
well as height, distance and geographic location. Sensitivity is
a different issue. If the wavelength is too large to catch a
smaller object then some things might be missed. Less signal is
reflected at greater distances, etc. But unlike skin-track
"primary" radars where both transmitters and receivers are at or
near the same locations, a Passive Radar can use the vast array
of transmitters that can be close to the target so the receivers
can be much farther away. There is a no-capture rate is any
system.

<snip>

>>Are they going to shut down all the 50,000 watt radio and tv
>>trabsmitters and the cell phone transmitters because of
>>"national security"??

>No, just have the government it buy out or gain some regulatory
>control (Patroit Act addendum) of the commercial passive radar
>system. At the worse, "good" ole harassment and intimidation.

Sounds very conspiratorial. Lockheed and other companies are
already building Passive Radar systems. I haven't heard of any
being closed down or subjected to "good ole harassment and
intimidation." Cripes we've let out so much technology to China,
Russia and numerous companies and nations around the world
despite almost futile export controls it's hard to see where
they could apply a Band-aid to stop the gushing hemorrhage. Dual
use equipment is even harder to stop - pharmaceutical gear that
can be converted to biowarfare, ball-bearing grinders that can
help in construction of intertial guidance systems for missiles,
etc.

>>The radio waves are out there bouncing off
>>various objects and all we have to do is have the receivers and
>>the signal processing computing power to distinguish the Doppler
>>shifting of high-speed or high-altitude maneuvering objects and
>>filter out normal aircraft, etc. Anyone can receive these
>>signals and do wahtever. I don't see how "national security" can
>>stop it anymore than it can stop what goes out over the
>>Internet.

>>Frankly the idea that terrorists are going to spend years trying
>>to make sense out of a mass of flight data from a Passive Radar
>>system for some obscure purpose seems absurd to me.

>I agree terrorists in the US don't need this system. All they
>need is shoulder fired missile at ANY US aircraft to create
>terror.

Then what's the problem? We're only talking about the US and
Canada here.

>If this system works to see our Stealth (which I have read that
>it can) or even non-Stealth aircraft, then the terrorists
>(i.e. in Iraq or Iran or North Korea or other Muslim countries or
>even China) would not need to sort out "masses of data". Just have
>to look for incoming vehicles to blast which they could not normally
>paint with radar without getting a missile in their behind.

That's absurd. "They" or the terrorists would have to sort
through literally millions of data points to try to find just
_one_ where a Passive Radar picked up something that their
ordinary radar did not. And how would they distinguish that
_one_ hypothetical Stealth profile from hundreds of civil
aircraft with not enough metal in them to be picked up on their
military skin-track radars? How would they ever be sure that it
was a Stealth and not just one of their own that was not big
enough to show on normal radar? How would that help them or tell
them anything? Months of data analysis would be too late to
defend against an attack where warning is needed in minutes of
seconds. So they find a 200 mph or 400 mph or 4,000 mph Stealth
target what does that tell them they didn't already know or
suspect?? That if they patiently sift through millions of
Passive Radar and ordinary radar tracks by careful comparison
they _may_ without any guarantees, they may possibly be able to
spot a Stealth bomber months after it dropped its bombs??

What if their own ordinary radars simply have blind spots where
_all_ of their aircraft fail to get detected at some time or
other?

All radars have radar horizons so anything no matter how large
will simply not show up if flying below the radar horizon and
only if they have height-finder capability will they be able to
eliminate that as the reason Passive Radar picked up something
that their regular radars did not. Any which way you look at it
will require massive amounts of intricate data analysis by the
terrorists or terrorist client states. And remember we're
talking about say, Iran, constructing its own Passive Radar _in_
Iran, which they can do at any time without having to wait for





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                            Re: Socorro - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:37:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:01:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:55:39 -0300
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:50:09 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>Dave Rudiak has again vetted the glasses nonsense supporting
>>what I said about their importance to the actual sighting and
>>the aftermath, so there's no point in my attempting to improve
>>on the succinct and obvious.

>>So Lonnie's eyesight was corrected for the important phases of
>>the sighting-other than when his face was in the dirt- and the
>>balloon theory is a fairy tale. There was no earthbound,
>>propulsive technology of the time to account for the craft*. The
>>case still stands unsolved.

><snip>

>>* Let's not forget the stability issues involved with a
>>rotorless craft propelled by jets or rocketry with the C of G
>>above the propulsive force and not hanging below it as in
>>helicopters. They are inherently unstable and the human pilot
>>cannot keep up with their tendency to fall around the C of G.
>>Even high speed, highly maneuverable winged fighters have to
>>have computers looking after stability to keep them airborne.
>>The common f-18A has 5 OBCs to keep it from falling out of the
>>sky. The F117A has 7. This is the newer, lightweight computer
>>systems of the late 70s and early 80s,90s and 100's not the
>>basement filling computers of the early 60s which would have had
>>to be crammed into this little, wingless, even more unstable,
>>auto sized machine along with the occupants, the engine,
>>instruments the fuel and seats etc.

>Don:

>You're a wonderful guy but have it all wrong; well, partially
>wrong.

>First off Rudiak didn't vet anything. He surmised, which he can
>do because he's an eye specialist. But still it's just
>supposition. We have no idea what Zamora's eye situation was in
>1964, and that's poor investigation no matter how much you guys
>try to fudge the isssue.

This is just more of your handwaving nonsense. It is possible to
surmise to _very high probability_ what Zamora's "eye situation"
was in 1964. He was only 31 years old and a traffic cop. Unlike
most people, cops have to pass physicals to get their jobs and
keep them. There are standards for health that they have to
meet. For visual acuity, the typical police standard is _at
least_ 20/20 acuity corrected and _at least_ 20/100 uncorrected.
If he hadn't met these _minimal_ acuity standards, he wouldn't
have passed the physical, nor would he have passed _subsequent_
periodic physicals.

The probability that Zamora, a healthy young 31-year-old subject
to vision screening, would meet these _minimal_ acuity standards
is 99+%. You are thus quibbling over a tiny fraction of 1%
possibility that somehow Zamora fell through the cracks, and had
some vision problem that somehow compromised his sighting
report. In addition, somehow this previously undetected vision
problem remained undetected in subsequent physicals such that
Zamora remained on the police force for many years afterwards
We're probably down in the .01% probability range now.

Further, as is typical of your style of argumentation, you never
provide any specifics. What _significant_ details of his story
were supposedly compromised by this never detected vision
problem whose very existence is itself highly improbable?

(Readers: Please note further below, where Reynolds now suddenly
attributes Superman-like visual acuity to Zamora when he somehow
deduces that Zamora's descriptions of the beings and clothing
show that they weren't Greys and were wearing "Earthlike"
uniforms.)

You also ignore important details that have nothing to do with
his vision. The craft took off with a roar, but then went
silent. Did Zamora also have severe hearing problems? There was
also a lot of physical evidence left behind: the landing pad
impressions, which could be used to corroborate his reported
craft size; the burn area on the ground and the bush that burned
and sliced cleanly in half; metal scrapings on a rock that Ray
Stanford had analyzed by NASA that didn't match existing known
alloys (their original story before they changed it).

Incidentally, Blue Book investigators did an analysis looking
for chemical propellant traces. They didn't find any. That's
another important indication that this wasn't a conventional
propulsion system like a jet or rocket.

>As for the no-such-aircraft-has-come-into-being argument, you
>have to concede from the Socorro incident that the vehicle
>Zamora saw failed apparently or seemed to, causing its occupants
>to be checking it out.

Now who's guilty of supposition? We don't know why it landed,
but obviously it's condition couldn't have been too bad, because
it was able to immediately take off again and zoom into the
distance after Zamora approached it.

>Therefore the vehicle didn't go further into production or use,
>perhaps.

More improbable, wild-assed speculation from somebody holding an
empty hand. If this craft had a mechanical problem, it was
obviously extremely minor (because it immediately took off
again, etc.). All experimental craft encounter snags. The
engineers fix them. If there are serious ones that can't be
fixed, then maybe that's reason for cancellation. But, again,
this craft seemed to have no problems fleeing the scene in a
hurry. It was a wingless, high- performance, VTOL vehicle with,
except for landing and takeoff, a silent propulsion system. The
military would kill for an aircraft like that.

>Also, where are those radiation findings, if any?

There was no radiation elevation found at the site, just like no
chemical propellents.

>Other witnesses? Did anyone check into them, thoroughly?

What's your point? That Zamora manufactured the story? That
would mean he also manufactured the physical evidence as well,
including burning the ground and shrubbery leaving no chemical
traces behind, a pretty neat trick.

There are other witnesses, but not as important as Zamora, who
got a close look. Two of them seemed to have seen the landing
part of the episode while driving into Socorro on their way back
home to Iowa.  Their names are known (Paul Kies and Larry
Kratzer), but after talking to the hometown Iowa newspaper
(Dubuque Telegraph Herald), they apparently didn't want to
discuss it any further. Ray Stanford reports in his book they
never answered his letters.

According to the local gas station owner, another carload of
tourists stopped for gas and commented about the low-flying
aircraft that had just passed over their car. This again would
have been the approach or landing part of the incident. Their
identities are not known. Just before this, an unknown object
had been seen flying slowly towards Socorro.

Stanford told me personally there was another policeman (name
known) who witnessed the end of the departure, when the vehicle
was climbing and disappearing into the distance. Unlike Zamora,
he's refused to go on record.

Stanford also wrote in his book there are a number of hearing
witnesses to both the landing and takeoff. He said he personally
spoke to two women who heard a loud roar, followed minutes later
by another loud roar. Neither wished to be identified. Stanford
reported in his book that a member of the Socorro sheriff's
department subsequently told him that literally hundreds of
persons on the south side of town heard both roars.

There were also other sightings of UFOs in the area following
Zamora's, including one by Stanford himself 6 days later, 48
miles west of Socorro. (He managed to take two photos.) Several
others were reported in the Albuquerque Journal.

>The departure of the vehicle was unlike most other flying saucer
>departures, which are invariably noiseless.

So first you say that it was unlike "most" departures, which
would be correct. Then you state that departures are
"invariably" noiseless, which is incorrect and contradicts what
you just said before.

The vast majority of sightings of the CE1 variety, where the
witnesses are not close. CE2 and CE3, or close cases, are much
rarer. That alone would reduce reports of noise, if UFOs make
noise. Usually no noise is reported in even CE2 or CE3 cases
(except for a frequently reported humming or buzzing).

However, it is simply not true that departures are "invariably
noiseless." Stanford noted a number of other cases, particular
from Europe in 1954 and the U.S. in 1957/58 where a small oval-
shaped craft , sometimes with small beings nearby were reported.
One case from November 5, 1954, in Spain (but of a large shining
disk) had the witness reporting that it rose with a roaring
noise resembling an explosion. Another from October 26, 1958,
from Baltimore was of an egg-shaped UFO. Before the object took
off, the two witneses reported a brilliant white light
accompanied by an deafening explosion-like sound.

Here's some more from Brad Spark's index:

http://www.cufos.org/BB_Unknowns_1_7.pdf

April 12, 1960 Louisianna: A fiery red disk was seen touching
down with a loud explosion and a flame, before taking off again.
There were ground traces at the site.

Feb 26, 1954, Massachusetts: Two witnesses saw a silver disc
with a white trail make a loud roar.

Oct. 11, 1955, Maryland: Two witnesses saw a white round object
turning red with sparks at end, with a deep roar.

Nov. 2, 1957, Levelland, Texas (one of famous Levelland car
stalling cases): 200 foot long torpedo-shaped object emitting
yellow flame and white smoke out the rear rose up from ground
and passed directly overhead with a thundering roar.

Get the point?

Your logic seems to be that because the object made a roaring
noise, it must be a human craft. However, you leave out the part
where the craft took off with a roar but then went completely
silent when it sped off at high speed into the distance. Please
tell us what known conventional propulsion system can silently
accelerate a craft like this.

>The occupants were not grays it seems, and their uniforms were
>Earthlike.

Amazing how you can deduce all that, especially from a witness
whose eyesight you claim is questionable. Ah, but if it can
somehow can be spun into a human crew, then Zamora's eyesight is
now incredibly sharp, eh Rich? Consistency in argumentation is
not exactly your strong point.

Actually all Zamora said was that they were small like children
and seemed to be dressed in white coveralls. His sighting of the
crew was brief and from hundreds of yards away, hardly close
enough for him to see "USAF" or "Osh Kosh BeGosh" on the
"coveralls," no matter how sharp his vision was.

>The insignia was hardly alien.

Another remarkable conclusion. Please tell us what the
difference is between a human and alien insignia. How did you
determine this?

>The Socorro incident, as you concede, is open to further investigation.

A totally meaningless tautology. All incidents are always open
to further investigation. So what?

>That's my point, which you apparently choose to dismiss or
>ignore.

You seem to no damn little about what is already known about
Zamora sighting or UFO cases in general, yet draw remarkable
conclusions from out of nowhere (" departures... are invariably
noiseless," "the insignia was hardly alien," "their uniforms
were Earthlike," etc.) The reason you are being dismissed or
ignored is because you obviously have nothing to contribute to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                            Re: Socorro - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:32:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:04:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Sparks


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

<snip>

>>This is malarky, Rich. You're just wasting time. You read all of
>>the rest that Dave sent, re the timeline and when Lonnie did have
>>his glasses on, and all you can come up with is weak nonsense.

<snip>

>Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
>question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
>the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

I don't understand what the "eye-glass question" does for you.
Seems to have a very low likelihood of a return compared to the
amount of probably highly illegal investigation that would be
required to get the answer, and it's not even clear to me what
exactly are you after? Zamora's optometry records? Those would
be confidential and protected by both federal and probably New
Mexico state law. Zamora won't be giving permission to grant
access to his medical/optometric records or answering questions
from UFO researchers about it as he has refused all further
interviews for about the past 40 years or so since around the
time Klass interviewed him, who may have been the last. Hmm
wonder why?

Speaking of Klass both he and Menzel were involved early on in
the case. Why didn't they get Zamora's "eye-glass" data? Or did
they and they found nothing out of the ordinary that they could
get any traction with so they quietly dropped the issue? Menzel
was famous or infamous for "asking the eye-glass question" and
lying to make up the answer he wanted to hear: He lied and
claimed, for example, that Father Gill "wasn't wearing his
glasses," when in fact Hynek found out Gill was wearing his
glasses.

Suppose you find out Zamora was 20/200, but 20/20 with the eye-
glasses. What would that tell you exactly? I don't see how that
would help any at all. At best it might help refine Dave
Rudiak's experiments on what distance the UFO might have
disappeared at. He has shown that the object would have
disappeared by distance recession at just about where Zamora had
estimated, about 6 miles away over Sixmile Mountain.

This shows that Zamora has unusually good judgment of distance
cues that go beyond the simplistic stereoscopic distance and
focus perception range and are more like a pilot's ability to
estimate object distances to several miles within a dynamic and
perceptual framework. As with Zamora, an object that starts out
at close range with visible known size at known distance is now
visually a "known object" even if a UFO, and can be tracked by
the human eye out to a considerable distance because it has been
calibrated for its known size at a known distance when it was at
close range.

Zamora reportedly helped Lincoln LaPaz with meteorite tracking.
This requires accurate angular observation of short-duration
objects in the sky with accurate timing by reenactment. Hynek
wrote that he had done a timed reenactment with Zamora of his
entire UFO sighting but this report is apparently not in the BB
or CUFOS files (it was specifically searched for at my request a
few years back).

My impression for what it's worth is that Zamora is an unusually
meticulous and accurate observer far beyond most of the UFO
witnesses I have ever encountered. His original sighting report
contains a wealth of detail not usually reported by witnesses or
extracted by investigators. If it's missing anything it's the
full set of timings by reenactment and angular data which could
have been extracted by careful investigators (if LaPaz had taken
some instruments with Zamora out to the landing site we could
have gotten some highly precise angular data). But this is data
of primary use for physics analysis not hoax busting or
debunking. It's calibrating the witness to extract more
scientific data as Hynek urged in The UFO Experience back in
1972 which all UFO investigators should read and understand.

Going to the "heart of an eyewitness's claim" doesn't sound like
physics analysis of trajectories and such.

Do you really think it will turn out Zamora was in reality
totally blind and he chased speeders using a guide dog in his
patrol car, wrote up his report in Braille, used sunglasses to
hide his total blindness from the Army, FBI, and law enforcement
investigators who arrived on the scene within minutes? And
managed to fool investigators who took him to the site for
months afterward?

I don't understand what we'd be looking for in "asking the eye-





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                 UFO Spotted Hovering Over Birch Hill Homes

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:09:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:09:50 -0400
Subject: UFO Spotted Hovering Over Birch Hill Homes




Source: The Berkshire Chronicle - Reading, Berkshire, UK

http://tinyurl.com/9vbpz

Oct 11 2005


Latest UFO Is Spotted Hovering Over Birch Hill Homes
By Nick Capehorn

A noisy UFO woke Birch Hill residents in the early hours of
Monday morning when it zoomed over the sleeping suburb.

The craft spent half-an-hour hovering above houses in Jevington
before zipping towards South Hill Park, according to witnesses.

Susan Mallia, who called the Midweek to see if anyone else
reported the strange sight, said: "I have never seen anything
like that before. It looked like a pile of scaffolding with
lights, red, blue and orange ones.

Story continues Continue story

"It also had a big spotlight that was moving around. I don't
think it was a helicopter because it sounded like a vacuum
cleaner or a generator.

"Perhaps it was a weather balloon. It was very noisy, and it
would have woken everyone in the area. It woke me at 2.30am and
my husband and I watched it for half and hour.

"Just as he went to get his camera it headed off to South Hill
Park and was out of sight -- but we could still hear it."

Midweek's sister paper the Bracknell News was invaded with calls
of an extra-terrestrial nature over the summer as UFOs flocked
to observe the town.

Nowhere in Bracknell Forest was left out of the spacemen's tour,
with the paper reporting sightings at the Coppid Beech Hotel
(July 7), Birch Hill (July 14), Crown Wood (July 19), Binfield
and College Town (July 28) and another in Binfield (August 30).

The News also interviewed local man Terry Walters, who claims he
was operated on by aliens in the 1960s and has alsoexorcised a
borough councillor's home.

Since then alien visitors seemed to have flown south for the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: Socorro - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:12:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:11:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Reynolds


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

<snip>

>Rich,

>I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
>d strewing red herrings all over the place when he
>obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
>elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
>involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
>fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
>at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
>examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
>D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
>issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
>you keep spewing in that regard).

>There is nothing at all wrong about raising questions on any
>historical case or reinvestigating it, but any rational person
>who wasn't simply grinding axes and spicing blogs would first
>study the literature thoroughly. You obviously have not done so.
>Nor apparently have you read Maj. Hector Quintanilla's account
>of how thoroughly the Air Force checked for experimental
>vehicles, etc., and how puzzled he was by the case.

So then what is your take, Richard, on the Socorro episode?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                             Re: Socorro - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:45:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:12:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Boone


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

>>>>>>I think that's cavalier thinking. But that's how ufology
>>>>>>is nowadays. What's cavalier? I don't think you've been at
>>>>>>it long enough to
>>>>>make that charge.

>>>This is malarky, Rich. You're just wasting time. You read all of
>>>the rest that Dave sent, re the timeline and when Lonnie did have
>>>his glasses on, and all you can come up with is weak nonsense.

>>>>That is not good investigation.

>>>I don't think you are in any position to claim that!

>>Don:

>>I see that your response conveniently leaves out the rundown of
>>my UFO experience.

>>Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
>>question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
>>the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

>>What position does one have to be in for them to be able to
>>question anything ufological?

>>Are there rules that prohibit questioning, by neophytes and
>>others?

>>Who makes up those rules?

>>While you think I'm wasting time, others do not I surmise. The
>>Socorro episode is not a done deal. It's still open to scrutiny,
>>or should be.

>Rich,

<snip>

>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>that he was of the highest repute locally,

Highest repute locally and some! You can say that again!

My aunt told me about Officer Zamora saying he was fair and
square, a hero to many people. She was very proud that he became
an cop because the spanish and native americans back then were
given a hard way to go.

Yep, from a first person who was there viewpoint, to her the sun
rose and shined on Officer Zamora.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: Socorro - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:45:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:14:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Reynolds


UpDaters:

I had occasion to talk with Lonnie Zamora's wife today,
10/11/05, and she informed me that Officer Zamora, who is in
good health, has no idea what his eysight prescription would
have been at the time of the Socorro sighting.

And Mrs. Zamora said she didn't know how we might find out what
his eyesight was in 1964, and asked what did it matter anyway.

Mrs. Zamora also said Lonnie doesn't talk about the sighting at
all anymore, and wishes not to.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: Socorro - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:57:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:17:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:38:01 -0300
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

<snip>

>If you want so desperately to solve the Socorro [curiously my
>spell checker wants to relace Socorro with Saucer] sighting then
>you have to do better than this nonexistent poor eyesight
>question. It's a red herring, pure and simple.

Don:

You and Listers may have seen my post about a phone conversation
I had today [10/11] with Mrs. Zamora, so I won't belabor that
point.

But I talked with an investigator with our Sheriff's office
here, a reader of our MediaWatch site, and he assures me that
the eyesight of a witness to a crime [an event] is very
important, an essential element for the Prosecutors office if a
suspect is being identified by a witness with eyeglasses: Were
the glasses on? What's the reason for the glasses, the eyesight
correction? Astigmatism? Near-sightedness? Far-sightedness? Is
the prescription current? Et cetera.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

               Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:01:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:33:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Clark


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:17:49 -0300
>Subject: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill


>Stan Friedman wrote:

>Kathy Marden has given me permission to post her response to
>that terrible Fulford column

>Stan Friedman

>From: Kathy Marde <Kmarden.nul >
>To: robertfulford.nul
>Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 4:41 PM
>Subject: Betty and Barney Hill

>Dear Mr. Fulford,

>The following is a quote from Betty Hill posted by Lan Fleming
on September 25, 1996:

>"Lan, to this day, I have no idea what the 'Outer Limits'
>programs were about. I never saw them. I never saw 'Twilight
>Zone.' I never watched that type of program, so I don't know
>what was shown on them. Neither did Barney. At that time, he
>never would have had the opportunity, since he worked nights."

>It has been posted on the Internet that the "Outer Limits"
>show aired on February 14, 1964, a Friday night. Barney and
>Betty did not watch science fiction programs (They preferred
>news and talk shows.) and Barney worked Monday through Friday
>nights at the South Postal Annex in Boston as a City Carrier,
>according to his employment record. Dr. Simon questioned Barney
>in deep hypnotic regression regarding the "Twilight Zone."
>Barney stated that he had never watched it but heard that it was
>"weird."

The claim that Barney Hill was recycling aliens from Outer
Limits is now a full-fledged pelicanist urban legend. It was
first propounded in 1990 by the prolific skeptical writer Martin
Kottmeyer, who did not bother to ask Betty Hill, who presumably
would know better than anybody, about it. I was the first
researcher to write her and inquire directly. She wrote me on
June 26, 1995:

"As for the Outer Limits program - never heard of it. Barney
worked nights. If he was not working, we were never home
because of our community activities. If we had been home, I am
sure this title would not interest us."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Socorro - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:35:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Clark


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:32:46 EDT
>Subject: Re: Socorro


>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

Brad,

>Speaking of Klass both he and Menzel were involved early on in
>the case. Why didn't they get Zamora's "eye-glass" data? Or did
>they and they found nothing out of the ordinary that they could
>get any traction with so they quietly dropped the issue? Menzel
>was famous or infamous for "asking the eye-glass question" and
>lying to make up the answer he wanted to hear: He lied and
>claimed, for example, that Father Gill "wasn't wearing his
>glasses," when in fact Hynek found out Gill was wearing his
>glasses.

Thanks for bringing up the matter of Menzel's spurious charge
about Father Gill's not wearing glasses at the time of his
sighting. The current discussion brought it to my mind, too. A
correction, however:

It was I, not Hynek, who (in a 1977 interview) showed Gill what
Menzel had claimed about his famous sighting: namely, that Gill
had not been wearing glasses, thus causing him to mistake Venus
for a UFO because his astigmatism led him to see an elongated,
out-of-focus image.

Menzel had never contacted Gill to see if the allegation made
any sense, and Gill knew nothing of it until I brought it to his
attention. He said, "I cannot specifically remember wearing
glasses, but I certainly would have remembered if I could not
find the glasses or if they had been lost or broken..... That
would have been a very memorable occasion."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

              Re: DMT Users See Insects From Parallel Universe?

From: Chris Burns <Thurstonoreggae.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:36:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:37:49 -0400
Subject: Re: DMT Users See Insects From Parallel Universe?


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:37:22 -0700
>Subject: DMT Users See Insects From Parallel Universe?

>http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/pc/dmtinsect.html

>Why Do DMT Users See Insects From A Parallel Universe?
>by Cliff Pickover
>Reality Carnival

>People using DMT often see insectlike beings from another
>universe.

List,

I don't know whether the topic of DMT has been discussed on the
list previous to Terry's post, but for those interested in
learning all possible angles and aspects of the "visitation"
experience, take the time to learn about DMT.

Certainly there is enough relevant to the abduction experience
to make you go "hmmm...".

A great book to start with is Rick Straussman's DMT: The Spirit
Molecule.

No need to jump to any premature conclusions about what the
alien imagery in the DMT experience means, but it is certainly
worth learning about.

Same goes for those into out-of-body and near-death experiences;





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 16:41:11 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:39:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Hall


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:12:21 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Rich,

>>I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
>>d strewing red herrings all over the place when he
>>obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
>>elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
>>involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
>>fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
>>at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
>>examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
>>D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

>>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>>that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
>>issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
>>you keep spewing in that regard).

>>There is nothing at all wrong about raising questions on any
>>historical case or reinvestigating it, but any rational person
>>who wasn't simply grinding axes and spicing blogs would first
>>study the literature thoroughly. You obviously have not done so.
>>Nor apparently have you read Maj. Hector Quintanilla's account
>>of how thoroughly the Air Force checked for experimental
>>vehicles, etc., and how puzzled he was by the case.

>So then what is your take, Richard, on the Socorro episode?

>Did Zamora see an ET craft? Or is the thing just an unsolvable
>sighting?


'Just an unsolvable sighting?' What does that mean? Sounds sort
of British John-like.

It is one of hundreds of cases, very thoroughly investigated,
that collectively show overwhelming strong patterns suggestive
of a non-earthly origin and justifying the ET hypothesis or as
Jim McDonald put it, perhaps something even more bizarre.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                          Secrecy News -- 10/11/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:51:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:41:43 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 10/11/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 96
October 11, 2005


**      ISOO SYMPOSIUM ON CLASSIFICATION POLICY
**      Q AND A WITH NEGROPONTE
**      AMICUS BRIEF URGES SCRUTINY OF SECRECY CLAIMS
**      SELECTED CRS REPORTS
**      THE ART OF SECRECY


ISOO SYMPOSIUM ON CLASSIFICATION POLICY

The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) will hold a
public symposium at the National Archives on October 18 to mark
the tenth anniversary of an executive order that initiated
significant changes in the national security classification
system.

Executive Order 12958, which took effect in October 1995,
triggered an avalanche of declassification of historically
valuable records that surpassed one billion pages last year.  It
also created bureaucratic innovations like the Interagency
Security Classification Appeals Panel that has served as an
alternate venue for members of the public to challenge agency
classification decisions.

But the executive order did little or nothing to combat the
systemic overclassification that the 9/11 Commission and others
identified as a flaw in the nation's security.

In fact, the order, amended by President Bush in 2003, has
permitted a massive expansion of classification activity in
recent years.  This, in turn, has contributed to the erosion of
government accountability and the impoverishment of public
deliberation on matters of war and peace, humane treatment of
enemy prisoners, and government surveillance, among other
topics.

The ISOO symposium brings together representatives of government
agencies, journalists, academics and public interest groups to
assess the state of classification policy today.  For more
information, see:

  http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2006/nr06-01.html


Q AND A WITH NEGROPONTE

The record of the confirmation hearing of John D. Negroponte to
be Director of National Intelligence, which has just been
published, provides some new scraps of information about his
understanding of the Director's role and his views on various
intelligence policy issues.

Since taking office, DNI Negroponte has kept a low profile as he
quietly consolidated power over the massive U.S. intelligence
bureaucracy.  The record of his April 12, 2005 hearing before
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence provides a large
fraction of his oral and written public statements on
intelligence, including answers to pre-hearing questions and
post-hearing questions for the record.

What happens if the DNI wishes to terminate a national
intelligence program that the Secretary of Defense wants to
preserve?  (In the case of a DoD program, the President
decides.)  Where does the DNI stand on disclosure of the
aggregate intelligence budget, as recommended by the 9/11
Commission and endorsed last year by the Senate?  (He would be
willing to study it, but "The President made clear his
opposition to declassification.")

These and many other such matters are discussed in "Nomination
of Ambassador John D. Negroponte to be Director of National
Intelligence," Senate Intelligence Committee, S. Hrg. 109-79,
April 12, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_hr/negroponte.html


AMICUS BRIEF URGES SCRUTINY OF SECRECY CLAIMS

The Supreme Court should critically examine government claims
that national security secrecy requires the dismissal of the
lawsuit brought by FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, several
public interest groups argued in an amicus brief filed with the
Court on October 10.

Citing the growing consensus within the government that too much
information is classified, the brief argues that simple judicial
deference to classification claims is inappropriate.

"We are asking courts to take a harder look," said Meredith
Fuchs, General Counsel at the National Security Archive and
principal author of the amicus brief.

See "Archive and Openness Advocates Urge Supreme Court: Tell
Lower Courts to Scrutinize Government Secrecy Claims":

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20051010/index.htm


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some new or newly acquired reports of the Congressional Research
Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following:

"Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture," updated
September 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32890.pdf

"U.S. Military Operations in the Global War on Terrorism:
Afghanistan, Africa, the Philippines, and Colombia," August 26,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32758.pdf

"Presidential and Vice Presidential Succession: Overview and
Current Legislation," updated September 27, 2004:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31761.pdf

"High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and
Policy Implications," updated September 9, 2003:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL31861.pdf


THE ART OF SECRECY

Among the more peculiar artifacts of the culture of secrecy are
the wall posters produced and distributed by government agencies
in order to instill security awareness and promote compliance
with security requirements.

Many of these wall posters are simple-minded to an extreme,
based on weak puns or failed attempts at humor and combined with
mediocre production values.  Occasionally, they achieve such a
intense concentration of stupidity that the viewer is helplessly
transported to another plane of existence.

A representative sample of security posters was collected and
introduced by Dan Dupont of InsideDefense.com who was
guest-blogging on DefenseTech.org here:

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001862.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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________
Steven Aftergood





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:24:02 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:43:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:18:59 EDT
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

Hi Brad!

You know, you raise a number of points, some of which
I could argue about till I am blue in the face and
some of which I would concede that you are correct.

Briefly,

1) Just because I cannot easily use the optical triangulation
method in daylight is not adequate reason to dismiss it. I
doesn't work for black objects at night either! But since most
reported UFOs are self illuminated, then this is less of a
problem than you make it out to be. Also, if the system is used
during daylight and the UFO is bright enough then it can work.

2) You keep mentioning how in the old days they weren't
successful so we can't be today. Well, they had the ancient
technologies of the 40's-60's for optical tracking. They had
good ole vacuum tubes and slide rules. This is the 21st century
and tech has advanced a little since then. So your zero
detection rate is bolderdash.

3) There are miniflaps and then there are miniflaps. One must be
able to sort out which are worthy and which are not. Set your
standards right and maybe you will be lucky. Automation gives
you the liberty to be less finicky about operational time and
sighting frequency.  Also, there ARE areas of more or less
continuous sightings to rely on (NOT meaning Area 51).

4) About NORAD not being able to identify EVERY single blip. How
do you know? Who are your sources? What clearance do you have?
The fact is we don't know and never will know what NORAD can or
cannot do. They very smartly do not tell us and the enemy their
abilities. Perhaps they file such data in the alien spaceship
file. If they gathered data showing that an unknown went from
low altitude to space and it was too fast to be earthly, then
they must either assume radar instrument error or a spaceship.
With optical data, this can eliminate instrument error.

5) About needing high resolution optical tracking, yes it would
be nice but depending upon the experiment, unnecessary. I am
only interested in tracking a flight path of a UFO and
determining that it goes into space from low altitude. Other
data is ICING, but it is essential to get this flight path data
because it helps clear up the point of origin issue. So, whether
the dot of light is highly resolved (likely mostly still a dot
of light in my opinion) or of lower resolution does not make
much difference in doing the triangulation. From your viewpoint,
I can understand you want detailed structural imaging of the
thing, but my experiment is not concerned with this. I do not
care if it is an amorphous blob, Superman, or a donut in shape.
I only care about trajectory.

6) About your never hearing about restrictions of passive radar
development, I was not aware that they had to inform you!
Really, this kind of nudging does not get the headlines.
Conspiratorial, yes, in a way, but seems to be the
government/industry way of doing business in many areas.

7) You state that its okay to do passive radar development since
it will only be used in the US. Ha-ha! It would leak to the rest
of the world quickly of course.

8) About passive radar used by foreign powers, it has been
expressed as a concern in some articles I have read. The
millions of points problem you mention is likely invalid in case
of war. There isn't likely alot of non-military traffic at such
a time. But the US military could just blow up EVERY foreign
transmitter in the country that could be used with passive
radar. The point is that the cost of having many such
transmitters is far cheaper than radar sites. That ordinary
radar would NOT be used (if it can be helped) is clear though
since as soon as a military aircraft is painted by radar, it
gets a missile. You also mention about the huge processing time
required for passive radar. Well, ideally you are right, but the
problem is that with the kind of technical development of
passive radar you advocate, the processing problem becomes
solved. So all that foriegn powers need is the chipset, some
fast computers and a bunch of transmitter towers, all tied to
their missile targetting computers. And note that the
programming and chipset design work is not likely easily done by
a third world nation, but they would be glad to get it from
pollyannish US people.

9) About the problems of optical triangulation beign able to
differentiate between two signals. I would simply say, its all
in the software dude! And, its far, far simpler than passive
radar software.

10) About all the other limits of the automated optical method I
mention, you have so many problems listed that I don't know
where to start. To summarize my reply, its nothing software
can't handle.

11) Distortion of passive radar comes from all sorts of things,
weather, solar flares, weird ionospheric activity, signal
interference from other sources. Remember you are measuring
signals from 100s of miles away and their reflections.

This becomes tedious after a point, though.

It never occured to me that UFO field research would be
considered a useless waste of time unless one had these mythical
passive radars. And after so many such field researchers had





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                            Re: Socorro - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:59:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:44:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:57:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:38:01 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

><snip>

>>If you want so desperately to solve the Socorro [curiously my
>>spell checker wants to relace Socorro with Saucer] sighting then
>>you have to do better than this nonexistent poor eyesight
>>question. It's a red herring, pure and simple.

>You and Listers may have seen my post about a phone conversation
>I had today [10/11] with Mrs. Zamora, so I won't belabor that
>point.

As Mrs. Zamora herself said, what difference does it make?

>But I talked with an investigator with our Sheriff's office
>here, a reader of our MediaWatch site, and he assures me that
>the eyesight of a witness to a crime [an event] is very
>important, an essential element for the Prosecutors office if a
>suspect is being identified by a witness with eyeglasses: Were
>the glasses on? What's the reason for the glasses, the eyesight
>correction? Astigmatism? Near-sightedness? Far-sightedness? Is
>the prescription current? Et cetera.

>Red herring? I think not.

And I'll say again, that Zamora had his glasses on during
important parts of the sighting. What it was without glasses
doesn't matter, though we do know that it wasn't worse than
20/100 (a police standard).

Further with his glasses on, his vision was at least 20/20,
another police medical standard. It is also exactly what one
would expect for a healthy person his age. Unless there is some
sort of eye pathology going on, like cataracts or diabetes, it
is extremely rare (a tiny fraction of a percent) to see acuities
lower than that in his age group. Had he had a developing
pathology that compromised his eyesight, it would have been
picked up in subsequent physicals, ending his career as a
traffic cop. That didn't happen either.

Whether he was near-sighted, far-sighted, and/or had astigmatism
is truly a red herring, since it doesn't matter if he was
wearing his glasses, which would have corrected any optical
defects. And even without glasses, we know that he was at least
20/100 regardless of what his prescription was because that is a
police medical standard. Comprehende?

Incidentally, if Zamora was farsighted, he was probably close to
20/20 even without glasses, because young farsighted people can
use their eye lens to compensate. The main reason young
farsighted people wear glasses is to lessen eyestrain,
particularly when seeing up close. Frequently far-sighted people
don't wear glasses until their 40's, when the lens runs out of
the ability to focus (because it thickens and loses
flexibility). That's when the middle-aged get their dreaded
first bifocal, a psychological trauma for many.

As for the newness of his prescription, it is very unlikely to
have mattered much. The classic age groups where there may be
rapid changes in prescription are the teens (during their growth
spurt) and middle and old age (when the eye lens loses
flexibility and also tends to develop cataracts and change
shape). But people between about 20 and 40, Zamora's age group,
tend to have very stable vision. Prescriptions hardly change at
all, even over a period of many years. Any changes are usually
extremely minor.

The point is a whole lot can be deduced about Zamora's eyesight
just from knowing his age and the fact that he was a traffic





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Socorro - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:36:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:45:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Smith


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:37:24 -0700
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>Incidentally, Blue Book investigators did an analysis looking
>for chemical propellant traces. They didn't find any. That's
>another important indication that this wasn't a conventional
>propulsion system like a jet or rocket.

Just a nit, but if they were looking for products of combustion
from jet fuel or other dirty fuels, you are right in assuming
that would imply such was not used. But if the combustion was
hydrogen and oxygen or chemical combinations with _gaseous_
combustion byproducts, then traces would not show up (unless the
fuel source was contaminated by these).

>If this craft had a mechanical problem, it was
>obviously extremely minor (because it immediately took off
>again, etc.). All experimental craft encounter snags. The
>engineers fix them. If there are serious ones that can't be
>fixed, then maybe that's reason for cancellation. But, again,
>this craft seemed to have no problems fleeing the scene in a
>hurry. It was a wingless, high- performance, VTOL vehicle with,
>except for landing and takeoff, a silent propulsion system. The
>military would kill for an aircraft like that.

The terrestrial explanation fails for an experimental vehicle
because you just don't "fly one around" and land and take off
again. Not if you are sane test pilots and a sane test program.
Its just not "Heh, John, lets take the experimental UFOlike VTOL
vehicle for a spin". Its more of a massive, detailed program
with hundreds of folk involved and a rigorously defined test
area beyond which they don't go without failsafes shutting it
down.

>Your logic seems to be that because the object made a roaring
>noise, it must be a human craft. However, you leave out the part
>where the craft took off with a roar but then went completely
>silent when it sped off at high speed into the distance. Please
>tell us what known conventional propulsion system can silently
>accelerate a craft like this.

The only idea I had about this noisy-then-silent phenomena was
that the sound waves were directed based on the propulsion
system. Thus, a messy rocketlike propulsion system near the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                      Re: Memory Without Klass - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 19:40:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:47:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass - Shough


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:33:07 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>><snip>

>>>>When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
>>>>a device which did stop car engines

>>>Jan, can you tell me the references of such a claim I have never
>>>heard before?

>>After about three weeks with various computer problems, I have
>>access to most of my files, but not the old E-mail files. So I
>>can't give you the specific url.

>>The device was produced by a British firm, the car had to run
>>over a strip with the electrical components in it. The device
>>didn't just stop the car, it wrecked the engine. Not exactly the
>>EME associated with UFOs, but neither is it a mystical device
>>Klass claimed. Once the effect has been established obviously
>>something more close to UFO EMEs could be engineered.

>>See also:

>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1259138,00.html

>>(Murray Bott found an incident in which RF with engine function
>>stopped blimp motor near large radio transmitter.)

>>Roos, John G. "Arresting Development: Non-Lethal Vehicle-
>>Stopping Device for the Army's Peacekeeping Bag of Tricks."
>>Armed Forces Journal International, vol. 138, no. 10, May 2001,
>>p. 24.

>>http://tinyurl.com/ch8oy

>The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board also put out a lengthy
>white paper in 1997 (or maybe 1999) outlining their vision for
>the 21st century American Air Force. Most of it was about laser
>and space-based weapons systems. However, it also mentioned the
>existence of high-power microwave weapons capable of stalling
>internal combustion engines (making the vehicles easy targets
>for subsequent bombing), also capable of scrambing aviation
>electronics and causing power blackouts. These are all
>electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
>with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
>was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
>dozens of cases of car stallings.)

But don't forget that the EMP-type methods in the two sources
referenced by Jan above are only effective against the
electronics in modern vehicles, not the combustion engine
itself, and so wouldn't have had any effect on the variety of
petrol and deisel vehicles reported disabled before about 1990
or so.

>The AFSAB paper was on the Net for a while, but was subsequently
>pulled. I regret now not having made a copy.

Incidentally Larry Robinson (with whom I have rarely failed to
_disagree_ strongly on a the few occasions we've "met") claimed
to have chapter and verse on a natural explanation for the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                            Re: Socorro - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:08:01 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:48:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Shough


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:38:01 -0300
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>First off Rudiak didn't vet anything. He surmised, which he can
>>do because he's an eye specialist. But still it's just
>>supposition. We have no idea what Zamora's eye situation was in
>>1964, and that's poor investigation no matter how much you guys
>>try to fudge the isssue.

>I'm not fudging anything. I'm stating facts and your are arguing
>conjecture. By your reasoning, Lonnie was running around armed
>with a handgun with the right to blaze away with it if the
>situation called for it. He spent his days-thousands of them-as
>a policeman doing his duty, wearing glasses. He drove a police
>cruiser, on the highways and byways with all of the other people
>while wearing his glasses. He did this apparently while-as
>you've claimed-he had faulty eyesight, even though he was
>wearing his glasses. Then for some reason when he reports a UFO
>you bring his eyesight into question.

<snip>

>>The Socorro incident, as you concede, is open to further
>>investigation. That's my point, which you apparently choose to
>>dismiss or ignore.

>Your point continues to be that he wore glasses and was
>therefore, blind. I did dismiss or ignore the fact that Lonnie
>ore glasses. I read the reports, the books, considered what he
>did for a living and the character assessments of the man, the
>timeline and I ruled out his wearing glasses as a none issue.

>There's no proof that his wearing glasses in any way abrogated
>his interpretation of the sighting or skewed his testimony.

>Lonnie had his glasses on during the most important parts of the
>sighting. You've been told that more than a few times. You
>choose to ignore this. The condition of Lonnie's eyesight had
>nothing to do with it. You know it and I know it.

Hi Don

A couple of butt-ins if I may: First of all it occurs to me that
there are pretty good portrait photographs of Zamora circa 1964
with his glasses on. I'm looking at one now (in Hynek's "UFO
Report"). The lenses don't look to me like the bottoms of beer
glasses. My impression is not worth much, but maybe David Rudiak
can deduce something about how strong (or not) the correction is
and thus at least put some limits on the possible defect in
Zamora's uncorrected vision?

Secondly, from the point of view of Zamora's character and
credibility as a witness, the fact that we _know_ he did lose
his glasses at one point is interesting. After all, we wouldn't
know this if he didn't mention it. He could easily have been
less fastidious as to the truth and skipped that part if he felt
the need to deflect criticism from claims he felt ambiguous
about. In my opinion this fact reinforces the conclusion that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 40

From: John Hayes <John.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 21:22:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:50:54 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 40


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan.nul>
==========================

UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 10, Number 40
October 12, 2005
Editor: Joseph Trainor

E-mail: Masinaigan.nul
Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/


ALIEN SPOTTED NEAR MEXICAN POWER STATION

      Night watchmen at a power station in Altamira, a
town in Mexico's state of Tamaulipas, claim to have
captured the image of an alien on videotape.  The image
was captured by the plant's security cameras.
      According to the Mexican newspaper Hoy Extramex,
"Widespread panic has been unleashed in Altamira after a
strange creature was videotaped in the section containing
the energy-producting turbines of that city's
thermoelectric plant, spreading once more the theory that
there is an extraterrestrial base in the area, presumably
with designs on invading the territory."
      Altamira has two large thermoelectric plants, which
have been designated Altamira 3 and Altamira 4 by
Mexico's Federal  Electric Commission.
      "According to Arturo Calcaneo, this newspaper also
published a report provided by fishermen who claimed
having cast their nets in the open sea and saw, to their
astonishment, how they did not sink and remained floating
on the water's surface."
      Elsewhere in Mexico, "a strange unidentified flying
object flew over the eastern part of" Ramos Arizpe in
Coahuila state, "was recorded by the urban cameras of the
Municipal Public Security's O-60 security system."
      "The 27-minute-long video was shown yesterday to the
media by Homero Duran Flores, head of the municipal
agency."
      The UFO resembles "a round object with a grey-
colored ring and a black circle in the middle, roating,
and was recorded at different times as it approached and
withdrew."
      "Duran Flores said that the video, recorded between
3:07 and 3:34 a.m." on Monday, October 3, 2005, "is at
the disposal of experts in the subject, since it is
'without doubt an important document, taking into
consideration the clarity and sharpness of the images.'"
      "Mayra Gallegos Muniz, a radio operator of the O-60
system, who was on duty when the call came in, said that
upon looking out her office window, the unidentified
flying object 'appeared very large, four or five times
the size of a star.'"  (See the Mexican newspapers Hoy
Extramex for October 5, 2005, "Extraterrestrials invade
Altamira," and Vanguardia for October 5, 2005, "Security
cameras record UFO over Coahuila."  Muchas gracias a
Scott Corrales y Dr. Ana Luisa Cid Fernandez y Jesus
Jimenez pos esos articulos de diario.)


UFO DAZZLES THOUSANDS IN THE PHILIPPINES

      "Thousands of residents in the towns of Milang,
Midsayap, Pikit, Alamada and Kidapawan City craned their
necks Monday night," October 3, 2005, "to witness what
many believe was an unidentified flying object (UFO)."
      The sightings took place on Mindanao, the large
southern island of the Philippines.
      "Vice Mayor Joselito Pinol of Milang personally saw
the flying object while on his way home from his farm in
Barangay Dugong."
      "Pinol told radio stations DXND and DXMS that the
object flew over Milang for at least 45 minutes."
      "The vice mayor described the flying object as a
vertical line, almost one meter (3 feet, 3 inches) long,
looking like the windshield wiper on a four-wheel-drive
vehicle."
      "'I thought this was only seen in our town,' Pinol
said, 'But I was amazed when my friends in other towns of
the province called me and told me that the object had
been seen in Kidapawan, as well.'"  (See the Filipino
newspaper Minda News for October 4, 2005, "What was that
unidentified flying object seen in NorthCot?"  Many
thanks to Roy Lopez for this newspaper article.).


UFO FLAP BREAKS OUT IN PERU

      A major UFO flap broke out in Peru last week, with
sightings near Chosica.
      "Residents of the Puente Piedra and Ventanilla
districts were witnesses to an unusual event: two
unidentified flying objects were reported in both areas."
      "The objects appeared in the night sky over one of
the many settlements along the Rio Chillon between Puente
Piedra and Ventanilla on Friday," September 10, 2005, "at
10 p.m."
      Witnesses described the UFOs as "two powerful lights
that could not be mistaken with airplanes, helicopters or
aerostats (balloons-J.T.).  They ascended with such
swiftness towards the town that they absorbed energy from
several light posts, causing them to go out."
      "'Those were UFOs and they caused the blackout and
interference with artifacts,' said Mario Zegarra."
      "They tend to appear when disasters approach,'
Zegarra added, 'They are warning us of these tragedies.'"
(Editor's Note:  This was about a month before the
catastrophic earthquake in Kashmir, which measured 7.6 on
the Richter scale.  It was the worst earthquake in the
Himalayan region in more than a century.)
      "'They were two oval-shaped objects.  They flashed,
but at a given moment, we were able to see them clearly,
and they were definitely neither airplanes nor anything
remotely similar.  We saw them in the sky,' said Isabel
Tafur, a resident of Puente Piedra."
      "Sra. Tafur's testimony was corrobrated by the
custodians at Public School No. 2081, who specified the
time of the sighting as 10 p.m."
      UFOs were also seen in the town of San Juan de
Lurigancho, near Chosica and Lima, the capital of Peru.
      "Residents of the Avenida Weisse in San Juan de
Lurigancho have also seen UFOs in recent days.  These
witnesses indicated that the saucers remained motionless
in the sky for several minutes before taking off toward
Chosica."  (See the Peruvian newspapers Panamericana
Noticias for October 4 and 5, 2005, "Residents of Puente
Piedra and Ventanilla see UFOs" and "We saw them in the
sky!"  Also, El Comercio for October 6, 2005.  Muchas
gracias a Scott Corrales y Monica Gaetano de Silva por
estos articulos de diario.)


WOMAN SPOTS SEVEN ORANGE UFOs OVER THE NORTH SEA

      On Sunday, September 18, 2005, Marcela Krystkova
reported, "I was flying from Prague," the capital of the
Czech Republic, "to Edinburgh (Scotland, UK).  The sky
got cloudy somewhere over the Netherlands.  Over the
(English) Channel, the clouds were a bit torn.  I felt
sleepy as I had to get up at 4 a.m. and didn't get to
sleep too well at night.  And just seeing clouds became
boring after a while.  Also, my seat was at the window
but near the wing, so the wing and the engine took a lot
of my view.  If I wanted to see something, I had to lean
forward and look out the farther window."
      "Then, around 1 p.m., I looked out again and saw we
were still over the (North) sea.  There was a gap between
clouds so I could see the sea.  Down, deep under me, I
could see some round orange things.  They looked like
round rubber lifeboats on the sea.  There were seven of
them.  They seemed to be floating on the surface.  I
noticed that they created a perfect boomerang-shaped
formation."
      "That attracted my attention.  They were moving
quite fast for something that big on the sea.  I could
swear that at the beginning they were a bit scattered but
now they were very much giving the impression of a single
body.  That's how perfect the formation was. Was it
military training?  I tried to have a better look to
identify what it was, but suddenly there were two white
clouds bursting out of two of the circles like an
explosion, and all the formation, like one body, moved
forward with great acceleration, leaving just two white
double lines (contrails?-J.T.)  The lines were short,
just about double the size of the triangle."
      "At high speed, all the formation disappeared under
the cloud, and I had the feeling that it wanted to hide,
not to be seen.  I hoped that it would come out the other
side of that large cloud before (her jetliner's) engine
and wing covered my view, but it didn't."
      "After the cloud, I saw a ship, looked big, at least
a ferry, maybe bigger.  And still the length of the ship
would make only about two-thirds of the side of the
boomerang.  And the circles were slightly bigger in
diameter than the width of the ship.  So the object must
have been huge."
      "Soon after, we approached the east coast of
Britain, and, at 1:40 p.m., we were landing at Edinburgh
airport."  (Email Form Report)


TRIO SIGHTS A UFO IN MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO

      On Sunday, October 2, 2005, at 8:10 p.m., eyewitness
Paul S. reported, "Me and my two roommates were out on
the porch" of their home in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
(population 544,832), "when one of them noticed two very
bight stars in the eastern sky where the city lights are
bright.  They were distanced apart approximately like two
stars on the Big Dipper (constellation Ursa Major-J.T.)."
      "As we were trying to make sense of why these stars
caught our attention, they started to fade exactly in
sync and disappeared completely in about six seconds.  To
the lower left remained a dim star or planet that was of
the solar system, as it did not appear out of the
ordinary."
      "Throughout the next few hours, we would check to
see if the two bright stars had returned.  The flickering
red one seemed to move up to the south slowly as the
night progressed.  We doubt it was airplanes because they
did not move, and why would they fade in sync?  (Email
Form Report)


THREE RED UFOs SIGHTED OVER VERNON, BRITISH COLUMBIA

      On Wednesday, October 5, 2005, at 8 p.m., eyewitness
Ronald J. reported, "My friend and I were driving past
the tree farm" in Vernon, British Columbia, Canada
(population 31,817) "when we both said at the same time,
'Look at those weird lights!'"
      "Directly ahead, around 20 meters (66 feet) down the
road, there were three very bright red lights.  The first
thing I thought of was car tail-lights, but they were too
high above the ground, as my friend pointed out."
      "We observed them for about 15 seconds, when they
passed around a slight bend in the road to our left, the
lights did not change direction, as fading tail-lights
would, they seemed to pass around the bend.  At the bend,
the road drops, but the lights did not descend but
remained at the same height."
      "I sped up slightly to see what kind of car this was
(and) rounded the bend, and there were no vehicles at
all."
      "The road is straight, with no turn-offs, and you
are able to see vehicles for almost a few kilometers at
that point.  There was just nowhere for it to have gone
that quickly.  We were only a couple of seconds behind
those lights.  Both my friend and I became frightened at
this point because of the reality of the situation."
      "There was just nowhere the vehicle could have gone-
steep shoulder, fenced, on the left and steep drop on the
right, with fields all around.  There were just no more
lights."
      The UFOs "moved around the slight bend in the road
to the left, but it was strange because it did not rotate
as car lights would.  It just stayed as three lights side
by side."
      "I continued on to my friend's home, turning at the
bottom of the road right into Okangan Landing.  We didn't
see anything else after this."  (Email Form Report)


SOLAR SYSTEM'S NEWEST MOON IS NAMED FOR TV HEROINE

      "A moon circles the '10th Planet' recently
discovered beyond Pluto, astronomers report."
      Located "about 9 billion miles from the sun, the
moon (dubbed 'Gabrielle') circles the planet (called
'Xena' or UB313) once every few weeks, says Michael Brown
of the California Institute of Technology, who announced
the planet's discovery in July 2005."
      "Xena is larger than Pluto, and its discovery has
triggered discussion among astronomers about rethinking
how planets are defined."
      "The moon could be the product of a collision
between objects in the comet belt (Kuiper Belt-J.T.) near
Pluto, and scientists say such crashes were once
surprisingly common."
      "The names Xena and Gabrielle are taken from the
fictional TV series Xena: Warrior Princess."  (See USA
Today for October 4, 2005, "'Planet' beyond Pluto has a
moon," page 7D.)
(Editor's Note: Xena's arch-enemy, Callisto, long ago
gave her name to a moon of Jupiter.)


LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

      On Thursday, October 6, 2005, I completed my trek
east across the USA from Duluth, Minnesota to
southeastern Massachusetts.  That's why there was no UFO
Roundup on October 5, 2005.  However, with a lot of help
from our correspondents and friends here in New England,
I was able to make deadline this week.  So, many, many
thanks to Robert Fischer, Mary Lou Jones-Drown, Scott
Corrales, Monica Gaetano de Silva, Roy Lopez, Krishnari
Bai Dharapurnanda and others for compiling all those
paranormal reports and making them immediately available
to me.
      Hopefully, we will have no more interruptions in
service, at least for the remainder of this year.  Along
the way, I picked up a couple of feature stories which I
will make available in a couple of weeks.  Our weekly
feature story, "From the UFO Files...," will return in
short order.  I still have a lot of unpacking to do.
Have a great week!

      And we'll be back next time with more UFO, Fortean
and paranormal reports from around the planet Earth,
brought to you by "the paper that goes home, UFO
Roundup." See you next week!

      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

Home to UFO Roundup, Encounters With Aliens On This Day,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI
Magazine plus archives of Humanoid Sighting Reports
(Albert Rosales), Filer's Files, UFO News UK and more...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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 > Oct > Oct 12

                          Re: Spicy Blogs - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:39:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:54:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Spicy Blogs - Rudiak


>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:42:01 -0400
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 13:38:05 -0700
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 20:36:38 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up
>
>>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 10:24:54 -0700
>>>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>>>As you told Paul Kimball, the way to get your blogs read is
>>>>to keep them "spicy." I doubt somebody like you would willingly
>>>>give up the "spice".

>>>This is false. David Rudiak is no doubt referring to a blog post
>>>I made some time ago wherein I stated that the RRR guys like to
>>>"keep it spicy" at their blog. This was my opinion, however, as
>>>anyone who read the post would have been aware. It was _not_
>>>something that Rich Reynolds told me, and it was certainly _not_
>>>something that Rich Reynolds told me to do in order to get one's
>>>blog read.

>>>David Rudiak has misrepresented what I wrote so that he can
>>>score a cheap debating point off of Rich Reynolds. I don't have
>>>a dog in this hunt, other than to set the record straight.

>>Odd, but just to set the record straight, you wrote the
>>following in your blog of July 11, 2005:

>>http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_redstarfilms_archive.html

>>"In honour of my pal Rich Reynolds (www.rrrgroup.blogspot.com),
>>who has recently been trying to convince me that the key to
>>blogging is to keep it spicy (or something like that - all I
>>really recall is him nattering on about "the medium" being 'the
>>message,'"

>Hmm... it seems that both David and I were wrong here. It
>appears that a few months ago I did write that RRR were trying
>to convince me that the key to blogging was to keep it spicy
>(not what I recalled, but obviously what I wrote). However,
>nowhere in there will you find that they said this because they
>thought it was a way to get a blog read, which is where David
>erred - he extrapolated from what I wrote something that just
>isn't there.

One last nit to pick: I think it reasonable to assume that the
purpose of making a blog "spicy" is to get people to read it.
That's the way I would interpret the meaning of "the key to
blogging.".

But no matter. I appreciate the apology from Paul. I would also
like to mention that I read his spicy blogs now and then. It
might surprise him to know I agree with him at least as often as
I disagree, if not more.

I also prefer Paul's version of "spice" to RRR's. It's much
easier on the palate. Call it a kinder and gentler spice.

Example: RRR regularly publishes something akin to the Top Ten
Demonic, Oppressive, Narrow-Minded, Fuddy-Duddy Ufologists, or
something like that. (Guess who periodically makes the list?)

But Paul publishes the Top Ten TV/Movie Sci-Fi Babes (with
pictures).

Which would you prefer? It's no contest as far as I'm concerned.
Babes trump bile.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                    Response To Fulford's 'Boring Aliens'

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:58:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:00:21 -0400
Subject: Response To Fulford's 'Boring Aliens'

-----


From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
To: Robert Fulford <robert.fulford.nul>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 8:41 PM
Subject: "Why are aliens so boring?"


Robert Fulford, National Post October 12, 2005\

To say that your October 8 article on UFO abductions is grossly
inaccurate is a major understatement. I say this as a nuclear
physicist who has worked for GE, GM, Westinghouse and other
major firms and has been seriously interested in UFOs since
1958. Since 1967 I have lectured on the subject "Flying Saucers
ARE Real" at more than 600 colleges and over 100 professional
groups in 9 provinces, 50 states and 14 other countries. I have
authored two books

"Crash at Corona: The Definitive Study of the Roswell Incident"
and TOP SECRET/MAJIC and written 80 UFO papers. Perhaps more to
the point, it is clear you have not done your homework on the
abduction of Betty and Barney Hill as described in John G.
Fuller's outstanding book "The Interrupted Journey". In contrast,
I met with Betty and Barney for hours back in 1968, 3 months
before Barney's death, have done a number of TV shows with
Betty; been to her home several times, met with John
Fuller, reviewed his papers at the Boston University Archives,
was the first to publish about the outstanding work done by Ms.
Marjorie Fish (with whom I spent many hours) on the star map
described by Betty and also spoke with Dr. Benjamin Simon the
very well respected psychiatrist who did the medical hypnosis
to extract Betty and Barney's reliving of the missing time
associated with the case. I have listened to some of the tapes
he made of 3 and =BD months of weekly separate sessions. Many
quotes are in the book.To suggest that Betty and Barney were
echoing fiction is absurd. The star map work proves that.

Obviously you haven't even read the book. There is clear proof
that Barney did not watch the TV show you mention or any other
that could have served as a stimulus for the story. Dr. Simon's
specialty was using medical hypnosis to have people relive
traumatic experiences (i.e. a war veteran whose buddy was killed
next to him, etc) so they can lose their impact on the person.
Fortunately for you, one can't legally defame dead people.
Betty, Barney, John and Ben are all deceased. They would have a
very strong case for defamation.

If you want to learn about the abduction phenomena, rather than
depending on debunker Clancy's take, I would suggest you review
the impressive book "UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the
Borders of Knowledge". It is published by the University Press
of Kansas, 2000, and edited by Dr. David Jacobs, Assoc.
Professor of History at Temple University. David has written
three other scholarly books on UFOs and worked with hundreds of
abductees. The book has contributions from a number of other
professionals including Dr. Don Donderi of the Psychology
Department at McGill University.

You owe your readers an apology. Your column is a perfect
example of what was described by Dr. Herbert Strentz in his 1970
PhD Thesis on "Press Coverage of UFOs" at Medill School of
Journalism at Northwestern University. He said: "The high degree
of ridicule present in the UFO phenomenon was reflected in the
press coverage.. The coverage has been marked by superficiality,
redundancy, silliness, careless reporting and lack of relevant
information.. the lack of relevant information was also
attributable to the reluctance of the press to ferret out
information about the phenomenon and those involved in it." It
is thirty five years later. He was certainly right on.

For shame.


Stanton T. Friedman, nuclear physicist-Lecturer





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                Brazilian UFO Disclosure & Amazon's Operation

From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 07:21:00 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:23:27 -0400
Subject: Brazilian UFO Disclosure & Amazon's Operation


Dear Colleagues:

I am glad to inform the International UFO Community that
Brazilian UFO Magazine has translated, subtitled and has for
download two of the most important TV programs where significant
info about the UFO phenomena in Brazil is treated. They are
Fantastico and Linha Direta (Fantastic and Direct Line), both
from Globo TV Network, the largest in the country and the 4th in
the world.

The Fantastico program of 22 May 2005 carried an entire
segment about the official Brazilian UFO Disclosure that took
place in 20 May 2005. It has about 8,2 minutes and the file to
download in good definition is 71,4 Mb. Specific address for
"Fantastico" program files:

http://www.ufo.com.br/publico/Fantastico_22_maio/

The file in English is: Program Fantastico i..> 11-Oct-2005
16:26  71.4 Mb

The Linha Direta program of 25 August 2005 was entirely
dedicated to the UFO problem in the Amazon. It is 43.4 minutes
long and has numerous, extraordinary visual effects that
reproduce the attacks on people on the island of Para State, in
the Amazon - called by the locals "chupa-chupa" or suck-suck
phenomena.

It was the tremendous intensity of the phenomena in the area in
1977 that forced the Brazilian Air Force to implement its
official and confidential Operation Saucer. This is one of the
best produced shows about UFOs ever. Specific address for "Linha
Direta" program files:

http://www.ufo.com.br/publico/Linha_Direta_25_Agosto/

The file in English is: Program Linha Direta..> 11-Oct-2005
20:20   299 Mb

Brazilian UFO Magazine public FTP general address is:

http://www.ufo.com.br/publico/

I have served as consultant to the Linha Direta program of 25
August 2005 and the material contained in the Fantastico program
of 22 May 2005 is based on the Brazilian UFO Magazine's campaign
UFOs: Freedom of Information Now. I invite any interested
parties to download both shows and see inside what is going on
in Brazil.

Meanwhile, I presented both shows shortly at the The 1st
Exobiology Ufology and Exopolitical  International Symposium,
held in Calabria, Italy, last weekend, and I intend to show them
completely at the Bay Area UFO Expo, next weekend:

http://www.thebayareaufoexpo.com/

Best regards,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Homemade Flying Machines - Stevenson

From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:27:24 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:25:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Homemade Flying Machines - Stevenson


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:31:54 EDT
>Subject: Homemade Flying Machines

>Wow! Look At These Homemade Flying Machines!

>http://kai.iks-jena.de/bigb/mav.html

>I love model aircraft making. This site, in German showcases
>lots of homemade state-of-the-art craft as well as military
>craft and concept craft.

>I've run into my share of homemade craft that people were flying
>around that others thought were UFOs.

>Any guy with  a garage and some parts and a day off can really

>put people into a spin.


Hi Greg and Listers

I've always liked this craft;

http://www.americanantigravity.com/documents/Plans/Construction-Guide-GRA3.pdf

and its the best use of any TV rather than watching them.

It's also said that Hi Fi electrostatic loudspeakers lift too
slightly if you turn the volume high enough :-)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                   Catholic Thought On Extra-Terrestrials

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:38:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:27:29 -0400
Subject: Catholic Thought On Extra-Terrestrials


Vatican astronomer ponders baptism of extraterrestrial

A pocket-sized book published by the Catholic Truth Society in
the UK addresses Catholic attitudes to extra-terrestrial life.

Independent Catholic News reports that with increasing numbers
of people believing not only in the possibility of intelligent
life on other planets, but even claiming encounters with aliens,
it is not surprising that the Catholic Church is beginning to
explore what effect the discovery of sentient ETs might have on
Christian theology.

In 'Intelligent Life in the Universe?' Catholic belief and the
search for extraterrestrial intelligent life, author Guy
Consolmagno SJ, asks:

- Would humans recognise intelligent life if we saw it?
- Could we communicate with it? Should we even try?
- Is Original Sin something that affects all intelligent beings?
- Is Jesus Christ's redemption valid for intelligent beings
  throughout the universe?
- or would other worlds have their own version of Jesus?
- Would the Church send missionaries to ET planets?

Guy Consolmagno SJ, a Jesuit religious brother and astronomer,
divides his year between the Vatican's observatory in Arizona
and its older observatory at the Pope's summer residence, Castel
Gandolfo, in the hills outside of Rome.

Brother Guy has advanced degrees in planetary science from MIT
and the University of Arizona. He spends his time observing
comets and asteroids, and does experiments with the Vatican's
vast collection of meteorites one of the largest in the world.
He is one of a dozen Jesuit astronomers doing this work. The





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                      Re: Hypersonic Propusion - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:35:35 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:29:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Hypersonic Propusion - Ledger


List:

For those who feel that any research conducted on new aero-
propusion methods are super secret see the following news
release from NASA. This is one of the reasons why I have no
faith in the the theory that secret technology of the past is an
explanation for some of our more exotic UFO episodes. If this
stuff already exists, why the following release?

Don Ledger

-----

Elvia Thompson
NASA Headquarters, Washington
(Phone: 202/358-1696)

Oct. 12, 2005

Marny Skora
Langley Research Center, Va.
(Phone: 757/864-6124)

CONTRACT RELEASE: C05-002

NASA AWARDS HYPERSONIC DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT

NASA announced GASL, Inc., Ronkonkoma, N.Y., received a follow
on contract for hypersonic propulsion development and testing to
support the agency's Langley Research Center, Hypersonic Air
Breathing Propulsion Branch, Hampton, Va. The contract has a
maximum value of $15 million.

The work under the contract provides for the operation and
application of shock-heated and combustion-heated test
facilities. It also provides for supporting equipment to conduct
test and evaluation of hypersonic aero-propulsion flow path
research at conditions that duplicate flight across the
atmosphere from static sea level to near orbital.

Specifically, as part of this activity, is the operation and
management of the government-furnished Hypersonic Pulse Facility
in either shock-expansion tunnel, or reflected shock tunnel
configurations; the acquisition of facility and propulsion flow
path data and the application of data processing tools to
provide well defined test conditions and performance of test
articles.

The contract also calls for the conduct of hypervelocity
aerodynamic and aero-thermodynamic research in a shock-heated
tunnel at test gas flows up to Mach 20 simulation; the design
and manufacture of research test hardware consisting of
specialized aero-propulsion test facility components and engine
flow path components. The research will be primarily conducted
at GASL facilities in Ronkonkoma.

For information about NASA and agency programs on the Web, visit:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

              No Spaceships Or Helicopters But Listen For Click

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:07:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:07:09 -0400
Subject: No Spaceships Or Helicopters But Listen For Click




Source: Port Clinton News Herald, Ohio

http://tinyurl.com/aq3h6

Tuesday, October 11, 2005


No Spaceships Or Helicopters - But Listen For The Click

Many years ago, I knew a lady who was regularly visited by
helicopters - usually in her postage stamp-size back yard. Oddly
enough, I was never there to witness a visitation so it follows
that I had some serious doubts - not about her truthfulness, but
maybe about her interpretation of reality.

Evenings spent sipping iced tea with Midge on her glass sun
porch were golden. Everything in the world, as seen through her
eyes, was possible. I was very young; she was a generation
older.

We talked of all things. Truth is, I mostly listened while Midge
spun her web.

Extra-terrestrials, as I knew them back then, were only in the
movies.

"That's all Hollywood," Midge had told me one night as we hung
out waiting for a helicopter or an undercover agent to stop in
for a visit. Her comment was meant for the movie I'd been to the
night before on a date and was at that moment describing in
great detail.

"When you least expect it," I spoke in a half-whisper to
dramatize the moment for all it was worth, "'The Thing' jumps up
and everybody screams." Midge wasn't terribly impressed, but she
let me finish.

Once, we waited hours for a promised visit from some silver
dollar-sized flying saucers that often swarmed around her dining
room table. Midge said she wasn't afraid of them and I shouldn't
be either because they were friendly. How she knew that, I never
found out, but I kind of figured that anything tiny enough to
fly around inside a silver dollar wasn't going to scare me,
either.

But it did. I couldn't imagine what I would say to an alien.
Midge said there were no rules, but I was to be accepting and
not show fear. I wasn't sure I could do that, but as it turned
out, I didn't have to worry about it because they didn't show.

Midge said she wasn't surprised. They didn't like to show off.

Once, during one of our lengthy chats, Midge stopped short. "Did
you hear that?" she whispered as she held up one hand to silence
me. "There's someone in the bushes over there." I listened but
heard nothing.

Then she waved her hand in dismissal and loudly declared: "It's
just one of J. Edgar's boys trying to catch me talking to the
wrong person."

Hours later, Midge was revved but I was exhausted and a bit
confused. I didn't know whether to believe a story that
meandered from flights across the Andes in a C-47, to packages
being surreptitiously kicked overboard at specific compass
readings. Her late husband was the pilot and the aircraft was
theirs.

Midge also taught me to be careful what I trusted to the
telephone wires. Her phones were tapped, she knew, and she
suspected that mine would be too, now that we'd become such good
friends.

As Midge aged, her stories grew, and with each telling, they
felt more real - even though I knew they were total
fabrication.

I'd never seen the space ships or the men hiding in the bushes
or the helicopters out back. But every once in a while, I did
hear a "click" on my phone line. I dismissed it as an overactive
imagination.

Midge has been gone for a while now and with her, the stories
that so fascinated and entertained me.

This morning, I read an AP news story that brought it all
rushing back.

"FBI Admits to Making Mistakes in Wiretaps" Dateline WASHINGTON
- "The FBI says it sometimes gets the wrong number when it
intercepts conversations in terrorism investigations ..."

If Midge knew about the Patriot Act and Homeland Security, she'd
have plenty to say on the subject. But, since she's not around,
I'll say it for her: Just listen for the click, folks.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

             My Weekly Reader Stirred Flying-Saucer Controversy

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:10:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:10:19 -0400
Subject: My Weekly Reader Stirred Flying-Saucer Controversy




Source: Richmond Times Dispatch - Richmond, Virginia, USA

http://tinyurl.com/bqrs2

Oct 12, 2005


My Weekly Reader Stirred Flying-Saucer Controversy

Time Capsules
Larry Hall

The specter of alien spacecraft hovering over the United States
became almost a national obsession in 1947.

That was the year the Air Force announced it had retrieved a
crashed "flying disc" near Roswell, N.M., only to retract the
statement hours later, saying the object really was a high-
altitude weather balloon.

Official denials of the presence of strange aircraft did not
stop a growing epidemic of UFO (unidentified flying object)
sightings in the United States, however. And with the advent of
the Atomic Age and the Cold War, newspapers around the country
treated the subject with more seriousness than amusement.

In 1950, an unlikely source tried to solve the flying-saucer
mystery. My Weekly Reader, a current-events publication used as
an educational supplement in many elementary schools, explained
what UFOs were in terms that young readers could understand and
assured youngsters they had no reason to fear flying saucers.

According to reports that year from The Times-Dispatch and The
Richmond News Leader, fourth- and fifth-graders in the area had
learned from My Weekly Reader that flying saucers were real and
easy to recognize.

"Some are raised in the middle like a pie. Others turn up around
the edge like a saucer," My Weekly Reader said. They varied
greatly in size, from a few inches to several city blocks, and
produced no noise or fumes.

Some were built of a substance that dissolved slowly with
exposure to Earth's atmosphere. "For this reason, the saucers
disappear soon after they hit the ground. You probably will
never find one."

But in case one remained intact long enough to be discovered, it
carried a label: "Military secret of the United States of
America Air Forces." Flying saucers, My Weekly Reader said, were
made in the United States.

Introduced in 1928, My Weekly Reader had such a reputation for
truth and accuracy that a fifth-grade teacher at a Richmond
school told The Times-Dispatch that her students accepted
everything in the article as fact, as did she. The teacher said
she "read it with her pupils, and . . . anything My Weekly
Reader said must be true."

The author of the article was identified only by the pen name
Tom Trott. The Richmond teacher said Trott's travel features
were a favorite of her students, and in Trott's first article of
the school year he had informed his young readers that he would
be "going on a secret mission for the government."

In the flying-saucer report, Trott said he had visited a major
airport somewhere on the East Coast.

"The most exciting thing we have seen is 'flying saucers,'"
Trott told the students. "For several years people in many parts
of our country have claimed to have seen flying saucers. The
government proved that some of these people were imagining
things. However, I am now allowed to tell you that some flying
saucers are real. They belong to our Air Force. They will some
day be a big help to our country."

Eleanor Johnson, managing editor of elementary school
publications for American Education Press, the company that
published My Weekly Reader, defended the article.

"Our correspondent had one thought in mind, and that thought was
to calm any hysterical fears some children might have built up
from hearing too much talk about mysterious flying objects from
other planets or deadly flying weapons of our enemies. . . . We
are in sympathy with Mr. Trott's motive to overcome a deluge of
humbuggery afloat in our land," Johnson said.

Johnson added that My Weekly Reader did not lie. "The staff is
convinced that flying saucers most certainly are among this
nation's experimental aircraft," she said.

Johnson referred to "similar reports on the so-called saucers
printed in various periodicals over the last six months," but
she did not cite specifics.

One reputable source that published a report on experimental
U.S. aircraft six months before the My Weekly Reader article
appeared was the news magazine U.S. News and World Report. Its
April 7, 1950, edition included news of the secret development
by the military of a disc-shaped aircraft that could hover like
a helicopter and accelerate like a jet.

The magazine said the aircraft had been built in 1942 at the
Langley Field Aeronautical Laboratory in Virginia.

Although military officials denied that such a craft ever had
gone beyond the model stage, the magazine disagreed. "Top Air
Force officials know where the saucers originate and are not
concerned about them," U.S. News and World Report said.

In reporting My Weekly Reader's contention that flying saucers
were real, The News Leader said the Air Force's official
position continued to be that no UFO sightings it had
investigated provided proof of anything unknown that posed a
threat to national security.

The Air Force did not end its official investigation of UFOs
until 1969, when it reached the same conclusion after examining
more than 12,000 sightings.


Larry Hall is a Times-Dispatch librarian/researcher. Contact him
at (804) 649-6076 or lhall.nul Time Capsules
features items from the archives of the Richmond Times-Dispatch
and The Richmond News Leader. To learn more about past events in
your community, try searching www.archivesva.com. For events
prior to 1985, contact the News Research Library at (804) 649-





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                NASA "Life's Building Blocks Common In Space"

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:14:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:14:02 -0400
Subject: NASA "Life's Building Blocks Common In Space"




Source: NASA

http://tinyurl.com/9bfah

October 11, 2005

George Deutsch
Headquarters, Washington
(Phone: 202/358-1324)

John Bluck
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
(Phone: 650/604-5026/9000)


RELEASE: 05-342

NASA Discovers Life's Building Blocks Are Common In Space

After A team of NASA exobiology researchers revealed today
organic chemicals that play a crucial role in the chemistry of
life are common in space.

"Our work shows a class of compounds that is critical to
biochemistry is prevalent throughout the universe," said Douglas
Hudgins, an astronomer at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett
Field, Calif. He is principal author of a study detailing the
team's findings that appears in the Oct. 10 issue of the
Astrophysical Journal.

"NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has shown complex organic
molecules called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are
found in every nook and cranny of our galaxy. While this is
important to astronomers, it has been of little interest to
astrobiologists, scientists who search for life beyond Earth.
Normal PAHs aren't really important to biology," Hudgins said.
"However, our work shows the lion's share of the PAHs in space
also carry nitrogen in their structures. That changes
everything."

"Much of the chemistry of life, including DNA, requires organic
molecules that contain nitrogen," said team member Louis
Allamandola, an astrochemist at Ames. "Chlorophyll, the
substance that enables photosynthesis in plants, is a good
example of this class of compounds, called polycyclic aromatic
nitrogen heterocycles, or PANHs. Ironically, PANHs are formed in
abundance around dying stars. So even in death, the seeds of
life are sewn," Allamandola said.

The NASA team studied the infrared "fingerprint" of PANHs in
laboratory experiments and with computer simulations to learn
more about infrared radiation that astronomers have detected
coming from space. They used data from the European Space
Agency's Infrared Space Observatory satellite.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                       Drugs Art & Aliens Who Lit Way

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:21:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:21:19 -0400
Subject: Drugs Art & Aliens Who Lit Way




Source: The Scotsman - Edinburgh, Scotland

http://news.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=3D2068802005

Tue 11 Oct 2005


Drugs Art And The Aliens Who Lit Our Way To Civilisation

Anna Smyth

Graham Hancock is breathless. He's telling me about his first
hallucinogenic trip in the Amazon jungle, and he just can't get
the words out fast enough. The former journalist and now
bestselling science writer spent five weeks living with
indigenous Indian shamans in Peru, where he ingested a sacred
plant drug known as ayahuasca.

We pick up the story just after the shaman began the ritual
ceremony by singing the icaros, ancient chants which draw the
spirits around the circle. Hancock then took a sip of the drug,
which he describes as a "vile-tasting liquid, so strong and
bitter-sweet and salty, so dark and concentrated as to be
repellent". His muscles involuntarily relax, he closes his eyes
and then the visions begin.

"I had a very scary beginning to that trip," he says. "I saw
incredible transformations of different animals and beings
glowing with light that appeared directly in front of my field
of vision. It was a typical scene which many describe as an
alien abduction. They were very anthropic, and definitely wanted
to communicate with me. It was rather like going to a strange
new country, where I had to start learning the rules of
communication."

Getting deeper into the experience, Hancock took another dose of
the drug, but his body couldn't take it. The nausea came on
strong and soon he was out in the dark, puking. Before long he
was drenched in sweat with only dry heaves left. He sank to the
ground and called an end to the trip because he was so afraid.
He opened his eyes, and the visions left him. You could conclude
from this account - detailed in Hancock's latest book,
Supernatural - that Hancock is just another traveller keen to
acquaint himself with the customs of new cultures. But there is
a little more to this trip than meets the eye.

A reporter by trade, Hancock was born in Edinburgh before moving
to India in his childhood. He returned to attend school and
university in Durham, from where he graduated in 1973 with a
degree in sociology. He went on to pursue a career in
journalism, writing for The Times, The Sunday Times, The
Independent and The Guardian.

But in the 1980s he gave up newspaper reporting to pursue his
own passion - the lost civilisation of man. In the past 20
years, he's written several books including the best-selling
Sign and Seal on the Ark of the Covenant - as well as filming
documentaries about his research.

"Three years ago I decided to go back to the subject which
fascinated me at university," he says. "I was interested in
human origins, in what makes us different from the apes. I found
that it wasn't the use of tools, as many people believe, but
abstract thought and the ability to manipulate symbols." The
answer was art. Cave paintings and writings which depicted
thoughts and visions, none of which have ever been achieved by
other species. In fact, even our human ancestors had no artistic
capability. Or not until 40,000 years ago, at least.

"Previously, we were very uncreative and boring. We used the
same tools continually without modifying them. Then, suddenly, a
light switched on in our brain. Fossils from 40,000 years ago
show that we began to explore spirituality, looked for signs of
life after death and innovated specialised tools. And we began
to paint. In France, Italy and South Africa and all over the
world, they've discovered incredibly accomplished paintings, but
no explanation for this burst of development."

This has been termed the "greatest riddle in archaeology", and
many academics have devoted their career to its study. The
reason behind the sudden transformation, the majority have
concluded, is hallucinogenic plants. Magic mushrooms would be a
relevant example, but all over the world, man stumbled across
drugs which opened the possibility for spiritual, creative
thought.

Professor David Lewis-Williams, of South Africa's Witwatersrand
University, believes that is the end of the story. These visions
- and therefore the art they produced - were universal because
all of mankind has the same neurology. Our brains are wired in
the same way, so when we take these drugs, our bodies have the
same response. Indeed, at the University of New Mexico,
researchers have found that volunteers given hallucinogenic
drugs drew the same kinds of paintings as those found in the
ancient caves. This, coupled with a wealth of other evidence,
supports Lewis-Williams' theory that drugs are the answer.

For most people that explanation would suffice, but not for
Hancock. He could not accept that the beginnings of human
spirituality came down to brain chemistry. For him, there had to
be more to it, and he decided to investigate, hence the first-
hand research trip.

What he has found - and what forms the basis of his new hefty
tome - is a theory that to many will sound absurd. He believes
that when shamans and drug users experience these
hallucinations, they are actually tapping into a parallel
universe. The visions - be they of fairies, elves or aliens -
are real, they exist all the time, and they want to communicate
with us.

"Think of it as though the brain is like a TV receiver. In order
to cope with everyday life, we have to tune into "Channel
Normal" for the majority of the time. But if we retune our
brains with these drugs, or alter our state of consciousness
through rhythmic dancing and drums, we can see images of the
parallel dimensions."

Hancock does not prescribe for a second to the idea that when
people experience "alien abductions", they are seeing foreign
creatures that may whisk them to another planet. What he does
believe is that the spirits dwell in this other dimension, and
if we let them, they will continue the teaching that they gave
to our ancestors.

"I believe these hallucinogenic experiences are the basis for
all modern-day religions. If you think about it, why would we
ever have cause to imagine a spirit world? Our uncreative
ancestors didn't, but then they found these drugs and saw for
themselves the spirit world, and realised there was more to
life. I think religion resulted from the need to explain these
supernatural encounters."

A sceptic would maintain that, outwith the experience of those
on drugs or in a trance, there is no evidence to support
Hancock's theory. And many could take offence to his assertion
that when Mohammed, Jesus Christ and St Paul thought they were
experiencing God, they were, in fact, just accessing the
parallel world. Part of the problem with accepting this higher
plane comes in locating its origin. If these spirits are the
"ancient teachers of mankind", as he says, where did they come
from? In this instance, as with every other, Hancock points to
science. Prepare for the most astonishing claim yet. "The secret
could be in our DNA," he says. "When Francis Crick, the
discoverer of DNA, died, it was revealed that his first vision
of the helix module occurred while he was on LSD. Although he
was an atheist, he then published a book which subscribed to the
theory of intelligent design, that our universe was not simply
the result of a series of chemical accidents.

"In brief, what he said was that after the Big Bang, life did
not evolve first on Earth. At the far side of the universe,
another civilisation developed, a highly advanced civilisation
who surpassed the stage we have currently reached. He asserted
that in some way their world became threatened - global warming,
or some such catastrophic event - and so they devised a way to
pass on their existence. They genetically-modified their DNA and
sent it out from their planet on bacteria, with the hope that it
would collide with another planet. It did, and that's why we're
here." What Hancock goes onto explain is that the DNA was
encoded with messages from that other civilisation.

They programmed the molecules so that when we reached a certain
level of intelligence, we would be able to access their
information, and they could therefore "teach" us about
ourselves, and how to progress.

Of course, this talk of aliens sending off bacteria sounds like
the ramblings of a deranged guest on a Jerry Springer show. But
the astonishing thing is that Hancock is intelligent and
articulate, and his writing is as expert as you would expect
from an esteemed international correspondent.

Precisely because he is so credible, his idea will no doubt
entice those looking for more conspiracy theories, and you need
only look as far as Dan Brown to see the commercial success
available.

But to give him credit, Hancock at no point claims these
discoveries for himself, he always points to archaeologists and
scientists who have been fascinated by similar concepts. Indeed,
all that he asks for is that people more qualified than himself,
investigate the questions he raises.

"I know [this] sounds preposterous and pointless to anyone
committed to objective science. The more closely I pursued these
questions, however, the more convinced I became that they point
towards matters of extraordinary substance, and that science has
done us an immense disfavour by its policy of ridiculing and
discouraging all rational inquiry in this area."

=95 Supernatural by Graham Hancock =A320 published by Century.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:23:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:18:59 EDT
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>Of course such data _could_ be used to track "UFOs", but the
>>primary reason is to track military targets of human origin.

>That isn't the development history which was dual-use two-
>tracked from the very inception, for both UFOs and "military
>targets." Obviously one was better for attracting and
>maintaining funding appropriations than the other.

That is interesting. I would like to know more about the
motivational history behind this dual-use system. I assume this
is a documented history of some sort and not just speculation.
Could you point me to this documentation?

>I should have added that a 1% detection rate applied to a low
>UFO occurrence rate as we have today is essentially zero. Zero
>UFO detections likely from a UFO "field lab."

This seems erroneous on many levels. I can see how an increase
in sightings could account for an increase in locations
designated to be flaps. Also, I can see how an increase could
make such designating more difficult. You are assuming a
decrease in quantity equals a 0 value for the variable of
"flap", which must equal 0 detections? Hmmm You cannot get here
from there... that is not statistics, its speculative rounding-
off. Would an increase in technology not effect a variable like
detection potential? I would think so. Also, whether I extract
subset (flap) from a database of 1200 units or 500 units, the
validity or legitimacy of that subset should not suffer.


>>No, Area 51 would not be high on my list. However, I am sure
>>some mini-flap areas could be found by examining witness
>>reports.

>I am just as sure that mini-flap areas cannot be found by the
>usual Area 51-type of witness reports, assuming that any true
>"mini-flaps" are even taking place. This is the prescription for
>pointless responses to numerous hair-trigger false alerts every
>time it "seems" initially there is a localized mini-flap
>somewhere. The Colorado Project spent a lot of useless time
>running around on such alerts from its so-called Early Warning
>Network.

A researcher should want a location with a recent history of
quality sightings from varied and credible witnesses supported
by quality documentation(video, stills). This documentation
should illustrate anomalies which cannot easily be attributed to
conventional sources. Whether one calls this a "flap", "mini-
flap", "flip-flap" or "flapenuguen", it makes no difference. We
just need one(subset) to start. If you would like me to
illustrate at least one such location that fits the above
requirements, I would happily do so.

>I think we differ in this. All one needs is adequate
>triangulation resolution to define the flight path of the
>object. If the flight path matches an aircraft or satellite
>behavior, then all we can say is that it _might_ be an aircraft
>or satellite (it could simply be a UFO behaving like these too).

>Even with NORAD and its vast resources with FAA and military
>flight plan data NORAD still cannot be sure of the identity of
>every single radar blip appearing like an aircraft or satellite.
>I don't see how that realization changes the situation from
>before.

I agree, that is why I would prefer the field lab approach.
Proof should come via multiple data streams. In fact, multiple
data streams from a reliable and objective source. Does radar
data via the government resemble this in any way? In addition,
it is important to note our own known abilities to manipulate
radar signatures and take into account what the potentials of an
advanced technology might be in this regard.

I don't really care much if this gets done or not. However, I
have seen this approach work quite successfully for a similar
scientific phenomenon and it could work here if there is
sufficient motivation to shed this co-dependence. How many times
have we seen Ufology get bitch-slapped, only to crawl back to
the source asking for the "correct" version of things. Like a





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                   EMF & UFOs [was: Memory Without Klass]

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:05:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:47:03 -0400
Subject: EMF & UFOs [was: Memory Without Klass]


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
>with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
>was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
>dozens of cases of car stallings.)

I found the post on the Levelland cases from Larry Robinson that
I mentioned previously. It was to Easton's UFORL list on March 12
2004. I think this is unusually interesting but I don't recall
any discussion of it.

Robinson said that he found a story in the May 1938 issue of
Popular Science, describing an event (a few years before 1938)
where a number of cars stalled on the same section of a road in
eastern Colorado. The road travelled through higher ground in a
cut and a total of 23 cars reportedly stalled there in a short
period of time, whilst 6 others (all Model-T Fords) drove
through unaffected. It was windy and there was a lot of dust
blowing. A rescue truck that was called in also stalled. A
remedy was discovered by a mechanic who accidentally earthed his
vehicle with a chain, when it started fine.

Apparently all the vehicles _except_ the Model-Ts had spark coil
ignitions with rotor distributors, whilst the Ts had separate
magnetos for each plug. Popular Mechanics' explanation in 1938
seems to have been that statically charged dust driven into the
engine compartments shorted out the batteries, or something
similar. But Easton pointed out that the starters still turned
over even on the coil ignition vehicles. He suggested instead
that static charge was collected by the rotor distributor arm
whilst it was not making contact and would be discharged
continuously through the spark plug, so fuel would be ignited
and wasted before the compression stroke.

As for why the magneto cars kept running, he argued:

"The Model T had one magneto for each spark plug, instead of a
distributor. So each plug wire had a discharge path through the
coil to ground when the magnet wasn't firing the plug. So the
plugs fired at the correct times, not at other times, and the
fuel charges were not wasted. Yes, the magneto has points, but
they open only at the time to fire that plug. So the static
would have an effect only just after the plug fired, which does
not effect the engine."

Has anyone come across this theory elsewhere? Does anyone think
it makes sense? It sounds sort of plausible on the face of it,
but I wonder what realistic static charge might accumulate on
the rotor arm due to dust during a short time between piston
cycles, and whether a sufficient spark could happen. And aren't
distributors usually sealed? And if cars could really be
disabled this easily, wouldn't it have been a quite common event
in some areas? Of course, if the Popular Mechanics report is
reliable then _something_ caused this stalling and it was
apparently connected with unearthed static.

Robinson obviously dismisses the Levelland UFOs as St Elmos fire
etc., but it isn't clear that his mechanism (if workable)
couldn't be an effect associated with genuine UFOs, whatever
they might have been.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                    Re: UFO Flies Over Bolivia - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:14:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:48:42 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Flies Over Bolivia - Maccabee


>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:06:32 -0400
>Subject: UFO Flies Over Bolivia


>INEXPLICATA
>The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
>October 9, 2005
======

>Source: La Patria Newspaper
>Date: 10.09.05

>UFO Flies Over Bolivia

>An unidentified flying object (UFO) flew over the skies of Oruro
>early morning yesterday for approximately an hour. It was
>recorded by citizen Gustavo Ponce, who at first did not believe
>what he was seeing.

>The time was approximately 01:30 hours in the morning when Ponce
>was heading for bed. At that time he saw a yellowish light in
>the sky that drew his attention, prompting him to reach for his
>binoculars to look at it more carefully.

>"It was a very strange and shiny figure that could be seen
>through the binoculars. I went ahead and took out my camcorder
>to videotape the UFO in the sky. As the camera zoomed toward the
>object, I could how it was breaking down into a shape resembling
>a jellyfish or something like it. It was very strange."

Uh, oh. Sounds like another "zoom and get out of focus" video
of a light in the dark sky with the camera set on auto focus and
it can't focus on a single light so it "hunts" for focus or
stays at some unfocused position.

Must use manual focus and focus on infinity to videotape light
at night without losing focus

>He added that the object was flying over the eastern part of the
>city and that it was the first time he had ever seen such an
>object, having never had previous visual contact with a UFO.

>LA PATRIA visited Ponce's home to see the images captured by his





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Socorro - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:36:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:50:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Allan


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>Thanks for bringing up the matter of Menzel's spurious charge
>about Father Gill's not wearing glasses at the time of his
>sighting. The current discussion brought it to my mind, too. A
>correction, however:

>It was I, not Hynek, who (in a 1977 interview) showed Gill what
>Menzel had claimed about his famous sighting: namely, that Gill
>had not been wearing glasses, thus causing him to mistake Venus
>for a UFO because his astigmatism led him to see an elongated,
>out-of-focus image.

>Menzel had never contacted Gill to see if the allegation made
>any sense, and Gill knew nothing of it until I brought it to his
>attention. He said, "I cannot specifically remember wearing
>glasses, but I certainly would have remembered if I could not
>find the glasses or if they had been lost or broken..... That
>would have been a very memorable occasion."

>For other absurdities in Menzel's (and Klass's) reconstruction
>of the incident, see The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 451-52.

Menzel tried many times to get in touch with Rev Gill about the
matter of the latter's glasses (and the sighting in general).
See p.151 of the book "UFOS, a Scientific Debate" (ed. Sagan &
Page). Unfortunately he never received any reply, nor were his
letters sent back to him.

I will admit it now. Whatever may be said about Menzel's
attitude to UFOs, I do accept his Venus explanation for Rev.
Gill's sighting (actually three sightings on successive nights).





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 12

                             Re: Socorro - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:37:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:31:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Allan


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro


>>I see that your response conveniently leaves out the rundown of
>>my UFO experience.

>>Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
>>question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
>>the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

>>What position does one have to be in for them to be able to
>>question anything ufological?

>>Are there rules that prohibit questioning, by neophytes and
>>others?

>>Who makes up those rules?

>>While you think I'm wasting time, others do not I surmise. The
>>Socorro episode is not a done deal. It's still open to scrutiny,
>>or should be.

>I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
>around strewing red herrings all over the place when he
>obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
>elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
>involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
>fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
>at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
>examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
>D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
>issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
>you keep spewing in that regard).

>There is nothing at all wrong about raising questions on any
>historical case or reinvestigating it, but any rational person
>who wasn't simply grinding axes and spicing blogs would first
>study the literature thoroughly. You obviously have not done so.
>Nor apparently have you read Maj. Hector Quintanilla's account
>of how thoroughly the Air Force checked for experimental
>vehicles, etc., and how puzzled he was by the case.

In the Fortean Times book , UFOs 1947-1997, (ed Hilary Evans &
Dennis Stacy), there is a chapter by Hector J. Quintanilla which
is mainly devoted to Socorro. He had conducted a very thorough
investigation and was genuinely baffled.

However, he writes (p.116): "Although I labelled the case
'unidentified' I've never been satisfied with that
classification. I've always felt that too many essential
elements of the case were missing. These are the intangible
elements which are impossible to check, so the solution could
very well be lying dormant in Lonnie Zamora's head".






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                      Re: Hypersonic Propusion - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:48:30 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:22:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Hypersonic Propusion - Miller


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:35:35 -0300
>Subject: Re: Hypersonic Propusion

>List:

>For those who feel that any research conducted on new aero-
>propusion methods are super secret see the following news
>release from NASA. This is one of the reasons why I have no
>faith in the the theory that secret technology of the past is
>an explanation for some of our more exotic UFO episodes. If
>this stuff already exists, why the following release?


Hi Don,

Oh boy, do you hit the $64,000 question bang on the head.

I've been searching for that quote from one of the former
directors of Lockheed's Skunk works (when I don't need it I keep
tripping over it and yet when I look for it, it can't be found)
who said something like, "If you can imagine it, we've made it"
or something very similar.

That quote is actually something that could be thrown into the
Socorro debate going on elsewhere as well.

I know it's a very open and unspecific statement that could
really mean anything or nothing but for the purposes of this
thread, I'm going to assume a smug skeptical stance and claim
that there are no such things as UFOs and that all unexplained
sightings are secret projects of some sort. So, back in 1947,
the U.S. military were capable of producing craft capable of
flying at over 1,000 miles an hour, at least according to
Arnold.

And we come to your point. If they had them then, what were they
doing with them? When were they used? What were they used for?

And therein lies the answer to many, many explanations or non
explanations of unidentified craft over the decades.

If (and we don't) one accepts the argument that Arnold's
sightings, as an example, were U.S. craft and that Arnold's
assessment of speed was broadly correct, then one can only
assume the Secret Government argument or that for some reason,
higher levels of technology have been saved for some other
purpose.

To counter my own argument slightly, I have never accepted the
declarations of military high ups who have said on past
occasions that "We don't have the technology to be able to do
that" after a particular display of acrobatics from some dot in
the sky. Even if one assumes the honesty of such a statement, at
least as far as the speaker may be concerned, regardless of
rank, the "need to know" rule I would reckon would exclude even
the very senior military from being aware of everything going
on. I think Greg Bishop's recent book at least taught us that.

So, either you're right and amazing aeronautical displays are at





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 16:28:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:25:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:36:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:37:24 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Incidentally, Blue Book investigators did an analysis looking
>>for chemical propellant traces. They didn't find any. That's
>>another important indication that this wasn't a conventional
>>propulsion system like a jet or rocket.

>Just a nit, but if they were looking for products of combustion
>from jet fuel or other dirty fuels, you are right in assuming
>that would imply such was not used. But if the combustion was
>hydrogen and oxygen or chemical combinations with _gaseous_
>combustion byproducts, then traces would not show up (unless the
>fuel source was contaminated by these).

<snip>

>>Your logic seems to be that because the object made a roaring
>>noise, it must be a human craft. However, you leave out the part
>>where the craft took off with a roar but then went completely
>>silent when it sped off at high speed into the distance. Please
>>tell us what known conventional propulsion system can silently
>>accelerate a craft like this.

>The only idea I had about this noisy-then-silent phenomena was
>that the sound waves were directed based on the propulsion
>system. Thus, a messy rocketlike propulsion system near the
>ground is very noisy because it is bouncing sound all over the
>place. But after take off and at a high enough altitude, the
>plume of the thruster may be tuned enough and aimed sufficiently
>to reduce the noise level considerably. It is hard to say for
>sure without knowing the kind of propulsion system.

Any rocket engine capable of landing and lifting off a 20-foot
vehicle with 2 men aboard would have blasted a giant crater in
the ground and melted lots of soil and rock with its many
thousands of pounds of thrust. No such crater was produced. Any
balloon that landed while still intact and functioning but
suddenly lost the ballast of two men's weight (however small





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

             2 Great Reasons To Attend 3rd UFO Crash Conference

From: Ryan Wood <majesticdocuments.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:04:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:33:17 -0400
Subject: 2 Great Reasons To Attend 3rd UFO Crash Conference


Two Great Reasons To Attend The 3rd UFO Crash Conference:
Rich Dolan & Peter Robbins

Friday, November 4th =96 Sunday, November 6th, 2005
Las Vegas, Nevada


Broomfield CO
Wednesday October 12, 2005

At this years Mutual UFO Network International Conference
(MUFON) in Denver there was only one speaker to receive a
standing ovation. Can you guess? It was Richard Dolan. His first
book, UFOs and the National Security State is a landmark in the
ufology literature. It can be ordered on-line here.

His talk at the 3rd UFO Crash Conference will be on the UFO
Secrecy: Political and Ethical Implications.

Few people doubt that there is some level of secrecy by military
and other government agencies regarding UFOs. The obvious
question: "what are they hiding?" has been asked and
investigated by many people for many years. But a less obvious
question presents itself: what has secrecy done to our society?

A quick answer is "many things." But a key result has been the
development of a new form of government in America: the
replacement of America's traditional republican institutions
with what we may accurately call a "National Security-Homeland
Security State."

Such a state did not spring up in full form immediately after
9/11/01, like Athena from the head of Zeus. Instead, it was more
than fifty years in the making, and UFO secrecy has played an
unmistakable dual role in killing the old republic and giving
birth to this new Leviathan.

Indeed, the question of "what are they hiding" helps to shed
light on the process. For a great body of diverse sources now
point to the likelihood that there have been multiple retrievals
of UFO technology, along with associated biological samples
(e.g. bodies). Several of these cases are discussed, as are
several key sources of leaks.

The author argues that the real or perceived necessity of
secrecy surrounding the recovery of exotic technology and bodies
by the U.S. national security apparatus forced a series of
silent "mini-revolutions" which successively eroded power from
traditional democratic-republican sources of government
(initially Congress, then the Presidency) to quasi-public/quasi-
private groups that operate with great amounts of money and
secrecy. While the very secrecy under review may ultimately
prevent a full answer to the details of this process, the
general outline has become evident.

UFO secrecy hasn't been the only knife in the back of the
American Republic. But it has been one of them, and as such
deserves due attention.

Peter Robbins has an impressive track record of participation
and leadership in the field of ufology from the Rendlesham
Forest incident, which he reported on at the 1st UFO crash
conference to his biographical investigation of the death of
Sectary James Forrestal to his upcoming talk on Orgone Energy &
Wilhelm Reich and UFOs. Below is an abstract of his talk.

One of ufology's most significant chapters remains one of its
most obscure. In the early nineteen fifties the brilliant
physician and scientist Dr. Wilhelm Reich developed the
cloudbuster, a simple yet effective apparatus which, when
properly employed, was capable of altering the weather. More,
some of these weather modification operations attracted UFOs -
first over southern Maine in 1953, then above Tucson the
following year. On December 14, 1954 these experiments
culminated in what can only be characterized as a 'battle' in
the skies over Tucson. Wild as these allegations may sound, they
were well-documented and multiply witnessed. Reich kept the
United States Air Force appraised of his sightings and weather
work at the same time the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) was
attempting to build a case against him. The interstate shipment
of a medical device (unauthorized by Dr. Reich) resulted in a
contempt charge, conviction, and his incarceration in Lewisburg
Federal Penitentiary (PA). Wilhelm Reich was found dead in his
cell in November 1957 just prior to his scheduled release.

What were the scientific dynamics behind Reich's successful
alteration of weather fronts? What part did the Air Force play
in his undoing? What were the specifics of his 1940-44 contacts
with Albert Einstein? Was MJ-12 involved in his death? Peter
Robbins spent years investigating this story and in addressing
these questions draws from Wilhelm Reich's out of print
writings, complete correspondence with Einstein, published
records of cloudbusting operations, and extensive interviews
with Reich's daughter, Dr. Eva Reich, definitive biographer Dr.
Myron Scharaf, long-time first assistant Elsworth F. Baker, and
a handful of other colleagues and students who worked by the
scientist's side. This PowerPoint lecture also includes video
clips. Today Reich's staggering contributions to science are all
but forgotten, his name and work derided and distorted by all
but a small core of practitioners, scholars and scientists. But
none of this alters the facts of this remarkable story.

Join us this year and sign up on line at:

www.ufoconference.com

or call me and we can do it over the phone, faxes and mail work
too. If you need more information or would like to talk with me
personally please call 720-887-8171.

Looking forward to seeing you there and having a great time.


Sincerely,

Ryan S. Wood
Conference Chairman

rswood.nul

14004 Quail Ridge Drive
Broomfield, CO 80020
FAX: 720-887-8239






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:14:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:43:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Rudiak


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:08:01 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:38:01 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:19:33 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro


>>>The Socorro incident, as you concede, is open to further
>>>investigation. That's my point, which you apparently choose to
>>>dismiss or ignore.

>>Your point continues to be that he wore glasses and was
>>therefore, blind. I did dismiss or ignore the fact that Lonnie
>>ore glasses. I read the reports, the books, considered what he
>>did for a living and the character assessments of the man, the
>>timeline and I ruled out his wearing glasses as a none issue.

>>There's no proof that his wearing glasses in any way abrogated
>>his interpretation of the sighting or skewed his testimony.

>>Lonnie had his glasses on during the most important parts of the
>>sighting. You've been told that more than a few times. You
>>choose to ignore this. The condition of Lonnie's eyesight had
>>nothing to do with it. You know it and I know it.

>A couple of butt-ins if I may: First of all it occurs to me that
>there are pretty good portrait photographs of Zamora circa 1964
>with his glasses on. I'm looking at one now (in Hynek's "UFO
>Report"). The lenses don't look to me like the bottoms of beer
>glasses. My impression is not worth much, but maybe David Rudiak
>can deduce something about how strong (or not) the correction is
>and thus at least put some limits on the possible defect in
>Zamora's uncorrected vision?

Martin and List,

I know the photo you're talking about. If Zamora was
significantly near-sighted, his eyes would be noticeably
minified through the lenses. If the correction was for
farsightedness, his eyes would be enlarged. My eyeball
impression of the grainy photo is that _maybe_ his eyes are
_slightly_ minified, but it's hard to tell. If so, he would be
slightly nearsighted. If he were slightly or moderately
farsighted, his acuity probably wouldn't suffer much even with
his glasses off (unless he had a very severe astigmatism, which
is rare). Young farsighted people can compensate for their
farsightedness by focusing their lens.

His worst acuity without glasses is already bounded by police
department medical restrictions, which seem to universally
require uncorrected acuity of 20/100 or better (so the policeman
can continue to function effectively even if he loses his
glasses: shoot guns, drive a car, identify suspects at close
range, etc.)

Even in the worst case scenario of only 20/100 acuity with his
glasses off, Zamora still would still be able to easily make out
larger details - e.g., the insignia on the craft Zamora
estimated as 2-1/2 to 3 feet in size. A 20/20 letter on an eye
chart is only about 9 mm in height. Thus if Zamora was 20/100,
he would only be able to read letters 4.5 cm in size or larger.
If he was 10 times futher away or 200 feet (the absolute
furthest he would have been from the craft when he viewed the
insignia without glasses), the letter would have to be at least
45 cm in size, or about 1-1/2 feet. This is still about half the
size of the insignia. Thus, even in the worst case acuity and
distance scenario, Zamora would still have been able to make out
the details of the insignia.

However, this is all academic, since Zamora approached the craft
on foot probably to within 50 feet and still had his glasses on.
Similarly, when he viewed the object zooming away and fading
into the distance he had his glasses on. When he saw the two
small humanoids standing near the craft he had his glasses on.
These are all important visual details, and having his glasses
off had nothing to do with it. Neither did hearing the craft
suddenly go silent or the existence of physical trace evidence
left behind that could be objectively evaluated by others.

Knowing Zamora's age and the fact that he was a traffic cop
subject to visual testing and restrictions really narrows down
what he could have and couldn't have seen. I think raising
questions about vision would be valid if there were many
unknowns about the witness' eyesight. E.g., a 70 year old
witness might have all sorts of common degenerative eye
conditions affecting vision such as cataracts or macular
degeneration. Unlike Zamora, the average person also wouldn't be
required to have regular vision tests with restrictions applied
to worst acuity. (By shear coincidence, today I had to go to the
DMV and read an eyechart to get my driver's license renewed.
This is probably the only instance that the average person is
subjected to repeated required acuity checking. However, it's
been 10 years since I was last tested, so the testing isn't
particularly frequent. Also the requirement is only 20/40
corrected vision, unlike the usual 20/20 corrected vision for
cops.)

But Zamora was young and a cop who had passed physicals. Further





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                          Re: Spicy Blogs - Kimball

From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:27:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:48:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Spicy Blogs - Kimball


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:39:31 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spicy Blogs

>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:42:01 -0400
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

David:

<snip>

>>Hmm... it seems that both David and I were wrong here. It
>>appears that a few months ago I did write that RRR were trying
>>to convince me that the key to blogging was to keep it spicy
>>(not what I recalled, but obviously what I wrote). However,
>>nowhere in there will you find that they said this because they
>>thought it was a way to get a blog read, which is where David
>>erred - he extrapolated from what I wrote something that just
>>isn't there.

>One last nit to pick: I think it reasonable to assume that the
>purpose of making a blog "spicy" is to get people to read it.
>That's the way I would interpret the meaning of "the key to
>blogging."

But it was not how it was meant, or at least not how I took it
when Rich said it. I took it to mean that you need to keep it
interesting for yourself. However, I can understand how others
would see it a different way.

Assuming your interpretation is correct, I should add that it is
nothing new for ufology. Stan Friedman has on more than one
occasion told me that you have to "sell the sizzle" as much as
"the steak." After all, the point, I suppose, is to get people
to listen to what you're trying to say.

It's interesting. I can track the number of unique hits on any
particular blog post, courtesy of Statcounter (just passed
40,000 total). There are basically three types of columns at The
Other Side of Truth - (1) ufological research (i.e. Wilbert
Smith, or MJ-12, or Canadian UFO investigations); (2) ufological
opinion columns (that would be the "spice"); and (3) more
personal stuff (my music background, friends and family, pics
from film shoots, and assorted top 10 sci-fi babe lists etc).
Guess which grouping - by an overwhelming majority - gets the
most hits? If you said (b), you would be 100% correct. Now, from
private e-mails from various UFO researchers, I know that my
research is respected (whether they agree with it or not). But
it isn't what people want to read - they want to read the
"spice."

However, I have also noted that once they get to the blog for
the spice, they'll sometimes stick around and check out some
of the research.

Now, none of this changes what I write, or when I write it (I do
it for my own amusement / edification - if other people tune in,
that's a bonus). I just find it an interesting commentary on
what people want out of ufology. It's the same phenomenon that
saw all of the attention at the recent Toronto con center on
Paul Hellyer, who had nothing of substance to offer, and not
Stan, who does (again, whether one agrees with him or not is a
separate question).

>But no matter. I appreciate the apology from Paul. I would also
>like to mention that I read his spicy blogs now and then. It
>might surprise him to know I agree with him at least as often as
>I disagree, if not more.

And it might surprise you to discover that there are instances
when I agree with you. And so it goes.

>I also prefer Paul's version of "spice" to RRR's. It's much
>easier on the palate. Call it a kinder and gentler spice.

I'm Canadian - we're required by law to be kinder and gentler. :-)

>Example: RRR regularly publishes something akin to the Top Ten
>Demonic, Oppressive, Narrow-Minded, Fuddy-Duddy Ufologists, or
>something like that. (Guess who periodically makes the list?)

As I have often told Rich, he and I part ways when he (or his
young cohorts, like Christopher Robin... er, sorry - Jay)
denigrates long-time researchers, for whom I have nothing but
the utmost respect, at least for their efforts, if not always
their conclusions.

Then again, my dad had a "law" as well - always respect your
elders. As I get older, I begin to appreciate it even more!

>But Paul publishes the Top Ten TV/Movie Sci-Fi Babes (with
>pictures).

>Which would you prefer? It's no contest as far as I'm concerned.
>Babes trump bile.

At last - Rudiak and Kimball agree! :-)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                      Ray Stanford On Zamora's Eyesight

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:31:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:05:24 -0400
Subject: Ray Stanford On Zamora's Eyesight


The following was forwarded to me, and Don Ledger, by Ray
Stanford about Zamora's glasses and eyesight. Ray isn't a
subscriber to the List and asked us to post it. It reinforces
what I've already said, in other posts, about how Zamora's eye
size through his lenses seems barely different than normal eye
size. This indicates that whatever prescription Zamora was
wearing was low and he required only a slight correction.

-----

From Ray Stanford, concerning the Socorro case and Rich
Reynolds' claims:

Let settle the matter of Zamora's vision (as of April 24, 1964):
List members (other than Rich Reynolds) have made some excellent
points concerning that, but let me add this: Look at the
universally published photo of Zamora (See the frontispiece in
my Socorro book, but the photo is available almost anywhere that
the Socorro case is covered in even a slightly thorough way, in
various media), taken with the very same glasses he was wearing
when he saw the UFO. (I ascertained that fact from Zamora,
himself.)

Note that in the photo, Zamora's eyes are in no noticeable
way(s) optically size-distorted. I have twice seen Zamora
without his glasses, and I know that his eyes are virtually the
same size, relative to the rest of his face, as one sees it in
the photo. That is a very substantial evidence that his optical
correction formula is in no way extreme and strongly suggests
that he could see reasonably well without his glasses.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 22:39:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:07:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:36:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:37:24 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Incidentally, Blue Book investigators did an analysis looking
>>for chemical propellant traces. They didn't find any. That's
>>another important indication that this wasn't a conventional
>>propulsion system like a jet or rocket.

>Just a nit, but if they were looking for products of combustion
>from jet fuel or other dirty fuels, you are right in assuming
>that would imply such was not used. But if the combustion was
>hydrogen and oxygen or chemical combinations with _gaseous_
>combustion byproducts, then traces would not show up (unless the
>fuel source was contaminated by these).

Just another nit, James, but in addition to charred rock and
scrub there was reportedly a 30cm patch of fused sand at the
site. This was the sample examined by the mineralogist who told
McDonald that the Air Force had taken it away.

I don't believe sand melts below about 1700 deg C so this would
limit some choices of fuels.

The hydrogen peroxide catalytic decomposition used in some
experimental rocket packs at this time produced only steam and
oxygen and wouldn't reveal signs of hydrocarbon propellants, but
the exhaust temperature of this reaction is only a few hundred C
- not enough to melt sand.

Are there similar propellant reactions with high enough





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:58:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:09:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Hall


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:36:46 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Thanks for bringing up the matter of Menzel's spurious charge
>>about Father Gill's not wearing glasses at the time of his
>>sighting. The current discussion brought it to my mind, too. A
>>correction, however:

<snip>

>>Menzel had never contacted Gill to see if the allegation made
>>any sense, and Gill knew nothing of it until I brought it to his
>>attention. He said, "I cannot specifically remember wearing
>>glasses, but I certainly would have remembered if I could not
>>find the glasses or if they had been lost or broken..... That
>>would have been a very memorable occasion."

>>For other absurdities in Menzel's (and Klass's) reconstruction
>>of the incident, see The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 451-52.

>Menzel tried many times to get in touch with Rev Gill about the
>matter of the latter's glasses (and the sighting in general).
>See p.151 of the book "UFOS, a Scientific Debate" (ed. Sagan &
>Page). Unfortunately he never received any reply, nor were his
>letters sent back to him.

And so lacking a reply he leaped to a false conclusion?

>I will admit it now. Whatever may be said about Menzel's
>attitude to UFOs, I do accept his Venus explanation for Rev.
>Gill's sighting (actually three sightings on successive nights).
>However, it is most unlikely anyone will want to go into this





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: Socorro - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:06:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:12:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:36:46 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Menzel had never contacted Gill to see if the allegation made
>>any sense, and Gill knew nothing of it until I brought it to his
>>attention. He said, "I cannot specifically remember wearing
>>glasses, but I certainly would have remembered if I could not
>>find the glasses or if they had been lost or broken..... That
>>would have been a very memorable occasion."

>Menzel tried many times to get in touch with Rev Gill about the
>matter of the latter's glasses (and the sighting in general).
>See p.151 of the book "UFOS, a Scientific Debate" (ed. Sagan &
>Page). Unfortunately he never received any reply, nor were his
>letters sent back to him.

I simply don't believe anything Menzel says. Father Gill told me
he had never heard Menzel's explanation before, which means
there were no letters in which that "theory" would have been
outlined.

>I will admit it now. Whatever may be said about Menzel's
attitude to UFOs, I do accept his Venus explanation for Rev.
Gill's sighting (actually three sightings on successive nights).

I believe you believe that. Indeed, I would be shocked if you
didn't. In your ideology _all_ UFO reports have to be
transformed into mere misperceptions so that orthodoxy can sleep
soundly at night. And of course if you don't have Venus, you can
always find something else, such as Klass's charge that Gill was
just trying to impress his colleagues.

No offense, but I am rather more interested in what Gill, an
eminently intelligent, matter-of-fact man (and not, like Menzel,
an ax-grinder), thinks. He rejects the Venus claim.

It is, however, worth noting that Menzel's "explanation" for the
supporting statements by the Papua New Guinea witnesses who
confirmed seeing the disc and the moving figures aboard it





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:11:23 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:28:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Rudiak


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:36:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:37:24 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>Incidentally, Blue Book investigators did an analysis looking
>>for chemical propellant traces. They didn't find any. That's
>>another important indication that this wasn't a conventional
>>propulsion system like a jet or rocket.

>Just a nit, but if they were looking for products of combustion
>from jet fuel or other dirty fuels, you are right in assuming
>that would imply such was not used. But if the combustion was
>hydrogen and oxygen or chemical combinations with _gaseous_
>combustion byproducts, then traces would not show up (unless the
>fuel source was contaminated by these).

You are correct that a hydrogen/oxygen combustion systrem would
have left no traces. (Side question: I know the Space Shuttle
uses such a system, but were they even testing them back in
1964? They have a reputation of being extremely difficult to use
and perfect.)

However, any organic propellent like kerosene would be
incompletely combusted. If the testing was properly done with
something highly sensitive like a gas chromatograph was used, it
should have been able to pick up traces of incompletely
combusted products.

However, as Brad Sparks notes in another post, the point is
largely academic, since even a more exotic hydrogen/oxygen
propulsion system would have blasted a huge crater in the
ground. My guess is that this was a magnetohydrodymic plasma
propulsion system: ionize the air beneath the craft and then
push off it with a large pulsed magnetic field. Zamora reported
that what he saw did not look like a normal flame and seemed to
penetrate into the soil.

>>If this craft had a mechanical problem, it was
>>obviously extremely minor (because it immediately took off
>>again, etc.). All experimental craft encounter snags. The
>>engineers fix them. If there are serious ones that can't be
>>fixed, then maybe that's reason for cancellation. But, again,
>>this craft seemed to have no problems fleeing the scene in a
>>hurry. It was a wingless, high- performance, VTOL vehicle with,
>>except for landing and takeoff, a silent propulsion system. The
>>military would kill for an aircraft like that.

>The terrestrial explanation fails for an experimental vehicle
>because you just don't "fly one around" and land and take off
>again. Not if you are sane test pilots and a sane test program.
>Its just not "Heh, John, lets take the experimental UFOlike VTOL
>vehicle for a spin". Its more of a massive, detailed program
>with hundreds of folk involved and a rigorously defined test
>area beyond which they don't go without failsafes shutting it
>down.

No disagreements here. Any testing would have been restricted to
a test site, certainly in its initial stages. They also wouldn't
send it off-range without at least one chase team in another
aircraft.

>>Your logic seems to be that because the object made a roaring
>>noise, it must be a human craft. However, you leave out the part
>>where the craft took off with a roar but then went completely
>>silent when it sped off at high speed into the distance. Please
>>tell us what known conventional propulsion system can silently
>>accelerate a craft like this.

>The only idea I had about this noisy-then-silent phenomena was
>that the sound waves were directed based on the propulsion
>system. Thus, a messy rocketlike propulsion system near the
>ground is very noisy because it is bouncing sound all over the
>place. But after take off and at a high enough altitude, the
>plume of the thruster may be tuned enough and aimed sufficiently
>to reduce the noise level considerably. It is hard to say for
>sure without knowing the kind of propulsion system.

Zamora was at most 200 feet away and probably 50-100 feet closer
when he heard the craft go silent. (According to Zamora, the
roaring was confined to the craft lifting straight up until it
had just cleared the ravine. Then, while hovering, it went
silent and started to move away horizontally, still very near
the ground.) I can't imagine how any conventional rocket or jet
propulsion system (especially supporting a craft whose weight
was in tons) could be silent at that distance, even if it was
pointed directly away from Zamora, which it couldn't have been.
The propulsion system had to hold the craft up when it was still





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                  Google Tracks UFO Sightings With New Map

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:33:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:33:09 -0400
Subject: Google Tracks UFO Sightings With New Map




Source: The New Mexican - Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/33610.html

October 12, 2005


Google Tracks UFO Sightings With New Map
By The New Mexican

Using their Google Maps API (or application program interface),
Google has launched a map of UFO sightings at:

http://www.ufomaps.com/

The interactive map is dotted with "flying saucer" icons
indicating where UFOs have been sighted. Clicking on the icon
pulls up a short summary of the sighting, with an additional
link to a more detailed report. Thte data is from the National
UFO Reporting Center.

The Google initiative is not the only site to use maps to chart
UFO activity.

http://www.larryhatch.net/

is a detailed effort to graph UFO activity ffrom the past 50
years or ealier, and as a sizable set of graphs, charts,
histograms and other data.

http://www.ufodisclosure.com

tracks alleged UFO flight corridors and patterns near Bisbee,
Arizona.

While not offering maps, another serious effort of research is





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: EMF & UFOs - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:10:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:35:07 -0400
Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs - Sparks


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:05:55 +0100
>Subject: EMF & UFOs [was: Memory Without Klass]

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
>>with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
>>was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
>>dozens of cases of car stallings.)

>I found the post on the Levelland cases from Larry Robinson that
>I mentioned previously. It was to Easton's UFORL list on March 12
>2004. I think this is unusually interesting but I don't recall
>any discussion of it.

>Robinson said that he found a story in the May 1938 issue of
>Popular Science, describing an event (a few years before 1938)
>where a number of cars stalled on the same section of a road in
>eastern Colorado. The road travelled through higher ground in a
>cut and a total of 23 cars reportedly stalled there in a short
>period of time, whilst 6 others (all Model-T Fords) drove
>through unaffected. It was windy and there was a lot of dust
>blowing. A rescue truck that was called in also stalled. A
>remedy was discovered by a mechanic who accidentally earthed his
>vehicle with a chain, when it started fine.

Robinson has a poor track record for "old magazine articles" he
read "years ago" with his longstanding claim to have read an ad
in a magazine he has never been able to find (and no one else
has either) with a story of a manned balloon landing where the
crew found a scary New Mexico policeman staring at them. This
supposedly "explains" the Socorro case as a manned balloon. Is
there an actual verified copy of this May 1938 Popular Science
article?

I think this car stopping tale is an urban legend going back to
the 30's and earlier, which includes variations where the Nazis
have developed a super duper raygun that can stop cars at a
distance, or aircraft engines, or the Italians have developed
the superweapon, or Marconi and Tesla are rumored to have
developed it. Other stories claim that certain areas of the
country cause car engines to stall or that ghosts or gremlins
interfere with car and aircraft engines. The following article
quotes a Sandi Labs spokesman who rightly points out that the
amount of electromagnetic energy that could fry a car engine
components would also fry the human
occupants to a crisp (like a microwave oven).

http://www.soci.niu.edu/~crypt/other/chupax.htm

British scientific intelligence pioneer R. V. Jones ran into a
"flood" of these car-stopping raygun devices in the pre-war days
of 1937-8. Jones tells how he spent two years tracing these
rumors until he finally found the answer: The Nazis apparently
found that when they tried to test the field strengths of new
radio transmitters they would get interference from nearby car
engines. So they would stop the cars for a certain distance
until the tests were over and then allow drivers to restart
their engines and proceed. So the rumor version garbled the
details so that it was the radio transmitters that "stopped" the
cars. Suppposedly Jones himself
spread these rumors to see if he could deceive the Nazis:

http://www.rafcaa.org.uk/admin/legends.htm

http://ncas.sawco.com/condon/text/appndx-v.htm

The idea that an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion
could burn out the microchips controlling most modern-day car
ignition systems has run into the problem that Army tests have
reportedly shown that vehicles are like Faraday cages. They have
metal surrounding the engine compartment suspended from the
ground on rubber insulators (tires) so they are difficult for EM
energy to penetrate into the interior of the engine
compartments.

Of course, the biggest mistake in history about the science of
all this was made by Klass in his ball-lightning UFO book UFOs
Identified! He thought that in EM physics theory that when they
talked about a "mirror image charge" on the opposite side of a
flat metal plane that this was a real electric charge that
magically formed on the opposite side when when an electric
charge was placed on one side.

So he theorized that if an electrically charged plasmoid were to
appear over a metal car hood that an "image charge" would form
on the opposite side of the flat metal hood, inside the engine
compartment where it could interfere with car ignition. Thus he
"explained" all the cases of UFO's causing car ignition failures
or stalling by this "mirror image charge" pseudoscience of his
"plasma UFO's."

The problem is that in EM theory the "image charge" is not real.
It is an imaginary concept designed for simplifying calculation
of electric fields in one idealized situation only. It is where
the flat metal plane can then be imagined to be removed from the
problem situation to do the calculation, it is replaced by the
charge and its symmetrical but imaginary "image charge" with no
metal plate in between. If the "image charge" was real then so
would the magical dematerialization of the entire metal plate
have to be real too!

When McDonald pointed out this error of elementary
electromagnetic theory to the CASI scientific group in Toronto
on March 12, 1968, Klass was in the audience and as a result





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                          Re: EMF & UFOs - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:08:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:38:27 -0400
Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs - Aldrich


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 19:40:43 +0100
>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 19:33:07 +0200
>>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:39:36 -0400
>>>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>><snip>

>>>>>When it was pointed out to him that a British firm had invented
>>>>>a device which did stop car engines

>>>>Jan, can you tell me the references of such a claim I have never
>>>>heard before?

>>>After about three weeks with various computer problems, I have
>>>access to most of my files, but not the old E-mail files. So I
>>>can't give you the specific url.

>>>The device was produced by a British firm, the car had to run
>>>over a strip with the electrical components in it. The device
>>>didn't just stop the car, it wrecked the engine. Not exactly the
>>>EME associated with UFOs, but neither is it a mystical device
>>>Klass claimed. Once the effect has been established obviously
>>>something more close to UFO EMEs could be engineered.

>>>See also:

>>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1259138,00.html

>>>(Murray Bott found an incident in which RF with engine function
>>>stopped blimp motor near large radio transmitter.)

>>>Roos, John G. "Arresting Development: Non-Lethal Vehicle-
>>>Stopping Device for the Army's Peacekeeping Bag of Tricks."
>>>Armed Forces Journal International, vol. 138, no. 10, May 2001,
>>>p. 24.

>>>http://tinyurl.com/ch8oy

>>The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board also put out a lengthy
>>white paper in 1997 (or maybe 1999) outlining their vision for
>>the 21st century American Air Force. Most of it was about laser
>>and space-based weapons systems. However, it also mentioned the
>>existence of high-power microwave weapons capable of stalling
>>internal combustion engines (making the vehicles easy targets
>>for subsequent bombing), also capable of scrambing aviation
>>electronics and causing power blackouts. These are all
>>electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
>>with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
>>was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
>>dozens of cases of car stallings.)

>But don't forget that the EMP-type methods in the two sources
>referenced by Jan above are only effective against the
>electronics in modern vehicles, not the combustion engine
>itself, and so wouldn't have had any effect on the variety of
>petrol and deisel vehicles reported disabled before about 1990
>or so.

>>The AFSAB paper was on the Net for a while, but was subsequently
>>pulled. I regret now not having made a copy.

>Incidentally Larry Robinson (with whom I have rarely failed to
>_disagree_ strongly on a the few occasions we've "met") claimed
>to have chapter and verse on a natural explanation for the
>Levelland car-stallings - this was a year or two ago on Easton's
>list. Does anyone recall?


Robinson does not impress me at all after our discussions of the
Socorro case. He failed to read the case all the way through,
and his explanation was based on a half-remembered article in a
magazine he could not recall. Many of his other explanation
suffer from the same problem.

The incident Muarry Bott referred to has nothing to do with
modern computerized motors. The Blimp flew near a very high
power radio transmitter and its engines were knocked out.

There are similar reports of car stalling and aircraft effect
from lightning.


Jan Aldrich





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: Socorro - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:26:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:40:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:37:35 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro


>In the Fortean Times book , UFOs 1947-1997, (ed Hilary Evans &
Dennis Stacy), there is a chapter by Hector J. Quintanilla which
is mainly devoted to Socorro. He had conducted a very thorough
investigation and was genuinely baffled.

>However, he writes (p.116): "Although I labelled the case
'unidentified' I've never been satisfied with that
classification. I've always felt that too many essential
elements of the case were missing. These are the intangible
elements which are impossible to check, so the solution could
very well be lying dormant in Lonnie Zamora's head".

>Was this Quantinilla's way of saying that he surmised that
Zamora may have invented, or embellished, his story?

Well, of course. This is precisely the sort of sleazy innuendo
in which he had to engage, in the absence of an iota of evidence
for a hoax.

In fact, the Socorro case was well investigated - as I well
know, having spent a whole lot of time going through the
investigative reports as I researched the case for my
encyclopedia - and is among the most impressive of UFO reports.
It baffled Quintanilla, who was ordinarily able to conjure up an
explanation out of thin air (e.g., the Portage County case); so





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                    'Einstein's Big Idea': Atoms And Eves

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:47:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:02:07 -0400
Subject: 'Einstein's Big Idea': Atoms And Eves


[Did anyone else see this? I thought the last part, at least,
pretty awful. On the other hand, my wife thought it wasn't a bad
way to get the young interested in science. JK]

Source: The Washington Post

http://tinyurl.com/b2zr4


'Einstein's Big Idea': Atoms And Eves

By Stephen Reiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 11, 2005; Page C01

It turns out that the casting directors at the "CSI" franchise
are right: Science is a babe magnet.

That must be the explanation for all the hot young scientists
and their lusty lovers populating "Einstein's Big Idea," airing
at 8 tonight on PBS. This latest installment in the Nova
series of science documentaries has to be accurate, because
those do-gooders in educational television wouldn't think of
appealing to our baser instincts, would they?

Here's 18th-century French scientist Antoine Lavoisier and his
fetching young bride discussing the ins and outs of oxidation as
they wend their way to the bedchamber through his laboratory.

Here's Emilie du Chatelet, the brilliant daughter of a French
courtier, who could disprove Isaac Newton on the mathematics of
motion and look great doing it. (Now I know what rocker Thomas
Dolby meant with his 1983 hit "She Blinded Me With Science.")

And here's the young Albert Einstein rousing his negligee-clad
wife with the speedy bowing of his violin, and suggestively
asking that she "Come with me and... think about the
electromagnetic theory of light."

"How you enchant a lady," she responds. (What an operator!)

When you get past the heavy breathing, this two-hour show traces
the origins and impact of the most famous equation in science -
E = mc{+2} - in a fast-paced and entertaining fashion. This year
marks the 100th anniversary of one of the most productive and
pathbreaking periods in science. For it was in 1905 that
Einstein, an obscure young patent clerk, had a "miracle year,"
publishing five papers on atomic structure, the nature of light
and the relationship between energy and matter. The work was so
radical and poorly understood that it took four years and the
intervention of physicist Max Planck before Einstein got his
first faculty position.

The show breaks down each part of the equation and demonstrates
how Einstein's insights built on the work of many scientists who
came before him. In each case, heaping spoonfuls of sugar help
the mathematics and physics go down. The scientists' stories are
told in the context of their ambitions, loves and
disappointments. And the producers have taken the trouble and
expense to get quality actors and put them in believable period
settings and costumes. For instance, Irish actor Aidan McArdle,
who portrays Einstein, succeeds in the Herculean task of
persuading the audience to follow his thinking on the nature of
light and then to care about this self-centered, obnoxious cad
when he callously divorces his wife (the impressive Shirley
Henderson, whose credits include "Bridget Jones's Diary" and
"Trainspotting").

After a brief opening tease in which Einstein's wife offers to
check his mathematics (wink, wink), the story begins in the
London of 1812, with Michael Faraday, a bookbinder's apprentice,
doing a pratfall into a puddle. Science at the time was a
gentleman's pursuit and the working-class Faraday needed
persistence, luck and brilliance to get into a laboratory full
time. Driven by his religious faith to understand God's works,
Faraday did pioneering experimental work on electricity and its
relationship to magnetism.

Other characters include Lavoisier, who demonstrated that mass
is never lost, even as it changes states from solid to liquid to
gas (his beheading during the French Revolution keeps the plot
moving); James Clark Maxwell, who had the mathematical chops to
prove that light is a form of electromagnetism; and the lovely
du Chatelet, who demonstrated the importance of squaring
(multiplying a number by itself) in determining the energy of a
moving object. That may sound like a snoozefest, but her affair
with Voltaire does spice up the presentation.

The history closes with the wrenching story of Lise Meitner, an
Austrian Jew who became the first woman in Germany to have the
title of professor. Despite her important work on radioactivity,
she was forced by the Nazis to leave her university and fled the
country. Taking a walk through the snow with her nephew, also a
physicist, in 1938, she had the insight that the uranium atom
could be split, releasing huge amounts of energy. That discovery
eventually led to the Manhattan Project - in which she refused





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:53:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:03:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Sparks


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:32:46 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:04:55 -0300
>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 10:25:35 -0500
>>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro [was: The Global UFO Cover-Up]

>Brad,

>>Speaking of Klass both he and Menzel were involved early on in
>>the case. Why didn't they get Zamora's "eye-glass" data? Or did
>>they and they found nothing out of the ordinary that they could
>>get any traction with so they quietly dropped the issue? Menzel
>>was famous or infamous for "asking the eye-glass question" and
>>lying to make up the answer he wanted to hear: He lied and
>>claimed, for example, that Father Gill "wasn't wearing his
>>glasses," when in fact Hynek found out Gill was wearing his
>>glasses.

>Thanks for bringing up the matter of Menzel's spurious charge
>about Father Gill's not wearing glasses at the time of his
>sighting. The current discussion brought it to my mind, too. A
>correction, however:

>It was I, not Hynek, who (in a 1977 interview) showed Gill what
>Menzel had claimed about his famous sighting: namely, that Gill
>had not been wearing glasses, thus causing him to mistake Venus
>for a UFO because his astigmatism led him to see an elongated,
>out-of-focus image.

<snip>

>For other absurdities in Menzel's (and Klass's) reconstruction
>of the incident, see The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 451-52.

Sorry but I have to correct the correction: In Hynek's 1972
book, 5 years before the 1977 interview (The UFO Experience
1972; Ballantine ed. p. 172) he writes:

"The self-styled 'arch enemy of UFOs,' Dr. Donald Menzel, of
Harvard has taken a characteristic opposite view. In his
Analysis of the Papua-Father Gill Case... he dismisses the
entire case as a sighting of Venus under the hypothesis that
Reverend Gill was not wearing his glasses at the time.
Unfortunately, he neglected to ascertain the following: the UFO
at times was seen under cloud cover; Venus was pointed out
separately by Gill; and Reverend Gill was wearing properly
corrected glasses at the time."

As for the Venus theory smugly re-asserted in another posting,
note astronomer Hynek's refutations above. The "men" were seen
when heavy cloud cover blanketed the sky (the multiple UFO's
were also seen descending and ascending "through" the clouds
according to Gill). Venus was pointed out by Gill separately in
the sky (Hynek also personally interviewed Gill on this, see The
Hynek UFO Report 1977).

To which I must add that Gill and the dozens of other witnesses





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                Disclosure Australia Project Announcement 26

From: Diane Harrison <auforn.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:13:13 +1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:07:38 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Australia Project Announcement 26


Disclosure Australia Newsletter 25 has just been posted to the
Project web site at:

http://disclosure.freewebpage.org

In this issue

* We look at what official Government documents exist on the
1978 disappearance of pilot Frederick Valentich

* We locate a UFO report from Maralinga in South Australia the
home of atomic bomb testing, with a comment by none other than
Harry Turner the former Joint Intelligence Bureau officer we
interviewed last year

* We pose the question as to what happens to UFO reports from
Department of Defence personnel?

* We present the results of our recent survey about the
Disclosure Australia Project. Respondents indicated they were
very happy with the work to date. They give feedback as to what
suggestions they have for stages 2 and 3 of this work. Remember
this is a project being conducted on behalf of all Australian
UFO researchers and organisations and will only work
with your support.

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

The Australian UFO  Research Network Disclosure Project

Auspiced by the
Australian UFO Research Network
PO Box 738, Beaudesert,
Queensland 4285
http://www.hypermax.net.au/~auforn

Secretariat: the
Australian UFO Research Association





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:53:35 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:12:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:37:35 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:12:41 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>I see that your response conveniently leaves out the rundown of
>>>my UFO experience.

>>>Others, including Paul Kimball, think that the eye-glass
>>>question is legitimate. It's not a small matter when it goes to
>>>the heart of an eyewitness's claim.

>>>What position does one have to be in for them to be able to
>>>question anything ufological?

>>>Are there rules that prohibit questioning, by neophytes and
>>>others?

>>>Who makes up those rules?

>>>While you think I'm wasting time, others do not I surmise. The
>>>Socorro episode is not a done deal. It's still open to scrutiny,
>>>or should be.

>>I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
>>around strewing red herrings all over the place when he
>>obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
>>elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
>>involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
>>fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
>>at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
>>examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
>>D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

>>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>>that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
>>issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
>>you keep spewing in that regard).

>>There is nothing at all wrong about raising questions on any
>>historical case or reinvestigating it, but any rational person
>>who wasn't simply grinding axes and spicing blogs would first
>>study the literature thoroughly. You obviously have not done so.
>>Nor apparently have you read Maj. Hector Quintanilla's account
>>of how thoroughly the Air Force checked for experimental
>>vehicles, etc., and how puzzled he was by the case.

>In the Fortean Times book , UFOs 1947-1997, (ed Hilary Evans &
Dennis Stacy), there is a chapter by Hector J. Quintanilla which
is mainly devoted to Socorro. He had conducted a very thorough
investigation and was genuinely baffled.

>However, he writes (p.116): "Although I labelled the case
'unidentified' I've never been satisfied with that
classification. I've always felt that too many essential
elements of the case were missing. These are the intangible
elements which are impossible to check, so the solution could
very well be lying dormant in Lonnie Zamora's head".

>Was this Quantinilla's way of saying that he surmised that
Zamora may have invented, or embellished, his story?

That what you're hoping for, Christopher. Doesn't read that way,
and sounds like you are putting words in his mouth. No doubt he
would have used it though if he'd thought of it. But since





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:00:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:29:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:24:02 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:18:59 EDT
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>Hi Brad!

>You know, you raise a number of points, some of which
>I could argue about till I am blue in the face and
>some of which I would concede that you are correct.

>Briefly,

>1) Just because I cannot easily use the optical triangulation
>method in daylight is not adequate reason to dismiss it.

Your strategy would reject the best UFO cases in preference to
some of the worst cases with Low Strangeness (low
unexplainability; Hynek's Strangeness = Unexplainability).

It is well-known in UFO research that Daylight Discs are cases
to be preferred over the "less strange" Nocturnal Lights for the
reason that it is so hard to tell what a "night light" is about.
Hynek emphasized that he put more strict standards on filtering
NL cases because of this. Some UFO researchers reject all
Nocturnal Lights out of hand to simplify the process.

Integral to this distinction is the fact that in daylight cases
a large angular size is more readily accepted as being necessary
to see that there is a metallic "disc" or some other
unconventional shape. Whereas at night one usually cannot see a
metallic "disc" and for some reason any funny movement or streak
of a pinpoint of light at night is more likely to be reported
than a streaking of a pinpoint-sized "something" in the daytime.

I'm not sure whether you are receptive to any wisdom from long
years of struggling with the UFO problem since you are so
critical and rejecting of any common sense understanding that
has been developed that way.

>2) You keep mentioning how in the old days they weren't
>successful so we can't be today. Well, they had the ancient
>technologies of the 40's-60's for optical tracking. They had
>good ole vacuum tubes and slide rules. This is the 21st century
>and tech has advanced a little since then. So your zero
>detection rate is bolderdash.

Your argument is balderdash. The problem isn't the technology
it's the distance factor together with terrain obstructions and
horizon limits. Despite the intensive concentration of UFO
sightings over New Mexico in the 1949-50 period where at least
100 unexplained cases can be documented, the UFO tracking
networks in NM only caught a few of them. The sightings were too
far away and/or below the local horizons. New Mexico is quite
mountainous.

The UFOs didn't concentrate all their displays at one single
convenient spot within the State of New Mexico. So instruments
could not be collocated at such a spot. Yet this was probably
the best UFO sighting concentration of documented genuine
Unexplained cases of all time. And still the ground-based UFO
"field lab" capture rate was only on the order of magnitude 1%.

Now UFOs are much lower in rate of occurrence and more dispersed
globally than they were in New Mexico in 1949-50. A global UFO
detection and tracking system is required or at minimum a
continental-coverage system, such as the Passive Radar system
which you disparage for some reason and refuse to consider
mating up with an optical system for some reason.

>3) There are miniflaps and then there are miniflaps. One must be
>able to sort out which are worthy and which are not. Set your
>standards right and maybe you will be lucky. Automation gives
>you the liberty to be less finicky about operational time and
>sighting frequency. Also, there ARE areas of more or less
>continuous sightings to rely on (NOT meaning Area 51).

I'm glad you are so sure _you_ know where these mini-flap areas
are located. Let's see you present _convincing evidence_ of a
mini-flap and also convince a financial backer of a UFO "field
lab" of that fact.

>4) About NORAD not being able to identify EVERY single blip. How
>do you know? Who are your sources? What clearance do you have?
>The fact is we don't know and never will know what NORAD can or
>cannot do. They very smartly do not tell us and the enemy their
>abilities. Perhaps they file such data in the alien spaceship
>file. If they gathered data showing that an unknown went from
>low altitude to space and it was too fast to be earthly, then
>they must either assume radar instrument error or a spaceship.
>With optical data, this can eliminate instrument error.

The GAO has security clearances and conducted a study of Air
Space Violations since 9-11, based on NORAD data. Of the 3,400
air space violations from 2001 to 2004 some 4% or about 136 were
unknowns or unidentified after tracking and/or attempted
interceptions. Interestingly, I've read many declassified AF air
defense histories from the 50's and this was roughly the same
order of magnitude "unknowns" back then. ADC experts said they
believed most of these were civil aviation they simply could not
identify, when no flight plans were required or had failed to be
filed, and of course some were UFOs.

<snip>

>6) About your never hearing about restrictions of passive radar
>development, I was not aware that they had to inform you!
>Really, this kind of nudging does not get the headlines.
>Conspiratorial, yes, in a way, but seems to be the
>government/industry way of doing business in many areas.

Major aerospace companies such as Lockheed Martin do not
announce major projects such as developing Passive Radar without
checking whether the government objects or considers it all
classified. That kind of thing could jeopardize Lockheed's
billions of dollars of defense contracts. Lockheed's Passive
Radar project hasn't been shut down as you would have us believe
would have to be done to keep it away from "terrorists."

<snip>

>8) About passive radar used by foreign powers, it has been
>expressed as a concern in some articles I have read. The
>millions of points problem you mention is likely invalid in case
>of war. There isn't likely alot of non-military traffic at such
>a time.

Civil aviation has not been stopped in times of war going on all
over the earth. The emergency grounding of civil flights for a
few days after 9-11 in the US was unprecedented and has not been
done in other wars or war zones. Lots of "concerns" are
expressed by ill-informed or jealous commentators in various
articles on many subjects.

<snip>

>You also mention about the huge processing time
>required for passive radar. Well, ideally you are right, but the
>problem is that with the kind of technical development of
>passive radar you advocate, the processing problem becomes
>solved.

Again you misunderstand the argument. "We" who would want to
find UFOs with a Passive Radar system are looking for things
that stick out like a sore thumb, highly unconventional speeds,
altitudes and trajectories. These are obvious and can easily be
programmed into any automated system so we're not swamped with
millions of ordinary behaving data points we don't care about.

"They" (the terrorist or enemy nations) are looking for non-UFO,
non-strange behaving, but radar-invisible, Stealth aircraft
hiding among a mass of other ordinary looking aircraft radar
blips. These blips would be ordinary and if "we" picked them up
"we" would not even know they were Stealth aircraft. No labels
appear on the blips. Passive Radar has no coded transponders to
electronically interrogate and identify unknown aircraft.
"Enemy" nations won't have any help from our Stealth aircraft in
identifying themselves.

Since a Stealth plane picked up on Passive Radar looks just like
any other ordinary (non-UFO) aircraft "They" (terrorists) will
have to spend months or years pouring over millions of radar
data points from both their ordinary radar sites and a
hypothetical Passive Radar system you claim they would want to
build, trying to find a blip on the Passive that didn't show up
on ordinary radar and then conduct an exhaustive investigation
to eliminate radar blind zones, horizon limits and targets-too-
small. In the end "They" (the terrorists) will never be sure
that by this tedious process of elimination that they have ever
100% positively identified a Stealth or not. Far too late to
warn of an impending attack.

Or if the terrorists didn't want to conduct an exhaustive
investigation of civil aircraft-too-small or radar blind zones
they can just naively assume that _all_ radar blips that their
Passive Radar picked up that weren't picked up on their regular
radars were _all_ Stealth aircraft - hundreds and hundreds of
false alarms of Stealth aircraft that were not that at all.

<snip>

>9) About the problems of optical triangulation beign able to
>differentiate between two signals. I would simply say, its all
>in the software dude! And, its far, far simpler than passive
>radar software.

No software will be able to tell the difference between one
pinpoint of light that looks like another pinpoint of light. Two
pinpoints of light 0.1 degree apart might be interpreted as a
single pinpoint of light 6 miles away by an optical
triangulation system (twenty-meter baseline), even though they
are actually two pinpoints of light a meter apart on a dark
object only 500 meters away. Or one pinpoint of light is a
distant star (or aircraft) and the other is on a dark object
(maybe even a UFO) close by and the optical triangulation system
misinterprets it as a single pinpoint at an intermediate
distance. All sorts of other scenarios and combinations are
highly likely and no way to distinguish them. Etc. etc.

<snip>

>11) Distortion of passive radar comes from all sorts of things,
>weather, solar flares, weird ionospheric activity, signal
>interference from other sources. Remember you are measuring
>signals from 100s of miles away and their reflections.

>This becomes tedious after a point, though.

Pray tell how a "solar flare" distorts a Doppler shift in a
radio signal??? You're just throwing a bunch of technical words
at us that don't do what you claim they can do. Masking signals
in noise is not the same thing as "distorting" a signal.

>It never occured to me that UFO field research would be
>considered a useless waste of time unless one had these mythical
>passive radars. And after so many such field researchers had
>stated that radar was so unreliable a tool since a high





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 22:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:30:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:24:02 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>This becomes tedious after a point, though.

>It never occurred to me that UFO field research would be
>considered a useless waste of time unless one had these mythical
>passive radars. And after so many such field researchers had
>stated that radar was so unreliable a tool since a high
>percentage of UFOs do not show up.

James:

This whole correspondence regarding field research has been an
eye-opener for me. I find myself continually slipping into
"clinical mode" because so many responses are strikingly similar
to language used by co-dependents and battered wives. "It's too
hard" - "I can't do it" - "It will never work" - "Next time he
will tell the truth" - "I can't make it without him" - "I don't
have the resources to make it on my own". This is dysfunction.
How many times have you watched Ufology get bitch-slapped, only
to come crawling back on its knees holding out a hand and
begging for another version of things? Now if a version ever
comes out worthy of tagging as the truth, how much is it really
worth after taking into account the history of abuse?

I see a "news-reporter-scoop" mentality/approach as the method
of choice for Ufologists. It is difficult to classify this field
as science when it uses this methodology. I do realize this
approach has some value due to the dynamics involved. However,
the approach which is being ignored is the "science - researcher





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 22:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:32:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:18:59 EDT
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:07:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>Of course such data _could_ be used to track "UFOs", but the
>>primary reason is to track military targets of human origin.

>That isn't the development history which was dual-use two-
>tracked from the very inception, for both UFOs and "military
>targets." Obviously one was better for attracting and
>maintaining funding appropriations than the other.

That is interesting. I would like to know more about the
motivational history behind this dual-use system. I assume this
is a documented history of some sort and not just speculation.
Could you point me to this documentation?

>I should have added that a 1% detection rate applied to a low
>UFO occurrence rate as we have today is essentially zero. Zero
>UFO detections likely from a UFO "field lab."

This seems erroneous on many levels. I can see how an increase
in sightings could account for an increase in locations
designated to be flaps. Also, I can see how an increase could
make such designating more difficult. You are assuming a
decrease in quantity equals a 0 value for the variable of
"flap". Which must equal 0 detections? Hmmm You cannot get here
from there... that is not statistics, its speculative rounding-
off. Would an increase in technology not effect a variable like
detection potential? I would think so. Also, whether I extract
subset (flap) from a database of 1200 units or 500 units, the
validity or legitimacy of that subset should not suffer.

>>No, Area 51 would not be high on my list. However, I am sure
>>some mini-flap areas could be found by examining witness
>>reports.

>I am just as sure that mini-flap areas cannot be found by the
>usual Area 51-type of witness reports, assuming that any true
>"mini-flaps" are even taking place. This is the prescription for
>pointless responses to numerous hair-trigger false alerts every
>time it "seems" initially there is a localized mini-flap
>somewhere. The Colorado Project spent a lot of useless time
>running around on such alerts from its so-called Early Warning
>Network.

A researcher should want a location with a recent history of
quality sightings from varied and credible witnesses supported
by quality documentation(video, stills). This documentation
should illustrate anomalies which cannot easily be attributed to
conventional sources. Whether one calls this a "flap", "mini-
flap", "flip-flap" or "flapenuguen", it makes no difference. We
just need one(subset) to start. If you would like me to
illustrate at least one such location that fits the above
requirements, I would happily do so.

>>I think we differ in this. All one needs is adequate
>>triangulation resolution to define the flight path of the
>>object. If the flight path matches an aircraft or satellite
>>behavior, then all we can say is that it _might_ be an aircraft
>>or satellite (it could simply be a UFO behaving like these too).

>Even with NORAD and its vast resources with FAA and military
>flight plan data NORAD still cannot be sure of the identity of
>every single radar blip appearing like an aircraft or satellite.
>I don't see how that realization changes the situation from
>before.

I agree, that is why I would prefer the field lab approach.
Proof should come via multiple data streams. In fact, multiple
data streams from a reliable and objective source. Does radar
data via the government resemble this in any way? In addition,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                    2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:44:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:33:46 -0400
Subject: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK


13-10-05 21:00

http://www.channel4.com/listings/C4/index.jsp

UFOs: The Secret Evidence






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:59:07 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:35:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Hall


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:37:35 +0100
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:52:15 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

<snip>

>>I think the word 'cavalier' applies best to someone who goes
>>around strewing red herrings all over the place when he
>>obviously has done zero investigation of the case, not even the
>>elementary reading of contemporary investigations. I was
>>involved real time in the Socorro investigation and have written
>>fairly extensively about the case. Back in the good old days we
>>at NICAP even obtained the full Air Force Soicorro file for
>>examination via the Air Force Office of History in Washington,
>>D.C.(flown from Maxwell AFB via courier plane at our request).

>>If you had read the contemporary reports you would know that
>>Zamora did not say the small beings had human-like uniforms,
>>that he was of the highest repute locally, that there is no
>>issue whatsoever about his eyesight (what utter nonsense that
>>you keep spewing in that regard).

<snip>

>In the Fortean Times book , UFOs 1947-1997, (ed Hilary Evans &
>Dennis Stacy), there is a chapter by Hector J. Quintanilla which
>is mainly devoted to Socorro. He had conducted a very thorough
>investigation and was genuinely baffled.

>However, he writes (p.116): "Although I labelled the case
>'unidentified' I've never been satisfied with that
>classification. I've always felt that too many essential
>elements of the case were missing. These are the intangible
>elements which are impossible to check, so the solution could
>very well be lying dormant in Lonnie Zamora's head".

>Was this Quantinilla's way of saying that he surmised that
>Zamora may have invented, or embellished, his story?


Shall we now engage in posthumous mind reading that, conveniently
for debunkers, maligns Zamora's reputation, counter to what is
known about him? Far more simply, it is well known that
Quintanilla was an extreme skeptic. To his way of thinking (with
which you ought to be familiar), it can't be something (a





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                   Channel 4 UK UFOs: The Secret Evidence

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:39:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:39:43 -0400
Subject: Channel 4 UK UFOs: The Secret Evidence




Source: The Daily Mirror - London, UK

http://tinyurl.com/ct5fy

13 October 2005


UFOs: The Secret Evidence
Pick Of The Day Channel 4, 9pm
Jane Simon

More people than ever believe in the existence of UFOs. But
Unidentified isn't the same thing as Extra-Terrestrial, of
course.

It just means that no government is putting up its hands and
saying: "That saucer-shaped thing in the sky with the flashing
lights? Oh yes, that's one of ours. We call it Harold."

The bad news for anyone hoping for proof that We Are Not Alone
is that this scrupulously researched two-hour film is
essentially a history of top-secret aerospace technology.

Leading defence journalist Nick Cook uses his expert knowledge
and contacts to try to get to the bottom of 60 years of real-
life X-Files.

He's certainly not the first person to suggest that the balls of
light - known as Foo Fighters - which Allied pilots spotted
during the Second World War were unmanned aerial combat vehicles
developed by the Nazis.

But if you follow the 2,000 German rocket scientists to the
States where they were put to work after the war as part of
Project Paperclip, even the most famous UFO incident at Roswell
in New Mexico starts to make sense.

Because if there is life on other planets, it does seem a bit of
a coincidence that the aliens' favourite place for a joy ride in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                          Filer's Files #42 -- 2005

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:42:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:45:45 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #42 -- 2005


Filer's Files #42 -- 2005
George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern
Vice President of Skywatch International
October 12, 2005, Web www.georgefiler.com


Earthquakes and Sightings Increase

This week's files cover: Increase in Earthquakes. Seashells and
life found on Mars.

Also UFOs were seen over Arizona, Atlantic Ocean, California,
Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Washington and Wisconsin.

Many sightings were also reported in Bolivia, Canada, Mexico,
Mongolia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Ocean.

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. 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 alien craft.

Expect more disastrous earthquakes

Is it possible the Sun=92s activity results in earthquakes? Almost
every day for two weeks in September, solar flares issued from a
giant sunspot named "active region 798/808." X-rays ionized
Earth=92s upper atmosphere, charged magnetic particles and Solar
protons hit our atmosphere. Surprisingly
dhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021103.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsf
c.nasa.gov/apod/ap021103.htmluring the storms, radiation levels
onboard the International Space Station (ISS) dropped. "The crew
of the ISS absorbed about 30% fewer cosmic rays than usual but
we can assume the Earth absorbed some of the terrific energies
from the sun and may have resulted in movement of the tectonic
plates." The reason is simple: When sunspots explode, they often
hurl massive clouds of hot gas away from the sun. These clouds,
called CMEs (coronal mass ejections), contain not only gas but
also magnetic force fields, knots of magnetism ripped away from
the sun by the explosion. Magnetic fields deflect charged
particles, so when a CME sweeps past Earth, it also sweeps away
many of the electrically-charged cosmic rays that would
otherwise strike our planet. This is the "Forbush decrease."

The Earth has a layered structure, with a relatively thin crust
of mobile plates, a solid mantle with gradual overturning
movement, and the outer and inner core of molten and solid iron.
Probably the greatest factors to effect the Earth are solar
flares. The magnetosphere protecting the Earth is being
generated by the dynamo action in the Earth's interior that may
be effected by activity on the sun.

It is logical to assume the heat and energy coming from the Sun
may effect our Earth=92s molten iron core. I seems logical that
there may be a cause and effect as the Earth's magnetic field is
effected by CMEs and flares on the sun, it may effect the 4,300-
mile-wide outer core and its mobile tectonic plates. When the
plates move they result in Earthquakes like the one that hit
Southern Asia. When a plate moves it seems to effect other
tectonic plates at different places in the world. The recent
Indonesian Tsunami may have helped caused the later movement in
Pakistan.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A powerful 7.6-magnitude earthquake near
the Pakistan-India border Saturday reduced villages to rubble,
triggered landslides and flattened thousands of buildings and
killing 30,000. In the capitals of Pakistan, India and
Afghanistan, buildings shook and walls swayed for about a
minute, and panicked people ran from their homes and offices.
Tremors continued for hours afterward. Communications throughout
the region were cut. Guatemala was also hit by an earthquake

The Asian area as far west as Turkey and the Ring of Fire around
the Pacific Rim appears unusually unsettled, and we can expect
major earthquakes and increased volcanic action at any time.
This are includes the American West Coast, Japan, Indonesia, and
China.

Mars has seashells
Sir Charles W. Shults III, of Xenotech Research writes, "I have
a new web page that details life on Mars and also supports
Panspermia theories that some organisms here on Earth were
imported from Mars on meteorites." Dr. Shultz has found that
Mars Rover Opportunity's images of fossil seashells match
seashells on Earth. The spiral seashell shown here has an
apparent 3 mm size with a depressed area where the hole would be
similar to Earth fossil shells.


The original NASA link is at:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/m/505/1M173017399EF
F55VWP2936M2M1.HTML Compare to these Earth sea shell fossils.

Thanks to Sir Charles W. Shults III,
http://www.xenotechresearch.com/mk505a.htm Arizona two
boomerangs or V shaped crafts

GILBERT -- My wife and I were driving home from Scottsdale, on
Wednesday evening September 14, 2005, at 8:45 p.m., when in the
southeast sky I noticed a stationary pulsating light. I thought
it was very odd to see that sort of light characteristic in the
flight path of Sky Harbor airport. It just hung over the San Tan
Mountains in the southeast sky. When I got home, my wife who was
behind me, pulled into our driveway and was very excited - she
was yelling, "Did I see the green lights?" She said she saw two
boomerang or V shaped craft with green lights. NUFORC Note: We
spoke via telephone with the husband.

Atlantic Ocean disk flies next to jet

PARIS-PHILADELPHIA -- On September 18, 2005 The witness was on a
Trans-Atlantic flight when he saw a lenticular black cloud fly
formation with our jet right off the wing, at 2 PM. It quickly
formed a solid sphere shaped mass and accelerated away at a high
speed in the clear sky. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

California spider like threads and a saucer

PINECREST --We were in the woods off Highway 108 when we saw
what looked like long strands of spider like web, some short,
long etc. The spider like strands were swirling, falling and
drifting somewhat very high on September 28, 2005, at 1:30 PM.

Then I saw the saucer like a flat plate with a dome which was a
dark gray in color. I told my friend that I saw a UFO, but
because of his poor eyesight he had not see it. However, he did
see the spider web stuff.

When I picked up my binoculars, I could not find it as it was
out of sight. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

MODESTO, CA -- R. David Anderson writes, "I saw the photo that
you had on your web site last week of the orbs taken in North
Carolina on September 22, FF #41, by The Carolina Group Research
field team. I took a photo that bears some similarity to it at
the Christmas parade downtown in December. I recently enlarged
the spherical-like objects that appear to be green orbs. They
were located above the ground, elevated by at least 30 feet.

Most of the orbs were surrounding the McHenry Mansion, a
historical home that was one of the earliest houses built in
Modesto. I am wondering if these light sources are of an energy
vortex of some type? I learned there had been many premature
deaths at the McHenry Mansion. Robert McHenry died there only
six years after he built the house, and his wife passed away
seven years later. Then the son lived there, and his daughter
was killed tragically in a gas appliance accident. Thanks to R.
David Anderson,

Colorado boomerang shaped object

BOULDER -- On September 19, 2005, I was lying down in our local
park at 8:20 PM, just looking at the stars when I witnessed a
boomerang shaped craft cross the sky directly overhead. The
craft had no lights, but was quite large and easy to spot as a
nearly full moon was just coming up over the horizon. I managed
to see the craft as it blocked out the stars, and they blinked
in and out as it traversed the sky.

The craft was 3 or 4 inches between my thumb and index finger at
arm=92s length. The craft was definitely under intelligent control
and moved from north to southwest without sound. It was dark in
color similar to the night sky. I watched the craft traverse
overhead in a straight line for ten seconds. Other airplanes
with lights were in the area. It could have been a glider flying
at night, a black military project, or an unknown craft guided
by intelligence. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

Florida 10 to 15 boomerang shaped objects

VENICE --About 10-15 boomerang shaped craft flew over on
September 4, 2005, at 9:45 PM. They appeared suddenly as if
descending from a very high altitude and were glowing milky
white. The outline of the group shifted fluidly -- as if they
were keeping formation loosely. Their lights did not blink and
was solid lighting. The silent over flight lasted only about
fifteen seconds as they disappeared into clouds as burglar
alarms were set off in the neighborhood. Thanks to Peter
Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

Illinois red lights in triangular pattern

NEW LENNOX =96 I work as a large equipment fueler and usually load
my truck for the days stops at around 4:45 AM every day. While
the truck was is loading on September 30, 2005, I noticed three
extremely bright stars in the shape of a triangle. I stood there
for a minute when all of the sudden the bottom left star moved
about a foot and half to the north.

At first, I thought it was a satellite, but then it stopped.
Then the bottom right object flew off to the east and I
eventually lost site of it. I looked back at the two remaining
objects only to see the top object slowly fade into the night
sky as if it was rising straight up. The first objects remained
in position. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

TINLEY PARK/ORLAND PARK =96 Ten miles east and eighteen hours
later three red lights hovering were seen over the Chicago
Suburbs on September 30th, about 11 PM. The following night on
October 1, 3005, they were seen again. They changed from red to
green and back again. Similar lights were seen last year. Video
and photographs to be looked at latter today. First report was
noted as being seen at 11:23 PM on, at 11:30 PM and last after
1:30 AM

OAK FOREST -- Two red lights were dangling in the air swaying
side to side slowly and looked just like stars disappeared after
about ten minutes. They were occasionally blinking when one just
disappeared the other went east until we no could no longer see
it. My brother lives two miles away and he said the lights were
directly above.

Last year aircraft on approach to O'Hara International Airport
were diverted due to unidentified flying objects on radar
southwest of the airport not far from this area. The Chicago Sun
Times carried the story on October 2nd. Thanks to Peter
Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com


Michigan red lights and triangle


ANN ARBOR -- My Cousin and I were fishing on the Huron River on
September 4, 2005, when I saw a very dim red-orange satellite
moving slowly at high altitude from west to east. Two seconds
later another satellite" appeared next to he first. The second
one was the same color as the first, only slightly dimmer.
Almost as soon as the second object appeared, it encircled the
first, one time in a counter-clockwise direction, and then the
two objects split up. The first, having changed its course only
slightly, continued in an easterly direction. The second bolted
south and disappeared.


Missouri fast moving triangle

ASHLAND -- Driving home from a friend=92s house, I approached my
exit into Ashland and saw three of four lights on the bottom of
an object with a blinking red light near the middle.

At first, I thought it was a fast flying plane as it flew across
the sky and crossed from one side of the highway to the other.
After crossing the highway, the object came to a stop and
hovered over a field.

The object slowly lost altitude and as it passed, I saw a faint
outline was triangular in shape. This object seemed to be moving
faster, hovered, and flew much lower than the planes I normally
see.


Nevada Dimly lighted chevron

RENO -- The witness saw an object on the northwest horizon that
was delta or chevron shaped on September 29, 2005 at 4:07 AM. At
first, I thought it was a dimly lit flock of geese, but realized
it was moving extremely fast and actually had very dim lights. I
am outside a lot between 0345-0410 PDT for my job and this was
by the far the weirdest thing I have ever seen. It was not
bright, but appeared close and made no sound. I just happened to
catch it because I was watching the weather balloon I had just
launched. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com


New Hampshire Disk


LACONIA -- I first noticed two small parallel vertical white
lines hovering just beneath a cloud on September 19, 2005, at 2
PM. I watched for twenty seconds what I thought was the back end
of a plane, but as it moved, it appeared to change shape. Then I
clearly saw a large silver-white disk, for fifteen seconds
before it just disappeared without moving. I believe it was
still hovering, but became invisible as the cloud next it was
blown by the wind, decreasing its reflection ability. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com


New Jersey alien in my wooded backyard.

COLLINGS LAKES -- I did not see a UFO, but and actual being,
which I believe to be an alien on September 22, 2005. At 1:25
AM,. I only saw it for a couple of seconds. I was running back
home to grab something for my husband, and a "thing" shuffled
from one side of my house, to my garage, and back into the
woods. He was only fifteen feet away from me. Mid-walk, he
turned to look at me, and he looked like the so called "gray"
alien. He was short, and I got the feeling of fear from it. It
had a very wrinkled forehead, black eyes, with very small whites
of his eyes showing. He seemed also to have wrinkles or bags in
other places; and its head was large. His eyes were very large
with a small and somewhat flared out nose. He was a gray or
whitish color, as was his cloak/hooded robe that covered most of
its body. He made a quiet sound and might have been trying to
eat from my trash?

My brother said, "I saw the same creature, a little weird dude
with a hood on out back" My family is quite scared, because we
do not think it left because we keep hearing loud noises. Thanks
to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

SEASIDE PARK =96 We observed very bright orange lights over the
ocean from the beach in Island Beach State Park at 9:30 PM, on
September 22, 2005. They were like fireworks bursting to the
east-southeast, about on-third up in the sky. There were no
boats or ships below the lights or any evidence of a rocket from
a boat. Lights would come on one, two, and then a group, looking
like a rash or pimples. We saw them for about ten seconds, and
then they reappeared in the same pattern for 30 to 45 seconds,
and then twice more.

The remarkably bright lights might be rotating. After a final
appearance of about fourteen seconds in a similar pattern, they
disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

New York teardrop

BROOKLYN -- I was watching television when I heard a gong or
church bell at 11:45 PM, on September 20, 2005. It seemed too
late for church bells, so I looked out my window and saw what I
thought was a blimp. It was making a whining sound that was a
cross between a quiet helicopter and blimp. It was flying lower
than any plane and too small to be a blimp. I was watching from
my high floor 10th Street building and realized it was too close
and low to be blimp.

The UFO was a cross between a small blimp and some kind of
"quiet" helicopter. It flew southwest over Prospect Park and
Coney Island out to sea. I described it over the phone to 911,
but they hung up on me. I called 311 and asked how to report a
UFO. They said it was outside their jurisdiction. I called the
FBI and they said to call the FAA, but I was unable get a
working number. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com


North Carolina are we alone?

High Point in Davidson County -- Jack Madison writes, "A Gallup
poll shows that 72 percent of Americans believe there is life on
other planets." And one in five of us believe aliens have been
in contact with human beings. Our own curiosity made us want to
find out what evidence, if any, there is of alien spacecraft
flying over North Carolina's skies. And why do people believe
in, and explore, life from beyond. At a farm, in an undisclosed
location, west of High Point in Davidson County, independent UFO
researchers like Alan Caviness look to the sky, looking for
signs of life. Life unlike anything we know. We sat down with
Caviness to talk about his experiences. "Earth has always been
visited. We've never been alone. I think this is a gradual
awakening that we're all in the middle of. And I believe I'm a
part of that. And so are many other people." Using digital
cameras, Caviness takes pictures, hundreds of them, and video.
He says the cameras pick up objects unseen to the naked eye.
Caviness said, "We do know that our cameras can pick up in the
near infrared part the light spectrum, which is beyond human
visibility."

Caviness says some UFO's can be seen without high technology-if
the aliens on board want you to see them. He and other believers
in High Point say the space crafts only come here from the
middle of March through early August. "These UFO's are
conducting some kind of annual operations. We know that because
we just don't see anything in the winter months when it's
coldest. March 11, out of 400 photographs, we got six UFO's. So,
we know that they're back."

In one account, Caviness and a companion saw two UFO's
approaching. They took these pictures. Then, whatever it was
gone. "We looked up, and they had to be right over our heads
because they were approaching us, and there were just not
visible. But they clearly showed up in the photos." Caviness
does not just believe these unidentified flying objects are
alien crafts, but that aliens are part of human life. He said,
"There are a lot more people being abducted by these UFO's then
you would ever dream."

People like Alan Caviness himself. "I know I've been abducted
before." Once, he says, he heard a strange clicking noise in
open air. On the way from his mailbox to his home, something
happened. Caviness recounted, "I walked to my front door-about
30 feet over short grass-and I no longer had my house key, my
car key, in my hand. I think I was taken and returned, minus my
keys. These things are happening." After entering his home, he
found a scar on his chest, a hole through his shirt. He claims,
within hours, the scar was gone. snip Thanks to Jack Madison
JMADISON.nul

Ohio 500 video tapes of UFOs


FOSTORIA =96 George Ritter recently took this video of a UFO over
farm next door.[]

John E. Combest, Inspection Engineer who investigating Ritter's
video images, "The attached sketch and notes addresses the
mystery of why there are no lenticular disk- -shaped craft
evident in any of the over 550 frames examined to date - but it
does not propose to have solved the mystery. The above images
makes my point.

Unless there is some reason why all the disk-shaped craft in the
area being photographed fly no higher than say 200 feet.
altitude, there should be some views of disk-shaped craft at
higher altitudes such as there seems to be of cylindrical,
rectangular, and compact craft. If a disk is flying horizontally
at low altitudes, then it would most likely be viewed edge-on,
and would have the appearance commonly described as two pie-
plates joined at their rims. But at increasingly higher
altitudes of horizontal flight a disk-shaped craft when directly
overhead would appear to be round. As it moves further away on a
horizontal path, it would increasingly appear to be elliptical
in shape with the elliptical shape becoming more and narrower as
the craft moves away.

I have identified 100 original frames as appearing to be "small"
to "medium" sized disk-shaped craft, but they all seem to be at
relatively low altitude, and all appear to be viewed edge-on.
Logic says there ought to be at least a few views in which a
disk at some higher altitude plainly has an elliptical shape -
but so far there are NONE. Further, with regard to what seems to
be disk-shaped craft - they ALL seem to be moving within about
5-degrees of horizontal flight, and NONE of them seem to have
the high angle with the Earth's surface that many of the other
shape craft seem to exhibit on occasion - including a few that
are 90-degrees to the ground plane. More about this topic later.
Thanks to John E. Combest, Inspection Engineer
jecombest.nul


Oklahoma flying soup can

MIDWEST CITY -- I was traveling north on Sunny Lane Road at 1
PM, and noticed a very white high altitude object almost
overhead on September 17, 2005. It looked like a soup can and
was stationary but very high. I viewed it through both my
windshield and the sunroof. Tinker Air Force Base is a couple
miles away, but this was clearly not a jet.

It did not float, move, flicker or change direction. At a
traffic signal I was able to watch it for at least a full
minute. It was cylinder shaped and just hovering. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

Pennsylvania black tubular object flying

BELLEFONTE =96At 10:30 AM, on September 30, 2005, the witness saw
a tubular shaped object that looked like a flying black
telephone pole in length and size. It was flying across Penn
State near the airport and towards New York with several low
flying planes flying close to the object.

Several witnesses reported it to the local 911 center, and the
airport confirmed that something was in the air, but was not
concerned. Later a similar looking object appeared again and
pictures were taken with a digital camera. Police were also
notified. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

Washington flying triangle

TACOMA --On September 18, 2005, at 6 PM, my wife, mother in law
and myself witnessed an object in the sky over Tacoma, it was a
V or triangular shape and appeared to be at an altitude well
over 4000 feet. For ten minutes it did not change position. Then
it flew off at a medium pace under 400 mph for several miles. It
was much too high to be a helicopter and since it was hovering
for several minutes, it was not a plane, My mother in law
thought it was a kite, but the distance it covered was much
further than would have been possible for a kite. It held its
altitude as it flew from west to east. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director Wisconsin oval disk

PELICAN LAKE =96 The witness reports seeing a bright white oval
shaped craft orbiting for about three hours on September 4,
2005. The disc was extraordinary and seemed to multiply like a
pearl necklace in an upward fashion every in a counter-clockwise
rotation, as if there were several rounded crafts coming out of
it, then it went back in kind of like a slinky.

The large discs were amazing and one emitted a beam of light and
their size was about 3/4 the size of the moon. They were very
large and extremely fast, much faster than any airplane. The
craft seemed to be circling. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

Australia flying triangle

QUEENSLAND, ATHERTON TABLELANDS -- Ross writes, "A picture taken
October 8, 2005, of a UFO circling around me in a broad circle
that was silent, with all three lights pulsing strongly," At no
time did I go over 16 degrees zoom, a fixed aperture of +6,
fixed/manual focus and no night enhancement /vision was on.
Thanks to Ross

Bolivia images captured on video

ORURO -- An UFO flew over the skies on early morning of October
8, 2005, for an hour. It was recorded by Gustavo Ponce about
1:30 AM. He saw a yellowish light in the sky that drew his
attention. "It was very strange and shiny when he saw it through
his binoculars so he took out my camcorder to videotape the
UFO." I zoomed toward the object, and it broke down into a shape
resembling a jellyfish." It was very strange."

La Patria visited Ponce's home to see the images attesting to
the fact that the shining object broke down into a full
circumference, adopting the shape of a jellyfish. Translation
(c) 2005. Scott Corrales, IHU.

Canada UFOs spotted

St. John=92s Newfoundland -- Bob Butler writes, "Recently, while
taking pictures with my digital camera at Signal Hill, I shot
some moving lights. This photo is taken from across the harbor
earlier. I'm sending all the pictures to get your opinion on the
last one more so than the first three since I feel that a pick
up truck that turned around behind me is responsible for the
strange red lights. The camera was its tri-pod, and I was
between the truck and the camera. Somehow it appears the
taillights caused the anomaly similar to the recent LA picture
that shows motion. I took the photos with the camera on a tri-
pod so the object must have been moving. The last one however
was taken a year prior in midday, and if you zoom in on the orb
in the sky, it is, for sure, unidentifiable. Thanks to
bobbutler.nul

Mexico: security cameras record UFO

RAMOS ARIZPE, COAHUILA =96 The Vanguardia Newspaper reports, "A
strange unidentified object that flew over the eastern part of
this city on October 3, 2005, was recorded by the urban cameras
of the Municipal Public Security's System. The 27-minute video
was shown to the media by Homero Duran Flores, head of this
government agency. "A phone call was received at 3 AM, from a
citizen that lights that could be seen. The cameras were focused
and picket up a perfectly visible disk," he explained. The image
shown to the media clearly depicts a round object with a gray-
colored ring and a black circle in its middle was rotating as it
approached and withdrew.

We are startled by the magnitude of the object and the clarity
of an object at altitude of one kilometer above the camera.
Duran Flores said that the video, recorded between 03:07 and
03:34, is at the disposal of experts in the subject, since it is
"without a doubt an important document, taking into
consideration the clarity and sharpness of the images." The
strange flying object startled witnesses by shifting shape says
Prof. Ana Luisa Cid: "I believe, from my personal perspective,
this video represents one the best items of UFO evidence in
Mexico." Translation (c) 2005. Scott Corrales, IHU.

Mongolia UFO over

ULAANBAATAR -- On September 30, 2005, I was going to Internet
cafe by bus a twenty minute ride from my home. I'm very
interested in astronomy and was watching the sky at 19:35 hours.
That thing was flashing a high intensity light, on and off
during the daylight. I observed very carefully it was also
ejecting some kind of dim smoke.

After two minutes, the UFO disappeared. I was checking its
trajectory, and suddenly the UFO appeared again, this time UFO
ejecting light flares, and now the light was off.

It was huge disk colored silver and two minutes later the UFO
started to blink its light and suddenly disappeared. I called
the local airport and the military RADAR control tower and asked
if any planes were currently landing? They said, No. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

New Zealand light

CHRISTCHURCH =96 A strange light was seen in the north skies at 8
PM, on September 21, 2005. I noticed what I thought was a star
while talking on my phone. When I looked back up at it, I
realized it had moved quite far away. Looking closely I realized
it had an orb like glow around it and was moving! Its movement
was up and down and side to side and it was too high to be a
plane.

There was also a light on the object that showed occasionally,
which indicated the craft might be spinning in the sky. Later
on, I went to look at it again and it had disappeared. A week
later, I saw about the same thing with a helicopter and airplane
circling the area where the light was. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director www.ufocenter.com

Truk Island, Pacific Disk Landings

Micronesia =96 During the last few weeks, there have been reports
of UFO landings and stayed on ground for four hours. Shipping
noticed craft landing near the shore. Most heavy sightings
continue along ring of fire.


Filer's Files: Worldwide Reports of UFO Sightings

Major George A. Filer USAF (Ret) & David E. Twichell are happy
to announce the release of our new book. If you like Filer's
Files newsletter and his monthly report in the MUFON Journal,
you'll love the book! It is a collection of some of the most
thought provoking UFO sighting and abduction reports from around
the world by average citizens, trained observers, astronauts and
U.S. presidents =96 with articles by Linda Moulton Howe and
Michigan MUFON's State Director, Bill Konkolesky and more.

Donate to Filer's Files to receive CD

Your donations do make a difference in my ability to bring you
the latest news! 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. 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. Be sure to ask for the
CD, Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson
Road, Medford, NJ 08055.

You can also go to:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr

for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American
Express, or Master Charge.


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 > Oct > Oct 13

                             Re: Socorro - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:25:41 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 12:15:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 16:28:11 EDT
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:36:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>About Blue Book investigators not finding fuel traces at Socorro

>Just a nit, but if they were looking for products of combustion
>from jet fuel or other dirty fuels, you are right in assuming
>that would imply such was not used. But if the combustion was
>hydrogen and oxygen or chemical combinations with _gaseous_
>combustion byproducts, then traces would not show up (unless the
>fuel source was contaminated by these).

>Any rocket engine capable of landing and lifting off a 20-foot
>vehicle with 2 men aboard would have blasted a giant crater in
>the ground and melted lots of soil and rock with its many
>thousands of pounds of thrust. No such crater was produced. Any
>balloon that landed while still intact and functioning but
>suddenly lost the ballast of two men's weight (however small
>they might have been) would have instantly shot up into the sky.
>Leaving the two men to face a New Mexico cop and within minutes
>a bevy of investigators with nowhere to run or hide. Obviously
>that didn't happen either.

I did not mention anything about a balloon. I thought we dealt
with that issue a long time ago. Sadly, the balloon theory
doesn't seem to work here.

But your presumptions about the rocket engine thrust level are
erroneous. No giant crater needed to be generated. You
assessment of the weight of the vehicle is based on the
indentations of the ground I assume, but those could be caused
by either a heavy vehicle at 1 g or a lighter vehicle at a
higher incoming landing g-force. Are you assuming a static, hard
landing gear or a smart, complete force absorbing one? You can't
make definitive remarks about rocket engine thrust levels
without knowledge of the vehicle mass. The whole object could be
a shell of lightweight substance and could only be carrying
fuel, engine and two pilots, which had a hard landing giving the
impression of huge weight.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Socorro - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:46:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 12:17:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Kaeser


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:59:07 +0000
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:37:35 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>In the Fortean Times book , UFOs 1947-1997, (ed Hilary Evans &
>>Dennis Stacy), there is a chapter by Hector J. Quintanilla which
>>is mainly devoted to Socorro. He had conducted a very thorough
>>investigation and was genuinely baffled.

>>However, he writes (p.116): "Although I labelled the case
>>'unidentified' I've never been satisfied with that
>>classification. I've always felt that too many essential
>>elements of the case were missing. These are the intangible
>>elements which are impossible to check, so the solution could
>>very well be lying dormant in Lonnie Zamora's head".

>>Was this Quantinilla's way of saying that he surmised that
>>Zamora may have invented, or embellished, his story?

>Shall we now engage in posthumous mind reading that,
conveniently for debunkers, maligns Zamora's reputation, counter
to what is known about him? Far more simply, it is well known
that Quintanilla was an extreme skeptic. To his way of thinking
(with which you ought to be familiar), it can't be something (a
controlled and powered craft) that is unexplained. so Zamora
must have been mistaken somehow.

As pointed out, Quintanilla viewed the Socorro case as baffling.
This was a difficult position for him, since this was a good
witness case with physical evidence of a landing and many people
involved in the immediate response. He took the time to visit
military bases in that region and sought out any experimental
programs that might explain the incident. Unfortunately, he was
never able to come up with an explanation.

There has been a lot of speculation regarding this being a
hoaxed event, and I think you'll find that students at the New
Mexico School of Mining in Socorro still believe that this
strange tale from the 60's was a student prank. But while that
might make a good movie, I think that's really a stretch for the
mid-60's given the behavior described.

During a trip to the Socorros area and a visit to the School of
Mining I met with a Geologist who had been called to the scene
of the landing shortly after the event (while the smoke from the
Pinon Pine was still in the air).

If it makes one feel better to think that Quintanilla really
believed that the Socorro event was hoaxed (by Zamorra or anyone





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

                        How To Contact Budd Hopkins?

From: Craig Beasley <fallingleaf.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:57:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:04:36 -0400
Subject: How To Contact Budd Hopkins?


Hey All,

I've been trying to get Budd Hopkins' attention on some
technical questions for a couple of months now, but I have
recieved nothing but one automated response. Basically, it said
"I ain't here, bucko".

Does anyone know how to reliably contact the guy, or get his
attention. It is a matter dealing with some information from his
Intruders book.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

              Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Watson

From: Nigel Watson <VALIS23A.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:04:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:06:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Watson


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:17:49 -0300
>Subject: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill


>Kathy Marden has given me permission to post her response to
>that terrible Fulford column

>Stan Friedman

>From: Kathy Marde <Kmarden.nul >
>To: robertfulford.nul
>Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 4:41 PM
>Subject: Betty and Barney Hill

>Dear Mr. Fulford,

>The following is a quote from Betty Hill posted by Lan Fleming
on September 25, 1996:

>"Lan, to this day, I have no idea what the 'Outer Limits'
>programs were about. I never saw them. I never saw 'Twilight
>Zone.' I never watched that type of program, so I don't know
>what was shown on them. Neither did Barney. At that time, he
>never would have had the opportunity, since he worked nights."

>It has been posted on the Internet that the "Outer Limits"
>show aired on February 14, 1964, a Friday night. Barney and
>Betty did not watch science fiction programs (They preferred
>news and talk shows.) and Barney worked Monday through Friday
>nights at the South Postal Annex in Boston as a City Carrier,
>according to his employment record. Dr. Simon questioned Barney
>in deep hypnotic regression regarding the "Twilight Zone."
>Barney stated that he had never watched it but heard that it was
>"weird."

They were obviously aware of such programs and certainly
discussed these topics with ufologists long before their
regression sessions. Betty was quick to read all the UFO books





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

                  Re: Gill sighting [was: Socorro] - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:10:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill sighting [was: Socorro] - Clark


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:53:42 EDT
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:32:46 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

<snip>

>>Thanks for bringing up the matter of Menzel's spurious charge
>>about Father Gill's not wearing glasses at the time of his
>>sighting. The current discussion brought it to my mind, too. A
>>correction, however:

>>It was I, not Hynek, who (in a 1977 interview) showed Gill
>>what Menzel had claimed about his famous sighting: namely, that
>>Gill had not been wearing glasses, thus causing him to mistake
>>Venus for a UFO because his astigmatism led him to see an
>>elongated, out-of-focus image.

>Sorry but I have to correct the correction: In Hynek's 1972
>book, 5 years before the 1977 interview (The UFO Experience
>1972; Ballantine ed. p. 172) he writes:

>"The self-styled 'arch enemy of UFOs,' Dr. Donald Menzel, of
>Harvard has taken a characteristic opposite view. In his
>Analysis of the Papua-Father Gill Case... he dismisses the
>entire case as a sighting of Venus under the hypothesis that
>Reverend Gill was not wearing his glasses at the time.
>Unfortunately, he neglected to ascertain the following: the UFO
>at times was seen under cloud cover; Venus was pointed out
>separately by Gill; and Reverend Gill was wearing properly
>corrected glasses at the time."

Sorry, Brad, now I have to correct your correction of my
correction. Actually, since you don't know anything about the
circumstances of our respective interviews, perhaps confusion is
inevitable. My memory of what really happened, however, is quite
clear, and on this point you're almost certainly wrong.

Nothing is said above about Allen Hynek's asking Gill
specifically about Menzel's explanation. Allen may have asked
him casually, during that first interview, if the reverend was
wearing glasses at the time, and the reference to Menzel may
well have been Hynek's subsequent editorial addition when he (or
Elaine Hendry) wrote his book. If Hynek went into Menzel's
"theory" about the case (which included racist twaddle about
gullible, illiterate natives going along with Gill's delusion
out of awe for the Great White Father, you will recall), Gill
had no memory of it when I showed him Menzel's account, because
he expressed surprise and amusement as he read it.

Gill visited the United States in the fall of 1977. When he
arrived in Chicago, I was alerted very quickly (by Allan Hendry)
and almost immediately thereafter got to spend a full day with
Gill. This was _before_ the extensive interviewing Hynek and
Hendry conducted with him, recounted in detail in IUR for
November and December 1977. (Gill stayed at the Hynek residence
in Evanston for about two weeks, if memory serves.) There Hendry
rules out the Venus identification and concludes that the
occupant-bearing- object report was indeed of a UFO and not some
of some prosaic stimulus such as Venus.

The Venus explanation may have too strained even for Klass, who
proposed another: that Gill was some insecure dweeb who tried to
impress others with bogus UFO stories. To do that, he had to
misrepresent Gill's personality (the two had never met, no
surprise) and his relationships both to an Australian fellow
missionary and to a native colleague.

Still, Gill's generosity of character and genuine desire to get
to the bottom of an extraordinary observation are expressed in
Bill Chalker's book The Oz Files. There the author recounts a
1995 exchange with the witness, recalling the Gill I remember as
opposed to the caricature one encounters in debunking portraits:

"He still remains puzzled by what he saw ...[but] he questioned
my characterization of some attempts to explain [the sightings]
as 'silly.' He felt that these 'explanations' were serious
attempts to bring understanding to the events. I think that
attitude encapsulates the integrity of Gill and the reality of





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

              Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 12:18:16 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:15:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Ledger


>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:44:17 +0100
>Subject: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>13-10-05 21:00
>http://www.channel4.com/listings/C4/index.jsp
>UFOs: The Secret Evidence

>Journalist Nick Cook, a British Aerospace specialist, applies
>his expert knowledge to the fantastical realm of UFOs, close
>encounters and tales of alien abduction to establish once and
>for all what has really been flying through our airspace over
>the last 20 years.


Hi Joe,

Not Nick Cook, writer for Janes, but just plain old journalist?
What happened to him, did he get the pink slip from Janes over
"The Hunt for Zero Point"?

Aerospace specialist, eh? I must remember that the next time I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:26:55 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:19:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:00:57 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:24:02 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images


I think you are very kind to worry about us neophytes wasting
our time with fruitless field research without being amed with
passive radars.

But don't worry about us. Let us learn our own lessons. If we
fail, so what?

>>1) Just because I cannot easily use the optical triangulation
>>method in daylight is not adequate reason to dismiss it.

>Your strategy would reject the best UFO cases in preference to
>some of the worst cases with Low Strangeness (low
>unexplainability; Hynek's Strangeness = Unexplainability).

I admit nocturnal lights have traditionally been the least loved
of UFO sightings. However, they have the merit of being easily
distiguishible at night (given good weather). For my
experimental goal, they are enough. If you want to set up your
own experimental goal, go ahead. I guess you will be waiting for
the passive radar to come out before bothering to do so.

>It is well-known in UFO research that Daylight Discs are cases
>to be preferred over the "less strange" Nocturnal Lights for the
>reason that it is so hard to tell what a "night light" is about.
>Hynek emphasized that he put more strict standards on filtering
>NL cases because of this. Some UFO researchers reject all
>Nocturnal Lights out of hand to simplify the process.

Good for them. Their job is to identify the UFO . Nocturnal
lights are difficult to identify. But with triangulation at
least you could track the path. If the path is like an aircraft
or satellite, then you must conservatively place it in that
category, even if it is really an alien spaceship. I am looking
for the nocturnal lights which meets my experimental goal of
going from low altitude to space or visa versa. Also, spectra is
a useful tool in sorting these too.

>Integral to this distinction is the fact that in daylight cases
>a large angular size is more readily accepted as being necessary
>to see that there is a metallic "disc" or some other
>unconventional shape. Whereas at night one usually cannot see a
>metallic "disc" and for some reason any funny movement or streak
>of a pinpoint of light at night is more likely to be reported
>than a streaking of a pinpoint-sized "something" in the daytime.

Screw the angular size! I am talking about an illumination
threshold that I can set on the automated system(s) to trigger
the recording and used by the software to do triangulation. If
you want to set up an experiment to get nice stereo images of
daylight UFOs, then go ahead! My goal is more focused since I
really don't think such photos will answer questions of point of
origin.

>I'm not sure whether you are receptive to any wisdom from long
>years of struggling with the UFO problem since you are so
>critical and rejecting of any common sense understanding that
>has been developed that way.

Yes, I am receptive to lessons learned. But I am not going to
put my intelligence in the drawer while listening to the wise
old folks. You see, part of the problem with UFOlogy folk is
that they get stuck in paradigms. Just because Blue Book or
Hynek deduced something or said something is no reason to let
everything stop right there.

Its hard enough in life to get enough energy to do anything
since everything except inertia seems doomed to failure, but
when folk come along with a little bit of energy to do something
in a field (UFOs or anything), then it is not a suitable course
of action for the old guard to try to give them endless reasons
to not try! The best course of the old guard is to encourage the
newsters to try their approach while giving them pointers.
Encouragement is essential for the new blood else they will get
ticked off and say screw you folks!

>>2) You keep mentioning how in the old days they weren't
>>successful so we can't be today. Well, they had the ancient
>>technologies of the 40's-60's for optical tracking. They had
>>good ole vacuum tubes and slide rules. This is the 21st century
>>and tech has advanced a little since then. So your zero
>>detection rate is bolderdash.

>Your argument is balderdash. The problem isn't the technology
>it's the distance factor together with terrain obstructions and
>horizon limits.

I guess we shall just have to agree to disagree. I guess we
shall just have to see for ourselves and learn hard lessons from
life on our own.

>Despite the intensive concentration of UFO
>sightings over New Mexico in the 1949-50 period where at least
>100 unexplained cases can be documented, the UFO tracking
>networks in NM only caught a few of them. The sightings were too
>far away and/or below the local horizons. New Mexico is quite
>mountainous.

Well, I guess I either have to set up on a mountain or
groundrule out mountainous regions from investigation. Or wait
for some passive radar.

>The UFOs didn't concentrate all their displays at one single
>convenient spot within the State of New Mexico. So instruments
>could not be collocated at such a spot. Yet this was probably
>the best UFO sighting concentration of documented genuine
>Unexplained cases of all time. And still the ground-based UFO
>"field lab" capture rate was only on the order of magnitude 1%.

To be fair, I would have to see the setups, procedures,
instrument sets. My guess is that it wasn't automated. Obviously
it did not have digital cameras or high speed processors or
internet connections.

>Now UFOs are much lower in rate of occurrence and more dispersed
>globally than they were in New Mexico in 1949-50. A global UFO
>detection and tracking system is required or at minimum a
>continental-coverage system, such as the Passive Radar system
>which you disparage for some reason and refuse to consider
>mating up with an optical system for some reason.

A global UFO detection system may be needed for the kind of data
YOU want. But I need just one set of tracking data confirming
travel from low altitude to space. I am willing to wait and have
the automated system give me the data. Do I have to wait a year?
Fine. I am not sitting there.

I think passive radar is COOL! I think it would be neat to have!
Regular radar is great too! It would be GREAT to link it with
optical systems. But as I have said, I think commercial passive
radar systems for tracking UFOs in real time (to do optical
tracking) is going to take alot of money and will likely not be
something the government will permit in the public's hands (like
active radar systems). How many "radar hams" are out there? Can
you get a license to run your own active radar? No.

But if it was allowed by the government (and who knows what
mentality is in control, since the US borders are wide open),
then I think is would be a crime not to use passive radar for
UFO research. Just a matter of funding.

>>3) There are miniflaps and then there are miniflaps. One must be
>>able to sort out which are worthy and which are not. Set your
>>standards right and maybe you will be lucky. Automation gives
>>you the liberty to be less finicky about operational time and
>>sighting frequency. Also, there ARE areas of more or less
>>continuous sightings to rely on (NOT meaning Area 51).

>I'm glad you are so sure _you_ know where these mini-flap areas
>are located. Let's see you present _convincing evidence_ of a
>mini-flap and also convince a financial backer of a UFO "field
>lab" of that fact.

First, I don't want financial backing. If I had to pay for
passive radar, then I would need a sugar daddy. My little field
stations are not going to break a bank. I estimate <$20K for
two.

About "mini-flap" areas, it all depends on what you want. Do you
want daylight discs or nocturnal lights? In fact, I should not
even use the term "mini-flap", it more like chronic small
infestations.

But then, I really don't think I even need these to get the data
I need over a 12hr/7day a week very long time period. Your data
doesn't prove me wrong. You only have data on reported
sightings.

Also, all the UFO passes that were never seen by anyone is not
in the dataset.

>>4) About NORAD not being able to identify EVERY single blip. How
>>do you know? Who are your sources? What clearance do you have?

>The GAO has security clearances and conducted a study of Air
>Space Violations since 9-11, based on NORAD data. Of the 3,400
>air space violations from 2001 to 2004 some 4% or about 136 were
>unknowns or unidentified after tracking and/or attempted
>interceptions.

Excellent. Assuming the data is true (and who are we to argue
with the GAO, a nice independent organization), then that is
interesting. Still, it doesn't address the problem of optical
UFOs not showing up on radar. (Are you going to now tell me this
doesn't happen often???) If NORAD mostly depends on active
radar, then it will only detect the UFOs that are opaque to
radar.

Personally, I do not believe the GAO, but thats just me.

>>6) About your never hearing about restrictions of passive radar
>>development, I was not aware that they had to inform you!
>>Really, this kind of nudging does not get the headlines.
>>Conspiratorial, yes, in a way, but seems to be the
>>government/industry way of doing business in many areas.

>Major aerospace companies such as Lockheed Martin do not
>announce major projects such as developing Passive Radar without
>checking whether the government objects or considers it all
>classified. That kind of thing could jeopardize Lockheed's
>billions of dollars of defense contracts. Lockheed's Passive
>Radar project hasn't been shut down as you would have us believe
>would have to be done to keep it away from "terrorists."

Yes, go and buy a nice passive radar system from a "Lockheed".
You know there are restrictions. Also, you can't judge too much
from press releases. The problem is that such "data" can be
inentionally released for misdirection to encourage other
companies to research in areas already proven infeasible (at
least for the application).

>>8) About passive radar used by foreign powers, it has been
>>expressed as a concern in some articles I have read. The
>>millions of points problem you mention is likely invalid in case
>>of war. There isn't likely alot of non-military traffic at such
>>a time.

>Civil aviation has not been stopped in times of war going on all
>over the earth. The emergency grounding of civil flights for a
>few days after 9-11 in the US was unprecedented and has not been
>done in other wars or war zones. Lots of "concerns" are
>expressed by ill-informed or jealous commentators in various
>articles on many subjects.

Somehow I think if China or North Korea felt it was going to be
invaded or attacked, civil aviation (as it exists there) would
not be functioning. Also, the millions of points problem would
be eliminated in your world by nice companies building fast chip
sets to do the processing.

>>You also mention about the huge processing time
>>required for passive radar. Well, ideally you are right, but the
>>problem is that with the kind of technical development of
>>passive radar you advocate, the processing problem becomes
>>solved.

>Again you misunderstand the argument. "We" who would want to
>find UFOs with a Passive Radar system are looking for things
>that stick out like a sore thumb, highly unconventional speeds,
>altitudes and trajectories. These are obvious and can easily be
>programmed into any automated system so we're not swamped with
>millions of ordinary behaving data points we don't care about.

No way!. Although we want to have a passive radar system, you
can't just pick out what you going to process. I guess you could
aim your receiving antenna to cover higher elevations and thus
miss most aircraft, but you can't pick out fast or odd signals
to process ONLY!!! You must deconvolve the entire signal, which
gives you every reflection in range.

>Since a Stealth plane picked up on Passive Radar looks just like
>any other ordinary (non-UFO) aircraft

Wrong. Point of origin, speed and altitude would be indicators.
Also, in war, the civil aircraft would be reduced.

>"They" (terrorists) will
>have to spend months or years pouring over millions of radar
>data points from both their ordinary radar sites and a
>hypothetical Passive Radar system you claim they would want to
>build, trying to find a blip on the Passive that didn't show up
>on ordinary radar and then conduct an exhaustive investigation
>to eliminate radar blind zones, horizon limits and targets-too-
>small.

Wrong. First, there is not millions of data points. Second, your
commercialized passive radar system would have chipsets to
answer all their processing needs. Thus, they would not take
"months".

>>9) About the problems of optical triangulation beign able to
>>differentiate between two signals. I would simply say, its all
>>in the software dude! And, its far, far simpler than passive
>>radar software.

>No software will be able to tell the difference between one
>pinpoint of light that looks like another pinpoint of light.

You need to look at content and background. Also, calibration of
camera orientation is a must.

>Two pinpoints of light 0.1 degree apart might be interpreted
>as a single pinpoint of light 6 miles away by an optical
>triangulation system (twenty-meter baseline), even though they
>are actually two pinpoints of light a meter apart on a dark
>object only 500 meters away.

In one camera, perhaps. But this doesn't make sense for
triangulation. In fact, it defeats the whole purpose of such a
system. How can I aim one telescope at one site at the two
lights and aim the telescope at the other site at the two lights
and not have absolute knowledge of the altitude and location? If
you are trying to say that I would not know which light to match
with the other data from the other telescope, then again, I say,
context (star background) and standard 3D stereo imagery
processing algorithms can extract this.

>>Or one pinpoint of light is a
>>distant star (or aircraft) and the other is on a dark object
>>(maybe even a UFO) close by and the optical triangulation system
>>misinterprets it as a single pinpoint at an intermediate
>>distance. All sorts of other scenarios and combinations are
>>highly likely and no way to distinguish them. Etc. etc.

Sorry, but this makes no sense. Why even have invented
triangulation? Lets just give up!

>>11) Distortion of passive radar comes from all sorts of things,
>>weather, solar flares, weird ionospheric activity, signal
>>interference from other sources. Remember you are measuring
>>signals from 100s of miles away and their reflections.

>Pray tell how a "solar flare" distorts a Doppler shift in a
>radio signal??? You're just throwing a bunch of technical words
>at us that don't do what you claim they can do. Masking signals
>in noise is not the same thing as "distorting" a signal.

I am not a communications or radio engineer. You keep talking
about Doppler shift as being something set in stone and I am
telling you that signals are not so nice as you make them out to
be. First, the signal you are relying on is not designed for
radar. It is weak. Listen to any AM radio and you can see that
weak station signals are affected by
weather/smoke/clouds/rain/trees.

Solar flares affect the ionosphere. This affects radio wave
propogation. Terrestrial EMF can affect radio wave propogation.
Gravity waves may too.

A strong signal (active radar) and nearby reflection can even
have "ghosts". Now you are telling me that you know enough about
passive radar to say the same effects are not the minimum we can
expect?

>>And after so many such field researchers had >>stated that
radar was so unreliable a tool since a high >>percentage of UFOs
do not show up.

>Huh? I've never heard that before, that radars are "so
>unreliable" because a "high percentage of UFOs do not show up"
>on them. Got some statistics on that? It's a new one on me.

I do not bookkeep these data. Its based on personal
communications and review of the literature. Reports frequently
say that although a UFO was seen, it did not show up on radar.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 14

                           Re: EMF & UFOs - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:07:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:31:30 -0400
Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:10:39 EDT
>Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:05:55 +0100
>>Subject: EMF & UFOs [was: Memory Without Klass]

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:34:08 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:14:43 -0400
>>>>Subject: Re: Memory Without Klass

>>>electromagnetic interference effects that have been associated
>>>with UFO sightings for 50 years or more. (The classic example
>>>was the November 1957 miniflap in Texas/New Mexico involving
>>>dozens of cases of car stallings.)

>>I found the post on the Levelland cases from Larry Robinson that
>>I mentioned previously. It was to Easton's UFORL list on March 12
>>2004. I think this is unusually interesting but I don't recall
>>any discussion of it.

>>Robinson said that he found a story in the May 1938 issue of
>>Popular Science, describing an event (a few years before 1938)
>>where a number of cars stalled on the same section of a road in
>>eastern Colorado. The road travelled through higher ground in a
>>cut and a total of 23 cars reportedly stalled there in a short
>>period of time, whilst 6 others (all Model-T Fords) drove
>>through unaffected. It was windy and there was a lot of dust his
>>blowing. A rescue truck that was called in also stalled. A
>>remedy was discovered by a mechanic who accidentally earthed
>>vehicle with a chain, when it started fine.

>Robinson has a poor track record for "old magazine articles" he
>read "years ago" with his longstanding claim to have read an ad
>in a magazine he has never been able to find (and no one else
>has either) with a story of a manned balloon landing where the
>crew found a scary New Mexico policeman staring at them. This
>supposedly "explains" the Socorro case as a manned balloon. Is
>there an actual verified copy of this May 1938 Popular Science
>article?

>I think this car stopping tale is an urban legend going back to the
>30's and earlier . . .

Hi Brad

I don't know the status of Robinson's claim and have no access
to archives of Popular Mechanics, which is/was a US publication
I believe. I was hoping someone on the List might know more or
be able to look into it.

On the face of it it's a very interesting story. I'm surprised
that there was no response whatsoever on the UFORL List or (as
far as I can see) anywhere else. I think the answer is for me to
ask Robinson about it. I'll do so today and post his reply.

I concur with everything you say about the history of "car
stopping tales", except that if we take UFO reports seriously
then not _all_ such tales are "urban legends". The effect
associated with UFOs, whatever it is, must have some underlying
physics, and it's possible that the same or similar physics





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 15

              We Haven't Had A Signal Yet Could You Try Again?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:27:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:27:53 -0400
Subject: We Haven't Had A Signal Yet Could You Try Again?




Source: The Times - London, UK

http://tinyurl.com/8qcrl

October 15, 2005

Guest Column

Does Alien Life exist? This is one of the most fascinating
questions in the whole of science. I'm hopeful that we'll learn
the answer by the end of this century.

In earlier centuries, many believed that the Moon and Mars were
inhabited. The science fiction of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells
popularised the idea of alien life. We're less optimistic about
Mars than our forebears were 100 years ago. There is certainly
nothing there like the "Martians" of popular fiction.

* An armada of space probes is being launched towards the Red
Planet to analyse its surface, to fly over it and (in later
missions) to return samples to Earth. Life could also exist in
the ice-covered oceans of Jupiter's frozen moon, Europa, and
there are plans to land a submersible probe that could explore
beneath the ice. Detection of even the most primitive life would
be a great discovery � it would offer clues to the mystery of
how life began.

Not even the optimists expect to find "advanced" life elsewhere
in our solar system. But our Sun is just one star among
billions. And in the vastness of space far beyond our own solar
system we can rule out nothing. Other stars have their own
retinue of planets circling around them, just as Earth and Mars
circle the Sun. Could some of these planets, orbiting other
stars, harbour life forms far more interesting and exotic than
anything we might find on Mars? Could they even be inhabited by
intelligent beings?

Claims that advanced life is widespread must confront the
question first posed by Enrico Fermi, the great Italian
physicist: if intelligent aliens were common, shouldn't they
have visited us already? Why aren't they, or their artefacts,
staring us in the face? Shouldn't we have seen so many UFOs that
there's absolutely no doubt about them? This argument gains
weight when we realise that some stars are billions of years
older than our Sun: if life were common, its emergence should
have had a head start on planets around these ancient stars.

But the fact that we haven't been visited doesn't imply that
aliens don't exist. It would be far harder to traverse the mind-
boggling distances of interstellar space than to transmit a
signal. That's perhaps how aliens would reveal themselves first.

Searches for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) have
concentrated on "listening" for radio transmissions that could
be artificial in origin, using large radio telescopes � this
option is familiar from fictional depictions, such as Carl
Sagan's Contact. Short stretches of data from the SETI searches
have been downloaded by millions of people to use as
screensavers on their home PCs � each hoping to be the first to
detect ET.

If we found such a signal, could we build up communication?
Intelligent aliens would probably be hundreds of light years
away, or more. Can we communicate with beings whose messages may
take hundreds, thousands, even millions of years to reach us?
There's no scope for snappy repartee.

I wouldn't hold my breath for success. But even if these
searches fail, that doesn't mean that we are alone. The brains
and senses of the aliens may be so different from ours that we
couldn't recognise any patterns in their signals. Or they may
not be transmitting at all. The only type of intelligence we
could detect would be one that led to a technology that we could
recognise, and that could be a minor and atypical fraction. Some
"brains" may have a quite different perception of reality.
Super-intelligent dolphins could be enjoying a contemplative
life on some water-covered planet without us even knowing. Still
other "brains" could actually be assemblages of "social
insects". If evolution on another planet in any way resembled
the artificial intelligence scenarios conjectured for the 21st
century here on Earth, the most likely and durable form of
"advanced life" may be super-intelligent machines whose creators
may long ago have been usurped or become extinct. There may be a
lot more out there than we could ever detect, or even imagine.
Absence of evidence wouldn't be evidence of absence.

Fictional aliens are usually depicted as mammalian bipeds. But
the reality, as the new Science Museum exhibition shows, could
be far more exotic. There's an enormous variety of life on
Earth, from slime mould to monkeys. Far greater variety could
exist elsewhere in the Galaxy; huge bulbous creatures floating
in the dense atmospheres of Jupiter-like planets; aliens the
size of insects on a planet where gravity pulled strongly; or
they may be freely floating in space. The great astronomer Fred
Hoyle wrote a classic science-fiction novel called The Black
Cloud, in which a cosmos cloud permeated by swirling electric
currents behaves like a super-intelligent brain.

We know too little about how life began, and how it evolves, to
be able to say whether alien intelligence is likely or not.
Indeed, if asteroid impacts and volcanic eruptions hadn't
happened the way they did, we don't know whether the Earth would
have ended up harbouring intelligent reptiles, or just insects:
or would there be a convergence towards something humanoid? The
emergence of intelligence may require such an improbable chain
of events that it is unique to our planet.

Even if aliens don't now exist, they may exist in the far
future. It has taken nearly four billion years for human beings
to evolve from the first life on Earth. Our Sun has burnt less
than half its nuclear fuel supply so it will be another six
billion years before it flares up and dies. That allows time for
descendants of the human species to evolve, here on Earth and
maybe far beyond, into creatures as different from us as we are
from protozoa.

Sir Martin Rees is the Astronomer Royal. The Science of Aliens





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 15

                    Pioneer Refines Plasma Healing Power

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:42:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:42:29 -0400
Subject: Pioneer Refines Plasma Healing Power




Source: The Virginian-Pilot - Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA

http://tinyurl.com/9hz7b

October 15, 2005


ODU Pioneer Refines Healing Power Of Plasma

By Philip Walzer

NORFOLK =97 Remember E.T.? The extraterrestrial movie hero had
unattractive, leathery skin, but his glowing finger could
instantaneously heal wounds.

Old Dominion University researcher Mounir Laroussi thinks he can
do the same thing .

Laroussi, an associate professor of electrical and computer
engineering, has developed a "plasma pencil," harnessing the
energies of the lesser-known fourth state of matter.

The pencil, a hand-held cylinder 5 inches long and one inch in
diameter, passed its first test: It can kill E. coli bacteria
but leaves skin cells unscathed.

"When we got this to work," Laroussi said this week, "we knew we
were sitting on something really special."

He says this is just the beginning. The device, he hopes, will
do even more: cleansing and healing wounds, treating dental
plaque, even killing cancer tumors without damaging the
surrounding tissue.

Like the whirling electrons and ions that Laroussi has studied
for nearly 15 years, scientists have been buzzing since his
paper was published last month in the journal Applied Physics
Letters .

His progress has been reported on Web sites such as
www.nature.com and www.physicsweb.org .

A plasma researcher in New Mexico calls Laroussi a pioneer in
the field.

"It's really the first demonstration of this technology that is
embodied in a practical manner," said Edl Schamiloglu , a
professor of electrical and computer engineering at the
University of New Mexico.

"In general," said another engineering professor, George Collins
of Colorado State, "his plasma work is world-class and full of
wonderful new innovations that are advancing the state of the
art."

To understand Laroussi's work, you have to understand plasma.

There are solids, liquids, gases ... and then there's plasma.
It's a stew of whizzing electrons, charged ions and neutral
particles. It makes up 99 percent of the known matter in the
universe, Laroussi said, though it can't be seen.

Its benefits, Laroussi said, have been exploited in such items
as fluorescent lights and semiconductor chips.

"We wanted to push plasma where it hasn't been before, which is
biotechnology," he said.

First, he needed to cool it off. In its normal state, at
hundreds of degrees Celsius, the plasma could burn away the good
with the bad.

So he brought it down to room temperature. That way, it can kill
the bacteria. But it doesn't harm healthy cells.

Laroussi proved the point at his lab this week.

He turned on the power for the pencil. A narrow, 2-inch-long
purple beam =96 Laroussi calls it a "plume" =96 shot out of it. He
brought it across the hands of two visitors.

Nothing happened. No singed flesh.

He's done this with hundreds of others. The first guinea pig was
Laroussi himself.

Of course, he wasn't scared. "I know what I have," he said.

Schamiloglu , the New Mexico professor, said the pencil improves
upon two previous inventions in plasma research.

One was a "plasma torch." It was too unwieldy, he said. And,
running on uncooled plasma, it could get too hot to handle.

The other was a "plasma needle" the size of a syringe. Much
easier to maneuver. But also prone to pricking the fingers of
even the most scrupulous technician.

"The plasma pencil represents a good compromise," Schamiloglu
said. "It's always satisfying to see something practical emerge
from basic research in universities."

Laroussi has received nearly half a million dollars in federal
grants for his work. His spacious lab is on the fifth floor of
the Norfolk Public Health Center on Brambleton Avenue, off
Colley Avenue. The lab is part of the Frank Reidy Research
Center for Bioelectrics , a partnership between Old Dominion and
Eastern Virginia Medical School.

Laroussi has collaborated with a postdoctoral research
associate, Xinpei Lu , and he has begun working with other ODU
professors in the areas of biology, oceanography and dental
hygiene.

One of them, Wayne Hynes , an associate professor of biological
sciences, also holds high hopes.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                              Invitation To ETI

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 12:24:04 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:35:31 -0400
Subject: Invitation To ETI


Hi Everyone!

Earle Benezet (Kentucky MUFON) brought this web site of a group
with a wide range of backgrounds to my attention:

-----

http://www.ieti.org/who/index.html

Welcome to Invitation to ETI, a Web-based, scientifically
credible SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence)
experiment. In these pages, you will find an invitation, issued
by an informal group of approximately 100 scientists, artists
and futurists from around Planet Earth, to any Extra-Terrestrial
Intelligence (ETI) having the capability to read it. This
invitation is issued in hopes of establishing a constructive
dialog between humanity and our cosmic companions.

-----

This group has many questions it wants to ask any ETs that
reside in our neighbourhood of space that are capabile of
reading their invitation to them. They are very curious about
many things about our neighbours, including their technological
capacities; social organization and governance and conflict
resolution; etc.

So far, the ETs seeming have not bothered to reply to their
invitation but in fact they have. For example, our holy books
contain direct revelations from ETs who have already provided us
with the answers to these and many other questions. The problem
is not with the ETs, it is with us who can read but ignore these
factual historical records.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

               Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Koi

From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:03:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:45:27 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Koi


>From: Joe McGonagle <Joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 03:09:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

><snip>

>>Hope someone on this List from the UK who saw or
>>recorded this TV documentary will fill us in on some
>>of these new revelations.

>There's a review by Steve Johnson at:

>http://www.ufodata.co.uk/pdf/UFOs_The_Secret_Evidence-a.pdf


Hi Joe, Nick, List,

Those that considered the Peter Jennings' UFO documentary a
disappointment should avoid Nick Cook's documentary. They might
blow a fuse.

Oh my goodness. Okay, Nick Cook's documentary had pretty
computer generated graphics and sounded serious. It's just a
shame about most of the content.

I know the views of a number of the people interviewed do not
coincide with the thrust of Nick Cook's explanation (i.e. "As
Cold War paranoia reached its peak, the CIA ruthlessly misled
the American people about UFOs in order to hide their
surveillance programmes against the Soviet Union"). However, the
clips of interviews used in the documentary appear to have been
selected to almost exclusively limit comments to those
supporting Nick Cook's view.

For example, we briefly saw Bruce Maccabee a couple of times -
but I don't think any comments were included from him on the
basic thrust of documentary.

Nick Cook's view that sightings increased dramatically with the
introduction of the U-2 and other surveillance aircraft is a
view that Bruce has strongly taken issue with, e.g. in his
article entitled "CIA's UFO Explanation Is Preposterous",
available online on his website at:

http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html

(As many of you will know, Bruce's article was a reaction to a
view expressed at footnotes 44 and 45 of the 1997 study by
Gerald K. Haines (National Reconnaissance Office historian)
entitled, A Die-Hard Issue: CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs,
1947-90 (Studies in Intelligence, Issue 1997 Vol. 1, No. 1). The
text of the study is available online on various websites,
including the CIA's website:

http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html )

(I note in passing that in relation to footnote 44 of Gerald
Haines' article ("44. See Gregory W. Pedlow and Donald E.
Welzenbach, The Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead
Reconnaissance: The U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954-1974
(Washington, DC: CIA History Staff, 1992), pp. 72-73" also
referred to in footnote 45 of the article by Gerald Haines), the
relevant book is available online at:

http://www.odci.gov/csi/books/U2/u2.pdf )

Similarly, during the documentary we were treated to the sight
of David Clarke and Andy Roberts nodding along to the wise words
of Nick Cook about Nazi secret weapons being responsible for the
foo-fighters reports. In fact, Dave Clarke has mentioned in an
email to Joe McGonagle's Ufologyinuk email discussion List that
"Andy made a very good point that the 'Nazi secret weapon'
explanation for Foo-fighters was nonsense and most of the
sightings can be explained as misindentifications, but because
this did not fit Cook's thesis it ended up on the cutting room
floor." See:

http://tinyurl.com/bd79m

In terms of factual errors in the documentary, life is too short
to even list them all. I'll just cover a couple of the real
howlers.

(1) After reference to the supposed fact that over 2 million
Americans claim to have been abducted (which in itself caused me
to wince, even though this is a claim I've heard made several
times apparently as a result of the Roper polls), Nick Cook went
on to say: "I've come to meet Travis Walton. He was the first
alien abductee of this epidemic". Um, the first person to claim
to have had an alien abductee was Travis Walton (who, by the
way, had his "encounter" in November 1975)? Really? What about
the Hills, Villas-Boas etc etc??

(2) Nick Cook claimed to have "discovered" a number of secret
projects which could account for UFO sightings. We had endless
shots of him shining his flashlight around a dark room filled
with piles of yellowing documents. On the few instances when he
was prepared to deal with specific instances, some of the things
included in the documentary were a bit... odd. For example,
Lonnie Zamora's 1964 Socorro incident was one of the few
sightings to get the full treatment - a reconstruction, complete
with actor (not wearing any glasses...) and fairly impressive
computer generated imagery (impressive at least by the usual
standards of British documentaries). It's just a shame that the
computer generated imagery had no resemblance whatsoever to the
description given by Lonnie Zamora. The object zipping around
the sky in the relevant reinactment was a classic disc-shaped
UFO, which looked nothing like the numerous descriptions and
sketches provided by Zamora. This is not a simply a minor gripe
about an inaccuracy in the imagery used - Nick Cook proceeded to
determine the probable identity of the object seen by Zamora on
the basis of this (incorrect) shape. Nick Cook said "Buried in
the depths of the archives, I've discovered blue prints which
reveal something quite fantastic - a supersonic saucer. Called
the Silverbug...", later stating "I believe Silverbug could
explain what Lonnie Zamora witnessed ... His description of a
silver disc-shaped object appears to fit in with the Silverbug
profile".

So, Cook "discovered" the relevant blue prints "Buried in the
depths of the archives" did he? Well, perhaps he should have
done an internet search or read a few UFO books. Project Silver
Bug was discussed, for example, by the following authors
(including Cook himself in his 2001 book):

Campagna, Palmiro in his The UFO Files: The Canadian Connection
Exposed (1998) at pages 63-66, 73-77 (in Chapter 5), 147, 150
(in Chapter 10), 155 (in Chapter 11), 169 (in the Postscript) of
the Stoddart softcover edition.

Cook, Nick in his The Hunt for Zero Point (2001) at pages 73-
77 (in Chapter 6), 226, 227 (in Chapter 22) of the Century
hardback edition.

Hyland, Gary in his Blue Fires: The Lost Secrets of Nazi
Technology (2001) at pages 99-100 (in Chapter 4), 190-205 (in
Chapter 8), 211-212 (in Chapter 9) of the Headline hardback
edition.

Matthews, Tim in his UFO Revelation (1999) at pages 69 (in
Chapter 5), 70, 72-79 (in Chapter 6), 81 (in Chapter 7) of the
Blandford softcover edition.

Michaels, Susan in her Sightings: UFOs (1997) at page 34 (in
the unnumbered chapter entitled Flying Saucers are Real) of
the Fireside softcover edition.

Redfern, Nick and Roberts, Andy in their Strange Secrets: Real
Government Files on the Unknown (2003) at pages 85-97 (in
Chapter 5) of the Paraview Pocket Books softcover edition.

Sutherly, Curt in his UFO Mysteries: A Reporter Seeks the
Truth (2001) at pages 99, 103 (in Chapter 7) of the Llewellyn
softcover edition.

Also, the relevant blueprints were included in the 1955 joint
Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) - Wright Air
Development Center (WADC) technical report on Project Silver Bug
(covering Project Y and Project Y2). (Technical Report No. TR-
AC-47, project No. 9961.) Images of that report are available
online at:

http://www.project1947.com/fig/sb/sb_html.htm

The text of report is also available online at:

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/silverbg.htm

Further relevant links are available at:

http://www.project1947.com/fig/1955a.htm

The images used in the reconstruction of Zamora's sighting
looked liked they could have been based on the Silver Bug
blueprints. Any viewers of the documentary could reasonably
conclude that the apparent similarity between those shapes would
was due to Zamora having seen a Project Silver Bug craft.
However, the image used in the reconstruction has no resemblance
to Zamora's description and his drawings of the object he
claimed to have seen. See:

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/a1999/mar/zamora.htm

http://www.nicap.org/zamoradir.htm

What really got up my nose was the incredible number of times
that Nick Cook made statements about things and documents "I've
discovered" or "I've found", including the 23 September 1947
memo from Lt-General Nathan F. Twining and the 28 July 1952 memo
from Prime Minister Winston Churchill to Secretary of State for
Air, Lord Cherwell, asking what the truth was about "all this
stuff about flying saucers".

Oh, and what about the comment that "many" UFO sightings were
caused by lenticular clouds? I know that this was a comment made
to, rather than by, Nick Cook but still it went completely
unchallenged and just had him nodding along.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 15:06:27 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:50:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 07:53:22 EDT
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 01:09:32 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Rev. Gill on his June 26, 1959 sighting:

>>"I saw Venus, but I also saw this sparkling object which to me
>>was peculiar because it sparkled, and because it was very,
>>very bright, and it was _above_ Venus and so that caused me
>>watch it for a while, and then I saw it descend towards us."

>>Basically, a very bright white light in the north western sky at
>>a 30 degree elevation, according to Rev. Gill.

>So Gill saw Venus separately from the main UFO.

>>At 18.45 there was indeed such a light: Venus. And just
>>_below_ he should have observed another bright planet,
>>Mercury, of lesser brightness.

>That time at the beginning of the sighting was 6:45 PM local
>time (18:45 hours). But Venus set below the mountainous WNW
>horizon in eastern New Guinea at about 9 PM (21:00 hours).
>Gill and the others continued to see the main UFO until 10:30
>PM (22:30 hours).

It's not so clear that he was observing the _same_ object all
the time, in particular in the final part of the June 26
sighting. Rev. Gill wrote in his notes:

[Begin Quotation]

8.50 Big one stationary and larger - the original (?) Others
coming and going through clouds. As they descend through cloud,
light reflected like large halo onto cloud - no more than 2000',
probably less. All UFOs very clear - satellites? "Mother" ship
still large, clear, stationary.

9:05 Nos. 2, 3, 4 gone

9:10 "Mother" ship gone - giving red light. No. 1 gone (overhead)
      into cloud.

9:20 "Mother" back.

9:30 "Mother" gone across sea towards Giwa - white, red, blue,
      gone.

9:46 Overhead U.F.O. re-appears, is hovering.

10.00 Still there, stationary

10.10 Hovering, gone behind cloud.

10.30 Very high, hovering in clear patch of sky between clouds.

10.50 Very overcast, no sign of U.F.O.

[end of quotation]

>Mercury is very difficult to observe being so close to the sun

See for example:

http://tinyurl.com/7s98a

>and for Gill there was heavy cloud cover throughout most of the
>sighting. More importantly Mercury set below the mountain
>horizon in the WNW at about 7:30 PM. It was gone.

Thus my original questions:

- Did Rev. Gil mention for how long he could observe what he
  thought was Venus?

- Was he asked if he also noticed Mercury?

>Mars however was 4 degrees below Venus in the sky but it was
>a dim magnitude +2 while Venus was about 250 times brighter at
>mag. -4. This was because Mars was very distant at this time,
>near superior conjunction.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                           Re: EMF & UFOs - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 06:12:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:52:55 -0400
Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs - Hatch


Hello Dave, Martin and all:

Somewhere way back in this thread, I think somebody referred to
a case of cars stopping etc. in 1930s Germany.

That rang a bell, so I fired up the trusty (obsolete) database
program and came up with this jewel:

#435: 1939/08/?? ??:??h d=10m 06:59E 51:26N WEU GER NRW
ESSEN,GERMANY:EVERYTHING MECHANICAL+ELECTRIC STOPS/10min:
EVEN CAR HORNS:NO UFO SEEN
Ref# 176 STRINGFIELD,Leonard: SITUATION RED Page. 94

Note the year 1939, 1 or 2 years later than I expected.

I have the 1977 Fawcett Paperback edition of Situation Red by
Stringfield, and turned back to page 94.

Below is full copy of the relevant passage:

-----

"We might ask which road, or is it both, that holds the answer
to the mysterious force that made time stand still in Nazi
Germany just before Hitler unleashed his armies into Poland in
1939. From a reliable source, the son of a member of the United
States Department of the Interior who was on a secret
intelligence assignment in Germany in the summer of 1939, an
event of the highest strangenesss befell the city of Essen.

During the traffic rush hour, everything mechanical, and
electrical stopped - cars, buses, street cars, motorcycles,
clocks. His father, who was there, recalled that during the peak
of the frustration, which lasted ten minutes, not one car was
able to blow its horn!

The answer seemed obvious at the time - a test maneuver of
Hitler's secret weapon! The German newspapers did not report the
incident, but the information describing the effects of the
suspect weapon was conveyed the proper sources in Washington. 0f
course, time has proved that the Germans did not possess a
weapon of this great magnitude, for the war would have ended
less favorably for the Allies ... "

-----

I regard Stringfield, now deceased, as an honest man, but one
who like many of us is a bit on the credulous side. The 'son of
a politician' could have been blowing smoke, or even testing
Stringfield for leakage for all we know.

This might make a nice Google search: Essen + 1939 + (add your
own terms). Essen was a big German city in 1939. Such events
should be recalled by thousands of people, even now, and written
about widely after the war.

Maybe this passage from Situation Red, vaguely recalled, gave
rise to some of the German Secret Weapons stuff that emerges
from time to time.

I left the listing in my database for reference, in the small
hope that there is some connection to UFOs.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                        Re: Gill Sighting - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:24:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:54:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 13:27:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:56:36 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>>Nothing is said above about Allen Hynek's asking Gill
>>>>specifically about Menzel's explanation. Allen may have asked
>>>>him casually, during that first interview, if the reverend was
>>>>wearing glasses at the time, and the reference to Menzel may
>>>>well have been Hynek's subsequent editorial addition when he (or
>>>>Elaine Hendry) wrote his book. If Hynek went into Menzel's
>>>>"theory" about the case (which included racist twaddle about
>>>>gullible, illiterate natives going along with Gill's delusion
>>>>out of awe for the Great White Father, you will recall), Gill
>>>>had no memory of it when I showed him Menzel's account, because
>>>>he expressed surprise and amusement as he read it.

>>>I see you're still peddling this nonsense about 'racism'. It is
>>>you who is making the interpretation about "gullible, illiterate
>>>natives". My reading is that the local people did not wish to
>>>challenge Father Gill's account because he was a respected
>>>figure in their community, irrespective of his race. This is an
>>>attitude which is not confined to Papua New Guinea, or even to
>>>the so-called 'developing world'. I think you may be guilty of
>>>imposing the reductive, analytical approach of a Western sceptic
>>>onto a community of which you obviously know little.

>>Apparently you haven't bothered to inform yourself of the issues
>>in question. The above, no more than reflexive wing-flapping,
>>does not merit a response.

>The time has long gone when I expected any sort of response from
>you, Jerry. Some might think it's because you've actually got
>nothing to say in response. Not me however, I realise it's just
>sheer disdain.

Bat squeeze-- you don't want responses, you want supporting
justifications for a foundationless hubris, an intellectualized
cluelessness, and a threadbare anthropomorphism. That's what
provokes the disdain you correctly identify, Sir. Yours is a
_tedious_ game, Mr. Rimmer, and tiresome for its tediousness.
Mr. Clark show a beatific patience in your regard.

Your ever-ready routine of "Lying, lazy, or loopy" won't even
get to first base (bust the wicket?). It certainly _hasn't_ at
any rate.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:27:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:55:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 13:27:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:56:36 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>I see you're still peddling this nonsense about 'racism'. It is
>>>you who is making the interpretation about "gullible, illiterate
>>>natives". My reading is that the local people did not wish to
>>>challenge Father Gill's account because he was a respected
>>>figure in their community, irrespective of his race. This is an
>>>attitude which is not confined to Papua New Guinea, or even to
>>>the so-called 'developing world'. I think you may be guilty of
>>>imposing the reductive, analytical approach of a Western sceptic
>>>onto a community of which you obviously know little.

>>Apparently you haven't bothered to inform yourself of the issues
>>in question. The above, no more than reflexive wing-flapping,
>>does not merit a response.

>The time has long gone when I expected any sort of response from
>you, Jerry. Some might think it's because you've actually got
>nothing to say in response. Not me however, I realise it's just
>sheer disdain.

Sigh. One can only conclude that all pelicanists think alike and
reflexively defend each other, even in (as is so often true) the
most egregious cases of ignorance, baseless speculation, and (in
the case of Menzel) the kind of racism that presumes all native
peoples to be interchangeably illiterate and in awe of the Great
White Father and all Western authority figures. Father Gill, who
was there, explained to me why this last is balderdash, and it
can be confirmed by anybody (not you, obviously) who cares
enough to look at the amply documented history of anti-Western,
anti-colonial sentiment in 1950s Papua New Guinea.

Yes, I confess it is hard not to hold in disdain views based on
ignorance, intellectual laziness, and the sheer faith that, no
matter what, you know better, from the confines of the Skeptics
Club at the Pelican Pub, than all UFO witnesses what they
actually saw. When it comes to what Gill and the PNG witnesses
observed, I'll take their word over yours every time. No amount





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 09:50:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:57:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:18:21 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:06:57 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:36:46 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:26:16 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro


Christopher,

>>>>Menzel had never contacted Gill to see if the allegation made
>>>>any sense, and Gill knew nothing of it until I brought it to his
>>>>attention. He said, "I cannot specifically remember wearing
>>>>glasses, but I certainly would have remembered if I could not
>>>>find the glasses or if they had been lost or broken..... That
>>>>would have been a very memorable occasion."

>>>Menzel tried many times to get in touch with Rev Gill about the
>>>matter of the latter's glasses (and the sighting in general).
>>>See p.151 of the book "UFOS, a Scientific Debate" (ed. Sagan &
>>>Page). Unfortunately he never received any reply, nor were his
>>>letters sent back to him.

>>I simply don't believe anything Menzel says. Father Gill told me
>>he had never heard Menzel's explanation before, which means
>>there were no letters in which that "theory" would have been
>>outlined.

>I decline to comment on Menzel's alleged racism. You clearly
>disbelieve Menzel on everything, even when he says he wrote
>several times to Gill but had no reply. Certainly you can fault
>Menzel on his attitude and explanations re UFOs, but to claim he
>was a liar on a matter of sending letters is taking things a bit
>far. Equally, is it not possible (just possible) that he got it
>right on the Gill sighting? Particularly as he was by no means
>the first to suggest the UFO was Venus.

For reasons that have been explained in detail in other Updates
postings and in the UFO literature (see Hendry's IUR articles,
for example), Venus is a dead issue. From Brad Sparks's recent
post:


"That time at the beginning of the sighting was 6:45 PM local
time (18:45 hours). But Venus set below the mountainous WNW
horizon in eastern New Guinea at about 9 PM (21:00 hours). Gill
and the others continued to see the main UFO until 10:30 PM
(22:30 hours)."


So let's move on, shall we? I have to note, however, that your
insistence on holding to an unlikely, even impossible,
explanation only speaks to the unfalsifiability of "skeptical"
hypotheses. However dumb, however at variance with witness
testimony, good sense, verified facts, and scientific
principles, no pelicanist claim, once proposed, ever dies. No
wonder it is so hard to take you guys seriously. It is hard to
believe that you take yourselves seriously.

Menzel was a liar, a word I don't use loosely. For one egregious
example, see his conveniently evolving story about his own UFO
sighting. As long ago as the 1970s, Brad Sparks was documenting
Menzel's problems with factual reporting, quite aside from sober
analysis.

If Menzel in fact wrote all those letters to Gill - which I do
not believe absent independent evidence to the effect - that
fact is fairly easily verifiable, since copies of those letters
ought to be in the archives of the American Philosophical
Society in Philadelphia. I have not visited the place to go
through Menzel's materials, but I know persons who have. If they
have seen all those supposed letters to Gill, please let us
know. Personally, I have a very hard time crediting the notion
that Gill would have ignored letters from the Harvard
Observatory, as opposed to communications from UFO buffs and the
casually curious.

>Forgetting the matter of whether Gill was or was not wearing his
>glasses there are a number of pointers in Rev. Cruttwell's
>Report (see FSR Special Issue, UFOs In Two Worlds) that
>indicate Father Gill was not a good observer at all, and that
>some of the other objects, particularly the "Tilley lamps", seen
>in Papua that summer were indeed Venus, (or Mars or Jupiter).

Where are all those other observers? Or were they just illiterate,
impressionable natives trying to impress the Great White Father?

>Thus the Venus answer was certainly put to Rev Gill at the time,
>so it is no good him saying years later that he had never heard
>of it (if that is indeed what he told you).

No, that is indeed not what he told me. He said he had not heard
of Menzel's and Klass's particular fantasies about what
happened. They surprised and amused him. You clearly have not
read anything about my interview with Gill.

>Rev Gill even conceded, later, that some of the smaller UFOs he
>& his group had seen those 3 nights might have been bright
>planets. (What an admission and quite a climbdown after having
>first described them as UFOs in his report!).

>Admittedly this does not account for the 'big' UFO with figures
>onboard.

No, it certainly doesn't.

>But it does show Gill was a poor observer of the night
>sky; he also might well have been overcome with excitement.

This is pretty funny, Christopher, when one considers that it
was his _lack_ of excitement that Klass made so much of. Again,
that speaks to the unfalsifiable nature of skeptical hypotheses.
From Klass, the sighting is suspect because the most famous
witness was not excited enough. From Allan, the sighting is
suspect because the most famous witness was "overcome with
excitement."

Give us a break, will you? Or is that asking too much?

And what again, by the way, of all those native witnesses who
testified to the sighting? No wonder you don't want to speak to
the issue of racism. It is implicit in any dismissal of the
story. Mysteriously, Gill - by the way, a strikingly
unexcitable man, as Bill Chalker will testify - becomes the
sole witness, or the only one worth paying attention to. And it
turns out, of course, that he isn't worth paying attention to,
either, because after all, you know better than he does what he
saw.

That brings to mind a paper by Charles Eisenstein ("A State of
Belief Is a State of Being") in the current issue of the Journal
of Scientific Exploration. Eisenstein, of the Department of
Science, Technology, and Society, Penn State University, makes
this wry and telling observation:


"The unfalsifiable worldview of the Skeptic extends far beyond
scientific paradigms to encompass a very cynical view of human
nature. The debunker must buy into a world full of frauds,
dupes, and the mentally unstable, where most people are less
intelligent and less sane than he is, and in which apparently
honest people indulge in the most outrageous mendacity for no
good reason, for the witnesses are, on the face of it, sincere.
How can I account for their apparent sincerity? I have to assume
either (1) that this apparent sincerity is a cynical cover for





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:03:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:42:00 -0700
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 20:50:14 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:59:39 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>And I'll say again, that Zamora had his glasses on
>>>during important parts of the sighting. What it was without
>>>glasses doesn't matter, though we do know that it wasn't
>>>worse than 20/100 (a police standard).

>>>Further with his glasses on, his vision was at least
>>>20/20, another police medical standard. It is also exactly
>>>what one would expect for a healthy person his age. Unless
>>>there is some sort of eye pathology going on, like
>>>cataracts or diabetes, it is extremely rare (a tiny
>>>fraction of a percent) to see acuities lower than that in
>>>his age group. Had he had a developing pathology that
>>>compromised his eyesight, it would have been picked up in
>>>subsequent physicals, ending his career as a traffic cop.
>>>That didn't happen either.

>>>Whether he was near-sighted, far-sighted, and/or had
>>>astigmatism is truly a red herring, since it doesn't
>>>matter if he was wearing his glasses, which would have
>>>corrected any optical defects. And even without glasses,
>>>we know that he was at least 20/100 regardless of what his
>>>prescription was because that is a police medical
>>>standard. Comprehende?

>>>Incidentally, if Zamora was farsighted, he was probably
>>>close to 20/20 even without glasses, because young
>>>farsighted people can use their eye lens to compensate....

>>>The point is a whole lot can be deduced about Zamora's
>>>eyesight just from knowing his age and the fact that he
>>>was a traffic cop. And finally, it is almost entirely
>>>irrelevant because he was wearing his glasses and was
>>>corrected at critical times of the sighting.

>>However, in fact Philip J Klass has written "One possible
>>explanation for the vagueness of his description is Zamora's
>>vision which, according to the Air Force records, is
>>20/200. That is, without glasses, Zamora can see at a
>>distance of 20 feet what a person with perfect vision can
>>see at 200 feet. Because Zamora lost his glasses shortly
>>after getting out of the car, most of his observations were
>>seriously handicapped" (see "UFOs - Identified" (1968) by at
>>pages 200-201 (in Chapter 18) of the Random House hardback
>>edition).

>>Now, I fully understand the reasoning which causes David to
>>say "even without glasses, we know that [Zamora] was at
>>least 20/100 regardless of what his prescription was because
>>that is a police medical standard. Comprehende?". However, I
>>note that his comment states that 20/100 vision "is" (i.e.
>>present tense) a police medical standard. Was this standard
>>the same in April 1964? If so, that would cast serious doubt
>>on the statement made by Klass. (It may be possible to show
>>that Klass and/or the Air Force were wrong and/or misled the
>>public - always fun point to make).

>It is certainly true in the present day the requirement
>is 20/100, and I doubt it would have been worse 40 years ago.
>Some departments require even better than 20/100, such as
>20/60. The only exception to this seems to be for contact lens
>wearers, who in some departments can be as low as 20/200
>without correction. The rationale behind this is that when you
>lose glasses, the correction is lost for both eyes, but a
>contact lens wearer is unlikely to simultaneously lose both
>contact lenses and will have normal vision in the remaining
>corrected eye. Also most people these days wear soft contact
>lenses, which are very unlikely to come out at all.

>>I also note the repeated statements by David and others that
>>Zamora's uncorrected eyesight is irrelevant since he had
>>his glasses on during the most important part of the
>>sighting. This is a view that was shared by Hynek. For
>>example, Hynek's report on his 12/13 March 1965 trip to
>>Socorro refers to a letter from Menzel, which appears to
>>have commented adversely on Zamora's vision. Hynek comments
>>on that letter as follows: "Para 2. I can't agree with
>>Menzel here. When he wears his glasses, his vision is okay.
>>He had the glasses on when he saw the flame at the time the
>>object was preparing to rise". The relevant extract is
>>quoted at length by Steiger, Brad in his "Project Blue Book"
>>(1976) at page 133 (in Chapter Five) of the Ballantine
>>Books paperback edition.

>>If anyone has the relevant letter from Menzel, the contents
>>of "Para 2" may add to our knowledge of Zamora's eyesight.

>>Also, I'm not sure what document(s) Klass was referring to
>>when he stated that "Air Force records" indicate that
>>Zamora's eyesight was 20/200 and this may be worth checking
>>by anyone more interested in this issue than the rather
>>transitory interest I'm displaying by posting this email. I
>>presume that Klass must be referring to relevant records in
>>Project Blue Book. The Socorro sighting is listed as Project
>>Blue Book Case Number 8766 on US National Archives and
>>Records Administration ("NARA") Microfilm T1206-1. An image
>>of the relevant index page has the Page ID ("PID") of
>>NARA-PBB1-304 (page 304 of 1014) at the link below. If the
>>index at the beginning of Roll 1 is accurate and
>>comprehensive, I think the relevant case file is included on
>>US National Archives and Records Administration ("NARA")
>>Microfilm T1206-50. Somone who has access to this, or
>>remembers the contents of the Socorro related documents, may
>>be able to confirm whether (a) Klass is correct to have
>>stated that Zamora's eyesight was recorded in Air Force
>>documents as being 20/200, and (b) give more details of the
>>relevant record of Zamora's eyesight and any comments on
>>that record within the Air Force documents.

One would think that one would use common sense in some of these
arguments. How in the name of heavens could Zamora have
exercised his duties as a police officer with 20/200 vision.
Doesn't that enter into the argument. Wouldn't one using common
sense discount Klass's statement right off the bat as absurd.
Klass said that Zamora lost his glasses shortly after he got out
of his cruiser is playing fast and lose with the truth. You have
to ask yourself if you enjoy getting sucked in by this type of
slight of hand. If the event took place over a short period of
time then "shortly after he got out of the car" is well into the
sighting time frame. Why not question Klass's reasons for these
obviations? Consider the position Klass occupied, the temptation
to trade favors for information, the opportunity to sit at the
apex of one of the best information flows from the US military
to the public at Aviation Week. All he had to do is what he did.
Klass's credibility is far lower than that of Lonnie Zamora's
where the Socorro case is concerned. Zamora was an honest cop at
the scene with nothing to gain from his report while Klass was
attempting to hold up his end of the bargain. Klass's
explanations for most UFO events are absurd to anyone who takes
the time to look past their own intellectual safety zone. If I
come across a UFO event of which I had not been aware previously
and I see Klass's name attached with one of his knee-jerk
explanations I see that as a flashing green light telling me to
examine further because if Klass got involved it is worthy of
further study.

>If it was recorded as 20/200, it is highly unlikely to be
correct. It would be just one more wrong number in the Air
Force's report on the incident. Dollars to do-nut that doesn't
even exist Dave.

E.g., Zamora said he ran maybe
>50 feet from his car, i.e. across the dirt road, while the
>object was roaring on takeoff, but stopped because the roar
>ceased. The Air Force map places his distance from the car at
>100 feet. Ray Stanford said Zamora pulled is car right up to
>the edge of the arroyo, only about 50 feet from the object. In
>the A.F. report, this is again doubled to 100 feet.

>Usually when a person's acuity is recorded, it is their
>_corrected_ acuity, not their uncorrected acuity. E.g., saying
>somebody is "legally blind" because their acuity is only
>20/200 refers to their best _corrected_ acuity, not their
>uncorrected acuity. Otherwise there would be tens of millions
>of "legally blind" people in this country. More likely the
>acuity recorded (if it is there) would have been Zamora's
>_corrected_ acuity. Knock a zero off of 20/200 and that would
>have been 20/20. Maybe Klass couldn't read or maybe the A.F.
>couldn't type.

That's probably closer to the mark.

>Anyway I wouldn't take anything Klass wrote at face value. I
>think we all know the man was a pathological liar when it came
>to UFO debunkery.

He was in the right position to stamp a case with the mark of the
pseudo scientist warning away other curious scientists with his
so-called reputation for the scientific method of which he
exercised none. The more absurd the explanation made it easier
for the mainstream scientist or journalist to quickly assess the
report and move on for surely if it was that easy and absurd then
the witnesses who reported the event were just more of those
fools outside of science who don't know their asses from a hole
in the ground.

I can't even blame mainstream science because I do it myself.
James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
explanation [BTW-not new James] for some reported triangular
shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion. I
have no doubt of it myself [I've proffered this explanation
often] and would add other satellites as well. Lights in the
night sky that are just a point of light I tend to blow off
because there are just so many lights in the night sky. But it
takes a well positioned Klass type to do serious damage-or
attempt to, to the Socorro case and Klass was well positioned to
do so but in this case he failed.

But, hey you have to make a buck somehow.

>At the end of the day, we are still back to the fact that all
>important parts of the sighting were done with Zamora's
>glasses on. Further his eyesight had nothing to do with other
>important aspects of the Socorro case, such as the silent
>departure and the corroborating physical trace evidence left
>behind.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 12:39:52 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:04:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Ledger


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 06:48:20 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:56:36 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>Nothing is said above about Allen Hynek's asking Gill
>>>specifically about Menzel's explanation. Allen may have asked
>>>him casually, during that first interview, if the reverend was
>>>wearing glasses at the time, and the reference to Menzel may
>>>well have been Hynek's subsequent editorial addition when he (or
>>>Elaine Hendry) wrote his book. If Hynek went into Menzel's
>>>"theory" about the case (which included racist twaddle about
>>>gullible, illiterate natives going along with Gill's delusion
>>>out of awe for the Great White Father, you will recall), Gill
>>>had no memory of it when I showed him Menzel's account, because
>>>he expressed surprise and amusement as he read it.

>>I see you're still peddling this nonsense about 'racism'. It
is you who is making the interpretation about "gullible,
illiterate natives". My reading is that the local people did not
wish to challenge Father Gill's account because he was a
respected figure in their community, irrespective of his race.
This is an attitude which is not confined to Papua New Guinea,
or even to the so-called 'developing world'. I think you may be
guilty of imposing the reductive, analytical approach of a
Western sceptic onto a community of which you obviously know
little.

>Apparently you haven't bothered to inform yourself of the
>issues in question. The above, no more than reflexive wing-
>flapping, does not merit a response.

>Jerry Clark

That could ressurrect an old term from the 1920s, Jerry; it
being a "Flapper" -but with a new connotation and a cloud of pin





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:07:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>All I said in my posting on Oct. 12 was that "Hynek found out
>Gill was wearing his glasses." I didn't say how Hynek had found
>this out. I tried looking up references but could not find a
>clear chronology of Hynek's involvement with the Gill case prior
>to 1972. Hynek did say he first heard about the case in a 1961
>visit to the British Air Ministry and he apparently had
>correspondence with Menzel about it in the 60's. Now you've
>filled in some more details. But it's hardly fair to say I don't
>know "anything" about interviews of Gill or that I'm "almost
>certainly wrong" about a point I never made (I never said
>anything about interviews). I read the Hynek UFO Report account
>but that covered the post-1972 period of Hynek's involvement,
>for the most part.

>>Hendry
>>rules out the Venus identification and concludes that the
>>occupant-bearing- object report was indeed of a UFO and not some
>>of some prosaic stimulus such as Venus.

>With all these astronomers involved, Menzel, Hynek, Elaine
>Hendry, I'm surprised that apparently no one figured out that
>Venus had set below the mountainous western horizon at about 9
>PM, about 1-1/2 hours before the main UFO disappeared to Gill
>and his other witnesses, a devastating refutation of the Venus
>theory.

The most devastating refutation of the Venus theory is not the
fact that it had set 90 minutes before the main UFO disappeared
(if it was indeed the main UFO), but the fact that Venus does
not, or ought not to, appear only a few hundred feet away as a
solid constructed craft with legs, and with three or four human
figures on board waving to the viewers below and beaming shafts
of light at them!

Father Gill is on record as saying some of the smaller objects
seen those nights could have been bright planets. Jupiter,
particularly, was prominent, at about 83 degrees altitude at
9pm. Mars was only a few degrees away from Venus and a bit lower
in the sky. Even Saturn was around. I conjecture that what Gill
saw at 10.30 was Jupiter, still high up at that time.

All through Rev Cruttwell's detailed report there are abundant
clues about Gill's poor observing ability. Never mind about his
glasses. On one definite occasion he did not recognise Venus
when another witness did. The "Tilley Lamps" and "kaleidoscopic
light" seen at times were almost certainly misidentifications of
Venus. Neither does the fact that he once claimed he saw Venus
and the big UFO simultaneously during the critical 3-day period
hold much water (as I said to Jerry Clark elsewhere).

The RAAF response is an obvious attempt to show that they did
not trust Gill as an observer, though their spokesman cleverly
avoided saying so.

The UFO may be a true unknown - nobody can say with certainty,
but by conceding that what he first claimed were UFOs were
possibly bright planets, Rev Gill has virtually hanged himself.
The 'going in to dinner' episode also counts against him more
than somewhat!

Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                           Re: EMF & UFOs - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:36:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:10:57 -0400
Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs - Shough


>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 08:08:24 -0400
>Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:07:24 +0100
>>Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:10:39 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: EMF & UFOs

>>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:05:55 +0100
>>>>Subject: EMF & UFOs [was: Memory Without Klass]

>>>Robinson has a poor track record for "old magazine articles"
>>>he read "years ago" with his longstanding claim to have read
>>>an ad in a magazine he has never been able to find (and no
>>>one else has either) with a story of a manned balloon landing
>>>where crew found a scary New Mexico policeman staring
>>>at them. This supposedly "explains" the Socorro case as a
>>>manned balloon. Is there an actual verified copy of this
>>>May 1938 Popular Science article?

>>>I think this car stopping tale is an urban legend going back
>>>to the 30's and earlier...

>>Hi Brad

>>I don't know the status of Robinson's claim and have no access
>>to archives of Popular Mechanics, which is/was a US
>>publication I believe. I was hoping someone on the List might
>>know more or be able to look into it.

>Martin,

>The problem with Robinson's claim in the end is that he has no
>supportive evidence that such an article is anything more than
>a figment of memory that has little or no basis in fact.

Steven

I think you are misreading this exchange. I am aware of the
manned-balloon article Brad mentions, the controversy over
Robinson's claim to recall it and the inability of others to
locate it. This is about an entirely different article.

>Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh, but a lot of people did make an
>effort to locate an article of that discription, and that would
>have included Popular Mechanics archives that are available in
>many libraries on microfilm.  But the quest to verify this story
>went further, with those involved in the early days of hot-air
>balloons interviewed to see if they recalled any such tale.
>All of this to no avail.

The story in question is stated to be from Popular Science and
has nothing to do with hot-air balloons. As far as I am aware no
one has attempted to find _this_ article, or even made any
public mention of having been aware of Robinson's post
concerning it, prior to my List message asking if anyone knew
anything. Apparently no one does, but if you do then I'd like to
hear about it.

>Robinson, on James Easton's site, was able to promote this
>theory with a lot of effort in trying to make a hot-air balloon
>fit the description given by Zamora, along with the
>indentations and burn marks left behind. We would perhaps
>disagree on the validity of the arguments put forth.

Steven

I know about Robinson's hot-air balloon and the UFORL
discussions. As you will know from my own posted discussion of
it and related theories on this List, I certainly don't (and
never did) think that a balloon of the kind envisaged by
Robinson could explain Socorro. As you will also know, I tried
my best to believe in some other type of balloon-assisted
experimental LEM-type rig, but failed. We might not disagree as
much as you imagine.

>I guess I'm surprised that you haven't found some of this
>discussion, but I don't know if the Easton site was archived or
>not.

I am aware of that discussion - and the Easton list is archived
by the way (though it seems to have died some time last year as
far as I can make out). But as I said, this 1938 Popular Science
article has nothing to do with balloons or Socorro. I have not
got a hard copy of this article, it is true but Robinson has in
this case given a precise citation of publication title, issue





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                     2 Autographed Redfern Proofs Remain

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:33:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:13:18 -0400
Subject: 2 Autographed Redfern Proofs Remain


I still have 2 copies of 'Body Snatchers In The Desert' for
sale. These are Autographed Advance Uncorrected Proof copies.
Add 'em to your collection.

USA & Canada - $12.50 USD (includes shipping)
Other Countries - $16.50 USD (includes shipping)
To purchase via PayPal go to:

http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/books/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Serious Question - Koi

From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:13:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:17:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Koi


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

<snip>

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

Hi Dick,

Speaking as a lawyer used to dealing with rather large and
complex cases, I think the first steps would be to:

(a) identify and define the issues, and then

(b) identify the evidence relating to those issues and organise
    that evidence.

This applies whether funding is unlimited or seriously lacking.

Only after evaluating the results of these rather obvious and
basic steps would I dream of anything more adventurous (such as
well-equipped mobile inter-disciplinary investigatory teams).
In fact, I would delay thinking about whether such effort is
even justified until the more basic steps had been taken.

Realistically, if there isn't the funding/inclination/ability
within ufology to take these basic (albeit boring) steps, then
any attempt "to resolve the controversy in a meaningful way" is
likely to remain a dream.  Everyone will keep having fun
enjoying the debates and investigating individual cases, but
little (if anything) will actually be resolved.  The wheel will
be reinvented time and time again.

Without clarity as to the issues in dispute, more funding would
almost certainly simply be wasted.

Without identifying the relevant evidence and organising that
evidence, anyone looking at the subject will simply see a
confusing mess.  This will result in a failure to convince most
independent by-stander with limited time of the implications of
the evidence, and mean that new researchers will take a long
time to get up to speed with the current state of the debate.

Has anyone even seen a simple list of the main issues that exist
within Ufology?

I've previously indicated in outline my own views on how a lawyer
(or at least this lawyer) would seek to define the issues and
organise the relevant evidence.  See the emails on my (rather
static) Blog:

(a) Problems within ufology:

http://tinyurl.com/8hylf

(b) The need for basic reference documents:

http://tinyurl.com/a23mp

(c) Developing basic ufological reference/working documents:

http://tinyurl.com/a7j7j

(The draft Chronology I've been working on for over two years is
my own major contribution to create basic reference documents of
the sort I've advocated. I'm extremely keen to get that document
completed because the other documents I'd like to see, including
a cross-referenced List of Issues, are far more intellectually
interesting and less mechanical to produce.)

Part of that effort would be to collate information on other
researchers (active or inactive), as one of the many steps that
could and should be taken to improve communication within
ufology and attempt to reduce the amount of reinvention of the
wheel that occurs. In relation to such an effort, a few days ago
I indicated that I'm preparing 2 lists to put on a Blog with an
invitation to provide comments - (a) a list of active UFO groups
in the UK, and (b) a list of inactive UK UFO groups. I have over
a hundred pages of notes typed up at present and have a lot more
material to collate. In relation to those Lists, I indicated
that I was drafting a letter I propose sending to various email
Lists etc seeking further information. To entice responses I
stated that I'd like to be able to say that certain recognizable
names within Ufology (and/or certain groups such as BUFORA
and/or MUFON) would be interested in the results of this
exercise.  So far, Stan Friedman (thanks Stan) has been the only
person that has complied (off-list) with my request for a simple
reply stating "interested".  (Hint, hint ...).

(Sorry if the above is a bit less cheerful than my usual posts,
but my wife has gone away for the weekend so I'm entitled to be
a bit grumpy...)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                 Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:02:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:25:07 -0400
Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Gehrman


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:15:23 +0000
>Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro

>>From: Jay Nelson <jnelson.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 17:30:41 -0600
>>Subject: A Curious Story About Socorro

>>Listerians,

>>Amid such daunting intellects (not to mention opinions), I've
>>long hesitated to post anything. But I notice the Socorro
>>sighting of Officer Lonny Zamora is being discussed yet again,
>>so I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

>>Some time ago, I read a strange little book called Flying
>>Saucers - Key to Creation? by a fellow who called himself
>>"George A. Eastland". Despite the New Age flavor to the title,
>>the writer actually sounded like an old aeronautical engineer
>>who'd been around, seen a few things, and thought hard about
>>them.

>>Amid his speculations, he tells a strange tale to illustrate the
>>point that things are not always as they seem. He said he once
>>met a biker, named Tea-Mex, in a bar who told him he'd built a
>>UFO. Tea-Mex said that some years previously he'd been working
>>as an aviation machinist in central New Mexico, and he and his
>>buddies got involved in building an engine from Popular
>>Mechanics and extensively modifying it.

>>One thing led to another; to make a long story short, when they
>>were done, they had basically a flying jet-powered gyroscope,
>>consisting of a vertically-mounted engine built with parts
>>purlioned from their worksite inside a small two-man craft.
>>There's a lot of detail in the book - even illustrations on
>>napkins. He even explained the "glyph" as a logo on the aluminum
>>aircraft skin they were using that they attempted to paint over.

><snip>

>This is a re-cycled yarn. I suggest you check the archives...and
>be more selective in your reading habits.

>[It appears he has been Dick - see:

>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/feb/m02-008.shtml

>and compare Kyle King's wording with 'Jay Nelson's' - seems like
>a phishing attempt to me. Mr 'Nelson' has been removed from the
>List... --ebk]

EBK, Dick, List,

(Sorry this it has taken so long for this reply, but I've been
traveling)

There must be some misunderstanding regarding Jay's mention of
the "Bean". I wrote him to ask if he knew why he'd been removed from
the list and he was dumbfounded and perplexed. Jay wrote the original
article describing the "Bean" on his web site,

http://www.weirdload.com/nm-ufo.html and Kyle took that article,
after giving proper credit, and posted it to the List.

Jay didn't realize that it had been posted to UpDates before
this, and innocently posted it as a possible plausible
explanation for the Zamora sighting. I don't think it was a
"phishing attempt" and I don't want to be removed from the list
for defending him, but I wanted to point this out to EBK so Jay
might be reinstated and forgiven for his 'transgressions'.

I do think folks should take a look at the complete story of the
"Bean" and examine the diagrams and drawings found in two
chapters in Eastland's book: "Flying Saucers - Key to Creation".
I've copied those chapters and will send them, free, to anyone





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Moderator

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:37:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:37:01 -0400
Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro - Moderator




>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:02:49 -0700
>Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:15:23 +0000
>>Subject: Re: A Curious Story About Socorro

>>>From: Jay Nelson <jnelson.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 17:30:41 -0600
>>>Subject: A Curious Story About Socorro

>>>Listerians,

>>>Amid such daunting intellects (not to mention opinions), I've
>>>long hesitated to post anything. But I notice the Socorro
>>>sighting of Officer Lonny Zamora is being discussed yet again,
>>>so I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

>>>Some time ago, I read a strange little book called Flying
>>>Saucers - Key to Creation? by a fellow who called himself
>>>"George A. Eastland". Despite the New Age flavor to the title,
>>>the writer actually sounded like an old aeronautical engineer
>>>who'd been around, seen a few things, and thought hard about
>>>them.

>>>Amid his speculations, he tells a strange tale to illustrate the
>>>point that things are not always as they seem. He said he once
>>>met a biker, named Tea-Mex, in a bar who told him he'd built a
>>>UFO. Tea-Mex said that some years previously he'd been working
>>>as an aviation machinist in central New Mexico, and he and his
>>>buddies got involved in building an engine from Popular
>>>Mechanics and extensively modifying it.

>>>One thing led to another; to make a long story short, when they
>>>were done, they had basically a flying jet-powered gyroscope,
>>>consisting of a vertically-mounted engine built with parts
>>>purlioned from their worksite inside a small two-man craft.
>>>There's a lot of detail in the book - even illustrations on
>>>napkins. He even explained the "glyph" as a logo on the aluminum
>>>aircraft skin they were using that they attempted to paint over.

>><snip>

>>This is a re-cycled yarn. I suggest you check the archives...and
>>be more selective in your reading habits.

>>[It appears he has been Dick - see:

>>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/feb/m02-008.shtml

>>and compare Kyle King's wording with 'Jay Nelson's' - seems like
>>a phishing attempt to me. Mr 'Nelson' has been removed from the
>>List... --ebk]

>EBK, Dick, List,

>(Sorry this it has taken so long for this reply, but I've been
>traveling)

>There must be some misunderstanding regarding Jay's mention of
>the "Bean". I wrote him to ask if he knew why he'd been removed from
>the List and he was dumbfounded and perplexed. Jay wrote the original
>article describing the "Bean" on his web site,

>http://www.weirdload.com/nm-ufo.html

>and Kyle took that article, after giving proper credit, and
>posted it to the List.

>Jay didn't realize that it had been posted to UpDates before
>this, and innocently posted it as a possible plausible
>explanation for the Zamora sighting. I don't think it was a
>"phishing attempt" and I don't want to be removed from the list
>for defending him, but I wanted to point this out to EBK so Jay
>might be reinstated and forgiven for his 'transgressions'.

<snip>

It appears this Moderator suffered a moment of overly-zealous
List-protectionism and only a cursory scan of Kyle King's
original post.

My apologies to Jay Nelson. His subscription has been
reinstated.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

             Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:43:58 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:40:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Balaskas


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:27:54 -0300
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 12:18:16 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

<snip>

>>>Not Nick Cook, writer for Janes, but just plain old journalist?
>>>What happened to him, did he get the pink slip from Janes over
>>>"The Hunt for Zero Point"?

>>>Aerospace specialist, eh? I must remember that the next time I
>>>send out my bio. Damn near as good as having a degree in
>>>aeronautical engineering. I smell another book in the offing.

<snip>

>>According to an e-mail from "Louis" about Nick Cook's
>>documentary that was forwarded to me by a well known and
>>respected Canadian researcher, don't expect to hear much rehash
>>of what is already known. There will be much new fascinating
>>documented evidence that some UFOs are our very own (yes, Don!)
>>designed back in the 1960s which include exotic new propulsion
>>systems based largely on data collected from...(make sure you
>>are seated)... Contactees!

>>If these official papers were mentioned on this TV documentary,
>>along with the contents of some recently discovered McDonnell
>>Douglas binders, a major U.S. aerospace company that Dr. Robert
>>Wood has privately worked for (yes, the same Wood that is
>>organizing 'The 3rd UFO Crash Conference' in Las Vegas next
>>month), then what our former Canadian Defense Minister, Paul
>>Hellyer, said at the 'Exopolitics Toronto' symposium last month
>>might be closer to the truth than many of us ufologists are
>>willing to accept!

<snip>

>It certainly wouldn't hurt to listen to what the man has to
>say. I met the Woods (father and son) last year when I presented
>at their conference in Vegas. What was Ryan Wood's job with
>McDonnell Douglas? Also which of Hellyer's statements are you
>referring to, Corso's "revelations" or the US General's remarks
>re the varacity of Corso's book?


Hi Don!

I too had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Wood and his wife at the
2002 MUFON International UFO Symposium in Rochester where I
purchased a reproduction of the "SOM-101" UFO crash retrieval
manual (one of the recently leaked so-called MJ-12 documents)
which he kindly autographed for me. Robert Wood considered this
manual to be the "real thing".

Robert Wood (Ph.D. in physics) was R&D manager at McDonnell-
Douglas Corporation, the same company which these old UFO
binders belonged to that I made reference to in my e-mail, until
he retired in 1993. I find it interesting that soon after Dr.
Wood retired, he became involved in disclosing the truth abouts
UFOs and served as a conduit for more leaked official documents
on UFOs. I also find it interesting that in Dr. Hall Puthoff's
review of Dr. Paul Hill's book 'Synopsis of Unconventional
Flying Objects' (a great UFO book!) he mentions that this book
is also highly recommended by Dr. Wood. Dr. Puthoff is known for
his zero-point energy research and exotic propulsion systems
much like the secret studies conducted by McDonnell-Douglas when
Dr. Wood worked for them.

Thanks to Joe McGonagle's post, I was able to learn that Nick
Cook's UFO documentary on UK TV did indeed make brief reference
to the contents of those McDonnell-Douglas binders (...defence
contractors believe that some UFOs are alien craft and that we
should attempt to learn how they work...) that are now in the
public domain but apparently nothing about the "Contactee"
connection which certainly played a part in replicating alien
technology in Canada by researchers such as Wilbert B. Smith and
a host of other top government scientists and engineers who
avoided outside attention to their research that was based on
information from "The Boys Topside".

Since the U.S. General's comment to former Canadian Defence
Minister Paul Hellyer regarding the incredible claims in Col.
Philip Corso's book 'The Day After Roswell' was "every word is
true and more", this is something that should not be ignored, no
matter what one thinks about Col. Corso or the contents of his
book which he did not have full control over and was not written
as he wanted it to be.

Maybe it is a big coincidence that 9/11 happened just before the
first public showing of an alien technology film documentary at
a cinema in Manhatten which the NSA (according to a pre-9/11
advertisement for this film in 'The New York Times') was trying
to stop. This alien technology film featured Pentagon insiders,
including Col. Corso, and how the recovered alien wreckage that
was kept at the Pentagon (which interestingly was also targeted
on 9/11) was forwarded to U.S. industry. When I phoned this
cinema after 9/11 to ask about this alien technology film and if
its showing would be rescheduled, the people I woke with said
they knew nothing about such a film! I tracked down the producer
of this alien technology film and sent him money for a video
copy but I yet to get it and subsequent e-mails that I have sent
to him have remained unanwered.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                     Re: Fireball Data Center? - Westra

From: Frits Westra <fw-nx.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:21:11 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:41:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Fireball Data Center? - Westra


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:51:35 -0700
>Subject: Fireball Data Center?

>Anyone know if this organization exists in some shape or form?

>Terry


Hello Terry,

You can submit fireball reports on this IMO webpage:

http://www.imo.net/fireball/report

A list of previous fireball reports is here:

http://www.imo.net/fireball/reports







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                    Re: Serious Question - Sanchez-Ocejo

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:09:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:45:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Sanchez-Ocejo


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

>What should we do with
>well-documented and well-investigated cases reporting craft-like
>UFOs that don't seem to have conventional/prosaic explanations?
>A long time ago when I participated in an American Psychological
>Association conference session on UFOs I sent a questionnaire
>around to this same effect. Dr. Donald H. Menzel responded
>"Throw in waste basket."


In the late 70's, Dr. Allen Hynek ask Dr. Willy Smith to create
a data bank of selected UFO cases. At that time we had only
UNICAT, a data bank full of thousands newspaper clips and all
kind of non serious cases.

That was the beginning of UNICAT PROJECT. For years Dr. Smith
work on this bank accepting only, like you said: "well-
documented and well-investigated cases reporting craft-like UFOs
that don't seem to have conventional/prosaic explanations"

Over the years UNICAT PROYECT accumulated 600 of selected cases.

Two years ago Dr. Willy Smith retired from Ufology and hand over
the UNICAT PROJECT to Jan Aldrich of PROJECT 1947. One of the
reasons of his retirement was that after hard years of work
creating UNICAT, he complained, "only a handful ufologist use
it".

As far as I can see, I have no alternative but to agree with Dr.
Donald H. Menzel:

"Throw in waste basket."

Only a handful of ufologists care or understands the scientific
method.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - White

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:46:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:46:07 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - White


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 13:33:05 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

<snip>

>Anyone ask Alex Jones about UFOs yet?

Many have tried on air. Alex's position is that he is not interested
in broadcasting anything he can't back up with solid evidence,
his specialty being wire service reports not picked up by the main
retail news sources, government and scientific reports, foreign
press, or Freedom of Information Act reports.

He has stated many times it would not surprise him at all that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                        Re: Serious Question - White

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:15:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:48:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - White


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

<snip>

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding)

I can't afford the UFO Encyclopedias, but if they contain a
large share of these cases well presented, ideally I'd say hire
and use volunteers to deliver a set to every residence in the
world.

At the same time, again unlimited funding, I'd post billboard
signs everywhere urging people to read their new free UFO
encyclopedias seriously.

>and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

One thing would be to register Strange Days... Indeed archives,
in MP3 format, on every podcast directory. Ditto any other talk
shows which take UFOs seriously.

This might be a stretch, but making soundtracks of the best UFO
TV documentaries, if the owners might be willing, available on
the podcast circuit as well.

Podcasting may turn into wireless broadcasting with the
increasingly available city-wide wireless Internet services, and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

             Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:27:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:49:57 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Maccabee


>From: Joe McGonagle <Joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 03:09:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

><snip>

>>Hope someone on this List from the UK who saw or
>>recorded this TV documentary will fill us in on some
>>of these new revelations.

>There's a review by Steve Johnson at:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:16:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:51:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:18:21 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>Thus the Venus answer was certainly put to Rev Gill at the time,
>so it is no good him saying years later that he had never heard
>of it (if that is indeed what he told you).

>Rev Gill even conceded, later, that some of the smaller UFOs he
>& his group had seen those 3 nights might have been bright
>planets. (What an admission and quite a climbdown after having
>first described them as UFOs in his report!).

>Admittedly this does not account for the 'big' UFO with figures
>onboard. But it does show Gill was a poor observer of the night
>sky; he also might well have been overcome with excitement. When
>he claimed to have seen both Venus, and the 'big unknown' just
>above it, on one night, what odds would you give that he had
>actually seen Mars (mistaken for Venus) and Venus (mistaken for
>the UFO)? Mars was very close, only four degrees lower in the
>sky, and bright as well. The truth is that Rev Gill was useless
>as an observer, and simply could not recognise Venus when he saw
>it. This is exactly what the RAAF implied in their response to
>an enquiry in Feb. 1960, except that their spokesman was too
>polite to say so.

>Consider: A very bright object, with or without 'humanoids' on
>board, hovering above the same place at about the same time for
>3 consecutive evenings for 2 hours or more each time. You ought
>to be able to draw your own conclusions, without
>the need for people like Menzel.

Christopher,

These are some conclusions I draw on the Venus hypothesis:

At the time of the first observation at 1845 Venus was bright at
mag -3.6 at about 26 degs elevation, 292 degs azimuth. Abuot 4.5
degrees below Venus at about 21.5 degs elevation and relatively
very faint at mag +3 was the planet Mars. (Of merely technical
interest, given its very faint magnitude of +6.5, is that the
planet Uranus was a further 2 degrees again below Mars.)

Gill said he looked at the sky with the purpose of spotting
Venus, then saw the UFO brighter and sparkling above Venus?
Might Mars have been mistaken for Venus, and Venus for a UFO?
Rather unlikely because Mars was very distant and rather faint
at this date, comparable in brightness to numerous surrounding
stars in the surrounding regions of Leo, Sextans and Cygnus.
Unlike Mars the star Regulus would stand out and could have
attracted attention. It was much brighter than Mars at magnitude
+1.4, but _above_ Venus. So the Mars/Venus confusion is not a
very strong theory, if we believe Gill when he says that he
identified "Venus" below the UFO.

Secondly the setting times are in conflict with Gill's statement
that they watched the UFO until about 2230. The astronomical
horizon setting of Venus was at 2036, probably much earlier
given the highland terrain NW of the mission. At 2230 Venus was
probably about 30 degrees below the visual horizon, and had been
below it for more than 2 hours. So unless the recorded time is
out by more than 2 hours it seems unlikely they were watching
Venus. As I recall, Gill wrote down a contemporaneous log of
events, which makes it unlikely that such an error could exist





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                       Re: Serious Question - Freeman

From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:40:52 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:53:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Freeman


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

<snip>

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

Mr. Hall, EBK and Listers,

IMO, the controversy can only be resolved by determining the
root cause of the UFO cover-up. If the best UFO cases we have
are to be taken seriously, it is best to know what institution,
or whatever, has the most to gain and the least to lose in the
event of exposing the reality of UFOs.

For example, what is the real impetus for suppressing the truth
about UFOs? Could it be just a national security question? Is it
purely a scientific coup against the vast amount of UFO data?
Could it just be a political maneuver to maintain the status
quo? Or is it religious in nature? Naturally, we could say it's
all of the above but who/what is solely responsible for
initiating the cover-up in the first place? These questions need
to be answered.

Ideally, the best UFO cases we have could be submitted to some
mainstream scientific body for their study and ask that they
give an opinion on each one. It might be interesting to see just
what those opinions turn out to be. Whatever response we get,
positive or negative, we then capitalize on it and try to gain
as much from it as possible.

Practically, we aim for the ideal scenario as described above.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                                The Real 4400

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:12:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:56:11 -0400
Subject: The Real 4400


An alien abduction documentary entitled The Real 4400 will be
shown this Wednesday evening at 9pm on Sky One in the UK:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                             Re: Socorro - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:58:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Smith


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
>explanation [BTW - not new James] for some reported triangular
>shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion. I
>have no doubt of it myself [I've proffered this explanation
>often] and would add other satellites as well. Lights in the
>night sky that are just a point of light I tend to blow off
>because there are just so many lights in the night sky.

I did not claim to be the first to notice NOSS causes UFO
reports. However, I did notice that in many UFO reporting
databases that _no_one_ attempts to solve the report by easily
correlating it with a NOSS triad. It is left to dangle as a





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:55:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:02:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sandow


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 13:27:50 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>I see you're still peddling this nonsense about 'racism'. It is you
>>>who is making the interpretation about "gullible, illiterate natives".
>>>My reading is that the local people did not wish to challenge Father
>>>Gill's account because he was a respected figure in their community,
>>>irrespective of his race. This is an attitude which is not confined to
>>>Papua New Guinea, or even to the so-called 'developing world'. I think
>>>you may be guilty of imposing the reductive, analytical approach of a
>>>Western sceptic onto a community of which you obviously know little.

>>Apparently you haven't bothered to inform yourself of the issues in
>>question. The above, no more than reflexive wing-flapping, does not
>>merit a response.

>The time has long gone when I expected any sort of response
>from you, Jerry. Some might think it's because you've
>actually got nothing to say in response. Not me however, I
>realise it's just sheer disdain.

John,

The issue here is very simple. The record of the Gill case shows
that the New Guineans didn't react to western missionaries with
automatic respect. There were a lot of tensions. Thus their
support of Gill's sighting is quite significant, and it's
remarkable, to say the least, that anyone would theorize as you





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 16

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Connors

From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:34:03 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:05:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Connors


It would seem to me that researchers and armchair pundits in
Ufology might find listening to Fr. Wm. Gill as an enlightenment
to their positions on the case... from the proverbial "horse's
mouth", so to speak. His interviews and lectures are on the
Humanoids compilation available at Faded Discs:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:03:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:11:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:26:26 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:58:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>Its more like passive radar has been an excuse for UFOlogists to
>>sit back in their chairs and do nothing, safe and strong in
>>their knowledge that someday their savior will come in the guise
>>of new technology. It _is_ almost mythical in this respect.

>The UFO community is virtually unaware of the Passive Radar
>concept which was not my project but developed by NUFORC
>Director Peter Davenport, so your comments are way off base.

I do not think the UFO community is unaware of passive
radar. It is the latest sensation. I am reminded of the
sensations of artificial intelligence, robotics, nanotechnology.
These latter three have certainly not made the dramatic progress
that everyone (well at least the public) had thought. I could add
space travel to the list since we are all aware of the early
books and movies predicting moonbases in the 1980s-1990s.

I know Peter Davenport has tried to popularize and encourage
passive radar's use for UFO research. This was a great buzz and
the talk of the UFO Internet for a while. He has actually tried
to get it going. Based on the SDI program (Oct15), it sounds
like he is having problems for various reasons (academic
stigma....government getting in the way??? I thought it would).

I am not trying to discourage its use but we really should not
be putting all our eggs in one basket. You seem to be saying to
me that all other UFO research is hopeless (based on the past
results of UFO field reseearch) until we can get this passive
radar. I think its clear that there is at least a minority of
UFO researchers who have gotten fed up with waiting.

>>I could be wrong. It just seems that active
>>radars (with a strong signal) have various anomolies due to
>>various hardware and weather issues, so why would not the weaker
>>signaled passive radar.

>It's a continuous wave system that is different from the
>ordinary pulse radar. You can't have "hardware" issues with all
>of the many thousands of broadcast transmitters at the same
>time. If "weather" is interfering with one transmitter's output
>just switch to another.

For the hardware issue, you may be right. A problem that is
definitely in the hardware of the radar could be compensated
using separate sets of hardware. (This works with active radar
too.) Regarding weather, it does make sense that if you have
multiple simulatenous hardware sites, you could minimize its
effects. (Same for active radar).  Larger scale phenomena
(ionosphere, geomagnetic effects, gravity waves) may just be
something you have to accept (a black out period).

Regarding active radar, I was thinking that since these systems
seem to be installed on boats and aircraft, then maybe its not
so hard to get ones hands on them. Anyone know the restrictions
of using these? Need a FCC radar operator's licence? Only
allowed to use them in certain areas?

>It seems to me that even
>though waving flashlights or weak lasers may not be useful,
>somewhat stronger lasers can be used to attract sentiently-
>crewed vehicles to the site.

>If you try to beam a high-powered laser of whatever type visible
>or IR into the air you will have law enforcement, FAA and
>Homeland Security coming down on you like a ton of bricks. Don't
>you read the news? Didn't you read about the airline pilot who
>suffered temporary eye damage in flight from someone beaming a
>laser into the cockpit? It became a national issue.

I am quite familiar with the news.

I think the cases you are referring to was upon approach for
landing. Aiming a laser beam for an extended period into a
cockpit at cruise altitude is pretty difficult.

I was assuming that the laser operation required permission from
authorities. I was not saying that we could just go out and do
it ourselves. If promotional searchlights (which shine up into





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                         Re: Serious Question - Koi

From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:21:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:32:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Koi


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:15:25 -0400
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>>Subject: Serious Question

><snip>

>>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>>funding)

>I can't afford the UFO Encyclopedias, but if they contain a
>large share of these cases well presented, ideally I'd say hire
>and use volunteers to deliver a set to every residence in the
>world.

Although the most comprehensive UFO Encyclopedia is indeed
rather expensive (the second edition of Jerry Clark's UFO
Encyclopedia retails at about 150 US dollars, and I paid about
the same to also get a copy of the out of print first edition),
a cut down version ("The UFO Book") is available at a far, far
lower cost (currently from 7 US dollars for second hand copy on
Amazon).

See:

http://tinyurl.com/cxlk9

Not as insightful, but still useful, is the much cheaper
encyclopedia edited by Ronald Story (which has a rather strong
emphasis on individuals within ufology and their personal views).
Second hand copies of Ronald Story's recent encyclopedia can
currently be picked up on Amazon for under two dollars (plus
postage). See:

http://tinyurl.com/d5vdx

Also, don't forget that whilst these resources are not free,
there are a surprising number of UFO books that are entirely free
online. In the present context, I'd highlight (again) the fact
that the complete text, with most images, of the original volume
of "The UFO Evidence" (edited by Richard Hall / NICAP), is
available free on-line at:

http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/contents.htm

>>and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

>One thing would be to register Strange Days... Indeed archives,
>in MP3 format, on every podcast directory. Ditto any other talk
>shows which take UFOs seriously.

Has anyone collated a list of UFO/SETI related podcasts
available online?

I've come across a few general podcast directories, such as the
one at:

http://www.podcastalley.com/

In relation to directories specifically aimed at those
interested in ufology, the "Anomaly Archives" website has
several relevant lists, in the sections entitled More Paranormal
Podcasts" and "Podcasts cited last issue" which are both on the
webpage below:

http://www.anomalyarchives.org/enews/archivenews0509.htm





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:22:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:34:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>Hendry
>>>rules out the Venus identification and concludes that the
>>>occupant-bearing- object report was indeed of a UFO and not some
>>>of some prosaic stimulus such as Venus.

>>With all these astronomers involved, Menzel, Hynek, Elaine
>>Hendry, I'm surprised that apparently no one figured out that
>>Venus had set below the mountainous western horizon at about 9
>>PM, about 1-1/2 hours before the main UFO disappeared to Gill
>>and his other witnesses, a devastating refutation of the Venus
>>theory.

>The most devastating refutation of the Venus theory is not the
>fact that it had set 90 minutes before the main UFO disappeared
>(if it was indeed the main UFO), but the fact that Venus does
>not, or ought not to, appear only a few hundred feet away as a
>solid constructed craft with legs, and with three or four human
>figures on board waving to the viewers below and beaming shafts
>of light at them!

Before we flap too far into pelicanist fantasy land, let's hear
from actual investigators:

"Dr. Hynek had Father Gill study the moon in the Illinois sky,
and he decided that the width of the object [with waving
occupants] was equal to five moons lined up end-to-end." As
Allan Hendry observes in the IUR piece from which this is quoted
(November 1977, p. 5), this alone rules out any imaginable
astronomical identification.

>Father Gill is on record as saying some of the smaller objects
>seen those nights could have been bright planets. Jupiter,
>particularly, was prominent, at about 83 degrees altitude at
>9pm. Mars was only a few degrees away from Venus and a bit lower
>in the sky. Even Saturn was around. I conjecture that what Gill
>saw at 10.30 was Jupiter, still high up at that time.

How many scoops of mud are going to be hurled at the wall before
one sticks? Perhaps someone with time on his or her hands ought
to start counting the varying pelicanist "identifications" of
the Gill UFO.

>All through Rev Cruttwell's detailed report there are abundant
>clues about Gill's poor observing ability. Never mind about his
>glasses. On one definite occasion he did not recognise Venus
>when another witness did. The "Tilley Lamps" and "kaleidoscopic
>light" seen at times were almost certainly misidentifications of
>Venus. Neither does the fact that he once claimed he saw Venus
>and the big UFO simultaneously during the critical 3-day period
>hold much water (as I said to Jerry Clark elsewhere).

And why is that, Christopher? Because you say so?

And what evidence do you have that he said that he had seen
Venus and the UFO at the same time only "once"? I realize that
you're throwing in that adverb to plant a sleazy innuendo
without having to defend its content, while making Gill look
shifty and untrustworthy, but I would love to see your
documentation -- if it exists, which would surprise me -- on
this.

>The UFO may be a true unknown - nobody can say with certainty,
>but by conceding that what he first claimed were UFOs were
>possibly bright planets, Rev Gill has virtually hanged himself.
>The 'going in to dinner' episode also counts against him more
>than somewhat!

Let's see now. The excitable Gill is a lousy observer because he
is cautious enough to suggest some of the ostensible UFOs were
"possibly bright planets." Huh? Does anybody follow the
reasoning here? Is there any reasoning here? Remember, elsewhere
Christopher wants us to believe Gill was a gullible,
impressionable UFO believer who read Adamski and even borrowed
phrases from him.

Why does Christopher fail to note Gill's perfectly reasonable
explanation for his action in going to dinner? And why is he
suddenly telling us that Gill's lack of excitement counts
against him when in his last posting addressed to me he was
telling us Gill's overexcitement counts against him? Is it
because pelicanists are by nature incapable of anything but
random squawking, with no one squawk connected in any way with
the previous one or the subsequent one? In other words, are
pelicanists random noise generators?

Is there any reason to fly, as this particular pelicanist does,
from misidentification to misdescription -- two entirely
different matters, the blurring of which is necessary for
slippery pelicanist argument? Whole books and papers are written
on the difference, which is crucial in both the physical and the
social sciences, in the identification and understanding of
phenomena under study.

>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>beyond a doubt.

I love that "beyond a doubt." And where does Christopher get
that "beyond a doubt"? Why, he pulls it out of his a - I mean,
his imagination.

Gill was in no sense a UFO buff. "Until I got down to Melbourne
[after leaving Papua New Guinea]," he told Hynek and Hendry (and
me; I queried him separately on the same point), "the only thing
I'd read on flying saucers is what I'd written myself [about his
own experience]. That is, I knew nothing. There might have been
a magazine article, but I was just disinterested." Eighteen
years after his sighting, Gill was asked if he had "any specific
theory to explain what you saw," he said simply, "No." Some UFO
buff. Some credulous twit.

The crapulous point about the "mothership," raised originally by
pelicanist cult leader Phil Klass, is easily debunked by the
simple matter of going to a dictionary (as I did when the King
Pelican first raised this phony argument), where it turns out --
no surprise -- that the phrase was in use well before George
Adamski borrowed it. (How provincial, for all his flights of
fancy, is the pelicanist.) The skeptical sociologist/anomalist
Marcello Truzzi thought this was hilarious when I pointed it out
to him. Ever after, he cited that anecdote as one prominent
example (usually to his fellow skeptics) of why Klass was not to
be taken seriously. We may afford, I think, Christopher Allan
the same courtesy.

For Gill's response to the pelicanists, see IUR, November 1977,
pp. 5-7, and December 1977, pp. 4-5, plus my article, based on
my interview with the witness, in the February 1978 issue of
Fate. Much, not all, of the last is incorporated into my entry
"Gill CE3" in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 449-52.

And where, by the way, are those mysteriously vanished Papua New
Guinea witnesses? I suppose the pelicanists would tell us that
since they're just a bunch of illiterate, impressionable,
superstitious natives trying to impress the Great White Father,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                             Re: Socorro - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:17:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:37:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Hall


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
>>explanation [BTW - not new James] for some reported triangular
>>shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion. I
>>have no doubt of it myself [I've proffered this explanation
>>often] and would add other satellites as well. Lights in the
>>night sky that are just a point of light I tend to blow off
>>because there are just so many lights in the night sky.

>I did not claim to be the first to notice NOSS causes UFO
>reports. However, I did notice that in many UFO reporting
>databases that _no_one_ attempts to solve the report by easily
>correlating it with a NOSS triad. It is left to dangle as a
>probable unknown rather than clear NOSS. I would not complain if
>the tools to solve the case were not so simple (on the Internet-
>HeavensAbove). In fact I suspect any case on three lights that
>just move in a straight line as being NOSS unless proven
>otherwise.

James,

Peter Davenport's database routinely identifies reports as





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                           Magonia Supplement Site

From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:38:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:51:05 -0400
Subject: Magonia Supplement Site


A new web site is now online, devoted entirely to Magonia
Supplement. All issues so far published (1-58) are available.
The url is:

http://magsupp.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

              Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:51:27 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:54:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK - Miller


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:27:11 -0400
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Joe McGonagle <Joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 03:09:50 +0100
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>><snip>


>From this review I gather that Cook's docu is a bust. He
>interviewed me. Don't know if I was left on the cutting room
>floor or if I'm in it.


Bruce,

As I'm sure you now know from Isaac's last post, you were indeed
in it, and a very fine effort it was too. A female friend here
in the UK told me how delightful it was to see you at last and
how she'd quite fancy getting to know you much better, but
regretfully adds that she prefers white wine to red.

As usual, we naively expect something original from a UFO
documentary and seem disappointed when it doesn't materialise.
Yes, Cook had a pre-arranged agenda but I'm not complaining
because I agreed with it even though he certainly took a few
liberties on the way towards his conclusion. A conclusion BTW
that was too vague but was, nevertheless, blindingly original -
namely that some UFO sightings can't be explained. That floored
me. He didn't give percentages. What percentage of sightings
can't be explained?

Well, as we know, that's a very variable figure depending upon
whom you talk to. Pro ETH'ers percentages tend to be much larger
that sceptic's percentages. But Ufologists often laugh and mock
at sceptics and I have to say that it is not a humane or kind
practise to laugh at those with small percentages because all it
does is affect their self esteem and their masculinity.

This could well breed a myth, like the one about Welsh coal
miners and men with large feet. Perhaps we ought to have a
bumper sticker that reads; "Ufologists Have Bigger Percentages"





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                        Re: Serious Question - White

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:52:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:55:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - White


>From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:40:52 EDT
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

<snip>

>Ideally, the best UFO cases we have could be submitted to some
>mainstream scientific body for their study and ask that they
>give an opinion on each one. It might be interesting to see just
>what those opinions turn out to be. Whatever response we get,
>positive or negative, we then capitalize on it and try to gain
>as much from it as possible.

>Practically, we aim for the ideal scenario as described above.

And I'm suggesting that the best way to get any of the proposed
solutions _moving_ is make every household aware of the best
UFO evidence.  That is a massive undertaking, of course.

But I predict that if every ordinary citizen knew about the best





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:28:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:58:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

<snip>

>>With all these astronomers involved, Menzel, Hynek, Elaine
>>Hendry, I'm surprised that apparently no one figured out that
>>Venus had set below the mountainous western horizon at about 9
>>PM, about 1-1/2 hours before the main UFO disappeared to Gill
>>and his other witnesses, a devastating refutation of the Venus
>>theory.

<snip>

>Father Gill is on record as saying some of the smaller objects
>seen those nights could have been bright planets. Jupiter,
>particularly, was prominent, at about 83 degrees altitude at
>9pm. Mars was only a few degrees away from Venus and a bit lower
>in the sky. Even Saturn was around. I conjecture that what Gill
>saw at 10.30 was Jupiter, still high up at that time.

We can't be flipflopping around on astronomical theories here.
Gill described a main UFO with 3 other "satellite" UFOs nearby,
in the NW sky, which doesn't fit these planets scattered around
the heavens. Only Venus and Mars were relatively close at one
point in the night, around 8 PM, but Mars was very dim, as I
previously mentioned. Unless you want to count Uranus, which was
within 2 degrees of Mars. Oops! Uranus is not visible to the
naked eye for most people and you'd have to be really anal to
try to retain that theory.

You forgot that Jupiter was in the opposite side of the sky, in
the SE, whereas the UFOs were in the NW, and Jupiter started out
at only 36 degrees altitude (elevation angle) at azimuth 106
degs (ESE).

Astronomical theorizing would make a stronger case if Gill had
reported a vertical alignment of three objects (instead of 4)
with the main one the highest, and on _both_ June 26 and 27,
1959.

The straightest alignment was at about 8 PM when Venus the
brightest was also the highest in the sky at 32 degs elevation,
Mars just below it at 28 degs and Mercury much much lower at 9-
10 degs elevation, and all three at azimuth 294 degs (WNW). And
it would make a stronger case if Gill reported disappearances





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                     Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:08:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:00:29 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary - Sparks


>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:43:58 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:27:54 -0300
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 12:18:16 -0300
>>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

<snip>

>>>>Not Nick Cook, writer for Janes, but just plain old journalist?
>>>>What happened to him, did he get the pink slip from Janes over
>>>>"The Hunt for Zero Point"?

>>>>Aerospace specialist, eh? I must remember that the next time I
>>>>send out my bio. Damn near as good as having a degree in
>>>>aeronautical engineering. I smell another book in the offing.

<snip>

>>>According to an e-mail from "Louis" about Nick Cook's
>>>documentary that was forwarded to me by a well known and
>>>respected Canadian researcher, don't expect to hear much rehash
>>>of what is already known. There will be much new fascinating
>>>documented evidence that some UFOs are our very own (yes, Don!)
>>>designed back in the 1960s which include exotic new propulsion
>>>systems based largely on data collected from...(make sure you
>>>are seated)... Contactees!

>>>If these official papers were mentioned on this TV documentary,
>>>along with the contents of some recently discovered McDonnell
>>>Douglas binders, a major U.S. aerospace company that Dr. Robert
>>>Wood has privately worked for (yes, the same Wood that is
>>>organizing 'The 3rd UFO Crash Conference' in Las Vegas next
>>>month), then what our former Canadian Defense Minister, Paul
>>>Hellyer, said at the 'Exopolitics Toronto' symposium last month
>>>might be closer to the truth than many of us ufologists are
>>>willing to accept!

<snip>

>>It certainly wouldn't hurt to listen to what the man has to
>>say. I met the Woods (father and son) last year when I presented
>>at their conference in Vegas. What was Ryan Wood's job with
>>McDonnell Douglas? Also which of Hellyer's statements are you
>>referring to, Corso's "revelations" or the US General's remarks
>>re the varacity of Corso's book?

<snip>

In the comments I have snipped out they amount to nothing more
than an appeal to authority, credentialism. If so-and-so was
Minister of Such-and-such why everything he says must be taken
as gospel truth. If So-and-so was head of R&D why then
everything he says must be written in granite the word of an





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                  Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 22:41:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:01:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile


Really,

Why can't some of the colorful characters of Ufology get high
profile sponsors?

I mean guys driving in a circle at high rates of speed and going
nowhere get sponsors.

Guys running into one another and jumping on each other get
sponsors.

Guys sliding around on ice with sticks get sponsors.

Guys hitting a little ball with a stick get sponsors.

Even guys running through 100 degree heat get sponsors.

Yet guys facing insurmountable challenges, crawling through
deserts, climing mountains, sailing the seven seas and most of
all inspring most of the mega billion money making sci fi and
literature market don't get sponsors?

I wanna see STP and Valvoline and Pepsi stickers on Ufologists
garbed in form fitting action suits.

I wanna see Stanton T. Friedman and Wendy Connors on tv debating
whether Classic Coca Cola beats some new fangled Coca Cola.

I wanna see Budd Hopkins with the Pillsbury Doughboy or the
Keebler Cookie Elves sitting on his couch explaining their
experiences of being captured by mysterious beings who went
after them for that special only chocolate chip recipe.

I wanna see Kevin Randle and Cap'n Crunch being abducted and
showing the aliens that Cap'n Crunch stays crunchy even in outer
space.

I wanna see Al Lehmberg and the Micheline Man praising those
tires as the tires that can make a quick getaway in case one
wants to make a fast retreat and outdistance those pesky bug
eyed critters.

I wanna see Peter Davenport answering a phone call as a bevvy of
suntanned babes call in a UFO sighting and Davenport jumps into
his James Bond style hotrod making the scene just in time to
save the day and sport the bikini clad babes to safety in his
Lexus.

I wanna see Don Ledger exhibiting 'The Matrix' type fight scene
moves as he dodges skeptibunkers during an all out donnybrook
whilst he espouses the benefits of the latest high tech sneaker.

I wanna see some recognition and appreciation for people who
have walked the walk.

Science and research don't have to be boring. Good sense of
humor and endorsements can fund lots of research.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                     Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:47:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:03:24 -0400
Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up - Boone


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:46:01 -0400
>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 13:33:05 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Global UFO Cover-Up

><snip>

>>Anyone ask Alex Jones about UFOs yet?

>Many have tried on air. Alex's position is that he is not interested
>in broadcasting anything he can't back up with solid evidence,
>his specialty being wire service reports not picked up by the main
>retail news sources, government and scientific reports, foreign
>press, or Freedom of Information Act reports.

>He has stated many times it would not surprise him at all that
>there are ETs and their craft flying around, but because he
>can't document it, he won't discuss UFOs.


Brilliant response of him.

Now the question is, what documentation would he need?

Does anyone have any documentation they feel could stand up to
Jones' standards?  If so, what?

I type this as I'm watching Academy Award Winning Director Ron
Howard's film, A Beautiful Mind.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:51:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:05:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

<snip>

>The most devastating refutation of the Venus theory is not the
>fact that it had set 90 minutes before the main UFO disappeared
>(if it was indeed the main UFO), but the fact that Venus does
>not, or ought not to, appear only a few hundred feet away as a
>solid constructed craft with legs, and with three or four human
>figures on board waving to the viewers below and beaming shafts
>of light at them!

Hi Christopher

I've re-read the Crutwell report after my previous post, which
relied on memory. I agree with you that the last recorded time
of observation on June 26 (2230) does not relate to the "main
UFO" but to a secondary object. What Gill called the "mother"
seems to have vanished for the last time at 2130 according to
his contemporary log. So the discrepancy with the setting hour
of Venus is smaller.

Taking 4000' for the average height of the mountains around the
west side of the bay at about 25 miles distance (tan 0.03 or
nearly 2 degs) then we should take about 8 minutes off the
astronomical horizon setting time of 2056. So Venus should have
disappeared by about 2048, or some 40 minutes before the time
recorded.

It would still be possible to argue that with the "heavy cloud
over Dogura" and "patchy" cloud coming and going overhead at
around 2050, they lost sight of Venus and then began looking at
a different nearby body at somewhat higher elevation, perhaps
the +1.4 magnitude star Regulus. If they transferred their
attention from Venus (25 arcsec subtense) to a bright star then
the final disappearance of the "mother" - "red, white, blue,
gone" - could more easily be explained as scintillation. Regulus
(horizon setting time 2139) should have disappeared behind the
mountains close to the 2130 time recorded.

>Father Gill is on record as saying some of the smaller objects
>seen those nights could have been bright planets. Jupiter,
>particularly, was prominent, at about 83 degrees altitude at
>9pm. Mars was only a few degrees away from Venus and a bit lower
>in the sky. Even Saturn was around. I conjecture that what Gill
>saw at 10.30 was Jupiter, still high up at that time.

I think Mars was too faint to play a role. Mercury was brighter
and could be a better candidate for a mistaken "Venus" at 1845,
as Manuel Borraz points out. The fact that it was close to the
horizon just above the mountains would have increased its visual
prominence. Brad Sparks worries about the residual sky
brightness an hour after sunset, which could be a factor; but
Crutwell's notes for the evening of the 27th indicate that by
this time the sky would be "really dark".

>All through Rev Cruttwell's detailed report there are abundant
>clues about Gill's poor observing ability. Never mind about his
>glasses. On one definite occasion he did not recognise Venus
>when another witness did.

Strictly speaking, on one definite occasion (July 6) Gill and
more than 12 others (David Durie, college principal and former
RAAF astro-navigator; Mrs. Durie; and more than 10 "college
men") saw an object which they all thought was a mobile UFO,
when _one_ other witness (Rev. Dams), who was only present for a
short time before leaving to fetch his camera and so missed much
of the sighting, decided later that it must have been Venus.

However, neglecting the reports of sudden movement most other
features of the sighting could well indicate Venus seen through
thin cloud, including the initial elevation and rate of descent
from 2040 to setting at about 2100 and the description of
reddening and a perceptible disc through binoculars.10x
magnification of Venus' 25 arcsec would yield an effective disc
of about 4.2 arc minutes or around 1/7 the size of the moon;
Venus' phase was not full, only about 0.4, but oriented
horizontally with the sun directly below, and diffused by the
thin cloud, this miniature "half moon" could well answer the
description "shaped like a disc".

>The "Tilley Lamps" and "kaleidoscopic
>light" seen at times were almost certainly misidentifications
>of Venus.

Some sound like Venus, but on the other hand many of the "Tilley
lamps" reported had large angular motions, were not in the
western sky, and/or were travelling in various directions
"across the sky" at significant rates, and in some cases they
were reported against mountain backdrops. In one case observed
by Gill the light moved in front of Mt. Pudi, SW of Boianai
Station and a long way from Venus. Some of the steady light
could perhaps have been satellites? But Venus is probably not
involved in some of these cases.

>Neither does the fact that he once claimed he saw Venus
>and the big UFO simultaneously during the critical 3-day period
>hold much water (as I said to Jerry Clark elsewhere).

See above.

>The RAAF response is an obvious attempt to show that they did
>not trust Gill as an observer, though their spokesman cleverly
>avoided saying so.

It was certainly an attempt to be noncommital in the absence of
any really clear information, but is remarkable for completely
avoiding any mention of a brilliant Venus as a possible cause of
the "main UFO" whilst citing the very faint Mars nearby as a
likely candidate for another one (Venus would still have been
visible for quarter of an hour after Mars vanished). This was
just a few months later in early 1960. Maybe, soon after the
event, the RAAF Directorate of Intelligence was just being coy
and surprisingly mindful of Gill's delicate sensibilities by
leaving this most "obvious" of conclusions unspoken?

On the other hand, even 10 years later a letter cited by Hynek
dated January 1970 from the Australian Department of Air "to a
colleague" still stated that:

"the RAAF could come to no definite conclusion... As a result
the sightings have been classified as aerial phenomenon [sic],
but most probably they were reflections on a cloud of a major
light source of unknown origin."

Still no Venus. We can only presume that, as you say, the
descriptions of a very large and detailed structured object many
times the size of the full moon were considered by RAAF
Intelligence to be impossible to reconcile with Venus without
accusing Gill of being completely off his trolley and beyond all
possibility of reasonable argument.

>The UFO may be a true unknown - nobody can say with certainty,
>but by conceding that what he first claimed were UFOs were
>possibly bright planets, Rev Gill has virtually hanged himself.
>The 'going in to dinner' episode also counts against him more
>than somewhat!

Saying that you are "prepared to accept the possibility" offered
by the RAAF that "some of the smaller objects" could have been
planets is not the same as truly believing it, but could be seen
as the concession of a reasonable man to the point of view of
well-meaning commentators who weren't there. Perhaps, like the
RAAF, he turns aside from confrontation on the matter of the
"main UFO" to offer pax on common ground. It is an inclusive
tactic. Little is lost since these smaller objects were only
featureless small lights "coming and going through the [patchy]
clouds", doing nothing much except "hovering"; maybe they were
stars that he would never have noticed at all had it not been
for the main event sensitizing him to look for other UFOs. He
described these starlike lights in a fairly starlike way. So
this is not necessarily in any sense a concession that the main
event - with a strikingly different character - did not happen.

>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>beyond a doubt.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                            Alien Intrigue Event

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:31:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:07:41 -0400
Subject: Alien Intrigue Event


There will be a free event in London on Wednesday October 26,
where UFOs and alien abductions will be discussed. I'm taking
part, along with Professor Chris French and Reverend Neil Hook.

We'll be looking at the UFO phenomenon and the alien abduction
mystery, but also exploring the relationships between these
phenomena and folklore, science fiction, religion and
psychology:

http://www.londonfreelist.com/details.asp?id=15899

This debate is one of a number of events and media features
arranged to complement the opening of the Science Museum's new
exhibition, The Science of Aliens:

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/exhibitions/aliens/index.asp





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                           Improved UFO Attractor

From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:16:44 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:08:59 -0400
Subject: Improved UFO Attractor


The much improved 'Great UFO and Extraterrestrial attractor'.
Also looks good as an Xmas tree so a good covert project for
this time of year.

http://www.colsweb.com/UFO_ET_attractor.gif

Observe for any visitations to the area with normal + IR + UV +
Light intensifier Video Cameras if possible. Telepathic contact
and interference from ET can also occur at the same time or
later as this attractor is almost irresistible for ET to
investigate especially if self contained with no electric wire
lead ins. Colsweb.com will not be held liable for ANY
occurrences and consequences at all when this devise and after
this devise is exhibited or used. Only try it at your own risk
from a safe distance outdoors only. Ounce success is achieved
then the disk should be redone and other configurations on the
design considered to attract again as ET will dismiss the devise





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                            October FOTOCAT News

From: Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos <ballesterolmos.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:43:14 +0200 (CEST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:11:42 -0400
Subject: October FOTOCAT News


The October 2005 updated of FOTOCAT News (English and Spanish
versions) can be found at:

http://fotocat.blogspot.com


Current issue's highlights:

1) FOTOCAT exceeds the 6,000 case entry

2) A report on the Australian photographic cases on record,
   including the actual FOTOCAT spreadsheet for Australia

3) The paper: An Overview of FOTOCAT Project (Documents section)

4) Review of Malaga (Spain) classic UFO photos of March 27, 1974
   (summary in English, full paper in Spanish)

Cooperation of local UFO colleagues is kindly requested.
Regional listings of FOTOCAT are available to interested
students for review purposes.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 17

                 Father Gill Australian Interview Transcript

From: Diane Harrison <auforn.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:59:47 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:17:16 -0400
Subject: Father Gill Australian Interview Transcript


Hi Listers

I've taken the time to type this up for you all to read
as many of you may not be familiar with this interview.

-----

Australian Flying Saucer Review
December 1959 Vol. 1 No 1

Tape recorded interview by
The Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society &
The UFO Investigation Center of New South Wales.

Transcript of Father William Gill interview.

Q: Father Gill will you be kind enough to let us know the nature
of your activities in recent years in Papus?

A: I have been on the staff of the Anglican Mission in Papua for
thirteen years - my many interest up there has been educational
work, and I have been working mainly on the north-east coast of
Papua, in Goodenough Bay area, about ninety miles from Samaria
Milne Bay.

Q: Father Gill, we understand you, or your mission folk, had a
series of interesting experiences during the month of June -
when, and on what days did these occur? Also what did you think
about unidentified flying objects before your experience?

A: Until my sighting I thought UFOs were a figment of
imagination or some electrical phenomenon. Well, the first
sighting occurred over Waimera about twenty miles from us. It
was observed by Dr. Ken Houston at a place called Waimera, near
Tagora, and that was late November of last year. At Boianai
itself, where I'm working, the first recored incident was on the
night of Sunday, 21st June. My own observations began on 26th
June and extended over a number of days.

Q; Take them, then in date order, when did the first sighting
that you you saw occur?

A: That was on the 26th June, at 6.45 p.m, and it continued
until 11.04 p.m.

Q: Over which direction was the object seen?

A: Milne bay district, over Boianai.

Q: Did the object - appear solid? Metallic? Gaseous?
Transparent?

A: Well, it appeared solid, certainly not transparent nor
gaseous; we just assume it was metallic from our own experience
of things that travel and carry men.

Q: Was any sound perceptible?

A: No.

Q: Did the object change colour?

A: yes, it changed from a brilliant white light when it was far
off, to a dull yellow, or perhaps pale orange, when it was
close.

Q: Did the object hover, or remain motionless at any time?

A: It both hovered and remained stationary.

Q: What was its speed in flight?

A: Much faster than a passenger plane.

Q: The height you mentioned was a couple of thousand feet.

Which of the following objects held at arm's length would you
described as apparent size? - grapefruit? A: Yes.

Q: describe the weather?

A: Well, the weather varied over the four hour period. I have
recorded here. At the beginning, at 6.45 p.m, there were patches
of low cloud over Tagora and Menapi, that is west and east of
us, and clear overhead. At 7.10 i was recorded that cloud
ceiling overhead was at about 2000 feet... I may mention that at
this time the object was under cloud over the west at Tagora. At
8.50 cloud was forming again overhead, and for the next hour or
so there were patches of cloud over the sky, then at 10.50 we
recorded we had heavy rain at 11.04 - that's when we finished
the recording.

Q: What were you doing at the time you saw the object, and how
did you happen to notice it?

A: I came out of the dining room after dinner and casually
glanced at the sky with the purpose, I suppose, of seeing Venus.
Well, I saw Venus bit also saw this sparkling object which was
to me peculiar because it sparkled, and because it was very,
very bright, and it was above Venus and so that caused me to
watch it for a while, then I saw it descend towards us.

Q: Were there any witnesses to this?

A: yes, there were thirty-eight of us.

Q: What further remarks would you make regarding this first
sighting of yours?

A: Well, of course, the whole thing was most extraordinary; the
fact that we saw what appeared to be humans beings on it, I
think, is the important thing. It is certainly the important and
exciting thing to us. They were not noticeable at first - they
came down, the object came down at about, I should say, 400
feet, maybe 450 feet, perhaps less, maybe 300 feet. It is very
difficult to judge at that time of night and not having
experience in measuring elevation, it's purely guess- work, but
as we watcheed it, men came out from this object, and appeared
on top of it on what seemed to be a deck on top of the huge
disk. There were four men in all, occasionally two, then one,
then three, then four - we noticed the various times that men
appeared, and when one, two and three appeared and one and two,
and then numbers one, three, four and two and so on. And then
later all those witnesses who are quite sure that our records
were right, they agreed with them, and saw these men at the same
time as I did - they were able to sign their names as witnesses
of what we assume was human activity or beings of some sort on
the object itself.

Another peculiar thing about it was this shaft of blue light
which emanated from what appeared to be the center of the deck.
Now from time to time men, these men, seemed to be working at
something on the deck; they'd bend forward and appear to
manipulate something on the deck, and then straighten themselves
up occasionally, would turn around in our direction, this blue
light - rather like a thin spotlight emanated skywards to stay
on for a second or two, and then switch off. I recorded the
times that we saw that blue light come on and off - for the rest
of the night. After all that activity it ascended and remained
very high.

Q: What did the craft look like?

A: Like a disk with smaller round superstructure, then again on
top of that another kind of superstructure - round rather like
the bridge on a boat. Underneath it had four legs in pairs
pointing diagonally downwards these appeared to be fixed, not
retractable, and looked the same on the two nights - rather like
tripods. On second night the pencil beam came on again for a few
seconds, twice in succession.

Q: Do you have any clues to the dimensions of the object?

A: I'm very poor mathematician but I, at time, dared to say that
it was about thirty-five to forty feet at the base and perhaps
twenty feet at the top.

Q: Did you try to establish contact with the pilots of the
craft?

A: We did. As one of the men seemed to lean over as though over
a rail and look down on us, I waved one hand overhead and the
figure did the same as though a skipper on a boat waving to
someone on a wharf. Couldn't see the rail but he seemed to lean
over something with arms over it... could see him from just
below waist up. Ananias, the teacher, waved both hands overhead
and the two outside figures seemed to wave back - no doubt that
movement made by arms was answered by the figures.

Q: What was the reaction by the native at signals?

A: Surprised and delighted. Small mission boys called out -
everyone beckoned to invite the beings down but no audible
responses....no expressions discernible on the face of the men -
rather like players on a football field at night.

Q: Did the machine cause any noise?

A: No engine noise heard at any time by anyone during the whole
series of sightings.

Q: We understand you tired to signal; the beings with a
torchlight?

A: Yes, we flashed the light and the object swung like a
pendulum, presumably in recognition. When we flashed the
torchlight towards the ground and we actually thought it was
going to land but it didn't.
We were all very disappointed about that.

-----

I hope you found this interesting


Regards

Diane Harrison

The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Skywatch Director
http://www.auforn.com

Isubscribe to:
http://www.isubscribe.com.au/title_info.cfm?prodID=15021

P.O Box 738
Beaudesert, 4285
Australia.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                     Wilhelm Reich Orgone Energy & UFOs

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:11:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:11:17 -0400
Subject: Wilhelm Reich Orgone Energy & UFOs





Source: Phenomena Magazine

http://tinyurl.com/8oz2d

Monday, October 17, 2005


Peter Robbins at the Third Annual Crash and Retrieval Symposium
Wilhelm Reich, Orgone Energy, and UFOs

Wilhelm Reich and Orgone Energy, and UFOs

By: Peter Robbins
Author and UFO Investigator

UFO investigator Peter Robbins gives Phenomena a sneak preview
of the Proceedings of the Third Annual Crash and Retrieval
Symposium, Las Vegas, Nevada, November 4-6, 2005, where Peter
will be delivering an abbreviated version of this article.

Wilhelm Reich's many books all begin with this particular
quotation: "Love, work and knowledge are the wellsprings of our
Life. They should also govern it." This article is dedicated to
living that idea.

It is fair to say that the past century saw more scientific
advances than any preceding it. But perhaps its most important
single, unified body of scientific knowledge remains its most
controversial. The common functioning principle unifying this
science, which its pioneering founder, Dr. Wilhelm Reich, named
orgonomy, is the study of how energy functions in the living and
the non-living realms. Orgonomy offers us ground-breaking
applications in fields as diverse as biology, psychology,
meteorology, cancer research, sociology, human sexuality, child
rearing, political science and ufology, among other areas of
study. But orgonomy was not well received into the times it was
born. Some of its key findings challenged the basic precepts and
physical laws our existing scientific order is built upon, while
it's bioenergetically based critique of mystical and mechanical
thinking would have made it anathema to the majority of people
in Western culture. So it should not surprise anyone to learn
that orgonomy has been ignored, distorted, attacked and
confounded since it was first codified, by both the scientific
mainstream and by establishment thinking.

The perceived threat it represented was so pronounced during the
Eisenhower Administration, that more than eight tons of Reich's
hardcover books, monographs and other original literature were
consigned to government incinerators because bureaucrats at the
Federal Drug Administration had targeted him as a medical fraud.
This, to the best of our knowledge, without ever having
attempted to replicate any of his published experiments - the
prevailing thinking being, why bother, he was a "quack". During
his lifetime Dr. Wilhelm Reich was the target of attacks from
both the right and the left, but his work and findings were
especially reviled by uncomprehending liberals, communists and
active Soviet agents who more than understood the danger his
work represented to their cause, especially as articulated in
such books as The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Reich's blasts at
Soviet-style communism have often been dismissed as the paranoid
delusions of a great mind finally unhinged, but we can confirm
that such observations were hyper accurate, and some even
prophetic.

But it was Reich's acceptance of UFOs as a physical reality that
dealt his professional reputation its most stunning blow. When
you study the progression of his scientific work and thinking,
it becomes obvious that his investigation into the phenomenon
was merely the logical extension of a common functioning
principle that had guided him throughout his almost forty years
in professional life; that is, how energy functions in the
living and non-living realm. Nonetheless, one of ufology's most
significant chapters continues to remain one of its least known:
in the early nineteen fifties Reich developed the cloudbuster, a
simple yet effective apparatus which, when properly employed,
was capable of altering weather patterns in the surrounding
atmosphere. More, some of these weather modification operations
attracted UFOs - first over southern Maine in 1953, then above
Arizona in 1954. On December 14 of that year, this series of
cloudbusting operations culminated in what can only be
characterized as a "battle" in the skies over Tucson. Wild as
these allegations may sound, they were well-documented and
multiply witnessed.

What were the scientific dynamics which allowed such a
deceptively simple apparatus to alter entire weather fronts, and
why did this activity seem to attract the appearance of UFOs?
What were the documented specifics of his contacts with the
United States Air Force, and of his relationship with Albert
Einstein? Is there any reason to suspect that MJ-12 was aware of
or interested in Reich's work, and are there any realistic
reasons to suspect foul play in his death? This paper draws from
a number of print, archival, and human sources (all noted),
including correspondence with A.S. Neil and Albert Einstein,
Reich's final book, Contact With Space, and Wilhelm Reich and
the Cold War, by my friend and colleague Jim Martin, who is also
founder of Flatland Books. I am also indebted to Reich
biographer Dr. Myron Scharaf, and to Reich's long-time first
assistant, Dr. Elsworth F. Baker, for having taken the time and
for having had the patience to answer many of my questions.

Jerome Eden was an author, educator and ufologist, and used to
refer to UFOs as the idiot child of the media. If this
characterization is accurate, and many of us would maintain that
it is, then I respectfully submit that the truth about Dr.
Reich's UFO-related observations, findings and conclusions are
the idiot child of ufology. The intention of this article is to
help familiarize the reader with the specifics of this
remarkable episode in Post War History. To best appreciate this
account however it is important that we view it in some context.
More, that we have a basic understanding of how Reich came to
arrive at that quietly historic moment in 1953 when he first
pointed a series of long metal pipes at an unknown object high
above his rural Maine property and observed that object react as
a direct result, then upon re-aiming, react again, and again.

Background

Wilhelm Reich was born in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1897.
His father was a stern government bureaucrat, his artistic
mother, a piano teacher. "Willi" and his brother Robert grew up
on the family's rural estate observing nature and natural
functioning first hand on a daily basis. Both were educated by
private tutors. In 1914 the Balkans erupted in flames, and over
the next four years World War One swept the empire and the rest
of old Europe into oblivion. Reich served with distinction as an
artillery officer in the Austro-Hungarian Army until war's end.
With all of the family's property and holdings vaporized in the
empire's defeat, Reich made his way to Vienna where he enrolled
medical school, supporting himself as a tutor for the duration
of his studies.

Reich was drawn to Vienna in part because of his intense
interest in the pioneering work of Dr. Sigmund Freud. Following
his graduation from medical school he became a pupil of Freud's,
then went on to work as Freud's assistant for the next six
years. They parted ways in 1929 when Reich, after much clinical
work and observation in the early psychoanalytic tradition,
presented case findings to Freud supporting his view that
literally all human neurosis were, at the deepest levels, were
rooted in some form of sexual dysfunction, a radical notion for
Victorian Vienna and mental health professionals of the 1920s.

Freud and his followers believed that many neuroses had a sexual
basis, but certainly not all of them. Reich's radical view that
the social problems of individuals and governments were caught
up in the dynamics of sexual repression estranged him from his
analyst colleagues. Reich's departure from the Freudian ranks
created a backlash of resentment and the origin of the myth of
his mental instability. After all, why else would he have split
with the great Freud? The rumor mongering and innuendo begun by
former psychoanalytic colleagues would follow him for the
remainder of his life.

It was about 1927 when Reich first became involved with the
Austrian Communist Party, his intention being to marry the
revolutionary mission of their already-existing mental health
clinics to those of healthy sexual functioning for workers. Here
responsible sex education and contraceptives were freely
disseminated. The popularity of these "Sexpol" (sex/politics)
clinics extended into Germany and then the Soviet Union, and for
a time were allowed to thrive. Much to the disappointment and
upset of the communists however, sexually healthy workers and
party members tended to put their personal happiness and goals
above those of the party, a travesty that could not be allowed
to stand: by 1934 Reich had been expelled from the Communist
Party, their rationale for his expulsion being that, yes - the
once-brilliant young scientist was now manifesting symptoms of
insanity. The essence of his alleged mental illness is reflected
in this obviously unhinged statement, "This is what I am
fighting for: the prevention of emotional human misery by the
establishment of a normal and natural - that is, orgastically
satisfying =88 human life in the masses of people. To any group or
individual intent on controlling the lives and thoughts of
others, these are the words of a truly dangerous man. The party
never forgave him this travesty and efforts to damage his
reputation and impugn his work became commonplace from 1934 on.

Later that year he immigrated to Scandinavia. Here he continued
with his experiments and therapeutic practice with a core group
of colleagues, devoting much of his experimental work and study
to the dynamics of cancer formation. His outstanding books The
Impulsive Character, Character Analysis, People In Trouble, The
Mass Psychology of Fascism and The Cancer Biopathy all came out
of this period. Reich immigrated to the United States in 1939
and was invited to join the faculty of New York City's New
School for Social Research the following year. He settled in
Forest Hills, a then-quiet district in the Borough of Queens
where he went into private practice, wrote, and refined his
character analytic therapy, or medical orgone therapy as it
became known. Energetic functioning in people was now his
primary interest and his key efforts were directed toward
dissolving the chronic muscular contractions of his patients.
This human "armoring" served to block natural feeling and hold
neurotic behavior in place.

The Orgone Energy Accumulator

It was during this time that he discovered the specifically
biological energy which he called orgone, and a deceptively
simple therapeutic and experimental device that could
concentrate the energy and allow it to be measured in a
laboratory setting. He named it the orgone energy accumulator,
or ORAC. Thinking individuals in many cultures had long pondered
this energy. Early Hindu texts referred to it as the "Prana,"
while Victorians named it the "ether," but the former tended to
mystify the concept while the latter to mechanize it. The size
of the accumulators Reich and his associates constructed over
the years varied, from that of a small box up to a large room.
However the ORAC most people are familiar with was designed to
hold a single person and about the size of a small phone booth.
A properly constructed accumulator is made up of alternating
layers of organic and inorganic material; steel wool and
fiberboard were found to be ideal for the purpose. The non-
metallic (organic) material tends to attract and hold the
atmospheric energy, while the metal (inorganic) also attracts
the energy, but unable to absorb it, rapidly reflects the
energy. Simply put, the accumulator works on the basis of what
Reich termed the orgonomic potential. That is, unlike the
conventional energy systems we are accustomed to thinking in
terms of, i.e.: electromagnetic energy moves from the stronger
system (the source) to the weaker - orgone energy flows from the
weaker system to the stronger one.

Sitting in an accumulator has a most perceivable result for
many, including myself. The weaker energy field radiating from
the inner layer (organic) is drawn to the stronger field of the
individual inside. The flow of the field is experienced as a
warming or tingling sensation. An individual with a naturally
high energetic charge may begin to feel uncomfortable fairly
quickly, possibly experiencing some dizziness, or the sensation
of some pressure in the head. Any such feelings quickly
dissipate when you exit. A person with a low energy charge
however can remain in an accumulator much longer while feeling
little if any difference. The number of layers used in the
device's construction contributes to its relative power; the
more layers, the higher the energetic potential. Depending on
the person, effects can be felt within a few minutes. A small
accumulator can be used to germinate plant seeds at an
accelerated rate while a slightly modified version speeds the
healing time of wounds and burns. I speak here from many well-
documented user and investigative accounts, as well as from
personal experience. Therapeutically, sitting in an ORAC has an
expansive effect on the organism, especially in terms of the
blood vessels. It also increases the bioenergetic level of the
experiencer by charging the tissues and the blood. There is no
set or prescribed length of time for its use, though fifteen
minutes to half an hour once or twice a day is not an unusual
routine.

Reich persevered with experiments designed to isolate and
confirm the reality of orgone energy, but aware of the
controversy the announcement of such a discovery might create,
he continued to verify his findings without fanfare or public
acknowledgement. One of the experiments was calculated to
measure the heat inside an ORAC and compare it with the
temperature inside a control box. The experiment was named To-T
(T oh minus T). Reich and his colleagues observed that a change
in the atmosphere would alter the temperature differential, and
To-T is a reliable predictor of changes in the weather. If there
is a conventional explanation for this temperature differential,
one that can be demonstrated under laboratory conditions, I am
not aware of it.

The Einstein Affair

In late December 1940, Reich sent a carefully worded letter
about his work to Albert Einstein. The letter, written in
German, said, in part, "Several years ago I discovered a
specific biological energy which in many ways behaves
differently from anything that is known about electromagnetic
energy. The matter is too complicated and sounds too improbable
to be explained clearly in a brief letter. I can only indicate
that I have evidence that the energy, which I have called
orgone, exists not only in living organisms, but also in the
soil and in the atmosphere; it is visible and can be
concentrated and measured (emphasis his), and I am using it with
some success in research on cancer therapy." The physicist
responded by letter six days later, apparently intrigued enough
to invite Reich to demonstrate the existence of this energy in
person. The meeting was arranged through Einstein's secretary-
assistant, Helen Dukas, and set for January 13, 1941.

The two men met for more than four hours that afternoon to
discuss Reich's work and findings. He had brought several
experimental devices with him to demonstrate his findings, and
Einstein observed the glowing orgone energy for himself through
a laboratory apparatus designed for that purpose. Seemingly
unwilling to believe his own eyes, the great physicist
acknowledged the decided glow, but refused to rule out what he
described as "the subjective element." It was toward the end of
their meeting that Reich told Einstein of the measurable heat
created inside the ORAC. Conversation then shifted to the
implications of such a discovery, something not lost on either
scientist. Reich noted in his diary that Einstein's reaction had
been, "That is impossible. Should this be true, it would be a
great bomb (to physics)." An understandable reaction, given that
the heat differential which had been repeatedly observed by
Reich and his assistants during To-T violated the Second Law of
Thermodynamics - that is, that equal volumes tend to equalize in
temperature. In anticipation of the meeting Reich had noted in
his diary, "Orgone constitutes the "field" that Einstein is
searching for. Electricity, magnetism, gravitation, etc., depend
on its functions." Einstein wanted to verify this temperature
differential for himself and Reich returned to Princeton the
following week to deliver the necessary equipment. We do not
know what Einstein wrote about this meeting, or about Reich.
Author Jim Martin noted that Einstein's Archives never responded
to any of his information requests, making them the only archive
to ignore a research inquiry during the preparation of his book,
Wilhelm Reich and the Cold War.

It is fair to say that in 1941 Albert Einstein was the best-
known scientist in the world; he had been so since his Theory of
General Relativity first began to make worldwide scientific news
in 1919. Einstein arrived in America from Germany in 1933, along
with his assistant and secretary Helen Dukas. While the FBI was
aware of the physicist's left-leaning sympathies, they strongly
suspected Ms. Dukas of being an active asset of Soviet
intelligence since at least 1929. Both Ms. Dukas and Dr.
Einstein were put under fairly close observation by the FBI from
the time they entered this country. (The FBI would soon begin to
build a huge file on Reich as well). Surveillance increased
following his joining other physicists in signing a secret
letter dated December 30, 1940 advising President Roosevelt to
authorize development of an atomic bomb project, this as the
Germans might be moving ahead on just such a venture (they
were).

Einstein spent a week conducting and studying To-T, and on
February 7 wrote Reich that he had confirmed (and reconfirmed)
that the accumulator registered an average 0.3-0.4 degree
temperature (centigrade) higher than the control box, confirming
Reich's assertion, and the observations of numerous others of
the past sixty years. But then one of Einstein's assistants
offered a simple explanation. The differential was caused by
"convection" - that is, the difference between the air
temperatures under and above the table the accumulator had been
placed on: Einstein had set one box on a table and suspended
another in the air. He closed the letter, "I hope this
(explanation) will awaken your sense of skepticism, so that you
will not allow yourself to be deceived by an illusion that can
be easily explained. Please have someone pick up your
instruments, since they are of some value. They are undamaged.
With friendly greetings, A. Einstein."

Stung, Reich wrote back imploring Einstein to re-conduct the
experiment, but this time following the strict protocols devised
to eliminate such a false explanation. Reich even describes his
having repeatedly and successfully conducting To-T with both
boxes buried underground, thus eliminating any possibility of
"convection," but Einstein would hear none of it. Reich thought
it memorable that that Einstein had been so willing to accept
the first rationale that had come along, as his expressing no
interest in re-conducting the experiment under more controlled
conditions. The letter ended with a moving plea for some respect
and consideration, but no direct response was ever forthcoming.
We do not know if Einstein even saw this letter; at the time all
of his mail would have been screened by Helen Dukas, who may
have had her own reasons for not wanting Einstein to confirm
Reich's findings. Letters from Reich and his colleagues and
Einstein and his assistants continued to change hands over the
next few years, but the no resolve was ever achieved. Jim Martin
writes in Wilhelm Reich and the Cold War:

Reich's letter to Einstein in response to "convection" is the
most eloquent example of scientific dialogue I have ever read.
Indeed, Reich's description of the issues involved, the
experimental protocols to test the objection, and the design of
new experiments to shed light on the question, so inspired me
when I first read The Einstein Affair, that I set up the
experiment at home. I confirmed the basic fact, for myself, and
have sought a rational explanation that fit into established
physical science, without success. Like so many of Reich's
discoveries, this has been completely ignored, but never
experimentally refuted.

Anyone interested in learning more about this equally compelling
and frustrating footnote to the scientific history of the
Twentieth Century can secure a copy of The Einstein Affair from
the Wilhelm Reich Museum bookstore in Rangeley, Maine. The
publication, which contains the complete Reich-Einstein
correspondence, includes all the protocols necessary for
conducting the To-T experiment; it is written in a manner that
will allow any interested layperson to conduct the experiment
for themselves.

Mrs. Brady and the FDA

The Federal Drug Administration began to build its case against
Reich in 1947. The red flag which alerted them to the danger
Reich and his work posed to the American people was an
extraordinarily vicious smear article written by a far-left-
leaning journalist, Mildred Edie Brady. "The Strange Case of
Wilhelm Reich" appeared in the May 26, issue of The New
Republic; other biased and distorted articles followed. Time
Magazine's offering was entitled "The Marvelous Sex Box."
Brady's article was a masterpiece of distortion which attacked
Reich's "sex racket" while trumpeting an out-and-out lie;
namely, that he had stated the orgone accumulator was a cure-
all. Mrs. Brady was not your routine freelancer; she was, among
other things, a respected member of the drug regulation elite
and actively helped to create FDA legislation as early as 1938.
She was also a founder of Consumers Union, a communist-dominated
organization which had broken away from Consumers Research, Inc.
in 1935. Brady was also professionally associated with one of
Reich's lawyers: Arthur Garfield Hays was a Sponsor of Consumers
Union. Former Consumers Research board member, J.B. Matthews,
wrote that in the nineteen thirties Hays was known to support
the Communist Party via its "united front" organizations. Reich
was unaware of his attorney's politics, and of his association
with Mrs. Brady.

There is no question that The New Republic article was clearly
libelous, and Reich instructed Hays to initiate libel action
against Mrs. Brady and the magazine. His medical colleagues
agreed and likewise wrote to Brady in support of Reich's
decision. Incredibly, Hays talked his client out of pressing the
action, and the scientist, unfortunately, took his counselor's
advice. This proved to be a crucial misstep and other scurrilous
articles followed over the years that the FDA quietly went about
building its case. Hays never told Reich that he knew and worked
with Brady, but in an equally pronounced travesty of justice,
one of Reich's other lawyers, Peter Mills, would go on to become
the prosecuting attorney when Reich finally came to trial. But
there were greater factors at play here as well. Jim Martin's
tenacious investigative scholarship has established that The New
Republic's owner, Michael Straight, was deeply connected to the
members of the Cambridge Five Soviet spy ring, and a legal
action against Brady and the publication might well have put
Straight on the stand. With Hays successfully convincing Reich
to waive any legal action, a trial-based opportunity to reveal
the degree to which Soviet intelligence had penetrated British
intelligence was lost.

"What do they want for Proof? There is no proof. There are no
authorities whatsoever. No president, no academy, court of law,
congress or senate on this earth has the knowledge or power to
decide what will be the knowledge of tomorrow. There is no use
in trying to prove something that is unknown to someone who is
ignorant of the unknown, or fearful of its threatening power.
Only the good, old rules of learning will eventually bring about
understanding of what has invaded our earthly existence."

                           --Wilhelm Reich, Contact With Space

Reich moved from New York to an area just outside the town of
Rangeley in rural southern Maine in the early nineteen fifties.
Here he built a new home and laboratory personally designed to
integrate home and laboratory into a single, brilliantly
practical building, now the home of the Wilhelm Reich Museum.
Another laboratory was added soon after for students. This
structure was the setting for the so-called Oranur Experiment, a
chilling example of the accumulator's undeniable ability to
concentrate energy. The experiment called for the placing of a
very small amount of radium in an accumulator, the unexpected
result of which was to toxify a surprisingly large area of
southern Maine surrounding his home and laboratory, one that
took several months to dissipate.

And so we come to it. Reich's interest in UFOs dates from 1953.
Why did he become interested in them, and how did he arrive at
his conclusions concerning them? Until 1953 there is no written
or anecdotal indication that he had paid any attention to all
the publicity surrounding "flying saucers," even when, in 1952,
some visitors to his home and laboratory reported seeing shining
objects in the sky that were decidedly not stars. In November
1953, though, he read one of the best books available on the
subject at the time, Flying Saucers from Outer Space. The
author, a retired Marine Corps Major named Donald Keyhoe, was a
highly respected and decorated World War II fighter pilot and
pioneered much of the basis for modern scientific UFO studies.
Reich's writings indicate he was intrigued by Keyhoe's
observation that the maneuverability, speed and silence of the
unknowns repeatedly defied conventional laws of mechanical
flight. At the time, Reich wrote, "I had not studied anything on
the subject: I knew practically nothing about it. But my mind,
used to expecting surprises in natural research, was open to
anything that seemed real."

Keyhoe's book was followed by E. J. Ruppelt's Report on UFOs.
Ruppelt was a retired USAF Captain who had headed the Air
Force's ongoing UFO record-keeping (and public relations)
program, Project Blue Book, and his book prompted Reich to note,
"The Ruppelt Report on UFOs clearly reveals the helplessness of
mechanistic method in coming to grips with the problems posed by
the spacemen. The cosmic orgone energy which these living beings
are using in their technology is beyond the grasp of mechanistic
science since cosmic laws of functioning are not mechanical but
what I term "functional." The helplessness of mechanical
thinking appears in the tragic shortcoming of our fastest
fighter jets to make and hold contact with UFOs. Being
unavoidably outdistanced is not a flattering situation for
military pride. The conclusion seems correct: Mechanistic
methods of locomotion must be counted out in coping with the
spaceship problem."

One night as he sat on the steps outside his home in Maine,
something flashed by at great speed, its behavior not suggestive
of a comet, meteorite, or shooting star. Reich reported the
sighting to the Air Force Base at Presque Island, Maine; it was
the first of many sighting reports he would forward to the Air
Force. Following his report, he was asked to fill out an
official questionnaire. In March, 1954, Reich sent a copy of his
survey on UFOs to the Air Force. The survey was actually a
manuscript detailing his theoretical conclusions of them as
spacecraft.

The questionnaire came out of AFR 200-2, the Air Forces=82
regulations regarding the reporting of UFOs which had gone into
effect in August of that year. Reich had filled out copies of
the form following a number of sightings. His daughter, Dr. Eva
Reich, now a retired physician living in Maine, recalled that
"the interest of the Air Force in UFOs was being totally
suppressed at that time. When you reported a UFO, they came to
you with this questionnaire, and told you it was secret, and had
you fill it out. Then they took it away; what happened with it,
nobody knows. When Reich published the questionnaire in Contact
With Space, he revealed a big secret."

Basic to this scientist's understanding of the universe was the
pervasive presence of energy (which he termed orgone energy),
implying the possibility of life in space. At this time his
questioning encompassed the galactic currents, the formation and
destruction of star systems, and the origin of the universe
itself. Along with his deepening involvement in cloudbusting, he
now began a careful examination of the stars and set about
proving that some "stars" did not behave like others. The method
he used was nocturnal, time-lapse photography. In this
investigatory technique, the camera is carefully set to face the
night sky with the shutter open: the experiment proceeded with
unexpected results. Some of the stars did not produce the white
lines caused by the Earth's rotation. These stars simply
vanished indicating they were something else. He now began to
wonder in earnest what they might be, and specifically what they
were doing in the skies over Maine.

Reich saw the Oranur Experiment, with its massive pollution of
the Maine area, as the cause of their immediate interest in the
region. Considering his own observations, those of a number of
co-workers, and independent reports of UFO activity over Maine,
it was hardly egoistic that he should assume that his activities
might be the subject of their special attention. If these craft
had harnessed the sea of energy pervading the universe, what
might be the effect of training a cloudbuster on one? The
results of this action were both profound and disturbing. He
writes in Contact With Space:

"I hesitated for weeks to turn my cloudbuster pipes toward a
"star" as if I had known that some of the blinking lights
hanging in the sky were no planets or stars but space machines.
With the fading out of the two "stars," the cloudbuster had
suddenly changed into a space-gun. When I saw the "star" to the
west fade out four times in succession, what had been left of
the old world of human knowledge after the discovery of orgone
energy, tumbled beyond retrieve. From now on everything,
anything, was possible. Nothing could any longer be considered
"impossible." I had directed the draw-pipes connected with the
deep well towards and ordinary star and the star had faded out
four times. There was no mistake about it. Three more people had
seen it. There was only one conclusion: The thing we had drawn
from was not a star. It was something else - a UFO! The shock of
this experience was great enough not to repeat such an action
until 10 October 1954."

Preceding this, on October 5 and 6, three large, yellow UFOs
hung low over the southern horizon with another over the
observatory on Reich's property. On October 10, a large reddish
UFO hovered just to the south of the property. At this point,
the cloudbuster was trained on it and it moved. The unknown
became less red as the device kept its aim, then moved higher,
and later sank down below the horizon. Shortly thereafter, a
second light (yellow) appeared in the west. After two minutes of
direct drawing, it faded, came back, flashed, pulsated, and
wobbled while moving irregularly from south to north. There was
for Reich the distinct, subjective impression of a struggle. It
came back again shortly after, and again, became fainter and
smaller after drawing on it. The remaining four unknowns (to the
north, south and west) then removed themselves, disappearing
from sight."

On October 10, for a second time, Reich dimmed "stars" and
induced them to move, "as if in flight in different directions."
He again concluded they were machines, and not ones of
terrestrial origin. While it might seem naive to some, Reich
choose to direct his written concerns regarding this likelihood
directly to President Eisenhower. The White House response asked
him to send such communications to the Air Force, and to the
CIA. As a result, a letter articulating his observations of, and
concerns about UFOs was sent to the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency, a career Naval Intelligence officer named
Roscoe H. Hillenkotter. Reich would have had no way of knowing,
but in more rarefied circles the Director was sometimes referred
to by another title - MJ-1.

Not only had Reich inadvertently made contact with a member of
the President's Ultra Secret UFO working group, he had reached
out to its top man. Was the information Reich supplied a
contributing factor in Hillenkoetter's becoming such a vocal
opponent of UFO secrecy following his stepping down as Director,
or was this simply part of a plan to allow an extremely highly
placed operative to insinuate himself smack in the center of
civilian UFO counterculture? I cannot say, but I am convinced
that if the members of MJ-12 were not aware of Reich's UFO-
related activities prior to October 1954, they were from that
time on, and would have identified him as a man whose actions
bore monitoring, and possibly worse.

In Wilhelm Reich and the Cold War, Jim Martin identifies one
other plausible link between Reich and MJ-12, and his name was
Lewis W. Douglas. Reich refers to him briefly in Contact With
Space as the Director Savings and Loan, and as a close associate
of President Eisenhower. He was also Director of Research for
the Institute of Atmospheric Physics in Tucson and a man very
interested in weather control. Their first contact dates from
1954 when Reich had his assistant, William Moise, attempt to
contact Douglas and arrange a meeting with him. It had not been
Reich who suggested to Moise that he get in touch with Douglas,
it had been Charles Gardner, Jr., Executive Secretary of the
Advisory Committee on Weather Control for the government; he was
also the National Weather Bureau's liaison with the Institute of
Atmospheric Physics. Gardner had actually written to Moise on
March 21, 1955 saying "we appreciate being informed of your
activities." Douglas's secretary wrote up Moise's calls in the
form of memos. The first one read, in part, "He {Moise} had just
come from Washington and had spoken to people in the Dept. of
Agriculture, Weather Bureau and in Mr. Gardner's office about
weather control. They suggested that Mr. D {Douglas} might be
interested in information he had." But no answer was forthcoming
until July 27 when Douglas cabled Moise, and Reich and Douglas
began to correspond. They likely would have met in Tucson later
that year, but Douglas had to be hospitalized for major surgery
during the time Reich visited Arizona.

My colleagues Jim Martin and Kenn Thomas (archivist, author and
conspiracy-related publisher) have engaged in some educated
speculation on the possibility of a link between Lew Douglas and
MJ-12, and it is worth relating here. I draw directly from
Martin's published comments in doing so. Douglas was known to be
very close to Eisenhower and had a well known interest in
weather control. The Douglas-Moise Memo=82 is dated July 14, 1954,
only ten days prior to the seminal National Archives=82 MJ-12
document, the Cutler-Twining Memo. Thomas reminds us that Robert
Cutler had been with the CIA as a psyops (psychological
operations) expert, and instrumental in bringing Eisenhower's
"Atoms for Peace" to completion. In his memo, Cutler informs
USAF General Nathan Twining (MJ-4) that a scheduled meeting is
being changed, and that the "Special Studies Project" would now
meet "during the already scheduled White House meeting of July
16, rather than following it as previously intended." What the
actual reason for this change, it insured that President
Eisenhower would be in attendance. Quoting Martin:

Thomas suggests that the timing of this sequence of events might
indicate that Douglas, as a member of Eisenhower's "kitchen
cabinet," may have been privy to or associated with the MJ-12
group. I agree that Douglas, one of the most powerful men in
American politics at the time, would have known about MJ-12 if
it existed. Thomas argues that Douglas, having been briefed
about the meeting of MJ-12 members on July 16 at the White
House, developed a more serious interest in Reich's planned
operations in Tucson on the basis of Reich's observations of
UFOs. This would have explained the sudden change in attitude on
July 27, 1955, when Douglas sent a telegram to Moise inviting
further correspondence. After all, Douglas had hired a "UFO
nut," James E. McDonald, to head the IAP in 1954."

Freewheeling conspiratorial musings or grounded, informed
speculation? Personally, I subscribe to the latter. For the
record, Martin establishes that Reich drove through Roswell on
his way to Tucson. There is some intriguing anecdotal evidence
that he returned there, but it is not inconclusive.

Reich's point of view on UFOs shifted between 1953 and 1957. At
first he theorized they were benign observers, but gradually
became convinced that, either by intention or accident, they
were contributing to the pollution accumulating in the
atmosphere. Contact With Space, privately published after his
1957 death, documents early weather modification, or CORE
(cosmic orgone engineering) operations and the 1954-55
cloudbusting expedition to Arizona. The book, published in an
edition of only five hundred, details a great deal more
information than this paper is designed to cover, and it is not
my intention here to synopsize this sweeping text, only that
Reich's scientific observations of, interactions with, and
findings on UFOs chronicled in Contact With Space made it
indispensable in the preparation of this article.

The following day, October 11, Reich authorized his friend,
research associate and son-in-law (who was a trained cloudbuster
operator), to call the Air Technical Intelligence Command (ATIC)
in Dayton, Ohio, and make an appointment to discuss the
disabling of the UFOs the previous day. Moise was in Ohio on his
way to Arizona at the time. A meeting with a General Watson was
agreed upon on for October 14. Over the phone Watson asked
Moise, if necessary, could their conference be continued into
the evening, and how did Reich know that the UFOs had been
disabled? Moise arrived at the facility early on the 14th where
he was met by a Dr. Byers, a physicist employed by the command.
Byers escorted Moise to the conference, also attended by a USAF
Captain Hill and a civilian named Harry Haberer (6:8). Asking
where General Watson was, Moise was told that he was unable to
attend. Angered, Moise left and returned to his Dayton motel.
The next day Moise received a phone call from Captain Hill
conveying Watson's apologies and was asked if the report could
be made to ATIC Deputy Commander Colonel Wertenbaker. Moise
agreed and they met later that day. Present were Captain Hill,
Dr. Byers, Haberer and the Colonel. Moise gave an oral
presentation and all took notes except the Colonel. Feeling that
this had been a significant meeting, that at least some
breakthrough had been made in interesting a branch of the
government in Reich's observations of the involvement with UFOs,
Moise wrote that:

The contact with Col. Wertenbaker was excellent throughout the
conference. He was serious, intent and looked at me while I
talked. He was the only one who did. His excitement increased as
the report progressed.

Several days later, the Colonel wrote to the Director of
Intelligence for the Air Force - somehow this note ended up in
the Food and Drug Administration's case file on Reich. It read
in part:

General Watson did not talk personally to Mr. Moise, I am happy
to say, but I interviewed this person . . . the information
given us by Moise defies description and I'll not attempt to
give you the details . . . the Air Force will do well to avoid
entanglements but what is absolutely necessary from the
standpoint of good public relations.

Dr. Byers, the physicist, told Moise that he was familiar with
Reich's work. Harry Haberer, the civilian in attendance, was
described as working on the history of UFOs with the Air Force.
Leaving Ohio, Moise continued on to Arizona. Meanwhile, Reich,
his son Peter, and several others were driving west as well.
Each vehicle carried an appropriate assortment of laboratory
equipment and had a cloudbuster in tow. They arrived at the
leased property ten miles outside of Tucson on October 19, 1954.
Once settled in, they commenced drawing operations, regularly
observing the atmosphere with their meteorological instruments.
Records were kept in accordance with strict scientific method.
Individual journals were also kept.

Robert McCulloch, another trained cloudbuster operator, assisted
Reich and Moise in the operation. Drawing began at the end of
October and many UFOs were observed during the nights of October
31 and November 1 over the area. By November 7, moisture in the
atmosphere had risen from the usual 15% to 65%, an unheard of
relative humidity for Tucson. Drawing continued, mostly from the
southwest direction. On November 7, the first clouds were
forming thickly and soon covered the sky, indicating rain. Then,
without apparent explanation, the clouds began to decompose.
That evening, a large, bright UFO was seen coming up from the
north. It moved slowly southwest until it stopped and hovered
for several hours ten to fifteen degrees above the southern
horizon. A connection between the dissipation of clouds and the
presence of UFOs in the skies seemed unavoidable after this
sequence of events continued to repeat itself.

Weather modification was a subject of genuine interest to a
number of military and civilian offices within the Eisenhower
Administration, and the Tucson-based Institute of Atmospheric
Physics was founded in 1953 as a direct result of the
President's 1953 Advisory Committee on Weather Control. An
atmospheric physicist with a background in Naval intelligence
was appointed to the committee as Associate Director, and at
some point during that November or December may have met Reich.
His name was Dr. James E. McDonald, and we know him to be
another scientist of great courage and passion, one who, like
Reich, had the temerity to work toward bringing the subject of
serious UFO studies to the American public, much to the
detriment of both their careers. Eva Reich recalled that
McDonald had visited the cloudbusting site when a TV crew came
to film their operations, and that both he and Reich had been
interviewed for the report. But the footage was never aired.
=46rom what we know of Dr. McDonald, there is every likelihood he
would have had cause for serious interest in at least two areas
of Reich's work. Still, we do not know conclusively whether the
two actually met, and possibly talked that day, or whether their
paths had merely crossed on the edge of that desert. But there
is the additional factor to consider as well - that at the time
McDonald was working closely with and for the previously
discussed Lew Douglas.

By November 13, the relative humidity had risen to 67% and rain
seemed imminent in a location which had seen none in five years.
But by that evening the humidity had dropped twenty points to
47%. The next day, two bright, pulsating, flashing UFOs were
seen low in the eastern sky. Upon direct draw, the first dimmed
after an initial stronger blinking, then remained dim. The
second wobbled, then it too, dimmed markedly. Suddenly, a third
came up in the east, as if from nowhere. Early on the morning of
the 18th, a UFO was seen on the horizon and within two hours an
Air Force aircraft was seen circling the area. More UFOs
continued to be observed in direct relationship with the
destruction of the relative humidity.

On the morning of November 29, Reich, looking at the eastern sky
through a three-and-a-half inch refracting telescope, observed a
fully articulated cigar-shaped craft. In his notes he writes
that he first refused to accept the notions, but windows were
clearly observed on the object and recorded in his drawings. The
ship was observed, as cloud cover would allow, off and on
between December 1 and December 17. Charts of its movements were
kept.

By December 14, the atmosphere in the area of the base camp, and
indeed, in Tucson itself was oppressive and deadening. Just
prior to this Reich's associate, Dr. Silvert, had transported a
small amount of radioactive material that had been exposed in an
accumulator from Maine to the Tucson site. The material had to
be towed on a cable one hundred feet behind a hired plane as its
lead shielding was unable to contain its altered reaction. At
about 4:30 PM, a huge black cloud formed over the Tucson area,
gradually turning deep purple with a somewhat reddish glow. The
background radiation count in the area jumped to an alarming one
hundred thousand counts per minute. The usual background count
had been holding at six to eight hundred counts per minute.
Twelve Air Force planes over flew the base camp and their
contrails (made of water vapor) quickly dissolved. Twenty
minutes after both cloudbusters began drawing, the skies cleared
At 5:30 PM four B-56 bombers flew in low over the area. Reich
felt that this "cloud" masked the presence of other UFOs. If so,
this incident was indeed properly categorized as a battle.
Interest in the newly arrived and highly aggravated radioactive
material was a suspected cause of their appearance.

As these historic events were transpiring, the University of
Arizona's weather modification study was ongoing and in process.
Part of the study involved the time-lapse photography of jet
planes contrails. As recorded, Reich had observed and reported
their presence during various cloudbusting operations, and had
observed the disintegration of their contrails during operations
in Arizona. He even wondered "Whether the Air Force had actually
such problems in mind, I cannot tell." Investigative author Jim
Martin was able to locate color film from the fifties in the
University of Arizona's Physics and atmospheric Science Building
showing Air Force jets being used in weather modification
experiments as Reich himself had wondered about. These and other
such findings led me to believe that our government had a very
real interest in Dr. Reich's UFO observations and findings, as
well as in his weather modification work =88 from the President on
down. By way of one last example (or coincidence) we should take
note that on November 22, 1955, President Eisenhower's proposal
for the peaceful use of atomic energy was accepted by the United
Nations. It was called "Atoms for Peace." Some months prior,
Reich had sent Eisenhower a copy of his paper documenting the
Oranur Experiment, and the operations and experiments that had
sprung from it. The paper was entitled "Atoms for Peace."

The literature generated about Reich's contempt trial is
considerable and any treatment here must oversimplify its many
complexities. While interested readers should try and locate a
copy of Jerome Greenfield's book, Wilhelm Reich versus the USA,
among other works on the subject, the basics are as follows. The
Federal Drug Administration had begun accumulating information
toward building a case against the scientist shortly after
Mildred Brady's article appeared in 1947, but it had been slow
going. None of Reich's past or current patients or any of those
with the physicians he=82d trained in medical orgone therapy had
registered a complaint with the FDA, or any other authority for
that matter. Reich and his associates had broken no laws, but
given that the FDA knew he was a quack and orgonomy a fraud, it
stood to reason there was no need to put any of his alleged
experiments to the test. Their responsibility was to bring this
sex obsessed medical menace to justice and they remained
undeterred in their efforts. And so the FDA went to the federal
court and brought a complaint against the interstate shipment of
accumulators or any components thereof. Their break came in 1955
when one of Reich's physicians, Dr. Michael Silvert, did just
that, and Reich, then involved in the Tucson cloudbusting
operation, took legal responsibility for the injunction's
violation. Silbert felt that allowing the matter to go to court
would be the equivalent of admitting they were in the wrong.
Reich, after due consideration, agreed and wrote to the judge
explaining his decision noting that his argument might be
rejected; they did, and the complaint became an injunction.

FDA agents began showing up on Reich's property, but he refused
to allow them access to any of his apparatus's or written
materials and continued with his experiments. This resulted in a
contempt of court citation, and while their original legal parry
had been civil, it had now graduated to a criminal and a court
date was set. Given the betrayal of his lawyers, he decided to
represent himself, and against the advice of some of those
closest to him, chose to make the trial a forum for the validity
of his research and findings. Eloquent though he was, the judge
would have none of it and he was convicted and sentenced to two
years in Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary in Lewisburg,
Pennsylvania. He was fifty nine years old.

Once in prison Reich underwent psychiatric evaluation. Staff
psychiatrists noted that he "gave no concrete evidence of being
mentally incompetent," but diagnosed him as being a paranoid
schizophrenia, this while admitting their finding was "not based
on physical evaluation." Early release was denied and the
Supreme Court chose not to comment on his final writ. He was
found dead in his cell on November 3, 1957, just seven days
before his scheduled release date.

Since his death, most accounts of Dr. Wilhelm Reich's life and
work, be they supportive or otherwise, follow a similar logic:
that the level of importance which he ascribed to his UFO
observations (and his allegations that the communists were out
to get him) were, in themselves, a means of "proving," or at
least suggesting that he had gone quite mad during his last
years. Such material is often presented in a manner suggesting
that a good deal of "fairness," objectivity and patience were
spent in sorting all this out=82 for the reader. Some writers
don=82t even bother. With no real interest in fair scientific
inquiry or method, and no serious grounding in UFO studies,
orgonomy, or the documented specifics of the conspiracy to
destroy his reputation and discredit his work, Reich's
detractors accuse and rant, exposing the madness they perceive.
Often written in angry displays of public-spirited concern, they
warn the good reader away, like police at the scene of an
accident. Other accounts are simply inaccurate.

In Contact With Space, Dr. Wilhelm Reich's reflections on the
possible implications of an extraterrestrial reality are often
moving, profound and disturbing. He dares, as a scientist, to
exercise a most precious right: the right to challenge an
established and accepted belief, the right to think a thought,
no matter how others might perceive it, recording that thought
for publication and standing by it in the face of almost
universal criticism. Read out of context - that is, without
benefit of any serious study of his previous writings,
methodology or discoveries - even the most intelligent and
perceptive reader may find it preferable to dismiss his
observations and conclusions as bearing witness to a great mind
finally derailed, rather than even considering them seriously.
The very act of claiming to have observed UFOs, and, over time,
their behavior, interacting with them via the cloudbuster,
ascribing to them intelligence and intention, keeping the Air
Force, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Bureau and
the office of the President appraised of his activities, and
finally, the posthumous publishing of Contact With Space, proved
intolerable to all by a few.

Even A. S. Neill, the distinguished British educator who was
Reich's loyal friend and colleague of many years, seemed
convinced these findings would only prove to be an embarrassment
to orgonomy. But not at first. In March of 1955, Neill wrote to
Reich:

Thanks for the saucer book which came a few days ago. It sure
made me sit up. So much Air Force testimony can't be ignored,
Inclined to accept your opinion that they are benign {an opinion
which changed markedly}, the only problem I can imagine would be
their arrival here to stop the inevitable atomic destruction of
all life. Mutual fear won't stop war. Almost looks as if Freud
was right in saying there is a death instinct when one sees the
whole mass of people thinking of football and radio etc. at a
time when the sinking of a U.S. aircraft carrier off Formosa or
the enthusiasm of a U.S. pilot might set the light to the
gunpowder barrel. Hence I say: let the spacemen come; they might
save us and if they came as destroyers they could not be more
dangerous than man himself.

I should stress here that Reich had few friendships or
professional relationships of such duration and depth and it is
not my intention to put a particular cast on Neill here. It is
just that he articulated the prevailing attitude so well. In
December 1957, a month after Reich's death, he wrote this to
Ilse Ollendorff, Reich's former wife and co-worker:

The difficulty will not be to separate what's valuable from what
isn't. The idea that the trial was orchestrated from Moscow is
just bunkum, and we have no proof of flying saucers anyway. Why
should Reich's great work be mixed up with either factor? That
Reich later had some illusions I think right, but they don't so
anything to lessen his work. We all have illusions and maybe the
greater we are, the greater the illusions. But that Eva {Reich's
daughter} and Moise {his son-in-law} and Steig {cartoonist and
illustrator of Reich's book Listen Little Man}, and a financial
backer of the Arizona expedition} should go on having illusions
is bad, bad for the future of Reich's acceptance as a scientist.

And there's the rub: "bad for the future of Reich's acceptance
as a scientist" - a consideration not taken lightly by Neill and
others deeply concerned about the future of orgonomy. I can only
wonder how Neill would have reacted had he been in the room when
students and faculty members at his beloved Summerhill school
described the UFO sightings they had had from the Summerhill
property in Leiston, Suffolk on the occasions I was a speaker
there. Author David Boadella sums the conundrum up:

why did the orthodox scientists and psychologists condemn Reich?
Why did they dismiss him as a paranoiac while Raknes (a
Norwegian colleague) and Dr. Hoppe of Israel and lots of the
sane American surgeons and physicians and I thought him to be
the most important thinker of our time? . . . I must face the
question that was so often raised by his enemies - his sanity. .
. . Apparently he believed that flying saucers were from other
worlds without due proof. Yet when the judge ordered him to be
examined by a board of psychiatrists, they pronounced him sane.

They were not alone. The great Reich scholar, Professor Paul
Matthews of New York University observed in his 1973 review of
Boadella's book, Wilhelm Reich: The Evolution of His Work:

Reich's scientific integrity, creativity, and genius, even to
the end of his life, need no defense or confirmation from me;
nor does his sanity need defense in the opinion of those who
were closest to him and in a position to gauge his mental
status, character structure, and work capacity at that time.

But does all this really come down to a question of Wilhelm
Reich's sanity? Medical researcher Ludwik Flek notes in his 1979
book, The Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact:

What we are faced with here is not so much a simple passivity or
mistrust of new ideas as an active approach which can be divided
into several stages.

A contradiction to the system appears unthinkable

What does not fit into the system remains unseen

Alternatively, if it is noticed, either it is kept secret, or
discredited

Laborious efforts are made to explain an exception in terms that
do not contradict the system

Despite the legitimate claims of contradictory views, one tends
to see, describe, or even illustrate those circumstances which
corroborate current views and thereby give them substance.

Thus the unacceptable or unacceptable theory is excluded. The
individual who persists in putting forth such a theory may
ultimately be excluded and, in a number of historic incidences,
declared to be out of touch with "reality" or insane. You may
have the knowledge of a master scientist and still not be able
to analyze or even see beyond the accepted theories of your own
era. Reich's work demands that we do just this.

Do Dr. Reich's observations, deductions and conclusions
concerning UFOs all conform to the best contemporary knowledge
on the subject? Many of them do, and are virtually identical to
those of countless other individuals. Can we say with certainty
that his death was the result of a conspiracy or fowl play
tracing back to MJ-12, the FDA, the Communist Party, the
"Hoodlums In Government" ("HIGS," as Reich termed them) employed
by the FDA, or to that powerful segment of society who tend to
mystify biology, then mechanically attempt to impose their own
sex-negative morality on the rest of us? No. The fact is that at
the time of his death Dr. Reich had high blood pressure was
overweight and a chronic smoker. But based on what he
represented to such diverse and powerful groups, would any (or
all) of the aforementioned have desired his death and had the
will and means to implement it? Oh yes. Without a doubt. And
with the official cause of death listed as a heart attack, the
question of murder is likely to remain an open one.

Irregardless of whether he was murdered or died of natural
causes, humanity lost a brilliant and courageous thinker in
November 1957, and one whose UFO-related work remains an
extremely significant area of study for any student of ufology.
I hope this paper will encourage readers to seek out the truth
of this matter for themselves, through reading and practical
application. While the most recent of the events described here
linger in the mists of history nearly fifty years past, they
continue to remain as shattering and relevant as if they had
occurred last week. Knowledge is often its own reward and anyone
who takes the time to Reich's understand work will only benefit
from it. To ignore the profound truths it embodies affirms the
actions of those who array themselves against all that is life
affirmative, and again sets the stage for the worst aspects of
history to repeat themselves. Remember, "Love, work and
knowledge are the wellsprings of our Life. They should also
govern it."

REFERENCES

Scharaf, M.: Fury On Earth: A Biography of Wilhelm Reich. New
York, St. Martin's Press/Marek, 1983

Reich, W, and edited by Boyd Higgins, M., and Raphael, C.:
Passion of Youth: An Autobiography. New York, Farrar Straus
Giroux, 1998

Reich, W, and edited by Boyd Higgins, M.: American Odyssey:
Letters and Journals, 1940-1947, New York, Farrar Straus Giroux,
1999

Martin, J.: Wilhelm Reich and the Cold War. Ft. Bragg,
California, Fort Bragg Books, 2000 (Note: Like Reich's Contact
With Space, Wilhelm Reich and the Cold War was published in an
edition of 500 copies, with all copies of Martin's book going to
subscribers who underwrote the cost of his research. I am
hopeful that we will see another edition of this important book
in the not too distant future.)

Robbins, P.: Wilhelm Reich and UFOs. The Journal of Orgonomy,
Volume 24, Number 2, New York, Orgonomic Publications, Inc, 1990

Robbins, P.: Wilhelm Reich and UFOs, Part II: Examining Evidence
and Allegations. The Journal of Orgonomy, Volume 25, Number 1,
New York, Orgonomic Publications, Inc, 1991

Reich, W.: Wilhelm Reich Biographical Material: History of the
Discovery of the Life Energy (American Period, 1939-1952)
Documentary Volume A - XI - E, The Einstein Affair. Rangeley,
Maine: Orgone Institute Press, 1953.

Reich, W.: Contact With Space. Rangeley, Maine: Orgone Institute
Press, 1957

Eden, J.: Planet in Trouble: The UFO Assault on Earth, New York,
The Exposition Press, 1973

Greenfield, J.: Wilhelm Reich VS. The U.S.A., New York, W.W.
Norton & Company, Inc., 1974

Westrum, R.: "The Blind Eye of Science," The Whole Earth Review,
No. 52, Fall, 1986

Boadella, D.: Wilhelm Reich: The Evolution of His Work. London:
Vision Press, 1973.

Croall, J. (ed.): Record of a Friendship: The Correspondence
Between

Wilhelm Reich and A.S. Neill. New York: Farrar &Giroux, 1981

Croall, J. (ed.): All the Best, Neill. London, Watts, 1984

Matthews, P.: "Book Review," Journal of Orgonomy, 7(2),
November, 1973

And conversations with Dr. Elsworth F. Baker, Dr Reich's former
first assistant; Reich biographer Dr. Myron Sharaf; author and
scientist, scientist and author Dr. Jim DeMeo, and investigative
writer and author Jim Martin.

* * * * * *

While almost all of the books written by Wilhelm Reich are
currently out of print, various editions are available through
better used book stores, book location services and on the
Internet. Recommended sources are The Wilhelm Reich Museum
Bookstore , The Orgone Biophysical Research Laboratory, The
Wilhelm Reich Museum Bookstore, The American College of Orgonomy
Bookstore. Books by Wilhelm Reich include:

American Odyssey: Letters and Journals, 1940-1947

Beyond Psychology: Letters and Journals, 1934-1939

The Bioelectrical Investigation of Sexuality and Anxiety

The Bion Experiments

The Cancer Biopathy

Contact With Space

Character Analysis

Children of the Future

Early Writings, Volume One

Ether, God and Devil / Cosmic Superimposition

The Function of the Orgasm

Genitality

The Impulsive Character

The Invasion of Compulsory Sex-Morality

Listen, Little Man!

The Mass Psychology of Fascism

The Murder of Christ

Passion of Youth: An Autobiography

People in Trouble

Record of a Friendship

Reich Speaks of Freud

Selected Writings

The Sexual Revolution

Peter Robbins has been involved in UFO studies for more than
twenty-five years, as a researcher, investigator, writer,
lecturer, activist and author. He is a board member of Budd
Hopkins' Intruders Foundation (which investigates the alien
abduction phenomenon) and contributor to Phenomena Magazine and
to their sister website, www.phenomenamagazine.com. He is also
the only Western staff writer for the Tokyo-based OUR-J UFO
Report. Robbins is co-author, along with Larry Warren, of the
British best-seller, Left at East Gate: A First-Hand Account of
the Bentwaters-Woodbridge UFO Incident, Its Cover-Up and
Investigation.

In December 2005 Peter will be embarking on a UK lecture tour to
mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Rendlesham Forest UFO





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                         UFOs Just What Name Implies

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:20:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:20:15 -0400
Subject: UFOs Just What Name Implies




Source: The Herald Democrat - Sherman, Texas, USA

http://tinyurl.com/aklxe

October 17 2005


UFOs Just What Name Implies, Says Perrin Veteran

By Donna Hunt
Today

"UFOs are just what the name implies n Unidentified Flying
Objects," Chandler Yergin of Tucson, Ariz., said this week when
contacted after last Sunday's column included parts of an
earlier interview with Yergin found on the Internet.

Yergin came to Perrin Air Force Base as an Airman Second Class
in 1951 to help install radar equipment. He was a radar mechanic
at the time and the crew had just completed the early warning
radar system at Perrin in March or April 1953, when the incident
in the column occurred.

The Internet piece told how Yergin was on duty performing
routine maintenance on a Plan Position Indicator when he saw a
huge blip in the New York sky. Yergin said that statement wasn't
true and he tried to correct the error with the reporter, but it
failed to be done. He learned about the huge blip through the
network of radar systems across the Southeast as it was picked
up on radar screens along the way.

Dick D. Williams of Denison pointed out last week that radar
will only reach about 300 miles and New York is way beyond that
boundary. Williams was at Perrin too in 1953 as a member of the
radar squadron, but the two didn't know each other.

Williams called the sighting "a bunch of bull." He said he came
to Perrin in 1953 before the radar site was completed and he and
the crew spent several months with nothing to do waiting for the
completion of the equipment. He worked with Carl Hagan,
commanding officer of the Radar Squadron, and Tony Cupp also was
among the first radar technicians who arrived here before the
equipment installation was completed.

The equipment, being brand new, was the most modern available
and could reach only about as far as Oklahoma City primarily
because of the curvature of the earth. Maximum distance for
radar is about 300 miles, Williams said.



Williams was one of the first members of the Radar Squadron,
coming here from Alaska with four or five others. He had 22
years in the service, six of those years between January 1952
until 1959. He was sent back for another tour of duty and when
Perrin closed, he retired as a Major and stayed in Denison.

Yergin agreed that the radar equipment would only reach about as
far as Oklahoma City, but said emphatically that when he picked
it up in that area he watched it split into nine smaller blips,
flying in formation.

At that time, Yergin said, the government was paranoid about
UFOs because there were so many reported sightings between 1950
and 1954. These sightings were being watched by Project Blue
Book teams that were at all bases and were already at Perrin
when the incident occurred.

He said this was the group of eight men in civilian suits with
uniformed armed guards who came into the radar hut, separated
the group and took them at gunpoint to a hangar on the back of
the field. They were interrogated for about four hours, during
which they had to draw diagrams of what they saw and write
narratives of everything that took place. They were ordered
never to talk about it to anyone under the threat of a $10,000
fine and 10 years in prison for violating the Official Secrets
Act.

Yergin said last week he has been on the "cutting edge" of
technology with a remarkable career of more than 37 years in
Aerospace Technology, working with prime contractors who
manufactured critical components for our satellites and weapon
systems. His clearances were secret and he was certified by NASA
to perform certain activities, he said.

"I KNOW there is nothing that can violate the laws of Physics as
we know them!" Yergin said, adding, "UFO's are simply
Unidentified Flying Objects."

He agreed that there is not a shred of evidence to confirm any
supernatural occurrence and the only real story about the
sighting was the paranoia of the government at that time. He
said a group of guys being taken at gunpoint, intimidated and
threatened with fine and imprisonment if they spoke about that
they had seen was pure paranoia.

"Eyewitness accounts of almost anything are notoriously
unreliable," he said, "especially where flying objects are
concerned and there is no frame of reference to determine size,
shape, height, speed, etc," He said he thought about six percent
of "sightings" have not been explained, but that doesn't mean
there is no explanation.

Vergin said he would like to find someone who was at the Radar
Annex at the time and/or one of the pilots that was scrambled to
try and get a visual sighting so they could have a good laugh
about it all over a drink.

Vergin remembers that the Perrin Radar Annex was located on FM
1417, not far from the main base. The facility was part of a
large system of radar stations guarding this country's sky
against attack during the Cold War. The facility also was known
as a Ground Controlled Intercept (GCI) site and it remained
active until Perrin closed.

Vergin said the large blip on the screen had been declared
hostile in New York because it wasn't identified. F-86 Fighters
from Perrin and planes from other bases were scrambled to try to
check out the blips. Virgin said he watched as the objects
crossed the Red River and when the fighters got to within 20
miles of them, the blips changed direction and took off toward
the Northwest.

A few minutes later the mob of government Blue Book
interrogators appeared with the armed guards.

In 1953 Yergin's father died and he asked for a transfer to a
non-critical field so that he could get a hardship discharge. He
was transferred to a survival school to become an instructor,
then was given that discharge to return home to help his mother
since he was the only surviving son.

He said he had a remarkable career that took him to France,
England, Spain, Belgium, Canada and Mexico as well as most of
the 50 states.

He said he had seen one other object that he couldn't identify.
He was sitting in the spa one night in Tucson and saw a
beautiful white object that looked like a lighted globe in the
sky. It was a cloudless night and he watched the object about 30
minutes, trying to figure how high it was. He noticed a small
cloud and watched to see if it went over or under the object.

The cloud passed under it and he could still see the light
through the cloud, he said. After about 40 minutes he looked
away and when he looked back, the light was gone, he said. He
put this sighting in the column of "unexplained," but that
doesn't mean its it extraterrestrial, he said. It just means it
was an "unidentified flying object."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                  SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:31:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:31:43 -0400
Subject: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis




Source: Astrobiology Magazine

http://tinyurl.com/8z88n

October 17 2005


How many technically advanced civilizations exist in our galaxy?
With this essay by Steven Soter, Scientist-in-Residence in the
Center for Ancient Studies at New York University, Astrobiology
Magazine initiates the first in a series of 'Gedanken', or
thought, experiments - musings by noted scientists on scientific
mysteries in a series of "what if" scenarios.


SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis

With this essay by Steven Soter, Astrobiology Magazine presents
the first in our series of 'Gedanken', or thought, experiments -
musings by noted scientists on scientific mysteries in a series
of "what if" scenarios. Gedanken experiments, which have been
used for hundreds of years by scientists and philosophers to
ponder thorny problems, rely on the power of one's imagination
to project these scenarios to logical conclusions. They do not
involve lab equipment or, often, even experimental data. They
can be thought of as focused daydreams. Yet, as in the famous
case of Einstein's Gedanken experiments about what it would be
like to hitch a ride on a light wave, they have often led to
important scientific breakthroughs.

Soter is Scientist-in-Residence in the Center for Ancient
Studies at New York University, where he teaches a seminar on
Scientific Thinking and Speculation, and a Research Associate in
the Department of Astrophysics at the American Museum of Natural
History.

In this essay, Soter examines the Drake Equation, which asks how
many technically advanced civilizations exist in our galaxy. He
also looks at the Fermi Paradox, which questions why, if there
are other technological civilizations nearby, we haven't heard
from them.

If civilizations exist in our galaxy with levels of technology
at least equal to our own, we might be able to detect some of
them using radio telescopes. And if civilizations exist with
technologies far in advance of our own, we might expect them to
have colonized millions of habitable worlds in the Milky Way,
and even to have visited our own planet. Yet there is no
evidence in the astronomical, geological, archaeological, or
historical records that extraterrestrial civilizations exist or
that visitors from other worlds have ever been to Earth. Does
that mean, as some have concluded, that ours is the only
civilization in the galaxy? Or could there be a natural self-
regulating mechanism that limits the intensive colonization of
other worlds?

In 1961 radio astronomer Frank Drake devised an equation to
express how the hypothetical number of observable civilizations
in our galaxy should depend on a wide range of astronomical and
biological factors, such as the number of habitable planets per
star, and the fraction of inhabited worlds that give rise to
intelligent life. The Drake Equation has led to serious studies
and encouraged the search for extraterrestrial intelligence
(SETI). It has also provoked ridicule and hostility. Novelist
Michael Crichton recently denounced the equation as "literally
meaningless," incapable of being tested, and therefore "not
science." The Drake equation, he said, also opened the door to
other forms of what he called "pernicious garbage" in the name
of science, including the use of mathematical climate models to
characterize global warming.

Crichton rightly pointed out that any numerical "answers"
produced by the Drake Equation can be no more than guesses,
since most of the terms in the equation are quantitatively
unknown by many orders of magnitude. But he is utterly wrong to
claim that the equation is "meaningless." An equation describes
how the elements of a problem are logically related, whether or
not we know their numerical values. Astronomers understand
perfectly well that the Drake Equation cannot prove anything.
Instead, we regard it as the most useful way to organize our
ignorance of a difficult subject by breaking it down into
manageable parts. This kind of analysis is standard, and a
valued technique in scientific thinking. As new observations and
insights emerge, the Drake Equation can be modified as needed or
even replaced altogether. But it provides the necessary place to
start.

When Drake first proposed his equation, we had no way to
estimate any of its terms beyond the first one, representing the
rate of star formation in our galaxy. Then in 1995, astronomers
began to discover planets in orbits around other stars. These
results now promise to sharpen our estimates for the second term
in the equation, denoting the number of habitable worlds per
star. Who knows what unforeseen discoveries will tell us about
the other terms in the equation?

In Classical antiquity, when Aristarchus conceived the
heliocentric view of the solar system and Democritus developed
an atomic theory of matter, they had no possible way to test
their ideas. The necessary observational tools and data would
not exist for another two thousand years. Of course, the
Crichtons of antiquity denounced such speculations as
pernicious. But when the time finally came, the ancient ideas
were still there, quietly waiting to inspire and encourage
Copernicus and Galileo, and the pioneers of modern atomic
theory, who took the first steps to test the theories. It may
take centuries, but eventually the Drake Equation and all its
elements will be testable.

We can express the Drake Equation in several ways, all of which
are more or less equivalent. Here is one form:


N = Rs nh fl fi fc L

where N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy, expressed
as the product of six factors: Rs is the rate of star formation,
nh is the number of habitable worlds per star, fl is the
fraction of habitable worlds on which life arises, fi is the
fraction of inhabited worlds with intelligent life, fc is the
fraction of intelligent life forms that produce civilizations,
and L is the average lifetime of such civilizations.

The rate of star formation in our galaxy is roughly ten per
year. We can define habitable worlds conservatively as those
with liquid water on the surface. Many more worlds probably have
liquid water only below the surface, but any subterranean life
on such worlds would not be likely to produce an observable
civilization. Recent discoveries of other planetary systems
suggest that habitable worlds are common and that nh is at least
one such planet in a hundred stars.

The remaining terms in the equation depend on the biology and
social development of other worlds, and here we are profoundly
ignorant. Our local experience may provide some guidance,
however. We know that life on Earth arose almost as soon as
conditions allowed - as soon as the crust cooled enough for
liquid water to persist. This fact suggests that conditions for
the origin of life on other habitable worlds are not
restrictive, and that the value of fl is closer to one than to
one in a thousand. But that is merely a guess. No one knows how
life began on Earth, and we cannot generalize from a single
case.

The conditions for intelligent life are probably more
restrictive. On Earth this step first required the evolution of
complex animals, which began about three billion years after the
origin of life, and then the development of brains capable of
abstract thought, which took another half billion years. Among
the millions of animal species that have lived on Earth,
probably only one ever had intelligence sufficient to understand
the Drake Equation. This suggests that fi might be a small
fraction.

The probability that intelligent life develops a civilization
depends on the evolution of organs to manipulate the
environment. On Earth, whales and dolphins may well have
intelligence sufficient for abstract thought, but they lack the
means to make tools. Humans, with dexterous hands, began making
tools over a million years ago. Starting about ten thousand
years ago, civilizations based on agriculture arose several
times independently, in Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, Mexico, Peru,
and New Guinea. This suggests that the value of fc is large, but
again we should not generalize from the experience of only one
intelligent and manipulative species.

We now come to the most intriguing term, the average lifetime L
of a civilization. The Drake Equation assumes that, whatever the
other factors, the number of civilizations presently in our
galaxy is simply proportional to their average lifetime. The
longer they live, the more civilizations exist at any given
time. But what is the life expectancy of a civilization? On
Earth, dozens of major civilizations have flourished and died
within the last ten thousand years. Their average lifetime is
about four centuries. Few if any civilizations on Earth have
ever lasted as long as two thousand years.

History and archaeology show that the collapse of any given
civilization causes only a temporary gap in the record of
civilizations on Earth. Other civilizations eventually arise,
either from the ruins of the collapsed one or independently and
elsewhere. Those civilizations also eventually collapse, but new
ones continue to emerge.

For example, in the eastern Mediterranean at the end of the
Bronze Age, the prevailing Mycenaean civilization suffered
widespread catastrophic collapse around 1100 BC. During a few
centuries of "darkness" that followed, the population was
illiterate, impoverished and relatively small -- but not
extinct. Classical civilization gradually arose and flourished,
and gave rise to the Roman Empire, which itself collapsed in the
fifth century AD. Another period of impoverished Dark Ages
followed, but eventually trade and literacy revived, leading to
the Renaissance. Each revival of civilization was stimulated in
part by the survival of relics from the past.

Our global technological civilization, with its roots in the
Mediterranean Bronze Age, is now arguably headed for collapse.
But that will not be the end of civilization on Earth -- not as
long as the human species survives. And the biological lifetime
of our species is likely to be several million years, even if we
do our worst.

We should therefore distinguish between the longevity of a
single occurrence of civilization and the aggregate lifetime of
a sequence of civilizations. Almost all discussions of the Drake
Equation have overlooked this distinction and therefore
significantly underestimated L.

The proper value of L is not the average duration of a single
episode of civilization on a planet, which for Earth is about
400 years. Rather, L is much larger, being the sum of recurrent
episodes of civilization, and constitutes a substantial fraction
of the biological lifetime of the intelligent species. The
average species lifetime for mammals is a few million years.
Suppose the human species lasts another million years and our
descendants have recurrent episodes of civilization for more
than 10 percent of that time. Then the average effective
lifetime of civilization on Earth will exceed 100,000 years, or
250 times the duration of a single episode. Other factors being
the same, this generally neglected consideration should increase
the expected number of civilizations in our galaxy by at least a
hundredfold.

While the aggregate lifetime of civilization on a planet may be
only a hundred thousand years, we should allow the possibility
that a small minority of intelligent life forms, say one in a
thousand, has managed to use their intelligence and technology
to survive for stellar evolutionary timescales -- that is, on
the order of a billion years. In that case, the average
effective lifetime of civilizations in our galaxy would be about
a million years.

If we now insert numbers in the Drake Equation that represent
the wide range of plausible estimates for the various terms, we
find that the number N of civilizations in our galaxy could
range anywhere from a few thousand to about one in ten thousand.
The latter (pessimistic) case is equivalent to finding no more
than one civilization in ten thousand galaxies, so that ours
would be the only one in the Milky Way. In the former
(optimistic) case, the nearest civilization might be close
enough for us to detect its radio signals. Estimates for N thus
range all over the map. While this exasperates critics who
demand concrete answers from science, it does not invalidate the
conceptual power of the Drake Equation.

If many civilizations have arisen in our galaxy, we might expect
that some of them sent out colonies, and some of those colonies
sent out still more colonies. The resulting waves of
colonization would have spread out across the Milky Way in a
time less than the age of our galaxy. So where are all those
alien civilizations? Why haven't we seen them? The physicist
Enrico Fermi first posed the question in 1950. Many answers have
since been proposed, including (1) ours is the first and only
civilization to arise in the Milky Way, (2) the aliens exist but
are hiding, and (3) they have already been here and we are their
descendants. In his book Where is Everybody? Stephen Webb
considers fifty proposed solutions to the so-called "Fermi
Paradox" but he leaves out the most thought-provoking
explanation of all, one that I call the Cosmic Quarantine
Hypothesis.

In 1981, cosmologist Edward Harrison suggested a powerful self-
regulating mechanism that would neatly resolve the paradox. Any
civilization bent on the intensive colonization of other worlds
would be driven by an expansive territorial impulse. But such an
aggressive nature would be unstable in combination with the
immense technological powers required for interstellar travel.
Such a civilization would self-destruct long before it could
reach for the stars.

The unrestrained territorial drive that served biological
evolution so well for millions of years becomes a severe
liability for a species once it acquires powers more than
sufficient for its self-destruction. The Milky Way may well
contain civilizations more advanced than ours, but they must
have passed through a filter of natural selection that
eliminates, by war or other self-inflicted environmental
catastrophes, those civilizations driven by aggressive
expansion. That is, the acquisition of powerful technology
ultimately selects for wisdom.

However, suppose an alien civilization somehow finds a way to
launch the aggressive colonization of other planetary systems
while avoiding self-destruction. It would only take one such
case, and our galaxy would have been overrun by the reproducing
colonies of the civilization. But Harrison proposed a plausible
backup mechanism that comes into play in the event that the
self-regulating control mechanism fails. The most evolved
civilizations in the galaxy, he suggested, would notice any
upstart world that showed signs of launching a campaign of
galactic conquest, and they would nip it in the bud. Advanced
intelligence might regard any prospect of the exponential
diffusion throughout the Milky Way of self-replicating colonies
very much as we regard the outbreak of a deadly viral epidemic.
They would have good reason, and presumably the ability, to
suppress it as a measure of galactic hygiene.

There may be many highly evolved civilizations in our galaxy,
and some of them may even be the interstellar colonies of
others. They may control technologies vastly more powerful than
ours, applied to purposes we can scarcely imagine. But
Harrison's regulatory mechanisms should preclude any relentless
wave of colonization from overrunning and cannibalizing the
Milky Way.

By most appearances, the dominant civilization on our planet is
of the expansive territorial type, and is thus headed for self-
destruction. Only if we can intelligently regulate our growth-
obsessed and self-destructive tendencies is our civilization
likely to survive long enough to achieve interstellar
communication. Steven Soter is Scientist-in-Residence in the
Center for Ancient Studies at New York University, where he
teaches a seminar on Scientific Thinking and Speculation, and a





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

              Researchers Want Contact With Other UFO Watchers

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:37:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:37:06 -0400
Subject: Researchers Want Contact With Other UFO Watchers




Source: The Toqueville Connection - New York

http://www.ttc.org/200510161451.j9gepru20453.htm

Sunday, 16 October 2005


European Researchers Want Contact With Other UFO Watchers

CHALONS-EN-CHAMPAGNE, France, Oct 16 (AFP) - Europeans
researching the phenomenon of unidentified flying objects, or
UFOs, are looking for more cooperation and information from
others who also are scanning the skies for such unusual events.

The UFO-watchers, gathered at a meeting since Friday in Chalons-
en-Champagne, east of Paris, adopted a resolution Sunday calling
for more cooperation.

"It is indispensable to strengthen and enlarge in Europe the
level of cooperation and exchange of information between the
groups and people who study the phenomenon in a rational way,"
the resolution sent to AFP read.

To foster more exchanges about UFO sitings, the group said it
will create a specific Internet website to distribute
information about ongoing research and its results.

The first meeting of European UFO watchers of the skies included
researchers from six countries, representing national UFO
organizations which study the phenomenon in "a scientific
manner", the organizers said.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                     Science Fiction Or Fed Conspiracy?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:42:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:42:21 -0400
Subject: Science Fiction Or Fed Conspiracy?




Source: The Tribune-Democrat - Johnstown, Pennsylvania, USA

http://tinyurl.com/e46ub

October 14, 2005 10:23 am

Science Fiction Or Fed Conspiracy?
By Chip Minemyer

Do you believe in unidentified flying objects? If you answered
"yes" to that question, you are among the roughly 50 percent of
Americans who accept that there is life in places other than on
earth, and you may believe that we've been visited by "people"
from outer space.

9Insert eerie soundtrack music here =96 ooo-wee-ooo.]

If you answered "no," then you are among those who think the
possibility that E.T. could land somewhere other than in
Hollywood is utter hogwash.

[Hrumph!]

Me? Well, I bounce around somewhere between the two camps. I'm
not totally convinced about extra-terrestrial life, since I've
not personally seen an alien and I've not been abducted, nor
have I experienced any close encounters. But I do work at a
newspaper, which means I've experienced literally hundreds of
strange occurrences.

And I have seen "E.T." several times, if that counts. I've also
seen "Men in Black," "Independence Day" and "Invasion of the
Body Snatchers," among other science-fiction classics.

The theme those movies share, and something researcher Robert
Hastings insists is not fiction, is a government knowledge of
alien activity and a cover-up of the evidence of excursions to
our planet by space travelers.

Hastings will travel to the Pitt-Johnstown campus at 7 p.m. on
Oct. 26 to make a presentation called "UFOs: The Hidden
History."

He said he will offer evidence not necessarily of the existence
of UFOs, but rather that the U.S. government believes in UFOs,
and that there has been a conspiracy to keep information away
from the rest of us. (Think Will Smith and the Arquillians
here.)

"There is a well-documented paper trail that shows that the
government accepts the existence of UFOs," Hastings said from
his home in South Carolina.

"There is on-the-record testimony from retired Air Force
personnel that aircraft have been recorded flying near our
nuclear facilities, including over our missile silos," he said.
"This is very serious, very real."

Don't believe him? Maybe you should be among those who check out
his presentation at UPJ next week.

"When I speak somewhere, it always draws a large turnout,"
Hastings said.

"The topic of UFOs is of interest to literally millions of
people. And according to most public-opinion polls, one in two
Americans believes in the existence of UFOs, and that number is
up significantly from decades ago."

Hastings says his most compelling piece of evidence is an FBI
memorandum dated March 22, 1950, and addressed to then-bureau
Director J. Edgar Hoover.

The memo says that "flying saucers" had crashed in New Mexico
and been secretly recovered by the Air Force. The memo also says
that aboard the spacecraft were found "bodies of human shape but
only 3 feet tall," Hastings said.

Phone home, indeed!

Hastings will bring to UPJ neither the bodies nor the flying
saucers, I'm sorry to report. Just the FBI memo.

"It's not overly interesting unless you can produce something
substantial to support it =96 either, 1.) a spacecraft, or, 2.)
the person or being that was in it," he said. "But the memo does
exist. It is authentic."

Hastings said this will be his fourth visit to Johnstown since
he began speaking about UFOs in 1981.

His lecture and slide show will focus on what he calls the U.S.
government's secret response to UFOs and is based upon
"previously classified documents" that have been obtained by
researchers thanks to the Freedom of Information Act.

Hastings expects his presentation will draw a mix of supporters
and skeptics, and maybe even a few hecklers.

"I'm always skeptical about what I hear. And, if properly
focused, skepticism is a very healthy trait," he said. "But I
differentiate that from flat closed-mindedness."

You can believe this: Hastings is convinced that we've been
visited, that the government believes it, and that there is a
threat to national and global security.

"When I speak somewhere and ask the audience if they've read or
heard about nuclear weapons-related incidents, usually about one
in 10 people say they have," Hastings said. "It's been a well-
kept secret, to say the least."

Hastings said he's not coming here to spread paranoia, just
information.

"I think that if people give me the benefit of the doubt when I
lay out the case," he said, "they will be genuinely impressed
with the documentation of the information and the specificity of
the data."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                            Re: Socorro - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:19:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:49:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Ledger


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
>>explanation [BTW - not new James] for some reported triangular
>>shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion.

Snipped

>I did not claim to be the first to notice NOSS causes UFO
reports. However, I did notice that in many UFO reporting
databases that _no_one_ attempts to solve the report by easily
>correlating it with a NOSS triad. It is left to dangle as a
probable unknown rather than clear NOSS. I would not complain
>if the tools to solve the case were not so simple (on the
>Internet- HeavensAbove). In fact I suspect any case on three
>lights that just move in a straight line as being NOSS unless
>proven otherwise.

From somewhere I learned that The NOSS satellites are separated
by approximately 21-23 kilometers in space and at slightly
different orbital altitudes. As you say, a horizon to horizon





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                        Re: Serious Question - Olmos

From: Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos <ballesterolmos.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:54:38 +0200 (CEST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:53:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Olmos


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

>All kidding aside (as Steve Allen used to say), I would like to
>ask all listers (wherever they may be on the spectrum of
>acceptance or rejection of alleged UFO data) to answer one
>simple (perhaps deceptively so) question: What should we do with
>well-documented and well-investigated cases reporting craft-like
>UFOs that don't seem to have conventional/prosaic explanations?
>A long time ago when I participated in an American Psychological
>Association conference session on UFOs I sent a questionnaire
>around to this same effect. Dr. Donald H. Menzel responded
>"Throw in waste basket."

>That certainly is one extreme answer on how to respond to
>anomalous data.

>On the opposite extreme, I suppose, would be to assume without
>further investigation that the reports are describing ET craft.
>Now, how about all kinds and degrees of intermediate positions
>that are not difficult to imagine for anyone who understands
>scientific method?

>I would be very interested to hear your views on this question.

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?


Dick:

If there is any slightest possibility of an exotic response in
the UFO data it will only be in the high-strangess, high-
credibility, (initially) unexplained reports.

Unless we find neutral researchers capable to revisit and study
them (either individually or collectivey), and by that I mean
University- based professionals, I am afraid it will continue to
be our own responsability to analyze the data.

This is why we need repositories of raw data (i.e., case
catalogues) where UFO and IFO reports are presented, for (a) to
base in-depth research on UFO reports, and (b) to use IFO





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                        Re: Serious Question - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:56:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:55:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Sandow


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

>What should we do
>with well-documented and well-investigated cases reporting
>craft-like UFOs that don't seem to have conventional/prosaic
>explanations?

<snip>

>Now, how about all kinds and degrees of intermediate
>positions that are not difficult to imagine for anyone who
>understands scientific method?

>I would be very interested to hear your views on this question.

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

Very good question, Dick.

I think the database of sightings should be mined for
statistically significant patterns. How consistent, in other
words, is the data? Especially in details that both people
reporting the sightings and people investigating them might not
have put any stress on.

And then the same thing should be done with sightings that can
be easily explained. What consistencies do these reports show,
and how do they differ from those it's harder to explain?

Not that this hasn't been done before. But maybe not as
thoroughly as I might like. Besides, it's always good (according
to the scientific method) to repeat studies, to make sure that
independent researchers, doing the same work, will get the same
results.

I suppose, given enough funding, that it would be useful to
establish teams to study the data, teams made up of skeptics,
non-skeptics, and, maybe most crucially, people with no
established position on UFOs, to whom the data might be entirely
new. Those teams could - if they approached the work honestly -
establish the guidelines for the research, and agree on the
conclusions. Not on the explanation of the sightings, but on





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                        Re: Serious Question - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:07:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:56:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Sandow


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:52:02 -0400
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>And I'm suggesting that the best way to get any of the
>proposed solutions _moving_ is make every household aware of
>the best UFO evidence.  That is a massive undertaking, of course.

>But I predict that if every ordinary citizen knew about the
>best UFO data, the pressure on government (or any other
>entity holding secret information about UFOs) would be irresistable.

I'm sure that's true.

At the same time, a lesson I've learned from marketing in the
music business (and elsewhere) is that massive publicity doesn't
always get results, and isn't cost-effective. In other words,
yes, it would be wonderful if every citizen had our UFO data,
but how do we make that happen? Simply talking about it, or
getting it talked about, in mass media might, surprisingly, not
help all that much, though it couldn't hurt.

It's usually more effective to get information in the hands of
people who'll do something with it, which includes spreading it
around. So I might suggest, once we had our data properly
organized and studied, a campaign to put the best of it in the
hands of selected opinion leaders. Let them then talk about it,
as they go about their active lives. Surprising how quickly
that'll spread the information. So, if we had massive funding, I
might want to identify 1000 people from science and the media
(probably other fields, too - people like Bono) who might be





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                  Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:41:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:58:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 22:41:29 EDT
>Subject: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile Sponsors?

>Really,

>Why can't some of the colorful characters of Ufology get high
>profile sponsors?

>I wanna see Peter Davenport answering a phone call as a bevvy
>of suntanned babes call in a UFO sighting and Davenport jumps
>into his James Bond style hotrod making the scene just in time
>to save the day and sport the bikini clad babes to safety in his
>Lexus.

>I wanna see Don Ledger exhibiting 'The Matrix' type fight scene
>moves as he dodges skeptibunkers during an all out donnybrook
>whilst he espouses the benefits of the latest high tech sneaker.

Trust me, Greg, you don't want to see me in a form fitting
outfit; mind you there would be lots of room on the outfit for
logos. And my knees are so bad these days it's painful for me to
even think about leaping around like Keanu Reeves. How about I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:00:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:51:20 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>>beyond a doubt.

>This is very likely true.

And this is very certainly rubbish. I don't know Martin Shough
personally, but I have been impressed with his thoughtfulness
and thoroughness, nowhere in evidence, alas, in the strange
sentence just above. It would be bad enough if it read, "This
could be true," but it's immeasurably worse when we read, "This
is _very likely_ true."

A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
this definition of "mothership":

"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller craft
(as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
smaller craft: TENDER."

In other words, it's a British shipping term. UFOs are not even
mentioned. It's a standard term predating ufologists and
contactees. It is not, the preposterous contrary implication
notwithstanding, a word only in the vocabularies of contactees,
ufologists, and their readers. Gill's extrapolation is a
perfectly understandable one, as reasonable as the borrowing of
nautical language for the word "spaceship," and does not require
immersion in UFO/contactee literature. And there are other
problems with trying to link Gill's language and Adamski's.

Gill had not read Adamski at the time of his sighting. He had
never even heard of him. Later, asked by Hynek and Hendry when
he first came upon the name, Gill said it was in the office of
Australian attorney/ufologist Peter Norris. "Of course, I was
entirely ignorant of all these people [contactees]," he
recalled. "It seemed rather extraordinary to me. You know
[visits to] the moon, Venus, and that sort of thing."

In Norris's office, Gill said, he "raced through" an Adamski
book (he told me it was Flying Saucers Have Landed, not the book
[the subsequent Inside the Space Ships] in which motherships
figure). Then, in Gill's words, "I read it, and afterwards I
said, 'Look, I just can't swallow this, I can't take this; if
this is what your UFO group is about, I wouldn't have anything
to do with it.'"

The quotes above are from IUR, December 1977, p. 7.

As of 1977, according to what Gill told me, he had read all of
three books relevant to extraterrestrial visitors: Von Daniken's
best-selling ancient-astronaut opus Chariots of the Gods?, the
Leslie/Adamski volume already mentioned, and Hynek's The UFO
Experience. He told me that the first two were, in his
estimation, "trash."

In my interview (Fate, February 1978) I noted, "He is frankly
skeptical of most UFO claims he hears, so much so, in fact, that
he did not really begin to trust me until I told him about
several UFO claims I had investigated and disproved."

As I've pointed out previously, I showed Gill what Menzel had
written about his case, namely that he wasn't wearing glasses at
the time of the sighting and that the native witnesses had
signed a confirming statement because they were illiterate and
in awe of the Great White Father. I noted, "Gill cannot
understand why Menzel assumed this without first checking with
him. (Menzel never communicated with Gill or any of the other
witnesses)." This puts the lie to Menzel's dubious claim that he





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                    NOSS Triple Satellites [was: Socorro]

From: James Ssmith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:16:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:05:50 -0400
Subject: NOSS Triple Satellites [was: Socorro]


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:17:25 +0000
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
>>>explanation [BTW - not new James] for some reported triangular
>>>shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion. I
>>>have no doubt of it myself [I've proffered this explanation
>>>often] and would add other satellites as well. Lights in the
>>>night sky that are just a point of light I tend to blow off
>>>because there are just so many lights in the night sky.

>>I did not claim to be the first to notice NOSS causes UFO
>>reports. However, I did notice that in many UFO reporting
>>databases that _no_one_ attempts to solve the report by easily
>>correlating it with a NOSS triad. It is left to dangle as a
>>probable unknown rather than clear NOSS. I would not complain if
>>the tools to solve the case were not so simple (on the Internet-
>>HeavensAbove). In fact I suspect any case on three lights that
>>just move in a straight line as being NOSS unless proven
>>otherwise.

>Peter Davenport's database routinely identifies reports as
>probably NOSS satellites (or other know phenomena). Beware of
>uncritical databases. Not all are that way.

Yes, I have seen his summations of various reports.

Unfortunately, it is unclear if any of these NOSS
classifications are based on analysis (i.e. are "probable"
because of lack of or low quality report data) or just Peter's
understanding of the behavior/appearance of NOSS triads. Has he
ever stated "definite NOSS" for a report? I don't think so. So





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                Re: We Haven't Had A Signal Yet Could You Try

From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:56:19 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:32:17 -0400
Subject: Re: We Haven't Had A Signal Yet Could You Try


>Source: The Times - London, UK

>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-1826262,00.html

>October 15, 2005

>Guest Column

>Earth To Aliens: We Haven't Had A Signal Yet. Could You
>Try Again?
>by Martin Rees

>But the fact that we haven�t been visited doesn�t imply that
>aliens don�t exist. It would be far harder to traverse the mind-
>boggling distances of interstellar space than to transmit a
>signal. That�s perhaps how aliens would reveal themselves first.

Hello List,

well, that is a fine but rather conservative article.

We all know that we have been visited. I am witness by myself
because I am following the events in Wiltshire, UK, since more
than 15 years. Numerous sightings took place there where the
infamous crop circle phenomenon originally stems from.

Now that we know that most of the modern circles in England are
man made we can sit back and ask: what else happened that makes
up the fascination of that phenomenon in and around Avebury and
Alton Barnes?

It is the increasing awareness about our own exoticism triggered
by this phenomenon. It is the glimpse of insight that we've been
educated, that someone at the end of the 80ies took humankind by
the hand and guided it into cosmic primary school class No. 1 to
learn basic cosmic principles.

One cosmic principle is: we are part of everything, we are
linked to everything. We are a complex concentration of fields.
For example, we do not need to travel physically because we are
able to get information from any place at any time. It depends
only on our training to get in contact with the cosmic matrix -
the larger field - to call the information which is stored
there.

This and much more is what is shown to us by "the Great Cosmic
Smile" as Ron Russell, one of the serious researchers,  once
called this phenomenon.

We are bound to/we are slaves of our state of technology and
therefore we look mainly for technology.

Any advanced alien culture will surely first have a look at our
stage of mind and spirit to calculate the risks of an encounter.
This was done and so 'they' decided to give us extra lessions in
raising awareness and consciousness and to power up our
spiritual abilities.

So it might be that Planet Earth is really the only one in that
density and dimensional field with us hereupon in the whole
Universe. But that does not mean that the Universe is not
overcrowded  with similar complex concentration of fields - so
called living matter - but on different dimensional levels and
in different densities. It might be that we will never receive a
signal because no one else is using similar devices.

At the moment, we are trapped here because we trust only on
metallic vehicles. The advanced civilisations have left that
stage behind and so they can come here without these craft and
manifest only as energy forms. This is what can be seen in
England. England is different. The modern UFO Phenomenon there
is more adavanced than the one in the USA because an
intelligence manifested there which counts more on the spirit -
another energy field - than on Bob Lazar's sports model.

We are more alien than we dare to give in to ourselves. We are
part of the Universe. We are the Universe.


Joachim Koch





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 18

                     Re: Fireball Data Center? - Mancusi

From: Bruno Mancusi <swissufo.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:24:37 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:12:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Fireball Data Center? - Mancusi


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:51:35 -0700
>Subject: Fireball Data Center?

>International Meteor Organization
>Fireball Data Center
>c/o Andre Knoefel,
>Saarbruecker Str. 8, D - 40476
>Duesseldorf, Germany phone
>(+49) 211:450-719 (auto-answer)
>e-mail: starex.nul (Internet)
>100114,3235 (CompuServe)
>FIREBALL REPORTS ARE WELCOME !

>I e-mailed Andre Knoefel and received a permanent error. Also,
>tried Googling "Fireball Data Center" and found no recent
>entries.

>Anyone know if this organization exists in some shape or form?


Hello Terry,

I'm a member of the IMO (www.imo.net). Andre Knoefel's e-mail
is:

aknoefel.nul






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:06:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:54:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:22:07 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>Before we flap too far into pelicanist fantasy land, let's hear
>from actual investigators:

>"Dr. Hynek had Father Gill study the moon in the Illinois sky,
>and he decided that the width of the object [with waving
>occupants] was equal to five moons lined up end-to-end." As
>Allan Hendry observes in the IUR piece from which this is quoted
>(November 1977, p. 5), this alone rules out any imaginable
>astronomical identification.

I agree it does, or ought to. But does it? Hendry himself notes
a case where a woman who said "I know what stars look like"
swore a UFO had illuminated windows with the round heads and
silvery-colored faces of the occupants inside. She observed this
over several nights. She was looking at the planet Venus. (See
UFO HANDBOOK p. 85, UK edition). All right I agree she was just
a single witness (with her husband).

>>Father Gill is on record as saying some of the smaller objects
>>seen those nights could have been bright planets. Jupiter,
>>particularly, was prominent, at about 83 degrees altitude at
>>9pm. Mars was only a few degrees away from Venus and a bit lower
>>in the sky. Even Saturn was around. I conjecture that what Gill
>>saw at 10.30 was Jupiter, still high up at that time.

>How many scoops of mud are going to be hurled at the wall before
>one sticks? Perhaps someone with time on his or her hands ought
>to start counting the varying pelicanist "identifications" of
>the Gill UFO.

>>All through Rev Cruttwell's detailed report there are abundant
>>clues about Gill's poor observing ability. Never mind about his
>>glasses. On one definite occasion he did not recognise Venus
>>when another witness did. The "Tilley Lamps" and "kaleidoscopic
>>light" seen at times were almost certainly misidentifications of
>>Venus. Neither does the fact that he once claimed he saw Venus
>>and the big UFO simultaneously during the critical 3-day period
>>hold much water (as I said to Jerry Clark elsewhere).

>And what evidence do you have that he said that he had seen
>Venus and the UFO at the same time only "once"? I realize that
>you're throwing in that adverb to plant a sleazy innuendo
>without having to defend its content, while making Gill look
>shifty and untrustworthy, but I would love to see your
>documentation -- if it exists, which would surprise me -- on
>this.

Are you saying he saw Venus & the UFO together more than once?
Ha! Stop accusing me of sleaze and innuendo, Jerry. And stop
planting words in my mouth. The documentation that he saw the
two together, once, is in Cruttwell's report part V section 3.
Have a look at part VII section 1 for the item on him
misidentifying Venus . (So did ten others, all "college men"
including one who had "great qualifications", was an ex-RAAF
navigator and who "knows a good deal about aircraft and a lot
about stars". They were all present). If in doubt ask Martin
Shough, who seems to agree.

No racism here, Jerry. These were all the top qualified guys.
And they were all fooled by Venus. Did I say all? I meant all
but one. And Gill was not the one.

>>The UFO may be a true unknown - nobody can say with certainty,
>>but by conceding that what he first claimed were UFOs were
>>possibly bright planets, Rev Gill has virtually hanged himself.
>>The 'going in to dinner' episode also counts against him more
>>than somewhat!

>Let's see now. The excitable Gill is a lousy observer because he
>is cautious enough to suggest some of the ostensible UFOs were
>"possibly bright planets." Huh? Does anybody follow the
>reasoning here? Is there any reasoning here? Remember, elsewhere
>Christopher wants us to believe Gill was a gullible,
>impressionable UFO believer who read Adamski and even borrowed
>phrases from him.

So you refuse to admit that Gill has weakened his case in any
way by this admission? What on earth ever caused him to suppose
these accompanying objects were UFOs? Oh yes, I am willing to
bet he had read Adamski or Keyhoe (maybe not their actual books
but articles based on them) before June 26. Maybe supplied by
Cruttwell.

>Gill was in no sense a UFO buff. "Until I got down to Melbourne
>[after leaving Papua New Guinea]," he told Hynek and Hendry (and
>me; I queried him separately on the same point), "the only thing
>I'd read on flying saucers is what I'd written myself [about his
>own experience]. That is, I knew nothing. There might have been
>a magazine article, but I was just disinterested." Eighteen
>years after his sighting, Gill was asked if he had "any specific
>theory to explain what you saw," he said simply, "No." Some UFO
>buff. Some credulous twit.

I never used the term "UFO buff". You did. I said he was
familiar with the literature. He forgets that Cruttwell had
already written to him about UFOs soon after his (Gill's) first
sighting from a launch on April 9, and doubtless planted the
idea in his head. For Gill to say: "the only thing I had read on
flying saucers is what I'd written myself" is simply false.
After 18 years he had simply forgotten.

I have conceded Gill may have encountered a genuine UFO. You
prefer to concede absolutely nothing, Jerry. You refuse to
believe what Menzel says, even if he said the sun was shining.
Yet you accept Gill's accurate recall 18 years after the event.
You just cannot or will not, accept that Father Gill, and his
native 'gang', saw anything but a manned craft of some kind.

See Cruttwell's report part VI (Corroboration from Giwa and
Baniara). Look particularly at the first paragraph therein.
Don't you have even the slightest shade of doubt, Jerry?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:57:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:03:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:26:26 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:58:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>Its more like passive radar has been an excuse for UFOlogists to
>>>sit back in their chairs and do nothing, safe and strong in
>>>their knowledge that someday their savior will come in the guise
>>>of new technology. It _is_ almost mythical in this respect.

>>The UFO community is virtually unaware of the Passive Radar
>>concept which was not my project but developed by NUFORC
>>Director Peter Davenport, so your comments are way off base.

>I do not think the UFO community is unaware of passive
>radar. It is the latest sensation....

Where is Davenport's Passive Radar concept "the latest
sensation"? Certainly not on UFO UpDates where it goes virtually
unmentioned. Whenever proposals for a "new approach" to UFO
research are made on UpDates basically no one (except me I
think) mentions Passive Radar. Which is my point in bringing it
up on this thread.

>I am not trying to discourage its use but we really should not
>be putting all our eggs in one basket. You seem to be saying to
>me that all other UFO research is hopeless (based on the past
>results of UFO field reseearch) until we can get this passive
>radar. I think its clear that there is at least a minority of
>UFO researchers who have gotten fed up with waiting.

I am saying that optically-dominated ground stations have
limited range in seeing UFO's close up enough to tell they are
UFO's, essentially has to be within about 1/2 mile, and that a
revolutionary concept such as Passive Radar with the potential
for continent-wide coverage of say 2,000-4,000 miles from a
single receiving site, is a quantum leap above a horizon-limited
optical tracking station. You dispute the effective range of
your UFO "field lab" based on zero data, but even if we accepted
your outlandish tracking ranges (100 miles you say?) the Passive
Radar covers a 30 x 30 x 30 = 27,000 times greater volume of
space.

If your UFO "field lab" costs say on the order of $10,000 and a
Passive Radar on the order of $100,000, then for the price of
just 10 of your limited ground stations we could get 2,700 times





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                       Re: Serious Question - Faccenda

From: Joe Faccenda uforth.nul
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:06:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:03:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Faccenda


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:52:02 -0400
>Subject: Re: Serious Question


>From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:40:52 EDT
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

<snip>

>Ideally, the best UFO cases we have could be submitted to some
>mainstream scientific body for their study and ask that they
>give an opinion on each one. It might be interesting to see just
>what those opinions turn out to be. Whatever response we get,
>positive or negative, we then capitalize on it and try to gain
>as much from it as possible.

>Practically, we aim for the ideal scenario as described above.

>And I'm suggesting that the best way to get any of the proposed
>solutions _moving_ is make every household aware of the best
>UFO evidence. That is a massive undertaking, of course.

<snip>

Sorry but I do not think this is in any way practical
or would contribute to ufo mainstream recognition.

Ufologists have been prodding and pushing, looking for nooks,
crannies, chinks, anything at all that they could use to prise
open governments files for years, and the result? Zilch.

If we were to compare the situation at present to a War Zone
what would be the disposition of the forces involved?

One side we have the Government/Military with there trillion
dollar budgets, World Corporations with there status quo, the
Media with its instilled debunking, and a Scientific community
who delight in explaining ufo reports/abductions as swamp gas,
balloons, Venus, or sleep paralysis.

On the other battle line we have what?

A few cranky individuals, myself included, who fight and
squabble over inane questions like did some guy have glasses on,
or do you think a priest is telling the truth....sheesh. Come on
guys, move on.

It seems to me we need to seriously question our whole approach
to what we are trying to achieve, we need to have a collective
voice, an agenda, in short we need to be organised.

As individuals we will achieve nothing, as an organised group we
will at least have a fighting chance of being recognised as the
'Ufo voice' and take on the debunkers/Media head on.

For far too long we have sat back and let our Governments
propaganda dribble through the Media without challenge, ufos are
not SF, they are real.

And we of this generation must set in place a 'blueprint' for
our future generations, we can only do that through a collective
agenda, a pool of our brightest stars, an organised and coherent
programme for the steps that must be taken. It is only through
such an organisation could we the troops support and defend what
we know to be the truth.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                     Mysteries Of Space & Sky Conference

From: Dr. S. Peter Resta <SPR100.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:35:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:10:02 -0400
Subject: Mysteries Of Space & Sky Conference


Announcing the Mysteries of Space & Sky UFO Conference
October 29, 2005, in Annapolis Maryland

Speakers include; Dr. David Jacobs, Robert Galganski (Roswell
debris field analysis), Rob & Sue Swiatek, Anna Jamerson (co-





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                 Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:04:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:12:08 -0400
Subject: Re:  2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK -


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:51:27 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:27:11 -0400
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>From this review I gather that Cook's docu is a bust. He
>>interviewed me. Don't know if I was left on the cutting room
>>floor or if I'm in it.

>Bruce,

>As I'm sure you now know from Isaac's last post, you were indeed
>in it, and a very fine effort it was too. A female friend here
>in the UK told me how delightful it was to see you at last and
>how she'd quite fancy getting to know you much better, but





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                    Exhibit Out To Show Truth About UFOs

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:16:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:16:04 -0400
Subject: Exhibit Out To Show Truth About UFOs




Source: The El Paso Times - El Paso, Texas, USA

http://tinyurl.com/ck78z

18 October 2005


Alien Nation
Exhibit Out To Show Truth About UFOs

Leonard Martinez
El Paso Times

It's all there in black and white -- at least for those who
believe in such things.

In the summer of 1947, a UFO allegedly crashed near Roswell.

For those who believe in UFOs, it was the undeniable proof of
the existence of Unidentified Flying Objects, which was
subsequently covered up by the government.

And for those who don't believe, it was all an elaborate
misunderstanding.

El Pasoans can judge for themselves by visiting the Roswell
Exhibit, on display through Oct. 31 at the Art Junction, 500 W.
Paisano.

"A lot of people ask me 'Do you believe?' and I tell them to
look at the faces of the people involved and read their
testimony and to make up their own minds," said Albert Acosta of
the El Paso Natural History Museum who worked with the UFO
museum in Roswell to create the traveling exhibit.

The exhibit features large canvas photographs, sculptures and
replica artifacts.

The exhibit shows different items that document when the crash
was called a UFO crash by the government to subsequent claims by
the government that it was not a UFO but debris from a weather
balloon.

Also included in the exhibit are a cast of the alien prop used
in the Showtime movie "Roswell," as well as toys inspired by the
UFO phenomenon.

"I think of it as American mythology," said Marty Martin, who is
co-director of the El Paso Natural History Museum with Acosta.
"It is a popular subject, like paleontology."

The exhibit has drawn inquiries elsewhere in the country after
record-breaking attendance at the Southwest Florida Museum of
History in Fort Myers, Fla., where it was previously displayed.

"As a result of the show in Florida, we've been contacted with
inquiries about the exhibit possibly being displayed at the
Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and the Strategic Air and
Space Museum for the 60th anniversary of the Roswell crash in
2007," Martin said.

Michael Alford, president of the El Paso Art Association, which
is hosting the exhibition, said his organization is happy to
have an exhibit that fascinates so many people.

"Either you are sold and believe in UFOs or you don't," Alford
said. "There is no gray area. It's unique for us to host it
because as artists, we use our imaginations every day. With this
exhibit, we ask people to open their minds."

Alford said that with Halloween coming up, it allows the
imagination of people to run wild, making visiting the exhibit
more fun and exciting.

One portion of the exhibit shows how UFOs are neither a recent
nor strictly American phenomenon.

"Here in this painting of the Virgin Mary with child, there is a
shepherd and a dog in the background drawing your attention to
what the artist really wanted you to see," Martin said, pointing
to the oval-shaped flying disc in the sky blown up to a larger
size next to the complete replica painting from the Middle Ages.

Liz Gaidry recently visited the exhibit.

"I thought it was very, very interesting, from the newspaper
clippings to the radio broadcast," Gaidry said. "Whether there
are UFOs or not, it's a great mystery. Some days I think this is
probably true. Then when my logical mind takes over, I think it
isn't true. It depends on which day you ask me."

Though Acosta doesn't outright say he believes in UFOs, he said
he understands why it might be necessary for those in power to
not want us to know that UFOs and aliens exist.

"Can you imagine what would happen to the economy? What would
happen to our religious beliefs? What would happen if each of us





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                             Re: Socorro - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:59:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:17:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Socorro - Smith


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:19:55 -0300
>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>In fact I suspect any case on three
>>lights that just move in a straight line as being NOSS unless
>>proven otherwise.

>From somewhere I learned that The NOSS satellites are separated
>by approximately 21-23 kilometers in space and at slightly
>different orbital altitudes. As you say, a horizon to horizon
>sighting of three points of light over a specified period of
>time would pretty much nail down the sighting as NOSS. Again,
>reports of points of light in the night sky leave me bored and
>anxious to move on.

Yes, I agree that nocturnal lights are the most boring of UFO
reports. However, they are actually the very best of sightings
for triangulating trajectories. What with all the
satellites/rocket bodies in orbit now as well as lots of
aircraft, its pretty hopeless to expect to see a UFO. But with
automated triangulation systems, these prosaic items can be
filtered.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                  False Targets Logan International Airport

From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:12:37 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:19:42 -0400
Subject: False Targets Logan International Airport


Dear Listerions,

I'm curious to know if anyone heard about any "supportive visual
references" pertaining to the "false targets" witnessed by air
traffic controllers a week ago at Logan International Airport.

Interesting to note that out of the one hundred plus U.S. media
reports (of course many a copy of the original) none used the
term "UFO," "Bogie," "unidentified," etc. An "Argentinean" paper
did entitle their article "UFOs Cause Alarm in Boston Airport"
which can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/dwsh4

I mention the latter because as an individual who scours media
sources (chiefly via the Internet) for any "UFO" related tidbits
using a variety of "key words," I found it "unusual" that the
incident at Logan didn't instigate said usage of the afore
mentioned words or a derivative thereof.

It's commonplace to see terms such as, "unidentified, strange,
mystery etc., pertaining to "unexplained incidents" e.g., Logan
et al as a story progresses; however, the reports in this
instance were peculioriginatingarly (in my view) sanitary.

In addition, although the "FAA" attributed the incident to a
"computer glitch," they also said, "A flock of geese [i.e., hard
target] can cause the problem, but this seems to be recurring."

Finaly, the article said, "The Federal Aviation Administration's
radar surveillance system in Merrimack, N.H., has been creating
false targets on radar screens."

Don, if your reading this, or any other pilots please chime in;
I'm assuming the "FAA radar surveillance system" is separate
from that at Logan, or is it? The articles state that, "Logan
air traffic control had to be switched to a backup radar system
in Nashua, N.H." Interesting to know if "other" radar stations
"saw" the same thing (as well as if there were "visuals").....





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:33:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:43:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>As I've pointed out previously, I showed Gill what Menzel had
>written about his case, namely that he wasn't wearing glasses at
>the time of the sighting and that the native witnesses had
>signed a confirming statement because they were illiterate and
>in awe of the Great White Father. I noted, "Gill cannot
>understand why Menzel assumed this without first checking with
>him. (Menzel never communicated with Gill or any of the other
>witnesses)." This puts the lie to Menzel's dubious claim that he
>wrote Gill numerous times with no response.

Jerry, do you think you would be able to point us to the
reference where Menzel talks about illiterate natives and the
Great White Father? Or better still perhaps you could quote the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

              Re: Father Gill Australian Interview Transcript -

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:58:30 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:45:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Father Gill Australian Interview Transcript -


>From: Diane Harrison <auforn.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:59:47 +1000
>Subject: Father Gill Australian Interview Transcript

>Hi Listers

>I've taken the time to type this up for you all to read
>as many of you may not be familiar with this interview.

>-----

>Australian Flying Saucer Review
>December 1959 Vol. 1 No 1

>Tape recorded interview by
>The Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society &
>The UFO Investigation Center of New South Wales.

>Transcript of Father William Gill interview.

By the way, I would also recommend taking a look at other 1959
document: the transcript of Rev. Gill's _talk_ to the Victorian
Flying Saucer Research Society on October 28, 1959 (is there any
on-line version?).

Right now I have no spare time to elaborate on this but it's
plenty of lively and interesting details on the interplay





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                   Journalists Film UFOs Over Oruro Bolvia

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:19:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:48:44 -0400
Subject: Journalists Film UFOs Over Oruro Bolvia


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 18, 2005


Source: La Patria (newspaper)
Date: October 18, 2005

Bolivia: Journalists Filmed Two UFOs Flying Over Oruro

Two unidentified flying objects were recorded by the cameras of
Bolivian TV channel ATB last Thursday. The first sighting
occurred in the early hours of Monday, October 10th. Since then,
local residents could not help but notice the presence of other
UFOs in the skies over their city.

According to Julio Espinoza, Paola Medina and Jose Romero, the
time was 20:30 when they went out to the street adjacent to the
television station to see the possible presence of a UFO, since
since last Saturday, the staff was following up on the
phenomenon after having collected the images provided by Gustavo
Ponce, a citizen who had visual contact with an unidentified
flying object (UFO) in the morning hours on Monday.

According to Paola Medina's account, they began to watch the
skies at 20:30 hours and by 21:00 had detected a strange object
in to the southwest of the Bolivian city of Oruro, which was
rhomboidal in shape and with incandescent lights that changed
colors from yellow to red to blue.

"It also changed shape, since it transformed from a rhomboidal
shape into a perfect square and into a classic flying saucer,"
she said.

This observation was confirmed by the citizens who phoned the TV
station from various parts of the city to report the presence of
the phenomenon. Citizens also saw another object flying over the
eastern section of the city: it was circular in shape with a
shiny yellowish light. It moved with a swinging motion and
vanished from the sky half an hour later.

Last Friday, several persons reported the presence of strange
objects in the skies over the city. One citizen even said that
one of the UFOs was at the altitude of the radio and TV antennas
located on San Felipe hill.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                  Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:13:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:54:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 22:41:29 EDT
>Subject: Why Can't Ufologists Get High Profile Sponsors?

<snip>

>I wanna see STP and Valvoline and Pepsi stickers on Ufologists
>garbed in form fitting action suits.

>I wanna see Stanton T. Friedman and Wendy Connors on tv debating
>whether Classic Coca Cola beats some new fangled Coca Cola.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                Local UFO Investigator's Interviews Published

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:03:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:03:40 -0400
Subject: Local UFO Investigator's Interviews Published




Source: The Lincoln Tribune - Lincolnton, North Carolina, USA

http://tinyurl.com/crzcs

2005/10/18


Local UFO Investigator�s Interviews Published
by Jason Saine

Lincolnton - George D. Fawcett, a Mount Airy native and
Lincolnton resident for the past 65 years recently was
recognized for his extensive UFO investigations and research.

The October, 2005 issue of the Our State Magazine in Raleigh has
published a four page article entitled, Flights Of Fancy. The
article was written by Neal Thompson of Weaverville, NC.

The Fall 2005 Volume XXXIV of the Davidson Journal of Davidson
College in Davidson featured a two page interview of Fawcett,
who was a student with his twin brother Garnet in 1951. The
story, written by John Stennis Syme, Editor of the Davidson
Journal was titled, Out Of This World (UFO expert researches
mystery within mystery.)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                    Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai Thailand

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:54:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:10:54 -0400
Subject: Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai Thailand


[Thai television coverage is a bit sparse the past two days. I
know FT did a spread on this phenomenon and at least one
"scientific" study by the Europeans a few years ago but no
definitive explanation of possible causes. If the full moon is
one variable why aren't the fireballs seen at other full moons -
or are they?. This year over 200 fireballs were seen. -Terry]

-----

Source: TourismThailand.org

http://tinyurl.com/9jssd

17/10/2005

Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai "Bang Fai Phaya Naga"

As the full moon crests the horizon, ruby orbs of light begin to
rise out of the Mekong River. As if by magic, they float
silently into the air and then evaporate in the inky blackness,
a phenomenon that awes and delights observers privileged to have
seen them.

For centuries, their existence was a closely-held secret among
villagers living near the northeastern town of Nong Khai. Then,
the miraculous event was discovered by outsiders who now flock
to the riverbanks each October full moon night in enormous
numbers--400,000, at last count.

The silence of the fireballs' ascent is emblematic of the
mystery of their origins beneath the murky Mekong. Villagers
claim that they are created by nak, mythical serpents as central
to Thai belief and as enigmatic as the fireballs themselves.

The debate over their formation reflects a clash of cultures. On
the one hand are the villagers for whom water and its denizens
holds an almost mystical fascination. And little wonder: water
nourishes the staple foods of rice and fish; it is central to
every rite, festival, and procession from the Royal Barges to
longboat races. Rivers and canals once supported most Thais'
boats and homes, and water explains every elemental mystery. For
a people who cling dearly to cherished beliefs about water--and
especially about its chief denizen, the nak (naga, in Sanskrit)-
-the scientists' desire to find a rational explanation for the
phenomenon, is an abomination. Faith and tradition vie with
science.

Between 6 and 9 p.m. on the full moon night of the eleventh
lunar month (October), the final night of Buddhist Lent,
smokeless, scentless, soundless fireballs begin to rise from the
deepest, Lao side of the Mekong. As many as 19 ruby globes at a
time ascend to heights of 30 to 300 metres for three to eight
seconds each, then simply vanish. In some years there are only a
few; in 1999, nearly 3,500 fireballs were counted. They can be
seen from ponds and a dozen riverbank villages but are most
numerous near Phon Phisai.

The villagers' assertion that the nak are responsible for the
miracle rests on an ancient Buddhist legend.

During his final incarnation, Lord Buddha returned to earth
after teaching his mother in Thavatimsa heaven at the end of
Buddhist Lent. Phaya Nak and his followers welcomed him back by
blowing fireballs into the sky. Since then, on the October full
moon night, fireballs--regarded as the fiery breath of the nak,
mirroring medieval European beliefs of fire-breathing dragons--
have risen from the Mekong River, a miracle that people call
"Bang Fai Phaya Nak," in recognition of the serpent king's
devotion.

On the preceding afternoon, villagers in traditional dress
parade through Phon Phisai, accompanied by bands, and floats
bearing images of the nak. In the evening, illuminated longboats
float by the crowds gathered on the riverbanks. When the
procession has passed, onlookers settle in to wait for the magic
to begin.

Many villagers claim to have glimpsed the gigantic nak, a belief
supported in some respects by science. Paleontologists say
gigantic aquatic snakes termed Madtsoids appeared worldwide in
the Cretaceous period. Fossilised vertebra found in South
American suggest a serpent 18 metres (60 feet) long and a metre
in diameter, near the size the villagers say they have seen. The
ancient creatures also bore crests resembling those of the naga.
Could descendents of the Madtsoids inhabit the depths of the
Mekong River, much in the way that the pseudoryx, once thought
extinct has surfaced in the mountains of northeastern Laos?

But, on the other hand, science has challenged folk belief in
the fireballs and fired a controversy. It began with skepticism
by one of Nong Khai's own citizens, Dr. Manas Kanoksilpa, who
for a decade has conducted scientific experiments to explain the
fireball phenomenon. Dismissing a human hand in their creation
(a charge initially levelled at the villagers), he says that the
Bang Fai Phaya Nak are globules of methane and nitrogen formed
from decomposed organic matter trapped in pools deep beneath the
Mekong. When the balls break the water's surface, they self-
combust and remain alight until they eventually run out of fuel
and fade. This is the explanation generally given for the
formation of swamp gas and will-o'-the-wisp.

In 2002, the Ministry of Science and Technology appointed a
committee of experts to study the issue. The team collected soil
and water samples, developed a submarine robot to probe the
riverbed, and set up eight gas-collecting and gas-monitoring
stations in swamps and rivers where sightings had been reported.
After a two-year study, they concurred with Dr. Manas that the
fireballs are caused by the sun warming organic matter on the
riverbed, causing it to decompose into flammable phosphine and
methane gas and combust in the presence of ionised atomic
oxygen. This explains why the fireballs are of uniform colour,
do not emit flares, smoke or sound, and eventually dissipate
without a trace.

Tracking studies have indicated that the phenomenon occurs in
March to May, and September and October, when the earth is
closest to the sun. But the committee sidestepped the question
of how the fermented matter could form in swiftly-running water.
Anticipating adverse reaction to their investigations, the
Ministry announced that the Royal Thai Navy would also monitor
the fireballs with equipment installed along the riverbanks.

Naturally, the findings have been disputed by Nong Khai
residents who see their time-honoured beliefs challenged by what
they view as attempts to portray them as superstitious country
bumpkins.

Secular conviction or swamp gas? Superstition or science?

The debate rages on. What cannot be disputed is the fireballs'
beauty. For those who have seen them, they are wondrous,
whatever the explanation. So, each full moon night in October,
spectators gather on the riverbanks to await the miracle. And
secretly hope for a chance sighting of the nak himself.

Contact information:
TAT Northeastern Office - Region 5
Areas of responsibility: Udon Thani, Nong Bua Lamphu,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                        Re: Serious Question - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks<RB47x.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:38:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:12:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Sparks


>From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:56:57 -0400
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>>Subject: Serious Question

<snip>

>>I would be very interested to hear your views on this question.

>>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

>Very good question, Dick.

>I think the database of sightings should be mined for
>statistically significant patterns. How consistent, in other
>words, is the data? Especially in details that both people
>reporting the sightings and people investigating them might not
>have put any stress on.

>And then the same thing should be done with sightings that can
>be easily explained. What consistencies do these reports show,
>and how do they differ from those it's harder to explain?

>Not that this hasn't been done before. But maybe not as
>thoroughly as I might like. Besides, it's always good (according
>to the scientific method) to repeat studies, to make sure that
>independent researchers, doing the same work, will get the same
>results.

It's been done before (George Valley, Grudge-Ruppelt, Battelle,
Vallee, etc.) and it has not "resolved the controversy in a
meaningful way." That is the question, not "how can we do
more studies of UFO's in a scientific manner?" The AF made
a policy decision on July 28, 1952, to deemphasize pattern
analysis of anecdotal intelligence reports of UFO's, based on a
broader MIT study of AF intelligence methodology in Project
Beacon Hill, as well as to devalue anecdotal reports. Arguments
can go back and forth on statistical analyses and they may
never "resolve the controversy," which is more of a social and
political issue than a scientific one.

A much better answer was in your other posting which does
suggest a possible way to "resolve the controversy":

"It's usually more effective to get information in the hands of
people who'll do something with it, which includes spreading it
around. So I might suggest, once we had our data properly
organized and studied, a campaign to put the best of it in the
hands of selected opinion leaders. Let them then talk about it,
as they go about their active lives. Surprising how quickly
that'll spread the information. So, if we had massive funding, I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                  1 Million Bucks For Bigfoot Nessie & Abby

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 21:32:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:14:03 -0400
Subject: 1 Million Bucks For Bigfoot Nessie & Abby


http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-17-bigfootbounty_x.htm

This story focuses on a scientist who says he's posting a $1
million bounty for pics that lead to the live capture of either
Bigfoot, Nessie, or Abby the Abominable Snowman.

As offball as it seems a million smackeroonies is enough to make
a lot of people give up some info.

Mayhaps Ufology could use more bona fide bounties for evidence
and proof.

Yet even though I know of witnesses who could bust open many UFO
investigations with solid confirmation or proof, even money
doesn't persuade these people.

Fear is strong.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                  Intelligent Design On An Another Planet?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:27:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:27:12 -0400
Subject: Intelligent Design On An Another Planet?




Source: The Seoul Times - Seoul, South Korea

http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=2303

October 19, 2005

Global Views
Op-Ed piece

Intelligent Design On An Another Planet?
Special Contribution
By Babu G. Ranganathan


Imagine finding a planet where robots are programmed so that
they can make other robots just like themselves from raw
materials.

Now, imagine an alien visitor coming to the planet and, after
many years of studying these robots, coming to the conclusion
that since science can explain how these robots work and
function there's no reason to believe that there was an ultimate
intelligent designer behind them.

The analogy above certainly is not perfect but it is sufficient
to reveal the fallacious thinking of those who attack
intelligent design behind life and the universe.

Chance physical processes can produce some level of order but it
is not rational to believe that the highest levels of order in
life and the universe are by chance. For example, amino acids
have been shown to be able to come into being by chance but not
more complex structures such as proteins which require for amino
acids to be in a precise sequence. A single cell has millions of
proteins.

If the cell evolved it would have had to be all at once. A
partially evolved cell cannot wait millions of years to become
complete because it would be highly unstable and quickly
disintegrate in the open environment.

The great British scientist Sir Frederick Hoyle has said that
the probability of the sequence of molecules in the simplest
cell coming into existence by chance is equivalent to a tornado
going through a junk yard of airplane parts and assembling a 747
Jumbo Jet!

What if we should find evidence of life on Mars? Wouldn't that
prove evolution? No. It wouldn't be proof that such life had
evolved from non-living matter by chance natural processes. And
even if we did find evidence of life on Mars it would have most
likely have come from our very own planet - Earth! In the
Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which could
have easily spewed dirt containing microbes into outer space
which eventually could have reached Mars. A Newsweek article of
September 21, 1998, p.12 mentions exactly this possibility.

Contrary to popular belief, scientists have never created life
in the laboratory. What scientists have done is genetically
alter or engineer already existing forms of life, and by doing
this scientists have been able to produce new forms of life.
However, they did not produce these new life forms from non-
living matter. Even if scientists ever do produce life from non-
living matter it won't be by chance so it still wouldn't help
support any argument for evolution.

Those advocating the teaching of intelligent design are not
demanding that Darwinian theory no longer be taught. Rather, the
advocates of intelligent design want the merits of both theories
taught side by side when the issue of origins is covered in
science classes and textbooks. This is only fair.

Science cannot prove we are here by either design (creation) or
by chance (evolution), but students should have full information
available to decide which position science best supports.

An organization of highly qualified scientists, The Institute
for Creation Research has published some excellent books
supporting faith in intelligent design for life and the
universe.

---

The above story was contributed by Mr. Babu G. Ranganathan. Mr.
Ranganathan has B.A. degree in Bible and Biology from Bob Jones
University. He has also had the privilege of being recognized in
the 24th edition of Marquis Who's Who In The East for his
writings on religion and science. For details visit:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

              Tenants Find Alien Protection Device Upon Move-In

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:31:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:31:44 -0400
Subject: Tenants Find Alien Protection Device Upon Move-In




Source: KCCI-TV Channel 8 - Des Moines, Iowa, USA

http://www.kcci.com/news/5116630/detail.html

October 18, 2005


Tenants Find Alien Protection Device Upon Move-In
Bomb Squad Called In

DAVENPORT, Iowa --  A home in eastern Iowa no longer has the
power to scare off underground aliens.

Police have taken away a device from a home in Davenport after
its new tenants discovered a box containing what they thought
was a bomb.

But the house's former owner said it was designed to scare off
aliens living underground.

Jessica Harper moved out of the house last month and left behind
the box. She said she got it from her mother's friend, an
astrologer who Harper describes as "off his rocker."

She said she didn't want to throw it away because it wasn't
hers.

The new tenants discovered the box Monday and evacuated their
home while the local bomb squad investigated.

Authorities would not confirm the device's purpose, but they
said it looks dangerous.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                Ufologiques Meetings Of Chalons-in-Champagne

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:36:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:36:52 -0400
Subject: Ufologiques Meetings Of Chalons-in-Champagne




Source: UFO Publication

http://tinyurl.com/9ysj8

18-10-2005

The Ufologiques Meetings Of Chalons-in-Champagne







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                      UFOs: The Hidden History Lecture

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:41:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:41:43 -0400
Subject: UFOs: The Hidden History Lecture




Source: North Texas e-News - Bonham, Texas, USA

http://www.ntxe-news.com/artman/publish/article_29379.shtml

Oct 19, 2005


Lecturer at A&M-C presents 'UFOs: The Hidden History' on Oct. 20
By Tori Woods
A&M-Commerce News


COMMERCE, Texas -- UFO researcher and lecturer Robert Hastings
will make a presentation on the Texas A&M University-Commerce
campus on Thursday, Oct. 20.

Hastings will speak in the American Ballroom of the Sam Rayburn
Memorial Student Center at 7:30 p.m.

Also on Thursday, there will be a Fright Fest at the Morris
Recreation Center featuring a carnival, pumpkin carving,
Halloween costume contest, and refreshments.

The Fright Fest, set from 6 to 8 p.m., is open to the community.

Hastings has spoken to over 500 colleges nationwide to discuss
his research on UFOs and, what he says, is the government's
effort to cover them up.

His fascination with this phenomenon began in 1967 while working
as an air traffic controller at Malstrom Air Force Base near
Great Falls, Mont.

He says, while he was at an air traffic control tower, five
objects that "were not aircraft" were tracked on radar for
several minutes. Jets were launched to investigate, and Hastings
later learned that as the jets closed in "the UFOs, performed a
vertical ascent and left the area at enormous speed -- beyond
the capability of any aircraft."

Documentation of these unexplained events, made public through
the Freedom of Information Act, goes all the way back to 1947.

One slide that will be shown during his lecture, shows a 1950
memorandum sent to former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. It
reports that "flying saucers" had crashed in New Mexico and had
been recovered by the U.S. Air Force. The memo goes on to say
that "bodies of human shape but only three feet tall" were found
inside the aircraft.

Hastings says these types of events have taken place on dozens
of occasions, and that there are documents to prove it. At the
end of his lecture, he will provide websites that will allow
members of the audience access to up to 600 pages of these now-
released documents.

This event is free, and the public is invited. For more
information, contact Breakout Entertainment at
www.breakout.tamu-commerce.edu.

For more information on the Fright Fest, call the rec center at
903-468-3170.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                       ET Lives... And He's Christian

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:47:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:47:02 -0400
Subject: ET Lives... And He's Christian




Source: Raiders News - Salem, Oregon, USA

http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com/lead-story225.htm

October 18, 2005


ET Lives... And He's Christian
By Ruth Gledhill

There is probably intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe,
and there is evidence in the Bible to suggest that it could be
Christian, according to the Roman Catholic Church.

In a document published by the Catholic Truth Society, the
official publisher for the Vatican, a papal astronomer
speculates that "sooner or later, the human race will discover
that there are other intelligent creatures out there in the
Universe".

Brother Guy Consolmagno, a Jesuit, who is one of the Vatican�s
leading astronomers, concedes that he could be wrong.
Ultimately, he says, "We don�t know." But in the new book, part
of the Explanations series designed to explain Catholic teaching
in everyday language, he says that part of his hunch is
scientific. With so many billions of planets, stars and
galaxies, he says, "surely, somewhere in that number, there must
be other civilised, rational beings".

To back up his hunch that the aliens will have been subject to
Christ�s saving grace, he cites the verses from John�s Gospel
known as the Good Shepherd passage. In John x, 14-16, Jesus
says: "I am the Good Shepherd... I have other sheep that do not
belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will
listen to My voice. So there will be one flock, one Shepherd."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:54:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:51:20 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]

>>>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>>>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>>>beyond a doubt.

>>This is very likely true.

>And this is very certainly rubbish. I don't know Martin Shough
>personally, but I have been impressed with his thoughtfulness
>and thoroughness, nowhere in evidence, alas, in the strange
>sentence just above. It would be bad enough if it read, "This
>could be true," but it's immeasurably worse when we read, "This
>is _very likely_ true."

Jerry

I'll do you the courtesy of addressing you directly. What a
shame that of all the issues in all of the cases (including this
one) about which you might have engaged me in fruitful
discussion, it should be a wrangle over shades of meaning
attached to a very paltry remark! However it seems I have no
choice.

First, my casual use of the expression "very likely" was not
intended to indicate any particular degree of probability, but
was rather a figure of speech, much as one might say "could well
be" or "very plausibly".

Second, I was responding generally to the suggestion of
"familiarity with the UFO literature", not particularly to the
Adamski reference in Chris Allan's second sentence which assumes
such importance in your response.

(Perhaps I should have <snip>-ped with more surgical precision.)

Thirdly, if it should prove to be the case that some exposure of
Father Gill to the language of 1950s saucer literature is
possible, or plausible, or even very likely, one should perhaps
avoid leaping defensively to conclusions about my opinion on the
case.

Now . . .

>A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
>unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
>this definition of "mothership":

>"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller craft
>(as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
>smaller craft: TENDER."

>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that it became
almost an iconic usage during the late 'fifties and 'sixties
among people who knew about flying saucers, from popular books,
magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have known nothing
whatever about shipping. I personally remember that it was a
term used by UFO enthusiasts of my childish acquaintance (adult
and not)around 1963 and thereafter with, I am sure, _no_thought_
of its nautical origin. And, no, this doesn't mean that Gill had
to have had this adopted usage in mind. But it is certainly
reasonable (not "bad") to consider the possibility that he might
have done.

>UFOs are not even
>mentioned. It's a standard term predating ufologists and
>contactees. It is not, the preposterous contrary implication
>notwithstanding, a word only in the vocabularies of contactees,
>ufologists, and their readers.

I am not implying this, therefore my contention cannot be
considered on that account preposterous.

>Gill's extrapolation is a
>perfectly understandable one, as reasonable as the borrowing of
>nautical language for the word "spaceship," and does not require
>immersion in UFO/contactee literature. And there are other
>problems with trying to link Gill's language and Adamski's.

Immersion? Who said that? And I am not even specifically trying
to link Gill's language directly with reading Adamski. This is
Chris Allan's suggestion, and you might want to address him on
the matter. I am however agreeing with Chris's broader point
that it is quite possible that Gill may have had indirect
exposure to some saucer terminology prior to June 1959.

>Gill had not read Adamski at the time of his sighting. He had
>never even heard of him. Later, asked by Hynek and Hendry when
>he first came upon the name, Gill said it was in the office of
>Australian attorney/ufologist Peter Norris. "Of course, I was
>entirely ignorant of all these people [contactees]," he
>recalled. "It seemed rather extraordinary to me. You know
>[visits to] the moon, Venus, and that sort of thing."

>In Norris's office, Gill said, he "raced through" an Adamski
>book (he told me it was Flying Saucers Have Landed, not the book
>[the subsequent Inside the Space Ships] in which motherships
>figure). Then, in Gill's words, "I read it, and afterwards I
>said, 'Look, I just can't swallow this, I can't take this; if
>this is what your UFO group is about, I wouldn't have anything
>to do with it.'"

>The quotes above are from IUR, December 1977, p. 7.

>As of 1977, according to what Gill told me, he had read all of
>three books relevant to extraterrestrial visitors: Von Daniken's
>best-selling ancient-astronaut opus Chariots of the Gods?, the
>Leslie/Adamski volume already mentioned, and Hynek's The UFO
>Experience. He told me that the first two were, in his
>estimation, "trash."

>In my interview (Fate, February 1978) I noted, "He is frankly
>skeptical of most UFO claims he hears, so much so, in fact, that
>he did not really begin to trust me until I told him about
>several UFO claims I had investigated and disproved."

Again, I'm not suggesting that the name Adamski need have meant
anything to Gill in 1959. Neither am I unaware of Gill's
conservatism, his reluctance to speculate and his early
suspicion that he had seen some experimental aircraft etc.

The "mother ship" terminology in 1959 was very far from limited
to the pages of Adamski. It was a widespread contactee usage
(see Angelucci, The Secret of the Saucers, 1955, for just one
other example that comes immediately to mind) and it spread
beyond that niche to be widely used in popular UFO circles, as
everyone knows.

So Gill might (as you suggest above) have originated the usage
independently by an "understandable extrapolation" from
seafaring terminology, _or_ he might, by another equally
understandable "borrowing", have absorbed the usage from some
third party who had exposure to ideas from popular UFO books
prior to June 1959.

Either seems to me about equally likely on the face of it. I
wouldn't dismiss either as "certain rubbish". Maybe you think it
very unlikely that a rather down-to-earth-seeming missionary in
the remote SE highlands of Papua would have such exposure when
he hadn't read any flying saucer books. But let's look at this.

Gill was "an old friend" of the Rev Norman Cruttwell of the
Menapi Mission, across the bay from Boianai. They went out to
Papua together in 1946 and had worked there together for 13
years. They knew each other "very well". They met and
corresponded regularly.

In November 1958 a series of sightings had occurred around
Goodenough Bay that prompted Cruttwell to write to the British
periodical Flying Saucer Review. He tells us that he got the
address of FSR from the back of a book on flying saucers (we
don't know which particular book this was). The editor of FSR at
the time, Brinsley le Poer Trench, wrote back to Cruttwell
saying that he was very interested in the sightings. Moreover he
asked Crutwell to send him any further reports of sightings from
the area, and thus it was that Cruttwell became "local observer
and investigator for New Guinea in the International UFO
Observer Corps."

It was in this capacity that he collected together the numerous
reports of "flying Tilley lamps" etc during the first half of
1959 - many of them during a month-long routine "walkabout" in
the mountains during June/July 1959 - and it was also in this
capacity that he received the "fat envelope" of Boianai sighting
material from Father Gill when he returned to Menapi.

Gill knew of Cruttwell's interest, and they had clearly
discussed the topic. We know this because Gill and a number of
Papuans sighted one of the "Tilley lamps" from a boat off
Boianai on April 9. At the time Gill was merely puzzled, but
following another sighting by a trader at Giwa on April 21,
Cruttwell wrote to him about it. It then occurred to Gill that
he too might have seen a UFO, and there was evidently some
further correspondence on the matter for Cruttwell says, "This
sighting [Gill's] was therefore of great importance to us at the
time, suggesting that some mysterious, apparently controlled,
craft were flying about over Papua at night."

So when Gill sent his materials to Crutwell ("the kind you have
been waiting for, no doubt") in June it was specifically because
he had known of Crutwell's interest in UFOs, and of his
arrangement with Flying Saucer Review, for several months at
least.

Is it possible that articles and books available to Cruttwell
had familiarised him with the "mother ship" phrase in a UFO
context? It is certainly possible.

Is it possible that Cruttwell had used the phrase to Gill in
this context during discussion and/or correspondence re
Cruttwell's interest in the Papuan sightings and his broader
reading on the subject during the months prior to June 1959?
Yes, of course it is possible.

Does this mean that Gill has to have been a credulous devotee of
the Space Brothers? No. Does it mean that he cannot have been an
accurate observer on June 26 1959? No, of course it does not,
any more than it means that Cruttwell must have been an
unreliable investigator. In fact what checks I have done on the
astronomical features of Cruttwell's reports indicate that he
was probably every bit as careful as his writing in "Flying
Saucers over Papua" would suggest him to be.

I hope this has gone some way to repairing the damage done to a
(no doubt undeserved and probably highly localised) reputation





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:56:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:03:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>I do not think the UFO community is unaware of passive
>>radar. It is the latest sensation....

>Where is Davenport's Passive Radar concept "the latest
>sensation"? Certainly not on UFO UpDates where it goes virtually
>unmentioned. Whenever proposals for a "new approach" to UFO
>research are made on UpDates basically no one (except me I
>think) mentions Passive Radar. Which is my point in bringing it
>up on this thread.

It _was_ the latest sensation a while ago. Now it is entrenched
in the psyche of ufology. Note that Davenport was on a number of
nationwide radio talk shows that appeal to the UFO audience.
This is much more than most of us can claim. He got his idea out
there. Even on UpDates his idea has been discussed, but not with
any real technical sense of implementing it (how many of us are
radio engineers?). Mainly the only interest is how can this be
funded. Sure it would be great to have everyone pitch in $10 to
fund the thing, but we don't do that. No, we have conferences on
exopolitics.

Why can't this passive radar be tied to the University research?
If us researchers are so scared of ridicule, go to Canada where
Persinger seems to flourish with his UFO research.

>>You seem to be saying to
>>me that all other UFO research is hopeless (based on the past
>>results of UFO field reseearch) until we can get this passive
>>radar.

>I am saying that optically-dominated ground stations have
>limited range in seeing UFOs close up enough to tell they are
>UFO's, essentially has to be within about 1/2 mile, and that a

I am sorry but this is bull. Why is this so hard to convey? Is
anyone else out their in Listland confused when I say that
triangulating a tiny dot in the night sky (with a proper
distance between the triangulation stations) can give you the
altitude and position of the tiny dot of light at even satellite
distances, be it Casper the Ghost or an interplanetary pelican
or alien spaceship or supersecret military orbital spaceplane. I
agree that you cannot see the details of the object. It doesn't
matter. What matters in _my_ experiment is that one can track
such a light going from low altitude to orbital altitude.

If your experiment involves very high resolution images of a UFO
(which I assume will provide you some sort of value added data),
then by all means wait for a passive radar system.

>revolutionary concept such as Passive Radar with the potential
>for continent-wide coverage of say 2,000-4,000 miles from a
>single receiving site, is a quantum leap above a horizon-limited
>optical tracking station.

So your one "passive radar" site/system is now powerful enough
to cover a continent. This is getting funny. Sorry, but I think
you do not understand the system enough to make such statements.
Weak reflected signals coming from a myriad of objects MUST be
deconvolved at the receiving site_S_ with a capital "S" and
processed in real time to drive your high resolution cameras. Oh
yeah! And by the way who told you you can get away with one
site?

Anyway, _potentially_ is a useless and meaningless qualifier
because it could take decades or centuries, millions or billions
of dollars.

>You dispute the effective range of
>your UFO "field lab" based on zero data, but even if we accepted
>your outlandish tracking ranges (100 miles you say?) the Passive
>Radar covers a 30 x 30 x 30 = 27,000 times greater volume of
>space.

One can image and triangulate LEO and GEO satellites. This
gives you an upperward range. A horizontal range of course
depends on your site altitude. Weather permitting as with
all satellite viewing.

But then your one passive radar site is not affected by
weather (how many myriad of dense clouds, rain, etc are
going to have to be processed!!! You need some hefty
supercomputers!)

>If your UFO "field lab" costs say on the order of $10,000 and a
>Passive Radar on the order of $100,000, then for the price of
>just 10 of your limited ground stations we could get 2,700 times
>better coverage with Passive Radar. My prediction is you'll just
>nitpick the $10,000 order of magnitude price tag by a few
>thousand here or there, talk about how this or that piece of
>equipment can be obtained for a few bucks less, etc. etc., all
>the while ignoring the meaning of "order of magnitude."

I think $10K is about right for the field station I am talking
about. However, I completely disagree with your passive radar
coverage estimates (for "one" station). I also completely
disagree with your pie in the sky estimation that passive radar
will "see over the horizon". Maybe to a small extent it can, but
certainly never one site used to see over the whole continent.
That is lubricrous. We are talking about not only primary
reflections of radio signals from an object but also secondary
ones. This is a waste of time to even attempt to build a system
to try to perform.

At least 'my' UFO field lab can be fielded today with ubiquitous
technology whose capabilities are being improved every day based
on consumer demand.

You passive radar system may 'someday' be purchased for $10K-
$100K per site, but the development costs to make your system
'real time' (to do the oh so critical very high resolution
optical imaging to "verify" that it is a "UFO") will cost
$10Million+. We are talking about IC design and manufacturing
probably parallel computing is needed. This is all state of the
art.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

               Re: ET Lives... And He's Christian - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:25:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:02:11 -0400
Subject: Re: ET Lives... And He's Christian - Chichikov


>ET Lives... And He's Christian
>By Ruth Gledhill

>There is probably intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe,
>and there is evidence in the Bible to suggest that it could be
>Christian, according to the Roman Catholic Church.

>In a document published by the Catholic Truth Society, the
>official publisher for the Vatican, a papal astronomer
>speculates that "sooner or later, the human race will discover
>that there are other intelligent creatures out there in the
>Universe".

>Brother Guy Consolmagno, a Jesuit, who is one of the Vatican�s
>leading astronomers, concedes that he could be wrong.
>Ultimately, he says, "We don�t know." But in the new book, part
>of the Explanations series designed to explain Catholic teaching
>in everyday language, he says that part of his hunch is
>scientific. With so many billions of planets, stars and
>galaxies, he says, "surely, somewhere in that number, there must
>be other civilised, rational beings".

Brother Guy is an email friend of mine. He sent me a .pdf
version of an earlier proof, which has now been slightly
amended.

The article quoted above is not quite an accurate summary of
points in the book,'Intelligent Life in the Universe?', which is
not available at this time in the US, though I understand it is
available in the UK.

I would advise against anyone taking this book as representing
an official Vatican position on the subject of ETs. I don't
believe that there is such a position. However, that it is
published at all by an official publisher is perhaps
significant. At least, there is no suggestion that the ideas in
it are doctrinally objectionable.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:48:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:05:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:06:17 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:22:07 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting


Christopher,

>>"Dr. Hynek had Father Gill study the moon in the Illinois sky,
>>and he decided that the width of the object [with waving
>>occupants] was equal to five moons lined up end-to-end." As
>>Allan Hendry observes in the IUR piece from which this is quoted
>>(November 1977, p. 5), this alone rules out any imaginable
>>astronomical identification.

>I agree it does, or ought to. But does it? Hendry himself notes
>a case where a woman who said "I know what stars look like"
>swore a UFO had illuminated windows with the round heads and
>silvery-colored faces of the occupants inside. She observed this
>over several nights. She was looking at the planet Venus. (See
>UFO HANDBOOK p. 85, UK edition). All right I agree she was just
>a single witness (with her husband).

First off, Hendry, who actually interviewed the man, concluded
that Gill did not see Venus. End of that. Second:

You cite, of course, an extraordinary and extreme case, and a
dubious guide to anything else. Why do you believe it tells us
anything about what Gill and the others saw?  Unless - as I
suspect - we are to believe that the Venus identification can be
hauled out when all else fails. As a long, dreary history has
demonstrated, Venus is the all-purpose, unfalsifiable
"explanation" of airborne CEs (or CE2s, as in the notorious
Portage County case or - for that matter - even in otherwise
solvable episodes such as the Mantell incident).

What I wonder, though, is this: why isn't Venus used, with
similar logic and cogency, to dispose of ball-lightning reports?
Couldn't many witnesses to BL actually be observing Venus and
wildly distorting their testimony because of their own
excitability and knowledge of BL reports and literature?

I would guess this argument isn't employed (1) because it would
sound crazy; (b) because ball lightning is respectable and UFOs
aren't, and (c) there is no desire to dispose of BL at any cost,
while the opposite is true of UFO reports. If not for those
small points, I'm sure we'd be hearing about Venus every time
someone described an anomalous lightning phenomenon. Future
historians of science, I suspect, will take note of precisely
these points.

>>And what evidence do you have that he said that he had seen
>>Venus and the UFO at the same time only "once"? I realize that
>>you're throwing in that adverb to plant a sleazy innuendo
>>without having to defend its content, while making Gill look
>>shifty and untrustworthy, but I would love to see your
>>documentation - if it exists, which would surprise me - on
>>this.

>Are you saying he saw Venus & the UFO together more than once?
>Ha! Stop accusing me of sleaze and innuendo, Jerry. And stop
>planting words in my mouth. The documentation that he saw the
>two together, once, is in Cruttwell's report part V section 3.
>Have a look at part VII section 1 for the item on him
>misidentifying Venus . (So did ten others, all "college men"
>including one who had "great qualifications", was an ex-RAAF
>navigator and who "knows a good deal about aircraft and a lot
>about stars". They were all present). If in doubt ask Martin
>Shough, who seems to agree.

This is, sadly, a non-answer. Gill said more than once, in any
number of interviews, that he had seen Venus and the UFO at the
same time. He showed Hynek and Hendry where it was placed during
his and the others' observation of the manned craft with the
waving crew. The use of "once," your disingenuous contrary
insistence notwithstanding, could have been no more than a cheap
effort to undermine his honesty.

>No racism here, Jerry. These were all the top qualified guys.
>And they were all fooled by Venus. Did I say all? I meant all
>but one. And Gill was not the one.

A "Venus" that appeared separately, was not visible for the
whole duration of the sighting, and appeared the size of five
full moons? There it is: pelicanism in a nutshell. The
witnesses, stupid, gullible, and unable to make the most obvious
distinctions, saw whatever the pelicanist declares they saw,
however grotesque the counterexplanation may have to be. Given
that less than scientific premise, it is no wonder that no
puzzling UFO report could ever emerge from the death clasp of
pelican wings.

By the way, an amusing and instructive paper addresses these
very matters (in anomalistics generally, not just ufology) in
the current issue of the Journal of Scientific Exploration. See
Charles Eisenstein's "A State of Belief Is a State of Being." A
quote noted at random applies to the present instance:

"Most of the skeptical materials I have encountered invoke
'reason' as the highest principle of human thought, implicitly
assuming their authors to possess this virtue in superior
qualities. Behind most skeptical explanations is the belief 'I
am better (smarter, saner, etc.) than you are.'"

>>>The UFO may be a true unknown - nobody can say with certainty,
>>>but by conceding that what he first claimed were UFOs were
>>>possibly bright planets, Rev Gill has virtually hanged himself.
>>>The 'going in to dinner' episode also counts against him more
>>>than somewhat!

>>Let's see now. The excitable Gill is a lousy observer because he
>>is cautious enough to suggest some of the ostensible UFOs were
>>"possibly bright planets." Huh? Does anybody follow the
>>reasoning here? Is there any reasoning here? Remember, elsewhere
>>Christopher wants us to believe Gill was a gullible,
>>impressionable UFO believer who read Adamski and even borrowed
>>phrases from him.

>So you refuse to admit that Gill has weakened his case in any
>way by this admission? What on earth ever caused him to suppose
>these accompanying objects were UFOs? Oh yes, I am willing to
>bet he had read Adamski or Keyhoe (maybe not their actual books
>but articles based on them) before June 26. Maybe supplied by
>Cruttwell.

Your evidence? Or did you just make that up, too? See my
separate post on Gill's UFO reading. Is it part of the
pelicanist job description that you get to make stuff up
whenever it suits your purpose?

>>Gill was in no sense a UFO buff. "Until I got down to Melbourne
>>[after leaving Papua New Guinea]," he told Hynek and Hendry (and
>>me; I queried him separately on the same point), "the only thing
>>I'd read on flying saucers is what I'd written myself [about his
>>own experience]. That is, I knew nothing. There might have been
>>a magazine article, but I was just disinterested." Eighteen
>>years after his sighting, Gill was asked if he had "any specific
>>theory to explain what you saw," he said simply, "No." Some UFO
>>buff. Some credulous twit.

>I never used the term "UFO buff". You did. I said he was
>familiar with the literature. He forgets that Cruttwell had
>already written to him about UFOs soon after his (Gill's) first
>sighting from a launch on April 9, and doubtless planted the
>idea in his head. For Gill to say: "the only thing I had read on
>flying saucers is what I'd written myself" is simply false.
>After 18 years he had simply forgotten.

Obviously, he meant published material, and he meant before he
came to Papua New Guinea. This is really clutching at straws.

>I have conceded Gill may have encountered a genuine UFO. You
>prefer to concede absolutely nothing, Jerry. You refuse to
>believe what Menzel says, even if he said the sun was shining.

Gill said Menzel never contacted him. Menzel said he sent
letters to Gill, and those letters never came back to him. The
evidence? If it exists (which I doubt), it's in the archives of
the American Philosophical Society. If anyone has seen them
there, please speak up. Meantime:

Menzel is known to have lied about significant things, including
his own sighting, as can (and has been) easily documented, and
about other matters (as Ruppelt, for example, has attested and
Brad Sparks has in other areas). There is no evidence that Gill
has lied about anything. Whom under the circumstances would any
rational person credit?

>Yet you accept Gill's accurate recall 18 years after the event.
>You just cannot or will not, accept that Father Gill, and his
>native 'gang', saw anything but a manned craft of some kind.

Not unless I see some contrary argument that makes sense. So far
I haven't, not even close. Neither, by the way, did Gill, who -
as I have quoted - as late as 1995 was saying he still awaited
one, too. In the real world, matters are settled with real





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 19

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:57:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:08:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:33:13 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>As I've pointed out previously, I showed Gill what Menzel had
>>written about his case, namely that he wasn't wearing glasses at
>>the time of the sighting and that the native witnesses had
>>signed a confirming statement because they were illiterate and
>>in awe of the Great White Father. I noted, "Gill cannot
>>understand why Menzel assumed this without first checking with
>>him. (Menzel never communicated with Gill or any of the other
>>witnesses)." This puts the lie to Menzel's dubious claim that he
>>wrote Gill numerous times with no response.

>Jerry, do you think you would be able to point us to the
reference where Menzel talks about illiterate natives and the
Great White Father? Or better still perhaps you could quote the
paragraph to us.

Be glad to, John.

Menzel prepared a report dated December 20, 1967, and in it
wrote:

"We are first to assume that Father Gill and Stephen Gill Moi
(teacher) both suffer from appreciable myopia and that they were
not wearing spectacles during the sighting. They probably had
appreciable stigmatism [sic] as well, so that the image of Venus
was large and definitely elongated."

(Earlier Menzel had stated, falsely, that "none of the sightings
by Father Gill and the mission group refers to" Venus.)

According to Menzel, the native witnesses did not observe either
the UFO or the waving occupants. He goes on: "Father Gill simply
assumed that the other people were seeing what he saw. Although
a great many 'witnesses' signed the report, I doubt very much
that they knew what they were signing and why. They would
certainly have been mystified as to why their great white leader
was seeing something that was invisible to them. On the other





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                       Re: Serious Question - Beasley

From: Craig Beasley <fallingleaf.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:01:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:08:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Beasley

>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question


Here's my take for what it's worth:

I think there is continued value in tracking trends, patterns,
and empirical characteristics of UFO's and related phenomena. If
ufology can continue to build the clearinghouse of data on the
subject, that's all to the good. If we can find a way to inform
people in a serious, credible, and digestible way, that's all to
the better. So we keep pulling together sighting reports and
publishing, but go the extra mile in simply and unabashedly
telling others that the clearinghouse exists.

That's a hurdle I've personally had to make, and recently it is
like a switch has been flipped for me. I tell people I'm a
Ufologist, a second career. No matter their reaction, my
confidence, finally after many years of internal apprehension,
is unshaken. That would be the "assuming a serious lack of
funding approach".

To tackle the "assuming unlimited funding" approach, I can only
speak for myself. I am interested and generally engaged upon
many of the discussed aspects of our field. However, being just
a single human with many other pragmatic things tugging at me, I
have to narrowly restrict what aspect I act upon. Being an
engineer, the restriction is obvious. If UFO's are craft of some
sort, technological and physical, what makes them work? I devote
myself to that. With the limited funds I have, I have some plans
that have an unpleasantly long timeline. If I won the Powerball
(i.e., unlimited funding) I would devote myself to building and
testing apparatus for study of those things that interest me.

Unlimited funding? Do what interests you, see where it properly
fits in with others' interests, then publicize the findings,
produce products sale, and generally move down an R&D path to
perpetuate new learning to complete the loop.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:10:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:51:20 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:50:21 EDT
>>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:53:45 -0500
>>>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting [was: Socorro]


Hi, Martin,

>>>>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>>>>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>>>>beyond a doubt.

>>>This is very likely true.

>>And this is very certainly rubbish. I don't know Martin Shough
>>personally, but I have been impressed with his thoughtfulness
>>and thoroughness, nowhere in evidence, alas, in the strange
>>sentence just above. It would be bad enough if it read, "This
>>could be true," but it's immeasurably worse when we read, "This
>>is _very likely_ true."

>First, my casual use of the expression "very likely" was not
>intended to indicate any particular degree of probability, but
>was rather a figure of speech, much as one might say "could well
>be" or "very plausibly".

If your words are supposed to mean something else, use the words
you mean. I could only respond to the words you wrote in the
context in which they apepar, not to the ones you may have had
in your head.

>Second, I was responding generally to the suggestion of
>"familiarity with the UFO literature", not particularly to the
>Adamski reference in Chris Allan's second sentence which assumes
>such importance in your response.

And how was I to know that?

>Thirdly, if it should prove to be the case that some exposure of
>Father Gill to the language of 1950s saucer literature is
>possible, or plausible, or even very likely, one should perhaps
>avoid leaping defensively to conclusions about my opinion on the
>case.

Again, I can't read your mind, only the words you wrote.

>>A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
>>unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
>>this definition of "mothership":

>>"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller craft
>>(as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
>>smaller craft: TENDER."

>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that it became
>almost an iconic usage during the late 'fifties and 'sixties
>among people who knew about flying saucers, from popular books,
>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have known nothing
>whatever about shipping. I personally remember that it was a
>term used by UFO enthusiasts of my childish acquaintance (adult
>and not)around 1963 and thereafter with, I am sure, _no_thought_
>of its nautical origin. And, no, this doesn't mean that Gill had
>to have had this adopted usage in mind. But it is certainly
>reasonable (not "bad") to consider the possibility that he might
>have done.

And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
use of "mothership."

Again, I could respond only to what you wrote, not to what you
meant but did not express. Debunkers of the case, starting with
Klass, use the "mothership" reference to argue that Gill was a
UFO buff who read Adamski and others.

Your assertion that Gill may have learned the term in discussion
with Cruttwell is hardly unreasonable. If you had said that in
the first place and made clear that you did _not_ consider
Allan's strange assertion about Gill's immersion in saucer
literature "very likely true," we wouldn't have had to go to the
trouble of this exchange.

You needn't fear: your reputation as thoughtful and thorough
remains solid with me. I'm glad we were able to reach an
understanding on this particular point.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                        Re: Serious Question - Warren

From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:23:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:11:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Warren


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

Good Day DIck, Et Al,

>All kidding aside (as Steve Allen used to say), I would like to
>ask all listers (wherever they may be on the spectrum of
>acceptance or rejection of alleged UFO data) to answer one
>simple (perhaps deceptively so) question: What should we
>do with well-documented and well-investigated cases
>reporting craft-like UFOs that don't seem to have
>conventional/prosaic explanations?

<snip>

>I would be very interested to hear your views on this question.
>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
> controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming
>unlimited funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of
>funding)?

Great question... and pardon my tardiness in giving my response.
Assuming you mean to resolve the controversy in a meaningful way
"for the masses," with proper funding, in my view, since the
"publics mind-set" is "the end product" of media minutiae, then
presenting well-documented and well-investigated cases in the
various forums e.g., print, radio, television etc., would be
prudent.

That said, everything is in the presentation  in my opinion
would have to be given in a "news format."

With "how it would presented" understood, the next vital
component would be to whom the responsibility would fall to
orate the event.

For the most favorable impact, this would have to be a group of
highly respected, visible individuals from various countries.
Given the parameters of the "quality evidence" in hand, as well
"unlimited funding" this shouldn't be a problem.

Ideally, the individuals required should be a mix of the highest
government and military officials, active and or retired; as
well as top media personalities. These individuals would be used
to demonstrate the portentous matter of the material presented,
and the duties of presenting individual case/evidence could fall
to Ufologists who are most knowledgeable  of the respective
case/evidence.

That would be the scenario assuming "unlimited funding."

On the other side of the fence, without the funds, raising the
capital would be essential to accomplish the afore mentioned
proposal.

This could be done by putting together a list of potential
investors, and a presentation of the pertinent data given to
them along with the proposal mentioned.

Of course the question in itself doesn't provide enough
information; for example, would there be opposition? If so, then
there would have to be a different construct, and that taken
into consideration.

In all cases, the production would have to be repetitive.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                    Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:31:16 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:14:01 -0400
Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary - Balaskas


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:08:59 EDT
>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary

>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:43:58 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:27:54 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

>>>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:31:12 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
>>>>Subject: Re: 2 Hour UFO Documentary Tonight In UK

<snip>

>>>>According to an e-mail from "Louis" about Nick Cook's
>>>>documentary that was forwarded to me by a well known and
>>>>respected Canadian researcher, don't expect to hear much rehash
>>>>of what is already known. There will be much new fascinating
>>>>documented evidence that some UFOs are our very own (yes, Don!)
>>>>designed back in the 1960s which include exotic new propulsion
>>>>systems based largely on data collected from...(make sure you
>>>>are seated)... Contactees!

>>>>If these official papers were mentioned on this TV documentary,
>>>>along with the contents of some recently discovered McDonnell
>>>>Douglas binders, a major U.S. aerospace company that Dr. Robert
>>>>Wood has privately worked for (yes, the same Wood that is
>>>>organizing 'The 3rd UFO Crash Conference' in Las Vegas next
>>>>month), then what our former Canadian Defense Minister, Paul
>>>>Hellyer, said at the 'Exopolitics Toronto' symposium last month
>>>>might be closer to the truth than many of us ufologists are
>>>>willing to accept!

<snip>

>>>It certainly wouldn't hurt to listen to what the man has to
>>>say. I met the Woods (father and son) last year when I presented
>>>at their conference in Vegas. What was Ryan Wood's job with
>>>McDonnell Douglas? Also which of Hellyer's statements are you
>>>referring to, Corso's "revelations" or the US General's remarks
>>>re the varacity of Corso's book?

<snip>

>In the comments I have snipped out they amount to nothing more
>than an appeal to authority, credentialism. If so-and-so was
>Minister of Such-and-such why everything he says must be taken
>as gospel truth. If So-and-so was head of R&D why then
>everything he says must be written in granite the word of an
>almighty, regardless how ridiculous and preposterous (such as
>space satellites being mentioned in a purported 1954 manual 3
>years before Sputnik and before the "re-entry problem" was
>solved only in mid-1957 so that something could likely survive
>reentry to be recovered).


Hi Brad!

Thank you for your comments regarding mine.

Whether you are a research journalist, a student, a scientist or
just a curious person with an inquiring mind in search of the
truth, unless you obtain your knowledge or facts through special
revelation (i.e from God or the ETs themsleves), what we do know
about UFOs with any degree of certainty does comes from people
of authority and credentials. Of course such general revelation
(i.e. from human sources) is often proven to be misinformed,
biased or even intentionally wrong, are you suggesting that we
we ignore any comments about UFOs they make, including even
prominent persons such as the Pope or the President should they
go public with their beliefs that ETs are real, already here and
that the world should be concerned?

Just because a respected former Canadian defense minister or
a certain prominent UFO researcher who worked on UFO-related
technologies in industry and even with the DIA's secret UFO
working group closely with other now prominent UFO researchers
(or insiders?), is no reason to accept what they tell us as the
gospel truth but to totally dismiss them will only insure that
the UFO phenomenon remains a mystery for this generation too.

As for those pre-Sputnik satellites in orbit around the Earth,
although not mentioned at all in my e-mails above, the
information about them came from unclassified articles and the
personal correspondence of astronomers and aerospace specialists,
including Philip Klass' 'Aviation Week (or Leak?) and Space
Technology'. These pre-Sputnik satellites were not even the only
one. From what I have been able to determine independently,
analysis of the Ubatuba or so-called "Sputnik 0" UFO crash
wreckage that is still in Dr. Peter Sturrock's possession at
Stanford University, is very compelling physical evidence that
these objects are not natural in origin but exhibit evidence of
advance non-Earthly technology.

Although I was a little confused as to what you wrote in your
reply, I hope I at least answered any questions you may have





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                          The History of Mr. Wells

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:47:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:17:29 -0400
Subject: The History of Mr. Wells


Source: Fortean Times Magazine - UK

http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/199_hgwells1.shtml

[Begin excerpt]

The History of Mr. Wells

With the release of a new film version of the science fiction
classic War of The Worlds, interest has been revived in HG
Wells, the father of the modern genre. SF author and commentator
David Langford takes a look back at the life and career of one
of the key figures in 20th-century literature.

Michael Condron's Martian Tripod sculpture in Woking Town centre.

Image: http://www.mcondron.co.uk/

Everyone remembers Herbert George Wells as one of the greats of
science fiction indeed as the father of the modern SF genre,
whose classic tale of interplanetary invasion The War of the
Worlds appeared in 1898 and has its latest film incarnation this
year.

Perhaps not so often remembered is that Wells became a celebrity
on a scale that today's SF authors can only dream of (unless
they happen to be Sir Arthur C Clarke). Wells clawed his way to
fame from working-class beginnings, despite being frequently
scoffed at by Establishment snobs as a "vulgar Cockney".





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:26:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:19:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:51:20 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>Gill using the term "mothership" shows his familiarity with the
>>>>UFO literature of the 50s. A reader of Adamski and/or Keyhoe
>>>>beyond a doubt.

>>>This is very likely true.

>>And this is very certainly rubbish. I don't know Martin Shough
>>personally, but I have been impressed with his thoughtfulness
>>and thoroughness, nowhere in evidence, alas, in the strange
>>sentence just above. It would be bad enough if it read, "This
>>could be true," but it's immeasurably worse when we read, "This
>>is _very likely_ true."

>Thirdly, if it should prove to be the case that some exposure of
>Father Gill to the language of 1950s saucer literature is
>possible, or plausible, or even very likely, one should perhaps
>avoid leaping defensively to conclusions about my opinion on the
>case.

>>A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
>>unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
>>this definition of "mothership":

>>"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller craft
>>(as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
>>smaller craft: TENDER."

>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that it became
>almost an iconic usage during the late 'fifties and 'sixties
>among people who knew about flying saucers, from popular books,
>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have known nothing
>whatever about shipping. I personally remember that it was a
>term used by UFO enthusiasts of my childish acquaintance (adult
>and not)around 1963 and thereafter with, I am sure, _no_thought_
>of its nautical origin. And, no, this doesn't mean that Gill had
>to have had this adopted usage in mind. But it is certainly
>reasonable (not "bad") to consider the possibility that he might
>have done.

<snip>

>The "mother ship" terminology in 1959 was very far from limited
>to the pages of Adamski. It was a widespread contactee usage
>(see Angelucci, The Secret of the Saucers, 1955, for just one
>other example that comes immediately to mind) and it spread
>beyond that niche to be widely used in popular UFO circles, as
>everyone knows.

<snip>

>So Gill might (as you suggest above) have originated the usage
>independently by an "understandable extrapolation" from
>seafaring terminology, _or_ he might, by another equally
>understandable "borrowing", have absorbed the usage from some
>third party who had exposure to ideas from popular UFO books
>prior to June 1959.

<snip>

>Is it possible that Cruttwell had used the phrase to Gill in
>this context during discussion and/or correspondence re
>Cruttwell's interest in the Papuan sightings and his broader
>reading on the subject during the months prior to June 1959?
>Yes, of course it is possible.

For what it's worth, I know of one instance from way before the
contactees and the 1950s where a witness spontaneously used the
term "mothership." This dates from July 1947 and was a sighting
in southern California by a woman who saw a large object with
multiple satellite objects. She called the object a
"mothership", since the satellite objects returned to the larger
one like chicks to a mother hen. (I'm doing this from memory, so
maybe the metaphor wasn't exactly that, but it's close.)

Thus Adamski. Flying saucer literature, and British naval
shipping terms don't necessarily have anything to do with Gill
using "mothership." He could have invented it on the spot, just





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                     Re: Field Research & Images - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:39:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:23:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Smith


>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
>To:ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:48:21 -0400
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:03:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>It seems to me that even
>>though waving flashlights or weak lasers may not be useful,
>>somewhat stronger lasers can be used to attract sentiently-
>>crewed vehicles to the site.

>Inspired by the famous 100 meter tall statue of the sun god
>Helios which is better known as the Colossus of Rhodes (a
>lighthouse and one of the seven wonders of the world) that
>served as a beacon to ships approaching the harbour from
>afar in ancient times, the massive 'Colossus Cinema
>Complex' was built in the northwest of Toronto not far
>from where I work at York U.

>This structure which looks like a giant flying saucer that has
>just landed, flashing lights and all, has a powerful beacon of
>its own to attract attention from all over. The beacon is a
>very bright beam of light that shoots vertically into the sky
>and remains on all night long to the annoyance of local
>astronomers.

>Although this complex, with spaceships and aliens in the
>lobby to greet movie goers (including an occasional ET
>dressed in black?), has been operational for many years
>now but it has not attracted the attention of any ET
>visitors, at least not enough to have them fly over the
>site in their uncloaked UFOs and risk being
>sighted by the public and making it in tomorrow's 'The
>Toronto Star' newspaper that happens to be printed nearby.

I think that although it may be visible from space directly
overhead the complex, from all other angles, it would not be
visible. Also, even this or the Luxor light would not be visible
at the Moon's distance. Finally, it could be that it is not
appearance but also content that should be considered. A beam of
light that appears every day may be boringly dismissed, but one
which is modulated in some way with a signal or message may be
worth investigating.

>>I was assuming that the laser operation required permission
>> from authorities. I was not saying that we could just go
>>out and do it ourselves. If promotional searchlights (which
>>shine up into the sky rather than horizontally like airport
>>lights or lighthouses) can be used relatively near airports
>>and bright lights such as at the Luxor can be used, then
>>lasers can be used if one does it out of the commercial
>>airways with permission and knowledge by FAA and
>>enforcement agencies.

>Where I work there is a mobile laser radar or lidar facility with
>a beam so bright that it outshines the Coloseus cimema complex
>beacon and although has not attracted any UFOs,

But were you/they looking for UFOs?

>its beam (or
>small segments of it) have occasionally been mistaken for
>a UFO. This laser radar was developed by Dr. Alan Carswell,
>my physics professor at York U. in the 1970s and is now
>used all over the world to study moving particles in our
>atmosphere from near the Earth's surface all the way to
>the edge of space and even beneath the world's large bodies
>of water. One such lidar will be aboard
>Pheonix, the next Mars lander which this same scientist
>is also involved with that will make another attempt to
>land in the water rich polar region of Mars where the
>terrain changes appearance with the seasons that can be
>easily explained as biological activity...

>A few years ago I joined up with a certain individual who
>claimed to attract the attention of UFOs over Lake Ontario
>and even to communicate with them with the use of a
>1,000,000 candlepower flashlight. Those bright lights that
>suddenly appeared and seemed to zig-zag back and forth
>could readily be explained as aircraft
>approaching and leaving an airport near Buffalo, New York
>just over the horizon but who was I to shatter someone's
>beliefs and discourage their personal scientific effort to
>try to observe and understand UFOs.

Funny story.

>As for lasers, such as those one can buy for a buck at the
>dollar store, they can easily shine a red spot of light on a
>house many blocks away at night and can be seen by someone
>many miles aways if it is directed straight at them. I would not
>encourage playing around with such lasers at night near areas
>of high security since instead of attracting the attention of ETs
>in their flying saucers it may attract a bullet or missile fired
>at you in self defense!

Yes, our innocent time of pointing out constellations in the
back yard with a laser has gone kaput thanks to a few idiots
aiming at police helicopters and airplanes.

But do we hear of complaints from pilots due to the laser beams
shot by satellites? No. Probably most of the problems of pilots
with lasers is psychological. But you never know what crazies
are out there.

In any event, with proper authorization of course, a high power
modulated (or complexly pulsed) laser that covers as much of the
night sky as possible should be visible out to the Moon's orbit
(as evidenced by Surveyor) and should have at least a chance of
attracting interested parties out there should they be present
and the message interesting enough ("come here for free cattle",
etc).

>Just as James has been very successful in detecting UFOs or
>other anomolous objects in space from going through the
>enormous NASA image data base that even specialists do
>not have to examine carefully, there are many other such
>government, militiary, education and private raw data
>(optical, radar, etc.) that can readily be accessed via the
>Internet without us having to invest
>even one cent from our own pockets.

Really? Can you list some? The quality of most satellite image
data (resolution/frequency of update) is unacceptable for UFO
work. Weather radar data available is good enough to see an
Independence Day sized craft but is not refreshed enough for UFO
tracking or high enough resolution. So if you or others can
provide us with a list of these Internet resources, it would be
helpful to the cause.

>You may be interested to know that there is a big feud
>going on between Spanish and American astronomers
>over the announcement by the Spanish of a newly
>discovered object in our solar system (not
>a UFO this time, but a large planetoid) that the Americans
>claim they already knew about since it was already in
>their computer data files which the Spanish accessed prior
>to making their big announcement.

No, I think the problem was that the search coordinates or plan
for aiming the telescopes was on the Internet (to the surprise





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                        PRG Update - October 19, 2005

From: Stephen Bassett <ParadigmRG.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:31:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:25:13 -0400
Subject: PRG Update - October 19, 2005


PRG
Paradigm Research Group




Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) Presentation - Tonight
www.favors.org/ff  [Events]

PRG Director Stephen Bassett will present tonight (Wednesday,
Oct. 19, 6 pm) at the Institute of Noetics Sciences in Petaluma,
CA.

Dr. Edgar Mitchell was the scheduled speaker but had to cancel
as his home is directly in the projected path of category 5
hurricane Wilma. Dr. Mitchell has to prepare his family and
home in advance of the storm.

Stephen will present on Consciousness, Word View and the
Politics of Disclosure which will be excerpted from the
Exopolitics presentations recently given at the University of
Toronto, Canada and the University of Calabria, Italy.

PRG Updates recipients in the Bay Area are welcome to attend.

For complete information see "Events" at:

www.favors.org/ff


University of Toronto, Canada Presentation
www.exopoliticstoronto. com

The September 25 Exopolitics Toronto Symposium produced by Mike
Bird, Victor Viggiani and MUFON Central Canada was a great
success. The highlight of the Sunday event the 30 minute
presentation by former Canadian Minister of Defense, Paul
Hellyer. He served during the administration of Lester Pearson
and was a contemporary of Secretary of Defense, Robert
MacNamara.

Mr. Hellyer stated clearly he was convinced there is an
extraterrestrial presence. He stated he had recently reread Lt.
Col. Philip Corso's book, The Day After Roswell, and contacted
an Air Force general in the United States who confirmed the
books major assertions.

This is a nontrivial development which will have repercussions.

Stephen Bassett followed Mr. Hellyer with the Keynote
presentation.


University of Calabria, Rende, Italy Presentation
www.cun-italia.net/welcome.htm

On October 5-6, 40 speaker from around the world came to Rende,
Italy by invitation from Centro Ufologico Nazionale to address
aspects of exobiology, ufology and exopolitics.

Stephen Bassett presented on exopolitics and ended his lecture
with a call for truth. All future exopolitics presentations by
PRG will end in the same way - a mantra for change:

"I call upon the government of the United States to end the
embargo withholding the truth regarding an extraterrestrial
presence from the American people. They are the sovereign
citizens of a republic, they are not children, they should not
be put on a need to know basis, they do have a right to know,
they can handle the truth, they have a social contract with the
government they pay for with their own money, and withholding
seminal information from them regarding the reality of the world
in which they live is not in that contract.



________________________________________________________


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 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:27:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz


Concerning whether Rev. Gill knew anything about Adamski. In the
following paragraphs, the Reverend was talking about Stephen
Moi's sighting on June 21, 1959. Note the "saucer shaped object
with four little black bumps" that Gill finds "at the back of
his mind":
__

Now, I said, Stephen, surely you've seen pictures or heard
people talk about flying saucers. He said no. I said well
perhaps you were mistaken - perhaps it was like a basketball or
looked like a shilling or someting like that. He said no, it
wasn't like a shilling. It wasn't like a basketball. It was like
a saucer. So I picked up a saucer and I said, like that? He
said, "Yes, like that, only upside down". So I wrote that down
and then I said: "Anything else about it?". He said: "Yes, there
were four little black dots underneath".

Well now, I had, somewhere or other, read about flying saucers,
but I wasn't terribly interested in it, and I had recalled
somewhere at the back of my mind that there was a saucer shaped
object with four little black bumps -or bumps of some kind-
underneath. So I reproduced from memory what I had at the back
of my mind, an put in these little black dots that Stephen
described. I said: "Was that it?" He said: "Yes, exactly".


[Rev. Gill's talk to the Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society on
October 28, 1959]
__

C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill probably
misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also how it all began
on this particular occasion:
__

I was visiting David's college - the teachers' training college
there - 20 miles away from us, and we were talking about this
experience. With me was the Reverend Edwin Dams, the Reverend
David Durie, the acting principal, and his wife. And after we
had discussed it for a few minutes he said, well, why not come
out and have a look at the sky and see if there's anything
there? And I said, oh, they just don't come at beck and call
like that, I think that would be rather useless. He said, well,
I'm going out at any rate. And he went out and he came rushing
back and said, "There is something - I'm sure there is". And so
we all went out and sure enough, I identified it as one of these
objects.

[Same source as above; Rev. Gill answering written questions at





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                           Secrecy News - 10/19/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:54:39 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:13:34 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News - 10/19/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 98
October 19, 2005


**      THE "INCOMPREHENSIBLE" ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1917
**      REPORTERS COMMITTEE FILES MOTION ON THE AIPAC CASE
**      JASON ON NIF IGNITION
**      DOE ORDER ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS SURETY
**      THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA ON FAS AND OPEN SOURCE RISKS


THE "INCOMPREHENSIBLE" ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1917

In its efforts to punish unauthorized disclosures of classified
information to the media, the US Government is turning to the
Espionage Act of 1917 (18 U.S.C. 793) which, among other things,
prohibits "communication of national defense information to
persons not entitled to receive it."

The Espionage Act was invoked in the recent indictment of two
former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, who did not work for the government and did not hold
security clearances, yet who are charged with mishandling
classified information, including disclosures to the press.

The Act may also be employed by the special prosecutor
investigating the unauthorized disclosure of the identity of CIA
officer Valerie Plame, according to news reports.

But using the Espionage Act to prosecute leaks to the press is
an extraordinary step with potentially profound ramifications.

In fact, the precise meaning of the Act is uncertain and experts
argue that it cannot mean what it says.

The Espionage Act is "in many respects incomprehensible," wrote
Harold Edgar and Benno C. Schmidt, Jr. in a definitive study
three decades ago ("The Espionage Statutes and Publication of
Defense Information," Columbia Law Review, May 1973, vol. 73,
pp. 929-1087).

As written, the espionage statutes are "so sweeping as to be
absurd," wrote Edgar and Schmidt.

"If these statutes mean what they seem to say and are
constitutional, public speech in this country since World War II
has been rife with criminality," they wrote.

"The source who leaks defense information to the press commits
an offense; the reporter who holds onto defense material commits
an offense; and the retired official who uses defense material
in his memoirs commits an offense."

Among many other textual difficulties in the Act, the language
governing improper disclosure by "authorized" persons such as
government employees (section 793d) is the same as the language
governing improper disclosure by "unauthorized" persons (section
793e).

Therefore, it appears that if government officials are liable
for unauthorized communications of defense information under the
Act, then reporters and other members of the public should be as
well - which would be plainly unconstitutional. Conversely, if
reporters cannot be held liable under the Act for communicating
defense information to the public, as they do all the time,
neither can government officials.

Because of the Espionage Act's ambiguity, "We have lived since
World War I in a state of benign indeterminacy about the rules
of law governing defense secrets," Edgar and Schmidt wrote.

But today, by turning to the Espionage Act to punish disclosures
to the press, even disclosures by non-government employees who
do not hold a clearance (as in the AIPAC case), the government
seems intent on bringing this state of benign indeterminacy to
an end.

One major development that occurred after the publication of the
Edgar/Schmidt law review article in 1973 was the use of the
Espionage Act in the successful prosecution of Samuel L. Morison
in 1985 for providing classified satellite images to Jane's
Defence Weekly.

But this was a unique instance.

"The selective action against Mr. Morison appears capricious at
best," wrote the late Senator Daniel P. Moynihan in a 1998
letter to President Bill Clinton, supporting a pardon for
Morison.

Senator Moynihan noted (following Edgar and Schmidt) that when
the Espionage Act was introduced in 1917 it included a provision
sought by President Wilson authorizing government censorship of
the press, but that Congress rejected the provision, indicating
that the legislators' intent did not extend to regulation of the
press.

"I would hope that in your review of Mr. Morison's application
for a pardon you reflect not simply on the relevant law, but the
erratic application of that law and the anomaly of this singular
conviction in eighty-one years," Senator Moynihan wrote. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/04/moynihan.html

President Clinton pardoned Samuel L. Morison on January 20,
2001.


REPORTERS COMMITTEE FILES MOTION ON THE AIPAC CASE

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has asked a
federal court for permission to file a friend of the court brief
in the pending prosecution of two former employees of the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (US v. Franklin, et al)
to explain the threat the case could pose to a free press.

Pointing out the strange fact that non-government employees are
being prosecuted for mishandling classified information, the
Reporters Committee argued that the AIPAC case "could affect the
very nature of how journalism can be practiced."

"The defendant private citizens have been charged for conspiring
to 'communicate' national defense information 'to any persons
not entitled to receive it.' 18 U.S.C. 793(d). Overly broad,
this language applies to any private party who speaks about
national defense information regardless of their intent or whom
they speak to."

"These charges potentially eviscerate the primary function of
journalism to gather and publicize information of public concern
particularly where the most valuable information to the public
is information that other people, such as the government, want
to conceal," the Reporters Committee motion argued.

See "Reporters Committee warns court of espionage law's
potential harm to journalists," October 13:

http://www.rcfp.org/news/releases/20051013-reportersc.html


JASON ON NIF IGNITION

The JASON defense advisory group has prepared a report on the
"prospects for achieving inertial confinement fusion (ICF)
ignition at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) by 2010."

"The scientific and technical challenges in such a complex
activity suggest that success in the early attempts at ignition
in 2010, while possible, is unlikely," the authors concluded.

See "NIF Ignition," June 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/nif.pdf


DOE ORDER ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS SURETY

In a new Order, the Department of Energy has reestablished the
Nuclear Explosive and Weapons Surety (NEWS) program, the prime
objective of which is "to prevent accidents and inadvertent or
unauthorized use of U.S. nuclear explosives (including nuclear
weapons)."

See DOE Order O 452.1C, "Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety
Program," approved September 20, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/doe/o452_1c.html


THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA ON FAS AND OPEN SOURCE RISKS

The President of India, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, noted in a
speech to Indian police officers last week that the world wide
web offers new tools and opportunities for law enforcement and
counterterrorism, but that it also presents risks.

He singled out the Federation of American Scientists web site as
a source of potentially problematic high resolution satellite
imagery.

"Most of you may or may not be aware that the high resolutions
pictures are freely available on the internet provided by many
sites including www.fas.org and Google earth," Dr. Kalam said.

In fact, however, the FAS collection of satellite imagery is
highly selective, largely historical and altogether quite
limited. For better or worse, we are simply not in the same
business as Google Earth.

See the discussion of "open source intelligence" in President
Abdul Kalam's October 15 speech at the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel
National Police Academy in Hyderabad here:

http://presidentofindia.nic.in/scripts/sllatest1.jsp?id=615



_______________________________________________
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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

               Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:38:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:14:39 -0400
Subject: Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -


>Source: Astrobiology Magazine

>http://tinyurl.com/8z88n

>October 17 2005

>How many technically advanced civilizations exist in our galaxy?
>With this essay by Steven Soter, Scientist-in-Residence in the
>Center for Ancient Studies at New York University, Astrobiology
>Magazine initiates the first in a series of 'Gedanken', or
>thought, experiments - musings by noted scientists on scientific
>mysteries in a series of "what if" scenarios.

<snip>

>Yet there is no evidence in the astronomical, geological,
>archaeological, or historical records that extraterrestrial
>civilizations exist or that visitors from other worlds have ever
>been to Earth.

Geez ... What about all the archeological artifacts which
strongly appear to reflect advanced visitors from elsewhere, or,
at least advanced technology in use in times past? What about
the Dogon tribe in which extraterrestrial history is part of
their lore?

Especially captivating are the gold 'model aircraft', at least
one of which has control surface breaks etched on wing and tail.

And what about the 4,000 (?) physical trace UFO cases? Or the
recording GPS unit showing a boat belonging to abductees passed
over land?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

              Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:17:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:04:20 -0300
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Nigel Watson <VALIS23A.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:04:32 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:17:49 -0300
>>>Subject: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>Kathy Marden has given me permission to post her response to
>>>that terrible Fulford column

<snip>

>>They were obviously aware of such programs and certainly
>>discussed these topics with ufologists long before their
>>regression sessions. Betty was quick to read all the UFO books
>>she could get so was not totally uncontaminated by UFO stories
>>and ideas.

>Just who were these ufologists besides Mr. Webb and when in
>relation to the experience did these discussions take place? Is
>there some basis for saying Betty read all the books she could
>get? How many was that? Just what abduction books were there
>prior to the Interrupted Journey that describe an experience
>anything like that of the Hills? It is certainly true that most
>people had heard of UFOs. So what?

>Let us not forget that Dr. Simon was a very well respected
>psychiatrist with long experience at using medical hypnosis to
>extract the truth about traumatic experiences. He was not a new-
>comer to the process.

>There is an enormous amount of emotion on the tapes... and it
>took great skill to break through the blocks without putting
>words in their mouths... which he didn't.


Stan, List, All...

Can't let this pass without a comment.

Recent studies, including those on soldiers who claim to have
seen horrific combat while serving in Vietnam has shown that the
amount of emotion displayed by the subject is no certain gauge
as to the reliability of the stories. In other words, many of
those who display the proper emotion while relating their tales
of combat have been proven to have never seen that combat, never
served in Vietnam and in some extreme cases, never even served
in the military.

What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:13:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:18:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:57:57 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:33:13 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Jerry, do you think you would be able to point us to the
>reference where Menzel talks about illiterate natives and the
>Great White Father? Or better still perhaps you could quote the
>paragraph to us.

>Be glad to, John.

>According to Menzel, the native witnesses did not observe either
>the UFO or the waving occupants. He goes on: "Father Gill simply
>assumed that the other people were seeing what he saw. Although
>a great many 'witnesses' signed the report, I doubt very much
>that they knew what they were signing and why. They would
>certainly have been mystified as to why their great white leader
>was seeing something that was invisible to them. On the other
>hand, they would not have been too surprised because after all,
>they looked upon Father Gill as a holy man."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:18:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:19:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:06:17 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:22:07 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:28:37 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>... Cruttwell's report....
>Have a look at part VII section 1 for the item on him
>misidentifying Venus . (So did ten others, all "college men"
>including one who had "great qualifications", was an ex-RAAF
>navigator and who "knows a good deal about aircraft and a lot
>about stars". They were all present).





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                Passive Radar [was: Field Research & Images]

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:43:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:24:18 -0400
Subject: Passive Radar [was: Field Research & Images]


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:03:07 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>I do not think the UFO community is unaware of passive
>>>radar. It is the latest sensation....

>>Where is Davenport's Passive Radar concept "the latest
>>sensation"? Certainly not on UFO UpDates where it goes virtually
>>unmentioned. Whenever proposals for a "new approach" to UFO
>>research are made on UpDates basically no one (except me I
>>think) mentions Passive Radar. Which is my point in bringing it
>>up on this thread.

>It _was_ the latest sensation a while ago.

No it wasn't and isn't. When "new approaches" to UFO research
are brought up on UFO UpDates such as the "Serious Question"
thread for example, not a single person has responded by
mentioning Passive Radar, or your ideas either, for that matter.

>Now it is entrenched
>in the psyche of ufology. Note that Davenport was on a number of
>nationwide radio talk shows that appeal to the UFO audience.
>This is much more than most of us can claim. He got his idea out
>there. Even on UpDates his idea has been discussed, but not with
>any real technical sense of implementing it (how many of us are
>radio engineers?). Mainly the only interest is how can this be
>funded. Sure it would be great to have everyone pitch in $10 to
>fund the thing, but we don't do that. No, we have conferences on
>exopolitics.

Again I stand by my previous statement: "Whenever proposals for
a "new approach" to UFO research are made on UpDates basically
no one (except me I think) mentions Passive Radar."

<snip>

>>>You seem to be saying to
>>>me that all other UFO research is hopeless (based on the past
>>>results of UFO field reseearch) until we can get this passive
>>>radar.

>>I am saying that optically-dominated ground stations have
>>limited range in seeing UFOs close up enough to tell they are
>>UFO's, essentially has to be within about 1/2 mile, and that a

>I am sorry but this is bull. Why is this so hard to convey? Is
>anyone else out their in Listland confused when I say that
>triangulating a tiny dot in the night sky (with a proper
>distance between the triangulation stations) can give you the
>altitude and position of the tiny dot of light at even satellite
>distances, be it Casper the Ghost or an interplanetary pelican
>or alien spaceship or supersecret military orbital spaceplane. I
>agree that you cannot see the details of the object. It doesn't
>matter. What matters in _my_ experiment is that one can track
>such a light going from low altitude to orbital altitude.

Your optical triangulation system could easily triangulate a
satellite because a satellite is not a UFO! It moves in a smooth
continuous fashion. Just limit your software to track only
distant satellites moving at 18,000 mph and you won't have any
false alarms with wildly accelerated false triangulations. But
you won't get any UFOs either.

You conveniently dodged the argument I made in my posting on the
12th:

"No software will be able to tell the difference between one
pinpoint of light that looks like another pinpoint of light. Two
pinpoints of light 0.1 degree apart might be interpreted as a
single pinpoint of light 6 miles away by an optical
triangulation system (twenty-meter baseline), even though they
are actually two pinpoints of light a meter apart on a dark
object only 500 meters away. Or one pinpoint of light is a
distant star (or aircraft) and the other is on a dark object
(maybe even a UFO) close by and the optical triangulation system
misinterprets it as a single pinpoint at an intermediate
distance. All sorts of other scenarios and combinations are
highly likely and no way to distinguish them. Etc. etc."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:25:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:26:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
>unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
>this definition of "mothership":

>"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller craft
>(as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
>smaller craft: TENDER."

>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

And Gill was highly dependent upon shipping to receive supplies
and letters as well as transport to and from the remote mission
outpost in New Guinea. Gill would have been more than
ordinarily familiar with nautical terminology given his
extraordinary dependence on shipping.

Whereas we who are steeped in UFO lore immediately jump to
conclusions of a UFO or Adamski connection when we see a term
like "mothership." But where is there any other Adamski
terminology or folkloristic themes evident in Gill's vocabulary
or narratives? Are the "men" who waved to him and the New
Guineans labeled "Space Brothers" or even just "brothers"? Any
described as blond or human looking? Are themes of peace and
brotherhood evident in Gill's account or did he not in fact
suspect it was a (warlike) military secret aircraft? Just the
opposite of Adamski's peaceloving Space Brotherhood.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                        Re: Passive Radar - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:17:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:28:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Reynolds


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>That is lubricrous.

<snip>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Serious Question - Bird

From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:11:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:32:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Bird


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>Subject: Serious Question

<snip>

>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

Dick,

I'd like to take a crack at your question.

I'll preface my approach by saying that I have been a computer
professional for over 33 years. I tend to look at all things as
being very yes or no-ish. There's no room in computers for
"maybe" on any issue. It just doesn't compute! The same can be
said about the UFO "controversy".

First of all, I think that the prize is already ours. The truth
about UFOs is not about proof, it is about time. It's no longer
about "are we alone", it's "when will we find out".

The skeptics are on the short end of the stick.

In your earlier question you asked, what do we do with all the
best cases? We do what we've been doing for nearly 60 years, we
keep on putting them on top of the pile of good cases that
preceeded them.

I don't need a mountain of cases to help me make up my mind
about are we alone. One or two will do. I think the Father Gill
case is excellent. I think the Ruwa Zimbabwe School case is
excellent. To that we could add the Shag Harbour case of 67,
and a thousand other excellent cases...

The reality of UFOs has never been about science. It has been
about politics. James McDonald learned this the hard way. He
started out applying science, but in the end he was crushed by
the politics.

I personally am tired of my Canadian government continuing to
withhold the truth on the reality of UFOs. That's why Victor
Viggiani and I organized Exopolitics Toronto - UFO Disclosure
And Planetary Directions Symposium just 3 weeks ago.

Our planet cannot move forward intelligently, until we know that
we are not alone. The best data more than suggests that we are
not alone. It's time to move to a more forward thinking
position.

A more important question should be, "will our planet survive if
our governments continue to lie to us or withhold truth"? And
not just about UFOs.....






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                 Mexican Airliner Crew Reports UFO Encounter

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:41:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:37:34 -0400
Subject: Mexican Airliner Crew Reports UFO Encounter


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 20, 2005

Source: Ana Luisa Cid
Date: 10.19.05

Mexico: Airliner Crew Reports UFO Encounter

Information provided by aviation expert Alfonso Salazar Mendoza,
researcher and co-author of the book, Los Ovnis y la Aviacion
Mexicana.

During the first days of October 2005, the crew of a Boeing 737-
200 (registration XA-MAA) witnessed the maneuvers of a plate-
shaped unidentified flying object, described by the flight
engineer as being highly luminous and similar to platinum.

The event occurred at 12:30 p.m. in the air corridor of the
Mexican state of Oaxaca, at an altitude of 20,000 feet and under
conditions of perfect visibility.

Witnesses describe the mysterious object as having emerged from
a cloud and entering another, becoming visible during that
period of time. They estimate that it was at a distance of 10
nautical miles from their aircraft.

The crew found the sighting truly remarkable, as in an earlier
instance, another airliner belonging to the same company
(Magnicharter) had reported a strange sphere that remained
static over the World Trade Center air corridor in Mexico City.

In the opinion of researcher Alfonso Salazar, a large percentage
of aviation professionals is convinced that unidentified flying
objects indeed exist and in his next book, Los Ovnis y la
Aviacion Mexicana II, (co-authored with Carlos Guzman) he will
reveal new cases of UFO and aircraft encounters.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

             Re: Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai Thailand - Johnson

From: Donald A. Johnson <donjohnson.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 05:21:42 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:41:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai Thailand - Johnson


>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:54:04 -0700
>Subject: Naga Fireballs Of Nong Khai Thailand

>[Thai television coverage is a bit sparse the past two days. I
>know FT did a spread on this phenomenon and at least one
>"scientific" study by the Europeans a few years ago but no
>definitive explanation of possible causes. If the full moon is
>one variable why aren't the fireballs seen at other full moons -
>or are they?. This year over 200 fireballs were seen. -Terry]

<snip>

Dear UFO UpDates List:

This afternoon (20 October 2005) I talked to an American, Christina
Bradley, M.P.H., who came to our University to interview for a teaching
job. She said she saw five (5) of the mysterious "Naga" balls of light
during the full moon festival as she watched the Mekong River from Nong
Khai, Thailand.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                              Boris Chourinov?

From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 14:34:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:43:16 -0400
Subject: Boris Chourinov?


Hi there,

Could anyone please supply me with an e-mail address for Boris
Chourinov?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 20

                           Filer's Files #43 2005

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 13:00:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:53:44 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #43 2005


Filer's Files #43 - 2005
George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern
Vice President of Skywatch International
October 17, 2005, Web www.georgefiler.com


Radar and satellites track UFOs

This week's files cover: Arthur C. Clarke says life exists on
Mars, as does Sir Charles W. Shults III, of Xenotech Research,
September UFO Sightings Weather Map by Steve Reichmuth, and
radar=92s and satellites are picking up UFOs.

In addition, witnesses saw UFOs over California, Colorado,
Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New
Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Utah, and Wisconsin. Many
witnesses saw UFOs n Argentina, Bolivia, Canada, Iraq, Mexico,
Puerto Rico, and the United Kingdom.

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. These Files assume that extraterrestrial
intelligent life not only exists, but my hypothesis is that of
the over one hundred UFOs reported each week, many represent
alien craft.

Arthur C. Clarke says life exists on Mars

Photo thanks to European Space Command

Arthur C. Clarke is one of the most celebrated science fiction
authors of our time. He is the author of more than sixty books
with more than 50 million copies in print, winner of all the
field's highest honors. Sir Arthur C. Clarke, has again managed
to upset the apple cart by directly stating what so few in the
planetary sciences community are willing to admit: things are
not as we have been told regarding our solar system. Surprising
many he stated: "I'm fairly convinced that we have discovered
life on Mars. There are some incredible photographs from [the
Jet Propulsion Laboratory], which to me are pretty convincing
proof of the existence of large forms of life on Mars! Have a
look at them. I don't see any other interpretation.")"

Mars has trilobites in ancient seas.

Sir Charles W. Shults III, of Xenotech Research writes, "I have
a new web page that details life on Mars and also supports
Panspermia theories that some organisms here on Earth were
imported from Mars on meteorites." Dr. Shultz has found Mars
Rover Opportunity's images of fossil trilobites that match found
on Earth". There were more than 500 trilobite species on Earth,
so called because their bodies are composed of three lobes or
segments. Trilobita are a Paleozoic group of Crustacea thought
to have been extinct on Earth since the Carbonferrous age. Their
apparent size is 2.5 mm and common features are bilateral
symmetry, three lobes or distinct segments. The Mars imager took
these multiple small images of trilobites.

When you find the same pattern on different rocks, you have a
clue that these rocks might be fossils. When you find that not
only is the same pattern present, but it is larger on large
specimens and smaller on small specimens, you have support for
the idea that it grew with the specimen.

Thanks to NASA/JPL/Cornell/USGS
http://www.xenotechresearch.com/random01.htm
http://www.xenotechresearch.com/murch02.htm rover arm breaks a
tooth from an urchin  Thanks to Sir Charles W. Shults III, K. B.
B. Xenotech Research The original NASA/JPL image link is here
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/m/593/1M180828264EF
F6200P2936M2M1.HTML,

http://www.xenotechresearch.com/mk505a.htm

Radar=92s and satellites picking up UFOs

Since September 11, 2001, NORAD fighters have scrambled or
diverted from air patrols in the U.S. Northern Command Area of
Responsibility more than 2,000 times to respond to possible air
threats, and have combined with Airborne Warning and Control
System (AWACS) and air-to-air-refueling aircraft to fly more
than 40,000 sorties.


Joe Stefula reports, "Our DSP satellites track the launch of various=
 missiles using various types of sensors but chiefly with Infrared sensors.=
 In addition to the missiles the sensors also are able to pick up=
 unidentified flying objects that are entering and leaving our atmosphere=
 called Fastwalkers." Slower anomalous objects are referred to has=
 Slowwalkers. The DSP satellite system once composed of 18 units in deep=
 space orbit picks up UFO intruders or "Fastwalkers" several times a week.=
 AeroJet General engineer Ron Regehr, helped design the satellites. Insiders=
 report there is a great deal of excitement as the UFOs sometimes trigger=
 the early warning system. Often they are referred to as Uncorrelated=
 Targets indicating they are not in the data base for objects in space.

Radar Problems Cause Long Delays

BOSTON AIRPORT - Travelers using Logan International Airport may
continue to experience delays, as officials are still working on
fixing the radar malfunction that has been causing major
backups. The problem began Sunday, and some travelers
experienced delays of up to five hours Monday, October 11, 2005,
according to WCVB-TV in Boston.

The Federal Aviation Administration's radar surveillance system
in Merrimack, N.H., has been creating false targets on radar
screens, the television station reported. A conflict warning
goes on advising of a potential collision, but the problem is
caused by a computer glitch that causes the system to detect
planes that aren't even there. Monday, Logan air traffic control
had to be switched to a backup radar system in Nashua, N.H. All
approaching planes had to be kept five miles apart, instead of
the usual three causing five hour delays. The computer
malfunction has occurred at other airports, according to FAA
spokeswoman Arlene Murray.

Editor=92s Note =96 Radars almost daily pick up UFOs causing
confusion with operators so the computers are set to not paint
high speed targets such as UFOs. Frequently they are seen and
videotaped near airports. FAA instructs operators to divert
aircraft away from the UFOs..

September UFO Sightings Weather Map

Steve Reichmuth reports, "September 2005 has been the most
active time period plotted yet so far since I began plotting
since May 2005, with 454 sighting reports from NUFORC and 75
sighting reports from MUFON CMS data bases.

Map commentary shows Anomalous light as *, Triangle craft ^,
disk craft <>, Other shapes , Landings L<>, and Entities E,

A MUFON CMS landing was reported in Killeen/Ft. Hood, Texas on
September 17, 2005.

(IFOs (Identified Flying Objects) posted for September 22, 2005
(around 19:10 hours) was a brilliant missile launch from
Vandenberg AFB, California with sightings reported into the
NUFORC and MUFON CMS from San Diego, San Francisco Bay area,
Phoenix, western New Mexico, and Rifle, Colorado .

Chicago, Illinois and outlining burrows in the last week of
September and into October has experienced some 40 plus reports
within a small 50 mile square area! Similar activity (and
similar objects) occurred in Cleveland, Ohio in July 2005.
http://www.mufon.com/


The Chicago sighting flap is centered within Tinley Park, Orland
Park, Orland Hills, Oak Forest, Lemont, Wheaton, Chicago
Heights, Aurora, all within a few miles of each other, all just
west of Chicago, Illinois. Alberta, Canada, and Ohio River
Valley states shows activity. Thanks to Steve Reichmuth Northern
California Mufon SSD- Alameda/Contra Costa Co.
http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxlIL.htmlskip


California huge flying triangle

MILPITAS - My fianc=E9 and I saw a very large triangle directly
through our moon roof this spring. We just finished a dinner
about 9:45 PM, We had to sit and wait for the RXR going by and
we opened the sunroof! This huge triangle was black-matching
with the night sky except we could see three red lights at each
corner=85As it went by-there was no sound, but it was flying at
less than 300 feet altitude and bigger than two football fields
long.

We saw one back in December 10, 1994. I went to the backyard,
and saw seven little triangles slip into the Milpitas Mountains.
They went like little toys falling out of something. The big
triangle had disappeared. Maybe it crashed or just blended with
the night sky and that=92s why we could not see it. Thanks to
Sharon


EAST OF MODESTO - On my way to work in the mornings I have been
seeing some unusual activity over the Sierras. At 7:20 AM, on
October 12, 2005, when I noticed several jets moving south and
north over the mountains. Then I saw a brilliant crescent-like
object that was about 35 degrees above the horizon. The jets
seemed to be skirting near the UFO. The crescent object flew
higher.

Suddenly, a spherical UFO shot out of the crescent-like object
and flew up. As the sphere moved upwards, the crescent stopped
moving, and began to fade away until you could no longer see it.
The sphere moved up until it looked like a bright star, then it
gradually faded. On October 14, 2005, I decided to take my
camera with me and I took some interesting pictures.


Colorado orbs

Dr. Bruce Maccabee writes, "If the pictures are taken at night
using a flash the "orb images" might very well be caused by
reflection from tiny dust particles in the air close to the
camera lens. Orbs that are seen at night without flash, i.e.,
orbs that are sources of light (not just reflectors of light)
have been reported numerous times throughout the world. They are
the orbs which are truly interesting. For a rare daylight orb
report and photo see: See "flash orb" analysis at
http://brumac.8k.com/orb1.html

Florida huge boomerang craft

PORT RICHEY - On September 28, 2005, at 5:52 PM, I saw a huge
craft flying quickly, with a distinct boomerang shape. Keep in
mind what I saw broke out of the dimension of space itself, was
red only to the fact that the red part of the UFO was like an
outlined cartoon drawing, drawn with a red marking pen. The
boomerang moved just like a boomerang would be thrown in a
cartoon drawing. It was flat, with no dimension to it. I
thought, a flying red tiger. So what did I see? Does it matter.
Not really! My self I am just an average person with a penchant
for Jesus, and his Father God Almighty! I have been seeing the
"lights in the sky" since age 8. I see these "objects" around us
almost daily. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
www.ufocenter.com

Northern Idaho 1947

Ted Bloecher writes, "Here's one to add to the DBase and for the rest of us=
 to search for. It's a Category 5: July 3rd, 1947. This interesting report=
 describes the landing, seen by a family of ten in Northern Idaho, of eight=
 huge objects. This report should have been among those in the Air Force=
 files because it had been reported to intelligence officers from the=
 Spokane Army Air Base, and an intensive air search was carried out by two=
 missions of the National Guards 116th Fighter Group. Local sheriffs=
 deputies also made a ground search, but since no apparent trace of the=
 objects was found, a report was probably never forwarded to Wright Field in=
 Dayton. (Ted Bloecher)

Illinois red lights

TINLEY PARK - We were walking north towards 175th street on a
path in Tinley Park on September 29, 2005, about 11:22 PM. All
of us looked up and saw one red light in the sky. Our friend
reminded us of the UFO sightings we saw a year ago around
Halloween. The red light kept at a steady pace in the sky
heading either straight up or northeast. About 20 minutes after
staring at the light, we arrived at my friend's house and it was
about the size of a star.

Two more came from the west around the same height and parallel
to each other heading east. We watched these fly at a steady
pace just like the others. We kept watching just as long as we
watched the first one. After awhile the first red light we saw
went out and the other two were slowly fading out. One went out
after awhile and then the last one went out, but before it did,
it fell really fast to the earth. Then, it shook back and forth
and finally went out. Thanks to Brian

Massachusetts

BERKSHIRE =96 October 5th was a clear night, and a helicopter
pilot took his dog for a walk in Pinegrove Park, when he noticed
a very large object located 290 degrees west, and 30 degrees
above the horizon at 10:20 PM, that had not been there a few
minutes before. The object was a bright yellowish, white color,
and "self-illuminating." It was about ten times larger than the
North Star looks. It is very large if it is, and i've never seen
it before!" I called my wife to bring me the camera as the
object continued to hover for five more minutes. The object
began to move to the southeast and changed to red and blue
lights underneath the craft.

I estimated the hovering craft to be 7 to 10 miles away and
close to four miles at about 10,000 feet altitude. Now, the only
aircraft I know of that can hover like that is a helicopter with
a large search light, but being a commercial helicopter pilot
myself, there are no search lights that would look like that and
give the impression of being self-illuminating, and being steady
and non-directional. Also the craft moved too fast to be a
helicopter, it flew about 400 knots (most military helicopters
have a top speed of 220 knots.) Thanks to MUFON CMS

Michigan bright light at top of the trees

HOLLAND - We were out in our hot tub on September 26, 2005, at
9:24 PM, when we noticed a UFO moving slow at first. It quickly
went forward then back then disappeared. Then three more
appeared and maneuvered, then all the lights disappeared and all
was silent and calm. We watched from the hot tub as all the
objects disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director

GOODRICH -There was a bright light from the top of the trees in
the wooded area near our subdivision on September 27, 2005. I
noticed the light from the window about 9 PM. The light was too
bright to be a star, but it seemed to be a white color. Slowly
the light descended into the trees so that it no longer could be
seen. There was also another light in the distance that slowly
hovered in the sky. This light or craft had different colored
lights, like blue, green, red, yellow and they sort of flashed
or changed color constantly. This craft eventually could not be
seen as it descended down into the trees/wooded area. These
crafts seemed to descend into the woods. There is a lake in that
area as well. This all took place for an hour or so. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com


New Jersey bright lights

MANALAPAN - The craft was hovering with the brightest lights I
have ever seen just above the tree line at 11 PM, on September
21, 2005. It hovered for quite a long time and then slowly
dipped below the tree line. We jumped into the car to follow and
drove to Tennent Cemetery where we saw it again. The lights were
all the way across the craft and it made no sound. It was
hovering and did not move for some time, then dipped below the
trees so we jumped into the car and drove to Wemrock Road to see
if it would reappear there. A shooting star shot across the sky
from where we saw it last. It was too large to be a helicopter.
Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

New York two bright lights

NEW PALTZ, CATSKILLS - On September 30, 2005, traveling north on
the New York State Thruway and approaching Exit 21, Catskill
exit around 8 PM, I saw two bright lights, close enough to each
other to look like they were connected, but hovering in the sky!
Its altitude was no more than 300 feet and it was hovering just
off the Thruway near a construction area. I was stationed at
Otis AFB for a year and I know this was not a plane or
helicopter. There were no blinking lights, just two very bright
lights almost touching each other hovering in the sky. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

North Carolina orbs

High Point in Davidson County =96 Alan Caviness writes, "There was
continuing orb activity in central North Carolina on September
22, 2005." The Carolina Group Research Project field team again
photographed orb images in the immediate vicinity of power
lines. As in earlier cases, randomness would not allow for this
to occur at such a high rate. Photographs taken around power
lines once again suggest that orbs are attracted to them. Some
of these orb type photos as well as lights, and UFOs are
available in a free CD by obtaining a subscription to these
files. These are similar or even the same, as the orbs
photographed in the Crop Circles in England. Thanks to Alan
Caviness

Ohio UFO video

AKRON =96 Amy writes, "I took an unbelievable one last night about
6:40 PM on October 15, 2005. We filmed it for about 3 or 4
minutes." I have this one and a really good one I took last
week, I'm going to make another tape and send it to you. These
are stills from the video yesterday. We were sitting in our car
at the Outback Steakhouse waiting for them to bring out our
food. (curbside service) My husband Ed was admiring the moon
when he first saw the object.

I filmed it with a Sharp digital camcorder. It was about one
mile away in the eastern sky. Thank God, I had my camcorder with
me and was able to get great video. The object at one point
looked like two black round things, they eventually joined to
make one object, when they were joining each other they had a
strange glow around them. They hovered in the same spot while
joining, they were coming down as if they were landing.

I handed the camera to my hubby since he was on the driver's
side and had a clearer view but we lost it. I am sure it landed
since it was coming down as if it was going to land, when we
lost sight of it. I am going out to the same spot tonight to see
if it will come back. Thanks to Amy

FOSTORIA =96 George Ritter writes, "I am now shooting my 500th
video tape and I often find UFOs in the tapes when I examine
them.

This craft was videotaped on October 12, 2005. Occasionally, I
spot them with the naked eye while taping. I have thousands that
I have documented over the years on a scientific repeatable
basis since 1998.
Thanks to George Ritter

Utah two disks over park.

DOCKSTADER PARK - On September 28, 2005, my wife and I were at
the park with our children when she noticed something strange in
the sky at 2 PM. My wife pointed out two white disks losing
altitude. We watched for three minutes and as they became
clearer, my wife ran to the truck and grabbed a disposable Fiji
Camera. She snapped the rest of the film on these two objects.

After ten minutes, one of the objects slowly moved upward and in
about ten seconds, the object vanished. The other object was
still in plain sight. It hovered for another five minutes and
vanished in front of our eyes. We took the film and had it
developed and only one photo showed the two objects but the
others showed nothing in the sky. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director www.ufocenter.com


Wisconsin four bright orange lights

LAKE GENEVA - At 8 PM, three customers called me outside on
September 18, 2005, to see four bright orange lights spread out
across the sky. For ten minutes, they were moving slightly when
they began moving toward each other and met up directly
overhead. Once together, they flew one by one higher until they
were out of sight. It took five minutes until the forth one flew
up and was gone. Other workers who said customers came inside
and saw the same thing the night before. Both nights were
perfectly clear, the first night they were here at 9 PM, then
back around midnight. Thanks to Brian Vike
http://www.hbccufo.com/

Argentina aircraft accompanied by UFO

CIUFOS-LaPampa reports, "About 7:30 PM, the presence of a UFO
was reported toward the south of Santa Rosa, La Pampa, near an
airliner during the last week of July 2005. The airport control
tower operator was observing the approach of a commercial flight
from Buenos Aires when he detected the presence of a luminous
object moving slowly and parallel to the aircraft, from east to
west. Faced with this circumstance, the tower operator requested
a confirmation of the unknown object's presence from the Flight
Plan Operator, located in the lower level of the control tower
building. Both men could visualize the airliner entering its
final approach from a south to north direction while the
luminous object halted its movement, issued a bright flash of
intense blue-white light, re-started its movement, stopped again
to emit another flash, and subsequently vanished before its
departure trajectory could be detected. This UFO was seen on
radial 140 and some 20 degrees over the horizon, vanishing
toward radial 180, and at no point ever being detected by the
airliner's crew.

LA PAMPA - On October 13, 2005, at 9:14 PM, a luminous object
was seen by three witnesses as it flew over the northern sector
of the city of Santa Rosa, La Pampa. Its luminosity was observed
for some 15 seconds, being an intense white in color, dimming
gradually until it vanished completely. Translation (c) 2005
Scott Corrales, IHU. Special thanks to Raul Oscar Chaves,
CIUFOS-LaPampa.

Bolivia: UFOs cause amazement

EASTERN REGION - The Journal of Hispanic Ufology reports,
"Channel 39 managed to capture images of five UFOs that were
seen October 12, 2005, over Eastern Oruro, causing curiosity and
amazement in thousands of witnesses. Channel 39 of the
Corporacion Orurena de Comunicacion (COC) captured the UFOs at
10:30 PM. The two strange objects drew people's attention due to
their red, green and blue lights. One was a silvery, circular
UFO that presented two circumferences - a smaller one located
inside the object and another outside spinning at an impressive
speed.

Channel 39 journalist and show host, Pedro Rubin de Celis, said
that Wednesday night's sighting confirms the theory that we are
not alone in the Universe. "This has been a marvelous presence
of UFOs in the firmament, and many people stepped out onto their
balconies to observe this spectacle. The camera zoom has shown
us, beyond the vehicle's flashes, a circle making concentric
movements within other circles around the vessel and with a
black dot at the center. The objects also had their own
movement," he explained. Translation (C) 2005, Scott Corrales,
Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU). Special thanks to Guillermo
Gimenez, Planeta UFO.

Canada UFO Circling Military Base

CFB COMOX, VANCOUVER ISLAND, B.C. - I saw a UFO circling the
military base at CFB Comox on September 25, 2005. I saw it at
12:15 pm and the skies were clear, except for one chemtrail
nearby. I got some pretty good pictures and this time it was
unmistakably a saucer. I got a half dozen images of it and in
one of them, there is a mirrored shadow object nearby.

In a telephone interview Brian Vike reports, "The witness said
in the photos you can see two objects, the white saucer shaped
craft, with another off to the left which appears darker in
color and seemed to be shadowing the other." The skies are clear
except for a contrail and there was no sound. The object slowly
made a direction change, but flew much slower than normal
aircraft. Thanks to A.L. Photos c. 2005, viewed at:

http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews =3Darticle =3D3261


OSHAWA - I would like to share more photos of these white
objects that I saw with the naked eye, quite high 2000 feet and
photographed. I took this batch on Saturday, October 1, 2005 at
about 11 AM. One other thing to note, in my observations in sky
watching, that the flashes in the daytime sky, are in fact,
becoming more frequent and more intense of brightness-like a
camera flash.

LAKE ONTARIO =96 I have a report of the unknown, that stuck out
like a sore thumb over Lake Ontario on October 15, 2005, at 7:10
PM ,while driving west in Oshawa. I noticed a very intense,
bright, white light in the sky, southwest of my position. No way
that it was a plane, helicopter, or the brightest star or
planet, and space station included. Five minutes after arriving
home, I continued further examination of this unknown intense
light. I am going to guess this very noticable light was over
Lake Ontario, 2-3 miles south of the shoreline of Ajax to
Pickering. The altitude appeared, well below orbit. This
stationary light, was viewed for about 15 minutes. The clouds
were starting to roll in from the west. This event, must have
been seen by others on the highway 401,westbound traffic. The
intensity was an awe of brightness.

I'm sure the security at the Pickering Nuclear Plant, were aware
of the happenings above. This concludes confirmation, that the
unknown, is making it's presence known to the masses. Thanks to
Paul Shishis

Iraq orbs photograped:

TIKRIT -I took this photo a while ago, from the roof deck of the
palace in which my unit hangs it's hat here in Tikrit. I shot a
panorama of the countryside view from the roof and the photos
before and after this photo do not have the "orbs" in them.

I have other shots of the same area taken when it was sunny and
I have not seen the likes of the "orbs" in any of my other
photos of this area. I have hundreds of other photos from FOB
Danger (Tikrit) and the "orbs" do not appear in any of them. It
looks to me that the "orbs" are in motion and moving towards me
at an angle, that impression is very clear especially when you
zoom in on an orb. Thanks to Pointman 7, Charles E. Ratliff,
1SG, HHC, 250th Signal Battalion, OIF III, FOB Danger, APO AE
09393

Mexican power station alien spotted

ALTAMIRA - According to the Mexican newspaper Hoy Extramex,
"Widespread panic has been unleashed in Altamira after a strange
creature was videotaped at the thermoelectric plant, spreading
once more the theory that there is an extraterrestrial base in
the area, presumably with designs on invading the territory."
The power station=92s night watchmen claims to have captured the
image of an alien on videotape on the plant's security cameras..
Thanks to UFO ROUNDUP, Vol. 10 # 40, 10/12/05 Joseph Trainor
editor

Puerto Rico phantom

LAJAS - Jose Martinez of Puerto Rico's PROJECT ARGUS has
provided us with photographs of the alleged "highway phantom"
that has been reported in the vicinity of Lajas, Puerto Rico.
Mr. Martinez says that the original photo and the enlargement
where taken by two agents of the Puerto Rico police, who
witnessed the phantom in the company of some youngsters who shot
video of the event.

The phantom, described as female, screams as it crosses the
highway from one side to another (Rt.303) Thanks to
Inexplicata,The Journal of Hispanic Ufology

U.K. Five Round Orange Orbs

HAINAULT, ESSEX - My partner and I, were just saying our
goodbyes from my parents house, about 9.30 PM, on September 17,
2005, when I spotted two slowly moving orange lights in the sky.
My Dad also saw them as they started to close in towards each
other. We called for my mum to come outside and she said "look".
She pointed towards three more orange bright lights traveling at
the same speed as the previous two in a triangular formation.
They were flying towards the original two lights, staying in a
triangular shape, then slowly changing formation and drifting
apart. My brother, ran back into the house to grab the digital
camera and we began to take pictures. I managed to take one
picture of the first two before they disappeared completely
behind the clouds..

Then, our neighbor walked up the street, and said that he had
seen the first two from his window. The three lights then
stopped dead and we all just watched. The top and bottom lights
(in the triangular formation) went out of vision as the clouds
moved over them. We could still see the middle orange light, for
three minutes until it shot off at amazing speed. The pictures
show a more defined shape to them. Thanks to

"Filer's Files: Worldwide Reports of UFO Sightings"

Major George A. Filer USAF (Ret) & David E. Twichell are happy
to announce the release of our new book. If you like Filer's
Files newsletter and his monthly report in the MUFON Journal,
you'll love the book! It is a collection of some of the most
thought provoking UFO sighting and abduction reports from around
the world by average citizens, trained observers, astronauts and
U.S. presidents =96 with articles by Linda Moulton Howe and
Michigan MUFON's State Director, Bill Konkolesky and more.

http://buybooksontheweb.com/description.asp?ISBN=3D0-7414-2812-1


Donate to Filer's Files to receive CD

Your donations do make a difference in my ability to bring you
the latest news! 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. 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. Be sure to ask for the
CD, Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson
Road,

Medford, NJ 08055.
You can also go to:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr

for majorstar.nul

You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge.


The next UFO Earth Mysteries Conference Congress will be held
November 12 & 13, 2005. We have exciting speakers who will share
their stories and their research. Bordentown, New Jersey .The
Days Inn , 1073 US Highway 206 (near I-295 and the New Jersey
Turnpike) Days Inn - 609-298-6100

MUFON UFO JOURNAL - For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL. A MUFON membership
includes the Journal and costs only $45.00 per year. To join
MUFON or to report a UFO go to http://www.mufon.com/. To ask
questions contact MUFONHQ.nul or HQ.nul

Filer's Files is copyrighted 2004 by George A. Filer, all rights
reserved.

Readers may post the complete files on their Web Sites if they
credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date
of issue. These reports and comments are not necessarily the
OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters to
majorstar.nul Sending mail automatically grants permission
for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to
keep your name or e-mail confidential. Caution, Most Of These





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                 Interviews With Betty Hill & Jacques Vallee

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:00:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:00:48 -0400
Subject: Interviews With Betty Hill & Jacques Vallee




A Belgian site has video interviews with Betty Hill
and Jacques Vallee and other clips.

See:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                           Brits Believe In Aliens

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:06:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:06:06 -0400
Subject: Brits Believe In Aliens




Source: The Sun Online - UK

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005480422,00.html

10-20-05


We Believe In Aliens

By PETE BELL
Sun Online

Science fiction staples like time travel and human teleportation
will be possible in the future...

At least that's what a large proportion of the British public
think, according to a new survey.

It found a third believed time travel - as seen on Dr Who -
would be possible in the future.

More than a quarter thought black holes could one day form the
gateway to another universe.

A fifth believed Star Trek-style teleportation might become a
reality.

And an amazing 12 per cent believed in the possibility that we
were living in a Matrix-type parallel world situated alongside
another.

The survey, commissioned by UKTV Gold also discovered the
following beliefs:

- Some 19 per cent believed scientists would one day be able to
bring back bodies to life after freezing them in liquid nitrogen

- Almost two-thirds were convinced humans have the capacity for
ESP (Extra Sensory Perception) or a sixth sense enabling them to
see into the future

- A quarter believed in aliens

- 40 per cent thought tales of alien abduction held some truth

- 34 per cent thought the Government has hidden information
about extraterrestrial activity, scientific developments or UFO
sightings

UKTV Gold's channel editor Red Johnson said: "Before we scoff
too much, we must remember the 'factoids', the science fiction
myths, which have come true.

"It would be difficult now to imagine a world without the all-
pervasive internet, yet the concept of cyberspace was first
suggested in William Gibson�s 1984 novel Neuromancer.

"So it could be that in a few years we could all be like Dr Who
travelling through time."

The survey was carried out for the launch of Doctor Who week on
UKTV Gold starting on October 23.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                             Area 51 Revelations

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:45:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:45:09 -0400
Subject: Area 51 Revelations




Source: Greg Ericson's Free Press International Blog

http://fpiarticle.blogspot.com/2005/10/area-51-revelations.html

October 14, 2005

[Many interesting images at site]


Area 51 Revelations

The boys at Area 51 have been very busy over the years. The area
in and around '51' is teeming with roads, facilities, and much
more.

It's difficult to know what's actually going on in 51 and Nevada
but I will try to explain. There are facilities that are blacked
out all around 51. There all also huge sections of Nevada where
the terrain is very blurry. It's my guess, the government is
letting us see what they want us to see and either blacking out
or blurring what they DON'T want us to see.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                        Re: Serious Question - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:13:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:51:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Sandow


>From: Brad Sparks<RB47x.nul>
>Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:38:27 EDT
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>>From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:56:57 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>>>Subject: Serious Question

>>I think the database of sightings should be mined for
>>statistically significant patterns. How consistent, in other
>>words, is the data? Especially in details that both people
>>reporting the sightings and people investigating them might not
>>have put any stress on.

>>And then the same thing should be done with sightings that can
>>be easily explained. What consistencies do these reports show,
>>and how do they differ from those it's harder to explain?

>>Not that this hasn't been done before. But maybe not as
>>thoroughly as I might like. Besides, it's always good (according
>>to the scientific method) to repeat studies, to make sure that
>>independent researchers, doing the same work, will get the same
>>results.

>It's been done before (George Valley, Grudge-Ruppelt,
>Battelle, Vallee, etc.) and it has not "resolved the
>controversy in a meaningful way." That is the question, not
>"how can we do more studies of UFO's in a scientific manner?"
>The AF made a policy decision on July 28, 1952, to
>deemphasize pattern analysis of anecdotal intelligence
>reports of UFO's, based on a broader MIT study of AF
>intelligence methodology in Project Beacon Hill, as well as
>to devalue anecdotal reports. Arguments can go back and forth
>on statistical analyses and they may never "resolve the
>controversy," which is more of a social and political issue
>than a scientific one.

>A much better answer was in your other post which does
>suggest a possible way to "resolve the controversy":

>"It's usually more effective to get information in the hands
>of people who'll do something with it, which includes
>spreading it around. So I might suggest, once we had our data
>properly organized and studied, a campaign to put the best of
>it in the hands of selected opinion leaders. Let them then
>talk about it, as they go about their active lives.
>Surprising how quickly that'll spread the information. So, if
>we had massive funding, I might want to identify 1000 people
>from science and the media (probably other fields, too -
>people like Bono) who might be open to what we have to say,
>and talk to them one by one. Slow start, tremendous momentum
>once this gets going."

Very reasonable, Brad. Thanks for listing the studies that do
what I suggested. I didn't have them available, though I know
they exist. I do think there might be some value in doing a
similar study once again, though. We have more data, and the
work could be done on a larger sample (certainly larger than the
Battelle study, if I remember it correctly).

We're also in a different era now, a time when talk about aliens
and their visits (the inevitable unspoken context of UFO
discussions) is more acceptable than it used to be. So people
might be more receptive than they were when the studies you
mention were done.

That  might especially be true if the two approaches were
combined. Do the statistical study, assemble all the old ones,
and then make the private visits to opinion makers. Bono, I can
imagine, might not care about the statistical stuff, but any
scientists who were approached would - if they were willing to
take the subject seriously at all - be impressed.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:29:23 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:54:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:43:31 EDT
>Subject: Passive Radar [was: Field Research & Images]

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>It _was_ the latest sensation a while ago.

>No it wasn't and isn't. When "new approaches" to UFO research
>are brought up on UFO UpDates such as the "Serious Question"
>thread for example, not a single person has responded by
>mentioning Passive Radar, or your ideas either, for that matter.

I agree it isn't _right_now_ because the public has moved on in
their interests. You can't expect them to keep being amazed and
impressed with the passive radar idea when many other interests
keep popping up. It had its five minutes of fame. Ideas can be
very interesting for a short time, but the rub is getting the
thing going after the initial glow of "sensational idea" has
rubbed off.

I agree that many List people are not participating in the
discussion. Many people just like to _read_ what's going on
since they either haven't the time to read the technical reports
or have little exerience with radio engineering. I am sure we
can elicit an amen chorus if we asked everyone if we should use
passive radar to look for UFOs. Why should they add their two
cents when they really want to have meaningful contributions and
this really requires experts (not us) to inform them about the
subject of passive radar? All we can do is make some assumptions
and guesses and deductions about the thing.

>>Even on UpDates his idea has been discussed, but not with
>>any real technical sense of implementing it (how many of us are
>>radio engineers?).

>Again I stand by my previous statement: "Whenever proposals for
>a "new approach" to UFO research are made on UpDates basically
>no one (except me I think) mentions Passive Radar."

What exactly do you want people on the List to do? Tell you
"atta boy" or "dittos" or other kudos? They may have various
kinds of expertise but radio engineering is likely not one of
them.

I will say that passive radar is a great idea if it can work. It
can at least beat the FCC restrictions on signal emissions. Its
problems seem many, which you think are minimal and I think
formidable. We can't convince each other and I am sure the List
is either on one side or the other and not willing to make fools
of themselves trying to argue.

>>Is anyone else out their in Listland confused when I say that
>>triangulating a tiny dot in the night sky (with a proper
>>distance between the triangulation stations) can give you the
>>altitude and position of the tiny dot of light at even satellite
>>distances, .....
>>I agree that you cannot see the details of the object. It doesn't
>>matter. What matters in _my_ experiment is that one can track
>>such a light going from low altitude to orbital altitude.

>Your optical triangulation system could easily triangulate a
>satellite because a satellite is not a UFO! It moves in a smooth
>continuous fashion. Just limit your software to track only
>distant satellites moving at 18,000 mph and you won't have any
>false alarms with wildly accelerated false triangulations. But
>you won't get any UFOs either.

Computerized optical triangulation does not require that you aim
your telescope at the object (at two well separated sites) to
triangulate. It requires two images and software to extract the
position/altitude. For the special case of black background and
white dots, this is "easy". Well, at least with a reasonable
number of white dots. For this reason, you set the threshold of
the cameras properly to reduce the number of dots to a certain
magnitude. Thus, with this approach, which you seem to think is
impossible given all the decades of work on stereo visioning
systems, you determine all the positions simultaneously.

Remember that the cameras I am talking about have a fairly wide
field of view, essentially equivalent to having someone looking
up in the sky all night.

Is there some chance for inaccurate solutions? Improve it with
three sites.

Now if you are concerned about matching dots from one frame to
the next, you are right that it takes some guesswork but this
can be eliminated with adequate camera frame rate.

In order to automate the slewing of telescopes at each site
would require fast enough computational time for the cameras (a
trade of number of pixels and threshold/nunber of possible
targets and frame rate).

>You conveniently dodged the argument I made in my posting
>on the 12th:

Not really. I thought I lumped it into the "software solution".

>"No software will be able to tell the difference between one
>pinpoint of light that looks like another pinpoint of light. Two
>pinpoints of light 0.1 degree apart might be interpreted as a
>single pinpoint of light 6 miles away by an optical
>triangulation system (twenty-meter baseline), even though they
>are actually two pinpoints of light a meter apart on a dark
>object only 500 meters away. Or one pinpoint of light is a
>distant star (or aircraft) and the other is on a dark object
>(maybe even a UFO) close by and the optical triangulation system
>misinterprets it as a single pinpoint at an intermediate
>distance. All sorts of other scenarios and combinations are
>highly likely and no way to distinguish them. Etc. etc."

I grouped this question with the rest of your tedious questions
and said that state of the art stereo imaging software
(available on the Internet as source code) can process all the
dots at the same time from each separated site. Knowledge of the
orientation/position of the moderate field of view cameras at
each site (must be calibrated) and other things like star
positions are adequate to give a unique solution. I am talking
about processing stereo images (with a large baseline). If you
feel uneasy that the solution is "not unique" then over-
constrain the problem with three sites.

In any event, it is doable using today's technology. (Speaking
from a computer software and hardware perspective).

>I've snipped out the rest of your tired argument about
>supposed software overloads with a Passive Radar system
>since they are off base. The system doesn't have to waste
>computing power calculating trajectories of well-behaved
>normal targets.

Thinking that all you need is one site shows me that you have
not read the technical documents carefully enough. You need more
than one site to gather the position and altitude data.

I have not seen anywhere that it can look over the horizon. Such
claims are unbelievable based purely on the knowledge that to
"see" an object over the horizon would require multiple
reflections off the ionosphere. Now talk about "non- unique"
solutions! Passive radar is basically line of sight.

How do you think you are filtering targets with passive radar?
The best way is to build you receiver antenna properly to gather
signals in the direction you want. But you CAN'T apriori
eliminate the chaff. The whole idea about passive radar is that
you gather the reflected radio signal (at more than one site)
from a known radio source and then examine the shift in signal
at each site to determine the possible reflection locations. But
you MUST process the signal as though there are many possible
reflections, not just one that you choose. The complex (and very
likely not real time) algorithms must be able to deconvolve the
signal to essentially say "in order to have received this
reflected signal at the three reciever antennas, then reflecting
objects must be at these X,Y,Z positions in the sky". So you
must process the aircraft and birds and clouds and everything
else and HOPE that the TRUFO is reflecting enough signal back to
the receivers to show up. And the issue is that you need enough
reflected signal, so likely need a whopping antenna.

How is directional radio reflectivity handled? Probably you will
assume a uniform reflectivity. Well, this may work with
homogenous objects like meteors/ion trails/birds, but plasmas
and TRUFO propulsion systems?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:33:17 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:56:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:17:30 -0500
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>That is lubricrous.

>Lubricrous? Sexually wanton?? This passive radar thing is





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:13:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:09:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:18 PM
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Gill Sighting - Sparks

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:06:17 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>>... Cruttwell's report....
>>Have a look at part VII section 1 for the item on him
>>misidentifying Venus . (So did ten others, all "college men"
>>including one who had "great qualifications", was an ex-RAAF
>>navigator and who "knows a good deal about aircraft and a lot
>>about stars". They were all present).

>This would be a more cogent argument if that misidentification
>had involved these multiple witnesses reporting a large craft
>with "men" topside waving to those below, instead of a mere
>light in the sky which they themselves identified as Venus.

True. And as I pointed out, the majority of the group, including
the ex-RAAF navigator (Durie, the College Principal), did _not_
"identify [it] as Venus" at all. Only _one_ individual out of
more than a dozen, the Rev. Dams who left to fetch a camera "on
first sighting the object" and didn't return until the object
was gone, later decided that he had seen Venus. The rest,
including Durie and Gill, remained certain that it was a UFO.
"There is no doubt that it moved [an anticlockwise circular
jiggle]. I yelled with astonishment," said Durie. So the example
of this sighting from Dogura is somewhat double-edged.

On the other hand, presumably Venus was not simultaneously
visible or the Rev. Dams scepticism could not have carried.
Durie, Gill and the others would have pointed this out. But they
don't mention Venus on this occasion, although it was there. The
Patrol Officer on the island of Baniara also happened to be
looking out for "the original object" that evening during the
same time frame. He saw no UFOs but "the planet Venus . . .
only" (he did wake up and see another light that hung there for
an hour in the early hours; Jupiter was by then setting in a
similar place).

So probably they were looking at Venus. Its elevation at the
start of the sighting would have been about 3 degrees and it set
close the time they lost sight of the light. The description is
quite suggestive of a setting Venus seen through variable haze
and the binocular appearance of a reddened disc seems
consistent. The sudden circular motion sounds like a good
description of an autokinetic illusion.

In other words, Durie's report seems to be outstandingly
accurate. This shows that the propensity to be deceived about
the meaning of what one is seeing can coexist with objective
recording of sense data. It makes this group of witnesses
including Gill collectively quite reliable, Durie in particular,
on this occasion.

What Gill might have perceived/reported had he not been with
Durie and Dams at the time is something we can never know, of
course. And the conclusion that Gill was able, a week after the
Boianai experience, to watch Venus for 20 minutes without
identifying it, or more to the point without wondering why this
UFO had supplanted the habitual place of Venus in the western
evening sky, does speak to the question of how familiar he can
have been with the spectacle of Venus in the night sky on and
before the nights of June 26-8. But still, it's certainly a
long, long way from a shared autokinetic illusion of movement to
seeing Venus as a huge structured object five times the width of
the moon! I would not be happy to make such a journey without
good reason. I don't at present see such a reason.

One can try though! Venus should have been prominent before and
after these 3 nights. Something is necessary to make these 3
night special. I'd like to see weather reports for the whole
period, but I don't suppose any still exist. Was the sky in the
west from Boianai consistently cloudy before and after, allowing
Venus to be only temporarily prominent in a weather-window where
there were unusual local conditions?

One possible factor contributing to an illusion of size could be
a thin mist, or haze. Seen through such a scattering layer the
light of Venus could be diffused into a patch. It's somewhat
consistent with this that when the object appeared to grow
larger, coming lower and closer, Gill said it was "not so
bright" and the colour became yellow or orange. Apart from
moisture there are other possible sources of haze - for example,
smoke particles from a forest fire somewhere, maybe - that might
tend to scatter the blue wavelengths out of a white light source
leaving it reddened, dimmed and looking enlarged.

Well maybe. But even so the amount of "exaggeration" involved in
Gill's account would be more like "hallucination". It just
doesn't square with his tone of voice somehow. And then there
are the other witnesses to this multiple delusion. Cruttwell
tells us that he personally interviewed a number of them -
 including five named teachers - and got all the same confirming
details about the object and the men. They weren't vague about
it but "most emphatic". Interestingly, he says that accounts
which were given privately by Papuan witnesses to other Papuans,
and which he then heard second-hand, were just the same. So
there doesn't seem to be much mileage in Menzel's idea that
these signatories to the sighting report had no idea what they
were signing.

And what about the simultaneous sighting report on June 26 from
Giwa, maybe 10 or 20 miles (I can't find very accurate maps) up
the bay? This was a single-witness report but in some respects
quite similar: A brilliant greenish light that descended
rapidly, approached and enlarged to an oval at the same time as
it dimmed in brightness to reveal a row of illuminated
"portholes", hovered like that for 4 minutes then shot off again
over the mountains. Whatever this was it could not have been
Venus (in the opposite direction). The time of this apparition
near Giwa corresponds roughly to the time when the manned object
went "through the cloud" at Boianai and disappeared for the
first time (the next sighting recorded there is 2028).

Admittedly, before making his own report to the Menapi Mission
Secretary the Giwa witness had heard the story ("Did you see the
American Air Force last night?") from some Papuans who he picked
up by boat from Boianai on the 27th, and could possibly be





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                      Re: Serious Question - Dickenson

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:44:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:12:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Question - Dickenson


>From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:11:24 -0400
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:19:59 +0000
>>Subject: Serious Question

><snip>

>>The question being: How should we proceed to resolve the
>>controversy in a meaningful way? Ideally (assuming unlimited
>>funding) and practically (assuming a serious lack of funding)?

>I'd like to take a crack at your question.

<snip>

>First of all, I think that the prize is already ours. The truth
>about UFOs is not about proof, it is about time. It's no longer
>about "are we alone", it's "when will we find out".

<snip>

Mike, you went to the crux there

(I really should've tried to answer that way)

When funding finally arrives it'll be because 'they' have
publicly arrived - at which point Ufology becomes part of
physics, biology and lots of other `ologies'.


Cheers






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:19:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:14:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:25:42 EDT
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:43:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

><snip>

>>A simple consultation of a dictionary (in this case the
>>unabridged Webster's Third New International Dictionary) reveals
>>this definition of "mothership":

>>"1: chiefly Brit: a naval vessel escorting or guarding smaller
>>craft (as torpedo boats or submarines). 2: a ship serving several
>>smaller craft: TENDER."

>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

>And Gill was highly dependent upon shipping to receive supplies
>and letters as well as transport to and from the remote mission
>outpost in New Guinea. Gill would have been more than
>ordinarily familiar with nautical terminology given his
>extraordinary dependence on shipping.

Fair point. There's also a question of the era. Shipping in
general and the memory of wartime convoys etc was much more a
part of people's lives then - and there - than it is now.

>Whereas we who are steeped in UFO lore immediately jump to
>conclusions of a UFO or Adamski connection when we see a term
>like "mothership." But where is there any other Adamski
>terminology or folkloristic themes evident in Gill's vocabulary
>or narratives? Are the "men" who waved to him and the New
>Guineans labeled "Space Brothers" or even just "brothers"? Any
>described as blond or human looking? Are themes of peace and
>brotherhood evident in Gill's account or did he not in fact
>suspect it was a (warlike) military secret aircraft? Just the
>opposite of Adamski's peaceloving Space Brotherhood.

>Did Gill's UFO look like Adamski's ball-tripod landing gear with
>two levels (no, Gill's had three levels and sticklike landing
>struts) or the cigar-shaped "mothership" with portholes in the
>side?

"No" to all these, but realistically the idea of Gill being a
closet contactee enthusiast has never really been the issue. I
think it's just a question of recognising that he was not
necessarily a total naif presented out of the blue with a
situation he could never possibly have imagined. Cruttwell may
possibly have "educated" him a little from his own reading - he
had at least one book, was interested enough to put himself out
investigating, probably subscribed to FSR after corresponding
with le Poer Trench (?) and probably mentioned things to his
friends. Gill _might_ have recalled that phrase from Cruttwell.

Incidentally, if we insist on making this about a connection
with Adamski (and we needn't, as the "mothership" business was
rife through the literature in those days; I mentioned
Angelucci, you can also look in Dan Fry to pick another one, and
probably we'd find some examples in Trench's FSR of the time)
Cruttwell _was_ familiar with Adamski. He says: "The resemblance
of these objects to the craft seen and photographed by Adamski
in America... is remarkable."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Passive Radar - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:19:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:17:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Shough


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:43:31 EDT
>Subject: Passive Radar [was: Field Research & Images]

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>>It _was_ the latest sensation a while ago.

<snip>

>Again I stand by my previous statement: "Whenever proposals for
>a "new approach" to UFO research are made on UpDates basically
>no one (except me I think) mentions Passive Radar."

Just for the record, I think I did respond positively on List
(and certainly off-List) to Peter Davenport when I first saw the
passive radar idea floated here some time ago. I still think
it's a good idea, but maybe people need convincing that it could
work.

Perhaps a concept-demonstrator study could be piggy-backed on an
existing research set up, or amateur meteor trackers already
using it could be approached about doing some systematic trials?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                  Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:24:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Kritkausky


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>I am saying that optically-dominated ground stations have
>limited range in seeing UFOs close up enough to tell they are
>UFOs, essentially has to be within about 1/2 mile,

Is this a type-o? A field lap with an effective range equal to
shouting distance? This is an estimate "many orders of
magnitude" shy of reality.

I have worked several evenings and days with such a Field Lab
and the equipment that such a lab includes.

We had lightening/discharge detection with a range of 40 miles,
cameras that could read the reg.#s of a helicopter 2 miles away
and even got spectral signatures of flares on the Goldwater
Range which is 60-100 miles in the distance.

Field Labs would be for local observation of flap areas and not
for a continental detection system. Their value lies in the
fact that they have the potential to - and in fact do - provide
multiple data streams of information about an unidentified
object.

You are comparing the coverage or range of these two concepts or
methodologies.

Telescopes have much greater coverage than microscopes, but that
does not translate into a greater "value" from telescopic
imaging over microscopic imaging.

What we need to compare is the value of the data in terms of
providing new information or a better quality of data.  .

>a revolutionary concept such as Passive Radar with the potential
>for continent-wide coverage of say 2,000-4,000 miles from a
>single receiving site, is a quantum leap above a horizon-limited
>optical tracking station. You dispute the effective range of
>your UFO "field lab" based on zero data, but even if we accepted
>your outlandish tracking ranges (100 miles you say?) the Passive
>Radar covers a 30 x 30 x 30 = 27,000 times greater volume of
>space.

I know I am not basing my figures above from speculation or
guesses... certainly not zero data. Speaking of which, from
what data did you arrive at a 1/2 mile coverage area for field
labs? Regarding coverage, we should all just throw out our
binoculars I guess, as our eyes have about 30X more coverage.

>If your UFO "field lab" costs say on the order of $10,000 and a
>Passive Radar on the order of $100,000, then for the price of
>just 10 of your limited ground stations we could get 2,700 times
>better coverage with Passive Radar. My prediction is you'll just
>nitpick the $10,000 order of magnitude price tag by a few
>thousand here or there, talk about how this or that piece of
>equipment can be obtained for a few bucks less, etc. etc., all
>the while ignoring the meaning of "order of magnitude."

Yes, we should ignore it for the sake of this conversation,
because if we are going to make a useful comparison, logic
demands it.

I love Peter's suggestion of Passive radar. I think every field
lab should have one or a similar technology..... Believe me, the
reason I have not commented on it is not because I don't share
your admiration for such a technology. I think it is even more
attainable than you realize.

A friend (and source for my field lab training), who stayed as
our house guest last week, has utilized this technology for
researching anomalies. It is amazingly sensitive and can even
chart wind turbulence when calibrated to do so.

This method used low power pulse UHF radio signals with great
success. I've seen the data, it is impressive.

The individual who built this is quite a sharp fellow and the
utility is undeniable. If you want to see what it looks like and
reference some real coverage specs, try this link:

http://www.itacomm.net/ph/radar/radar_e.pdf

This is a great technology, but I believe the developers would





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

               Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -

From: Gary Matteson <mystrius.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:14:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:26:55 -0400
Subject: Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:38:28 -0400
>Subject: Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis

>>Source: Astrobiology Magazine

>>http://tinyurl.com/8z88n

>>October 17 2005

>>How many technically advanced civilizations exist in our galaxy?
>>With this essay by Steven Soter, Scientist-in-Residence in the
>>Center for Ancient Studies at New York University, Astrobiology
>>Magazine initiates the first in a series of 'Gedanken', or
>>thought, experiments - musings by noted scientists on scientific
>>mysteries in a series of "what if" scenarios.

><snip>

>>Yet there is no evidence in the astronomical, geological,
>>archaeological, or historical records that extraterrestrial
>>civilizations exist or that visitors from other worlds have ever
>>been to Earth.

>Geez ... What about all the archeological artifacts which
>strongly appear to reflect advanced visitors from elsewhere, or,
>at least advanced technology in use in times past? What about
>the Dogon tribe in which extraterrestrial history is part of
>their lore?

>Especially captivating are the gold 'model aircraft', at least
>one of which has control surface breaks etched on wing and tail.

>And what about the 4,000 (?) physical trace UFO cases? Or the
>recording GPS unit showing a boat belonging to abductees passed
>over land?

>Those are evidence in my book. Such 'no evidence' claims are
>pure cover up propaganda, as I see them.


Hi Eleanor.

In an Ivan T. Sanderson book, Uninvited Visitors, inside the
cover is a photo of an incised stone, archeologists found on
Rome's Palatine Hill which features what appears to me and
Sanderson a "modern" building and a "rocket" ship.  Sanderson





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:14:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:29:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Gill Sighting - Sparks
>Sent: 10/20/2005 9:15:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:18 PM
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Gill Sighting - Sparks

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:06:17 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>>>... Cruttwell's report....
>>>Have a look at part VII section 1 for the item on him
>>>misidentifying Venus . (So did ten others, all "college men"
>>>including one who had "great qualifications", was an ex-RAAF
>>>navigator and who "knows a good deal about aircraft and a lot
>>>about stars". They were all present).

>>This would be a more cogent argument if that misidentification
>>had involved these multiple witnesses reporting a large craft
>>with "men" topside waving to those below, instead of a mere
>>light in the sky which they themselves identified as Venus.

>True. And as I pointed out, the majority of the group, including
>the ex-RAAF navigator (Durie, the College Principal), did _not_
>"identify [it] as Venus" at all. Only _one_ individual out of
>more than a dozen, the Rev. Dams who left to fetch a camera "on
>first sighting the object" and didn't return until the object was
>gone, later decided that he had seen Venus. The rest, including
>Durie and Gill, remained certain that it was a UFO. "There is no
>doubt that it moved [an anticlockwise circular jiggle]. I yelled
>with astonishment," said Durie. So the example of this sighting
>from Dogura is somewhat double-edged.

Thanks for correcting my memory of the incident and adding in
the details. My point would be that it didn't take a Menzel to
come along and figure out that this July 6, 1959, sighting (if I
recall the date correctly) was Venus. One person at least, among
the witnesses figured out it was Venus and the rest may have
been persuaded as well later on, after Gill had written up his
report of it. No one, not a single person there, including Gill
who should have been the most disposed of all to see the "men"
again, no one saw any "men" waving their arms on top of a three-
leveled saucer the width of 5 Full Moons. Not a single person!
Not Gill! This Venus sighting did not generate the illusion or
hallucination of a Close Encounter of the Third Kind.

<snip>

>Patrol Officer on the island of Baniara also happened to be
>looking out for "the original object" that evening during the
>same time frame. He saw no UFOs but "the planet Venus . . . only"
>(he did wake up and see another light that hung there for an hour
>in the early hours; Jupiter was by then setting in a similar
>place).

>So probably they were looking at Venus. Its elevation at the
>start of the sighting would have been about 3 degrees and it set
>close the time they lost sight of the light. The description is
>quite suggestive of a setting Venus seen through variable haze
>and the binocular appearance of a reddened disc seems consistent.
>The sudden circular motion sounds like a good description of an
>autokinetic illusion.

Note too that Venus so low on the horizon at 3 degrees (or much
less depending on the mountains) would look much different than
it would high in the sky around 30 degrees on the nights of
Gill's earlier sightings, due to the "Moon illusion" and actual
atmospheric refraction and horizontal cloud layer occultation
effects. This I think answers your later question as to how Gill
could have failed to identify what should now have been the
familiar sight of Venus in the western sky. It's near-setting
appearance made it look very unfamiliar.

>In other words, Durie's report seems to be outstandingly
>accurate. This shows that the propensity to be deceived about the
>meaning of what one is seeing can coexist with objective
>recording of sense data. It makes this group of witnesses
>including Gill collectively quite reliable, Durie in particular,
>on this occasion.

Observation is much more accurate than interpretation by the
witnesses of their observation. The interpretations can be
highly inaccurate, while paradoxically the observational data
remains highly accurate, as you point out. In my analysis of the
Condon Report's suppressed IFO control studies I found that
witness observations had been 97%-98% accurate, while their
interpretations were on the order of only 50% accurate.

<snip>

>Admittedly, before making his own report to the Menapi Mission
>Secretary the Giwa witness had heard the story ("Did you see the
>American Air Force last night?") from some Papuans who he picked
>up by boat from Boianai on the 27th, and could possibly be
>echoing it. But if he got the story from the Papuans directly the
>very next morning, that is interesting in itself isn't it?

Yes, Gill did not invent the sighting and coerce the Papuans to
go along with his hoax or delusion. The Papuans themselves





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                    ABC-TV Affiliate Needs Miami UFO Info

From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:15:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:38:17 -0400
Subject: ABC-TV Affiliate Needs Miami UFO Info


List,

Cathy Corso of WPLG, Channel 10 in Miami, is looking for
someone to do a segment on UFOs. She's interested in anyone who
has been following the UFO activity in the Miami area and who
may have videos, photos, or anything else of interest related to
UFO phenomena.

She contacted me a couple of days ago and said she can't find
anyone.

She's willing to go anywhere within a 2 hour driving radius of
Miami.

Those of you who meet her criteria should contact her at:

305-325-2348






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

             Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:59:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Friedman


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:04:20 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Nigel Watson <VALIS23A.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:04:32 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:17:49 -0300
>>>>Subject: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>>Kathy Marden has given me permission to post her response to
>>>>that terrible Fulford column

><snip>

>>>They were obviously aware of such programs and certainly
>>>discussed these topics with ufologists long before their
>>>regression sessions. Betty was quick to read all the UFO books
>>>she could get so was not totally uncontaminated by UFO stories
>>>and ideas.

>>Just who were these ufologists besides Mr. Webb and when in
>>relation to the experience did these discussions take place? Is
>>there some basis for saying Betty read all the books she could
>>get? How many was that? Just what abduction books were there
>>prior to the Interrupted Journey that describe an experience
>>anything like that of the Hills? It is certainly true that most
>>people had heard of UFOs. So what?

>>Let us not forget that Dr. Simon was a very well respected
>>psychiatrist with long experience at using medical hypnosis to
>>extract the truth about traumatic experiences. He was not a new-
>>comer to the process.

>>There is an enormous amount of emotion on the tapes... and it
>>took great skill to break through the blocks without putting
>>words in their mouths... which he didn't.

>Stan, List, All...

>Can't let this pass without a comment.

>Recent studies, including those on soldiers who claim to have
>seen horrific combat while serving in Vietnam has shown that the
>amount of emotion displayed by the subject is no certain gauge
>as to the reliability of the stories. In other words, many of
>those who display the proper emotion while relating their tales
>of combat have been proven to have never seen that combat, never
>served in Vietnam and in some extreme cases, never even served
>in the military.

>What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion
>of the subject as a way of telling if the experience was real,
>imagined, or is an outright lie.


In general I agree with Kevin in that there are good actors and
many others who can be very emotional and lie at the same
time.....

But the difference here is that Dr. Simon was a master at using
medical hypnosis to extract a re-living of an experience as
opposed to a mere re-telling.

Did the testimony about Vietnam battles etc., come out under
hypnosis by a psychiatrist as competent as Ben Simon using
medical hypnosis?

Obviously, I think there are a whole host of reasons for
accepting the Hill story besides the emotion.

I was very impressed with Barney when I met with him and Betty
in 1968 and with John Fuller and my conversations with Dr.
Simon, and with my review of Fuller's papers at Boston
University.

Because there are scam artists and liars certainly doesn't mean





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:02:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

Hello, sailors!

>>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that it became
>>almost an iconic usage during the late 'fifties and 'sixties
>>among people who knew about flying saucers, from popular books,
>>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have known nothing
>>whatever about shipping. I personally remember that it was a
>>term used by UFO enthusiasts of my childish acquaintance (adult
>>and not)around 1963 and thereafter with, I am sure, _no_thought_
>>of its nautical origin. And, no, this doesn't mean that Gill had
>>to have had this adopted usage in mind. But it is certainly
>>reasonable (not "bad") to consider the possibility that he might
>>have done.

>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
>is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
>use of "mothership."

This is pretty feeble stuff.

I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
naval supply ships, etc.

To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would use
the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
an element of desperation which is extreme even for you, Jerry.

When Gill said "mothership" he meant mothership in exactly the
way that Adamski and dozens of other contactees, ufologists,
journalist and science-fiction writers used it at the time, and
I do not see what you think you have to gain by trying to
wriggle out of this obvious conclusion.

>Again, I could respond only to what you wrote, not to what you
>meant but did not express. Debunkers of the case, starting with
>Klass, use the "mothership" reference to argue that Gill was a
>UFO buff who read Adamski and others.

Not a UFO "buff" (like you and me, Jerry) but someone who had at
least a glancing familiarity with what was being written about
UFOs in the popular press at the time. I find it amusing that
you are so desperate to portray Gill as a UFO-naif, whose only
contact with the word "mothership" would be through naval
jargon.

>Your assertion that Gill may have learned the term in discussion
>with Cruttwell is hardly unreasonable. If you had said that in
>the first place and made clear that you did _not_ consider
>Allan's strange assertion about Gill's immersion in saucer
>literature "very likely true," we wouldn't have had to go to the
>trouble of this exchange.

Depends what you mean by "immersion". Some topics, flying
saucers amongst them, were so widely discussed and reported in
the late 50s, early 60s, that it would be impossible for any
intelligent, well-read individual, as I'm sure Father Gill was,
not to have absorbed at least some of the vocabulary of the
subject. This is even without bringing up the subject of the
"flying saucer vicars" who were such a feature of British life





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:36:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:31:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>Concerning whether Rev. Gill knew anything about Adamski. In the
>following paragraphs, the Reverend was talking about Stephen
>Moi's sighting on June 21, 1959. Note the "saucer shaped object
>with four little black bumps" that Gill finds "at the back of
>his mind":
 __

<snip>

>Well now, I had, somewhere or other, read about flying saucers,
>but I wasn't terribly interested in it, and I had recalled
>somewhere at the back of my mind that there was a saucer shaped
>object with four little black bumps -or bumps of some kind-
>underneath. So I reproduced from memory what I had at the back
>of my mind, and put in these little black dots that Stephen
>described. I said: "Was that it?" He said: "Yes, exactly".

>[Rev. Gill's talk to the Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society
>on October 28, 1959]

Hello Manuel

Thank you very much for sending me the full text of this talk.
I'd only seen excerpts before.

That image _may_ have come from hearing Norman Cruttwell
describe an Adamski "scout ship". Cruttwell was familiar with
Adamski's photographs and describes showing them to a Papuan
witness after a sighting in July. Or it could have come from
seeing magazine pictures at some time.

Gill himself suggested to David Durie in a letter on June 26,
before the main event at Boianai that night, that the "saucer"
seen by Stephen Gill Moi (or Moi Gill) on the 21st could have
been influenced by an image lodged in his unconscious, as it was
"very likely" that Stephen had "seen illustrations of some kind
in a magazine". He challenged Stephen: "Surely you've seen
pictures or heard people talk of flying saucers?" Stephen said
no. But evidently Gill was aware that such materials had been
available from time to time around Boianai.

But it's also interesting, isn't it, that Stephen's sighting was
completely independent of Gill in the sense that the latter had
been away on patrol in the mountains and returned to hear
Stephen's story a couple of days after the event. Stephen
apparently volunteered the description spontaneously, without
any coaching from Gill, who believed that Stephen had "no
knowledge of previous sightings". And Gill himself did not
describe seeing an Adamski-style craft on June 26, but rather an
object with an odd arrangement of "legs", just like the other
witnesses, including Stephen. The only thing in Gill's report
that might plausibly be traced to things he had previously heard
or read from Cruttwell is the "mother ship" reference. __

>C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill probably
>misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also how it all
>began on this particular occasion:
 __

>I was visiting David's college - the teachers' training college
>there - 20 miles away from us, and we were talking about this
>experience. With me was the Reverend Edwin Dams, the Reverend
>David Durie, the acting principal, and his wife. And after we
>had discussed it for a few minutes he said, well, why not come
>out and have a look at the sky and see if there's anything
>there? And I said, oh, they just don't come at beck and call
>like that, I think that would be rather useless. He said, well,
>I'm going out at any rate. And he went out and he came rushing
>back and said, "There is something - I'm sure there is". And so
>we all went out and sure enough, I identified it as one of
>these objects.

>[Same source as above; Rev. Gill answering written questions at
>the end of the talk.]

I find this interesting too, again on the positive side. I
pointed out elsewhere that what they described was a fairly
accurate portrait of Venus setting, correct as to times and
elevations and with details of the planet's phase visible in
binoculars, reddening due to atmospheric scattering near the
horizon, and autokinetic jiggles of the observer's eye. Now we
find that this is so, even though they had just been talking
about Gill's sighting and were (at least some of them) very much
"in the mood" to see UFOs.

The mundanity (is that a word?) of this sighting is in contrast
to the very remarkable phenomenon described by Gill at Boianai a
week earlier. Just the restraining influence of normative peer
pressure maybe? Or do we have to concede that there were other
physical factors involved at Boianai? So very gross is the
disparity that in my view we ought to concede that there were
other physical factors. But what were they? As I can't really
believe in the astronomical/meteorological theory as it stands,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

             Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:28:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:46:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Reynolds


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

<snip>

>>What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion
>>of the subject as a way of telling if the experience was real,
>>imagined, or is an outright lie.

>In general I agree with Kevin in that there are good actors and
>many others who can be very emotional and lie at the same
>time.....

<snip>

>Obviously, I think there are a whole host of reasons for
>accepting the Hill story besides the emotion.

<snip>

>Because there are scam artists and liars certainly doesn't mean
>that nobody is to be believed.

It would seem sensible to dismiss two of Kevin Randle's
observations, lying and imagining, when it comes to Betty and
Barney Hill, Lonnie Zamora, Reverend Gill, Velez, Bueche, and a
few others who have have sightings or experiences.

Betty Hill, on the very face of it, had an experience. She
didn't make it up, and she didn't imagine it. Zamora saw
something, as did Gill.

And the abductions of Velez and Bueche were real to them; they
are not liars or prone to imagining things in the psychiatric
sense.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:23:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:50:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting


Sigh, John,

>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
>>is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
>>use of "mothership."

>This is pretty feeble stuff.

>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
>should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
>naval supply ships, etc.

Of course you're just blowing smoke here, since you really have
no idea which words were or were not in Father Gill's vocabulary
- which, I might note, having met him and spent hours talking
with him (as you haven't), I found to be an excellent and
erudite one, reflecting his good education and knowledge of the
world beyond his own provincial concerns. Anyway, in due course
we shall have occasion to be reminded precisely of what Gill
himself had to say on the subject.

As you of course fail to note, the only reason anything is made
of his use of the phrase "mothership" is that debunkers are
grasping at any straw available, and this one is thin even as
straws go. Having much more experience of the nautical than you
and I have - simply by function of his being dependent on
shipping owing to his remote, ocean- bound geographical location
- Gill could easily have known the word.

If only Klass were still alive, you could take your complaints
to him, where they belong. Klass took great delight in wasting
ufologists' time. Apparently you have chosen to perpetuate that
grand avian tradition.

Nautical matters were certainly closer to Gill's daily concerns
than the claims of George Adamski. In other words, his use of
"mothership" is a matter of no particular consequence to
anything and betrays no special knowledge of UFO terminology.

>To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would use
>the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
>wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
>made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
>an element of desperation which is extreme even for you, Jerry.

Sounds more as if your wings are flapping even more vigorously
than usual.

>When Gill said "mothership" he meant mothership in exactly the
>way that Adamski and dozens of other contactees, ufologists,
>journalist and science-fiction writers used it at the time, and
>I do not see what you think you have to gain by trying to
>wriggle out of this obvious conclusion.

One can only presume you are being disingenuous again. Let me
repeat, since apparently you have memory problems:

"Mothership" came into the discussion only because Klass used it
to try to discredit Gill as a UFO-obsessive who could only have
gotten the phrase from Adamski. Got that now? My point was
simply that this is hardly necessarily true and almost certainly
untrue. Got that? Klass clearly believed, hilariously, that
"mothership" did not exist in the vocabulary of English-speaking
people who had not read Adamski. If Gill used it, it betrayed
his immersion in, or at least keen awareness of, the most
extreme saucer beliefs. In fact, Gill had little interest in
UFOs. Got that? Can we drop this now?

Significantly, when asked about his use of the term, Gill, who
is the ultimate authority here, replied thus: "Well, it seemed
as though it was a 'mother' with her 'children.' Just a sort of
feeling. The use of the term 'ship' is natural because of the
superstructure, see; it reminds you of a ship. I could have even
called it a 'launch.' It gave the impression of a 'mother
chicken'" (IUR, November 1977, p. 6). Allan Hendry then asked if
"that was your own choice of words, then, rather than something
you'd read before." Gill responded, "That's right." Note, by the
way, the nautical terms in Gill's vocabulary. In short:

(1) "Mothership" existed in English in a non-UFO context prior
to Adamski and could have been used by Gill

and

(2) Gill himself says that the term seemed a logical one to
employ in context and did not allude to "something [he'd] read
before."

and

(3) Gill did not say that his observation brought to mind a neat
phrase he'd encountered in UFO literature or popular saucer
discourse.

and

(4) Gill was bright, articulate, and creative enough to speak in
his own words and draw his own analogies.

Reflecting on this recently, I was struck at how often I hear
the phrase "mothership" used in, for example, CNN's coverage of
naval matters, usually in connection with the war in the Persian
Gulf. We may confidently expect, I'm sure, to learn from our
pelicanist friends how this betrays the UFO interests/awareness
of journalists.

>Depends what you mean by "immersion". Some topics, flying
>saucers amongst them, were so widely discussed and reported in
>the late 50s, early 60s, that it would be impossible for any
>intelligent, well-read individual, as I'm sure Father Gill was,
>not to have absorbed at least some of the vocabulary of the
>subject. This is even without bringing up the subject of the
>"flying saucer vicars" who were such a feature of British life
>at the time!

Why the exclamation point? To give phony weight to a matter of
little interest or relevance?  I could respond by pointing out
that "flying saucer postal workers" are a feature of American
life!

The second, central sentence in the quote above speaks to
something I've long noted: the provincialism of UFO-interested
persons, who profess to see reflections of their own
fascinations in the broader society where they don't exist.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:45:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:04:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>I have worked several evenings and days with such a Field Lab
>and the equipment that such a lab includes.
>We had lightening/discharge detection with a range of 40 miles,
>cameras that could read the reg.#s of a helicopter 2 miles away
>and even got spectral signatures of flares on the Goldwater
>Range which is 60-100 miles in the distance.

Great!

>Field Labs would be for local observation of flap areas and not
>for a continental detection system. Their value lies in the
>fact that they have the potential to - and in fact do - provide
>multiple data streams of information about an unidentified
>object.

>You are comparing the coverage or range of these two concepts or
>methodologies.

>Telescopes have much greater coverage than microscopes, but that
>does not translate into a greater "value" from telescopic
>imaging over microscopic imaging.

>What we need to compare is the value of the data in terms of
>providing new information or a better quality of data. .

I agree with you on all points.

>I love Peter's suggestion of Passive radar. I think every field
>lab should have one or a similar technology..... Believe me, the
>reason I have not commented on it is not because I don't share
>your admiration for such a technology. I think it is even more
>attainable than you realize.

See below, but passive radar obviously can be done since
there are reports of its use with meteor counting and such.
I don't see any real benefit of passive radar over active
radar except that you don't have to worry about FCC regulation
with passive radar. The signal processing for passive radar
seems more complex.

>A friend (and source for my field lab training), who stayed as
>our house guest last week, has utilized this technology for
>researching anomalies. It is amazingly sensitive and can even
>chart wind turbulence when calibrated to do so.

The only problem I have is with your classifying this friend's
radar with "passive radar". Since it is emitting a radio signal,
it is active radar. Still, I think active radar is a great
addition to any field station if you can afford it. Its great
that he lists how to build it and everything!

>This method used low power pulse UHF radio signals with great
>success. I've seen the data, it is impressive.

>The individual who built this is quite a sharp fellow and the
>utility is undeniable. If you want to see what it looks like and
>reference some real coverage specs, try this link:

>http://www.itacomm.net/ph/radar/radar_e.pdf

A very good report. Just the sort of report I like to see which
describes the field setup up in detail and presents results
(although I would like to know if any more results were
generated using the system since the report was published in
2002).

Also, the report is good in pointing out that even though the
radar "saw" something, nothing was visible with the eyes.

Also, of interest is the requirement of most active radars to
rotate. The described setup antenna was fixed.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                          Secrecy News -- 10/21/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:19:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 11:55:59 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 10/21/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 99
October 21, 2005


**      FAILURE TO DECLASSIFY INTEL BUDGET TERMED "UNSATISFACTORY"
**      LEE HAMILTON ON SECRECY
**      F-16 FIGHTER AIRCRAFT FOR PAKISTAN
**      DOD ON CONTRACTORS AND ARMED FORCES
**      ZAWAHIRI TO ZARQAWI: THE ASPENS ARE TURNING


FAILURE TO DECLASSIFY INTEL BUDGET TERMED "UNSATISFACTORY"

In a progress report on the status of the recommendations made
by the 9/11 Commission, the former Commissioners rated Congress
"unsatisfactory" for failing to declassify the intelligence
budget total.

The final report of the bipartisan Commission last year had
singled out budget declassification as best place to begin
combating the excessive secrecy that has degraded the
performance of U.S. intelligence agencies (at page 416).

But not even the national catastrophe of September 11 proved
sufficient to dislodge the official prejudice in favor of
unfettered secrecy.

Ironically, the intelligence community has probably suffered
more than anyone from budget secrecy, as significant cuts to
classified intelligence spending were imposed in the 1990s
without public awareness or even the possibility of debate.

("In the 1990s, we suffered deep cuts in intelligence funding,"
DCIA Goss recalled on June 29, 2005.)

The proponents of budget secrecy thus bear a heavy burden of
responsibility for the steadily eroding quality of U.S.
intelligence.

Last year, the full Senate voted in favor of intelligence budget
disclosure, but the measure was opposed by the Bush White House
and rejected by most House Republicans. It was abandoned in a
House-Senate conference.

Now, the 9/11 Commission members urge in their new report,
"Congress should pass a separate appropriations act for
intelligence, making public the overall amounts being
appropriated from national intelligence and being assigned to
the various components of the intelligence community."

See "Report on the Status of 9/11 Commission Recommendations"
from the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, October 20:

http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/2005-10-20_report.pdf

A new critique of the Silberman-Robb Commission on WMD
Intelligence written by David Isenberg and published by the
British American Security Information Council is available here:

http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Research/05WMD.pdf


LEE HAMILTON ON SECRECY

"At a time when the U.S. intelligence community is under intense
scrutiny in the aftermath of 9/11 and the failure to find
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, we only increase public
skepticism about our government by denying the public
information," said Lee H. Hamilton, the distinguished former
Congressman and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission.

Mr. Hamilton was the keynote speaker this week at a remarkable
symposium sponsored by the Information Security Oversight Office
(ISOO) to commemorate the tenth anniversary of Executive Order
12958 on national security classification.

Under other circumstances, many of Mr. Hamilton's remarks would
be considered truisms, e.g. "Information must be made available
-- to the maximum extent possible -- to the American people."
But today, such sentiments practically amount to a radical
critique of government policy.

See the text of his presentation here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/hamilton.pdf

The superb ISOO symposium offered genuinely diverse and strongly
argued perspectives, unresolved disagreements, and even a few
laughs.

For a partial account of one of the symposium panels, see
"Official: Secrecy decisions 'subjective'," by Shaun Waterman,
UPI, October 18:

 http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID051018-070909-6371r


F-16 FIGHTER AIRCRAFT FOR PAKISTAN

The United States may offer to sell Pakistan "up to 55 new and
25 used F-16" fighter aircraft, a newly updated Congressional
Research Service study says, citing unspecified "reports."

See "Pakistan-U.S. Relations, Congressional Research Service,
updated October 13, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB94041.pdf


DOD ON CONTRACTORS AND ARMED FORCES

A new Department of Defense Instruction defines "DoD policy and
procedures concerning DoD contractor personnel authorized to
accompany the U.S. Armed Forces."

Contractors deployed alongside U.S. military forces in Iraq and
elsewhere have assumed increasing responsibilities for military
tasks up to and including prisoner interrogation, but in doing
so they have also created legal, administrative and procedural
problems.

The new DoD Instruction attempts to bring some order to what has
occasionally been a chaotic situation and addresses, for
example, the conditions under which contractors may be armed.

The issuance of the Instruction earlier this month was first
reported by InsideDefense.com.

See DoD Instruction 3020.41, "Contractor Personnel Authorized to
Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces," October 3, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i3020_41.pdf


ZAWAHIRI TO ZARQAWI: THE ASPENS ARE TURNING

The letter purportedly written from Al Qaeda's Ayman al Zawahiri
to Abu Musab al Zarqawi and released October 11 by the Director
of National Intelligence has met with continuing skepticism and
has now entered the domain of spoofery.

The anomalous fact that the supposed letter to Zarqawi advises
the recipient, if in Fallujah, to "send greetings to Abu Musab
Al Zarqawi," noted last week in Secrecy News, was elaborated in
a Reuters story by David Morgan.

See "US Cannot Explain Suspicious Zawahri Letter Passage,"
October 14:

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N1460892.htm

The story was picked up appreciatively by Harry Shearer in his
satirical broadcast "Le Show" on October 16. An audio clip can
be found here (thanks to A):

http://tinyurl.com/ajtep

Taking it to the next level, T.A. Frank wrote his own letter
from Zawahiri to Zarqawi in the The New Republic:

"Please remember that here in Waziristan, out East, where you
train, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in
clusters-- partly because their roots connect them, partly
because a recent volley of daisy-cutters has reduced them to
charred stumps."

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i051031&s=frank103105

U.S. intelligence analysts are not completely oblivious to the
peculiarities of the proffered Zawahiri letter.

A national security reporter who was briefed by senior
intelligence officials told Secrecy News:

"One hypothesis from the analysts is that the last line--about
giving regards to Zarqawi if in Fallujah--was a note to one of
the couriers who would have carried or transmitted the letter--
 and not, therefore, part of the letter addressed to Zarqawi.
The senior official said that he has 'rarely been more
confident' that the letter was indeed authored by Zawahiri,
based on intelligence from 'multiple' sources."


_______________________________________________
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.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to
secrecy_news-remove.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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________
Steven Aftergood





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                What Makes Them Work? [was: Serious Question]

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:17:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 11:58:54 -0400
Subject: What Makes Them Work? [was: Serious Question]


>From: Craig Beasley <fallingleaf.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:01:12 -0500
>Subject: Re: Serious Question

<snip>

>Being an engineer, the restriction is obvious. If UFOs are
>craft of some sort, technological and physical, what makes them
>work? I devote myself to that. With the limited funds I have, I
>have some plans that have an unpleasantly long timeline.

Craig -

We had a discussion on this List a couple of years ago about the
Townsend Brown experiments in which he demonstrated net thrust
using high voltage capacitors. I'm sorry I don't remember/can't
find details now, but it turns out there are _two_ effects
involved:

One is a bit of thrust where the capacitor plates are exposed to
the ambient air, and some of the air molecules become ions. The
electric field actually causes a small flow of air near the
plates, forming a very small thrust electrostatic "rocket
engine". This is apparently the principle behind the model
"UFOs" which are sold on the web and look like the flying
triangles, and which depend on lightweight tether wires to
supply the charge to them.

The other, much more promising for those who would like to
construct a home made "UFO" were some experiments in which
capacitors enclosed within solid dielectric were found to
produce net thrust, again small, but seemingly these did _not_
depend on electrostatic rocketry.

I did see some web documentation on the solid dielectric
enclosed capacitor thrusters from what I recall was a serious
source.

Presumably, if a dielectric could be found which is light enough
(like some of the amazingly lightweight ceramics?) and if
multiple plates could be stacked up like pancakes, and if
circular plates could be segmented and individually charged to
provide attitude control, maybe a "UFO" could be built on the
second principle which could indeed operate outside the
atmosphere.

Clearly, UFO reports indicate far more sophisticated and
powerful technology is in use in the actual craft, but at the
same time, a "home brew" machine using electrostatic technology





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

              Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:48:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:04:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle


>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:04:20 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

<snip>

>>>Let us not forget that Dr. Simon was a very well respected
>>>psychiatrist with long experience at using medical hypnosis to
>>>extract the truth about traumatic experiences. He was not a new-
>>>comer to the process.

>>>There is an enormous amount of emotion on the tapes... and it
>>>took great skill to break through the blocks without putting
>>>words in their mouths... which he didn't.

>>Stan, List, All...

>>Can't let this pass without a comment.

>>Recent studies, including those on soldiers who claim to have
>>seen horrific combat while serving in Vietnam has shown that the
>>amount of emotion displayed by the subject is no certain gauge
>>as to the reliability of the stories. In other words, many of
>>those who display the proper emotion while relating their tales
>>of combat have been proven to have never seen that combat, never
>>served in Vietnam and in some extreme cases, never even served
>>in the military.

>>What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion
>>of the subject as a way of telling if the experience was real,
>>imagined, or is an outright lie.

>In general I agree with Kevin in that there are good actors and
>many others who can be very emotional and lie at the same
>time.....

>But the difference here is that Dr. Simon was a master at using
>medical hypnosis to extract a re-living of an experience as
>opposed to a mere re-telling.

>Did the testimony about Vietnam battles etc., come out under
>hypnosis by a psychiatrist as competent as Ben Simon using
>medical hypnosis?

Yes.

The point was that in many cases of reliving of events under
hypnosis, medical and otherwise, there are no records that might
be used. Those telling of childhood assault, Satanic Ritual Abuse,
and in other cases, there is no record that might be consulted
for veracity of the tale.

In these cases, where 'wannabes' were telling of their combat,
in a clinical environment, under medical hypnosis, they were
exhibiting the emotions that would be expected. Then, when the
records were checked, it was found that they didn't agree with
the stories being told.

As an aside, many of those caught with records that did not
reflect their tales of combat, suggested that the records had
been altered because they had been in Cambodia or Laos, or on
secret missions. Does this sound familiar?

So, my point, and the whole point, was that a display of the
proper emotions does not 'prove' that the subject is telling the
truth. The recovered and recalled memories, under hypnosis, with
the proper emotion, should be just one small part of the overall
assessment.

>Obviously, I think there are a whole host of reasons for
>accepting the Hill story besides the emotion.

>I was very impressed with Barney when I met with him and Betty
>in 1968 and with John Fuller and my conversations with Dr.
>Simon, and with my review of Fuller's papers at Boston
>University.

>Because there are scam artists and liars certainly doesn't mean
>that nobody is to be believed.

All I'm saying here is that we cannot rely only on the emotions
exhibited by the subject. That they were properly emotional just
doesn't mean anything by itself.

And I didn't suggest that we reject all cases because there are the
liars out there, only that we be aware that emotion of the subject





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

               Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:24:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:12:13 -0400
Subject: Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis -


>From: Gary Matteson <mystrius.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:14:52 -0500
>Subject: Re: SETI And The Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis

<snip>

>Hi Eleanor.

>In an Ivan T. Sanderson book, Uninvited Visitors, inside the
>cover is a photo of an incised stone, archeologists found on
>Rome's Palatine Hill which features what appears to me and
>Sanderson a "modern" building and a "rocket" ship. Sanderson
>asks, what was the stone artist attempting to depict? Darned if
>I know. Not evidence of anything I suppose yet I wonder.

>Gary C. Matteson

"Not evidence of anything..."? That is my whole point. Such
things _are_ evidence. That is my whole beef with naysayers, who
wave away huge amounts of evidence which, in a murder trial,
say, would be admissible.

Being less than perfect, undeniable does _not_ disqualify an
item of evidence, it just makes it less than enough to win the
case solely on its own merit. Evidence is not black and white
in any other field, so why should it be in ufological matters?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                                We Are Alone

From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:17:05 -0400
Subject: We Are Alone


Since no one else in the Universe will talk to us Earthlings
(beyond basic instructions such as, "Come with me"), for all
practical purposes, we are alone. We are isolated from
communicating with them. We are in the same room, but they won't
speak with us.

I want to know why ET refuses to do it. I want to know why we
are ignored and effectively alone.

Is that one of the reasons the UFO cover-up exists? Because so
many people believe we are not alone in the Universe, and are
hopeful for the future, but in fact, we are ignored and can rely
only on ourselves?

Even if SETI picked up signals from a civilization, sent a
query, and was prepared to wait for hundreds or thousands of
years for a reply, there's no guarantee that a reply would be
forthcoming, based on the non-communication we've seen with the
UFO-nauts - assuming flying saucers are occupied. Yet an
assumption of SETI, I believe, is that communication might be
possible if the other planet is close enough. Hope springs
eternal.

The reality appears to be that aliens want to conceal their
identities and home planets, and have no desire to conduct a





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                          Today Is National Nut Day

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 05:13:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:19:24 -0400
Subject: Today Is National Nut Day


Hello all:

According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                 Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul com>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 10:07:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:33:55 -0400
Subject: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2


The Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles


Entry No. 2 BUFO's OFFICIAL PETITION TO THE PENNSYLVANIA
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION regarding their request for the
iniation of a   (GAO) Government Accounting Office inquiry
into the cover up of The Carbondale UFO incident of November 9-
11,1974.

(A gentle critique).

Welcome back to the Carbondale Ufo Crash Chronicles - I'm really
glad you've returned and may be sharing this information with
your fellow saucerheads or saucerheadettes... as the case may be.

This time we are going to explore the lack of merit to the BUFO
PETITION for a G. A. O. inquiry into the Carbondale UFO crash
cover up - which of course, the BUFOrian's believe to be a
factual and potentially historic event... or, as their ace
investigator Ron Hannivig refers to the matter, "The big one!"

Since some of my reader's may not be aware of the fact that I
was one of the three pimary UFO field investigators at the
Carbondale crash site on the 11th of November,1974. It might be
a good idea for those readers to peruse my essay/report on the
Carbondale UFO/Lantern Hoax at the

http://magonia. mysite. wanado-members. co. uk/ms55. htm

the story is posted in full-length. It's not a quick read so,
have some milk and cookies at the ready.

The essay/report is far too lengthy and detailed to place in
this journal but, it suffices to say that quite a few serious
UFO researchers who have read it feel that it is a revealing,
instructive and informative article. I won't bother to quote
them here as I wouldn't want to be accused of tooting my own
horn... But, then again,what the hell, "toot-toot!!"

However, that's not really what I wanted to discuss with you
this time. The thrust of this writing is directed at the
frivilous and extraordinarily nonsensical BUFO PETITION that
Mary Sutherland recently came up with. Of course, I may be
giving Mrs. Sutherland far too much credit here, as the document
does seem to have a rather pronounced Hannivigian flavoring to
it. (one may recall Ronald Hannivig is one of BUFO's pair of
Carbondalean saucer sleuths).

Anyway, while reading the BUFO petition, I quickly realized that
it was not only seriously flawed but, contained several
wonderful examples of unbridled UFOOLogy that I wanted to share
with you. (I hope you'll recall that UFOOLogy is a kind of
investigative dysfunctioning which permits quantum leaps of
illogiocal assumptions to taint UFO reasearching and
investigative thought processes). So, with UFOOLogy redefined, I
think we may safely continue...

Hmm, if you go to:

http://www. burlingtonnews. net/carbondalerussian

you can see the petition. You'll quickly notice that it contains
a lot of 'Whereas' lingo and looks kinda official too. However,
I'm certain that when the Congressional Delegates read the
petition they are not only going to wonder who in the hell wrote
this drivel but, "why?" The answer to that question may not be
very difficult to grasp, once those legal beagles sink their
teeth into it. Let's start at the beginning...

PETITION TO PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION FOR
INVESTIGATION OF NOVEMBER 9, 1974 Carbondale Incident.


1. "Whereas, on November 9, 1974 something crash landed into the
silt pond of Carbondale, Pennsylvania. "

Actually, no one observed anything crash landing in the pond at
the time of the initial incident. It was thought that a meteor
which the original reportees (three local teens) had observed
was assumed to have been the same object they discovered moments
later glowing in the pond - that object was actually a six volt
battery powered R. R. lantern.

Twenty-five years later one of the boy's confessed that he made
up the part of the story about seeing an object in the sky
plummet into the pond. However, there may have been some "I saw
it too!" bandwaggoning eyewitnesses who came forward after the
downed UFO rumors had spread throughout the community?

2. "Whereas, for the past 27 years, citizens of Carbondale and
surrounding communities have attempted to find out what it
was. "It's actually been 31 years since the incident occured but
then again, who's counting except BUFO's Hannivig, Sutherland
and Scassellati? During that time not one person from Carbondale
or its surrounding communities has ever contacted me regarding
the on site field investigation and witness interviews that Mr.
Douglas K. Dains and I performed on the incident. I had several
phone calls on November 12,1974 and shared reports with several
UFO researchers at that time, but that was the extent of it.

This obvious lack of interest and objectivity in the case is a
rather curious state of affairs because I know that BUFO's Mr.
Hannivig was informed in 1995 that I was one of the primary
investigators at the scene; and he claimed that "my name didn't
ring a bell for him. "I thought this to be highly unusual
because many news paper stories of the incident mentioned the
names and organizations of all three UFO field investigators at
the alleged crash scene.


Yet, Ron Hannivig never bothered to contact me, it was only
after I contacted BUFO on the internet (in April of 2004), that
Mary Sutherland and a fellow named Rick Fisher, (Fisher had gone
to Carbondale to interview Frank Scassellati). Mr. Fisher of
Paranormal,Pa. inquired as to when I might be sending a
"duplicate copy" of the original report on my findings regarding
the incident to Carbondale's Historical Society - (as the
original 31 page report to the Carbondale Police Department had
mysteriously vanished).

I tried to assist Mrs. Sutherland and her investigators by
providing them with names, addresses and investigative leads
that they might follow up on regading "unanswered questions"
that they found to be baffling, suspicious and mysterious about
the case. I also provided Mrs. Sutherland with a draft of my
essay on the Carbondale Hoax which she promised to post at her
website for her readership to peruse. (In lieu of correcting
several posted distortions about my involvememt at the pond
years earlier).

That didn't happen, and I finally told her to forget about it as
I was planning to post the story myself. But her inverstigator,
Frank Scassellati did post a "rebuttal" to some of the thoughts
I shared with Mrs. Sutherland. He seemed to be particularly upset
with my comment that the story of the incident had over the
years obviously become a piece of Lackawanna County folklore.

Mary Sutherland finally did post a wee bit of my essay in March
of 2005. (i. e.,11+ months after she promised to do so) but, at
"MJ Graeber", not BUFO sites or links. That posting suddenly and
mysteriously appeared along with BUFO's Petition after I
informed Mr. Scassellati that I planned to post this journal
exposing all the BUFOrian nonsence regarding the Carbondale
matter. Mary's responce also appeared when Mr. Harney of Magonia
sent my Carbondale essay/report to UFO UpDates and it appeared
on "Virtually Strange".

3... "Whereas, military personnel from the Army and Air Force
were identfied at the scene by eyewitnesses, including news
reporters and fire fighters, as involved in the search, and
military vehicles were observed at or near the impact site. "

There were not any military personnel at Carbodale during the
entire 44 hour incident. There were Civil Air Patrol members
(some wearing fatigue uniforms - they came from Carbondale and
Scranton, Pa. ) Some of the C. A. P. members were driven to the
scene in a military truck with a canvas tarps, its doors were
clearly marked with the "Civil Air Patrol"logo yet, some near
sighted or simply mistaken folks thought it read U. S.
Army,U. S. Air Force and NASA too.

I briefly spoke to a one Air Force officer who was with the
C. A. P. at the site on Nov. 11,1974 - perhaps this lone individual
is the military personnel that BUFO is talking about (?) Perhaps
the C. A. P. lad who wore a pistol on his hip is the armed Army
troops or military police personnel that some people thought
they saw and encountered at the scene (?)

Perhaps the sighting of the C. A. P. truck sparked the various
covert military truck stories. (?) Perhaps the fact that a piece
of damaged machinery fron the defunct DeAngelis company's coal
breaker at the pond had been taken away on a lowboy trailer at
approximately 6 A. M. on Nov. 10th. further fueled the rumors of a
saucer retreival(?) Perhaps BUFO should have mentioned all this
information in their flimsy, non-objective and woefully slanted
petition.

I once worked for a construction firm, and it was standard
operating procedure to move equipment on Sundays to avoid
traffic, and have it available on Monday morning work crews or
necessary repairs.

BUFO's investigators probably are well aware of these facts yet,
they seem to prefer to say that the military were there, and
that news reporters and fire personnel had reported seeing them.
But, Hannivig and Scassellati have failed to post copies of the
five fire company's daily log entries confirming their claims,
and they have not posted the published news articles that
mention any groups other than the C. A. P., the Carbondale police
and volunteer fire companies being present at the so-called
crash site. Doing so is very basic investigative procedure.

They also have not identified which military units were present,
and posted copies of such units daily "Morning Reports" which
would certainly verify their presence at the scene. Strangely,
BUFO's defective detectives haven't even posted the information
contained in the Carbondale police reports concerning the
incident and that information would be very easy to obtain. BUFO
also hasn't posted the UFORIC report which is available as a
matter of public record at the Carbondale Historical Society,
and that lengthy and detailed document has been available for
many months.

4. "Whereas, some witnesses report seeing a glowing object
moving in the waters of the silt pond located in Carbondale,
Pennsylvanua prior to the arrival of military. "

Egads, BUFO almost got this one right! Police and several
witnesses actually did see the disc of light on the surface of
the water "appear to move. "It is highly probable that the "
illusion of movement "occured as the submerged lantern was
nudged by police as they were attempting to scoop it up in a
fish net which was fitted on the end of a 10ft pole.

What was observed by the witnesses and the police may have been
a shift of the railroad lantern's light beam as the lamp
resettled in the silt after it fell out of the fish net. (there
are three illustrations of this light beam shifting in UFORIC's
31 page report on the incident at the Carbondale Historical
Society), and BUFO is well aware of that document because I
informed Mr. Fisher when I would be sending it along.

5. "Whereas, some witnesses state that a large covered object
was transported out of the area on a military flat bed tractor-
trailer truck:"

Well, the only witnesses BUFO has mentioned in their postings
regarding this claim is a "child-at-the-time" gal named Dawn
Race, her mother and her sister Kim whose statements are
completely contradicted (and probably discredited) by two other
eyewitnesses who say they saw a strange object being taken from
the pond during the early morning hours of Nov. 10th 1974 too.
The problem is that neither of the alleged total of five
eyewitnesses mention seeing each other at the pond during the
covert activities. (i. e., the three never saw the other two,
and vice versa. ) So, it seems that someone may be fibbing,
mistaken or visually impaired.

Moreover, the witnesses descriptions of the object do not match,
and two of them are certain that the men at the pond were "not
in uniform. "The same two also say that it was so dark that
they couldn't make out the facial features of the men who asked
them to leave the area - but, they think one of them may have
been the Acting Police Chief.

Yet, BUFO's investigators would ask us to believe that Ms. Race
age 4 at the, her sister Kim age 7, and Mother were able to see
precisely what was going on from a much greater distance than
the original reportees who told their version of events to the
Isis Center's Ms Mary Schmitt, only days after the incident had
been deemed a hoax. Moreover, Dawn Race recently informed me
that she was actually with her Grandfater and sister at the time
of her observations.

Additionally, the two 1974 (Isis Ceneter) witnesses came forward
at the behest of the young Bobby Gillette's Mother, who was
upset that her boy was suspected of perpetrating a costly and
embarrassing prank. Apparently,Vera Gillette didn't like the
idea that some neighbors were calling her boy a liar! Bobby
Gillette was 14 years old at the time.

BUFO's star eyewitness (Ms Dawn Race) was allegedly in the
company of her Mother and sister Kim, at 3 a. m. on the very
dark and frigid morning of Nov. 10th,1974. They were standing in
the St. Rose of Lima Cemetery observing the military place a UFO
on a flat bed truck according to BUFO - While the other couple
(19 year old Bill Brady and Ms. Peggy Mendez-16, who were
described as teenage friends), had managed to skirt the police
cordon and sneak into the area where they observed a small
humming blue object with seven or eight men around it. (Young
Brady and Ms Mendez said they got to within thirty feet of the
object).

Interestingly, the couple were also friends of Bobby Gillettes'
- while BUFO's newest eyewitness is a friendof another boy
(i. e., John Lloyd) who was at the pond with his brother a
Gillette. In fact, after BUFO's investigators visited the pond
with Ms. Race on April, 27th 2004 she, her sister Kim and Rick
Fisher (of Paranormal, Pa. ) were reported to have visited John
Lloyd at his home by Frank Scassellati but, Fisher categorically
denies that ever happening. Ya know, in the old days of UFO
investigation we tried to interview the witnesses separately, on
a one to one basis somehow, it seemed to be the proper thing to
do. (I persoanlly believe that Mr. Fisher's version of the story
is factual).

Of course, there were also rumors that an object was secretly
removed from the pond and placed on a flat bed railcar, in an
armored truck, lifted by two military helicopters- and that even
a locally owned delivery truck was somehow involved in the
recovery activities at the silt pond. So, I guess you can take
your pick of which "unverifiable rumor" you prefer on this
matter.

BUFO's investigators seem to embrace the military flat bed
tractor-trailer story which their child-at-the-time witness has
told them about. (Eventhough she says the recovery took place at
a time they do not agree with so, I guess somebody at BUFO seems
to be a little confused about the matter). Moreover, Ms Race
told me that she never saw anyhting being loaded upon the
truck... she just observed it leaving the area.

Curiously, the UFO that was said to have been spirited away by
the military at Kecksburg, Pa. nine years earlier, was also
reported to have been removed from the area on a flat bed
military truck and covered with a tarps just as BUFO's
eyewitness reports. But, Mr. Hannivig, Mr. Scassellati and Mrs.
Sutherland only passingly mention this striking similarity in
their many postings.

Nor do they sound a note of caution about child-at-the-time
witness testimony, which quite often turns out to be more of
what the child heard adults saying about a situation than a
matter of observed fact.

Then of course, there is the sad, but valueable lesson learned
in the acceptance and endorsement of child-at-the-time star
Roswell eyewitness Gerald Anderson. He completely bamboozeled
Stanton Friedman, Walter Andrus of MUFON, the folks at CUFOS and
countless others in the UFO field until Thomas J. Carey unmaskd
him as a chronic and habitual yarn-spinner. I hope the folks at
BUFO contact Mr. Carey about this highly instructive story.
(tcarey1947.nul com).

Additionally, a month before the Carbondale saucer crash
incident occurred, a retired professor of mass communications
from the University of South Florida, (Robert Spencer Carr), was
appearing on many nationally syndicated TV and radio talk shows
discussing the alleged crash of three flying saucers in New
Mexico back in the late 40's. The Professor was a hoaxer who
also appeared at quite a few universities with his yarns. -
 Carr's son revealed upon his father's passing that his Dad told
these bogus stories because he simply enjoyed the attention that
the stories afforded him. (in short, he was a bit of a lonely
and eccentric old man. )

I later learned from another Ufologist that the professor wasn't
actually a professor at all; he had retired after working for
the Disney Corp. But, he was the first to use the term "Building
18" (One might recall from the vast saucer litereature, that
building or, hamger 18 is were quite a number of downed UFOs and
alien bodies are said to be warehoused). Brad Sparks was the
first to inform me of Carr's link to hangar 18.

Mr. Carr was a silver-haired gent who looked something like a
Kentucky Colonel... many people believed his stories which
included visits to his Florida home by little aliens on numerous
occassions. One wonders how much Carr's yarns may have helped to
trigger all the "spontaneous rumors" that sprang up in the coal-
cracking community of Carbondale back in '74 (?)

6. "Whereas, some witnesses report being stopped by armed U. S.
military officials who prevented them from approaching the crash
site;"

There were not any armed military units or military police at
the scene, Carbondale police and Civil Air Patrol younsters were
used to cordon off the area because it was feared that a
satellite or space capsule's nuclear powered battery - or,"Snap
Unit" as they are commonly called might have survived re-entry
and may have been leaking its radioactive contents into the
pond.

One young C. A. P. member did come to the site with a pistol on
his hip. It was reported to have been a 45 caliber automatic,
and it was removed by the lad's superior at the request of
Carbondale actimg police chief Det. Sgt. Francis X. Dottle, when
he was alerted to the situation by Jerry Palko, a Scranton Times
Reporter (and life-lomg resident of Carbondale) who was at the
scene covering the story.

Additionally, two of the pond's banks were quite steep and
slippery so quite naturally, it was also feared that someone
might accidentally fall into the pond in the fridged darkness.
But, press people and curiousity seekers were permitted in the
area during day light hours. Yet, some conspiracy-minded
induvuduals have deemed these routine safety precautions to be
evidence of a "Press Lock out".

7. "Whereas, after all these years our government insists that
nothing occured and police department of Carbondale continues to
claim that this was a hoax by some local teenager. Both
government and City of Carbondale refuse to disclose records and
evidence on the incident. "

The primary flaw with this claim is that it is completely
foundationless and lacking in candor. BUFO should post all of
it's requests to authorities along with the authorities'
responce to those alleged requests if they are going to accert
that they were denied access to them or some type of physical
evidence.

I suspect the "evidence" that BUFO is talking about would be the
railroad lantern because nothing else was found in the pond.
Hannivig and Scassellati had also been actively seeking
information concerning the whereabouts of 10 photos of the glow
on the pond's surface, as well as the missing lantern which
Frank thought was still in police lock up. (see his posted 2004
e-mail to Mrs. Sutherland on the matter).

I provided BUFO with the name of the photographer who took 13
(not 10) photos at the pond on Nov. 10th,1974 and told them that
the lantern was taken home as a retirement souvenir by the
policeman who was Acting Police Chief during the UFO incident.
The lantern had also been on display at a local tavern for
awhile as a curiousity piece. There's not a hint of this
information to be found in the BUFO petition.

8. "Whereas, the Cold War is long gone;"

This is a rather curious comment which Ron Hannivig may have
thought to include in the petition. I think the general idea is
to inform the delegation that it is alright for the government
to fess up about recovering a Soviet missile in the pond, and
it's okay for the Russians to know that we did. If correct,this
bit of mental gymnastics is probably Mr. Hannivig's most
creative UFOOLogical fantasy.

9. "And whereas, The public has the right to know what its
government recovered and answers to the following questions:"

"What landed near Carbondale,PA on November, 1974"

Nothing but a railroad lantern which was tossed into a pond by
three teenagers on a nothing-else-to-do Saturday night in
Carbondale. But, Bobby Gillette later confessed that he and the
Lloyd brothers had also tossed a flashlight into the pond before
they tossed the lantern in- and that the flashlight didn't burn
very long. Gilette said that he and his buddies were trying to
scare his sister Maria with a story that a monster or, something
scary was in the water... (i. e., a post halloween prank that
simply got out of control).

"Where did the orders come from for Army, Air Force, personnel
to be dispatched to the scene."

The Army, the Air Force and local National Guard were not at the
scene. The Carbondale police and a few surrounding community
police were, along with Civil Air Patrol members from Carbondale
and Scranton,PA. There were also five volunteer fire companies
at the site from nearby communities.

"Why did the military personnel and local officials contain the
area to prevent the object from being observed."

Although this question contains its own answer, I'll correct its
errrors by pointing out that the area was cordoned off to
"protect "the public from potential danger as it was initally
feared that the object in the pond "may" have been radioactive
Space Junk (i. e., a damaged Space Nuclear Auxillary Power
unit).

It was Dr. Hynek of CUFOS, who first warned the Acting Police
Chief of this "potential danger", and explained that a falling
meteor would have been instantly extinguished as it struck the
pond. Dr. Hynek instructed the acting chief to proceed with
caution and obtain a geiger counter to check out the pond area.
The geiger counter was then loaned from the Forest City Police
Department. (All of this is a matter of public record).

"What was the importance of the object that caused the military
to rapidly respond to the Carbondale area. "

I'm hoping that the BUFOrians will be able to figure this one
out for themselves, if they cannot, perhaps the question should
be engraved on the wall of a UFO Mysteries Museum for all future
BUFOrians to gaze upon in breathless wonder. A routine
examination of newspaper archival photographs taken diuring the
incident reveal that no military personnel were present, along
with the complete lack of any reporter mentionoing they were.

Well, I think that we've discussed enough of the BUFO PETITION'S
ridiculous claims for now. Unfortunately, even with these
unfounded charges, accusations and questions responded to, I'm
certain that the inquisitive folks at BUFO will manage to come
up with a few more.

But, I think we have a good enough start to realize that the
BUFO slant on this topic is not only frivilous, it's almost
moronic too. (i. e., they are not presenting a fair and balanced
(i. e,objective) accounting of the Carbondale incident...
perhaps the G. A. O. can look into that little problem too?

Moreover, BUFO bases all its investigative assumptions on the
statements of the late Robert D. Barry of the 20th Century UFO
Bureau; who claimed that a military man (an unidentified
colonel), told him about a Soviet missile "probably" being in
the pond. However, this colonel was never named and BUFO doesn't
even know if he ever existed. - yet, the BUFOOLogists refer to
him as a " military spokesman "thereby giving their spin on the
story a bit of high-ranking (albeit, highly-questionable)
authority. Mr. Hannivig appears to be the most prolific Spin
Meister of the group, and we'll discuss several of his gems in
the next entry of this journal.

I once informed Mrs. Sutherland that the Carbondale UFO crash
story had become a part of Lackawanna County's folklore - and
that just as Davy Crockett hadn't actually kilt him a barr when
he was only three (and everybody knows it), that knowledge
hasn't compelled anyone to alter the lyrics in ole Davy's song
of praise. I even asked Mary if she knew that Davy had
reportedly riden on a light'n bolt?

Mary replied, "No, I didn't know that Davy Crockett was said to
have riden a light'n bolt. Was this light'n bolt of natural
origin or ET engineered "... smiles. Mary continued, "But
getting back to Carbondale, what happened that day was not
folklore but it may be an important part of our American History
someday. It is up to us now to find out all the facts so that
our future generation can have a better source than what we had
given to us from prevoius generations. Davy Crockett is a good
example of how history rewrites according to how they "wanted"
it instead of what really happened. Let us not repeat this same
mistake. "

After having read Mrs. Sutherland's highly informative and
instructive words, I didn't have the heart to inform her that
the Davy Crockett ballad was written at Disney Studios during
the 1950's (not the 1850's), somehow I feel she may have missed
the point entirely but, I did tell her that Davy's ride on a
light'n bolt may have given rise to the 1960's term "Hot Pants!"

I Anyway, I suppose that Mary's failure to post my complete
essay on the Carbondale incident is an indicator that future
generations are not going to receive an objective, fair and
balanced reporting on the Carbondale incident from BUFO. That's
why I'm going through the effort of writing this journal to pass
along... I just wish I had a Tee-shirt or a UFO keyfob to offer
for sale too but, I don't.

So, stay tuned, and we'll continue our probe of this continuing
BUFOOLogical activity in the next entry of the CARBONDALE UFO
CRASH CHRONICLES... 'til then, " Keep on watch'n the skies,
reading UFO Updates" and NEVER under estimate the wisdumb of
BUFOOLogy!


Matt Graeber





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

                     Hair Of The Alien Interviews Online

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 02:33:15 +1000
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:43:48 -0400
Subject: Hair Of The Alien Interviews Online


For those who may be interested I have quoted below a link to my
blog:

http://theozfiles.blogspot.com

which describes a recent interview on

www.radiooutthere.com

that features Peter Khoury and I talking about the subject
matter of my new book, Hair Of The Alien.

Further on line radio interviews such as 21st Century radio,
Hilly Rose etc can be accessed via links provided on some of my
earlier weblog posts, accessible on my site directly or through
its archive section.

Regards,

Bill Chalker

-----

The Blog:

Available now at:

www.radiooutthere.com

is Barry Eaton's recent excellent interview of Peter Khoury and
myself. Barry Eaton's interview first appeared on his Sydney,
NSW, Australia FM 99.3 radio show on 2NSB North Shore on
Wednesday September 28th 2005. It will be available directly on
the web site and later via its archived shows for a while.

I particularly enjoyed the interview because it gave me the
opportunity to catch up with Barry again. The first time I
encountered him was back in 1991 when he was the MC for Gary
Wiseman's highly successfully UFO conference held at the Sebel
Town House in Sydney. This conference also featured my friends
Jenny Randles from the UK and Jerome Clark from the US.

I remembered that Barry was fielding questions after my lecture,
which was on physical evidence of UFO reality, one of my long
term focuses in this subject. I had given what I thought was a
somewhat conservative presentation anchored in hard data that
argued for a physical reality for UFOs. So I was hoping to get
some intelligent questions on the subject of UFO reality. The
first question fell far short of that and turned out to be a
question that Barry even characterised as a pretty silly
question. He was asking me to confirm whether I was a CIA
operative!

Only a week or two earlier I had been fingered by a Nexus group
video presenter as being an ASIO agent! Fortunately I over heard
that bit of stupidity and wild and wooly thinking and confronted
the fellow on the spot. He was clearly apologetic, but I was
more interested in getting him to try to critically think
through his silly claim.

Back to the Sebel Town house lecture and the question as to
whether I was CIA, I was thinking how to respond to this
silliness. If you try to seriously respond and deny it you are
accused of lying (assuming a conspiratorial believer menality),
if you try the humorous route one is accused of avoiding the
issue, and if one tries the joking approach of agreeing to the
fantasy, you run the risk of such people actually believing you.
Surprisingly it was the then president of the Australian
Skeptics Barry Williams who came to my rescue! Barry and I had
jousted on the subject of UFOs from time to time. Barry was in
the audience and interjected saying , I know Bill and yes he is
CIA! Yes, he works in the food industry and he is in the
Catering Institute of Australia (CIA). Barry new that I worked
in the food industry as a chemist and laboratory/quality
manager. He invented the Catering Institute of Australia
connection. While I did work in the food industry at the time,
the humorous connection was a good healthy way to diffuse a
silly question and the audience seemed to agree.

Later I sought out the fellow who asked the question to give a
more considered reality check for his rampant delusions about
me. I found him manning his stand, promoting a Nazi UFO theory
and other conspiratorial takes. It seemed clear to me that no
matter what I said and no matter what evidence I highlighted to
the contrary I would be viewed in a conspiratorial light!

I welcomed Barry Eaton's good sense and Barry Williams unlikely
defence of me.

I hope you find the interviews with Peter Khoury and myself of
interest, and that it encourages you to consider the subject
more deepily, including getting into the detailed evidence my
book on Peter Khoury's experience presents: Hair Of The Alien -
available via





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

              Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Hebert

From: Amy Hebert <ahebert4.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:30:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:04:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Hebert


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:28:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

<snip>

>>>What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion
>>>of the subject as a way of telling if the experience was real,
>>>imagined, or is an outright lie.

<snip>

>>Obviously, I think there are a whole host of reasons for
>>accepting the Hill story besides the emotion.

<snip>

>>Because there are scam artists and liars certainly doesn't mean
>>that nobody is to be believed.

<snip>

Gentlemen, List:

You have all raised valid points. The level of emotions
expressed in witness testimonies cannot be considered the only
or even a major factor in evaluating the credibility or lack of
in sighting/encounter cases. How much the subject believes his
or her encounter to be true is not a baseline upon which to
begin or end analysis. Unfortunately, in the past, too much
emphasis has been placed on the emotional involvement of the
witnesses while recounting their encounter(s).

After studying hypnosis and even obtaining my certification (in
a one weekend seminar, Ha!), I quickly realized I could not, in
any sense of professionalism, use this tool to evaluate
abduction claims. I threw all the books about abduction by many
of the most famous investigators/researchers out the door and
into storage (a process I highly recommend to anyone interested
in doing genuine scientific studies or investigations of
abduction claims). All the techniques used up to that point
(1997) and even to this day simply do not qualify as valid tools
upon which to base any scientific research or study.

What we have seen thus far in reference to abduction "research"
is nothing more than half-baked attempts to either find the
truth or keep it hidden. The very fact that these wholly
inadequate tools are _still_ the main techniques used in
abduction research is a clear indication little, if any,
progress has or will be made in solving this mystery.

Before anyone can think of researching even one abduction claim,
investigators/researchers must FIRST investigate whether or not
the individual has or has not actually been abducted. Unlike UFO
sightings, abductions are claimed to involve very close
interaction of the witness with objects and/or beings either
physically or through some other yet unknown method. As far as
research and investigations are concerned, a study of abduction
claims must begin with the search for _physical evidence_ in
some form using witness testimony only as a supplement rather
than the foundation of the entire study. (Note: the emphasis of
these studies are for research and investigation purposes not
necessarily required for therapeutic considerations.)

As long as we run around crying, "But they don't leave cocktail
napkins!" we won't even think to look for alien beer bottles
under the bed or in the closet. What I'm saying is, if we are
ever going to find the evidence needed to support or invalidate
abduction claims, we must dig much deeper into the human psyche
as well as the mysteries surrounding us.

Keeping in mind (always!) that, like humans, alleged abductors
may be quite capable of many levels of deception, our studies
must first focus on obtaining evidence that will qualify as
valid for the purpose of scientific research. Using individuals
claiming recurring abduction encounters, we may begin
investigating these claims by implementing double and triple-
 blind studies designed to gather any possiblem physical
evidence left at the initial scene of the encounter, on the body
of the claimed abductee and at any point along the timeline
during which the claimed abduction takes place.

Since power failures are often claimed to occur during abduction
sequences, mechanical devices which do not rely on electric or
battery powered sources are the preferred tools for gathering
potential evidence. These devices can be easily hidden within
conventional objects in order to conceal their existence and
purpose not only from the claimed abductee but also from the
awareness of the "abductors". Keeping the existence of these
devices and tools hidden help rule out possible manipulation of
the information/evidence by the claimed abductee or others with
whom he or she may interact.

Unfortunately, before any such studies can begin, we must first
find researchers and investigators not only _qualified_ to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:44:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:07:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:36:43 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>><snip>

>>C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill
>>probably misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also
>>how it all began on this particular occasion:

>>I was visiting David's college - the teachers' training
>>college there - 20 miles away from us, and we were
>>talking about this experience. With me was the Reverend
>>Edwin Dams, the Reverend David Durie, the acting
>>principal, and his wife. And after we had discussed it for
>>a few minutes he said, well, why not come out and have a
>>look at the sky and see if there's anything there? And I
>>said, oh, they just don't come at beck and call like that, I
>>think that would be rather useless. He said, well, I'm
>>going out at any rate. And he went out and he came
>>rushing back and said, "There is something - I'm sure
>>there is". And so we all went out and sure enough, I
>>identified it as one of these objects.

>>[Same source as above; Rev. Gill answering written
>>questions at the end of the talk.]

>I find this interesting too, again on the positive side. I
>pointed out elsewhere that what they described was a fairly
>accurate portrait of Venus setting, correct as to times and
>elevations and with details of the planet's phase visible in
>binoculars, reddening due to atmospheric scattering near the
>horizon, and autokinetic jiggles of the observer's eye. Now we
>find that this is so, even though they had just been talking
>about Gill's sighting and were (at least some of them) very much
>"in the mood" to see UFOs.

However, on the "negative" side, since Gill also stated that "I
identified it as one of these objects", it casts serious doubts
on Gill's ability to identify Venus.

We can also deduce that the majority of "these objects" must
have looked like celestial bodies.

And concerning this very sighting, we read in the same
transcript:

"And as we watched it it came down and hovered under a
cloud."

"And we saw it come down through the cloud"


"And then it went through a cloud and it came out again and
hovered" . Needless to say that Venus was always over the
clouds. Thus, we must concede that this kind of statements could
involve a high degree of subjectivity.

So, following what has been said in this thread, it appears that
some of the usual arguments against the astronomical hypothesis
might be weaker than supposed:

 - Venus was pointed out by Gill separately in the sky (what
about Mercury?).

- Whereas Venus had set by about 9 PM on June 26, it is a
flatout physical impossibility for Venus to have remained
visible until past 10:30 PM (but don't forget that, by the end,
the sighting was in fact discontinuous...).

- The UFOs were seen descending and ascending "through" the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                         Re: Passive Radar - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:05:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:09:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Sparks


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:45:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>>I love Peter's suggestion of Passive radar. I think every field
>>lab should have one or a similar technology..... Believe me, the
>>reason I have not commented on it is not because I don't share
>>your admiration for such a technology. I think it is even more
>>attainable than you realize.

>See below, but passive radar obviously can be done since
>there are reports of its use with meteor counting and such.
>I don't see any real benefit of passive radar over active
>radar except that you don't have to worry about FCC regulation
>with passive radar. The signal processing for passive radar





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:18:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:23:13 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
>>>is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
>>>use of "mothership."

>>This is pretty feeble stuff.

>>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>>familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
>>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
>>should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
>>naval supply ships, etc.

>"Mothership" came into the discussion only because Klass used it
>to try to discredit Gill as a UFO-obsessive who could only have
>gotten the phrase from Adamski. Got that now? My point was
>simply that this is hardly necessarily true and almost certainly
>untrue. Got that? Klass clearly believed, hilariously, that
>"mothership" did not exist in the vocabulary of English-speaking
>people who had not read Adamski. If Gill used it, it betrayed
>his immersion in, or at least keen awareness of, the most
>extreme saucer beliefs. In fact, Gill had little interest in
>UFOs. Got that? Can we drop this now?

>Significantly, when asked about his use of the term, Gill, who
>is the ultimate authority here, replied thus: "Well, it seemed
>as though it was a 'mother' with her 'children.' Just a sort of
>feeling. The use of the term 'ship' is natural because of the
>superstructure, see; it reminds you of a ship. I could have even
>called it a 'launch.' It gave the impression of a 'mother
>chicken'" (IUR, November 1977, p. 6). Allan Hendry then asked if
>"that was your own choice of words, then, rather than something
>you'd read before." Gill responded, "That's right." Note, by the
>way, the nautical terms in Gill's vocabulary. In short:

>(1) "Mothership" existed in English in a non-UFO context prior
>to Adamski and could have been used by Gill

>(2) Gill himself says that the term seemed a logical one to
>employ in context and did not allude to "something [he'd] read
>before."

>(3) Gill did not say that his observation brought to mind a neat
>phrase he'd encountered in UFO literature or popular saucer
>discourse.

>(4) Gill was bright, articulate, and creative enough to speak in
>his own words and draw his own analogies.


Jerry and List,

In another post I mentioned a July 1947 story of a woman in
southern California using "mothership." It was working from
memory. I pulled my files and found the actual story. The woman
doesn't exactly say "mothership", but she does refer to the
primary object as the "mama disc" and the smaller objects as
"baby discs." Here's the actual story:

---

Santa Barbara News-Press, July 7, 1947

'Mama' Disc With Brood Reported

LANCASTER, July 7, (INS)--At least the "flying saucers" stories
don't get boring.

Today motherhood came to the mysterious discs.

The sheriff's office at Lancaster received a telephone call from
Mrs. Amy Herdliska, in nearby Palmdale, who related:

"Over the mountains south of Palmdale I saw what looked like a
mama disc, with three to five little baby discs flying around
her.

"The little ones would cavort around for a while, then they
would come back and seem to fly into mama disc's pouch.

"Anyway, the mama disc absorbed the baby ones."

---

Compare this with Gill's explanation above for using
"mothership":

"Well, it seemed as though it was a 'mother' with her
'children.'"

Human beings commonly employ metaphors to describe the
unfamiliar in terms of the familiar. And that's what seems to
have happened here in both instances.

For certain the woman in 1947 could not have been influenced by
Adamski contactee or any other flying saucer literature from the
1950s. Of course, pelicanists often believe in time travel
theories, how events from the future explain events from the
past. A famous example was the Air Force claiming that crash
dummies and flight accidents from the 1950s and 1960s explain





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                    Talk Show Host Alex Jones On Ufology

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:09:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:15:55 -0400
Subject: Talk Show Host Alex Jones On Ufology


Last week, Thursday or Friday I believe, US talk show host and
documentary producer Alex Jones fielded a call that led to his
opinions on Ufology.

During the segment a caller asked him about Reptoids.

I found it funny as I was spending the time playing a 'Spider-
Man' video game where he was battling a villain who is
reptillian. Needless to say I stopped the game to hear Jones'
reply.

It wasn't pretty for Ufology. Jones made it quite clear without
documentation he wasn't going to touch the subject. Perhaps the
Reptoid reference pushed the wrong button but he followed up by
referring to Ufology as a religion and not a field of study.

That said to me he either, hadn't studied the subject and
evidence, or he had his own view on things that summoned forth a
negative comment about this field.

I for one have yet to attend a revival meeting at the Ebenezer
UFO Temple of Stanton T. Friedman nor have I born witness to a
baptism performed by Budd Hopkins.

Jones also stated it was a matter of credibility that in the end
the issues he spotlights will bear out his being credible over
the mainstream news.

I can see his point of view and have no malice toward him. To me
he's sort of Rush Limbaugh's 'Evil Twin Clone From The Alternate
Universe' as they both sound alike. Jones is a kick butt
investigator and charismatic figure but putting all of Ufology
into a basket negative comment makes me think perhaps one
should not take all his other stories and documentaries as
gospel - pun not intended.

Jones has espoused numerous conspiracy theories that make some
of the UFO theories look brilliant by comparison. So the issue
of credibility is so-so here.

He has his viewpoints and I respect them, yet one man's
credibility is another man's fodder for fun.

Heck, I could say that Limbaugh and Jones are twin Reptoid
scoundrels playing both sides and are bent on placing giant pea
pods in the broadcast booths of radio hosts around the globe
where we'll all be inundated by right-wing blowhards dominating
the airwaves.

Oh, wait a minute.....

It's too late! They're here! They're after you!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:19:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting


>>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

>Hello, sailors!

>>>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that it became
>>>almost an iconic usage during the late 'fifties and 'sixties
>>among people who knew about flying saucers, from popular books,
>>>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have known nothing
>>>whatever about shipping. I personally remember that it was a
>>>term used by UFO enthusiasts of my childish acquaintance (adult
>>>and not)around 1963 and thereafter with, I am sure, _no_thought_
>>>of its nautical origin. And, no, this doesn't mean that Gill had
>>>to have had this adopted usage in mind. But it is certainly
>>>reasonable (not "bad") to consider the possibility that he might
>>>have done.

>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
>>is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
>>use of "mothership."

>This is pretty feeble stuff.

>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>familiar with a fairly specialized piece of maritime jargon,
>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
>should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
>naval supply ships, etc.

>To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would use
>the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
>wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
>made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
>an element of desperation which is extreme even for you, Jerry.

I'm afraid the desperation is all yours, John. A simple check of
a small sample of North American newspapers underscores how
normal the use of "mothership" was in the popular vocabulary, as
documented in the press. Note that in no case does the writer
feel compelled to define "mothership" as some sort of exotic
term whose definition would stump many readers. I could cite
dozens more citations, but these will do as examples:

"Operations in the mothership would be able to sight for bomb
targets...." (Freeport [Illinois] Journal-Standard, August 28,
1940)

"It was surmised that a mothership approached to within 100
miles of Honolulu...." (Helena [Montana] Independent, December
17, 1941)

"This may have been the entire force, which apparently stole
into Sydney from a mothership lying off southeastern Australia"
(Lethbridge [Alberta] Herald, June 1, 1942).

"Mothership for 70 Warbirds" (caption to photo of aircraft
carrier, Monessen [Pennsylvania] Daily Independent, April 23,
1937)

"Bearing to mothership Beaver, bodies of three men who lost
their lives on U.S. Submarine S-37..." (caption to photo,
Mansfield [Ohio] News, October 22, 1923).

We are supposed to believe that Gill's use of this ordinary word
was somehow remarkable and revelatory. In fact, it was no such
thing. Even remotely.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

              Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:37:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:21:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Randle


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:28:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:54:25 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

<snip>

>>>What this means, simply, is that we cannot rely on the emotion
>>>of the subject as a way of telling if the experience was real,
>>>imagined, or is an outright lie.

>>In general I agree with Kevin in that there are good actors and
>>many others who can be very emotional and lie at the same
>>time.....

<snip>

>>Obviously, I think there are a whole host of reasons for
>>accepting the Hill story besides the emotion.

<snip>

>>Because there are scam artists and liars certainly doesn't mean
>>that nobody is to be believed.

>It would seem sensible to dismiss two of Kevin Randle's
>observations, lying and imagining, when it comes to Betty and
>Barney Hill, Lonnie Zamora, Reverend Gill, Velez, Bueche, and a
>few others who have have sightings or experiences.

I never suggested that any of those people were lying or imaging. I
said, simply, that suggesting the emotion of recovered and recalled
memories does not validate the experience. Nothing more. That
the level of emotion is not indicative of validity.

>Betty Hill, on the very face of it, had an experience. She
>didn't make it up, and she didn't imagine it. Zamora saw
>something, as did Gill.

Yes, Betty Hill had an experience. As did Zamora and Gill. I
never suggested anything else and don't understand how you
could even say this concerning my comments. I was speaking only
of the emotion that is experienced by those undergoing hypnotic
regression and saying that it does not underscore validity.

>And the abductions of Velez and Bueche were real to them; they
>are not liars or prone to imagining things in the psychiatric
>sense.

I have not suggested that either Velez and Bueche are liars or
prone to imagining things. If their obvious emotions under
hypnosis were used to gauge the reliability of their
experiences, I would suggest caution because the level of
emotion does not translate into a proof that an event was real.
And I was suggesting this only about the emotions=E2=80=A6 they
certainly could be real, only that it is an unreliable gauge.

>To keep bringing in those epithets (lying and imagination)
>merely beclouds the issue and the episodes that occurred. The
>impression left is worse than skepticism and debunking.

I would suggest that flying off on a tangent, missing the point
and generally misunderstanding beclouds an issue more than
anything else. And I would suggest that before you engage your
keyboard, you attempt to understand exactly what was said.

One more time for clarity. I was pointing out that emotions,
exhibited under hypnotic regression do not prove anything. That
those inventing tales (in this case referring to men who claimed
Vietnam combat experience who had not experienced the combat,
who had not been in Vietnam, and who had not been in the Army)
showed what would be considered the proper level of emotion in
recounting their untrue tales. I was suggesting that as a proof,
the level of emotion displayed was not reliable and that we, as
researchers and investigators must look in other directions.

So, I hope you now get it. I was referring only to the emotion.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

              Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2 -

From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:07:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:23:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2 -


>From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul com>
>To: ufoupdates.nul net
>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 10:07:37 EDT
>Subject: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>The Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles

>Since some of my reader's may not be aware of the fact that I
>was one of the three pimary UFO field investigators at the
>Carbondale crash site on the 11th of November,1974. It might be
>a good idea for those readers to peruse my essay/report on the
>Carbondale UFO/Lantern Hoax at the

>http://magonia. mysite. wanado-members. co. uk/ms55. htm

>the story is posted in full-length. It's not a quick read so,
>have some milk and cookies at the ready.

This URL has obviously got a bit garbled. Anyway, all issues of
Magonia Supplement are now on a new web site, and the Carbondale
crash report is at:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 23

                    Re: Field Research & Images - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 18:29:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 09:51:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Field Research & Images - Shough


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>I love Peter's suggestion of Passive radar. I think every field
>lab should have one or a similar technology..... Believe me, the
>reason I have not commented on it is not because I don't share
>your admiration for such a technology. I think it is even more
>attainable than you realize.

>A friend (and source for my field lab training), who stayed as
>our house guest last week, has utilized this technology for
>researching anomalies. It is amazingly sensitive and can even
>chart wind turbulence when calibrated to do so.

>This method used low power pulse UHF radio signals with great
>success. I've seen the data, it is impressive.

>The individual who built this is quite a sharp fellow and the
>utility is undeniable. If you want to see what it looks like and
>reference some real coverage specs, try this link:

>http://www.itacomm.net/ph/radar/radar_e.pdf


Hi Rob, list






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                        Re: We Are Alone - Dickenson

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:27:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:00:33 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Dickenson


>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>Subject: We Are Alone

<snip>

>The reality appears to be that aliens want to conceal their
>identities and home planets, and have no desire to conduct a
>discourse with us. Why? What would have to change for a
>discourse to take place?

<snip>

Hello Dave & List,

Your question's been answered by several folk, when talking of
'civilized' aliens:

"A civilization very much more advanced than we will be engaged
in a busy communications traffic with its peers; but not with
us, and not via technologies accessible to us." --Carl Sagan in
Communication With Extraterrestrial Intelligence

and

"Communication is a universal, but the use of radio is a
parochial, when we go out into the Galaxy... a radio signal will
be about as useful as a smoke signal - Communication evolves"
--Profs. Jack Cohen & Ian Stewart in Evolving The Alien

But, talking of possible 'uncivilized' aliens - we may be
living in a reservation, ghetto, or off-limits area. From our
own experience we could expect only exploitative or meddling
officials, careless patronizing tourists, murderous perverts or
policemen - [to be] hanging around our area. Armed with 'magic'
technology

Hope that puts your mind at ease.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: We Are Alone - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:33:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:02:19 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Lehmberg


>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>Subject: We Are Alone

>The reality appears to be that aliens want to conceal their
>identities and home planets, and have no desire to conduct a
>discourse with us. Why? What would have to change for a
>discourse to take place?

I suspect, Mr. Morton, that just a _few_ more individuals such
as yourself, genuinely asking that very question, would go a
long way towards facilitating the discourse to which you refer.
That's my feeling.

The old myth about an alien's request to "take me to your
leader" has not been born out in history, I suspect. It's the
rank and file individual that is the key, I believe, and it is
that, pretty much, keeping *officialdom* at bay. Aliens are the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                        Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:39:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:16:06 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov


>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>Subject: We Are Alone

>Since no one else in the Universe will talk to us Earthlings
>(beyond basic instructions such as, "Come with me"), for all
>practical purposes, we are alone. We are isolated from
>communicating with them. We are in the same room, but they won't
>speak with us.

>I want to know why ET refuses to do it. I want to know why we
>are ignored and effectively alone.

<snip>

One question that's occurred to me as an answer to Dave's
question: When was the last time you wanted to climb a hillside
so you could engage a flock of sheep in philosophical discourse?

And to carry on with that analogy: Even if you spoke to the
sheep, they wouldn't understand that the noises you were making
was speech. And would you be satisfied with braying: 'baa baa',
or would you soon lose interest?

Another hypothesis one could offer is that no one wants to
engage in discourse with a lot of bloody little beasts.

There are many other possible answers.

For myself, I like the parable told me by a Maryknoll brother
years ago:

An expedition from Earth landed on another world. The
conversation got around to religious experience, and the other
world people described the wonderful, life changing visit by God
to their planet some time before.

'And what about you?,' the aliens asked. 'Has God ever visited
your world.'

Much foot scraping and some downcast looks. Finally: 'Yes.'

'And what happened?'

A long silence, then: 'We killed Him.'

Aliens, glancing at their chronometers: 'Ahem, Well, we've got
many previous engagements, so we'll have to bid you good-by.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

             Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:38:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:18:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill - Reynolds


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:37:22 EDT
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:28:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:08:13 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford, Betty & Barney Hill

<snip>

>>To keep bringing in those epithets (lying and imagination)
>>merely beclouds the issue and the episodes that occurred. The
>>impression left is worse than skepticism and debunking.

>I would suggest that flying off on a tangent, missing the point
>and generally misunderstanding beclouds an issue more than
>anything else. And I would suggest that before you engage your
>keyboard, you attempt to understand exactly what was said.

>One more time for clarity. I was pointing out that emotions,
>exhibited under hypnotic regression do not prove anything. That
>those inventing tales (in this case referring to men who claimed
>Vietnam combat experience who had not experienced the combat,
>who had not been in Vietnam, and who had not been in the Army)
>showed what would be considered the proper level of emotion in
>recounting their untrue tales. I was suggesting that as a proof,
>the level of emotion displayed was not reliable and that we, as
>researchers and investigators must look in other directions.

Kevin:

I fully understood your reference, but to add, in context, that
liars and imaginers are rife, makes the casual reader - and
there are many here - remember only that lying and imagination
were invoved in the Hill, Gill, abduction scenarios being
discussed.

At some point persons named in the discussion are linked by the
terms, liar and imaginer.

It seems prudent to separate discussions here and elsewhere
about hoaxers and those who seem to have had a real experience.

Further, emotional response, while tested otherwise in your
example, is an idnicator that something happened to the person
with the emotional response. It may not be exactly what the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                Re: Robert Fulford Betty & Barney Hill - Koch

From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:41:23 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:24:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Robert Fulford Betty & Barney Hill - Koch


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:48:11 EDT
>Subject: Re: Robert Fulford Betty & Barney Hill

>So, my point, and the whole point, was that a display of
>the proper emotions does not 'prove' that the subject is
>telling the truth. The recovered and recalled memories,
>under hypnosis, with the proper emotion, should be just
>one small part of the overall assessment.

Hi Kevin, Hi List,

I am a physician so I have got quite a bit of insight of people
who show emotions after something severe happened to their
lifes.

After more than 26 years of practising I have been involved in
many of these situations where people show emotions - and
lessons were learned on both sides.

By the time, you get a sense of who is a malingerer and who is
not and if you then start to look for the facts - you'll win.

Kevin's point is clear. A question: is a case a case only if all
the required components are present such as: time anomalies,
physical traces, psychological traces and short or long times
effects?

I know that Kevin is an advocate of the 'sleep paralysis
phenomenon'. Everyone of us has experienced this phenomenon more
or less often, it depends on our daily life cycle and
distribution of active and rest periods. The more... the less...
- you all know.

They know also, for sure.

So can you really level all these phenomena only because on
phenomenon is known in this very case and then it is applicable
to all others?

Isn't it a danger for our research to qualify the testimony of a
witness according to the standard of a researcher beforehand?

Have we to re-evaluate our own standards? Who is right?

Stanton Friedman has talked to Betty. We have the records of Dr.
Simon.

At the time these records were taken no one would have
questioned Betty's and Barney's emotions. That we discuss this
subject now and in the way we do - isn't it a sign that we might
have lost our realistic sight of events? Aren't we now biased,
too?

Have you heard Barney Hill screaming on the tapes?

All the best,

Joachim Koch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                  Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:25:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Lehmberg


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 05:13:12 -0700
>Subject: Today Is National Nut Day

>According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
>National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)

>If that is so, why are the forums so quiet?


I've read, just recently, that the mighty oak is a nut that





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                           Re: We Are Alone - Koch

From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 19:00:00 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:28:16 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Koch


>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>Subject: We Are Alone

>Since no one else in the Universe will talk to us Earthlings
>(beyond basic instructions such as, "Come with me"), for all
>practical purposes, we are alone. We are isolated from
>communicating with them. We are in the same room, but they won't
>speak with us.

>I want to know why ET refuses to do it. I want to know why we
>are ignored and effectively alone.

Hello Dave,

We all know that we have been visited. I am witness by myself
because I am following the events in Wiltshire, UK, since more
than 15 years. Numerous sightings took place there where the
infamous crop circle phenomenon originally stems from.

Now that we know that most of the modern circles in England are
man made we can sit back and ask: what else happened that makes
up the fascination of that phenomenon in and around Avebury and
Alton Barnes?

It is the increasing awareness about our own exoticism triggered
by this phenomenon. It is the glimpse of insight that we've been
educated, that someone at the end of the 80's took humankind by
the hand and guided it into cosmic primary school class No. 1 to
learn basic cosmic principles.

One cosmic principle is: we are part of everything, we are
linked to everything. We are a complex concentration of fields.
For example, we do not need to travel physically because we are
able to get information from any place at any time. It depends
only on our training to get in contact with the cosmic matrix -
 the larger field - to call the information which is stored
there.

This and much more is what is shown to us by "the Great Cosmic
Smile" as Ron Russell, one of the serious researchers,  once
called this phenomenon.

We are bound to/we are slaves of our state of technology and
therefore we look mainly for technology.

Any advanced alien culture will surely first have a look at our
stage of mind and spirit to calculate the risks of an encounter.
This was done and so 'they' decided to give us extra lessions in
raising awareness and consciousness and to power up our
spiritual abilities.

So it might be that Planet Earth is really the only one in that
density and dimensional field with us hereupon in the whole
Universe. But that does not mean that the Universe is not
overcrowded  with similar complex concentration of fields - so
called living matter - but on different dimensional levels and
in different densities. It might be that we will never receive a
signal because no one else is using similar devices.

At the moment, we are trapped here because we trust only on
metallic vehicles. The advanced civilisations have left that
stage behind and so they can come here without these craft and
manifest only as energy forms. This is what can be seen in
England. England is different. The modern UFO Phenomenon there
is more adavanced than the one in the USA because an
intelligence manifested there which counts more on the spirit -
 another energy field - than on Bob Lazar's
sports model.

We are more alien than we dare to give in to ourselves. We
are part of the Universe. We are the Universe.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                             Zamora's Eyeglasses

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:30:50 -0400
Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses


Errol Bruce-Knapp mentioned during his radio show, Strange
Days... Indeed, Saturday night [10/22] that persons were
obsessed with Lonnie Zamora�s eyeglasses when he saw the Socorro
craft [1964] that has received much discussion at UFO UpDates
and in UFO media for over 40 years.

I�ve raised the eyeglass issue, not to indicate that Zamora may
have misperceived what he saw but, rather, to point out that
David Rudiak and Jerry Clark claim that the Socorro incident was
investigated (vetted, to use today�s word) fully.

It wasn�t.

No one to this day knows what Zamora�s eyesight was or what
eyeglass prescription he had at the time of his sighting, which
I accept, by the way, as pretty much accurate as he reported it.

In any crime or witness account where someone says they saw
something, it becomes incumbent upon those who claim the
incident was fully investigated to show that this was so.

And eyesight becomes important, maybe essential, in that
investigation.

Again, my point was and is that Rudiak and Clark are wrong when





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Harney

From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:32:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Harney


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:18:25 -0700
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>For certain the woman in 1947 could not have been influenced by
>Adamski contactee or any other flying saucer literature from the
>1950s. Of course, pelicanists often believe in time travel
>theories, how events from the future explain events from the
>past. A famous example was the Air Force claiming that crash >
dummies and flight accidents from the 1950s and 1960s explain
>witness reports of alien bodies during the Roswell incident in
>1947.

I wonder how often this canard about the US Air Force and the
crash dummies is going to be repeated. It is time it was
disposed of.

The point about the experiments with dummies (described in some
detail in Captain McAndrew's report) is that the details tally
quite well with some of the Roswell witness reports.

The assertion that they could not have been the source of
stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
appeared in the news media at the time.

The stories of alien bodies did not emerge until the late 1970s,
leaving plenty of time for ageing witnesses to become somewhat
vague about when the incidents which they remembered occurred.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: Passive Radar - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 21:01:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:34:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:45:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

<snip>

>>I love Peter's suggestion of Passive radar. I think every field
>>lab should have one or a similar technology..... Believe me, the
>>reason I have not commented on it is not because I don't share
>>your admiration for such a technology. I think it is even more
>>attainable than you realize.

>See below, but passive radar obviously can be done since
>there are reports of its use with meteor counting and such.
>I don't see any real benefit of passive radar over active
>radar except that you don't have to worry about FCC regulation
>with passive radar. The signal processing for passive radar
>seems more complex.

Apologies for jumping belatedly into the middle of your debate,
gents. But here are a few points about the merits and demerits
of passive radar as I understand them.

Although the individual receivers would be inferior to active
pulse radars in giving target bearing/elevation information,
doppler speed and range information would be relatively good.
Signal processing is more complex, but it is done, and the
result is said to be at least comparable to active surveillance
coverage, with improved altitude cover on the whole. There are
several possible advantages. You could get some of these
benefits by tying together a lot of electronically independent
active radars; but this is very expensive to do, and you don't
get all the benefits.

The passive radar update rate is effectively continuous. You
don't have the blind time that is caused either by the duty
cycle of your output device or, more important, the deionisation
time in the antenna duplexer. In a monostatic active radar you
tend to have good short range coverage with short pulse lengths
and high pulse repetion frequencies, or good long range coverage
and a close-in blind zone by using long pulse lengths and low
prfs, but not both. There are no minimum range limits with
passive.

Passive radar can cover arbitrarily short-range and and is
effective at doppler-separating moving targets down to low
altitudes, and so could be useful in local flap areas where a
small area of a few miles needs close-range monitoring. More
importantly you don't have a scan rate to worry about, which
ordinarily limits you to sampling a one-or-two degree slice of
the surveillance drum only once every few seconds. With passive
radar your effective sample rate is a software issue and can be
arbitrarily short depending only on processing time for whatever
sophistication you require. I've read that typical rates in
practical systems are around a second or less.

What else? Well with monostatic primary radar using moving-
target-indicators/detectors you can have problems like blind
speeds and tangential fade, which cause targets to drop off the
screen. You don't get this with passive multistatic systems.
Individual receivers might still be subject to doppler ambiguity
(where false speed measurements occur), but an ordinary pulse-
doppler active radar is subject to this anyway and doesn't have
the multiple data-streams (to echo a phrase) by which passive
radar software can eliminate it in the final cross-correlated
track.

A possible benefit for UFO studies (from the point of view of
ETH or secret-technology hypotheses) would be the fact that the
target cannot know it is being illuminated, and because there is
no single dedicated transmitter frequency or
transmitter/receiver location it cannot easily utilise tactical
deception jamming against the system.

A related benefit is that radar absorbent materials and low-
cross-section geometries are of limited use for two reasons:
first, the metric wavelengths being exploited mean that
resonances from large structural features of targets are
contributing to the total echo, and second the system does not
rely on direct backscatter from anntenna to target and back like
an active radar, but is predominantly using forward scatter from
one ground location to another. Forward scatter is a hugely more
efficient process and gives a much higher fraction of the
incident energy at the receiver. Stealth geometries rely largely
on minimising backscatter, often directionally, and suppressing
the echo of chaotic short wavefronts from engine details and so
on. This is why stealth is relatively ineffective against UHF
passive radar.

For those who don't go in for the ETH or similar, passive radar
could be very useful for researching exotic natural phenomena in
the field of radar meteorology. Many people have suggested that
extreme examples of various types of clear air echoes might
explain some of the puzzling radar reports, or related phenomena
just over the margin of current knowledge. Most of these types
of effects rely on forward scatter mechanisms from laminar
temperature/humidity anomalies, and the energy then has to
backscatter from terrain or some other reflector and return via
the same path, meaning that signal sterngths at the receiver are
quite low on surveillance radars. Much research in these areas
has used bistatic set-ups for many years. A full multistatic
array using cross-correlated forward scatter echoes could
produce really valuable data on these phenomena on metre scales
by giving very sensitive dynamic maps of how they form and
propagate second by second over very large areas.

One other area which touches on both the above groups of
hypotheses is that passive radar exploiting metric UHF
wavelengths would be optimum for detecting ionisation phenomena
- often suspected to be either associated with or a primary
cause of UFO events. Typical centimetre surveillance radars
would not see these so well, and especially not by direct
backscatter.

The question of how much classified data has already been
gathered using passive radar is an interesting one. The concept
is older than that of monostatic active radars (antenna
duplexing was an impossible dream in the early days) and there
have been lots of applications in research and air defence ever
sionce the 1940s. Bistatic radar was apparently used in the DEW
line in the mid-50s. Large scale integrated multistatic arrays
for continent-wide US air defence using TV signals and new
processing power were studied in the 1990s and there may have
been some implementation. One other area studied at this time
was exploiting Global Navigation Satellite and GPS satellite
signals, and the then Soviet equivalent standard GLONASS. The
system was tested on various types of aircraft and missiles and
even mobile ground ordnance. I suspect there's quite a variety
of classified passive radar already operational.

I don't know what the GPS wavelength is, but regarding TV and FM
signals, even though the inherent resolution of metre waves is
poor compared to centimetric radar the multiple data sources and
software integration means that passive radar has huge potential
for target identification because it's a fully 3-D system. It
allows the computer to match signal strengths at different
receivers against the second-by-second track information and
produce a map of the target cross-section at a number of
different aspects which can then be compared with a register of
characteristic patterns in the computer's memory.

So it seems there's potentially a lot of information to be
extracted about unidentified targets by a passive radar array.
As far as ufologists are concerned, in practical terms it might
still be pie in the sky - but so's an active radar array, and
amateur passive radar is not entirely new ground. There are
meteor-detection enthusiasts out there already. Of course there
will always be huge technical and operational problems with
both, but with passive arrays at least the hardware is cheap and
off-the-shelf, there are no licensing issues, and most of the
innovation is in the software. The beauty of it is the
accessiblity of those multiple data-streams: Independent
receiver sites don't need expensive independent radar
installations, and near real-time plot extraction from multiple
sites would give the best possible coordinates for zeroing in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:19:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:55:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific. There
>>>is no "very likely" connection between Adamski and Gill in their
>>>use of "mothership."

>>This is pretty feeble stuff.

>>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>>familiar with a fairly specialized piece of maritime jargon,
>>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
>>should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
>>naval supply ships, etc.

>>To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would use
>>the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
>>wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
>>made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
>>an element of desperation which is extreme even for you, Jerry.

>I'm afraid the desperation is all yours, John. A simple check of
>a small sample of North American newspapers underscores how
>normal the use of "mothership" was in the popular vocabulary, as
>documented in the press. Note that in no case does the writer
>feel compelled to define "mothership" as some sort of exotic
>term whose definition would stump many readers. I could cite
>dozens more citations, but these will do as examples:

>"Operations in the mothership would be able to sight for bomb
>targets...." (Freeport [Illinois] Journal-Standard, August 28,
>1940)

>"It was surmised that a mothership approached to within 100
>miles of Honolulu...." (Helena [Montana] Independent, December
>17, 1941)

>"This may have been the entire force, which apparently stole
>into Sydney from a mothership lying off southeastern Australia"
>(Lethbridge [Alberta] Herald, June 1, 1942).

>"Mothership for 70 Warbirds" (caption to photo of aircraft
>carrier, Monessen [Pennsylvania] Daily Independent, April 23,
>1937)

>"Bearing to mothership Beaver, bodies of three men who lost
>their lives on U.S. Submarine S-37..." (caption to photo,
>Mansfield [Ohio] News, October 22, 1923).

>We are supposed to believe that Gill's use of this ordinary word
>was somehow remarkable and revelatory. In fact, it was no such
>thing. Even remotely.

Shame you couldn't find a quotation from after W.W.II, and one
which was not a specific naval reference. I suppose I could ask
you to find a quotation where 'mothership' is used as an analogy
in a non-UFO context, but not even I would send you off on such
a wild-goose chase.

What I find amusing is your desperation to prove that Father
Gill was totally naive about the UFO topic before his sightings.
When Menzel tries to make such a big issue about Gill's use of
the term, the sensible answer would have been to say so what?
Everyone knew about UFO motherships, they were in popular
magazines and newspaper reports since the time of Adamski,
what's the big deal? But any suggestion that there might be wide
understanding of the phrase might give support to those psycho-
social theories which suggest that knowledge about UFOs is
widespread among the general public, and not confined to small
coteries of "UFO-buffs", to use your phrase. And that, of
course,. would never do.

By the way, in Allen Hynek's 'The UFO Experience' (paperback
edition, p.295-297) he reproduces Menzel's analysis of the Gill
case, which says, in part:

"Although a great many 'witnesses' signed the report, I doubt
very much that they knew what they were signing or why. They
would certainly have been mystified as to why their great leader
was seeing something which was invisible to them".

You quote him as saying "great _white_ leader", which certainly





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                    Re: Area 51 Revelations - Scheldroup

From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:48:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:04:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Revelations - Scheldroup


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 6:45 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: Area 51 Revelations


>Source: Greg Ericson's Free Press International Blog

>http://fpiarticle.blogspot.com/2005/10/area-51-revelations.html

>October 14, 2005

>[Many interesting images at site]


>Area 51 Revelations

>The boys at Area 51 have been very busy over the years. The area
>in and around '51' is teeming with roads, facilities, and much
>more.

>It's difficult to know what's actually going on in 51 and Nevada
>but I will try to explain. There are facilities that are blacked
>out all around 51. There all also huge sections of Nevada where
>the terrain is very blurry. It's my guess, the government is
>letting us see what they want us to see and either blacking out
>or blurring what they DON'T want us to see.

>Here is a list of what I've found so far:

>[Continued at site]

>[UFO UpDates thanks http://www.anomalist.com & Richard Hendricks for the lead]


http://www.thewhyfiles.net/area51_3.htm

"4. An aircraft parked on a dirt road, next to what may be an
underground opening or a possible vent."

I collected two more planes, not just the one shown at
thewhyfiles, however, there were to be found a few other strange
artifacts. So here is my fly-around using Google Earth. Good
day, good day, good day. <g>

http://earth.google.com/

Civet Cat Canyon
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168503

Civet Cat Canyon - Subterrain Building ?
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168507

Civet Cat Canyon - Plane 1
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168514

Civet Cat Canyon - Plane 2
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168516

Civet Cat Canyon - Plane 3 Hanger ?
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168518

Civet Cat Canyon - Plane 3
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168519

Civet Cat Canyon - Hanger near Airport
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/download.php?Number=168520






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                      Re: Area 51 Revelations - Hebert

From: Amy Hebert <ahebert4.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:35:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:07:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Revelations - Hebert


>Source: Greg Ericson's Free Press International Blog

>http://fpiarticle.blogspot.com/2005/10/area-51-revelations.html

<snip>

>It's difficult to know what's actually going on in 51 and Nevada
>but I will try to explain. There are facilities that are blacked
>out all around 51. There all also huge sections of Nevada where
>the terrain is very blurry. It's my guess, the government is
>letting us see what they want us to see and either blacking out
>or blurring what they DON'T want us to see.

Na, no need to blur anything. They can hide just about anything
in 'plane sight' and no one would know what they were looking at
even when looking straight at it.

Actually, the blurry stuff is probably where they _want_ you to
focus rather than on the clear stuff. That's the trick - to know
where they _want_ you to look can sometimes be used to figure
out where they _don't_ want you to look.

When it comes to CC&D, a good rule of thumb is to look where no





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

               Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:28:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:11:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2


>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:07:17 +0100
>Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>>From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul com>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul net
>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 10:07:37 EDT
>>Subject: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>>The Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles

>>Since some of my reader's may not be aware of the fact that I
>>was one of the three pimary UFO field investigators at the
>>Carbondale crash site on the 11th of November,1974. It might be
>>a good idea for those readers to peruse my essay/report on the
>>Carbondale UFO/Lantern Hoax at the

>>http://magonia. mysite. wanado-members. co. uk/ms55. htm

>>the story is posted in full-length. It's not a quick read so,
>>have some milk and cookies at the ready.

>This URL has obviously got a bit garbled. Anyway, all issues of
>Magonia Supplement are now on a new web site, and the Carbondale
>crash report is at:

>http://magsupp.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ms55.htm


Hello Matt, John:

Ooof! That's a long read. Quite interesting, and I have only one
quibble:

A casual reader, seeing the words "...a gleaming facet of
contemporary ufological folklore..." could easily get the
impression that most people in ufology still think Carbondale is
truly anomalous.

Granted there may some that consider this "Pennsylvania's
Roswell", or at least pretend to for their own purposes, but I
would wager 50 cents that the overwhelming majority of readers
here consider the case bogus as I do.

Its one of the more treasured items on my list of discredited
sightings for one thing:

http://www.larryhatch.net/DISCRED.html Scroll down to ..

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.


In short, the 'gleaming jewel' is a stinkeroo, and most
sensible, well informed ufologists know that. The article might
seem to imply otherwise; that we are drooling idiots who buy
into Carbondale even after it has been thoroughly and expertly





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Balloons And Fleets Of UFOs

From: Amy Hebert <ahebert4.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 01:37:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:14:44 -0400
Subject: Balloons And Fleets Of UFOs


On UFO Updates, 6-7-05, Santiago Yturria stated, in reply to one
of my posts:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/jun/m07-020.shtml

"We know that it's absolutely required to see these birds or
balloons in movement to make comparisons with those videos from
Mexico and by consequence to establish their diferences or their
similarities.

A proper study and analysis require actual footage of these
birds-balloons and you know it. Therefore you failed to present
links to actual videos so your claims result irrelevant and
inmaterial."

As per Santiago's request, in order to provide actual video
footage of balloons in movement for comparisons, I began
studying balloon flight patterns video taping each experiment. I
began these experiments by studying individual balloon behaviors
while in flight then video taped groups of balloons I had
launched into the sky. Prior to these studies, I had only video
taped individual balloons in the sky because it never occurred
to me that observers on the ground would not have the abilities
to distinguish between "fleets" of balloons and "fleets" of
UFO's. I tried to find "bird-balloons" to launch and video tape
but, alas, the local stores do not stock them.

After reviewing the VHS tape sent to me by Nick Balaskas who
received the tape from Santiago (I asked for a copy but Santiago
refused to send one), I still felt my original contentions were
valid and that many of the objects in the alleged "Fleets of
UFO's Over Mexico" videos were either birds or balloons. Some of
the videos were so blurry and distorted it may be impossible to
ever clearly discern what the objects were/are.

While some of the "fleet" videos may well be images of flocks of
birds in the sky, my experiments, thus far, have focused
primarily on balloon flight patterns and behaviors. This study
is on-going and I encourage anyone interested to conduct their
own studies in order to learn more about these IFO's.

By way of sharing the results of my experiments, I will
specifically address some of the previous claims made by
Santiago Yturria in reference to balloons and their flight
behaviors as compared to the flight patterns and various
characteristics of alleged "Fleets Of UFO's Over Mexico".

On UFO Updates, 4-24-05, SantiagoYturria wrote:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/apr/m26-002.shtml

"The sighting took place in broad day light and began with a
formation of seven objects, white luminous and sphere-shaped.
Robles Gil made a good zoom shot into one of the objects and
described it as an intense luminous light, like plasma energy.

At this moment one of the objects broke formation and began
performing maneuvers around the others as if it was
intelligently controlled. Mr. Robles Gil zoomed into this object
and flight path around the other objects was clear and defined.
Certainly intriguing images."

Although neither Santiago Yturria nor John Velez have yet to
confirm or deny the origin of the clips posted at the URLs
listed below as belonging to Mr. Arturo Robles Gil or who
actually made these video clips, please refer to clips #1, #2,
#3, #4, #5, and especially clip #6 at:

http://www.virtuallystrange.com/aic/mexovni2.html

and

http://www.virtuallystrange.com/aic/mexovni3.html


For a comparison study, please refer to Experiment 1, 7-4-05,
Clips #4 and #5 in which I video taped one balloon, flying in a
triangular formation with two other balloons, suddenly
"maneuvering" downward toward another balloon in the formation,
then "maneuvered" around (circled) the balloon and "maneuvered"
back up into the sky. And for you viewing pleasure, please refer
to Experiment 7, 7-22-05, Clips #2, #4, #5 and #6 in which one
could easily interpret these various balloon flight patterns as
"maneuvers".

Experiments and video clips (smaller clips for faster download)
are located at:

http://ufomatrix.com --> Reality Check --> Reality Checks

Or:

http://uforealitycheck.com -->Reality Checks

Or direct html (no flash) at:

http://ufomatrix.com/balloons/balloons.htm


On 4-27-05, Santiago Yturria stated:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/apr/m28-
001.shtml,

"Then we made the study comparing both videos, the balloons and
the UFO fleet and the results were more than explicit. The
balloons formation was so disorganized and every balloon acting
in an independent random behavior while the announced UFO fleet
preserved all the time the perfect formation, every object kept
the same exact distance from the other and all the formation was
moving in perfect synch as a whole body. You and I know very
well that this manoeuvers to be performed by a bunch of balloons
is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSIBLE!! That will just go against the pyshic
laws even if they are tied togheter."

For comparisons, again refer to experiments #4, #6 and #7 at:

http://ufomatrix.com/balloons/balloons.htm

In these experiments, groups of balloons were observed and video
taped moving in what appear to be formations, as whole bodies
and often at relatively equal distances from each other
including balloons tied together.

Balloons can and do float in formations and move together as a
"whole body" or group. Even the alleged "UFO fleets" do not move
in perfect synch and various objects can be observed shifting
around in much the same manner as do the balloons in my videos.
Depending upon the speed, directions and temperatures of the
upper air currents, groups of balloons perform very similar
"maneuvers" to those presented in the "UFO fleet" videos. Of
course, the balloons do not move _exactly_ as the objects in the
"fleet" videos but neither do the alleged "UFO's" in all the
other "fleet" videos.

Also note the distinct "warble" or "falling leaf" behavior
displayed by all the balloons in my experiments as compared to
very similar behaviors exhibited by the alleged UFO's presented
in Clips #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6 at:

http://www.virtuallystrange.com/aic/mexovni2.html

and

http://www.virtuallystrange.com/aic/mexovni3.html


As balloons rise into the air, with and without string attached
to their bases or openings, they spin and wobble which causes
them to float back and forth in a fashion often described as a
"falling leaf" motion. Careful note should be made of this
distinct characteristic of balloons as it a reference tool that
can be used in future comparison studies and may help observers
more accurately distinguish between balloons in the sky and
objects that appear to be UFO's.

Most of the balloons in my experiments appear black although
their actual colors were silver, white, red, blue or mixed
colors. This is due to the fact the only time I had to conduct
these experiments were in the evenings after work and the sun
was setting causing the balloons to appear in shadow. If I had
launched them in the morning hours, they would have appeared as
"luminous objects" in the sky with the sun shining more directly
on them.

Not included in this presentation are the numerous experiments
that went awry when balloons "died" before I could launch them,
got caught in tree tops or I was attacked by insects while
trying to video tape (have footage of a giant ant traversing the
camera lens). In addition, please note the temperatures during
which these experiments were conducted. It was summer and
extremely hot. To anyone wishing to replicate these experiments,
I highly recommend doing so in the fall, winter or spring, wear
long pants, socks and insect repellent, hire assistants or bribe
your kids to help and plan to launch your balloons within 6
hours after they have been inflated. Oh, and avoid driving
trucks with manual transmissions
while12 helium balloons are floating around in the cab.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:31:54 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:16:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:44:07 +0200
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:36:43 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>><snip>

>>>C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill
>>>probably misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also
>>>how it all began on this particular occasion:

<snip>

>>I find this interesting too, again on the positive side. I
>>pointed out elsewhere that what they described was a fairly
>>accurate portrait of Venus setting, correct as to times and
>>elevations and with details of the planet's phase visible in
>>binoculars, reddening due to atmospheric scattering near the
>>horizon, and autokinetic jiggles of the observer's eye. Now we
>>find that this is so, even though they had just been talking
>>about Gill's sighting and were (at least some of them) very much
>>"in the mood" to see UFOs.

>However, on the "negative" side, since Gill also stated that "I
>identified it as one of these objects", it casts serious doubts
>on Gill's ability to identify Venus.

Well, as I said, I'd agree that it reflects on Gill's and
others' predisposition _as_of_July_6_ to _interpret_ Venus as
"one of these objects". In terms of the descriptions, though,
neither Durie nor Gill report anything inconsistent with a
binocular observation of Venus setting - a small bright disc on
the horizon "coming down" slowly through broken cloud. There is
really nothing there that suggests a propensity to extreme
fantasy.

As Brad Sparks pointed out, seeing Venus so close to setting,
evidently affected by atmospheric effects on the horizon
(reddened, and also possibly distorted - Gill mentions that the
"disc" seen through binoculars, presumably Venus' 0.6 gibbous
phase oriented parallel to the horizon, appeared to tilt towards
the north then later towards the south) is different from
casually spotting Venus by naked eye as Gill said he did on June
26, when it was about 20 degrees up, with the UFO "higher up,
almost overhead". Venus evidently did present a striking sight
at setting on Jul 6. But we can argue that if Gill had not had
the experiences at Boianai on June 26-28 then his avowed
previous scepticism would nevertheless have asserted itself on
July 6, and he may have happily agreed with the Rev. Dams that
they were looking at Venus.

So I find it difficult to use this event to calibrate Gill's
previous experience. There are both positive and negative
implications, depending on how we look at it, but neither is
very strong because we can't separate out the influence of the
earlier event.

>We can also deduce that the majority of "these objects" must
>have looked like celestial bodies.

>And concerning this very sighting, we read in the same
>transcript:

>"And as we watched it it came down and hovered under a
>cloud."

>"And we saw it come down through the cloud"

>"And then it went through a cloud and it came out again and
>hovered" . Needless to say that Venus was always over the
>clouds. Thus, we must concede that this kind of statements
could
>involve a high degree of subjectivity.

Yes this is possible.

>So, following what has been said in this thread, it appears that
>some of the usual arguments against the astronomical hypothesis
>might be weaker than supposed:

> - Venus was pointed out by Gill separately in the sky (what
>about Mercury?).

This is possible too. Mercury was mag 0.4 at a little over 8
degrees elevation and 295 degs azimuth, probably clear of the
hills for 20 or 25 minutes after 1845. It was brighter than most
nearby stars, though no brighter than nearby Procyon (also mag
0.4) only 14 degrees to the north and at the same elevation. But
admittedly Mercury would have appeared directly below Venus.

>- Whereas Venus had set by about 9 PM on June 26, it is a
>flatout physical impossibility for Venus to have remained
>visible until past 10:30 PM (but don't forget that, by the end,
>the sighting was in fact discontinuous...).

It was. Gill's log seems to show that the "mother" disappeared
at 2130, not 2230. However this is still about 40 minutes too
late to have been Venus. As I suggested it is possible that
Venus was lost in thick cloud to the west and set without them
noticing, whilst they transferred their attention  some slightly
higher star - maybe Regulus, the only star brighter than about
mag +3 anywhere near the right area. Regulus would have set
about the time that the "mother" finally disappeared. But
Regulus is still a very dim star, bearing no comparison to
Venus. Venus at the time was more than 100 times as bright!
Also, although Gill's log only indicates the mother disappearing
"across sea to Giwa - white, red, blue, gone" which is a bit
ambiguous and could suggest strong scintillation of a star on
the point of setting, his narrative accounts appear to describe
a large angular motion "across the bay" for a distance estimated
at 30 miles.

>- The UFOs were seen descending and ascending "through" the >
clouds according to Gill (it seems that Venus "did" the same on
>July 6).

Strictly, on July 6 Venus is described by Gill as descending
through clouds, evidently in the sense of passing between bands
of cloud near the horizon, _not_ ascending. Durie is the one who
describes the sudden "circular" movement, presumably an
autokinetic illusion, which must have had some apparent upward
motion; but this is not the same as seeing Venus "ascending and
descending through the clouds", and is not "according to Gill".

But I concede that there's an awful lot of ambiguity in all
this, and I'm not happy either with his statement in Victoria
that all of the secondary, more star-like objects also had
little legs, just like the "mother". However when it comes down
to it the question is less about Venus than about whether or not
we think Gill was outrageously deluded on June 26-27 and had
what we must call a vivid hallucination, presumably stimulated
by Venus, of an enormous structure with men on top. The _only_
evidence we can adduce that he may have been subject to such
things is the Boianai affair itself, and this is merely
circular. Such ancillary evidence as there is suggests that a)
other unknowns were observed in the immediate area before and
after this date in circumstances that fairly decisively preclude
Venus, and b) many other observers at Boianai did report to Gill
and to one another that they had seen the same thing he
reported.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                         Re: Passive Radar - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:02:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:17:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:45:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:39:59 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:59:40 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

>See below, but passive radar obviously can be done since
>there are reports of its use with meteor counting and such.
>I don't see any real benefit of passive radar over active
>radar except that you don't have to worry about FCC regulation
>with passive radar. The signal processing for passive radar
>seems more complex.

Dear all






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                  The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:22:46 -0400
Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

<snip>

>>>>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that
>>>>it became almost an iconic usage during the
>>>>late 'fifties and 'sixties among people who knew
>>>>about flying saucers, from popular books,
>>>>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have
>>>>known nothing whatever about shipping.

<snip>

>I'm afraid the desperation is all yours, John. A
>simple check of a small sample of North American
>newspapers underscores how normal the use
>of mothership was in the popular vocabulary, as
>documented in the press.

<snip>

Hi Jerry, List,

While the word mothership itself is hundreds of years old in the
sense of motherness (1) its naval use was coined by Rear Admiral
Albert S. Barker (1845-1916) when he was commander of the
Asiatic Squadron.

Barker invented the term for warships when gunships of the same
squadron were assigned to their care and supervision (2).

However, the term mothership itself was still not entirely
familiar until after the World Wars. Until then it was usually
written in inverted commas and as two words. An article in the
Coshocton (Ohio) Daily Times of October 14th, 1909, for example,
feels the need to explain what the expression meant to its
readers:

-----

Cradling The Submarines

Mother Ship Puts Little Boats to Bed at Her Side.

Putting submarine boats to bed by their mother ship interested
spectators in New York the otber day. The vessel, called the
parent of tbe underwater boats, was the Castine. Each submarine
flotilla is now accompanied wherever it goes by a parent ship
<snip>

-----

I'd rather not get into a discussion about whether Gill would
have drawn the word from naval usage or from UFO writings, but I
do have my own opinion about that too.

Regards,

Chris


(1) For example:

We can hardly suppose, as some evil-minded person has suggested
to us, that this address is put forth as a specimen of "native
manufactures", under the nursing mothership of the
Home-League... (The United States Democratic Review, Volume 10,
Issue 46, April 1842.)

 -ship, which indicates a particular condition
or state, is a suffix from Old English (originally
 -scipe).

(2) Mother Ships of the Navy, The Evening Democrat (Warren,
Pennsylvania), November 23rd 1900.


2003-2004 Archives and links

http://anomalies.bravepages.com/main.htm

2004-present Archives at the Yahoo Group Website:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magonia_exchange/

Other pages of interest:

http://caubeck.tripod.com/lang/

http://caubeck.tripod.com/the_sport_of_flying_saucers/index.html

http://caubeck.tripod.com/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                       Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Hale

From: Roy Hale <roy.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:48:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:25:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Hale

>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>I've raised the eyeglass issue, not to indicate that Zamora may
>have misperceived what he saw but, rather, to point out that
>David Rudiak and Jerry Clark claim that the Socorro incident was
>investigated (vetted, to use today's word) fully.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:27:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>Errol Bruce-Knapp mentioned during his radio show, Strange
>Days... Indeed, Saturday night [10/22] that persons were
>obsessed with Lonnie Zamora's eyeglasses when he saw the Socorro
>craft [1964] that has received much discussion at UFO UpDates
>and in UFO media for over 40 years.

>I've raised the eyeglass issue, not to indicate that Zamora may
>have misperceived what he saw but, rather, to point out that
>David Rudiak and Jerry Clark claim that the Socorro incident was
>investigated (vetted, to use today's word) fully.

>It wasn't.

>No one to this day knows what Zamora's eyesight was or what
>eyeglass prescription he had at the time of his sighting, which
>I accept, by the way, as pretty much accurate as he reported it.

>In any crime or witness account where someone says they saw
>something, it becomes incumbent upon those who claim the
>incident was fully investigated to show that this was so.

>And eyesight becomes important, maybe essential, in that
>investigation.

>Again, my point was and is that Rudiak and Clark are wrong when
>they say that the Socorro episode was investigated through and
>through. It wasn't.

What kind of service footwear was Officer Zamora wearing at the
time of the incident? Was it a sturdy boot allowing officer
Zamora steadier footing or was it a dress shoe unsuited to harsh
terrain and therefore contributory to a very real potentiality
for stumbling at a critical observational time...

We don't know? No one asked? It's not in the record?

'Tis true. The Socorro 'episode' was _not_ investigated "through
and through."

It "wasn't".

A red herring by any other name and all of that.

There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
enough denialist.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 24

                        Re: Gill Sighting - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:14:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:29:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:19:55 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>You quote him as saying "great _white_ leader", which certainly
>sounds more racist. Did Hynek leave out the "white" from the
>original report, or did someone add it?

What a wonderful exhibition of zero-G dancing, Mr. Rimmer!
Were is not so desultory and obfuscating it would be an absolute
_pleasure_ to behold! [Golf clapping].






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:39:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:24:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Reynolds


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:26:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>What kind of service footwear was Officer Zamora wearing at
>the time of the incident? Was it a sturdy boot allowing
>officer Zamora steadier footing or was it a dress shoe
>unsuited to harsh terrain and therefore contributory to a
>very real potentiality for stumbling at a critical
>observational time...

>We don't know? No one asked? It's not in the record?

>'Tis true. The Socorro 'episode' was _not_ investigated
>"through and through."

>It "wasn't".

>A red herring by any other name and all of that.

>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>enough denialist.


Ah, the smell of sarcasm always draws me out Alfred. Are you
sure you've got no English blood in you?

If we're getting down to the nitty gritty, then Lonnie's
underpants might as well get thrown in to the mix as well for if
he is of normal flesh and blood, then a sighting of a UFO with
little occupants would surely have made him fill them. Now, if
he kept them and they are still around, then I for one would be
convinced that what he saw was not of this earth.

But failing that, well, Rich arguably may be on the wrong
approach with this but it still comes down to the following; Did
Mr. Z, that day, see a craft and beings that were not of a
terrestrial nature or did he see something a bit more prosaic?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: The Term Mothership - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:18:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:29:09 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Lehmberg


>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>I'd rather not get into a discussion about whether Gill would
>have drawn the word from naval usage or from UFO writings, but I
>do have my own opinion about that too.

>Regards,

>Chris

>(1) For example:

>We can hardly suppose, as some evil-minded person has suggested
>to us, that this address is put forth as a specimen of "native
>manufactures", under the nursing mothership of the
>Home-League... (The United States Democratic Review, Volume 10,
>Issue 46, April 1842.)

>-ship, which indicates a particular condition
>or state, is a suffix from Old English (originally
>-scipe).

>(2) Mother Ships of the Navy, The Evening Democrat (Warren,
>Pennsylvania), November 23rd 1900.

>2003-2004 Archives and links

>http://anomalies.bravepages.com/main.htm

>2004-present Archives at the Yahoo Group Website:

>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magonia_exchange/

<snip>

UFO UpDates - an experience, an adventure, _and_ an education.
With a hat tip to Senor Aubeck if I may be so bold.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                     Re: What Makes Them Work? - Beasley

From: Craig Beasley <fallingleaf.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:13:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:32:23 -0400
Subject: Re: What Makes Them Work? - Beasley


>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:17:08 -0400
>Subject: What Makes Them Work? [was: Serious Question]

>>From: Craig Beasley <fallingleaf.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:01:12 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Serious Question

><snip>

>>Being an engineer, the restriction is obvious. If UFOs are
>>craft of some sort, technological and physical, what makes them
>>work? I devote myself to that. With the limited funds I have, I
>>have some plans that have an unpleasantly long timeline.

>Craig -

>We had a discussion on this List a couple of years ago about the
>Townsend Brown experiments in which he demonstrated net thrust
>using high voltage capacitors. I'm sorry I don't remember/can't
>find details now, but it turns out there are _two_ effects
>involved:

>One is a bit of thrust where the capacitor plates are exposed to
>the ambient air, and some of the air molecules become ions. The
>electric field actually causes a small flow of air near the
>plates, forming a very small thrust electrostatic "rocket
>engine". This is apparently the principle behind the model
>"UFOs" which are sold on the web and look like the flying
>triangles, and which depend on lightweight tether wires to
>supply the charge to them.

>The other, much more promising for those who would like to
>construct a home made "UFO" were some experiments in which
>capacitors enclosed within solid dielectric were found to
>produce net thrust, again small, but seemingly these did _not_
>depend on electrostatic rocketry.

>I did see some web documentation on the solid dielectric
>enclosed capacitor thrusters from what I recall was a serious
>source.

>Presumably, if a dielectric could be found which is light enough
>(like some of the amazingly lightweight ceramics?) and if
>multiple plates could be stacked up like pancakes, and if
>circular plates could be segmented and individually charged to
>provide attitude control, maybe a "UFO" could be built on the
>second principle which could indeed operate outside the
>atmosphere.

>Clearly, UFO reports indicate far more sophisticated and
>powerful technology is in use in the actual craft, but at the
>same time, a "home brew" machine using electrostatic technology
>would (or should) really shake the ground under the "noisy
>negativists."

Thanks, Eleanor! The leads will be most helpful.

I've looked into T. Townsend Brown before, but it's been some
time. His life story seems to be along the line of Tesla's: The
genius outside the box. Brown seemed a little more at ease at
getting in and out of the box, though. I'll look up more of his
work, and I'm glad you reminded me.

The stack of plates idea is intriguing, as well. It would be
interesting to see how easy one could build a test rig for that.

Someday, I'll play with a lifter.

Thanks again!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:55:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:34:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>Errol Bruce-Knapp mentioned during his radio show, Strange
>Days... Indeed, Saturday night [10/22] that persons were
>obsessed with Lonnie Zamora's eyeglasses when he saw the Socorro
>craft [1964] that has received much discussion at UFO UpDates
>and in UFO media for over 40 years.

>I've raised the eyeglass issue, not to indicate that Zamora may
>have misperceived what he saw but, rather, to point out that
>David Rudiak and Jerry Clark claim that the Socorro incident was
>investigated (vetted, to use today's word) fully.

>It wasn't.

>No one to this day knows what Zamora's eyesight was or what
>eyeglass prescription he had at the time of his sighting, which
>I accept, by the way, as pretty much accurate as he reported it.

>In any crime or witness account where someone says they saw
>something, it becomes incumbent upon those who claim the
>incident was fully investigated to show that this was so.

>And eyesight becomes important, maybe essential, in that
>investigation.

>Again, my point was and is that Rudiak and Clark are wrong when
>they say that the Socorro episode was investigated through and
>through. It wasn't.

Boy, what a bunch of double-talk. Rich Reynolds just won't let
this one go.

As I've pointed out over and over, a great deal can be deduced
about Zamora's eyesight simply knowing that he was a young man
and a traffic cop. He was very unlikely to have a serious
pathology at his age (31) that would have significantly affected
his vision, such as cataracts, and even if he had, the
_mandatory_ police vision requirements would almost certainly
have picked it up.

The mandatory best corrected acuity for policeman is usually
20/20 or better, and best uncorrected (without glasses) acuity
is 20/100 or _better_, which equates to a very modest
prescription. (This is also confirmed by the photo of Zamora
wearing his glasses, where there is almost no minification or
magnification of his eyes when viewed through the glasses, as
would be true if the prescription was low.) Thus the fact that
he was a cop automatically filters out the 1 or 2% of the
population his age whose best corrected vision would have been
less than 20/20, and further filters out the roughtly 30% of the
population his age whose uncorrected acuity would be less than
20/100.

Further, as has been pointed out about a million times now,
Zamora was wearing his glasses during all critical parts of the
sighting, and we further know, to very high probability, his
vision was at least 20/20 at those times. For the brief period
when he lost his glasses, his eyesight was at least 20/100 (or
better). This is when the craft was very close and taking off
with a roar, then departing horizontally and silently at high
speed. The most important detail here was the switch from a very
loud to a totally silent propulsive mode, which had nothing to
do with his eyesight. (Oh, I forget - Zamora's hearing wasn't
properly vetted either, was it?)

Perhaps Rich Reynolds will be specific for once, instead of
waving his hands, and tell us what signficant part of the
sighting report was affected by Zamora's eyesight. And if he
can't do that (which he can't), then what is the point of
continually raising the issue, other than to be a nattering
gadfly?

And since he is still claiming that this was a secret government
craft of some sort, perhaps he can further enlighten us with
specifics of this craft. I think we would all be very interested
to know what craft the government had then, or now, that was a
VTOL craft, that could also fly horizontally at very high speed,
with no wings or stabilizers, and could also do this trick
silently.

Yes, that completely silent propulsion system is a real puzzler.
(That's why Rich never mentions this little detail when ranting





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:41:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>And eyesight becomes important, maybe essential, in that
>investigation.

>Again, my point was and is that Rudiak and Clark are wrong when
>they say that the Socorro episode was investigated through and
>through. It wasn�t.


Dave Rudiak, Brad Sparks, you and I were arguing this case
predominantly, with Greg Boone, Dick Hall and even Ray Stanford
thrown in. Jerry had a couple of comments way back when it was
developing out of the Global UFO coverup. Jerry has been very
verbal in the Father Gill case which grew out of the Socorro
case which a look at at the archives will verify.

Regardless of what you are being fed, off-line Rich, the
eyeglass issue has been vetted. It might have been important had
it had any substance. But it didn't. You know it and I know it.
Don't let yourself be led on.

The Socorro case got more investigation time than most-a book by
Ray Stanford, A NICAP investigation by Dick Hall and even a
look-over by Hynek. No case is ever over but to say that you're
arguement was that the case wasn't thoroughly investigated is
playing fast and loose with the facts. You first targetted the
non-starting balloon issue then you fixated on Zamora's eyesight
which using all common sense - never mind facts - is another
non-starter.

For my part I've wasted enough of my time on it. Arguing for the
sake of arguing so _you_U can justify an entrenched position from
which you find it difficult to climb out of, rather than the
merits of the case _is_ in my estimation a waste of one's time.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                          Re: We Are Alone - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:01:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:42:58 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Ledger


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:27:05 +0100
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>>Subject: We Are Alone

><snip>

>>The reality appears to be that aliens want to conceal their
>>identities and home planets, and have no desire to conduct a
>>discourse with us. Why? What would have to change for a
>>discourse to take place?

><snip>

>Your question's been answered by several folk, when talking of
>'civilized' aliens:

<snip>

Communication among highly advanced, space traveling
civilizations would have to be as exotic as the means of travel
itself, otherwise it would of little use. This planet could only
hope to communicate [at this point receive-only] with
intelligence species at about the same levels of emergence and
radio technology as ourselves and close enough for us to receive
VHF and UHF radio propagation, microwave transmission and light
driven [laser] technology.

It could be that we {Earth] are being unintentionally bombarded
with spurious intelligent, data-bearing technology that we have
no way of picking up, much less understanding what it is saying.

Imagine our present day communications technology transplanted
to the year 1880 with all of that data washing through Earth's
atmosphere and all you had to receive with was a telegraph key
driven by electromagnetic impulses coming down a wire. It could
be that that's all we have to work with now, the 2005 version of
the telegraph key, then add on a few thousand or millions of
years of technology advancement to that.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:05:10 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:44:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:05:25 EDT
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:45:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>Passive radar obviously can be done since
>>there are reports of its use with meteor counting and such.
>>I don't see any real benefit of passive radar over active
>>radar except that you don't have to worry about FCC regulation
>>with passive radar. The signal processing for passive radar
>>seems more complex.

>There are hundreds of broadcast transmitters filling up almost
>the entire volume of space received by Passive Radar. Whereas a
>single active radar must both transmit and receive along a line
>of sight limited by the horizon.

A passive radar _receiver_  must be line of sight of the
reflecting object otherwise you cannot rely on the reflected
signal  (which must reflect off the ionosphere at best to get to
the passive radar receiver).





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                        Re: Passive Radar - Davenport

From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:08:40 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:48:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Davenport


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:19:44 +0100
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:43:31 EDT
>>Subject: Passive Radar [was: Field Research & Images]

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:14:56 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Subject: Re: Field Research & Images

><snip>

>>>It _was_ the latest sensation a while ago.

><snip>

>>Again I stand by my previous statement: "Whenever proposals for
>>a "new approach" to UFO research are made on UpDates basically
>>no one (except me I think) mentions Passive Radar."

>Just for the record, I think I did respond positively on List
>(and certainly off-List) to Peter Davenport when I first saw the
>passive radar idea floated here some time ago. I still think
>it's a good idea, but maybe people need convincing that it could
>work.

>Perhaps a concept-demonstrator study could be piggy-backed on an
>existing research set up, or amateur meteor trackers already
>using it could be approached about doing some systematic trials?
>Making use of other people's noise could be cheap. But maybe
>these avenues have already been explored.


I am delighted by the recent posts regarding "passive" radar.
Some of the remarks have been "on mark," I believe, but a few of
the statements that have been made deserve comment.

First of all, there are several "passive" radar systems
operating successfully, so I have not proposed creating a new
technology. Two notable examples of systems that work are 1) the
system built by Prof. John Sahr, Ph.D. (EE), at the University
of Washington in Seattle, and 2) the system built by Prof. Peter
Brown, Ph.D. (ASTRON) at the University of Western Ontario. The
former was designed to study changes (~1 meter) in the e-region
of the Earth's atmosphere; the latter, ostensibly, to count
and/or track meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere.

Both systems have been in existence for many years, underscoring
the fact that "passive" radar is not "pie in the sky." It is a
down-to-earth technology, which has only to be adapted and
"tweaked," in order for it to apply to detecting other unknowns,
i.e. UFO's, in the atmosphere and near-Earth environment.

One comment that the system would require prodigious computer
power is correct. Even a small, mono-static (i.e. single
receiver station) requires the ability to perform approximately
10 giga-flops per second for real-time analysis of a target. A
larger, multi-static system, with two or more receivers, whose
data are collected, analyzed, and compared on a real-time basis,
requires on the order of 100 giga-flop capability.

The ability to process all of the data has been the principal
barrier, over recent decades, to constructing such a system,
even though intelligence and defense personnel recognized the
advantages of "passive" radar over the more traditional "active"
radar that has been in use since the 1940's. Few individuals, or
even institutions, had that kind of number-crunching capability.
However, today, such computer capability is on the near horizon,
and is close to being available to anyone with the means to
purchase it.

Other comments on the list have addressed the legitimate concern
over target correlation, i.e. which received signal at each
receiver applies to which target. When an FM transmitter
"paints" either the atmosphere, or near-Earth environment,
potentially hundreds, or even thousands, of objects will reflect
the signal back down to the receivers at ground level.
Processing all of those reflected signals, and having all the
receiver stations "agree" as to which signal arrived from which
target, probably is the biggest challenge to a "passive" system.

However, this task is simplified dramatically by our ability
today to measure time quite precisely, principally through the
use of the Global Positioning System time source, accurate to
about one part in a billion. If a receiver is synchronized to
the GPS clock, it can determine quite accurately when a given
reflected signal arrives at its antenna. With this data in hand,
the different receivers can then compare respective arrival
times, and then start to perform triangulation to targets on the
basis of time-of-arrival, as opposed to multiple, three-
dimensional calculation of Doppler shift for each target. This
ability dramatically simplifies the task of target correlation.

I do _not_ wish to say that the task of target correlation is
easy! I only wish to suggest that recent technological
developments have provided us with some powerful tools, which,
for the first time in history, provide us with the ability to
get our arms around this problem.

The other major task involves target "discrimination," which
probably is a more easily solved than correlation.
Discrimination involves separating those targets of known
origin, e.g. aircraft, birds, orbiting space debris, atmospheric
ionization, etc., from targets of unknown origin.

However, if the system collects and analyzes multiple samples
per second, targets can be "screened" for characteristics which
would allow "knowns" to be separated from "unknowns." For
example, one would not expect a satellite, migratory bird, or an
aircraft to be traveling at several kilometers per second at 80
kilometers above the surface of the Earth. Moreover, one would
not expect the system to receive an equally strong signal from a
meteor both before, and after, it entered the Earth's
atmosphere.

Hence, a "passive" radar system could be designed to "flag," and
record, such events. Obviously, and all we have to do is
"capture" one such return, in order to make the world sit up and
take notice...

All of the above issues I have addressed in the paper I wrote
for the 2004 MUFON symposium, and which is posted at the NUFORC
website. In addition, I have posted there links to other, more
mainstream, articles, which address more "pedestrian"
application of "passive" radar.

Curiously, I have been discussing my proposal since January
1995, and only now are people beginning to take interest in the
concept. On seven occasions, I have presented the idea to people
who count their wealth in billions, and I have yet to receive
even a hint that they might be interested in sponsoring
construction of such a system.  Very bizarre, given the hundreds
of millions of dollars some of those individuals have thrown at
the SETI project, which has yet to produce a single result.

In conclusion, "passive" radar is now within our grasp, and it
will provide us with the ability to resolve the UFO debate, once
and for all, without the input of some government bureaucracy.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                  For 'Abductees' Logic Is An Alien Concept

From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:10:47 -0400
Subject: For 'Abductees' Logic Is An Alien Concept


Clancy review - For 'Abductees' Logic Is An Alien Concept

Since I've participated in a couple of articles about Susan
Clancy's new book, I want to just briefly note that although my
name is Will, I am not the character named "Will" in her book -
which also means I am not the "Will" in the 21 Oct Wall Street
Journal article either.

The Wall Street Journal article is reproduced in the following:

-----

Source: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05294/592778.stm

Friday, October 21, 2005


For 'Abductees' Logic Is An Alien Concept
By Sharon Begley
The Wall Street Journal

The first thing that struck Susan Clancy during the weekend she
spent with people who had been abducted by extraterrestrials was
that they weren't that much odder than the folks at her family
reunions.

It's not that Dr. Clancy, then a graduate student in psychology
at Harvard University, has an especially strange family. But as
she was drawn deeper and deeper into the world of "abductees,"
she realized that they tend to be respectable, job-holding,
functioning members of society, normal except for their belief
that short beings with big eyes once scooped them up and took
them to a spaceship. What makes abductees stand out is something
that is so common in American society it's a wonder there aren't
more of them: an inability to think scientifically.

Reading the title of Dr. Clancy's new book, "Abducted: How
People Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens," millions
of Americans probably figure the answer to the implicit question
is obvious: People come to believe they were abducted by aliens
because they were. Some 40 percent of Americans believe it
possible that aliens have grabbed some of us, polls show.

Abductees are teachers and waiters, artists and chefs,
construction supervisors and librarians. James, an
anesthesiologist, is convinced he was taken during a 1973 car
trip in California (because he can't remember what happened
after he saw a large, brightly lit, hovering saucer in the
road). Will, a massage therapist, was abducted repeatedly by
aliens, he told Dr. Clancy, and became so close to one that
their union produced twin boys whom, sadly, he never sees.

Numerous studies have found that abductees are not suffering
from mental illness. They are unusually prone to false memories,
she and colleagues found in a 2002 study, and tend to be
unusually creative, fantasy-prone and imaginative, but so are
lots of people who have never met a little green man.

Even the smartest abductees fall short, however, when it comes
to scientific thinking. Dr. Clancy asked if they realize that
memories elicited by hypnosis are unreliable. Yes, the abductees
said, but they are really, really careful with hypnosis, so
their recovered memories must be real. Do they understand that
sleep paralysis, in which waking up during a dream causes the
dream to leak into consciousness even while you remain unable to
move, can mimic the weird visions and helplessness that
abductees describe? Of course, they say, but that doesn't apply
to them. As one abductee explained, she was taken not while she
slept but when she was on the couch watching Letterman.

And do they understand that the most likely explanation of bad
dreams, impotence, nosebleeds, loneliness, bruises or just
waking up to find their pajamas on the floor does not involve
aliens? Yes, they told Dr. Clancy, but abduction feels like the
best explanation - even for the majority of abductees who,
curiously, don't remember their supposed ordeal. (Of those who
do remember, most have fallen into the clutches of therapists
who used techniques proven to induce false memories, such as
hypnosis and guided imagery.)

Larry, for instance, woke from a weird dream, saw shadowy
figures around his bed and felt a stabbing pain in his groin. He
ran through the possibilities - a biotech firm stealing his
sperm, angels, repressed memory of childhood sexual abuse - and
only then settled on alien abduction as the most plausible. Sam
blamed his impotence on aliens, not on his recent prostate
surgery. He had read that stress can cause impotence, and alien
abduction is stressful.

The principle of parsimony that underpins all of science - the
simplest explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most
likely to be right - is, well, alien to abductees. So is the
notion that "it feels right" doesn't make it so, and that
exceptions to rules are, indeed, exceptions.

What an inability to think scientifically does not explain,
however, is why many people believe this one weird thing, not
weird things in general. In other words, why ET?

"Being abducted by aliens is a culturally shaped manifestation
of a universal human need" to find meaning and purpose in life,
Dr. Clancy writes. That need is stronger and more basic than any
attachment to empiricism, logic or objective reality.

Most important, perhaps, is that alien abduction feels, to
abductees, like the best explanation for their feelings and
memories. It is transformative, giving their life meaning,
reassuring them of their own significance. Will, the twins' dad,
is happy he was "chosen," saying the abduction showed him there
is "something out there much bigger, more important than we
are." Through his twins, he can "have a part in it."

Dr. Clancy, raised as a Catholic, is aware of the human needs
that religion fills - and how belief in alien abduction fills
them, too. "People get from their abduction beliefs the same
things that millions of people the world over derive from their
religions," she writes: "meaning, reassurance, mystical





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                     22 Year-Old UFO Mystery Re-Studied

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:24:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:24:09 -0400
Subject: 22 Year-Old UFO Mystery Re-Studied




Source: The ABC Network - Australia

http://www.abc.net.au/centralvic/stories/s1489262.htm

Monday, 24 October  2005

[Picture at site]


A 22 Year-Old UFO Mystery Studied Again
Reporters: Jonathan Ridnell and Jo Printz

22 years ago, Russell Henthorn took some photos of mysterious
lights in the sky.

The Royal Australian Air Force has taken a look at them, as have
various UFOlogists: now, the book's being reopened on those
still-unexplained photos as the Bendigo and District
Astronomical Society hosts a meeting about them. Russell
Henthorn will be at the meeting.

"It was a pretty interesting time," Russell says of the time
when he took the photos - May, 1983.

"There'd been quite a few sightings in the area, lots of lights
reported throughout the Bendigo district. I was out playing
table tennis with my brother, and spotted a fairly impressive
light that was extremely bright and appeared to be quite
shimmery.

"Initially, I thought 'it's probably just a bright star', but
given that there was such a lot of activity in the area, I
thought I'd take a closer look. I got my father's binoculars
out, had a closer look and it was pretty impressive.

"What I saw through the binoculars initially was pretty much
like a colour and light show - again, very brightly coloured
reds, greens, blues, which did appear to spin. It was quite
impressive at the time.

"I went and grabbed my camera - I was an amateur photographer at
the time - and set her up and took some photos."

Russell's set of photos wasn't the only one, he says.

"A local radio announcer had also taken some pictures a couple
of days before, but my particular photos showed a form in the
light that hadn't been seen before.

"It certainly did create some interest. We had the RAAF come up
and interview me, and the media was quite excited about it at
the time; we had a number of research groups inquire as well."

The RAAF came up with their own conclusions, Russell says,
saying that the object he photographed was a star. The
brilliant, shifting colours were due to a temperature inversion,
they said.

Russell won't commit himself one way or another: he just doesn't
know.

"To be honest, I'm probably my own worst sceptic," he says.

"I think it was probably a star, because of the way it tracked -
 it did tend to go in a straight line. But the impressive part
about it was the colour - particularly in my photo anyway - the
colour and the shape.

"It is a mystery. I can honestly say that this is an out-of-the-
world and there's not another one like it anywhere in the
world."

Russell says he doesn't often talk about the photos but, when he
does, he usually gets a response.

"When I do [talk about the photos], a lot of people do come up





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                         Mystery With The UFO Story

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:29:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:29:33 -0400
Subject: Mystery With The UFO Story




Source: The Herald-Democrat - Sherman, Texas, USA

http://tinyurl.com/cvbte

Monday October 24, 2005


The Mystery With The UFO Story

By Donna Hunt
Today

My husband told me not to do it; he said I would open a real can
of worms. When did he get so smart?

I didn't listen to him and boy have the UFO sighters come out of
the woodwork.

Just keep in mind, as former Perrin radar mechanic who sighted
not one, but several UFOs in the area in 1951, these things in
the sky aren't necessarily from outer space. They are what they
say n Unidentified Flying Objects.

I wrote the first column after a friend saw a History Channel
piece that told about the sighting of a "flying saucer" at
Denison in the late 1800s. Research led to that column. Then the
second one was after I interviewed the former Perrin Airman,
Chandler Yergin, by phone from his home in Tucson, AZ.

During that week and since, I've received a number of telephone
calls and e-mails from others who have seen unidentified objects
in the sky.

One, a friend of many years n since high school days, shared his
story with me, the first time he had told it outside those that
witnessed the objects with him, he said. He shared with the
understanding that his name not be used for fear his friends and
neighbors today would think that he had "lost it."

His sighting took place in about 1956. He and his wife had just
returned home in the evening in the area of Mockingbird Lane in
Northwest Denison. As they got out of the car they saw several
objects at the top of the hill that seemed to be circling each
other and trading places from top to bottom.

He said about eight neighbors and his parents came out into the
yard and witnessed the display as well, watching for several
minutes before the objects split up and flew away. He said he's
sure of what he saw and has a bunch of witnesses to back him up.

A friend at Health Trends� pool who read the articles told me a
story that her late husband related several years ago. She said
he was returning home from work one evening in the Pottsboro
area and saw a strange looking circular object in the field near
the Country Store.

He told her he stopped his pickup and watched for a minute, then
decided he could load it into his pickup and take it home. He
crossed over the fence to retrieve it. About that time the
sphere took off straight up and disappeared over the store.

She said he told her he looked behind his pickup all the way
home to see if the object was following him. It wasn't.

Another friend told me of a sighting 50 years ago. She said her
parents lived on Snow Road, southeast of Denison and she lived
in Dallas. She and her husband and younger son and her brother
and wife were all visiting her parents.

She said they were relaxing on the screened-in porch on the east
side of the house and were looking out at the night sky. She
remembers looking at some red lights in the south and thinking
they were television/radio tower lights. Suddenly they started
moving toward the north and everyone seemed to spot the objects
at the same time. They ran into the back kitchen door so they
could have a better view.

She said the lights seemed evenly spaced and high in the sky,
but not as high as an airplane. They couldn't hear a sound, As
the lights moved overhead she and her family members ran to the
front door and onto the front porch still trying to figure out
what they were seeing. As they watched, the lights began to go
up one by one. She couldn't remember how many, but thinks it was
five to nine, possibly four in front and five behind, spaced
like bowling ball pins.

She said they talked about it for hours and the next morning
there were three or four lines in the newspaper, saying several
people had reported lights in the sky that evening. The
suggested theory was that they had seen weather balloons. She
didn't believe that theory because, she said their movement
seemed too deliberate. Anyway, their identity has never been
explained to her satisfaction.

Jonathon Oden, who graduated from Denison High in 1998 and
currently lives in the Phoenix area, has an interest in the
unexplained. He said that he and his wife saw something strange
in the sky in Denton one day in 2002. It was clearly shaped like
a huge triangle with straight edges and precise corners. They
watched it creep along the sky, headed northwest without veering
from its course until it was out of sight.

He said his interest was peaked that day and since he has
learned that North Texas has a rich history of UFO activity.

He pointed out that Denison was likely the first place the word
"saucer" was used in print to describe a UFO. He read about that
in a book published in 1997 by Jim Marrs, a Texas Resident. In
his book, Alien Agenda, Marrs provides a comprehensive look at
UFO related history, Jonathon said.

Tom Scott, curator of the Fannin County Museum of History,
formerly wrote a column, "Bois d'Arc Sketches" for a Bonham
newspaper. He sent us a copy of a column he wrote that cited
sightings in the Bonham area as far back as 1843 when Bonham was
known as Bois d'Arc.

In March 1897 a cigar shaped object was seen in the area. That
same month a Dallas newspaper and others in the area reported
the sighting of a cigar shaped object between Honey Grove and
Paris. A farmer had said he was chased by the object that was
dragging an anchor along the ground. The farmer said the anchor
snagged his pants and raised him into the air until his pants
ripped and he fell.

Two weeks later, according to Tom's column, a man going between
Bonham and Denton also said he saw "some kind of manufactured
craft." Other who saw it said it was 200 feet long with large
windows. Some people even said they heard hymns being sung as it
passed overhead.

Now that is getting a little weird. I wish I had photographs to
document some of these stories, but alas, they are not
available. Thanks to all for sharing their stories. We don't
think you're weird, just observant.

Donna Hunt is former editor of The Denison Herald. She lives in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                          Re: We Are Alone - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:24:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:16:59 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Ledger


>From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:39:25 -0400
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>>Subject: We Are Alone


>'And what about you?,' the aliens asked. 'Has God ever visited
>your world.'

>Much foot scraping and some downcast looks. Finally: 'Yes.'

>'And what happened?'

>A long silence, then: 'We killed Him.'

>Aliens, glancing at their chronometers: 'Ahem, Well, we've got
many previous engagements, so we'll have to bid you good-by.
Make yourselves at home. No, you needn't let us know when you're
leaving.'


It could be that he died, or is dying of his own accord.
Wasn't/isn't 'God' just another way of trying to explain away
things you didn't understand and the fear of death, while some
chose to exploit this ignorance and fear of the universe around
you? Science has been steadily explaining away that which we did
not understand and was atrtributed to god, and it continues to
do so. What was once god's work is now the mundane but
magnificent working of this universe, never mind all of the
other universes of which we are unaware.

As for the last statement it will likely be more of a pat on the
shoulder with the communication, "... been there done that. It
served its purpose at the time but we moved on. Try and get over
the fact that everything dies eventually. Stop wasting time
worrying about it, or what's going to happen afterward."

Of course we haven't defined which god we are referring to, but





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:42:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak


>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:18:25 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

><snip>

>>For certain the woman in 1947 could not have been influenced by
>>Adamski contactee or any other flying saucer literature from the
>>1950s. Of course, pelicanists often believe in time travel
>>theories, how events from the future explain events from the
>>past. A famous example was the Air Force claiming that crash >
>dummies and flight accidents from the 1950s and 1960s explain
>>witness reports of alien bodies during the Roswell incident in
>>1947.

>I wonder how often this canard about the US Air Force and the
>crash dummies is going to be repeated. It is time it was
>disposed of.

I wonder how often this canard about the sensibility of the US
Air Force and the crash dummies is going to be repeated by
uncritical, unthinking skeptics. It is time it was disposed of.

>The point about the experiments with dummies (described in some
>detail in Captain McAndrew's report) is that the details tally
>quite well with some of the Roswell witness reports.

The point about the experiments with dummies is that the details
do _not_ tally well with some of the Roswell witness reports:
Crash dummies 6 feet tall and very human looking (wonder why);
bodies reported by Roswell witnesses were small, nonhuman
looking, and often decomposing. That sure sounds like an exact
match to me.

After ridiculing the reports of bodies in the original 1994 Air
Force report as being the result of hoaxers and other unreliable
witnesses, the Air Force then turns around and using the same
reports from the same hoaxers and "unreliable witnesses" to
claim that they "tally quite well" with crash dummies and air
accident victims. Does John Harney note a bit of logical
inconsistency if not outright hypocrisy here? But what else
would one expect, since the reports were written by Air Force
counterintelligence people trained in propaganda and
disinformation techniques. Colonel Weaver, the main author of
the 1994 report, taught these subjects.

>The assertion that they could not have been the source of
>stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
>years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
>dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
>appeared in the news media at the time.

Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
email to me).

It is also interesting that General Ramey back in 1947 went out
of his way to ridicule the idea that there was a crew, stating
that the object was "too lightly constructed to have carried
anyone." Then he "scoffed at the possibility that the object
could have been piloted." Why would Ramey bring the subject up
to begin with? Possibly it was a form of damage control against
rumors or speculation of bodies being involved.

Another example of this from contemporaneous stories was Ramey
also stating the object would have been 25 feet across if
reconstructed. That's a very odd statement for the small, torn-
up radar target displayed on Ramey's rug, which would only be
about 4 feet across if reconstructed. Where did 25 feet come
from? Well oddly, that squares exactly with the reports of the
size of the craft from two witnesses I know of, one being Johnny
McBoyle, the Roswell reporter who tried to phone in the story to
Albuquerque. Lydia Sleppy, the teletype operator, told Stan
Friedman that when they tried to wire McBoyle's story out, they
were cut off by the FBI. Sleppy and others also said McBoyle was
mentioning something about bodies being recovered.

So Ramey saying it was 25 feet across could have been more
damage control in case other stories about a 25 foot craft
leaked out. Regardless, Ramey's contemporaneous message does
specifically mention the existence of "the disc" and something
important being "in the 'disc'" (the bodies?).

Finally I have heard this "contemporaneous" nonsense from every
Roswell debunker I have ever read or debated. Basically the
argument is if it wasn't reported at the time then it isn't true
(unless it supports debunking arguments) and if it was reported
at the time then it must be true (unless it doesn't support
debunking arguments).

But all "contemporaneous" actually tells you is what the press
was told by various sources, how they interpreted it, and how
they finally printed it. Contemporaneous reporting isn't
necessarily 100% true and accurate and eyewitness testimony
decades later isn't necessarily false or grossly distorted. How
could anybody with a brain argue with that? Well skeptics do,
all the time.

Even back in 1947, what the press was being told was often
contradictory. The base press release said what was recovered
was a flyiing disk, found by the rancher "sometime last week."
In only about an hour, General Ramey started changing that into
a weather balloon found 3 weeks before. So which was it? Mack
Brazel said he told Sheriff Wilcox that maybe he had found a
"flying disk." But Wilcox told UP that Brazel came in saying he
thought he found a "weather meter." Which was it? After
describing a balloon of some type at his press conference,
Brazel then absolutely denied it was any sort of balloon that he
had found. So which was it? Wilcox told UP that Brazel had found
the device about 3 weeks before, but he told AP that Brazel had
found it only a few days before. Which was it? Wilcox told UP
that Brazel had first come in the day before yesterday (or
Sunday, July 6), but he told AP that Brazel came in Monday (July
7). Which was it? Wilcox claimed Brazel told him the object was
only about as big as his safe, or 3 to 4 feet across. But Ramey
said the object was about 25 feet across if reconstructed. Which
was it?

Skeptics also don't seem to take into account the possibility of
cover stories being put out, despite many historical examples of
how governments have lied through their teeth. In these cases,
the "contemporaneous" news articles are simply reporting the
cover story, not the real story behind the story. As the
computer geeks say, GIGO, or "garbage in, garbage out."

E.g., initially the Eisenhower administration denied the U-2 was
a spy plane. Instead, they claimed it was an errant NASA weather
plane that crashed because the pilot passed out from oxygen
starvation. NASA went along with the scam, even manufacturing
phony transcripts of the pilot's last conversations. At Edwards
AFB, a U-2 was repainted with a NASA logo and phony ID number
and then shown to the press. Then the Soviets hauled out Francis
Gary Powers and the remains of the U- 2, including the spy
cameras. Checkmate. The U.S. government was caught red-handed in
flagrant lie, an elaborate cover story. But if the Russians
didn't have the evidence, you can bet the U.S. government would
have stuck with the cover story and government propagandists and
apologists would have repeated the party line for as long as the
government held to the story.

But such things couldn't have happened during the Roswell
incident. No way. The military absolutely told us the
unvarnished truth, even if the story was inconsistent and kept
changing, even back in 1947. And it's kept on changing, with
AFOSI mutating the 1947 singular weather balloon/radar target
(Ramey/Newton's description) into the present-day multiple
balloon/multiple radar target Mogul balloon plus the ridiculous
crash-dummies from the future.

>The stories of alien bodies did not emerge until the late 1970s,
>leaving plenty of time for ageing witnesses to become somewhat
>vague about when the incidents which they remembered occurred.
>No doubt when investigators assured them it must have been 1947
>they were not inclined to argue, as they had no way of checking.

No doubt you find it comforting to regurgitate the official
party line, which is what you are doing here, as do all
debunkers, as if reading from a common script. For all I know,
maybe you even believe that the U2 really was an errant NASA
weather plane, since that was the U.S.'s official story.

Even the normally UFO cynical American press generally thought
the 1997 crash dummy report incredibly stupid and unbelievable.
Nobody would confuse 6 foot plastic mannequins with small,
rotting alien bodies. Nobody would confuse times like that (only
gullible, unthinking skeptics would swallow such preposterous
psychobabble explanations like "time compression"). And a number
of the body witnesses weren't even living in New Mexico when the
dummy and other tests were happening. Do you honestly think
General Exon's Air Force friends at Wright-Patterson who told





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                   Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:12:51 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:40:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Ledger


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 05:13:12 -0700
>>Subject: Today Is National Nut Day

>>According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
>>National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)

>>If that is so, why are the forums so quiet?

>I've read, just recently, that the mighty oak is a nut that
>stood its ground.....





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                    Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:35:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:43:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Hatch


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:06 -0500
>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 05:13:12 -0700
>>Subject: Today Is National Nut Day

>>According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
>>National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)
>>If that is so, why are the forums so quiet?

>I've read, just recently, that the mighty oak is a nut that
>stood its ground.....

Per the same website, and for another 9 hours as I write this,
it is National Bologna Day.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:49:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:44:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sparks


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:31:54 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:44:07 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:36:43 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>>>>C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill
>>>>probably misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also
>>>>how it all began on this particular occasion:

<snip>

>>>I find this interesting too, again on the positive side. I
>>>pointed out elsewhere that what they described was a fairly
>>>accurate portrait of Venus setting, correct as to times and
>>>elevations and with details of the planet's phase visible in
>>>binoculars, reddening due to atmospheric scattering near the
>>>horizon, and autokinetic jiggles of the observer's eye. Now we
>>>find that this is so, even though they had just been talking
>>>about Gill's sighting and were (at least some of them) very much
>>>"in the mood" to see UFOs.

>>However, on the "negative" side, since Gill also stated that "I
>>identified it as one of these objects", it casts serious doubts
>>on Gill's ability to identify Venus.

>Well, as I said, I'd agree that it reflects on Gill's and
>others' predisposition _as_of_July_6_ to _interpret_ Venus as
>"one of these objects". In terms of the descriptions, though,
>neither Durie nor Gill report anything inconsistent with a
>binocular observation of Venus setting - a small bright disc on
>the horizon "coming down" slowly through broken cloud. There is
>really nothing there that suggests a propensity to extreme
>fantasy.

>As Brad Sparks pointed out, seeing Venus so close to setting,
>evidently affected by atmospheric effects on the horizon
>(reddened, and also possibly distorted - Gill mentions that the
>"disc" seen through binoculars, presumably Venus' 0.6 gibbous
>phase oriented parallel to the horizon, appeared to tilt towards
>the north then later towards the south) is different from
>casually spotting Venus by naked eye as Gill said he did on June
>26, when it was about 20 degrees up, with the UFO "higher up,
>almost overhead". Venus evidently did present a striking sight
>at setting on Jul 6. But we can argue that if Gill had not had
>the experiences at Boianai on June 26-28 then his avowed
>previous scepticism would nevertheless have asserted itself on
>July 6, and he may have happily agreed with the Rev. Dams that
>they were looking at Venus.

>So I find it difficult to use this event to calibrate Gill's
>previous experience. There are both positive and negative
>implications, depending on how we look at it, but neither is
>very strong because we can't separate out the influence of the
>earlier event.

>>We can also deduce that the majority of "these objects" must
>>have looked like celestial bodies.

>>And concerning this very sighting, we read in the same
>>transcript:

>>"And as we watched it it came down and hovered under a
>>cloud."

>>"And we saw it come down through the cloud"

>>"And then it went through a cloud and it came out again and
>>hovered" . Needless to say that Venus was always over the
>>clouds. Thus, we must concede that this kind of statements
>>could involve a high degree of subjectivity.

>Yes this is possible.

>>So, following what has been said in this thread, it appears that
>>some of the usual arguments against the astronomical hypothesis
>>might be weaker than supposed:

<snip>

I agree with Martin Shough's analysis (I've snipped out the rest
for sake of brevity). He concludes later it is still an
"Unknown" in his book though not without problems. As Paul
Kimball and others have pointed out the broader question is why
so much effort has been exerted on this case (or on Zamora's
eyeglasses)?

There are much better "Unknowns" that the psycho-socialists
won't touch: For all the attacks and smears and innuendo applied
to Rev. Gill and his qualifications or lack thereof as an
observer, whether he was "subjective," whether he was
"influenced by Adamski" (whom he claims he had never heard of
when his June 1959 sightings had occurred), etc. etc., notice
that the psycho-socialists would never dream of taking on cases
involving the world's leading scientific experts in visual
observation and investigation of aerial phenomena and their
trajectory reconstructions (Dr Lincoln LaPaz), the renowned
astronomer who discovered the planet Pluto who was an expert in
visual observation personally (years of skywatching observation)
and professionally (as Chief of Optical Instrumentation for the
White Sands Proving Ground/Missile Range), Dr. Clyde W.
Tombaugh. Both of them had multi-witness personal UFO sightings.

LaPaz witnessed a Daylight Disc, a supersonic white ellipsoid
200 feet in size triangulated by its known distance and position
in darting in and out of a cloud bank at known distance. LaPaz
was the world's leading expert on aerial phenomena investigation
and observation, having spent decades in personal meteor
observation. The validity of his trajectory reconstructions with
witnesses after the fact was validated by external evidence out
of his control many times in his long career -- namely the
finding of numerous fallen meteorites where his trajectories
showed them to be. If LaPaz's methods were invalid or if he
showed poor judgment in refining witness testimony then he would
never have found any meteorites.

Or how about the world's leading aircraft designer, Lockheed's
Skunk Works director Clarence "Kelly" Johnson, designer of
the U-2 (and later the SR-71/CIA Oxcart)? Johnson had a
multi-witness Daylight Disc sighting with a planeload of
independent witnesses consisting of his top aerodynamicist
(double Cal Tech aero engr and mech engr) and top test
pilots one of whom was an expert in visual observation who had
training in calibrating his distance estimates for remote aircraft
using a radar when he observed. Johnson and his wife were on
the ground when they sighted the 200-foot black wing hovering
stationary and did not know that the Lockheed aircraft crew
was seeing the same thing at the same time. Both groups
of observers witnessed the object suddenly take off into the
stratosphere, accelerating to at an estimated 25,000+ mph to
90+ miles altitude, disappearing due to distance. Johnson
observed using binoculars which his wife retrieved for him,
which enabled him to observe the disappearance takeoff
trajectory for about 7x longer time than the naked eye
observers due to the magnification of the binoculars, which
provides a cross-check on the distance estimated by
visual acuity limits.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Reason

From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 23:10:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:48:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Reason


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:54:12 -0400
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:22:07 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting


>>"Dr. Hynek had Father Gill study the moon in the Illinois sky,
>>and he decided that the width of the object [with waving
>>occupants] was equal to five moons lined up end-to-end." As
>>Allan Hendry observes in the IUR piece from which this is quoted
>>(November 1977, p. 5), this alone rules out any imaginable
>>astronomical identification.

>I agree it does, or ought to. But does it? Hendry himself notes
>a case where a woman who said "I know what stars look like"
>swore a UFO had illuminated windows with the round heads and
>silvery-colored faces of the occupants inside. She observed this
>over several nights. She was looking at the planet Venus. (See
>UFO HANDBOOK p. 85, UK edition). All right I agree she was just
>a single witness (with her husband).

One needs to be careful to distinguish betwen the perceived size
of an object and its angular diameter. The former is determined
largely by a perceptual mechanism called size constancy - there
is an excellent non-technical description of how this works in
Richard Gregory's book "Eye and Brain" (Weidenfeld & Nicolson,
1979).

It's size constancy which can make Venus appear as a large,
silvery object - note this does not change the object's apparent
angular diameter. Movements of the eye, together with optical
defects in the representation of the image, can create the
suggestion of portholes or windows. However, I know of no
perceptual mechanism which can create the impression of round
heads and silvery faces inside those windows, and this leads me
to suspect that something else was operating here - perhaps akin
to the phenomenon whereby people whose relatives are flying in a
plane overhead will often believe their relatives are waving to
them through the windows.

I don't own a copy of Hendry's book and it's a long while since
I read it, but I do remember that it was shot through with
confusion and bewilderment over the ways in which people
misperceive IFOs. But as is so often the case, much of what
Hendry found incomprehensible is readily explained in terms of
known perceptual mechanisms.

In any case it seems that, for whatever reason, by the time he
wrote his book Hendry had become committed to the notion that
there is something about the misperception of IFOs which is
fundamentally mysterious. So he may well have been predisposed
to hear bizarre and apparently inexplicable accounts of human
misperception and consequently misinterpreted what witnesses
were telling him.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:16:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:49:50 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Sparks


>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>>In other words, it's a British shipping term.

<snip>

>>>>>And I am a Briton. I know this. I also know that
>>>>>it became almost an iconic usage during the
>>>>>late 'fifties and 'sixties among people who knew
>>>>>about flying saucers, from popular books,
>>>>>magazines and UFO clubs etc., but who may have
>>>>>known nothing whatever about shipping.

<snip>

>>I'm afraid the desperation is all yours, John. A
>>simple check of a small sample of North American
>>newspapers underscores how normal the use
>>of mothership was in the popular vocabulary, as
>>documented in the press.

<snip>

>Hi Jerry, List,

>While the word mothership itself is hundreds of years old in the
>sense of motherness (1) its naval use was coined by Rear Admiral
>Albert S. Barker (1845-1916) when he was commander of the
>Asiatic Squadron.

>Barker invented the term for warships when gunships of the same
>squadron were assigned to their care and supervision (2).

>However, the term mothership itself was still not entirely
>familiar until after the World Wars. Until then it was usually
>written in inverted commas and as two words. An article in the
>Coshocton (Ohio) Daily Times of October 14th, 1909, for example,
>feels the need to explain what the expression meant to its
>readers:

-----

>Cradling The Submarines

>Mother Ship Puts Little Boats to Bed at Her Side.

>Putting submarine boats to bed by their mother ship interested
>spectators in New York the otber day. The vessel, called the
>parent of tbe underwater boats, was the Castine. Each submarine
>flotilla is now accompanied wherever it goes by a parent ship
<snip>

-----

>I'd rather not get into a discussion about whether Gill would
>have drawn the word from naval usage or from UFO writings, but I
>do have my own opinion about that too.

Dave Rudiak found a similar phraseology in a 1947 case long
before Adamski and having nothing to do with naval shipping or
warships.

But more importantly there is no trace of "Adamski-isms"
elsewhere in Gill's sighting report or writings.  Nothing about
calling the "men" who waved to him and the others as "Space
Brothers" or even "brothers." or describing them as long-haired
blonds and human looking.  Nothing describing the UFO's as





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

              Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2 -

From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:18:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:01:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2 -


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:28:09 -0700
>Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:07:17 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>>>From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul com>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul net
>>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 10:07:37 EDT
>>>Subject: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 2

>>>The Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles

>>>Since some of my reader's may not be aware of the fact that I
>>>was one of the three pimary UFO field investigators at the
>>>Carbondale crash site on the 11th of November,1974. It might be
>>>a good idea for those readers to peruse my essay/report on the
>>>Carbondale UFO/Lantern Hoax at the

>>>http://magonia. mysite. wanado-members. co. uk/ms55. htm

>>>the story is posted in full-length. It's not a quick read so,
>>>have some milk and cookies at the ready.

>>This URL has obviously got a bit garbled. Anyway, all issues of
>>Magonia Supplement are now on a new web site, and the Carbondale
>>crash report is at:

>>http://magsupp.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ms55.htm

>Hello Matt, John:

>Ooof! That's a long read. Quite interesting, and I have only one
>quibble:

>A casual reader, seeing the words "...a gleaming facet of
>contemporary ufological folklore..." could easily get the
>impression that most people in ufology still think Carbondale is
>truly anomalous.

>Granted there may some that consider this "Pennsylvania's
>Roswell", or at least pretend to for their own purposes, but I
>would wager 50 cents that the overwhelming majority of readers
>here consider the case bogus as I do.

>Its one of the more treasured items on my list of discredited
>sightings for one thing:

>http://www.larryhatch.net/DISCRED.html Scroll down to ..

>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.

>In short, the 'gleaming jewel' is a stinkeroo, and most
>sensible, well informed ufologists know that. The article might
>seem to imply otherwise; that we are drooling idiots who buy
>into Carbondale even after it has been thoroughly and expertly
>trashed.


I'm sorry that Mr.Hatch has mistakenly interpreted my Chronicles
entries as an extention of my (assumed) beliefs that many
ufologists are drooling idiots who believe in the UFO crash
story associated with the Carbondale incident of 1974.

That was never my intention. All I am attempting to do is
"alert" the younger generation to the chicanery that goes on
within the field, and more recently on the widely unchecked net.

There seems to be a somewhat defensive tone to Mr.Hatch's
disapproval of my writing because he feels it is insulting to
folks of his self-appointed ufological statue.

When in fact, it is merely "informative" and never questions the
expertise or the beliefs of the elite elders of ufology.

I personally do not take myself that seriously, and always
approach a subject in "anticipation" of what I may learn from
the other fellows experience and thoughts on a topic.

Many thanks to Mr.Hatch for adding Carbondale to his discredited
list. I'm wondering why he hadn't done so "before" I had alerted
hin to Bobby Gillette's 1999 confession on the incident through
Herb Taylor back in 2004?

It has been my experience that wisdom does not automatically
come with age... it seems to come with humility, experience and
tolerance of others. ( e.g., If Mr.Hatch knew the Carbondale
entry had to be so much hokum, why then did he even bother to
read the damn Chronicle entry?)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                          Re: We Are Alone - Morton

From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:42:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:03:39 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Morton


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:33:32 -0500
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:25:56 EDT
>>Subject: We Are Alone

>>The reality appears to be that aliens want to conceal their
>>identities and home planets, and have no desire to conduct a
>>discourse with us. Why? What would have to change for a
>>discourse to take place?

>I suspect, Mr. Morton, that just a _few_ more individuals such
>as yourself, genuinely asking that very question, would go a
>long way towards facilitating the discourse to which you refer.
>That's my feeling.

>The old myth about an alien's request to "take me to your
>leader" has not been born out in history, I suspect. It's the
>rank and file individual that is the key, I believe, and it is
>that, pretty much, keeping *officialdom* at bay. Aliens are the
>ultimate sedition, and that may not be a bad thing.


Alfred, Ray, Pavel, Joachim, and All -

Thank you.

And I wasn't as clear as I should have been, but I think
everyone understood that I meant public, regular, meaningful
communication with aliens as opposed to a few people being told,
"Don't be afraid, come with me, sit down, open your mouth,..."
etc. This would involve multiple aspects, including the possible
interviews on CNN and with the New York Times, speeches or
letters to the UN, speaking with various groups (scientists,
psychologists, sociologists), etc.

If "speaking" is impossible or impractical for most aliens, then
communication via telepathy or pictures might work.

I assume they're smart enough to learn to read and write our
languages, so written communication should also be possible.

Additionally, if aliens are speaking with a few government
officials, and those officials aren't passing on the messages to
the rest of us, then we, the public, are still isolated from
alien discourse. And if that's occurring, I'm confident that the
aliens are aware that their message is not getting out to the
world - but perhaps they want it that way.

My original reason for bringing up the subject was to point out
a flaw in the thinking of most experiencers, SETI explorers,
astronomers, theologians, and perhaps even some ufologists:
Experience has shown that the concept of "We are not alone" must
be tempered with the caveat, "Yes, but they refuse to speak with
us, except for a few basic phrases one might use with their
house pet, such as roll over, sit, and no biting."

There may be a cosmic quarantine, but it's apparently one of
communication, not of visibility.

If the reason is that we're not smart enough, a way needs to
found to improve us. If the reason is that we're hostile and
murderous, that may be a manifestation of the former, and could
theoretically be solved by medical science.

Taking the tack of making ourselves worthy of contact may be an
easier and smarter way to achieve the goal of communicating with
aliens than trying to pry open the deeply concealed government
secrets through the full disclosure of same.

I don't know the reasons for the coverup, but it's just possible
that if the reasons were disclosed, most people might become
hysterically angry at the snubbing by those alien creatures who
view us as sheep, pets, vicious animals, idiots, or whatever
their view is. And that in itself would represent the reasons
they choose to avoid discourse: It's pointless and dangerous.
Abiding by Quarantine laws would be superfluous for them since
it would be obvious to all visitors who and what we are, and
that avoidance of close contact would be prudent.

While it's been suggested that the visitors are already raising
our collective conscience through crop circle activities or some
other method, I don't feel any more aware today than I did 30
years ago, nor do I notice a change in those around me. So I
don't think that's occurring. We may 'be' the Universe, but what
good does that do us if the other residents of the House won't
speak to us?

The UFO coverup might be just one symptom (vague though it may
be) of our unhealthy and undeveloped place in the Universe. For
those who wish to join-up with other, more advanced creatures
from star fields unknown, the Earth is their prison, and they
are prisoners of their limitations and reputations, relegated to
a lower caste in the Universe of advanced species. Someone very
smart needs to fix this situation quickly.

The UFO coverup is like the Maginot Line and the Ardennes Forest
combined - complex, thick, very hard and tough, and difficult to
penetrate.

The Line was only partially penetrated and mostly bypassed, then
occupied from behind when it became irrelevant.

The UFO coverup has been partially penetrated, as well, but its
obliteration seems difficult, unlikely, and unnecessary.

By making ourselves qualified to learn the answers we seek, the
coverup would not be further penetrated or destroyed: it would
be bypassed and become irrelevant in a meltdown of reasons for
its existence, and we would finally be allowed to sit at the
conference table with our visitors - if that's what we want, and
assuming we're referring to physical creatures as opposed to
energy fields, etc.

None of this is necessary, of course, if Lonnie Zamora wasn't
wearing his standard-issue police shoes, or if Fr. Gill saw the
planet Venus gliding over his village with creatures waving
back. Clearly, flying saucers don't exist, and we can return to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 25

                        Re: Gill Sighting - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:07:19 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:05:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Bourdais


>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:18:25 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

><snip>

>>For certain the woman in 1947 could not have been influenced by
>>Adamski contactee or any other flying saucer literature from the
>>1950s. Of course, pelicanists often believe in time travel
>>theories, how events from the future explain events from the
>>past. A famous example was the Air Force claiming that crash >
>dummies and flight accidents from the 1950s and 1960s explain
>>witness reports of alien bodies during the Roswell incident in
>>1947.

>I wonder how often this canard about the US Air Force and the
>crash dummies is going to be repeated. It is time it was
>disposed of.

>The point about the experiments with dummies (described in some
>detail in Captain McAndrew's report) is that the details tally
>quite well with some of the Roswell witness reports.

No, no, no!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:06:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:18:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Reynolds


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

><snip>

>For my part I've wasted enough of my time on it. Arguing for the
>sake of arguing so _you_U can justify an entrenched position from
>which you find it difficult to climb out of, rather than the
>merits of the case _is_ in my estimation a waste of one's time.
>It's the case that is of issue here, not whether you win or
>lose.

Don Ledger, David Rudiak, et al.

I'm not arguing the eyeglass thing for you old-timers. You boys
think Zamora saw an ET craft, even though no one will come out
and say that, specifically.

As I've written elsewhere, the insignia that Zamora saw might be
important. If his eyesight was a bit off, he may have
misperceived it somewhat, making it difficult to investigate.
And I think it's a major clue in his sighting.

(One more thing, and don't answer if this bores you or makes
your ufological blood boil, but look at the cop photo of Zamora,
the one with his glasses on: one eye is larger than the other. A





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:05:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:19:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:39:56 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

><snip>

>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>enough denialist.

>You got that right, Alfred...

Yes, Mr. Reynolds, after much personal soul searching and with





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:18:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:22:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Smith


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>No case is ever over ...

Ouch! Is this really the paradigm for UFOlogy?

About Zamora's prescription, all I know is that if I dropped my
glasses, I could not make out anything 50 feet away. Looking at
the available pictures of Zamora, I cannot judge his
prescription.

The glasses are clearly not an inch think (mine aren't either).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                        Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:29:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:23:23 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:24:36 -0300
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>It could be that he died, or is dying of his own accord.
>Wasn't/isn't 'God' just another way of trying to explain away
>things you didn't understand and the fear of death, while some
>chose to exploit this ignorance and fear of the universe around
>you? Science has been steadily explaining away that which we did
>not understand and was atrtributed to god, and it continues to
>do so. What was once god's work is now the mundane but
>magnificent working of this universe, never mind all of the
>other universes of which we are unaware.

<snip>

If science has disproved the existence of God (cap) I must have
missed it.

Anyway, theology is way off topic here. However, if we ever do
establish contact with creatures from elsewhere, and can do so





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:31:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:25:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

><snip>

>>What kind of service footwear was Officer Zamora wearing at
>>the time of the incident? Was it a sturdy boot allowing
>>officer Zamora steadier footing or was it a dress shoe
>>unsuited to harsh terrain and therefore contributory to a
>>very real potentiality for stumbling at a critical
>>observational time...

>>We don't know? No one asked? It's not in the record?

>>'Tis true. The Socorro 'episode' was _not_ investigated
>>"through and through."

>>It "wasn't".

>>A red herring by any other name and all of that.

>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>enough denialist.

>Ah, the smell of sarcasm always draws me out Alfred. Are you
>sure you've got no English blood in you?

>If we're getting down to the nitty gritty, then Lonnie's
>underpants might as well get thrown in to the mix as well for if
>he is of normal flesh and blood, then a sighting of a UFO with
>little occupants would surely have made him fill them. Now, if
>he kept them and they are still around, then I for one would be
>convinced that what he saw was not of this earth.

>But failing that, well, Rich arguably may be on the wrong
>approach with this but it still comes down to the following; Did
>Mr. Z, that day, see a craft and beings that were not of a
>terrestrial nature or did he see something a bit more prosaic?

>I'd like you to stand on that mark there Alfred, the one with
>the spotlight on it, and tell us which way you swing on this. I
>won't scold if you use the word "believe".

I believe UFOs the way I believe apples fall from trees and for
the same reasons, Stuart. Gravity is the precurser of a
tenacious and ubiquitous and divergent life after all. Notice
the absence of the word "in" in the preceding.

Zamora: a salt and pepper small town cop with a lot of
idiosyncratic credit who seems to have a reputation for
straight-arrow behavior. A level headed public person who has
impressed peer, subordinate, and superior alike with an ethics
he lived and just didn't pay lip service too. A family man with
years of documented excellence who impressed every named
researcher who ever came in contact with him? Another innocent
man trying to tell the truth as he sees it and so has to endure
the Pigman Klass' attentions for his trouble?

A man, by _no_ means "blind," who _sees_ something decidedly out
of the box and has the temerity to make a report of same to the
rest of us... ...seemingly out of duty and courage? Zamora
abundantly satisfies Hynek's Rubric for people as observational
instruments, handily.

Zamora saw what he said he saw, Stuart. I think that's the
beginning and the end of it, right there.

You?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                                  RRR Group

From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:29:05 -0400
Subject: RRR Group


Greetings to the Listarians,

http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

RRR Group = Rehash, Ridicule & Redundant Group

Ever notice it's the same three people commenting on its pages?
Even the historical Jesus had twelve followers.

Tells me all I need to know.

If it wasn't for RRR using UFO UpDates, UFO Review and The
Anomalist as shills, this blog would quickly clog.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Frank Drake On Ambiguity

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:09:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:09:24 -0400
Subject: Frank Drake On Ambiguity




Source: Forbes Magazine - New York, New York USA

http://tinyurl.com/cxvf7

10.24.05


Communicating
Frank Drake On Ambiguity


Frank Drake is a renowned astronomer whose principal research
activities are directed toward the detection of intelligent life
in the universe. He conducted the first radio search for
extraterrestrial intelligence and helped construct the Voyager
interstellar record, which carried pictures and music from Earth
out into the cosmos.

If you're sending a message to extraterrestrials, what you want
to send is what's special about us and our planet--what is
unusual. Now that�s not basic chemistry or mineralogy, it�s
pretty much the cultural stuff and the consequences of
evolution. The consequences of evolution will be different
everywhere.

So that�s why on the Voyager record, there is a little chemistry
and some mineralogy given, but much of it has to do with our
physiology, our way of life, our culture, the things that are
special to us and will not be exactly duplicated anywhere in the
universe.

But the problem with that information is when you try to send
it, ambiguity arises because it is very hard to express ideas
like joy or fear in pictures alone.

In the Voyager record, we tried to figure out how to express
death. And there's one picture that attempts to do that by
showing a picture of a family where the age of each person is
given. The fact that there is a maximum age is a clue that
typically, that's how old we get to be. That�s how our age and
our longevity is expressed, though it�s sort of indirect. That
same picture also clarifies another point that people never
think of, which is whether we are born big or small. We�re born
as babies, but one could conceive of a biology where creatures
are born out of eggs, essentially full-sized, and as they get
older they get smaller. It�s kind of bizarre, but it could be.
But that one picture on the Voyager clarifies that issue because
the small people have smaller ages and the large people larger
ages. So that�s how we clear that one up.

There�s another picture on the Voyager record, which in
retrospect was a big mistake. It shows a woman in the grocery
store buying groceries, and she�s eating some grapes. That
picture was there to show where we get food and how we eat. But
what we didn�t even notice was that in that same picture, on an
upper shelf, there are some toy trucks. They look just like
real, full-size trucks that appear in some of the other
pictures. It can give the false impression that you buy baby
trucks in the grocery store, and you feed them, and they grow
into big trucks. That doesn't make sense at all to us, but it
could totally confuse the extraterrestrials.

You can�t assume anything. I tell people that you�ve got to try
to imagine that you�re a 14-legged spider looking at these
things.


-- Excerpted from an interview with David M. Ewalt on





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Desmond Morris On Close Encounters

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:11:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:11:57 -0400
Subject: Desmond Morris On Close Encounters




Source: Forbes Magazine - New York, New York USA

http://tinyurl.com/bmzb3

10.24.05, 9:00 AM ET

Communicating
Desmond Morris On Close Encounters

Desmond Morris is a zoologist and author, and one of the world�s
leading authorities on human and animal behavior. He is the
author of books including The Naked Ape and People Watching, and
host of numerous television documentaries.

I would be scared to offer extraterrestrials any kind of
communication. Many people would go up and sort of raise a hand
and say hello. But the fact is that if you have the opportunity
to meet such people or creatures, the secret is to watch them
and see what they do. They might be doing the same with you, of
course. If they were friendly, they might be watching you to see
what you were doing. The only way you can tell that a gesture is
friendly is if that gesture is not associated with a hostile
act. You can�t simply smile because smiling is a uniquely human
gesture - it has a completely different meaning in chimpanzees.

We think that we would smile at the aliens - I'm thinking of
Close Encounters of the Third Kind, where the aliens come out of
their spaceship and the humans greet them. If I remember
correctly, the humans mostly stood still, and one or two of them
raised a hand.

If I were faced with that situation, I would remain immobile. I
wouldn�t make any gestures until I could see what kind of body
language was present between the aliens. Unfortunately, if it
was just one to one, you couldn't see that. Generally speaking,
gentleness is the key to friendliness. So I wouldn�t make any
sudden gestures or sharp movements, but rather I�d almost move
in slow motion, making my movements very gentle, with no power
attached to them.

I think gentleness as opposed to power, and slowness as opposed
to sharpness, would have a pretty universal meaning. Any life
form should, generally speaking, consider a gentle or slow
movement to be non-threatening. But as for any other sort of
signal, I simply don�t think anything else would mean anything
to them.

I know that some of the space capsules have contained strange
sorts of messages, but I don't think it would mean anything to
aliens.

I daresay that out of all the thousands or millions of galaxies
in the universe, somewhere something could understand our
messages, but I think the chances are that the aliens we meet
will not be even bipedal and bilaterally symmetrical. We may
meet something which is an amorphous blob, and there wouldn't be
any form of communication possible. I think the chances of
meeting men with slightly funny faces, the kind you get in space
operas and science-fiction movies, is utterly remote.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Expectations for a Final Theory?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:17:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:17:03 -0400
Subject: Expectations for a Final Theory?




Source: Astrobiology Magazine - New York, New York, USA

http://tinyurl.com/8m5hd

Oct 24, 2005


Expectations for a Final Theory?
Terrestrial Origins Summary

Martin Rees is Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the
University of Cambridge and Britain�s Astronomer Royal. He is
the author of numerous popular science books, including the
bestselling Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the
Universe. Astrobiology Magazine caught up with Rees as he
ponders the effect of interplanetary travel on human evolution,
the origin of life on Earth, and the limits of human
intelligence.

Martin Rees is Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the
University of Cambridge and Britain's Astronomer Royal. He is
the author of numerous popular science books, including the
bestselling Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the
Universe.

Astrobiology Magazine caught up with Rees at the recent Division
of Planetary Sciences conference in Cambridge, England, where he
gave the opening address. He was kind enough to grant us a
follow-up to the interview with him that we published earlier
this year. Here, he ponders the effect of interplanetary travel
on human evolution, the origin of life on Earth, and the limits
of human intelligence.

Astrobiology Society, what do you think are the most important
questions in astrobiology today?

Martin Rees (MR): I think it's important to pursue the planetary
exploration programs that are now going on. Also, the question
of the origin of life is important. I suspect we will get
stronger guidance as to the likelihood of life elsewhere by
understanding how life began here on Earth. So I'm strongly in
favor of all attempts to solve that question.

Complexity is another question. If there is simple life, is the
emergence of complex life likely or unlikely? Also, for post-
human evolution; if humans ever head beyond the Earth and
establish independent communities, how quickly will those
communities diverge so that they're no longer human? I think it
wouldn't take very long, using modern genetics, and they would
be likely to adapt themselves to the alien and hostile
environment.

AM: Do you have a favorite theory for the origin of life on
Earth?

MR: Being a physicist rather than a biologist, I don't feel
qualified to comment on that. But maybe the computer simulations
will prove more important than real laboratory experiments. With
computers, you can simulate evolution faster than it can
actually happen.

AM: Last time we spoke, we touched upon your concept of six
numbers, and how these six numbers would lead to certain
governing rules of the universe. So I wonder what you think
about the theory of convergence in the natural world, and by
extrapolation, the idea that these rules were born of
'intelligent design'.

MR: I don't think we can ever address that scientifically. I
think the important question is whether we will ever have
equations or formulae which pin down the values of the strength
of the forces, the mass of the electron, the mass of the proton,
et cetera. Another question is whether the fundamental laws of
nature are at a deeper level, so that what we have traditionally
thought of as the laws of nature are merely, in a sense, bylaws
in our cosmic patch. Our cosmic patch would be larger than the
Hubble volume, but nonetheless not the entirety of physical
reality.

recently hosted a conference entitled, 'Expectations for a Final
Theory'. This conference was a gathering of experts in string
theory and other aspects of fundamental physics. The aim was to
discuss the question of whether the basic theory is going to
determine uniquely the basic numbers of physics and cosmology,
or whether this theory will allow an enormous number of Big
Bangs governed by different fundamental laws. This is one of the
key questions confronting physics in the coming decades. We
would like very much to know whether there could, in principle,
be a Big Bang governed by different laws, perhaps less biophilic
laws, or whether somehow the laws of Nature are unique.

I'm very glad that for us in Europe, intelligent design is not a
serious issue. It dismays me that in a country like the United
States, which in many respects is technically advanced, that
this should be an issue in serious public policy. In Europe
we're very glad indeed that we have a more educated public,
which even though many people are religious, realizes that
there's no conflict between religion and science. So I think it
is puzzling and dismaying to us that there is fundamentalism in
the United States and the Middle East, both of which are equally
damaging.

AM: I've heard that you're working on a new book.

MR: I am; it's called 'What we still don't know'. It's going to
be on the questions confronting 21st century science. The origin
of life is one, the existence of aliens is another, the nature
of fundamental theory is another, and complexity is a fourth. It
also addresses the question of whether limits to science will
come from us having reached bedrock, as it were, or if, on the
other hand, it'll come from the limits of human brains, which
will achieve their limit before we've actually probed the depths
of the human condition.

AM: Do you think there is a limit to how far our intelligence
can take us?

MR: I certainly think that humans are not the limit of
evolutionary complexity. There may indeed be post-human
entities, either organic or silicon-based, which can in some
respects surpass what a human can do. I think it would be rather
surprising if our mental capacities were matched to
understanding all the keys levels of reality. The chimpanzees
certainly aren't, so why should ours be either? So there may be
levels that will have to await some post-human emergence. The
Martin Rees interviews on cosmology and biology are serialized





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                            How To Talk To Aliens

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:20:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:20:01 -0400
Subject: How To Talk To Aliens




Source: Forbes Magazine - New York, New York, USA

http://tinyurl.com/7ogoq

10.24.05

Communicating
How To Talk To Aliens
David M. Ewalt

On Nov. 16, 1974, astronomer Frank Drake dedicated a new
observatory in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, by sending humankind's
first deliberate communication to extraterrestrials.

The message, made up of 1,679 seemingly random zeros and ones,
was shorter than the first four paragraphs of this article, but
it still took three minutes to send. While the message began its
voyage to the cosmos--a 24,000 year trip to M-13, a cluster of
stars in the constellation Hercules, to be exact--visiting
dignitaries listened over a loudspeaker while each bit played as
a short, high-pitched tone. Some participants later said it
brought tears to their eyes.

Humans have debated the best ways to contact our interstellar
neighbors for centuries. In 1820, German mathematician Karl
Friedrich Gauss proposed cutting an enormous right triangle into
the Siberian pine forest, creating a monument to the Pythagorean
theorem big enough to see from outer space. Twenty years later,
Austrian astronomer Joseph von Littrow expanded on that idea,
suggesting the excavation of huge trenches in the Sahara desert,
which would be filled with kerosene and set ablaze. Flaming
triangles, circles and squares would be a beacon to our solar
neighbors, at least until the fire went out.

To a large extent, modern technologies have made these
suggestions irrelevant. Since the 1920s, human radio and TV
broadcasts have spammed the galaxy, and anyone listening has
already gotten an earful. "In some sense, this is all academic,
because we have been broadcasting to aliens for decades," says
Seth Shostak, senior astronomer at the SETI Institute, a
nonprofit organization dedicated to the search for
extraterrestrial intelligence. "They're already watching Kate
Smith and Kukla Fran and Howdy Doody."

But what if we decided we wanted to send a message with intent,
something that will say more about us than an episode of The
Love Boat? What's the best way to create a message that will be
received, understood and useful?

The Arecibo broadcast represented one approach. Those 1,679
zeros and ones carried hidden meaning for any intelligent
species who noticed that 1,679 is the product of two prime
numbers, 73 and 23. Arrange the message in 73 rows of 23
numbers, and you get a picture painted in bits. (Click here to
see the decoded Arecibo message.) It was a novel approach, but
the message was hidden, and it depended on aliens making leaps
of logic in order to decipher it.

Arecibo wasn't the first time Drake pondered how to address an
alien audience. In March 1972, a plaque he designed with
legendary astronomer Carl Sagan was blasted into space on board
the Pioneer 10 spacecraft. (Click here to see the Pioneer
Plaque.) A few years later, Drake and Sagan would team up again
on a much more ambitious project, attaching a gold-plated record
full of music and photos onto the two Voyager probes.

These efforts are notable because so few other attempts have
been made to craft a message to alien civilizations. But as
actual attempts at communication, the spacecraft fall flat.
They're too small to notice and move too slowly. Far better to
use a broadcast signal, which we can target at a specific star,
and which moves at the speed of light.

We could use the same radio frequencies as the Arecibo message,
but why not do something a little more dramatic? The universe is
pretty transparent to optical light--that's how we can see far
away galaxies. If we used a bank of high-powered lasers, we
could beam a high-bandwidth message across the cosmos.

And we could do it with style. "One nice thing about light is
that creatures develop eyes, and it would be possible to make
optical radiation bright enough to see," says Paul Horowitz, a
professor of physics at Harvard University. "That's an
unmistakable signature. You look up, and there's a star,
blinking in code, and the color's changing, too."

Next comes the question of what the message should say. Drake
says if he could do it again, he might convene an international
committee of scientists, artists, politicians and religious
figures to produce a holographic movie about life on Earth.

Other researchers suggest that the best way to get an alien's
attention is to send it a significant numeric pattern, perhaps
prime numbers or the value of Pi. "Maybe the most fundamental
way to initiate a message would be with mathematics," says
Horowitz. "A lot of stuff will surely be understood by anybody,
no matter what slime they're made out of, because it�s so
basic."

The mathematical approach has its critics. "You're not going to
send the value of Pi," says Shostak. "If aliens sent us the
value of Pi, wouldn't you be disappointed? You learned that in
seventh grade."

Instead, why not transmit everything we've got? "I would just
send the entire contents of Google's servers," says Shostak. "To
begin with, you don't have to worry about the fact that they
don�t speak English, because there's a lot of redundancy, so
they'll learn it. And every subject is in there. Sure, there's a
lot of pornography, but that's human stuff, too."

Besides, it doesn't make sense to tease an alien civilization
with just a "hello," considering that it could take millennia
before we hear back from them. "It's like the Romans sent a
message [to aliens] and we got the reply," says Shostak. "[The
reply] was actually directed at Cicero, not at us. I just think
that you would send as much info as the technology would allow
on the assumption that you're not going to hear back."

The discussion might seem academic. But many astronomers are
confident they'll detect an extraterrestrial intelligence in the
next few decades, and when that happens, we better have an
official reply ready, or risk being drowned out by the public.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                       Mines May Point To Life On Mars

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:23:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:23:40 -0400
Subject: Mines May Point To Life On Mars




Source: The Daily Princetonian -  Princeton, New Jersey, USA

http://tinyurl.com/c77at

Monday, October 24, 2005


Lecture

Mines In Canada, South Africa May Point To Life On Mars

Jill Feffer
Princetonian Contributor

Recent scientific discoveries indicate that life on Mars may be
more likely than previously thought, geosciences professor
Tullis Onstott said Friday.

Speaking in Peyton Hall at the academic year's first meeting of
the Princeton Astrobiology Club (P-ABC), Onstott said that
recent high-resolution images of Mars have shown topographical
features like volcanoes to be much younger than originally
suspected.

With the issue of age in doubt, the question of life on Mars has
also been revived. The primary method for exploring this
possibility is to look for water, he said, because living things
require water for survival.

Scientists are encouraged by the discovery of microbial life in
water from gold mines in South Africa and Canada, Onstott said.
The water, four kilometers below ground, is the same depth at
which water is believed to be trapped on Mars. The next step
will be to locate the same organisms on the "Red Planet", he
added.

While undergraduates are not needed to help with that project,
Onstott said, the P-ABC is an excellent place to "seek answers
to the most important questions."

The club, which aims to promote astrobiological issues on
campus, was founded last spring by Zach Berta '07, David Smith
'07, Mike Dreibelbis '07 and Jason Aramburu '07. They were
inspired by GEO/AST/EEB 255 "Life in the Universe," which
Onstott co-taught last fall.

The P-ABC "is an important club on campus. It brings together
all the different sciences, uniting ... different topics for the
common goal of viewing life in an astronomical context," Berta
said. "Earth may be cool, but we also have perspective in terms
of feeling very, very small."

The club's previous activities included several lectures, a
"Star Party" using Peyton Hall's telescope and a trip to NASA
headquarters in Washington, D.C. in conjunction with a Wilson
School task force.

Future plans for the P-ABC's expansion include a field trip to
the Goddard Space Center in Maryland and the establishment of a
certificate in astrobiology. The certificate would be modeled
after a program like environmental studies and would most likely
involve four courses in astronomy, ecology and evolutionary
biology, geology and chemistry, as well as related JP and thesis
work, Smith said.

The club is also planning a lecture by Greg Olsen, a Princeton





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                 A Better Transmission System For Deep-Space

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:28:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:28:55 -0400
Subject: A Better Transmission System For Deep-Space




Source: Eureka Alert.Org - Washington, DC, USA
        The American Science Serving Society

http://tinyurl.com/7t26l

Public release date: 24-Oct-2005

Contact: Harvey Leifert
hleifert.nul
202-777-7507

American Geophysical Union

Creating A Better Transmission System For Deep-Space Applications

Recent advances in wireless computing technology could improve
deep-space missions like asteroid research and remote spacecraft
operations by changing the way signals are sent from Earth. A
new method designed to effectively deliver commands and
instructions using hundreds of millions of tiny transmitters
linked together could also free the giant satellite dishes
currently used to send and receive the long-range information
for other applications. A research paper describing the scheme
for relatively simple high-power transmitters will be published
in the October issue of Radio Science, a journal of the American
Geophysical Union.

The technique is based on a principle known as a phased array, a
method to align a number of mini-transmitters alongside one
another and direct their combined beam into the sky. Such a
system has previously been used for military radar technology,
but has only recently become cost effective for civilian use
because of improvements in consumer computing technology,
according to the paper authored by Louis Scheffer at Cadence
Design Systems. He indicates that the advantages from so many
individual transmitters, using designs similar to cell phone
technology, could include improved reliability and efficiency
over currently used systems while reducing the transmission
costs associated with the mammoth satellite dishes. Overall, he
suggests that the net result could be significantly lowered
costs for space communications, more data from science
spacecraft, and an increase in planetary and deep-space research
that requires remote signals.

Currently, planetary radars and distant spacecraft
communications need transmitters with extremely high power,
which has been accomplished by combining a strong microwave
source with a large reflective antenna. This is now done with
giant satellite dishes mechanically steered to a point in the
sky. NASA's Goldstone radar, for example, the agency's
sensitive, deep-space analysis radar, uses a 500 kilowatt
transmitter and a 70-meter [230-foot] reflector for tracking
asteroids that may collide with Earth. The large antenna is
focused on only a small point in space at a time, and must be
adjusted--and occasionally shut down--due to changing weather
conditions. In addition, Scheffer points out that while almost
all of the world's largest antennas are used to both send and
receive, the powerful transmissions severely hinder their
ability to detect faint signals from space.

"Imagine trying to listen for a whisper while you are shouting,"
Scheffer said. "Also, these antennas are incredibly busy, so
only a small fraction of the possible science gets done."

He proposes a large, flat array of low-power transmitters
printed on a number of circuit boards and attached to an
unmoving infrastructure on the ground, controlled by computers,
which can deliver an enormously powerful beam in any direction,
or even multiple directions at once. The paper outlines the
requirements of a new system that would offer enhanced
reliability, since a single failure would not affect the overall
signal, and improved maintenance costs because of its lack of
moving parts and weather resistance. The system Scheffer
proposes is designed solely to transmit, as is needed for
planetary radar and spacecraft control. The transmitters would
also allow existing antennas to operate in a more efficient
receive-only mode.

If available mass-production manufacturing techniques used for
electronics can be assumed for the centimeter-sized chips, a
transmitter similar to the Goldstone radar could be constructed
for nearly one-quarter the cost, Scheffer reports. He notes that
the significant amount of research and work done in the field of
phased array radars renders the development of such a system
plausible, though no previous applications to earth and space
sciences have been studied. He further suggests that as computer
chip technology continues to improve, additional wavelength and
smaller antennas are possible to further improve the systems.

The first possible application would likely be for spacecraft
command and asteroid research to observe objects that may pose a
threat to Earth. A more speculative application, according to
Scheffer, is that sending powerful signals to distant stars is
easier and cheaper than previously thought. This dramatically





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Town Baffled By Deaths Of 22 Horses

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:30:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:34:36 -0400
Subject: Town Baffled By Deaths Of 22 Horses


To Errol and the Listerions:

This is strange beyond strange...

Still Lurking , but things are better now.

GT McCoy

-----


Source: The Denver Post - Denver, Colorado, USA

http://denverpost.com/news/ci_3148446

10/25/2005


Town Baffled By Deaths Of 22 Horses
By Amy Brouillette
Denver Post Staff Writer

Authorities are considering everything from poisonous weeds to a
lightning strike to explain two incidents this month that have
killed 22 horses and have residents in the ranching town of
Calhan on edge.

"People are really nervous," said Eileen Johnson of Pikes Peak
Co-Op, a horse-feed supply store in Calhan, a town of about 900
people 35 miles northeast of Colorado Springs. "If it were just
one incident, that would be different."

On Saturday, 16 dead horses were discovered in a pasture owned
by rancher William DeWitt.

The animals were found on the barren landscape not far from a
neighboring ranch where six horses and a burro were found dead
Oct. 11.

"The cases may be linked, but at this point we are just not
sure," said Lt. Clif Northam, spokesman for the El Paso County
Sheriff's Office, which is investigating both incidents.

At 10 a.m. Saturday, DeWitt discovered the horses after being
alerted by his neighbor Ned Sixkiller, who had been checking his
stalls in an adjacent field.

When DeWitt arrived on the scene, he found the horses on their
sides, strewn around the pasture. He immediately called police.

"I've never seen or heard of anything like this," said DeWitt,
72, a lifelong rancher who owns 40 more horses. "I was shocked."

Investigators said the horses had been dead at least three days
and that there was no sign of trauma. A veterinarian called to
the scene speculated that because of their proximity to one
another and a barbed-wire fence, the animals may have been
killed by lightning.

Northam said there were reports of lightning in El Paso County
on Wednesday night.

"If it was lightning, it would be the largest strike I've ever
seen," DeWitt said.

Foul play is not suspected in either case, but investigators
said they are "ruling nothing out" until they receive results
from autopsies and other tests.

Sixkiller also reported to authorities the animals found dead
Oct. 11. He told investigators he found the animals - three
mares, a filly colt, a stud colt, a filly yearling and a burro -





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 41

From: John Hayes <John.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:24:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:36:22 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 41


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan.nul>
==========================

UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 10, Number 41
October 26, 2005
Editor: Joseph Trainor

E-mail: Masinaigan.nul
Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/


LUMINOUS RED UFOs APPEAR IN ILLINOIS

      "Unidentified flying red objects spotted recently
over Tinley Park and Orland Park" in Illinois "have
stirred up UFO investigating communities everywhere."
      ""National UFO Web sites are all over the red
beauties."
      According to the National UFO Reporting Center in
Seattle, Washington state, "Late Friday night, September
30, 2005, our offices began receiving reports of several
peculiar red lights seen in the night sky above Tinley
Park and Orland, Illinois."
      "Those peculiar pulses of red light floated over
Southland skies last weekend, around 11:15 p.m. Friday
night, and again at 1 a.m. Saturday, eerily similar to
ones that showed up last year on mild weekend nights in
August and September (2004).  Hundreds of Southlanders
saw the lights last weekend, too-and found them just as
puzzling as their predecessors."
      "But a small circle of friends in Tinley Park
believe they've debunked the mystery of the glowing red
floaters."
      ""Dave Palagi was sitting with his wife around a
fire in their friends' backyard September 30, enjoying a
lovely clear night when they all saw the oddity
explained."
      "'We could clearly see the red lights themselves
were flares, and each was suspended by two balloons,' he
said."
      "'An occasional ash could be seen dropping.  Another
member of the party then saw a third balloon, farther to
the north and much higher.  We were watching them
actually rising-lazily drifting along and going up.'"
      "Palagi figured the balloons were launched around
175th Street and 84th Avenue, not far from Wally and
Maureen Bekta's home in the 8200 block of Queen Victoria
Lane where the group sat."
      "Maureen Bekta also saw the lights and 'the balloon-
type thing on top of the two that were lower and
closer.'"
      "'It was low enough that we felt it was a prank,'
she said.  The balloons themselves were dark-colored.
'You could just see the outline.'"
      "'Aha!' Palagi said, 'This is how they did it.  It
was just such a revelation after seeing these things last
year.'"
      "It's been anyone's guess what the lights are, since
everyone seems to know what they are not."
      "A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) spokeswoman
said she checked into the lights last year, too.  If they
weren't planes or helicopters, the FAA wouldn't track
them."
      "'We don't track lights,' Elizabeth Isham Corey
said."
      "Tinley Park police, who received some calls last
weekend, denied reports of flares."
      "'From all the reports we've received, they're not
flares with some helium balloons or anything like this,'
Tinley Park Police Commander Tom Boling said."
      "Boling said his department would not investigate
the lights 'unless there's some reckless conduct that
would endanger someone.'"
      "'We just don't know what's causing these red lights
to appear in the sky,' he said.
      "The National Weather Services was also stumped."
      "But an astronomer at Chicago's Adler Planetarium,
who concluded the lights weren't meteors or comets or
satellites, said they did appear to be man-made."
      "Dr. Mark Hammergren watched several tapes of last
year's lights at the request of the local Mutual UFO
Network (MUFON) chapter."
      "'One thing that makes me very suspicious is that
these sightings have all occurred on weekends - (that)
suggests that there's some human activity connected with
it,' he said.  'I would love to believe this, but I'm not
going to base my career and spend my time on something
that's been cooked up by hoaxsters.'"
      "There exists a 'standard' UFO hoax that uses a
candle and a plastic dry cleaning bag to fashion a sort
of glowing hot-air balloons, but these (Illinois) lights
are too brilliantly red to be ordinary flames, Hammergren
said."
      "He likes the road flare theory."  (See the
newspaper The Daily Southtown of Tinley Park, Ill. For
October 9, 2005, "UFOs have a flare about them."  Many
thanks to Robert Fischer for this newspaper article.)


EIGHT  FIREBALLS SEEN IN MARTINSVILLE, INDIANA

      On Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 7:30 p.m., Kathleen
Amity was outdoors at her home in Martinsville, Indiana,
looking north, when she spotted "what first appeared as
two fireballs behind a hill and the tree line.  Then the
two split into four smaller balls of fire.  Seconds
later, four more appeared directly to the west."
      "They all hovered above the tree line for about two
minutes.  Then they slowly sank behind the hill.  They
were extremely bright orange and let off an orange glow
in the sky around them.  It was 7:30 p.m. and had just
gotten dark."
      She described the UFOs as "round, bright orange fire
balls."  (Email Form Report)


UFO SIGHTED OVER BIRCH HILL, BERKSHIRE

      "A noisy UFO woke Birch Hill residents in the early
morning hours of Monday," October 10, 2005, "as it zoomed
over the sleeping suburb" in Berkshire, UK.
      "The craft spent half an hour hovering above houses
in Jevington before zipping towards South Hill Park,
according to witnesses."
      "Susan Mallia, who called the (newspaper) Midweek to
see if anyone else reported the strange sight, said: 'I
have never seen anything like that before.  It looked
like a pile of scaffolding with lights-red, blue and
orange ones.'"
      "'It also had a big spotlight that was moving
around.  I don't think it was a helicopter because it
sounded like a vacuum cleaner or a generator.'"
      "'Perhaps it was a weather balloon.  It was very
noisy, and it would have woken everyone in the area.  It
woke me at 2:30 a.m., and my husband and I watched it for
half an hour.'"
      "'Just as he went to get his camera, it headed off
to South Hill Park and was out of sight-but we could
still hear it.'"
      "Midweek's sister paper, the Bracknell News, was
invaded with calls of an extra-terrestrial nature over
the summer as UFOs flocked to observe the town."
      "Nowhere in Bracknell Forest was left out of the
spacemen's tour, with the paper reporting sightings at
the Coppid Beech Hotel (July 7), Birch Hill (July 14),
Crown Wood (July 19), Binfield and College Town (July 28
and another in Binfield (August 30)."
(Editor's Note:  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle used this area
as the location of the Sherlock Holmes story, "The
Adventure of the Copper Beeches."  Curiously, Sherlock
Holmes and Dr. John H. Watson were in the area on April
20, 1889, which, of course, is the birth date of Adolf
Hitler.)
      "The News also interviewed local man Terry Walters,
who claims he was operated on by aliens in the 1960s and
has also exorcised a borough councilor's home."
      "Since then, alien visitors seemed to have flown
south for the winter, but it appears that they are once
again spying on the town's residents."  (See the
Berkshire newspaper Midweek for October 11, 2005, "Latest
UFO is spotted hovering over Birch Hill homes."  Many
thanks to Robert Fischer for this newspaper article.)


FIVE UFOs SEEN BY THOUSANDS IN EASTERN BOLIVIA

      Five unidentified flying objects (UFOs) were seen
last Wednesday night," October 12, 2005, "over eastern
Oruro" in Bolivia, "causing curiosity and amazement in
thousands of witnesses who managed to see the unknown
images, which were captured by Canal (Channel) 39 of the
Corporacion Orurena de Comunicacion," a Bolivian TV
network.
      "The flying objects appeared in the sky at 10:30
p.m.  They consisted of two strange objects located in
the eastern region that drew people's attention due to
their red, green and blue lights.  They also appeared and
vanished in the firmament."
      Witnesses also reported that the multiple lights
blinked in sequence.
      ""The most notorious one was a silvery, circular UFO
that presented two circumferences-a smaller one located
inside the object and another outside the circumference,
spinning at an impressive speed."
      "Canal 39 managed to record the UFOs' presence as
citizens phoned the television station to describe what
they could see from their respective areas."
      "Abel Flores Mujica, one of the witnesses,
manifested his surprise at having seen the unidentified
object in space."
      "'I refer to it as an artifact, since I couldn't
believe what I was seeing.  My daughter went outside, and
I told her, 'That's a UFO.  She replied that it wasn't a
UFO, that it was the planet Mars that was delayed in
covering (moving through-J.T.) space.  But that object
had lights, and it wasn't a star.  Last night's event
startled me, and then my daughter said, 'Look, it's not
the only one, there are others there,' and it was
evident,' he said."
      "Canal 39 journalist and TV show host Pedro Rubin de
Celis said that Wednesday night's sighting confirms the
theory that we are not alone in the universe."
      "'This has been a marvelous presence of UFOs in the
firmament, and many people stepped out onto their
balconies to observe this spectacle.  The camera zoom has
shown us, beyond the vehicle's flashes, a circle making
concentric movements within other circles around the
vessel and with a black dot at the center.  The objects
also had their own movement,' he explained."  (See the
Bolivian newspaper La Patria for October 14, 2005,
"Channel 39 managed to capture images of five
unidentified objects."  Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y
Guillermo Gimenez of Planeta UFO por este articulo de
diario.)



Letter From the Editor:

      First I'd like to apologize for not having issue 41
ready in time for October 19, 2005.  My "Model T"
computer is up and running.  However, my current server
will not allow me to connect and claims I am using
obsolete software.  So now I have to find a new server or
else newer software before I can get back online.
      While away from the Net, and deprived of my usual
news sources, I have been consoling myself by watching
Jimmy Neutron and Taradise on the relatives' cable TV.
My favorite episode of the former..."I Dream of Jimmy,"
which is a nice take-off on Dennis Quaid's 1983 film
Dreamscape.
      They have some great one-liners on that show.
Here's an example:
      Jimmy's Dad: "I'll never forget my first sleepover.
The food fights, the practical jokes, the crying for
Mom..."
      Jimmy's Mom: "That was our honeymoon, dear."
      And then there's Taradise, which stars Tara Reid,
who seems to have replaced Jessica Simpson as the world's
dumbest blonde.  Occasionally, Tara issues
pronunciamentos called "Tara-Facts," which are truly eye-
opening.
      In one segment, a British reporter asked our
heroine, "Did you visit the island of Lesbos?"
      Tara replied, "No.  What's that?"
(Editor's Comment: The buzzsaw noise you hear is Sappho
spinning in her grave.)
      Visiting Croatia's seashore, Tara said, "This is the
highest spot on Earth."
      And in the most recent episode, Tara proclaimed,
"Biarritz is the greatest country in the world!"
(Editor's Note: Actually, it's a seaside resort city in
southwestern France.)
      Well, that's an F in geography for Miss Reid.
Somebody sign up that girl for summer school.

      And we'll be back soon...hopefully...with more UFO,
Fortean and paranormal news from around the planet Earth,
brought to you by "the paper that goes home-UFO Roundup."
Hope to be seeing you all again soon.

      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

Home to UFO Roundup, Encounters With Aliens On This Day,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:42:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:39:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 21:01:27 +0100
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

Thank you for an excellent, well-put discourse on the topic!

>The passive radar update rate is effectively continuous. You
>don't have the blind time that is caused either by the duty
>cycle of your output device or, more important, the deionisation
>time in the antenna duplexer.

Limited as you say by processing speed.

>Passive radar can cover arbitrarily short-range and and is
>effective at doppler-separating moving targets down to low
>altitudes, and so could be useful in local flap areas where a
>small area of a few miles needs close-range monitoring. More
>importantly you don't have a scan rate to worry about, which
>ordinarily limits you to sampling a one-or-two degree slice of
>the surveillance drum only once every few seconds.

A valuable attribute for passive radar, given fast moving
objects.

>With passive
>radar your effective sample rate is a software issue and can be
>arbitrarily short depending only on processing time for whatever
>sophistication you require. I've read that typical rates in
>practical systems are around a second or less.

1 second? Interesting if true. Meteor trackers usually don't
need to do _real_ time analysis while military applications
would definitely need faster rates.

Although I agree that software may be able to handle the
processing, it seems more likely that it will require
specialized signal processing circuit boards to get the best
processing speed.

A couple questions.

1) Passive radar is "line of sight", right? Just like active,
except active requires the emitting signal to be "line of
sight"?

2) The larger area you are covering and the greater resolution
you desire, then the processing speed is affected?

3) Are passive radar receiver antennae omnidirectional and if so
how do they handle ground reflections of signals reflected
off of targets?

>A possible benefit for UFO studies (from the point of view of
>ETH or secret-technology hypotheses) would be the fact that the
>target cannot know it is being illuminated, and because there is
>no single dedicated transmitter frequency or
>transmitter/receiver location it cannot easily utilise tactical
>deception jamming against the system.

True, but I still wonder if their technology is basically
radar transparent (not even trying to hide) based on past
reports. It could be that the past radars were inadequately
pointed or operated or we simply are not getting the true
story from the airport control towers or the radar illuminated
"UFO" was not hardware, but something else.

>I don't know what the GPS wavelength is, but regarding TV and FM
>signals, even though the inherent resolution of metre waves is
>poor compared to centimetric radar the multiple data sources and
>software integration means that passive radar has huge potential
>for target identification because it's a fully 3-D system. It
>allows the computer to match signal strengths at different
>receivers against the second-by-second track information and
>produce a map of the target cross-section at a number of
>different aspects which can then be compared with a register of
>characteristic patterns in the computer's memory.

Excuse me if I am too much a novice at these matters, but it
seems to me using a handheld radio that numerous weather effects
(and the ionosphere) play havoc on signal strengths. Sure you
can build a bigger, better antenna and amplify the signal, but
these signal effects must impact using field strengths. Can
f.s. really be relied upon in any way?

>So it seems there's potentially a lot of information to be
>extracted about unidentified targets by a passive radar array.
>As far as ufologists are concerned, in practical terms it might
>still be pie in the sky - but so's an active radar array, and
>amateur passive radar is not entirely new ground. There are
>meteor-detection enthusiasts out there already. Of course there
>will always be huge technical and operational problems with
>both, but with passive arrays at least the hardware is cheap and
>off-the-shelf, there are no licensing issues, and most of the
>innovation is in the software. The beauty of it is the
>accessiblity of those multiple data-streams: Independent
>receiver sites don't need expensive independent radar
>installations, and near real-time plot extraction from multiple
s>ites would give the best possible coordinates for zeroing in
>optical and other instrumentation.

Sounds good to me! Surely too expensive for amateurs though.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:50:37 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:40:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Hall


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>>Again, my point was and is that Rudiak and Clark are wrong when
>>they say that the Socorro episode was investigated through and
>>through. It wasn�t.

>Dave Rudiak, Brad Sparks, you and I were arguing this case
>predominantly, with Greg Boone, Dick Hall and even Ray Stanford
>thrown in.

<snip>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                           Terry Groff In Hospital

From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:31:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:41:37 -0400
Subject: Terry Groff In Hospital


Dear Listerions,

Terry Groff was admitted to the emergency room at Parkland
Hospital in Dallas two days ago. Looks like he's going to be
okay, but will remain there a few more days.

Please join me in wishing him well - a prayer, a positive





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:58:15 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:43:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:08:40 -0700
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

Thank you for chiming in on this topic, since its your "baby".

>Both systems have been in existence for many years, underscoring
>the fact that "passive" radar is not "pie in the sky." It is a
>down-to-earth technology, which has only to be adapted and
>"tweaked," in order for it to apply to detecting other unknowns,
>i.e. UFOs, in the atmosphere and near-Earth environment.

I agree it has been done. But it is "pie in the sky" from the
budget standpoint for 'real' Ufologists.

>One comment that the system would require prodigious computer
>power is correct. Even a small, mono-static (i.e. single
>receiver station) requires the ability to perform approximately
>10 giga-flops per second for real-time analysis of a target. A
>larger, multi-static system, with two or more receivers, whose
>data are collected, analyzed, and compared on a real-time basis,
>requires on the order of 100 giga-flop capability.

>The ability to process all of the data has been the principal
>barrier, over recent decades, to constructing such a system,
>even though intelligence and defense personnel recognized the
>advantages of "passive" radar over the more traditional "active"
>radar that has been in use since the 1940's. Few individuals, or
>even institutions, had that kind of number-crunching capability.
>However, today, such computer capability is on the near horizon,
>and is close to being available to anyone with the means to
>purchase it.

If the basic passive radar system is cheap and easy, but the
real time processing hard and costly, can we not record and
postprocess at a cost effective rate (storage should be cheap
these days). Then, although we do not have real time data to
allow us to zoom in with other instruments based on the passive
radar data, we can at least have our own data set, which can be
matched to concurrent optical recordings.

>However, if the system collects and analyzes multiple samples
>per second, targets can be "screened" for characteristics which
>would allow "knowns" to be separated from "unknowns." For
>example, one would not expect a satellite, migratory bird, or an
>aircraft to be traveling at several kilometers per second at 80
>kilometers above the surface of the Earth. Moreover, one would
>not expect the system to receive an equally strong signal from a
>meteor both before, and after, it entered the Earth's
>atmosphere.

I still have problems with the ionosphere and radar. Do you know
how this barrier is handled?

>Hence, a "passive" radar system could be designed to "flag," and
>record, such events. Obviously, and all we have to do is
>"capture" one such return, in order to make the world sit up and
>take notice...

Definitely. But do we need real-time to accomplish this goal? I
don't think so.

>Curiously, I have been discussing my proposal since January
>1995, and only now are people beginning to take interest in the
>concept. On seven occasions, I have presented the idea to people
>who count their wealth in billions, and I have yet to receive
>even a hint that they might be interested in sponsoring
>construction of such a system. Very bizarre, given the hundreds
>of millions of dollars some of those individuals have thrown at
>the SETI project, which has yet to produce a single result.

Bizarre, but could the reason be that they are pressured by the
military indistrial complex wanting to prevent detection of
advanced aircraft (spacecraft) (Stealth bombers and beyond)?
Or do you think the government pressures them to keep
definitive data about UFOs out of the public's hands?

>In conclusion, "passive" radar is now within our grasp, and it
>will provide us with the ability to resolve the UFO debate, once





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:19:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:45:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Gehrman


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>For my part I've wasted enough of my time on it. Arguing for the
>sake of arguing so _you_U can justify an entrenched position from
>which you find it difficult to climb out of, rather than the
>merits of the case _is_ in my estimation a waste of one's time.
>It's the case that is of issue here, not whether you win or
>lose.

Don, List,

There is an issue that none of you will address and that is Eastland's
report on the "Bean" as an explanation.  It may be pure BS but if it is,
then it's an elaborate attempt to neutralize Ray Stanford's research.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:16:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:47:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:19:55 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>>When Menzel tries to make such a big issue about Gill's use of
>>the term, the sensible answer would have been to say so what?

>First of all, it wasn't Menzel. It was Klass.

Well, John was right, and I was wrong on this point. Since
writing the above, I've found that Menzel also tried to make a
big deal of Father Gill's use of the word "mothership." On page
148 of Sagan and Page's UFOs: A Scientific Debate, Menzel
writes, "Certainly Father Gill was familiar with the UFO
phenomenon. He certainly used the UFOlogist jargon, such as
'Mother Ship.'"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:51:55 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Rudiak


>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>While the word mothership itself is hundreds of years old in the
>sense of motherness (1) its naval use was coined by Rear Admiral
>Albert S. Barker (1845-1916) when he was commander of the
>Asiatic Squadron.

>Barker invented the term for warships when gunships of the same
>squadron were assigned to their care and supervision (2).

>However, the term mothership itself was still not entirely
>familiar until after the World Wars. Until then it was usually
>written in inverted commas and as two words. An article in the
>Coshocton (Ohio) Daily Times of October 14th, 1909, for example,
>feels the need to explain what the expression meant to its
>readers:

>-----

>Cradling The Submarines

>Mother Ship Puts Little Boats to Bed at Her Side.

>Putting submarine boats to bed by their mother ship interested
>spectators in New York the otber day. The vessel, called the
>parent of tbe underwater boats, was the Castine. Each submarine
>flotilla is now accompanied wherever it goes by a parent ship
><snip>

>(1) For example:

>We can hardly suppose, as some evil-minded person has suggested
>to us, that this address is put forth as a specimen of "native
>manufactures", under the nursing mothership of the
>Home-League... (The United States Democratic Review, Volume 10,
>Issue 46, April 1842.)

>-ship, which indicates a particular condition
>or state, is a suffix from Old English (originally
>-scipe).

>(2) Mother Ships of the Navy, The Evening Democrat (Warren,
>Pennsylvania), November 23rd 1900.

I did an electronic search of the N.Y. Times and L.A. Times
yesterday and found that "mothership" or "mother ship" was a
very commonly used term even before WWII, applied in various
contexts to the main harboring or protective ship to other craft
of all types: smaller seaships, submarines, seaplanes,
dirigibles, etc.

It has also been used in purely aeronautical terms for one
aircraft being launched or carried by another bigger one.
Although this started mainly around 1948 in application to the
to drops of experimental planes like the X-1 and X-15 from the
carrier aircraft, the first such instance I found dates clear
back to 1910! In a N.Y. Times article, Oct. 2, reporting on a
translation of a German military white paper on applications of
the new aeroplanes to combat, the article notes that the primary
use at that time was considered to be reconnaissance. The
smaller, faster aeroplane was envisioned as being carried near
enemy lines by a blimp or dirigible, then released:

"...the chief usefulness of the flying machine in war will be
for scouting. It is suggested that until the enemy actually is
sighted the aeroplane be towed or carried by an aerial cruiser
in such a way that it is ready for instant flight, and so
attached that the act of starting it will free it from the
_mother ship_....  As soon as the first important observations
of the enemy have been made the aeroplane is dispatched to
headquarters, the airship remaining to make further study. The
airship is to be used only if the enemy is at great distance..."

The first mixed naval/aeronautical use I found in a 1918 N.Y.
Times article about two seaplanes and the host ship. The
subheadline, e.g., reads: "NC-1 Scrapes a Gig from the Mother
Ship" Polar explorer Amundsen wrote an article in the L.A.
Times in 1926 describing the history of seaplane use in polar
exploration. Two seaplanes were to be carried aboard the main
vessel, that Amundsen at one point refers to as the
"mothership."

Use of the term in the two papers started right around 1900
(N.Y. Times electronic archives dated back to 1852; L.A. Times
to 1885). I did not find an instance in this abbreviated search
where the newspaper felt it necessary to explain the term to the
readers.

Overall in the two papers there were about 2600 instances of use
in the 20th century, with the two-word "mother ship" being at
least 10 times more common than "mothership." It was primarily a
naval term or mixed naval/aeronautical term until after WWII.
Then it began to be used more in aeronautical and aerospace
contexts. The first such instances I found were 1946 and 1947,
where the "mother ship" was the guide ship to a remotely-
 controlled drone aircraft. By 1948, it was being used for the
carrier/dropship to the X-1 experimental plane. It was very
commonly used for the carrier/dropship for the X-15 in the
1960s. In 1962, it began being used for the orbiting command
module on the Apollo project. The lunar lander would leave and
return to the "mothership." E.g., this June 22, 1962 article in
the L.A. Times explaining the basic concept:

"At the selected point of landing, two astronauts riding in the
transfer capsule will detach itfrom the main spacecraft and
begin the descent to the surface, leaving one or two men in the
orbiting _mothership_."

In all this, I found only one instance where "mother ship" was
used in a UFO context, a 1955 N.Y. Times book review of
Adamski's "Inside the Space Ships":

"The saucer took off and flew on magnetic force to a mother-ship
2,000 feet long that was hovering close overhead. The mother-
 ship proved to be tastefully furnished in every detail,
iincluding two 'incredibly lovely young women' (no antennae).
The petite blonde was from Venus, and she wore golden sandals.
The merry brunette was from Mars, and she could read Adamski's
innermost thoughts. She also kissed him lightly and gave him a
drink of slightly viscous water. Those girls rocked him back on
his heels for a while, but he hadn't seen anything yet. ...The
mother-ship flew 50,000 miles from Earth, traveling smoothly on
'the currents in space'...."

Well you get the idea. I had to stop typing because the review
was steaming my glasses.

This brief overview of the origins of "mothership" from two
major newspapers suggests that it was a commonly used term in
various naval and aeronautical contexts, even in the first half
of the 20th century, but almost never used in a UFO context even
after 1950. It also was generalized almost immediately from its
original purely naval use, to the new craft of airplanes,
starting clear back in 1910, being used either as the host naval
or aerial ship.

With this historical background, even if Father Gill had never
heard "mothership" in a purely aeronautical context, he could
easily have generalized it from the common naval term, just as
many had done spontaneously before him. Contrary to what the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:54:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>The assertion that they could not have been the source of
>>stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
>>years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
>>dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
>>appeared in the news media at the time.

>Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
>clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
>"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
>strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
>it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
>tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
>email to me).

"Specifically mentions"?

The phrase "victims of the wreck" makes no sense, and is bad
English. You can have "victims of the crash", "victims of the
hurricane","victims of the plague", etc. but "victims of the
wreck" is a non-starter (unless Ramey's command of English was
atrocious). So we can rule out this phrase, I think, from
Ramey's infamous memo.

In addition, I claim the "V" is just as likely to be a "Y", and
the "W" in wreck looks like a "G". This "W" in any case looks
very different from the "W" in "weather", so they cannot both be
"W". So where does this analysis of Ramey's memo lead us?
Answer: nowhere. I suggest that unless some super-powerful new
technology arrives, we drop the whole idea of ever being able to
decipher this Ramey scrap of paper.

>It is also interesting that General Ramey back in 1947 went out
>of his way to ridicule the idea that there was a crew, stating
>that the object was "too lightly constructed to have carried
>anyone." Then he "scoffed at the possibility that the object
>could have been piloted." Why would Ramey bring the subject up
>to begin with? Possibly it was a form of damage control against
>rumors or speculation of bodies being involved.

>Another example of this from contemporaneous stories was Ramey
>also stating the object would have been 25 feet across if
>reconstructed. That's a very odd statement for the small, torn-
>up radar target displayed on Ramey's rug, which would only be
>about 4 feet across if reconstructed. Where did 25 feet come
>from? Well oddly, that squares exactly with the reports of the
>size of the craft from two witnesses I know of, one being Johnny
>McBoyle, the Roswell reporter who tried to phone in the story to
>Albuquerque. Lydia Sleppy, the teletype operator, told Stan
>Friedman that when they tried to wire McBoyle's story out, they
>were cut off by the FBI. Sleppy and others also said McBoyle was
>mentioning something about bodies being recovered.

I believe 25 feet was the estimated diameter of one of the
balloons. A likely over-estimate, but it was done from fragments
of what was in Ramey's office.

Lydia Sleppy's story has 'improved' considerably with time and
retelling. Her original tale to Stanton Friedman made no mention
of the FBI, and was far simpler than the later, embellished,
versions. It appeared in a 1974 issue of SAGA magazine. The FBI
mysteriously entered the the Sleppy-McBoyle story years later. I
cannot dig up all the references now.

>So Ramey saying it was 25 feet across could have been more
>damage control in case other stories about a 25 foot craft
>leaked out. Regardless, Ramey's contemporaneous message does
>specifically mention the existence of "the disc" and something
>important being "in the 'disc'" (the bodies?).

>Finally I have heard this "contemporaneous" nonsense from every
>Roswell debunker I have ever read or debated. Basically the
>argument is if it wasn't reported at the time then it isn't true
>(unless it supports debunking arguments) and if it was reported
>at the time then it must be true (unless it doesn't support
>debunking arguments).

Not at all. One thing that was reported at the time and is
certainly false is that the disc was "loaned" to USAF higher
headquarters. A clear case of a misheard word (should be
"flown") by a copy typist over the phone. The error was then
repeated from this. This error supports neither the believer or
the debunking arguments.

The differing accounts of when the disc was discovered, i.e.
"last week", "three weeks ago", and "a few days ago" can be
explained by the various reporters getting confused over when
the disc was first discovered and when it was recovered.
(Something I have pointed out before). Haut's original press
release was based on rushed information before he had time to
get the story correct. He never got it first hand from Brazel
anyway and, as far as I know, never saw the recovered 'disc'.

>But all "contemporaneous" actually tells you is what the press
>was told by various sources, how they interpreted it, and how
>they finally printed it. Contemporaneous reporting isn't
>necessarily 100% true and accurate and eyewitness testimony
>decades later isn't necessarily false or grossly distorted. How
>could anybody with a brain argue with that? Well skeptics do,
>all the time.

>Even back in 1947, what the press was being told was often
>contradictory. The base press release said what was recovered
>was a flyiing disk, found by the rancher "sometime last week."
>In only about an hour, General Ramey started changing that into
>a weather balloon found 3 weeks before. So which was it? Mack
>Brazel said he told Sheriff Wilcox that maybe he had found a
>"flying disk." But Wilcox told UP that Brazel came in saying he
>thought he found a "weather meter." Which was it? After
>describing a balloon of some type at his press conference,
>Brazel then absolutely denied it was any sort of balloon that he
>had found. So which was it? Wilcox told UP that Brazel had found
>the device about 3 weeks before, but he told AP that Brazel had
>found it only a few days before. Which was it? Wilcox told UP
>that Brazel had first come in the day before yesterday (or
>Sunday, July 6), but he told AP that Brazel came in Monday (July
>7). Which was it? Wilcox claimed Brazel told him the object was
>only about as big as his safe, or 3 to 4 feet across. But Ramey
>said the object was about 25 feet across if reconstructed. Which
>was it?

See above. A lot of the contemporary press reports are likely to
be error-prone in places, due to the desire to 'be firstest with
the mostest'. There is only one actual date for the discovery
given anywhere, and that is June 14, which came directly from
Brazel. The rest are all semi-vague phrases like those I list
above. I agree with Karl Pflock that June 14 is therefore very
likely the true date. To those people who still insist that the
USAF planted that date in Brazel's mind I refuse to debate the
matter any further.

The claimed differences in size were probably due to confusion
in the press over the balloon portion and the radar target(s).
Carelessness can explain a lot. You do not need cover-ups or
damage limitation exercises to account for it.

>Skeptics also don't seem to take into account the possibility of
>cover stories being put out, despite many historical examples of
>how governments have lied through their teeth. In these cases,
>the "contemporaneous" news articles are simply reporting the
>cover story, not the real story behind the story. As the
>computer geeks say, GIGO, or "garbage in, garbage out."

>E.g., initially the Eisenhower administration denied the U-2 was
>a spy plane. Instead, they claimed it was an errant NASA weather
>plane that crashed because the pilot passed out from oxygen
>starvation. NASA went along with the scam, even manufacturing
>phony transcripts of the pilot's last conversations. At Edwards
>AFB, a U-2 was repainted with a NASA logo and phony ID number
>and then shown to the press. Then the Soviets hauled out Francis
>Gary Powers and the remains of the U- 2, including the spy
>cameras. Checkmate. The U.S. government was caught red-handed in
>flagrant lie, an elaborate cover story. But if the Russians
>didn't have the evidence, you can bet the U.S. government would
>have stuck with the cover story and government propagandists and
>apologists would have repeated the party line for as long as the
>government held to the story.

>But such things couldn't have happened during the Roswell
>incident. No way. The military absolutely told us the
>unvarnished truth, even if the story was inconsistent and kept
>changing, even back in 1947. And it's kept on changing, with
>AFOSI mutating the 1947 singular weather balloon/radar target
>(Ramey/Newton's description) into the present-day multiple
>balloon/multiple radar target Mogul balloon plus the ridiculous
>crash-dummies from the future.

>>The stories of alien bodies did not emerge until the late 1970s,
>>leaving plenty of time for ageing witnesses to become somewhat
>>vague about when the incidents which they remembered occurred.
>>No doubt when investigators assured them it must have been 1947
>>they were not inclined to argue, as they had no way of checking.

>No doubt you find it comforting to regurgitate the official
>party line, which is what you are doing here, as do all
>debunkers, as if reading from a common script. For all I know,
>maybe you even believe that the U2 really was an errant NASA
>weather plane, since that was the U.S.'s official story.

Had the Russians not captured Gary Powers, the USAF or the CIA
might have thought they could cover up the U-2 affair for
several years, but it was very risky. Suppose, for example, that
it happened again within a few months? Or even a third time?
Would they still have tried to cover it up?

As for trying to cover up an ET crash, what if that also
happened again, and again? Don't forget, they had no control
whatever over ET crashes or in fact any ET actions. (They still
haven't either). For all the USAF knew, ETs had already landed
in Russia the year before!

>Even the normally UFO cynical American press generally thought
>the 1997 crash dummy report incredibly stupid and unbelievable.
>Nobody would confuse 6 foot plastic mannequins with small,
>rotting alien bodies. Nobody would confuse times like that (only
>gullible, unthinking skeptics would swallow such preposterous
>psychobabble explanations like "time compression"). And a number
>of the body witnesses weren't even living in New Mexico when the
>dummy and other tests were happening. Do you honestly think
>General Exon's Air Force friends at Wright-Patterson who told
>him about being personally involved and seeing the bodies were
>telling him about crash dummies from the 1950s and 1960s?

I think General Exon's testimony has been discredited by other
writers, particularly Pflock. See p.124 of his book.

There is an interesting example of time distortion/compression
in Magonia 65 (Nov 1998). In it Peter Rogerson gives an example
of a witness, the chief stewardess to the June 1954 BOAC
Stratocruiser sighting over Goose Bay, who alleged in the 1990s
that she and the two pilots were hypnotically regressed by a
psychiatrist soon afterwards, whom she met at the Air Ministry.

In fact these witnesses were never regressed, and the man she
had met (a Dr Stephen Black) was someone she was interviewed by
years later, in 1968, in a BBC documentary on UFOs. She had
recalled his name correctly but got the date wrong by 14 years!
Hypnosis was mentioned during the documentary, but that is all.
She had become confused when she recounted the story for Jenny
Randles in a book published in the 1990s, i.e. some 35-40 years
after the UFO event had occurred.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                 Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 3

From: Matt Graeber <Matthewgraeber.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:03:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:20:44 -0400
Subject: Carbondale UFO Crash Chronicles Entry No. 3


Entry No. 3 The Not-So-Gentle Art Of Character Assasination

(with a bufonian spin)

So, here we are again, about to venture into the murky BUFOian
world of suspicion, unchecked accusation, outlandish assumption
and unbridled UFOOLogy. But this time we're going to a level of
responce that we haven't employed in previous Carbondale UFO
Crash Chronicle entries because the BUFOrian "Spin" involved in
what we are about to discuss is absolutely malicious, insideous
and reprehensible.

This time we'll discuss the claims and charges that the
bufoonians have leveled at retired Detective Lieutenant Francis
X. Dottle, He was the Acting Police Chief (and a Det. Sgt.) at
the time of the alleged UFO incident back in 1974. In the
interest of fairness, I must start off by saying that I will be
taking comments by BUFO's Ronald Hannivig (and the late Robert
D. Barry) out of context but, I will quickly add that I haven't
altered the meaning, character or intent of their writings.

So, let's get started.....

At:

www. burlingtonnews.net/carbondalerussiann

you'll see BUFO Paranormal and Radio's NEWS REPORT, which is
actually a press release that claims to reveal The Carbondale
UFO Story the News Media and Public never received back in 1974.

The posting is a composite of Mr. Robert D. Barry's 31 year old
(One man) 20th Century UFO Bureau report on the incident with
additional rants provided by BUFO's Ron Hannivig and/or Mrs.
Mary Sutherland (it's difficult to distinguish beween the two at
times), concerning their suspicions and accusations regarding 10
missing photographs that were taken of a glowing object beneath
the pond on November 10th, 1974 shortly after the railroaad
lantern was retreived from the pond by the scuba diver and
proclaimed to have been the source of the light beneath the
surface.

That's true, the 13 (Not 10), photos were of a glowing light
'on' the pond's surface, not what may have been beneath the
pond's surface. The photos had not yet been developed and were
not missing at the time of the news conference. So, how does the
existance of these photos serve to prove that a cover up had
been perpetrated by the Carbobdale police?

No one mentioned the photos at the press conference because they
were not an issue or an item of particular interest to anyone
other than the police as evidence, _if_ charges were ever to be
brought against the hoaxers. Moreover, the photos were the
property of Mr. Jerome Gillott (the photographer) and Sgt.
Dottle was not at liberty to just pass them out to anyone who
expressed an interest in them. (this obviously annoyed Mr. Barry
of the 20th. Century UFO bureau), Mr. Barry didn't explain why
he hadn't contacted the photographer directly about the photos
but, since he was the one man show at the bureau, it may have
simply slipped his busy conspiratorial mind?

Young Gillott (17) at the time, had promised to send me a couple
photos for my report when the negatives were developed (i.e.,
The photos may have been of some use in a written report
concerning the hoax) but, he never did, and after sending him a
reminder letter and phoning his home twice I decided to complete
my December, 1975 UFORIC report without the photos.

I provided BUFO with Mr. Gillott's address and phone number in
April of 2004, because Mrs. Sutherland's investigators were
looking in the wrong place for information on the photos,
eventhough Gillott was identified in several press accounts as
the photographer. Hannivig and Scassellati were looking for
someone named 'Al'.

The press had taken many photos at the so-called UFO recovery
site which were far more interesting and detailed than Gillott's
shots. Ron Hannivig should throughly examine these many
newspapaer file photos and tell us how many armed military
personnel he can spot in the crowds. (Ans. None!)

Additionally, Mr. Barry had started complaining about Sgt.
Dottle's not providing him with the photos on 11-14-74... I
guess that Barry thought the Carbondale Police Department had
its own photo lab and didn't have to wait for the prints to
arrive at the corner drug store from the kodak lab. (a common
small town police department practice back in the early 70's)

Let's read a little more from BUFO's shocking press release. It
continues, "Another fact, unknown to the news media and the
general public is the fact that there exists two strips of 35m.
m. film of the glow from the submerged object in the pond. Mr.
Barry and his unidentified assistant, witnessed and examined the
strips of film which contained at least five frames each of a
glowing object.....

Hence, there exist at least ten pictures, in negative form, of
"the object". (No, Ron that's not quite right; what exists are
13 negatives of the GLOW on the pond's surface, NOT the object
beneath the pond's surface).

The BUFOrian Spin continues... "On the film, the image shows a
dark, circular object with some frames from a somewhat smaller
object and another showing it as being larger. All frames seemed
to show a basically circular shape. The films are in the
possession of the Carbondale Police Department (as of 11-12-74).
Acting Police Chief Francis Dottle informed Mr. Barry that when
the photos are made from the negatives, the pictures will show
"a yellow glow". Barry requested a frame or two for use in
analyzing the object but was refused. (According to Barry). The
pictures were taken about 3 A. M. on 11-10-74"

This is perhaps the most revealing piece of BUFOria regarding
the so-called "Missing Photos"- first of all, the negatives
WOULD show a dark circular shape on the water's surface as light
appears to be dark on a negative plate.

Moreover, the apparent size changes of the glow on the water's
surface were caused by the fact that several of the photographs
were telephoto shots while others were not. So, where's the
mystery in all this "Missing Photos" nonsence Mr. Hannivig?

Oh yes, Sgt. Dottle was also accused of not providing Mr. Barry
with a couple of frames of the negatives to further analyze on
the day after the 44hr. fiasco had terminated - Obviously, Mr.
Barry felt that Sgt. Dottle probably didn't have anything else
to do that day except cater to the whims and requests of the
20th Century UFO bureau. I mean, Didn't Mr. Barry have the
common sence to realize that Sgt. Dottle still had a police
department to run and a community to serve and protect? The
nonsense continues.....

"Nothing was said of the possibility that it (the object in the
water) was a Russian missile." That's also true, because Mr.
Barry had not yet started spinning the yarn that it might have
been a Soviet missile or a UFO. Moreover, if Mr. Barry did
suspect that it was a Soviet missile in the pond, why didn't he
bring it up at the press conferene himself? After all, he and
his assistant (a rather strange fellow that some folks jokingly
called Igor), had been telling stories to anyone who would
listen, about a UFO over Russia incident earlier in the day at
the pond.

Indeed, stories which included the UFOs having zapped and
completely destroyed a Soviet tank factory with high-powered ray
gun beams. So, what was Mr. Barry's problem with simply
mentioning the possibility of a Soviet missile being in the
pond at the Carbondale Press Conference on Nov 11th, 1974? My
guess is that he hadn't fully concocted the story yet.

Although, there were rumors that two men in dark suits (MIB's)
told a Scranton Times Tribune reporter about the UFO/Sovier tank
factory incident. I think Mr. Barry and his assistant were
wearing charcoal grey suits at the pond - perhaps, they were the
MIB's people were talking about?

Mr. Barry wasn't a team player at the site either, and I did not
observe him performing a thorough field investigation at the
pond. He seemed to be more of a social butterfly- interested in
speaking with spectators and press people. He was also busy
handing out religious tracts, and warning folks that some UFOs
are actually piloted by fallen angels.

His report of the incident makes no mention of sample-taking or
scientific observations and measurements - rather, it is
basically concerned with his claim that a reliable (albeit never
identified) informanant (i. e., a mysterious military man - a
colonel to be exact) told him that a Soviet missile, or part of
one might be in the pond. Barry never even specified which
branch of the service the "Military Man" was supposed to be a
member of.

Years later I used my computer's search engine to learn a little
more about Robert D. Barry of the 20th. Century UFO Bureau, and
my suspicions (that he was very emotional and vocal ndividual)
were confirmed on UFO UpDates by several pro-UFO resarchers who
knew him.

Isn't it curious that BUFO's Ron Hannivig quotes primarily from
Barry's report of the incident, never seems to use Mr. Dains
comments (Doug Dains was Dr. Hynek's field investigator at
Carbondale), nor does Ron Hannivig mention my report as a
referrence source except, when he can take it out of Barry's
slanted report to make a foundationless pro-cover up point of
some kind.

(e. g., Ron quotes Barry concerning my saying that the lantern
was "inoperational" when I examined it moments after it was
retreived from the pond. Ron's and Barry's "Spin" is that
because it was "inoperational" when I handled it, it probably
couldn't have been operational while it was in the pond, amd
therefore probably wasn't the source of the mysterious submerged
light.

 So, according to the substandards of BUFOOLogical wisdom; the
lantern couldn't have been the glowing object in the water. That
is not the case at all - for it was reported that one of the
lantern's bulbs filaments faintly glowed as it was lifted from
the water. (I didn't see that as I was on the pond's bank, not
in the search and recovery boat as the lantern was taken
aboard).

It was speculated by Mr. Jerome Gillott, the Photographer, who
was in the boat that displaced water in the lantern's cylinder
permitted the battery to momentarily make better contact and the
filament glowed for a second or two. This does not prove that
the lantern could not have been the object that was observed
glowing in the pond for 6-8 hours on the evening of Nov. 9th
into the wee hours of Nov. 10th.

(see my essay for more details and the results of simple
experiments which illustrate my point - you can perform these
very basic and inexpensive experiments yourself at home).

http://www.magonia.mysite.wanado-members.co.uk/ms55.htm

But, Ron Hannivg would attempt to keep the mystery alive by
pointing out that the object in the pond reportedly 'moved' in
order to elude police bullets that were fired at it. Ron
correctly quips that railroad lanterns do not pocess locomotive
capabilities. But, BUFO's super sleuth Ron Hannivig fails to
mention the fact that light beams can shift and appear to be in
diverse locations when in fact, they are located a one place.
That's how store advertising "Search Lights" appear to be
flitting all over the sky when in fact, they're located at a
fixed position on the ground.

Mr. Dains and I both determined that the matter was probably a
hoax perpetrated by teenagers early on in our investigations,
while Barry, and now Hannivig, Sutherland and Scassellati are
determined to resuscitate the resolved and quite mundane UFO
Hoax. Moreover, Hannivig can't seem to make up his mind if the
object in the pond was a disc (i. e., a flying saucer) or a
Soviet missile.

If it was a missile it had to be a very small variety as the
location of the light source in the pond was only 7-8 feet deep.
But, then there's still the problem of Ron's explainimg why an
unmaned missile would have onboard or exterior lighting?

If the object were a Flying Saucer from another world, then it's
inhabitants probably had to be very small - perhaps on the order
of G.I. Joe action figures or Barbie Dolls in stature because,
the disc of light on the pond's surface was reported to be about
3-5ft. in diameter.

As you may already know, there were not any little alien bodies
floating on the water - and highly advanced space creatures
probably wouldn't equip their scout ships with Sears Roebuck
railroad lanterns to use as distress signaling devices.

Of course, there is an outside possibility that the object was a
Hi-Tech experimental Frisbee... you've probably heard about all
those "Black Projects" going on at the nation's toy companies
haven't you? (Be sure to check out BUFO's Online Store for a
remote controlled toy mini-saucer that you can actually fly in
the comfort of your own home... wheee!)

I'm certain that by this point in my story you are picking up on
Mr. Hannivig's Spin Meistering of the ridiculous Barry report.
But, we have yet to determine if Ron Hanninvig and Mrs.
Sutherland are simply ill-informed, conspiracy-minded saucer
enthusiasts, BUFOons, or if their spin on the story is agenda
motivated - (i. e., a fully conscious and devious contrivence?)
However, the next BUFOrian statement may serve to answer these
perpexing questions for us.....

"To the citizens of Carbondale, we offer you our dedication to
solving this 30 year old mystery once and for all. We now know
that the Acting Chief of Police not only knew the true nature of
the object that fell into the pond, but deliberately and
maliciously lied to us as to what it was. He also knew that the
area was radiactive and chose not to inform you of the danger.
He also had photos that he chose to supress. Dottle was not nor
is he now a friend of the people of Carbondale."

Well, let's start at the beginning of this gross bit of
BUFOOLogy. Why should Ron Hannivig, Mary Sutherland of Wisconsin
and Frank Scassellati take it upon themselves to set the record
straight on a non-mystery that was resolved 31 years ago? Where
are the "very concerned" townspeople who approached them after
they had been turned away by the authorities at Carbondale? Who
are these many perplexed and frustrated citizens, and why do
they assume that BUFO can assist them when there is a viable
(and cost free) Freedom of Information Act at their disposal?

One would think that with all these troubled citizens seeking
help from BUFO, Mary Sutherland and her investigators wouldn't
need to petition anyone for a G. A. O inquiry into the matter -
they, as an organized citizen's group could put quite a bit of
pressure on local politicans and municipal authorities regarding
their demands. So, why bother to bring in the Federal Government
for a local matter when you haven't exhausted all your options -
and still have the Freedom of Information Act available to you?

If Mr. Hannivig is stating that Sgt. Dottle, the Acting Police
Chief knew the true nature of the object in the pond why doesn't
Ron Hannivig post the documentation to prove this outrageous
claim? If Mr. Hannivig has anything more that his suspicions and
Spin Meistered assumptions regarding the long ago matter of Sgt.
Dottle's failure to alert Carbondale's citizens about dangerous
radioactive levels existing at the Russel Park pond - why
doeesn't Ron Hannivig post the proof?

Hannivig, the self-proclaimed "investigative journalist at
large" has had 31 years to track it down... ya know, as the
Texans say, " I'm athink'n that this feller is all hat and no
cattle!"

Hannivig could have posted the field notes of the individual (A
volunteer Civil Air Patrol youngster) who obtained the so-called
"High" radiological reading at the pond. My 1974 report on the
incident provided all the youngsters names. He could have
produced hospital admissions and emergency room records from
that time indicating that some citizens, volunteers, and police
personnel were exposed to and treated for radiation sickness.
Where's the press releases on this matter Mr. Hannivig?

But, that's not Ron Hannivig's style. Rather, he would assail
the now handicapped man who protected Carbondale's citizens from
numerous potential dangers that the UFO situation had thrust
upon him - including his advising the UFO resarchers not to
bring up the matter of an "unverified" and incorrect .150
roentgen reading at the pond. Actually, the reading was .05R
(a normal background level) and the first report I received
concerning it was scrawled on a piece of paper hurriedly passed
to me at the press conference, it mistankenly read "1500. R. at
the pond!"

But, if that were the case I wouldn't be sitting here typing
this entry. Moreover, the rumored faulty reading was altered a
couple of times and finally seemed to settle at .150R. by the
close of the press conference.

I think that Mr. Barry's .50 R notation in his report may be a
typo. (i.e., .50 instead of the actual .05) but I'm not certain
that it was an error because Barry did not accompany Dains and I
back to the pond to verify the faulty CAP reading; nor did he
share his written report with us.

Continuing BUFO's ridiculous assault on Sgt. Dottle's advising
the UFO investigators not to mention the errant radiological
reading - Hannivig, quotes Robert D. Barry's report of 31 years
ago and says, "the 20th Century UFO Bureau was contacted
Thursday 11-11-74 (actually, Thursday was the 14th), by a
concerned Carbondale man and wife who said the atmosphere is
"that they are being called liars" and that "something is
radically wrong and the whole town is sick over the object being
reported as a railroad lantern." Oh, Mr. Hannivig, I ask you
sir, have you no shame, no shame at all?

Hannivig and Barry never identified the complaining Carbondale
man and his wife, just as they have never identified the
mysterious Military Man who told Barry about the Soviet missile
possibly being in the pond. One must be very cautioius when
reading Barry and Hannivig, they are word-tricky and non-
objective reporters. They are also prone to present heresay,
distortion and misrepresentations in their writings which appear
to be devoid of established investigative and journalistic
protocols, verified fact gathering methodology and common sence.

But, Sgt. Dottle's responsibilites during the UFO fiasco also
included the cordoming off of the pond area because we didn't
know what was in the water, and because unattended children were
playing on the pond's steep banks, standing on the rooftops of
abandoned structures at the coal breaker, and several kids were
even climbing into the defunct breaker's coal chutes.

Moreover, so many people were pouring into the area in
automobile's that Carbondale's streets were becoming impassable.
Dottle feared that emergency vehicles might not be able to
respond in a timely matter if they were needed at the site. One
reporter mentioned that he noticed license plates fron 17 states
and Canada.

Somehow, Ron Hannivig doesn't grasp the merit of Sgt. Dottle's
handling of the situation and he prefers to see the above stated
"safety measures" as being part of a cover up. Ron Hannivig
wasn't there, I was, and I can assure you that Sgt. Dottle's
activites were always directed at protecting the community from
harm. He was concerned about the public, the volunteers, his
policeman AND with assisting Mr. Dains recover the submerged
object intact in case it was of scientific value to Dr. Hynek's
UFO researches.

Sgt. Dottle worked very closely with the UFO researchers at the
scene and made no demands of us until the "unverified radiation
report rumor" sprang up as the press comference was already
underway. He did so because he feared that the rumor might spark
a panic in town.

He did so because the 44 hour ordeal had worn his nerves thin
and because he, his policemen and the volunteers were dog-tired.
He did so because the report was "completely unverified. " So,
why in the hell should he have permitted the obviously emotioal
Mr. Barry to yell "fire!", when there wasn't so much as a
detectable whiff of smoke in the air?

Mr. Dains, the C.A.P. and I had been taking geiger-counter
readings all day, at all sections of the pond's bank. The
hightest reading was .04R. The only C.A.P. reported .05R was
located in the very spot where I had set up my equipment on the
bank but, a little further in the mud which became accessable
because the pumping operations had lowered the water level. (see
my essay on the incident for more details)

Sgt. Dottle requested that we not mention the radiation rumor
because he realized that the very vocal and visibly emotional
Mr. Barry was chomp'n at the bit to revive the UFO character of
the situation. In short, Barry didn't want the incident to be a
closed issue - after all, he and his assistant hadn't driven all
the way from Yoe, Pa. just to go back to his spiritual mentor
and UFO Bureau funder (Rev. Carl McIntire) empty handed.

Mr. Barry said in his report, "With the news conference now in
the past, the 20th Century UFO Bureau is at liberty to reveal
the story the news media _never_got_ on the Carbondale,
Pennsylvania UFO Hoax. The bureau first came across the Russian
missile report as a result of a conversation with one of the
members of a military unit who was at the scene in Carbondale on
Monday (11-11-74)"

Obviously, Mr. Barry and Ron Hannivig _must_ be talking about a
high-ranking Civil Air Patrol youngster, because there were no
military units at Carbondale... not even local National
Guardsmen.

To top things off, in another UFOOLogical posting, Ron Hannivig
says that he has several eyewitnesses who saw Sgt. Dottle toss
the lantern into the pond on 11-11-74, and Mark Stamey, the
volunteer scuba diver from New York went into the water to fetch
it.

What a terrible thing for Ron Hannivig to suggest about a New
York fellow who was initally thought to have been a CIA agent by
the UFO rumor momgers of Lackawanna County. What a terrible
thing to say about the Acting Chief of Police too.

Well, if any of the above were true, Hannivig would have a
couple thousand eyewitnesses to this brazen cover up attempt not
just a few. There would be numerous news people who saw and
photographed Dottle's allegedly dastardly deed, and Mr. Dains
and I certainly would have remembered it too.

Ya Know, someday ole Ron Hannivig may have to produce these
eyewitnesses for the G. A. O, or in a court of law... it will be
very interesting to see just how much his reliable (Albeit
unidentified) eyewitnesses recall under oath.

I won't go through the bother of responding to each of Mr.
Hannivig's "charges" and "spinnings" which appear within the 11
page posting at the BUFO site. But, it's perfectly obvious to me
that Ron Hannivig is either woefully conspiracy-minded or else
he's an individual who is desperately seeking attention. In
either case or both, Mrs. Sutherland does share some
responsibility for the cruel, malicious and untrue things that
he's said about Sgt. Dottle. After all, she posted those nasty
remarks at her BUFO sites.

I've often wondered how an agressive young attorney versed in
libel and slander suits would feel about BUFO's unchecked
behavior on the World Wide Web regarding the numerous assaults
on the professionalism, integrity, and ethical character of Sgt.
Francis X. Dottle? I've even wondered if BUFO is a corporation?

Actually, there is no excuse for the distortion, fabrication and
outright absurdities that BUFO has posted on the web. There is
more than enough documentation to dismiss the entire Carbondale
affair as a series of hoaxes perpetrated by three local teens, a
neighboring community's fibbing deputy sheriff and an over-
zealous self-proclaimed UFO expert whose rantings of thirty
years ago still reverberate in the a nonsencical and extremely
malicious postings of Mr. Ronald Hannivig, Mrs. Mary Sutherland
and Mr. Frank Scassellati.

The only reason why the Carbondale light-in-the-water mystery
carried on for 44 hours was because, even after patrolman
Jacobina fired his service revolver at the submerged light, the
police and the UFO investigators were still "uncertain" that the
object was not space junk of some kind.

Moreover, since the press had already latched on to the story it
would have been quite foolish to assume what the object was
rather than to "phsically verify" what it was. Dr. Hynek had
opened the door to the "possibility"of radioactive contamination
at the site, and Sgt. Dottle did what he had to do for the
protection of the community.

So, now you know some of the behind the scenes concerns and
thinking that went into the recovery efforts at the Russell Park
pond back on that long-ago Novenber day.

It's really ashame that the BUFO team can't grasp the concept of
a silly teenage prank being blown completely out of proportion
and control by unbridled rumor-mongers, sensation seekers and
Johnny-come-lately bandwaggoning eyewitnesses. There never was
an object seen in the sky by the teens, they made that part of
the story up when police arrived on the scene to investigate a
strange light in the water. That object was the railroad
lantern, the first light they tossed into the pond was a common
flashlight.

Well, I hope we can link up in cyberspace real soon, and I also
hope that you will remember that there are two (or more) sides
to every story. So, please do check out what the folks at BUFO
have to say about the dreadful cover up at the Carbondale UFO
crash site, 'til then...





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: NOSS Triple Satellites - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:48:58 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:23:26 -0400
Subject: Re: NOSS Triple Satellites - Balaskas


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:16:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Subject: NOSS Triple Satellites [was: Socorro]

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:17:25 +0000
>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:19:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:53:20 -0300
>>>>Subject: Re: Socorro

>>>>James Smith raised the the NOSS satellites as the probable
>>>>explanation [BTW - not new James] for some reported triangular
>>>>shaped UFOs at high altitude seen by witnesses on occasion. I
>>>>have no doubt of it myself [I've proffered this explanation
>>>>often] and would add other satellites as well. Lights in the
>>>>night sky that are just a point of light I tend to blow off
>>>>because there are just so many lights in the night sky.

>>>I did not claim to be the first to notice NOSS causes UFO
>>>reports. However, I did notice that in many UFO reporting
>>>databases that _no_one_ attempts to solve the report by easily
>>>correlating it with a NOSS triad. It is left to dangle as a
>>>probable unknown rather than clear NOSS. I would not complain if
>>>the tools to solve the case were not so simple (on the Internet-
>>>HeavensAbove). In fact I suspect any case on three lights that
>>>just move in a straight line as being NOSS unless proven
>>>otherwise.

>>Peter Davenport's database routinely identifies reports as
>>probably NOSS satellites (or other know phenomena). Beware of
>>uncritical databases. Not all are that way.

>Yes, I have seen his summations of various reports.

>Unfortunately, it is unclear if any of these NOSS
>classifications are based on analysis (i.e. are "probable"
>because of lack of or low quality report data) or just Peter's
>understanding of the behavior/appearance of NOSS triads. Has he
>ever stated "definite NOSS" for a report? I don't think so. So
>we end up with a never completely closed reports.

>Other mediums (Filer's Files and others) seem to never consider
>such analysis, focusing on reports rather than explanation.
>Reports sell better I guess.


Hi James!

Sightings of a moving triangular formation in the night-time sky
consisting of three star-like points that seem to define the
corners of a single large and much closer triangular craft are
common among amateur astronomers and are frequently mentioned in
newsletters such as the one below from the Kingston Centre of
the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.

-----

At 3am Aug.8, [2002], a naked-eye NOSS triple-satellite hoved
into view on a path from Pegasus to Capella. It looked like a
giant delta-winged Concorde Jet. While admiring this slow
awesome giant, again a meteor shot right thru it!

http://www.rasc.ca/nl/kingston-200207.pdf

-----

Then again, there is the account of two such dark triangles
crossing the clear night sky which were seen by a couple of
amateur astronomers with the Ottawa Centre of the RASC who told
me about them in confidence. No, these moving triangles were not
early sightings of NOSS or any other secret satellites orbiting
in tight formation since their dark undersides brightened up as
they flew over a distant well lit car dealership which proved to
these experienced obervers of the sky that they were two solid





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:33:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:25:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Maccabee


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>>What kind of service footwear was Officer Zamora wearing at
>>the time of the incident? Was it a sturdy boot allowing
>officer Zamora steadier footing or was it a dress shoe
>>unsuited to harsh terrain and therefore contributory to a
>>very real potentiality for stumbling at a critical
>>observational time...

>>We don't know? No one asked? It's not in the record?

>.>'Tis true. The Socorro 'episode' was _not_ investigated>
>>"through and through."

>>It "wasn't".

>>A red herring by any other name and all of that.

>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>enough denialist.


>Ah, the smell of sarcasm always draws me out Alfred. Are you
>sure you've got no English blood in you?

>If we're getting down to the nitty gritty, then Lonnie's
>underpants might as well get thrown in to the mix as well for if
>he is of normal flesh and blood, then a sighting of a UFO with
>little occupants would surely have made him fill them. Now, if
>he kept them and they are still around, then I for one would be
>convinced that what he saw was not of this earth.

For the life of me I can't understand why no one quickly
contacted his Dentist!

If Z was really scared when he saw the thing rising up while
making noise, he may have started grinding his teeth with fear
as he moved quickly to get away from the odd but scary object.
Noticeable wear on his teeth imediately after the sighting would
be proof that something strange was seen and not just a hoax to
bring tourists to the mayor's land.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                       Re: Passive Radar - Kritkausky

From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:27:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Kritkausky


>From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:08:40 -0700
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>First of all, there are several "passive" radar systems
>operating successfully, so I have not proposed creating a new
>technology. Two notable examples of systems that work are 1) the
>system built by Prof. John Sahr, Ph.D. (EE), at the University
>of Washington in Seattle, and 2) the system built by Prof. Peter
>Brown, Ph.D. (ASTRON) at the University of Western Ont ario. The
>former was designed to study changes (~1 meter) in the e-region
>of the Earth's atmosphere; the latter, ostensibly, to count
>and/or track meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere.

Peter, do you know if anyone has placed any limitations on the
use of this radar by these two individuals? Also, I'm curious if
they are crunching numbers in real time. It does not seem like
it would be required in either endeavor. Although, I guess with
the meteor tracking, you may have enough time to transmit a
quick "heads-up" or "incoming". Seems like an ideal Mel Brooks
or Monte Python bit... the world collectively diving for cover.

>Both systems have been in existence for many years, underscoring
>the fact that "passive" radar is not "pie in the sky." It is a
>down-to-earth technology, which has only to be adapted and
>"tweaked," in order for it to apply to detecting other unknowns,
>i.e. UFO's, in the atmosphere and near-Earth environment.

>One comment that the system would require prodigious computer
>power is correct. Even a small, mono-static (i.e. single
>receiver station) requires the ability to perform approximately
>10 giga-flops per second for real-time analysis of a target. A
>larger, multi-static system, with two or more receivers, whose
>data are collected, analyzed, and compared on a real-time basis,
>requires on the order of 100 giga-flop capability.

Do you have any specs on what they are using as far as software
and machine/processors?

>Hence, a "passive" radar system could be designed to "flag," and
>record, such events. Obviously, and all we have to do is
>"capture" one such return, in order to make the world sit up and
>take notice...

I would agree that this may be the case if there were another
data stream to associate/correlate the blips(raw data) to.

>In conclusion, "passive" radar is now within our grasp, and it
>will provide us with the ability to resolve the UFO debate, once
>and for all, without the input of some government bureaucracy.

If it were supplemented with one or two other data streams, I
would agree. Lastly, I would like to second this motion for
independence and pro-activity, its a healthier more scientific





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:29:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:29:44 -0400
Subject: Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind




Source: The Western Mail - Wales, UK

http://tinyurl.com/85nvu

Oct 26 2005


Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind

Alien abduction is probably all in the mind, according to
research presented today.

A new study supports the theory that people who claim to have
contact with aliens are psychologically vulnerable to false
memories.

Compared with other people, they also believe more strongly in
the paranormal, and report experiencing more X Files-type
activity, made famous by the programme starring Gillian Anderson
(pictured) as Dana Scully.

Wales has been a hotspot for UFO sightings, including a spate of
reports of extra-terrestrial experiences in 1977, which led to a
government inquiry into strange goings-on in the so-called Broad
Haven Triangle.

But research by Professor Chris French, head of the Anomalistic
Psychology Research Unit at Goldsmiths College in London has
suggested that this type of contact with alien life may be all
in the mind.

Prof French carried out the study by comparing 19 alleged
"abductees" and 19 random volunteers.

He found that in psychological tests, so-called "experiencers"
scored more highly in a number of areas, including belief in the
paranormal, a tendency to hallucinate, and "dissociative"
tendencies which can lead to altered states of consciousness.

They were also likely to fantasise, and had a history of sleep
paralysis. Like other paranormal experiences, such as encounters
with ghosts, alien abduction is often associated with sleep
paralysis episodes, Prof French says.

In this state, a sleeper wakes to find him or herself unable to
move but aware of their surroundings. At the same time, dream-
like auditory and visual hallucinations may occur.

Prof French, who will present his findings tonight at the
Science Museum in London, said, "In the late 20th century, an
increasing number of people around the world began to claim that
they had had a most bizarre experience.

"Typically, they would report being taken from their beds or
from their cars by alien beings."

These beings were often around four feet high, with spindly arms
and legs and oversized heads.

"The abductees, or 'experiencers' as they prefer to be known,
would describe how they had found themselves on board an alien
spaceship where they were subjected to (often painful) medical
examination, during which sperm or ova might be extracted.

"Although it is hard to estimate just how many people have
conscious memories of this kind it is likely to run into at
least several thousand worldwide."

The findings were backed by Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe,
director of the Cardiff Centre for Astrobiology, who suggested
claims of alien contact were derived from a desire to believe in
extra-terrestrial life.

"It's some kind of instinctive need to link up with life outside
Earth, but the experiences that are recorded by these people are





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                 Rolling Out Red Carpet For World's Skeptics

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:33:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:33:49 -0400
Subject: Rolling Out Red Carpet For World's Skeptics




Source: The Buffalo News - Buffalo, New York, USA

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20051025/1067170.asp

10/25/2005


Rolling Out The Red Carpet For The World's Skeptics
By Paula Voell
News Staff Reporter

Looking for the Center for Inquiry's international congress?
Just follow the cars with the "I Doubt It" decals.

That's the mantra for the 600 to 800 attendees expected to
converge in Buffalo from around the world this week. These are
the people who scrutinize and critique what others believe
without questioning.

They'll be here for a congress called "Toward a New
Enlightenment," meant to respond to assaults on science, reason,
free inquiry, secularism and humanist values.

"We are committed to science and reason to resolve human
problems," said Paul Kurtz, Center founder. "We are naturalists
and recognize that the human species is part of nature. We also
recognize the need for raising the level of values and
criticizing the banalities of modern culture.

"We're arguing for planetary ethics," said Kurtz, the powerhouse
behind all that the Center has spawned - Prometheus books, the
area's largest publishing house; the periodicals "Skeptical
Inquirer," "Free Inquiry" and "Philo" and the organizations that
promote rational inquiry, critically investigate claims of the
paranormal and, the newest endeavor, examining alternative
medicine and mental health therapies.

The confreres will arrive in Buffalo at a momentous time.
They'll be here on the 25th anniversary of the Council for
Secular Humanism, the arm of the Center that defends the issues
of the nonreligious. They'll be here to witness the expanded
Center building, which will double its conference and seminar
capacity with an additional 13,600 square feet added to its
Amherst site. Mostly, though, they'll be here to talk and to
listen to one another.

As usual, all of the hot button issues will be on the table,
under the microscope of free inquiry. Included in topics are:
"Playing God: Ethical Issues in Euthanasia and Physician-
Assisted Suicide," "Science vs. Religion: From the Classroom to
String Theory" and "Is Religion the Default Mode?"

As Kurtz leads a tour of the under-construction glass-walled
building, he - the world's leading skeptic - knocks on wood,
saying that he hopes it will all be finished in time.

Weeks before the conference, the $2.5 million expansion is still
a hard-hat zone with construction workers about to put up the
exterior structure. Plans call for an atrium, expanded space for
a library and more rooms for seminars.

With the addition to the local building, the Center will more
easily be able to house the 60,000 volumes of its research
library, the largest of its type in the world, according to
Kurtz; included are rare books such as all the first editions of
Thomas Paine, including "The Age of Reason" and works by Ethan
Allen from 1784. Recently, the Center received a shipment of
boxes containing the complete library of famed performer Steve
Allen, who willed his books and the papers he personally wrote
to the Center, where he was a longtime member.

It's no wonder that Kurtz might feel that he needs all the help
available between the building expansion and the congress that
includes keynote addresses by Richard Dawkins, zoologist and
author of "The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of
Evolution" and Ann Druyan, co-writer with her husband, the late
Carl Sagan, of the award-winning series "Cosmos."

Kurtz is particularly pleased that Buffalo's Nobel laureate
Herbert Hauptman and Sir Harold Kroto are among the presenters.
And, then, a Saturday afternoon panel will feature professors
from Oxford, Fordham and Marquette universities, along with Sam
Harris, author of "The Death of Faith" to discuss "The
Scientific Examination of Religion."

In the last few decades, Kurtz has gone from being a University
at Buffalo professor to being one of the world's best known
skeptics, embracing the role and encouraging everyone to look
closely when a Bigfoot claim surfaces or someone says they see
an image of the Virgin Mary in some peeling paint. In the last
two years, Kurtz and company have taken on alternative medicine
and claims for mental health therapies.

"But we aren't only debunkers," said Nathan Bupp, director of
public relations.

"Our main focus is to gain a public appreciation of science.

"Another thing that's important is the ethical dimension. We
reject the ancient religious dogmas, and people ask how can you
be moral unless you are devoutly religious. We say that you can
lead a fulfilling, meaningful life without religious tradition,
based on naturalism and a constructive and positive view."

Now called the Center for Inquiry - Transnational, the
organization has just been granted "special consultative status"
under the United Nations Economic and Social Council and will be
allowed to testify at the United Nations.

From this original site, other centers have been added, at
Rockefeller Center, Los Angeles, Tampa and 14 other North
American cities, as well as sites in Europe, Africa and other
countries with the newest planned for Beijing.

"It just snowballed," said Kurtz. "Buffalo is a place of
snowballs."

Kurtz will preside over the congress' opening ceremony and
present welcoming remarks at a multimedia retrospective "In
Praise of Free Thought" scheduled for 2 p.m. Thursday. It will
be followed by a performance of Mozart's "Sonata in D-major for
Two Pianos" by Frieda and Steve Manes. General registration for
conference sessions, which go from Thursday to Sunday, is $195
per person. For information on congress events, call 1-800-458-
1366.

The Center will hold an open house so that the public can see
its new space and become familiar with its work from 2 p.m. to 8





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                         Ranchers Worry About Horses

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:38:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:38:06 -0400
Subject: Ranchers Worry About Horses




Source: The Gazette - Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA

http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=3D1311557&secid=3D1

October 25, 2005

Ranchers Worry About Horses

By Bill McKeown
The Gazette

CALHAN - Folks in this close-knit community on the eastern
plains are baffled and worried about two mysterious incidents in
which 22 horses and a burro were found dead.

The rural residents in these parts are pretty level-headed
people, and they scoff at the notion that UFOs might be
responsible. But many were around when a spate of unsolved
cattle mutilations occurred in the 1970s and again in the early
1990s, and they=92re willing to entertain the notion =97 maybe with
a little tongue in cheek =97 that cults, creeps and "black
helicopter"people might be to blame.

"There=92s strange stuff going on,"Terry Ashcraft said Monday
while doing some business at the Pikes Peak Co-op in Calhan.

Ashcraft, who lives 19 miles east of town, remembers driving a
farm truck down a dark rural road 15 years ago at harvest time
and "running off"a helicopter in a field where cattle were later
found mutilated.

"It=92s all speculative at this point, but I wouldn=92t rule out a
cult being reactivated like 15 years ago,"he said.

The veterinarian investigating the deaths of the animals, John
Heikkila, fielded lots of questions from worried stockmen Monday
as he performed state-required inspections of animals at the
weekly Calhan livestock auction.

The tall, burly Montanan, who has cared for animals in the area
for years, said he=92s pretty certain the 16 horses found dead
Saturday in rancher William DeWitt=92s pasture were killed by
lightning. All of the horses were found lying within 50 yards of
one another, including one found still perched on its knees,
snout to the ground.

But Heikkila said he=92s willing to entertain even farfetched
ideas about the deaths of six horses and a burro owned by
rancher Ned Sixkiller.

"I=92ve got so little clue on Ned=92s, it just might be UFOs,"he
said with a laugh.

Sixkiller found his animals dead on Oct. 11, less than two miles
from where the 16 horses were found Saturday.

Heikkila performed autopsies on Sixkiller=92s animals and found
perfectly round puncture wounds in their hides or skulls, about
the size of 22-caliber bullets. But the wounds were no more than
three-quarters of an inch deep, and exams and X-rays revealed no
bullet fragments or slugs in the carcasses.

The vet said a first round of tests for poisons and for a feed
additive for cattle that is deadly to horses have come back
negative. He said he=92s waiting for further tests that might
reveal why the blood in Sixkiller=92s animals didn=92t clot, which
he said would be expected.

If that test doesn=92t solve the mystery, he said, a definitive
cause of the animals=92 deaths might never be known.

"Ned=92s was not a case of lightning,"Heikkila said. "In real
life, there are a lot of incidents where we just don=92t know.=94

Still, Heikkila knows folks in the Calhan area are suspicious
about the mysterious deaths happening so close in time and
distance to one another. When he walked into the pasture
Saturday and saw the 16 horses lying dead, he was, too.

"When I first saw all those dead animals, I about wanted to puke
myself,"he said. "I came in with a biased opinion. I went
looking for puncture wounds like I found on Ned=92s animals. It
took me a lot of time working through the problems, but I don=92t
think they=92re related.=94

He said the 16 horses did not show signs of being burned by
lightning, but he said that=92s not unusual. But he did find some
other classic signs they had been hit by lightning, signs he
didn=92t find in the six animals owned by Sixkiller.

Among them: The eyeballs in many of the animals had literally
been exploded; the tissue had essentially melted away in the
three to seven days that passed between death and discovery; and
the horses had not been disturbed by scavengers, which avoid the
flesh of animals killed by lightning.

The vet said it=92s unusual for so many animals to be killed all
at once by lightning, but he said it isn=92t impossible. He said
the horses were in a pasture that had a lot of moisture, and a
couple were found entangled in wire fencing that can conduct
lightning.

Ralph Lewis, who was herding cattle through the auction pens
from atop his horse Monday, doesn=92t know what to make of the
deaths.

He owns 30 to 40 horses near where the dead animals were found,
and he plans to move his most valuable horses to a friend=92s
pasture where they can be watched.

"Nothing makes sense about it,"he said. "It could be lightning,
but it seems strange. We haven=92t had that much lightning. And
I=92ve had cattle killed by poisonous weeds, but they don=92t all
die in the same spot.

"Personally, I think somebody did something to them. I=92ll tell
you what, if I caught someone doing something to my horses, it
wouldn=92t be good. That=92s my livelihood.=94

Clare Loughrey, who stopped into the co-op to get some supplies
Monday, agreed. Loughrey said she can understand how lightning
killed the 16 horses; she=92s seen up to eight cattle killed by
one strike.

But those deaths =97 or the six others days earlier =97 had better
not be caused by cults or the methamphetamine addicts that folks





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

               UFOs: The Full Spectrum Conference December 2-3

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:47:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:47:22 -0400
Subject: UFOs: The Full Spectrum Conference December 2-3




Source: Edgar Cayce.Org

http://www.edgarcayce.org/conferences/new120205/ufo_evidence.asp



Investigate the latest evidence on major UFO theories from top
UFO researchers and personalities

Is there really such a thing?

UFOs: The Full Spectrum Conference December 2-3, 2005

Featuring

Jacques Vallee, Ph.D.
Stanton T. Friedman, M.Sc.
Loren Coleman
Betty Andreasson Luca
Brent Raynes
Gregory L. Little, Ed.D.
John Van Auken

At the A.R.E. December 2-3, 2005

Registration: Friday, December 2, 8:00 a.m.

Are UFOs and abductions the result of alien encounters? Or are
they coming from another realm. We have assembled some the best-
known researchers in ufology and famous personalities to present
the best evidence


A.R.E. Conferences
215 67TH Street
Virginia Beach,
VA 23451

E-mail: confregistrar.nul

Phone:

1-888-273-0020





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                            Hiding In The Mirror?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:42:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:42:34 -0400
Subject: Hiding In The Mirror?




Source: News Centre - Case Western Reserve University,
        Cleveland, Ohio, USA

http://www.case.edu/news/2005/10-05/krauss.htm

October 21, 2005


Is there another world in the mirror, Case physicist asks

Krauss explores extra dimensions in new book, Hiding in the
Mirror

Hiding In The Mirror

Like Lewis Carroll's Alice, who steps through the looking glass
into a strange world, Lawrence Krauss, Case Western Reserve
University professor of physics, began his search for extra
dimensional worlds with the Twilight Zone episode, "Little Lost
Girl." Krauss explores the fascination both scientists and lay
people have with the possibility that there that is more out
there than meets the eye=97in his new book, Hiding in the Mirror:
the Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions, from Plato to String
Theory and Beyond (Viking Press).

Forty years after watching the television show that involved a
little girl falling through a portal to another dimension (which
Krauss says terrified him as a child), he immediately thought of
that episode when he decided to write the book.

But Krauss also wonders whether the episode subconsciously
influence his life today, as the neighborhood hero who rescued
the child was a physicist. Krauss only remembered this piece of
information when he was doing research for his seventh popular
science book and watched the episode again.

Krauss indicated that man's speculations about other dimensions
has a long history, going back to at least Plato's allegory of
people trapped in a cave who must watch the changing shadows on
the wall in order to interpret the real events taking place in
the world beyond their direct view. This speculation has carried
on through science fiction, art and literature in the 20th
century, and has culminated in the recent scientific fascination
with the idea that the universe may contain as many as 10 or 11
dimensions of space, arising from string theory.

"One thing that has connected man through the ages is his
imagination...it is the world beyond our experience where we are
digging deep into our own psyches," Krauss writes.

Like Krauss' other books, Hiding in the Mirror has its own
science lessons. Krauss said this book afforded him the
opportunity to present a historical review of empirical science
in the last two centuries, beginning with the discovery of the
laws of electromagnetism that eventually would lead to larger
questions about the link between time and space that Albert
Einstein would solve in 1915 with his general relativity theory.
The book continues through the remarkable discoveries associated
with the nature of the subatomic world, including the
discoveries of nearly exotic particles such as positrons, muons,
neutrinos, and quarks that have led mankind to a new
understanding of the four forces in nature, and to a clear
appreciation that somehow gravity is fundamentally different
than the other forces in a way that is still not understood.

It is the attempt to reconcile gravity and quantum mechanics
that led scientists in the 1980s to explore string theory, with
its possibility of extra dimensions.

"I wanted to update the reader on current research and give them
a balanced treatment of the string theory to let them see for
themselves whether they believe in extra dimensions," said
Krauss.

Krauss is the Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics and Astronomy
at Case and his own work involves exploring the fundamental
forces in the cosmos by attempting to understand the large scale
evolution of the Universe.

The book is already being billed as the first "fair and
balanced" treatment of string theory, as Krauss attempts to
separate the popular hoopla from the realities. It has already
gotten considerable advance attention through news stories
describing the current debate over string theory, and praise
from such well known figures as Walter Isaacson, author of the
bestselling Benjamin Franklin: An American Life, and former CEO
and head of CNN, who calls it a "brilliant, thrilling book."
Hiding in the Mirror has become a main selection of the
Scientific American Book Club.

Krauss concludes the book with a discussion of something even
more exotic than the possibility of six or seven extra
microscopically small extra dimensions. This involves the recent
theoretical discovery that some or all of these dimensions could
in fact be infinitely large and still remain hidden, a discovery
that was made in part by one of Krauss' former doctoral
students.

Krauss acknowledges, however, that "Today, there is no more
evidence that extra dimensions exist than there was 100 years
ago."

Recent discoveries continued to spark the human imagination





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                  Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 07:54:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:58:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Lehmberg


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:12:51 -0300
>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 05:13:12 -0700
>>>Subject: Today Is National Nut Day

>>>According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
>>>National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)

>>>If that is so, why are the forums so quiet?

>>I've read, just recently, that the mighty oak is a nut that
>>stood its ground.....

>Geez, I gotta remember that one Al for the next time I'm accused
>of same.

You're always good with me, old friend. Nuts are many times
_preferred_ to their antithesis... the irony?

There are persons who believe that Phil Klass was not a foaming
sack of boiled rancid peanuts... a gaping flamer of the first
order with regard to being a nut in the most insulting sense of
that word, himself.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:37:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:01:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:18:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>The glasses are clearly not an inch thick (mine aren't either).

>I just don't see why he would make up being able to see





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:39:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:03:12 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg


>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0600
>Subject: RRR Group

>Greetings to the Listarians,

>http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

>RRR Group = Rehash, Ridicule & Redundant Group

>Ever notice it's the same three people commenting on its pages?
>Even the historical Jesus had twelve followers.

>Tells me all I need to know.

>If it wasn't for RRR using UFO UpDates, UFO Review and The
>Anomalist as shills, this blog would quickly clog.

>RRR is not exactly a critical thinkers oasis.


Those are my suspicions, too, Wendy, and I think I went the
distance trying to give the benefit of the doubt. To much
'sizzle' turns the 'bacon' into a carcinogen... burning fat is
very unhealthful. I won't be contributing over there any more.

IMO, I think there are real consistency, fidelity, and constancy
problems at the "R" Cubed Ranch... but that's just me.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                              My Own Experience

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:00:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:05:39 -0400
Subject: My Own Experience


I played a modest part in the Cold War. Some time during the
late eighties I had a conversation with two people who worked
for a significant US organization, and the topic of UFOs came
up.

They seemed sincerely puzzled by the phenomenon, and asked me
for my opinion on the subject. These were people I'd worked with
over the course of years, and I'm sure I correctly judged their
sincerity and concern.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: RRR Group - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:12:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:07:02 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Reynolds


>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0600
>Subject: RRR Group

>Greetings to the Listarians,

>http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

>RRR Group = Rehash, Ridicule & Redundant Group

>Ever notice it's the same three people commenting on its pages?
>Even the historical Jesus had twelve followers.

>Tells me all I need to know.

>If it wasn't for RRR using UFO UpDates, UFO Review and The
>Anomalist as shills, this blog would quickly clog.

>RRR is not exactly a critical thinkers oasis.


Glad to see you're feeling better Ms. Connors, feisty as ever.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 15:52:29 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:08:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:31:27 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>Zamora saw what he said he saw, Stuart. I think that's the
>beginning and the end of it, right there.

>You?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: We Are Alone - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:22:01 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Ledger


>From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:29:46 -0400
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:24:36 -0300
>>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>It could be that he died, or is dying of his own accord. W
>>asn't/isn't 'God' just another way of trying to explain
>>away things you didn't understand and the fear of death,
>>while some chose to exploit this ignorance and fear of the
>>universe around you? Science has been steadily explaining
>>away that which we did not understand and was atrtributed to
>>god, and it continues to do so. What was once god's work is
>>now the mundane but magnificent working of this universe,
>>never mind all of the other universes of which we are
>>unaware.

><snip>

>If science has disproved the existence of God (cap) I must
>have missed it.

Or you are choosing to. Actually I said "...steadily explaining
away..." Science is eroding the base of religion and has been
for a century or more. And so is education which is crawling
along even in the socalled "1st" world countries.

>Anyway, theology is way off topic here. However, if we ever do
>establish contact with creatures from elsewhere, and can do
>so on a sophisticated level, the great questions of existence
>are very likely to be subjects of discussion.

It is off topic. But if we subscribe to some advanced races
hundreds of thousands if not millions of years ahead of us I'm
sure they will have answered that question-and are perhaps the
reason for it-thus dragging us back on topic. By showing up they
might inadvertantly account for the advent of religion; or
perhaps it was purposely applied.

Gods are an easy way to explain away what you can't explain; not
just the paranormal but the prosaic. Little side benefits such
as having power over and the exploitation of many by a few has
its attractions as well.

It fuels religion.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:17:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:13:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
>>clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
>>"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
>>strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
>>it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
>>tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
>>email to me).

>"Specifically mentions"?

>The phrase "victims of the wreck" makes no sense, and is bad
>English. You can have "victims of the crash", "victims of the
>hurricane","victims of the plague", etc. but "victims of the
>wreck" is a non-starter (unless Ramey's command of English was
>atrocious). So we can rule out this phrase, I think, from
>Ramey's infamous memo.

Just where do you get this stuff, Christopher? Do you just make
it up as you go along? Those are rhetorical questions, by the
way. I'm afraid we already know the answer.

I have literally thousands of examples at hand, but five
examples will do:

"The coroner's jury... held an investigation over the bodies of
11 victims of the wreck of the Shriners special train...."
(Daily Kennebec [Maine] Journal, May 14, 1907).

"He refused to remain, insisting that his place was with the
families of the victims of the wreck" (Syracuse [New York]
Herald, April 30, 1911).

"Thirty-eight victims of the wreck were undergoing treatment
today...." (Statesville [North Carolina] Landmark, September 6,
1926).

"Following is the list of the known dead, victims of the wreck
of the streamliner City of San Francisco...." (Oakland
[California] Tribune, August 14, 1939).

Headline: "Victims Of Train Wreck In Which 65 Died." Caption:
"Victims of the wreck of the Congressional Limited at Frankford
Junction, near Philadelphia...." (Mansfield [Ohio] News-Journal,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:26:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:14:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

<snip>

>The phrase "victims of the wreck" makes no sense, and is bad
>English. You can have "victims of the crash", "victims of the
>hurricane","victims of the plague", etc. but "victims of the
>wreck" is a non-starter (unless Ramey's command of English was
>atrocious). So we can rule out this phrase, I think, from





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 26

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:09:37 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:25:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:16:07 EDT
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

<snip>

>>Hi Jerry, List,

>>While the word mothership itself is hundreds of
>>years old in the sense of motherness (1) its naval
>>use was coined by Rear Admiral Albert S. Barker
>>(1845-1916).

<snip>


>Dave Rudiak found a similar phraseology in a 1947
>case long before Adamski and having nothing to do
>with naval shipping or warships.

>But more importantly there is no trace of
"Adamski->isms" elsewhere in Gill's sighting report or
>writings. Nothing about calling the "men" who waved
>to him and the others as "Space Brothers" or >even
"brothers," or describing them as long-haired
>blonds and human looking.  Nothing describing the
>UFO's as Adamski's three-ball tripods with two decks
>or cigar-shaped motherships with portholes.  No one
>saw anything that was "cigar-shaped."  Nothing
>speculating about the "peaceful" intentions of >the
"men" in fact the speculation was that this
>was not ET like Adamski's freindly aliens but was a
>secret aircraft of the "American Air Force."


Hi Brad,

The pre-existence of the noun "mothership" does not mean Gill
was ignorant of its UFO association, and because of its strong
association with UFOs in the 1950s it's unlikely to have been
merely a coincidence.

Just because he used one word popularised by contactees it
doesn't mean he would necessarily have recalled or used others.

My mother knows what a PDA and an Ipaq is because she has used
mine. When she saw a photo of the portable Play Station unit
recently she said "That looks like a large Ipaq." But I know she
wouldn't recall the names of any of the PPC accessories I bought
in England last summer. That's not how language is acquired. She
has a digital camera but she commonly says "Pixies" instead of
pixels. Use of one specialised term is no indication of an
awareness of others in the same semantic group.

Rudiak's find of a statement from 1947 about a "mama disc, with
three to five little baby discs flying around her" is completely
irrelevant. "Mama" and "baby" are common adjectives you'll find
attached to ducks, bears and anything else we want to
anthropomorphise. "Mother" is used this way more rarely, and in
this case we see it as a prefix. "Mama disc" would not have been
a familiar expression to Gill or to anyone else and sounds
comical; "mothership" would have sounded familiar and entirely
natural in a UFO context.

As an aside, I can mention a probably untrue story about a
living family of saucers was published in the October 1959
edition of "Flying Saucers." The incident supposedly happened in
1925 near Battle Mountain, Nevada. One saucer falls from the
sky, hurt and afraid. "When the object "saw us," the witness
says, "it breathed frantically and rose up only a few inches,
only to fall back to earth again...We could see no eyes or
legs."

The story ("I saw a Flying Saucer") is much longer, and ends
when a parent flying saucer comes down and tenderly lifts the
little one up with its four loving "sucker-like tongues"!

Anyway, as far as Gill is concerned, no real evidence supports
any argument but the timeframe of the event tips the balance
slightly towards a theory
of word association by the witness, not recoining.

Regards,

Chris





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:59:52 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

><snip>

>>While the word mothership itself is hundreds of
>>years old in the sense of motherness (1) its naval
>>use was coined by Rear Admiral Albert S. Barker
>>(1845-1916).

<snip>


>>Barker invented the term for warships when gunships
>>of the same squadron were assigned to their care and
>>supervision (2).

>I did an electronic search of the N.Y. Times and
>L.A. Times yesterday and found that "mothership" >or
"mother ship" was a very commonly used term even
>before WWII

<snip>

>In all this, I found only one instance where "mother
>ship" was used in a UFO context, a 1955 N.Y. Times
>book review of Adamski's "Inside the Space Ships"

<snip>

Hi David,

I used a larger and wider selection of newspapers for my search
(27.8 million pages, from 1757 to 2005) plus some other sources.

Again, while the word "mothership" was not commonly used in
newspapers in a UFO context in all those years, it really does
not take more than one highly publicised case (ie, Adamski) to
create the word association. Then, like today, terminology often
became extremely well-known without the assistance of
newspapers.

Having been using a dozen or more digital newspaper archives
over the last 5 years I have come to realise that digital
searches in newspaper collections are not a good measure of the
popularity of certain kinds of words. This is especially (but
not only) true of major national newspapers.

To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms
UFO + mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above
(at the largest commercial archive on the net). How many times
does it say the two words have coincided in print since 1947?

Fifteen. Think about that.

Regards,

Chris
caubeck.nul

2003-2004 Archives and links
http://anomalies.bravepages.com/main.htm

2004-present Archives at the Yahoo Group Website

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magonia_exchange/

Other pages of interest:

http://caubeck.tripod.com/lang/

http://caubeck.tripod.com/the_sport_of_flying_saucers/index.html

http://caubeck.tripod.com/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                        Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:32:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:04:44 -0400
Subject: Re: We Are Alone - Chichikov


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:22:01 -0300
>Subject: Re: We Are Alone

>>If science has disproved the existence of God (cap) I must
>>have missed it.


>Or you are choosing to. Actually I said "...steadily
>explaining away..." Science is eroding the base of religion and
>has been for a century or more. And so is education which is
>crawling along even in the socalled "1st" world countries.

<snip>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:09:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:07:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:33:44 -0400
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>>If we're getting down to the nitty gritty, then Lonnie's
>>underpants might as well get thrown in to the mix as well for if
>>he is of normal flesh and blood, then a sighting of a UFO with
>>little occupants would surely have made him fill them. Now, if
>>he kept them and they are still around, then I for one would be
>>convinced that what he saw was not of this earth.

>For the life of me I can't understand why no one quickly
>contacted his Dentist!

>If Z was really scared when he saw the thing rising up while
>making noise, he may have started grinding his teeth with fear
>as he moved quickly to get away from the odd but scary object.
>Noticeable wear on his teeth imediately after the sighting would
>be proof that something strange was seen and not just a hoax to
>bring tourists to the mayor's land.

>Or maybe he chipped a tooth while running...who knows!

>But, really, don't you think a thorough investigation would
>include his teeth?

Wow - another valuable uncovered facet of an obviously
incompetent investigation, Doc. Well done!

You know circumcision could be an angle if having to deal with
some kind of hallucinatory fungal infection. I wonder... was Mr.
Zamora circumcised? If not, why not? Why don't we know? Maybe
Zamora was innocently high due to bad hygiene and mistook
camping ballooners for spacemen. Hmmm... so high he was deaf to
the roar of the propane... too stoned to know which way the wind
was blowing...

Hey! This is easy!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:10:37 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:13:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind - Friedman


>Source: The Western Mail - Wales, UK

>http://tinyurl.com/85nvu

>Oct 26 2005

>Close Encounters Of The Mind Kind

>Alien abduction is probably all in the mind, according to
>research presented today.

>A new study supports the theory that people who claim to have
>contact with aliens are psychologically vulnerable to false
>memories.

>Compared with other people, they also believe more strongly in
>the paranormal, and report experiencing more X Files-type
>activity, made famous by the programme starring Gillian Anderson
>(pictured) as Dana Scully.

>Wales has been a hotspot for UFO sightings, including a spate of
>reports of extra-terrestrial experiences in 1977, which led to a
>government inquiry into strange goings-on in the so-called Broad
>Haven Triangle.

>But research by Professor Chris French, head of the Anomalistic
>Psychology Research Unit at Goldsmiths College in London has
>suggested that this type of contact with alien life may be all
>in the mind.

>Prof French carried out the study by comparing 19 alleged
>"abductees" and 19 random volunteers.

<snip>

I appeared on two different UK TV programs a few years ago with
Chris French. He was pleasant enough but seemingly ignorant
about UFO data. One doesn't find many astrobiologists who have
dug into the subject in depth either.

Wasn't French supposed to be doing a study, presumably leading
to a published or at least publishable paper? Has anybody seen
it?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                           Re: RRR Group - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:14:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:18:59 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Ledger


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 200508:39:16 -0500
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0600
>>Subject: RRR Group

>>Greetings to the Listarians,

>>http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

>>RRR Group = Rehash, Ridicule & Redundant Group

That's fairly accurate, Wendy.

>>Ever notice it's the same three people commenting on its
>>pages? Even the historical Jesus had twelve followers.

I only checked this once and won't return.

<snip>

>>RRR is not exactly a critical thinkers oasis.

>Those are my suspicions, too, Wendy, and I think I went the
>distance trying to give the benefit of the doubt. To much
>'sizzle' turns the 'bacon' into a carcinogen... burning fat is
>very unhealthful. I won't be contributing over there any
>more.

>IMO, I think there are real consistency, fidelity, and
>constancy problems at the "R" Cubed Ranch... but that's just
>me.

I just took a look at Rich's Blog which incidentally right now
is telling anyone who reads it that the V-173 Flying Flap Jack
and the Northrop wings flew in significant numbers and for some
years after and therefore accounted for many UFO sightings -
apparently he means during the war as well.

In fact the V-173, an underpowered, undersized fabric and
plywood prototype flew for an hour and a half from New Jersy in
1942 and was then grounded. The full sized XF5U-1 prototype was
shipped to Muroc [later Edwards] for testing and never flew.
That was the extent of the "Flapjack's" carreer.

The other culprit is the various and crash-prone 1/3rd scale
prototype flying wings [again flying in and around Muroc and
then Edwards] from 1940 which the actual finished version-the
YB-49 bombers-were not in real evidence until 1948. One never
flew the other crashed and burned at Edwards, the third made it
into the movies [War of the Worlds] then the AF cancelled the 29
they had ordered in favor of 35 Consolidated B-36s. The Flying
Ram he refers to made one flight on Sept. 12,1945 at Muroc. It
spun in and crashed killing its pilot.

I find Rich's generalization of the facts sloppy and
irresponsible. There is obviously little research involved at





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                           Re: RRR Group - Connors

From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:44:30 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:21:53 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Connors


Greetings to the Listarians:

-----

From: <rrrgroup.nul>
To: <fadeddiscs.nul>
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:40 AM
Subject: Bitch

>While Rich Reynolds may tolerate your ignorant rants, the
>rest of the RRRGroup doesn't.

>Our primary consolation is that you will be dead soon.

>Look for some bashing at our blog, now that we've
>uncovered some interesting things from your past.


>Christopher Jay






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                       Re: My Own Experience - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:35:15 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:26:12 -0400
Subject: Re: My Own Experience - Ledger


>From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:00:50 -0400
>Subject: My Own Experience

<snip>

>They seemed sincerely puzzled by the phenomenon, and asked me
>for my opinion on the subject. These were people I'd worked with
>over the course of years, and I'm sure I correctly judged their
>sincerity and concern.

>The tone of the conversation was deadly serious. I've taken
>the question of UFOs very seriously myself ever since.

Like yourself - and I'm sure many others - there was a turning
point for me. I read books about the phenomenon but by-in-large
they were nearly all about the episodes in the United States.
Two conversations switched me from inactive to active mode and I
decided to take a hand. One was an account by an avionics-tech
aquaintence at a Canadian Air Force base and the other was the
account by a co-worker, whom I had known for some ten years, of
a very close encounter she experienced with 4 of her friends
when she was 15 years old.

Since then I've had discussions with military personnal about





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:44:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:56:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:06:22 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:22:12 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>><snip>

>>For my part I've wasted enough of my time on it. Arguing for the
>>sake of arguing so _you_U can justify an entrenched position from
>>which you find it difficult to climb out of, rather than the
>>merits of the case _is_ in my estimation a waste of one's time.
>>It's the case that is of issue here, not whether you win or
>>lose.

>Don Ledger, David Rudiak, et al.

>I'm not arguing the eyeglass thing for you old-timers. You boys
>think Zamora saw an ET craft, even though no one will come out
>and say that, specifically.

Nobody really knows at this point why you repeatedly argue this
other than to make a nuisance of yourself. It certainly isn't
shedding any new light on the case.

>As I've written elsewhere, the insignia that Zamora saw might be
>important.

Yes, it is your contention that this was an experimental human
craft made by Hughes Corporation, or some such thing and the
insignia would identify the craft. As usual, there are never any
specifics to back it up. It's time to produce the body: Dates,
project name, project history, etc., etc. We are especially
interested how the _silent_ propulsion system worked on this
wingless, VTOL, high-performance craft, and why the whole
concept would be junked and never make it into the military
product line to replace those old-fashioned jets.

>If his eyesight was a bit off, he may have
>misperceived it somewhat, making it difficult to investigate.
>And I think it's a major clue in his sighting.

This has already been covered in detail, but you continue to
ignore it. Zamora estimated the size of rthe insignia as 2-1/2
to 3 feet. He would have first seen the insignia as he
approached the craft on foot _with_his_glasses on_. He probably
got to within 50 feet of the craft (Ray Stanford thought it may
have been as close as 25 feet).

Now a 20/20 letter on an eyechart is a little less than 9 mm
high at 20 feet. To keep it the same angular size as one moved
to 50 feet, it would have to be scaled by a factor of 50/20 or
2.5 to about 22 mm, or slightly less than an inch. Thus you are
claiming that a man with his glasses on and with at least 20/20
vision (we know because of police vision standards) couldn't
properly make out an insignia at least 30 inches in size, when
he could make out a letter on an eyechart less than 1 inch in
size to pass his police physical.

Even if he didn't have his glasses on, it wouldn't make any
difference, because police standards limit how bad his vision
could have been to 20/100. What 20/100 acuity means is that the
letters on the eyechart have to be 5 times bigger to be read
than if one has 20/20 acuity. Thus a 20/100 letter at 50 feet
would be 5 x 22 mm = 11 cm, or less than 5 inches high. But even
5 inches is still a lot less than Zamora's 30+ inches for the
size of the insignia.

Even if one assumes that Zamora didn't take note of the insignia
until after he had run away and temporarily lost his glasses, he
could still have made it out. I previously did a _worst case_
analysis (did you bother to read it?), where Zamora ran as far
as 200 feet from the craft (Air Force's inflated number - it was
probably more like 100 feet). At that distance, a 20/100 letter
would have to be 4 times bigger than at 50 feet to be read by
Zamora, all assuming (again worst case) that Zamora's vision
without glasses really was no better than 20/100. So 4 times
bigger works out to 4 x 11 cm = 44 cm or 17 inches in size. But
this is still less than Zamora's at least 30 inch insignia. It
would appear a little fuzzy to Zamora, but he could still make
out the gross details even in this worst case situation.

The far more likely situation is that Zamora first noted the
insignia while wearing his glasses when he approached the craft
on foot to within 50 feet. In that case, the insignia was at
least 30 times larger in size than his acuity limit.

No amount of smokeblowing by you or anybody else is going to
change this.

>(One more thing, and don't answer if this bores you or makes
>your ufological blood boil, but look at the cop photo of Zamora,
>the one with his glasses on: one eye is larger than the other. A
>physical flaw or an eye problem? I'm almost kidding here, but
>then...)

Uneven eye size is extremely rare. Far more likely he's merely
squinting a little bit with his right eye. Sounds like you're





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                           Secrecy News - 10/26/05

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:43:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:58:32 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News - 10/26/05


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 100
October 26, 2005


**      WHITE HOUSE ISSUES ORDER ON INFORMATION SHARING
**      SENATE BILL WOULD INCREASE BIODEFENSE SECRECY
**      PENTAGON CLEARANCE FOR JUDITH MILLER QUESTIONED
**      CRS ON THE GREAT MISSISSIPPI FLOOD OF 1927


WHITE HOUSE ISSUES ORDER ON INFORMATION SHARING

In response to intelligence reform legislation enacted last
year, President Bush signed an updated executive order yesterday
directing agencies to strengthen the sharing of information on
terrorist threats.

Federal agencies shall "give the highest priority to ... the
interchange of terrorism information among agencies [and]
between agencies and appropriate authorities of State, local,
and tribal governments, and between agencies and appropriate
private sector entities," the President ordered.

See executive order 13388, "Further Strengthening the Sharing of
Terrorism Information to Protect Americans," October 25, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13388.htm

Section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention
Act of 2004, which prompted the new executive order, identified
overclassification, among other things, as an obstacle to
information sharing.

The Act called upon the President to require agencies "to
promote a culture of information sharing by reducing
disincentives to information sharing, including over-
classification of information and unnecessary requirements for
originator approval, consistent with applicable laws and
regulations" (sec. 1016(d)(3)). See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2004_rpt/h108-796.html#1016

The new order does not explicitly address overclassification.
But it references a 2004 executive order that instructed
agencies - to little visible effect - to "minimiz[e] the
applicability of information compartmentalization systems to
terrorism information," and to "creat[e] unclassified versions
for distribution whenever possible."

See executive order 13356, "Strengthening the Sharing of
Terrorism Information To Protect Americans," August 27, 2004
(revoked by the latest order):

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13356.htm

"Information sharing should not be impeded because of outdated
classification rules," said Zoe Baird of the Markle Foundation
at a hearing of the House Intelligence Committee on October 19.

"Furthermore, we must work to extinguish the belief that those
who collect information own it," she said.

"This information sharing construct is a very important thing,"
said Adm. William O. Studeman at the same hearing.

"I don't believe it could be done without a zero-based look at
security," he said. "Security reform needs to be looked at."


SENATE BILL WOULD INCREASE BIODEFENSE SECRECY

A rapidly moving bill introduced in the Senate last week would
establish a new Biomedical Advanced Research and Development
Agency (BARDA) that would be categorically exempt from
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Ordinary FOIA exemptions place specific categories of
information beyond the reach of FOIA.

But the audacious new BARDA exemption would nullify the
applicability of the FOIA to an entire agency.

"Information that relates to the activities, working groups, and
advisory boards of the BARDA shall not be subject to disclosure
under section 552 of title 5, United States Code [i.e. the
FOIA], unless the Secretary or Director determines that such
disclosure would pose no threat to national security," the bill
states.

(The FOIA, of course, already includes an exemption for properly
classified national security information.)

"Such a determination shall not be subject to judicial review,"
the bill adds, in an implicit acknowledgment that the proposed
secrecy policy might not survive independent scrutiny.

The bill, co-sponsored by Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) and
Majority Leader Bill Frist, among others, was introduced on
October 17 and promptly reported out of Committee on October 24.
It now awaits action by the full Senate.

See S. 1873, a bill "to prepare and strengthen the biodefenses
of the United States against deliberate, accidental, and natural
outbreaks of illness":

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s1873.html

"Even intelligence agencies and the Defense Department do not
have blanket exemptions from FOIA," noted Nick Schwellenbach of
the Project on Government Oversight.

"Exempting BARDA would mean congressional and public oversight
of the agency and its important activities would be severely
curtailed," according to a statement on the POGO blog here:

 http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2005/10/bioshielding_in.html

"Secrecy is inappropriate when developing [drugs and other]
countermeasures for natural infectious disease," wrote Alan
Pearson and Lynn Klotz of the Center for Arms Control and Non-
 Proliferation in a letter to Senators.

"Robust and effective countermeasure development can take place
only in a climate of timely and free exchange of materials and
information," they wrote. See:

http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002155.php


PENTAGON CLEARANCE FOR JUDITH MILLER QUESTIONED

Senator Byron Dorgan, speaking on the Senate floor yesterday,
pondered the rules governing authorized access by reporters to
classified information.

His reflections were prompted by an assertion from New York
Times' Judith Miller that she had held a security clearance for
access to classified information while embedded with a military
unit in Iraq. That assertion was later modified to indicate that
Ms. Miller had signed some kind of non-disclosure agreement.

"How can you give a nondisclosure form to a reporter and then
show them secret or top secret material? Take a look at the law,
which I will read tomorrow in the Senate. That is not what is
allowed," Senator Dorgan said. See his remarks here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/dorgan102505.html


CRS ON THE GREAT MISSISSIPPI FLOOD OF 1927

Seeking to glean lessons for emergency management from disasters
of the past, a new report from the Congressional Research
Service examines the levee-busting Mississippi river flood of
1927, and the government's response to it.

The CRS found that granting largely unchecked authority to then-
 Commerce Secretary Herbert Hoover "enabled the relief effort to
be carried out expeditiously and creatively."

But that same absence of oversight meant that "when local and
state relief workers behaved illegally, they were not held
accountable."

"Furthermore, the concentration of power in a single set of
hands enabled Secretary Hoover to undertake inadvisable actions
with nearly no constraints."

See "Disaster Response and Appointment of a Recovery Czar: The
Executive Branch's Response to the Flood of 1927," October 25,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33126.pdf

Some other recent CRS reports include the following:

"Terrorist Capabilities for Cyberattack: Overview and Policy
Issues," October 20, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33123.pdf

"Military Retirement: Major Legislative Issues," updated October
25, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB85159.pdf

Congressional or Federal Charters: Overview and Current Issues,
August 25, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22230.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

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________
Steven Aftergood





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:00:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rimmer


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>enough denialist.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:45:15 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:11:46 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Rudiak


>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:09:37 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:16:07 EDT
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>>>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

>>>While the word mothership itself is hundreds of
>>>years old in the sense of motherness (1) its naval
>>>use was coined by Rear Admiral Albert S. Barker
>>>(1845-1916).

>>Dave Rudiak found a similar phraseology in a 1947
>>case long before Adamski and having nothing to do
>>with naval shipping or warships.

>The pre-existence of the noun "mothership" does not mean Gill
>was ignorant of its UFO association, and because of its strong
>association with UFOs in the 1950s it's unlikely to have been
>merely a coincidence.

Chris, it could just as well be argued that because "mothership"
was only occasionally associated with UFOs that Gill was likely
unaware of its UFO association. My electronic searches of the NY
and LA Times certainly do not support your assertion that there
was a "strong association" with UFOs (I found only one such
article out of 2600 with "mothership", a book of review of
Adamski in 1955). Probably, if I searched a little more, I would
find a few more UFO-related articles with "mothership," but
still the vast, vast majority of such articles with "mothership"
had absolutely nothing to do with UFOs.

And as Jerry Clark pointed out, Gill when asked about this
denied knowing about Adamski or much about UFOs in general prior
to his sighting.

My electronic searches, summarized in a post today, indicate
that "mothership" or "mother ship" was commonly used in a purely
naval or mixed naval/aviation context prior to WWII (e.g.
seaplanes carried by host sea vessels), and after WWII more in a
purely aviation or aerospace context. Hence remotely controlled
drone aircraft just post-WWII were said to be controlled by
"motherships," experimental planes like the X-1 and X-15 were
carried and dropped by bigger aircraft referred to as
"motherships", and starting in the early 1960s, the Apollo
command module was constantly referred to as the "mothership" to
the lunar lander.

>Just because he used one word popularised by contactees it
>doesn't mean he would necessarily have recalled or used others.

<snip>

>Rudiak's find of a statement from 1947 about a "mama disc, with
>three to five little baby discs flying around her" is completely
>irrelevant. "Mama" and "baby" are common adjectives you'll find
>attached to ducks, bears and anything else we want to
>anthropomorphise.

>"Mother" is used this way more rarely, and in
>this case we see it as a prefix. "Mama disc" would not have been
>a familiar expression to Gill or to anyone else and sounds
>comical; "mothership" would have sounded familiar and entirely
>natural in a UFO context.

As far as I can see, there is no difference between saying "mama
disc" and "mother disc". Let's not split semantic hairs. It's
the same symbolic metaphor whether applied to UFOs, naval
vessels, aircraft, or human spacecraft.

In all cases, regardless of the craft, "mother" in "mothership"
(or "mother ship"), has the deeper symbolic associations with
mothers, being sources of origin, protection, nurturance,
support, home, etc. It is these deeper symbolic meanings which
are one reason words evolve in their usage to begin with. Naval
vessels are not biological animals, so why was "mother" ever
applied them originally? It makes no sense if only a shallow
level of meaning is applied, but makes perfect sense if the
various deeper symbolic associations are used. "Motherships" are
the source of origin or the home base (like an aircraft
carrier), or protect the smaller ships (like a battleship), or
provide critical logistic support, or all of these things.

Thus "mothership" was not only applied to naval vessels, but
very quickly to the new-fangled "aeroplanes" within only a few
years of their invention. As my other post indicates, I found a
story in the N.Y. Times from 1910 where it was envisioned that
short-range "aeroplanes" as scout craft would be carried and
launched from long-range "airships" (i.e., blimps and
dirigibles), referred to in the article as the "mothership." A
1918 article has seaplanes being carried on a surface vessel,
again referred to as the "mothership" of the planes.

Thus other human beings made a symbolic association and called a
larger host ship the "mothership" long before the age of
Adamski. So why couldn't Father Gill do the same, even if he
had never heard the term in association with UFOs? Where, e.g.,
did Adamski get it?

>As an aside, I can mention a probably untrue story about a
>living family of saucers was published in the October 1959
>edition of "Flying Saucers." The incident supposedly happened in
>1925 near Battle Mountain, Nevada. One saucer falls from the
>sky, hurt and afraid. "When the object "saw us," the witness
>says, "it breathed frantically and rose up only a few inches,
>only to fall back to earth again...We could see no eyes or
>legs."

>The story ("I saw a Flying Saucer") is much longer, and ends
>when a parent flying saucer comes down and tenderly lifts the
>little one up with its four loving "sucker-like tongues"!

Even if "mothership" isn't used here, it strikes me as the same
symbolic imagery, namely a larger object caring for or parenting
a smaller one.

>Anyway, as far as Gill is concerned, no real evidence supports
>any argument but the timeframe of the event tips the balance
>slightly towards a theory
>of word association by the witness, not recoining.

Chris, you are ignoring Gill's testimony that he was unaware of
Adamski, barely knew anything about the subject, and made up the
word "mothership" on the spot, because the smaller UFOs seemed
like children around the larger UFO mother craft. Of course,
maybe Gill had seen the term in association with UFOs,
consciously forgot it, then it sprang back to mind during the
incidence. We can imagine all sorts of possibilities, but then
we are into mindreading.

I think Gill's own words are the best evidence about why he used
the word that we are likely to get. Further, he was far from the
first to make such symbolic associations. Just my brief search
of two newspapers found many similar usages of the word by
various people, often in completely novel situations. Most of





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:02:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:14:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rudiak


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 15:52:29 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:31:27 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>Zamora saw what he said he saw, Stuart. I think that's the
>>beginning and the end of it, right there.

>>You?

>He saw something that didn't quite make it back to White Sands.
>Or had just left. Piloted by humans, regardless of size.

Stuart,

Easy to say, but is there one single bit of evidence to support
this? Consider Zamora's description plus physical evidence left
behind:

1. Small, wingless, oval-shaped craft with landing gears. Likely
weighed at least a few tons, based on landing pad impressions in
hard soil.

2. Capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL craft): did
this with a loud roar emitting a peculiar "flame."

3. Once aloft, switched to a completely silent propulsion mode.

4. High performance vehicle: once aloft, silent propulsion
system capable of accelerating vehicle to high (probably
supersonic) speed within about 20 seconds. Vehicle also flew
horizontally at high speed just above ground, all without
visible wings, stabilizers, other control surfaces or external
propulsion.

I don't know of any human vehicle then or now that even remotely
fits such a profile. If we had such a vehicle over 40 years ago,
what happened to it? A craft with such characteristics would





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:37:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:17:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:17:47 -0500
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>"Specifically mentions"?

>>The phrase "victims of the wreck" makes no sense, and is bad
>>English. You can have "victims of the crash", "victims of the
>>hurricane","victims of the plague", etc. but "victims of the
>>wreck" is a non-starter (unless Ramey's command of English was
>>atrocious). So we can rule out this phrase, I think, from
>>Ramey's infamous memo.

>Just where do you get this stuff, Christopher? Do you just make
>it up as you go along? Those are rhetorical questions, by the
>way. I'm afraid we already know the answer.

>I have literally thousands of examples at hand, but five
>examples will do:

>"The coroner's jury... held an investigation over the bodies of
>11 victims of the wreck of the Shriners special train...."
>(Daily Kennebec [Maine] Journal, May 14, 1907).

>"He refused to remain, insisting that his place was with the
>families of the victims of the wreck" (Syracuse [New York]
>Herald, April 30, 1911).

>"Thirty-eight victims of the wreck were undergoing treatment
>today...." (Statesville [North Carolina] Landmark, September 6,
>1926).

>"Following is the list of the known dead, victims of the wreck
>of the streamliner City of San Francisco...." (Oakland
>[California] Tribune, August 14, 1939).

>Headline: "Victims Of Train Wreck In Which 65 Died." Caption:
>"Victims of the wreck of the Congressional Limited at Frankford
>Junction, near Philadelphia...." (Mansfield [Ohio] News-Journal,
>September 7, 1943).

OK, it looks like you win. Maybe American phraseology differs
from English phraseology.

We in the UK certainly do have shipwrecks, and victims thereof.
Unlike you, we rarely have train wrecks or victims thereof, but
we do have train crashes, plus their victims.

We very rarely have plane wrecks or victims, but we do have
plane crashes and victims.

We very rarely have car or bus wrecks or victims, but we do have
car and bus crashes plus, of course, their victims.

We hardly ever have balloon wrecks or victims, but the
occasional balloon fall or crash plus the odd victim.

Finally, we never, never, have UFO wrecks or victims. We may
have had the odd UFO crash, depending on who you believe.

Whilst we may have very few wrecks, we do often have wreckage
(which you probably don't have).

Despite the above, I concede you have won the point.

It is obviously time I got down to reading the US newspapers.
You are just too erudite for me.

How & why do you manage to collect such quotes anyway?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:59:06 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:13:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller


>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:33:44 -0400
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:51:09 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:32 -0500
>>>>Subject: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>For the life of me I can't understand why no one quickly
>contacted his Dentist!

>If Z was really scared when he saw the thing rising up while
>making noise, he may have started grinding his teeth with fear
>as he moved quickly to get away from the odd but scary object.

>Noticeable wear on his teeth imediately after the sighting
>would be proof that something strange was seen and not just a
>hoax to bring tourists to the mayor's land.

>Or maybe he chipped a tooth while running...who knows!

>But, really, don't you think a thorough investigation would
>include his teeth?


Bruce,

It is unfair of you to trivialise this case, which many people
take seriously. You would not want to hurt their feelings,
surely.

Besides, underpants versus teeth? No contest.

But to be serious for a moment, have you considered a build up
of ear wax which may have caused him to stumble? Couple this
with an increase in blood pressure and I believe hallucinations
often result. I understand that many a sighting has been as a
result of Loaded Ear Syndrome.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                            Re: RRR Group - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:38:48 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:40:02 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Hall


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:12:15 -0500
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0600
>>Subject: RRR Group

>>Greetings to the Listarians,

>>http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/

>>RRR Group = Rehash, Ridicule & Redundant Group

>>Ever notice it's the same three people commenting on its pages?
>>Even the historical Jesus had twelve followers.

>>Tells me all I need to know.

>>If it wasn't for RRR using UFO UpDates, UFO Review and The
>>Anomalist as shills, this blog would quickly clog.

>>RRR is not exactly a critical thinkers oasis.

>Glad to see you're feeling better Ms. Connors, feisty as ever.

>Thanks for the attention.

>RR

Very revealing comment because it is becoming increasingly
obvious that attention is exactly what you are seeking; not





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

               Re: Desmond Morris On Close Encounters - White

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:50:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:41:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Desmond Morris On Close Encounters - White


>Source: Forbes Magazine - New York, New York USA

>http://tinyurl.com/bmzb3

>10.24.05, 9:00 AM ET

>Communicating
>Desmond Morris On Close Encounters

<snip>

>I think the chances of meeting men with slightly funny faces,
>the kind you get in space operas and science-fiction movies, is
>utterly remote.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                           Re: RRR Group - Connors

From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:47:17 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:43:12 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Connors


Greetings to the Listarians:

I've been thinking quite a bit about the RRR Group. How can
researchers be sure that it isn't a stealth group of CSICOP
infiltrating legitimate Ufology at the base level?

Lots of markers on the RRR blog that begs the question.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                 Government's Fear-And-Loathing Of Ufology?

From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:57:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:49:30 -0400
Subject: Government's Fear-And-Loathing Of Ufology?


Whither The Government's Fear-And-Loathing Of Ufology?
By Larry W. Bryant

"The classified-ad pages in such U. S. military newspapers as
the Army's Fort Myer 'Pentagram' and the Langley Air Force Base
'Flyer' constitute a marketplace of ideas, services, products,
and announcements. As such, like a Metrobus on the streets of
Washington, D. C., this open-to-the-public portion of such
government-owned property must assure that, as per the U. S.
Supreme Court's 1964 doctrine regarding debate on 'public
issues,' all advertisers therein have equal access to airing
their views in an uninhibited, robust, and wide-open manner." -
 Larry W. Bryant (Oct. 26, 2005)

In researching and gathering some 40 examples of my various
"UFO-cover-up-whistleblower" solicitation ads published since
1984 in such military post/base newspapers as the Fort Myer,
Va., "Pentagram" and the Bolling Air Force Base, D.C., "Beam,"
in response to the defendants' discovery request in my ongoing
First Amendment lawsuit of Bryant v. Rumsfeld, et al., I
revisited an ad run in the Andrews AFB, Md., "Capital Flyer"
back on Feb. 12, 1988.

Because of its sheer, prophetic irony, you might call this ad a
"sleeper," a sort of literary time capsule destined to be opened
to a new life, like a certain kind of cicada, 17 years into the
future. Titled "Support a UFO Political Party," the ad's content
gives no hint of what might lie ahead for prospective
advertisers desiring to share any political message with the
newspapers' intended audience:

Support a UFO Political Party

"Some UFO researchers are exploring prospects for forming a
national political party centered on the premise that full
freedom of UFO information should be the rule rather than the
exception as regards the government's role in acquiring,
analyzing, and disseminating UFO-research information. Titled
the UFO Political Party of America (UPPA), the grassroots
citizens group would seek to field candidates at all levels of
state and national office, to lobby Congress for reforming the
government's questionable UFO policy and practices, and to
develop a platform for dealing with such issues as official UFO
secrecy, funding of UFO-research projects, and expanding public
awareness of UFO reality. Interested persons are encouraged to
contact UPPA [c/o Larry W. Bryant at: . . . ]."

As some of you now know, from your having read the related
complaints filed in June 2004 and January 2005 in my two (now-
 consolidated) cases challenging the U. S. Defense Department's
censoring of my various issue-ad submissions, the government has
branded a number of those proposed ads as "political" - and
hence, under regulations updated in the late eighties,
unsuitable for publication in any U. S. military newspaper.

In his deposition taken on Oct. 21, 2005, one John Rives of the
Maryland-based Comprint Military Publications, Inc., the
government's contract printer for the Andrews AFB "Flyer,"
opined that my ad "Blow the Whistle on 'Hostile Aerial Craft'"
(published on April 18, 2003, in the Comprint-printed
"Pentagram") now constitutes a "political ad" - and that he
would refuse to publish it were I to submit it for
republication. He added that his decision derives from his
receipt of word from the "'Pentagram' office" at Fort Myer that
that (public affairs) office is "unhappy" with both my
previously published ads and with the ones I've recently
submitted.

Of course, Rives's decision, based as it is on the expressed
objection/disapproval received from the contracting agency at
Myer, serves only to perpetuate the issue behind my 1987 lawsuit
of Bryant v. Weinberger, et al., which succeeded in ending, via
consent decree, the then-secretary of defense Weinberger's
censorship of my UFO-related ad submissions.

Do Mr. Rives and his masters at Myer truly wish to face a show-
cause order from the U. S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia (Alexandria Division) as to why they now
should not be held in (conspiratorial) contempt of court for
violating provisions of the Weinberger-era consent decree? And:
what overriding fear of UFOlogical disclosure/debate so
motivates these officials as to sacrifice First Amendment
protections in favor of enforced UFO secrecy? Readers might wish
to seek the answers by submitting their own UFO-related ads to
the "Pentagram"; to the Langley AFB, Va., "Flyer" (which also
recently has rejected my latest UFO-related ad, "Blow the
Whistle on the Neo-UFO Whistleblowers!" - re the new Collins-
 Doty book "Exempt from Disclosure" - on grounds that the ad
conflicts with conclusions of the USAF 1960's-era "Project Blue
Book"); to the Bolling AFB "Beam"; to the Arnold AFB, Tenn.,
"High Mach" (which, curiously, has ACCEPTED the Collins-Doty-
 book ad); and to the Andrews AFB "Capital Flyer."

For that matter, wouldn't a mass influx of such issue-ad
submissions make a great project for a high-school civics class
- or even for a first-year class at, say, Rutgers University's
School of Law?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                  Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:22:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:53:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day - Maccabee


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:35:27 -0700
>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:42:06 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Today Is National Nut Day

>>>According to at least one website, today Saturday, 22 October is
>>>National Nut Day, in the USA at least. (Google that up.)
>>>If that is so, why are the forums so quiet?

>>I've read, just recently, that the mighty oak is a nut that
>>stood its ground.....

>Per the same website, and for another 9 hours as I write this,
>it is National Bologna Day.

>http://www.foodreference.com/html/html/october24.html





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Rolling Out Red Carpet For World's Skeptics -

From: Dave Morton <Marspyrs.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 18:21:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:51:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Rolling Out Red Carpet For World's Skeptics -


>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:33:49 -0400
>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Rolling Out Red Carpet For World's Skeptics
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers

>Source: The Buffalo News - Buffalo, New York, USA

>http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20051025/1067170.asp

>10/25/2005


>Rolling Out The Red Carpet For The World's Skeptics
>By Paula Voell
>News Staff Reporter

<snip>

>Kurtz will preside over the congress' opening ceremony and
>present welcoming remarks at a multimedia retrospective "In
>Praise of Free Thought" scheduled for 2 p.m. Thursday. It will
>be followed by a performance of Mozart's "Sonata in D-major for
>Two Pianos" by Frieda and Steve Manes.

<snip>

That would be Opus number K.448, Paula, so we can all follow
along. The piece is excellent - a tour de force.

With Kurtz et al in attendance, I'm surprised they didn't select
the more appropriate Mozart piece: A Musical Joke, K.522. It's a
"wickedly pointed parody of incompetent composition and
performance."

From Neal Zaslaw's book "The Compleat Mozart", contributor
Andrew Raeburn says this about the Musical Joke:

First movement:

"The very start of the Allegro shows what singular lack of
invention the audience is to be entertained..."

Second movement:

"The Minuet, afer an uneasy first half, becomes totally chaotic
in the second, when the horns find themselves hopelessly out of
kilter..."

Third movement:

"...There follows an orgy of non-sequiturs, of sudden and
unwanted loud punctuation marks..."

Fourth movevement: "The Presto is a sort of Rondo, with its
maddeningly perky theme reappearing whenever it's needed. A
fugato passage quickly fizzles out after four measures and is
followed by an episode of seemingly infinite modulation. Ill-
considered deeds of contrapuntal daring are undertaken in the
coda, and this odd serenade comes to a halt in a multiple and
cacophonous crash of five different keys."

Mozart knew Pelican music when he heard it.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 27

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:26:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:05:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 23:19:55 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 10:58:38 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting


[Note to Listfolk: This message was sent to the List on Monday,
October 24, but Errol now informs me that he never received it.
I have already apologized for an error in the original, and my
apology was posted, no doubt to the confusion of John Rimmer and
other readers. In any event, I have revised the first version,
sans error, and the new, improved version follows. - J. Clark]


Patient and gentle Listfolk:

>>>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>>>familiar with a fairly specialized piece of maritime jargon,
>>>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why Gill
>>>should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of submarines,
>>>naval supply ships, etc.

>>>To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would use
>>>the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
>>>wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
>>>made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
>>>an element of desperation which is extreme even for you, Jerry.

>>I'm afraid the desperation is all yours, John. A simple check of
>>a small sample of North American newspapers underscores how
>>normal the use of "mothership" was in the popular vocabulary, as
>>documented in the press. Note that in no case does the writer
>>feel compelled to define "mothership" as some sort of exotic
>>term whose definition would stump many readers. I could cite
>>dozens more citations, but these will do as examples:

>>"Operations in the mothership would be able to sight for bomb
>>targets...." (Freeport [Illinois] Journal-Standard, August 28,
>>1940)

>>"It was surmised that a mothership approached to within 100
>>miles of Honolulu...." (Helena [Montana] Independent, December
>>17, 1941)

>>"This may have been the entire force, which apparently stole
>>into Sydney from a mothership lying off southeastern Australia"
>>(Lethbridge [Alberta] Herald, June 1, 1942).

>>"Mothership for 70 Warbirds" (caption to photo of aircraft
>>carrier, Monessen [Pennsylvania] Daily Independent, April 23,
>>1937)

>>"Bearing to mothership Beaver, bodies of three men who lost
>>their lives on U.S. Submarine S-37..." (caption to photo,
>>Mansfield [Ohio] News, October 22, 1923).

>>We are supposed to believe that Gill's use of this ordinary word
>>was somehow remarkable and revelatory. In fact, it was no such
>>thing. Even remotely.

>Shame you couldn't find a quotation from after W.W.II,

"A converted navy vessel is fishing at present off Costa Rica....
Another 'mothership' ... is being outfitted at Astoria..... (Elyria
[Ohio] Chronicle-Telegram, April 14, 1948).

"The Russian mothership Tambov and her 29 trawlers and
coasters...." (Syracuse [New York] Herald-Journal, May 22,
1950).

"The mothership Tonan Maru carried 6,346 tones of whale
meat" (Indiana [Pennsylvania] Evening Gazette, April 16, 1955).

>and one
>which was not a specific naval reference.

"Pilotless planes, carrying equipment, flew thru [sic] the air
over the atomic bomb tests at Bikini. Their mothership flew
safely to one side of the explosion area" (Syracuse [New York]
Post-Standard, December 5, 1948).

"The X15 was dropped from its harness under the wing of a B52
mothership at 45,000 feet." (Monessen [Pennsylvania] Valley
Independent, November 16, 1960).

I have plenty more where those come from.

>What I find amusing is your desperation to prove that Father
>Gill was totally naive about the UFO topic before his sightings.

Gill, whose honesty not even pelicanists have questioned
(Menzel: "There is no question, of course, of the integrity of
Father Gill"), stated repeatedly that he did not have then, and
did not develop in later years, an interest in UFOs. He had only
the most rudimentary knowledge of the subject even in 1977, when
Hendry, Hynek, and I talked with him (I independently of them).

Gill did not employ ufological terminology in describing his
sightings when recounting them soon after their occurrence. Only
the single term "mothership," which he has testified he did not
borrow from the UFO literature but thought up himself, overlaps,
and it is meaningless. (As for Adamski, as I have already
written, Gill read - after his sighting, at the request of
ufologist Peter Norris - the first Adamski book [written with
Desmond Leslie], Flying Saucers Have Landed. It is the second,
Inside the Space Ships, in which motherships are prominent.)

Remember, too, that John was recently asserting (see above, and
on the basis of no visible evidence) that Gill did not know
nautical terminology, even as he fails to prove either that or
that conversely, Gill spoke ufological language. In any event, I
produced a quote which makes it clear to any nonpelicanist that
Gill was indeed conversant in nautical terminology.

>When Menzel tries to make such a big issue about Gill's use of
>the term, the sensible answer would have been to say so what?

It's good to find that John, however belatedly, now claims this
is an issue of no significance. Too bad he didn't express
himself on the matter long ago, only now to find it
inconsequential only after he finds it consequential enough to
argue about. In any event:

Menzel and Klass thought Gill's use of "mothership" was
significant, as evidence of the witness' familiarity with even
arcane ufological terminology; thus, we are to infer, he was
predisposed to see spaceships (excuse nautical analogy). To all
demonstrable appearance, in fact, they were wrong about where
Gill likely got the word (which by the way the OED traces at
least to 1890, not - apparently as Menzel and Klass [and, I
infer, Rimmer] would like us to believe - to Adamski's Inside
the Space Ships). Since Klass/Menzel/Rimmer don't think it a "so
what?" matter (in a sentence I've clipped, Rimmer to the
contrary cites it as evidence of psychosocial forces at work),
it is simply silly and self-serving of Rimmer to lapse into
disingenuity on the point. As one so often suspects, pelicanist
ideology - on its best days - is as much rhetorical strategy as
genuine inquiry.

>Everyone knew about UFO motherships, they were in popular
>magazines and newspaper reports since the time of Adamski,
>what's the big deal?

In fact, my search of a newspaper data base, in which millions
of pages of pages of English-language papers are stored,
documents that the use of "motherships" in a UFO context is
extremely rare. In mainstream discourse, with which perhaps John
ought to reacquaint himself, "mothership" seldom means a disc-
carrying larger ship (if John will excuse the nautical
terminology which seems so to offend him). "Everyone," in other
words, did not know about UFO motherships; say the word to an
average citizen, and a wholly other meaning - the one that
demonstrably appears in mass discourse - came to mind. (I would
guess today that "mothership" in an ET context is far more
likely to conjure up images of Star Trek and Star Wars than of
giant real-world spaceships [excuse nautical analogy] in the
atmosphere.)

>By the way, in Allen Hynek's 'The UFO Experience' (paperback
>edition, p.295-297) he reproduces Menzel's analysis of the Gill
>case, which says, in part:

>"Although a great many 'witnesses' signed the report, I doubt
>very much that they knew what they were signing or why. They
>would certainly have been mystified as to why their great leader
>was seeing something which was invisible to them".

>You quote him as saying "great _white_ leader", which certainly
>sounds more racist. Did Hynek leave out the "white" from the
>original report, or did someone add it?

I suspect that an editor did that, presumably in an effort -
surely a misguided one - not to be accused of passing on racist
language, even if only in a quote.

Menzel's original document (dated December 20, 1967) which I
cited was, it goes without saying (I am going to presume that
John is not implying otherwise), accurately rendered. That's
why, after I'd shown it to him, Father Gill - somewhere between
bemused and amused - remarked, "That 'great white leader'
business might happen in Hollywood movies about African
missionaries, but certainly not where I was.... They didn't want
a European there at all, really, and they wanted me least of all





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Filer's Files #44 - 2005

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 12:31:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:30:06 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #44 - 2005


Filer's Files #44 -- 2005
George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern
Vice President of Skywatch International
October 25, 2005, Web www.georgefiler.com


Apollo 11 Astronauts Saw UFO

This week's files cover: Apollo 11 astronauts saw UFOs, General
Twining says UFOs are real, Sir Charles W. Shults III, of
Xenotech Research says there is running water on Mars. Shuttle
videotapes UFOs over the Pacific Ocean and a Record Year of
Dubious Renown!. The above photo was provided by Navy Commander
Graham Bethune.

In addition, witnesses saw UFOs over Arkansas, Arizona,
California, Florida, Nevada, New Jersey, South Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania and Texas. Many witnesses saw UFOs in Argentina,
Bolivia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Norway, and the United Kingdom.

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. These Files assume that extraterrestrial
intelligent life not only exists, but my hypothesis is that of
the over one hundred UFOs reported each week, many represent
alien craft. The United States Air Force Project Blue Book
conducted a worldwide investigation of UFOs from 1947 until
December 1969, when it disbanded its investigative team. We are
now continuing the investigation.

Apollo 11 Astronauts Filmed UFOs

Dr. Pat Marcatillio called to inform me that Buzz Aldrin on the
Science Channel show called, "The First on the Moon The Untold
Story" announced that on the third day of travel from Earth the
entire crew saw and filmed a UFO two hundred thousand miles from
Earth on July 19, 1969.

Buzz states, "There is something out there, that was close
enough to be observed. And what could it be?" The announcer
states, " Traveling along side Apollo 11 was a curious object
like this one filmed on a later mission that was not part of
their own rocket it could only be one thing; a UFO. Buzz states,
Mike thought he could see it in the telescope and in one
position he could see a series of ellipses, but when you made it
real sharp it was sort of bell shaped, that didn't tell us very
much .

On July 20, 1969, astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong
landed their Lunar Module on the moon's Sea of Tranquility and
became the first two humans to walk on the moon. This
unprecedented heroic endeavor was witnessed by the largest
worldwide television audience in history.

Buzz Aldrin was presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the
highest honor amongst over 50 other distinguished awards and
medals from the United States and numerous other countries.
Since retiring from NASA, the Air Force, and his position as
Commander of the Test Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base,
Dr. Aldrin has remained at the forefront of efforts to ensure a
continued leading role for America in manned space exploration.
To advance his lifelong commitment to venturing outward in
space, he founded his rocket design company, Starcraft Boosters,
Inc.,


In 1947, Commander General Nathan Twining signed Air Material
Command's Opinion that UFOs were real. .

As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the considered
opinion of this command concerning the so-called "Flying Discs":

 a. The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary
or fictitious.

 b. There are objects probably approximately the shape of a
disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as
man-made aircraft.

 c. There is the possibility that some of the incidents may be
caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.

 d. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates
of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action
which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by
friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that
some of the objects are controlled either manually,
automatically or remotely.

Mars has liquid Water

Sir Charles W. Shults III writes, "Going through the older
images, I found one from Opportunity Sol 050, still inside Eagle
Crater, where there were a couple of interesting geysers." I
tracked the water sources back and located this puddle of brine.
You can see the salt crystals forming in it as soft, rounded
shapes on the surface. I have left the colors saturated in this
image to enhance the contrasts and make them more visible.

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/050/1P132623545ES
F0602P2577L7M1.HTML

http://www.xenotechresearch.com/mwet02.htm Thanks to Sir Charles
W. Shults III, K. B. B. President of Xenotech Research


Editor=92s Note: Thanks to the European Space Agency image of Mars=
 vegetation. Mars makes its closest approach to Earth on October 30th, for=
 the next 13 years. There is a big dust storm on Mars you may be able to=
 pick up with binoculars. Mars looks like a brilliant orange star rising in=
 the east after sunset.


Shuttle Discovery videotapes UFO
PACIFIC OCEAN -- Dr.Oren Swearingen writes, "The Shuttle
Discovery STS 114 mission was flying northwest over the Pacific
Ocean between Hawaii and California at 13:54 GMT, on August 6,
2005. The shuttles camera is looking down at the Pacific Ocean
that should be dark, but is not. There are lights moving around.
The shuttle is flying upside down, and the Earth appears at the
top of the picture and space is below, and the glow of the
atmosphere outlines the horizon. Ships cannot be seen from
space. Some lights are flashing and moving. An object near the
left edge lights up and starts moving across the screen to the
right following the curvature of the Earth.

Another object comes quickly on-screen, going from right to left
and slows down which is impossible for an inanimate object to do
in space. Near the left edge, it comes to a complete stop, as
two other objects fly across the screen, and then make a 180
degree turn and fly back across the screen. At this time, NASA
moves the camera away from the objects. According to Newton=92s
Laws of Motion, and object set in motion in the vacuum of space
will continue forever in the same course unless acted upon by an
outside force. These must be self-illuminated and self-propelled
objects =97 proving that it is a genuine UFO. To view film go to
http://www.projectprove.com/Arts/114u/114u.htm Thanks to Jeff
Challender and Oren Swearingen

Arkansas Amazing Black Triangle

LITTLE ROCK -- Two vehicles came swooping in near Little Rock
Airport, just after twilight. Both were descending at an
unacceptably high rate of speed. I instantly slowed to about 48
mph, just slow enough to capture the active motion against a
relatively stable foreground. It suddenly dawned on me that
these aircraft were in hot pursuit and heading toward me! That's
when it all became clear that I was observing a real UFO.

The vehicles leveled-off at an altitude of 1,000 feet and
continued at me for about 1 mile. Their additional descent went
unnoticed until the first craft slowed to a nearly parked
position. Behind him, was a full battle-ready Huey helicopter
which also came to a sudden halt, much as though he was scared
of getting more than an inch closer. The Black Triangle
proceeded to move forward and I rolled to a position just beyond
it's wingspan. At that point, it was about 1 1/2 blocks away and
I could see the entire thing through my driver's side window,
but as it moved, it filled my Jeep's entire windshield.

I looked intensely at every portion of that machine with
feelings of both one of terror and relief. My biggest fear was
that the helicopter would fire upon it and I would be caught in
the fireball below! Another helicopter appeared. Below is a
graphic image which illustrates what Tom witnessed, an excellent
job he done on this.

Thanks to Larry and Brian Vike HBCC UFO Research

Arizona humanoid

PHOENIX -- I saw something unusual in the sky on September 23,
2005, this morning almost directly above my head. It was a dark
blood-red object barely moving north. I grabbed the binoculars
and saw that it was definitely not balloons. The object looked
red but when looking through the binoculars the object had a
golden-yellowish top (head?). and a black jet pack looking thing
on the left side along with two leg-like appendages hanging down
with round "shoes."

The golden-yellowish head looked like an octagon-shaped helmet
through the binoculars. The jet pack looked just like a jet pack
from Buck Rogers with two oxygen tanks. Its shoes seem to direct
the object. When the object moved the legs moved too. If it were
balloons then why did it change direction and never lose or gain
altitude? The object never wobbled or reflected the sun like a
balloon. It was flying north then stopped and headed west in a
perfectly straight line. Speeding up a video shows true motion
and there is no mistaking that this object is going in a
straight line. The object was moving at a snail's pace and at
one point came to a complete stop and changed course going in
the opposite direction. There were no winds at ground level and
it was around 90 degrees and partly sunny.

This object was eerily similar to the one I captured on August
4, 2004 and acted the same way. Thanks to The Journal of
Hispanic Ufology October 18, 2005


California two light rectangular objects

SAN MARCOS -- On September 29, 2005, I received a pair of 8 x
30 binoculars with a 3.2 megapixel camera built in. I was
tracking an incoming jet landing at McCellan Palomar Airport,
when I caught sight of two rectangular light colored objects
that were connected to one another that hovered at about 20,000
feet.

It remained motionless for about a minute, then moved east, then
north, in an arc and rose steadily until it disappeared. Less
than a week later I was looking through my binoculars at 6 PM,
and caught sight of objects moving through my field of view.
Some were light and some dark. They were mostly indistinct, and
hard to follow. One dark object was like a little patch of smoke
or cloud. It flew south and became solidly defined as a sort of
flying carpet, but then it became two skinny elongated triangles
attached at the tips.

It folded itself and repeated the steps of carpet, triangle,
fold and back to carpet. I watched it for about a minute moving
south. It went through the cycle I described maybe 8-10 times
while in view. Thanks to Brian Vike

ORANGE COUNTY -- Ed Brooks writes, I have had numerous sightings
in the last four months on a weekly and sometimes daily basis. I
will include a few recent photos I have taken on October 25,
2005. Thanks to Ed Brooks


Florida Triangle

GAINESVILLE =96 A slow moving low flying black triangle was
spotted with dim star-like lights October 20, 2005, at 8:14 PM.
I stepped out of my apartment and a movement overhead caught my
eye. It was very slow moving and either very low overhead or
absolutely enormous. At first when I recognized the dark
triangular shape, I thought perhaps it was a stealth bomber, but
it was too low and flying too slow and did not make a sound. The
moon was just rising as sunset was only about an hour prior to
the event. They seem to fly only at night. The object was barely
noticeable, except for dim lights around its edges, it was
roughly as bright as the dimmest stars. It distorted the
background sky to conceal itself. It flew due east and I chased
it as best I could in my car and almost had an accident. I have
a BS in psychology, and am pretty even keeled, but when I saw
this object, I was afraid I was having a psychotic breakdown.
Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com


Nevada Five Lights Appeared

LAS VEGAS -- I was sitting on a curb on October 14, 2005,
outside a building, had been there about 10 minutes. The sky was
clear with no clouds when five lights appeared, like tiny stars
drifting slowly southwest. One by one they became nine balls of
light but some would head in the opposite direction, stop then
start drifting again SW. My boyfriend agreed they were not
balloons. Then, one of them turned a bright red and slowly went
SW of the other lights, it seemed a little larger than the rest.
It would go from red to white, then red. A couple of times, when
a plane would come near it, it would disappear then come back
later.

I saw a UFO mother ship over the western mountains of Las Vegas
in 1994. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com


New Jersey triangle

CHERRY HILL -- Three white objects in triangle formation hovered
and then objects flew away from each other at high speed on
October 3, 2005, at 11:15 PM. I saw a triangle shape made of
three distinct objects hovering in the sky. I was driving at the
time, and eventually slowed down to make special note of this
object. It hovered for over a minute, followed by the objects
flying off into separate directions. This quickly told me it was
not a solid triangle with three lights. I could only track one
of them flying to the west, which shot off at high speed. The
objects themselves were all circle/ball shaped with a large
bright white center. They all had small blinking red lights
around this central white area. They were as big as a dime held
at arm=92s length.

ELIZABETH -- The object was hovering for about 30 seconds and
shining due to reflection of the sun on October 19, 2005, at
7:30 AM, until I couldn't see anything. I work near the airport
but I don=92t know what it was, but it was really strange. It
could not have been an airplane. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director www.ufocenter.com


STIRLING =96 Henry Schuren reports his wife and he saw a strange
craft on Route 516 at 6:30 PM, on October 23, 2005. His wife was
driving at 35 to 40 mph, and he looked out his side window to
see a grapefruit sized craft traveling in formation with their
car. The object flew parallel to them for several minutes at the
slow speed so they pulled into a large parking lot, and could
still see the object. Now it was the size of a golf ball, so
they flashed their car lights three times. The craft apparently
noticed the lights and flew directly toward them as it descended
and grew larger. They then became afraid and decided to leave
the parking lot as the object continued to follow them at 40
mph. Upon reaching Route 206 five minutes later the craft
disappeared. Thanks to Henry Schuren

North Carolina V-shaped or triangle

MARINE CORP BASE -- I was out in field with a deer I just shot,
when I saw four lights flying towards me on October 23, 2005, at
7:30 PM. It flew over me flying southwest. It had a diamond
shape with glowing red lights with a large round red light in
its center. The craft had two white strobes on each wing tip and
a red strobe in the front center that were seen only as it flew
by. I could hear a faint jet noise after it went by. With jet
noise that far behind the craft it usually means that it is at
very high altitude, which would indicate this thing was a huge
craft. But I thought it was only 1000 feet or so, and the size
of a B 2 at that altitude. That's not all, it came back or there
were two of them flying the same flight path.

Ohio video of triangle

AKRON =96 Amy took a video of a triangle shaped object as it flew
over the Fairlawn Fire and Police Department at dusk on October
12, 2005. The video was taken with a Sharp Video camera.

Pennsylvania UFO chased by jets

CHAMBERSBURG =96 The witness reports seeing an object reflecting
sunlight followed by a military jet at 6:35 PM, on October 17,
2005. The object left no visible exhaust, and was chased by
three jets that left white exhaust contrails. The object
increased the gap between itself and the first mentioned jet
slightly as I watched. The object and the first jet were heading
southwest. All aircraft and the object were at a very high
altitude. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com

Texas triangle videotaped

AUFMAN =96 Larry writes, "I was outside on October 22, 2005,
taking photos of a large line of clouds, at about 2:30 PM."
After the clouds passed over my house, I noticed a very small
pin-point of something white at about 11 o'clock high looking
toward the southwest. I went into the house and got my Sony, and
when I got back it was still there. I had a hard time finding
it, but I finely zoomed in on it and it was a white triangle.

Then, it started changing to different shapes and morphing. I
downloaded the whole thing on the computer and slowed it down
and it sure appears to be changing shapes. The object was moving
to the southwest at 30 or 40 mph and I took three and half
minutes of videotape before I lost it. Thanks to Larry and Brian
Vike. http://www.ufocasebook.com/kaufman102205photos.html

Argentina another UFO spotted

LA PAMPA -- The time was about 6 PM, on October 16, and Gustavo
Jos=E9 Montiel saw a "flying machine" 45 degrees over the horizon.

The witness pointed out the UFO to his wife since he works in
avionics and radar systems. Montiel stopped his vehicle and got
out. Both he and his wife observed in wonderment as "two dark
inverted soup bowls, were suspended in mid-air, issuing long
jets of steam or white smoke from their lower section toward the
ground."

The witness immediately contacted the Airport's Control Tower
asking if "they had any aircraft in that sector". They did not,
and that "they could not check that radial due to a lack of
radar coverage." At one point, one of the UFOs "interrupted the
jet of steam and initiated an escape toward the east at an
impressive rate of speed, vanishing in a matter of seconds."
Translation (c) 2005, S. Corrales, IHU. Tthanks to Raul Oscar
Chaves, CIUFOS-La Pampa


Bolivia the presence of a shining UFO


ORURO -- The elenco de artistas de Tra-la-l=E1 Show were surprised
on October 23, 2005, at 00:45 hours by the presence of a UFO
that flew near Caihuasi. The elenco troupe was 36 kilometers
away from Oruro. The artist Cecilia Traves=ED states "We observed
a reflection on the right side of the bus and commented on how
beautiful the moon looked. The boy said, "The moon was on the
other side of the bus."

"It was a bright red globe that blinded the eyes; and
illuminated two kilometers of the mountains, it was really
extraordinary. It was a scene that I have never witnessed before
in all my life. Manolo, my son said, "It was a UFO!" Indeed, the
reflection of the object was so great that we could not believe
it. Traves=ED asserted that the flying object moved up and down
and the center looked like a fire. After a few minutes the globe
or whatever it was disappeared. The local television channel had
reported a similar object which was seen by others. Thanks to
Frank Warren


Canada metallic disk and UFOs sighted

ST. THOMAS -- At 12:10 PM, on October 6, 2005, I noticed two
jetliners heading west only a couple hundred feet from each
other leaving behind two straight fluffy white contrails. The
contrails were extremely thick and did not dissolve, but
extended back as far as I could see. In front of them at the
same altitude was a shinny disk a few hundred feet ahead. It was
slightly wobbling as it flew. Suddenly a very bright light
emitted from the front of the disk and faded and then one came
from the back of the disk. The disk was going faster than the
Jetliners and they seemed to be chasing it. Thanks to Brian Vike
www.hbccufo.com

CHRISTINA LAKE, B.C. -- My sister saw what we believe might be
the same UFO that someone else reported on October 8, 2005. My
sister was traveling from Christina Lake to Castellan in the
early AM, when she saw a circular object with long triangles
coming down from it. Because of their speed of travel, the
object continued to stay almost in front of the sun. The road
turned and she lost sight of it. Thanks to Brian Vike
www.hbccufo.com

Chile chance UFO photographed

VALPARAISO - El Mercurio reports, "The UFO in a photograph taken
by a reader of La Estrella in Olmu=E9, becoming visible when the
frame was printed, reopened the subject of UFOs which has
occurred repeatedly in Chile's 5th Region. In early October, a
resident of Cerro Monjas claimed having observed a UFO in broad
daylight, capturing it on his digital camera. Jeannette Fa=FAndez
Nunez, at 7:15 PM, October 15, after having enjoyed a lovely
picnic in Olmu=E9 with her husband, children and other relatives,
noticed the beauty of the landscape lit by the full moon at
dusk, and took a photograph. She was considerably surprised when
upon printing the image that is seemingly metallic and as
luminous as the image of the Moon.


Mexico airliner crew reports UFO

Oaxaca -- Aviation expert Alfonso Salazar Mendoza of Inexplicata
reports during the first days of October 2005. The crew of a
Boeing 737-200 (registration XA-MAA) witnessed the maneuvers of
a plate-shaped unidentified flying object, described by the
flight engineer as being highly luminous and similar to
platinum. The event occurred at 12:30 PM, in an air corridor at
an altitude of 20,000 feet. Witnesses describe the mysterious
object as having emerged from a cloud and entering another about
ten miles from their aircraft. The crew found the sighting truly
remarkable. Also, another airliner belonging to Magnicharter had
reported a strange sphere that remained static over the World
Trade Center air corridor in Mexico City.

Alfonso Salazar is writing a book called "Los Ovnis y la
Aviaci=F3n Mexicana II" claiming a large percentage of aviation
professionals are convinced that UFOs exist. Translation (c)
2005. Scott Corrales, IHU.

Norway numerous objects put on show

MOSS OSTFOLD -- I was standing outside at 7 AM, on October 17,
2005, when I saw an object suddenly appear then appear one at a
time grow until there were five. They flew closer and closer but
made no sound. The objects made maneuvers that planes could do.
They flew slow at first, then shifted into fast maneuvers, then
flew back in formation again. The objects were not blinking. I'm
puzzled about what they could be but I have a nice clue. They
seemed to be making signals in the sky. They were very beautiful
to watch indeed. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com

A Record Year of Dubious Renown!

David E. Twichell writes, In "Global Implications of the UFO
Reality", I attempted to convey a sense of urgency for the
implementation of alternative energy devices allegedly back-
engineered from downed UFOs. I cited several, credible,
scientific sources that blamed the global warming problem on
human activities, i.e. the burning of fossil fuels and the
disposal of nuclear waste. There were those who labeled me an
"alarmist", and I was reminded, "Earth changes have been going
on since time immemorial."

Be that as it may, a study, published in the journal "Science"
in 2002 declares; "Earth's polar ice sheets are changing over
relatively short time scales, that is, decades versus thousands
of years." This applies to earth changes in general as well.

The book was published in 2003. Although my predication of
future, accelerated, global catastrophes was far from unique, I
wrote; "The reader will have the advantage of looking back on
the data to check this prediction. I hope it has been
exaggerated."

The article "Increasing Western Media Concern about Chaotic
Global Weather, Earthquakes and Meteor Explosions in Atmosphere"
by: Sorcha Faal, appeared in the March 2005 issue of MiMUFON=92s
Newsletter. The article addressed the record breaking natural
catastrophes occurring in the time period between November 14,
2004 and January 12, 2005. It also outlined an exhaustive list
of many of these record events. The article concluded with:
"This list should only be remarkable for what is not included,
not what is. To include all the significant and record setting,
weather events for just this time period alone, November 14th to
January 12th, would take many hundreds of pages.

"Also not noted here have been these past year=92s worldwide
record numbers of floods, tornados, hurricanes, cyclones and
typhoons that have served to make this past years events the
costliness in human history, as reported by the world=92s largest
insurance company Munich Re. Munich Re board member Stefan Heyd
has also said that the weather extremes "underline our long-
standing demand for prompt and rigorous measures against global
climate change. After the disappointing outcome of the recent
climate summit in Buenos Aires, time is running out."

As of the end of October, international climate data suggest
that 2005 is on track to be the hottest year ever. In September
of 2005, a team of university of Colorado and NASA scientists
announced that the Arctic sea ice cap shrank by two million
square miles this summer. Although Artic ice decreases in the
summer months as a matter of course, this is a difference of
500,000 square miles more than that recorded between 1979 and
2000. Given the Artic ice field started with two and a half
million square miles in the spring of 2005, this represents a
twenty-five percent decrease.

Temperatures are taken from thousands of sites around the globe
and show that the Earth=92s temperature has raised one =96 one and a
half degree in the past century. This would appear to be an
insignificant amount over a one hundred year span, however,
hurricane Katrina was proof positive of the difference a mere
one degree increase can make. Further, meteorologists predict
yet another one degree increase by next year in the Gulf region
=96 one degree in one year as opposed to one hundred years.

The experts have finally agreed that global warning has
accounted for much of the Earth=92s chaotic weather conditions and
the ferocity of these conditions will only increase and with
more frequency.

With hurricane Wilma, named storms have already exhausted the
alphabet, and the hurricane season still has one more month to
go. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were considered two of the most
deadly and destructive of their kind, disabling (at least
temporarily) twenty-five percent of America=92s oil rigs and
refineries in the Gulf region. Perhaps it is a mere coincidence,
but it would appear that Mother Earth has targeted the source of
its ills. If such is the case, it would be better named "poetic
justice".

In the aforementioned book I wrote: "Mother Earth has been
attacked by a parasite. Its name is "humankind". Her immune
system has kicked in to destroy the invader in an attempt to
save her own life. As in the case of our own physical bodies,
either she will be successful or she will die =96 taking the
parasite with her.

"I wonder if the parasite that invades our bodies is smart
enough to realize that its actions will ultimately cause its own
demise. I wonder if humankind is any smarter."

Whether alternative energy sources are the result of back
engineering from crashed UFOs or that of mankind=92s own
technologies, they do exist and must be implemented as soon as
yesterday. The economic backlash of such implementation can and
will be dealt with despite our inherent fear of change. We have
dealt with bigger issues and survived. Isn=92t that what it=92s all
about . . . surviving? Thanks to David Twichell

UK fleet caught on film

ENFIELD -- There has been an increase in UFO sightings over the
UK in the past few months, and Gene Harley reports that on
October 20, 2005 at 9:30 PM, he took an image of a gigantic
fleet of UFOs flying close to M25, with his mobile phone camera.
Gene, driving with a group of friends, saw a fleet of 50
brightly illuminated flying objects, in a scattered formation
heading roughly east. It took only about 4 minutes for the
objects to pass over and head out of sight. There seemed to be a
fair amount of aircraft activity near London at the time. Gene
contacted the local media in his area, including the BBC and
none seemed interested in his story. One of the most amazing
features that struck us from the footage is that each light
seems to be flashing individually between white and red. This
pretty much rules out the idea that this could be a plane
because they only have a couple of flashing lights on the wings.
Thanks to

Martin, Dave and Andy Cosmic Conspiracies Investigation Team
www.ufos-aliens.co.uk


Michigan MUFON UFO Meeting

George Filer will be speaking at the Michigan MUFON UFO Meeting
on Sunday, November 6, 2005, at 1 PM. Walli's East Restaurant in
Flint, Michigan. Contact Bill Konkolesky State Director Michigan
MUFON wjk.nul (248).515.-9568

Filer's Files: Worldwide Reports of UFO Sightings

Major George A. Filer USAF (Ret) & David E. Twichell are happy
to announce the release of our new book. If you like Filer's
Files newsletter and his monthly report in the MUFON Journal,
you'll love the book! It is a collection of some of the most
thought provoking UFO sighting and abduction reports from around
the world by average citizens, trained observers, astronauts and
U.S. presidents =96 with articles by Linda Moulton Howe and
Michigan MUFON's State Director, Bill Konkolesky and more.


http://buybooksontheweb.com/description.asp?ISBN=3D0-7414-2812-1

Donate to Filer's Files to receive CD

Your donations do make a difference in my ability to bring you
the latest news! 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. 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. Be sure to ask for the
CD, Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson
Road,

Medford, NJ 08055.
You can also go to:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr

for majorstar.nul

You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL. A MUFON membership
includes the Journal and costs only 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 2005 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 > Oct > Oct 28

                    Thai Lanterns Clue To 'UFO' Sightings

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:54:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:54:02 -0400
Subject: Thai Lanterns Clue To 'UFO' Sightings



Source: The Ilford Recorder - Ilford, Essex, UK

http://tinyurl.com/dmm8g

27 October 2005


Thai Lanterns Clue To 'UFO' Sightings

Mysterious lights spotted over Hainault in August could have
been explained this week - after a similar sighting in Essex on
Thursday.

Drivers on the M25 near Great Dunmow pulled over on the hard
shoulder in dismay when they saw 30 orange lights hovering above
the road.

They were described as looking like they were hanging from the
sky by a thread, at about the height a firework would reach.

The Ministry of Defence said no military exercises were going
on, air traffic controllers said nothing showed up on their
radar - leaving puzzled motorists none the wiser.

But on Sunday it emerged that the lights were illuminated Thai
lanterns released over Leez Priory for a wedding.

Debbie Mead, from the priory, said they are now popular at
weddings.

But Michelle Fitzgibbons, of Romford, who first reported the
sighting over Hainault to the Ilford Recorder said she was sure
that the lanterns didn't explain what she saw.

And Ann Hosie, who lives on the Limes Farm estate in Chigwell,
is also adamant the lights were something else.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                       Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:55:29 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark


>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

<snip>

>To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms
>UFO + mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above
>(at the largest commercial archive on the net). How many times
>does it say the two words have coincided in print since 1947?

>Fifteen. Think about that.

Exactly, Chris. If any proof were needed of the disconnect
between the UFO world and the mainstream world, that's it.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: RRR Group - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:35:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:58:30 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Reynolds


>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:44:30 -0600
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>Greetings to the Listarians:

>-----

>From: <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: <fadeddiscs.nul>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:40 AM
>Subject: Bitch

>>While Rich Reynolds may tolerate your ignorant rants, the
>>rest of the RRRGroup doesn't.

>>Our primary consolation is that you will be dead soon.

>>Look for some bashing at our blog, now that we've
>>uncovered some interesting things from your past.

>>Christopher Jay

>-----

>I rest my case on the RRR Group.

>Wendy Connors

I've written to Wendy and apologized profusely for Christopher's
crude and obscene e-mail to her. (He will be taken down for it.)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Address For Rob Swiatek?

From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:36:48 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:24:05 -0400
Subject: Address For Rob Swiatek?


Dear List:

My day job as a Resource Management Support Clerk with the 35th
Service Batallion has been keeping me so busy that I'm only
getting to turn my computer towards this List a mere once or
twice a week lately, and then only for a few brief moments at a
time.

Haven't had any time at all to reply to a lot of discussion here
that I've wanted to participate in. I'm spending so much time
inside chain link fences and barbed wire that I'm starting to
feel like I'm incarcerated.

Hopefully, the work load will lighten up over the next few weeks
and I can get back to joining you all in some discussion of some
of the matters currently at hand.

In the mean time, can anyone provide me with a current e-mail
address for Rob Swiatek?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                         Re: Passive Radar - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:56:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:26:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:42:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 21:01:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

<snip>

>A couple questions.

>1) Passive radar is "line of sight", right? Just like active,
>except active requires the emitting signal to be "line of
>sight"?

Sure. But I don't think you'd need every _receiver_ to be in
line of sight from the illuminator. The system as a whole needs
to be able to identify the reference signal, so I imagine that
the digitally interconnected array can process reflected signals
at all receiver sites as long as the illuminator is in line of
sight from some of them. The occulted receivers would "know"
what the properties of the raw reference signal should be even
though they can't see it.

>2) The larger area you are covering and the greater resolution
>you desire, then the processing speed is affected?

If you have more receivers and more processing requirements then
that must be true.

>3) Are passive radar receiver antennae omnidirectional and if so
>how do they handle ground reflections of signals reflected
>off of targets?

It's hard to find concrete info on specific built set ups, but I
think in the sort of "parasitic" scheme that would be of most
interest to us the individual antennae are omindirectional. As I
understand it (which may be not very well) proposals like the
LOFAR array would use clusters of tens or hundreds of simple
fixed dipoles, each cluster separated by a baseline of hundreds
of kms, so you have a lot of phased arrays, each one in effect a
steerable beam. The whole is basically an extremely flexible
Synthetic Aperture Radar.

I think some simpler set ups have problems with preserving
signal visibility because the direct signal of the illuminator
can swamp weak reflections at the receiver, so the illuminator
has to be selected to be far over the horizon or masked by
topography and your reference receiver has to be there too, or
else you have to use adaptive filtering to remove the direct
signal. With the phased array you can direct the receiver
sensitivity to exclude even relatively nearby illuminators (or
suppress them to the point where your filtering becomes easy)
and and so you can track weak reflectors.

>>A possible benefit for UFO studies (from the point of view of
>>ETH or secret-technology hypotheses) would be the fact that the
>>target cannot know it is being illuminated, and because there is
>>no single dedicated transmitter frequency or
>>transmitter/receiver location it cannot easily utilise tactical
>>deception jamming against the system.

>True, but I still wonder if their technology is basically
>radar transparent (not even trying to hide) based on past
>reports.

Some of the best hard(ish) evidence that there is anything to
track is radar evidence, so I don't see a general case for radar
transparency based on those past reports. I read you as saying
that there is no such radar evidence, and suggesting that this
is because of "their technology". This seems convoluted
reasoning to me. I would rather say that there is some evidence
of some phenomena with some radar opacity.

There are a few cases where there is persuasive visual evidence
of some object that you'd expect to have been radar tracked, but
wasn't. I'd say there are at least as many where a radar track
is reported but nobody saw anything. Granted that there are
genuine unknowns in both categories, and granted that some of
these are sightings of "their technology", I think detection
failure might still be explained in conventional ways because
neither visual nor surveillance radar cover is 100% efficient
for all kinds of reasons (non-luminosity, radar nulls and
shadows, anti-clutter filters, staffing/reporting and other
operational issues etc). You could argue reasonably that "they"
probably _ought_ to have advanced stealth techniques, wherever
they hail from. Maybe they do. This is why I made the point that
known stealth techniques are more likely circumvented by passive
than by active radar.

There's also a lot of indirect evidence that there are classes
of unknowns that are either plasma phenomena or have plasmas
associated with them. If they are reported to cause induction
heating, static discharges, radio attenuation and other em
effects like car-stops, the suggestion is that these phenomena
are open to the em environment and in principle could be
detectable by scattering radar. Again, a passive radar using VHF
wavelengths that scatter well from plasmas would be well adapted
to tracking these.

>It could be that the past radars were inadequately
>pointed or operated or we simply are not getting the true
>story from the airport control towers or the radar illuminated
>"UFO" was not hardware, but something else.

Yes, and a VHF passive radar array could be very useful in
detecting and investigating "something else" - be it plasmas or
weird refractive index anomalies - as I pointed out.

>>I don't know what the GPS wavelength is, but regarding TV and FM
>>signals, even though the inherent resolution of metre waves is
>>poor compared to centimetric radar the multiple data sources and
>>software integration means that passive radar has huge potential
>>for target identification because it's a fully 3-D system. It
>>allows the computer to match signal strengths at different
>>receivers against the second-by-second track information and
>>produce a map of the target cross-section at a number of
>>different aspects which can then be compared with a register of
>>characteristic patterns in the computer's memory.

>Excuse me if I am too much a novice at these matters, but it
>seems to me using a handheld radio that numerous weather effects
>(and the ionosphere) play havoc on signal strengths. Sure you
>can build a bigger, better antenna and amplify the signal, but
>these signal effects must impact using field strengths. Can
>f.s. really be relied upon in any way?

We're all novices here, but according to what I've read the
multi-aspect pattern matching of radar signatures has been
studied and trialed, in simulation and using real-world data, by
people who know what they're doing. Some of this is DARPA and
NATO funded. There's the Automatic Target Recognition system
developed with Lockheed-Martin's "Silent Sentry" passive radar -
 a commercial product. You can find open source papers on the
net. If Fast Illinois Solver Code tables, Multipole analysis,
Inverse Fast Fourier Transforms and Monte Carlo simulations are
your thing then you'll understand the practical guts of this
pattern-matching software better than I do! But the principles
are plain enough.

>>So it seems there's potentially a lot of information to be
>>extracted about unidentified targets by a passive radar array.
>>As far as ufologists are concerned, in practical terms it might
>>still be pie in the sky - but so's an active radar array, and
>>amateur passive radar is not entirely new ground. There are
>>meteor-detection enthusiasts out there already. Of course there
>>will always be huge technical and operational problems with
>>both, but with passive arrays at least the hardware is cheap and
>>off-the-shelf, there are no licensing issues, and most of the
>>innovation is in the software. The beauty of it is the
>>accessiblity of those multiple data-streams: Independent
>>receiver sites don't need expensive independent radar
>>installations, and near real-time plot extraction from multiple
>>sites would give the best possible coordinates for zeroing in
>>optical and other instrumentation.

>Sounds good to me! Surely too expensive for amateurs though.
>Else, why do we not have one? If we have experts out there
>building active radar (e.g. the Hessadalen paper), then where
>are they for passive? I know it has been built by non- military
>agencies for meteor tracking, but its still a black box. Maybe I
>am missing the dissertation discussing how to make one.

I don't think we're going to see ufologists with backyard
passive radar arrays any time soon. But computers get cheaper
and cleverer all the time. If we can't build a practical amateur
system today someone else might be able to tomorrow. If we think
about it now they won't be starting from scratch in a vacuum.

Meanwhile the issue of piggy-backing is worth thinking about. If
you read Sars' proposal on the US/Dutch LOFAR system (anyone
know whether this is getting built or not, by the way?) you'll
see that he pitches it as a radioastronomy telescope and an
instrument for detailed ionosphere studies, because the
ionosphere gets in the way of the radioastronomy at VHF. So if
ionosphere reflections defeat your radioastronomy goals well
then you opportunistically turn the failure into a method of
studying the problem!

Maybe UFO studies could be parasitical on other fundable studies
of geophysical phenomena in a similar way, if Peter Davenport or
someone else can convince researchers to retain and share their
data for re-examination. This may need something a bit like
NARCAP's pitch, which imports the UFO problem on the back of the
air safety issue. Maybe appeal to researchers from some "safe"
position on moral high ground, like studying anecdotal radar
evidence of anomalously severe temp/humidity gradients or
possible unknown types of clear air turbulence.

As you say, although real-time is nice it isn't essential for
evidentiary purposes. Re-using old radar data could be done in
the same way (well, hopefully a better way!) as the Condon team
used the Prairie Network cameras. If "we" know ahead of time
that such data might be available then arrangements could be
made in advance to monitor UFO reports in the coverage area
during the study period, or auto cameras could be set up. There
could be a lot of unused latent information in the passive radar
data and recovering it would "only" take time, cunning and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:25:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:27:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Clark


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 22:37:05 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:17:47 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>We in the UK certainly do have shipwrecks, and victims thereof.
>Unlike you, we rarely have train wrecks or victims thereof, but
>we do have train crashes, plus their victims.

>We very rarely have plane wrecks or victims, but we do have
>plane crashes and victims.

>We very rarely have car or bus wrecks or victims, but we do have
>car and bus crashes plus, of course, their victims.

>We hardly ever have balloon wrecks or victims, but the
>occasional balloon fall or crash plus the odd victim.

>Finally, we never, never, have UFO wrecks or victims. We may
>have had the odd UFO crash, depending on who you believe.

>Whilst we may have very few wrecks, we do often have wreckage
>(which you probably don't have).

>Despite the above, I concede you have won the point.

Thanks, Christopher, but it's not really a question of winning.
I think what we've seen is yet another instance supporting the
old joke that America and England are divided by a common
language.

>It is obviously time I got down to reading the US newspapers.
>You are just too erudite for me.

>How & why do you manage to collect such quotes anyway?

>Do you make a study of wrecks?

Nah, though I do have an interest, unrelated to the above, in
train-wreck ballads, going back to my childhood when, as the son
of a railroad man, rail folk songs like "Wreck of the Old 97"
entranced me.

Actually, like Chris Aubeck and a handful of other Listfolk, I
subscribe to a service that gives me access to the contents of
English-language newspapers from the mid-18th Century to the
present. Ain't the Internet wonderful?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:27:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:29:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>enough denialist.

>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an eager
>believer.

Excellent, Mr. Rimmer!

You _finally_ get it vis a vis your admission here that none of
your explanations is remotely convincing enough, and that it is
_you_ most typifying the "eager believer". That _is_ what you
meant, is it not?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: My Own Experience - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:48:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:30:45 -0400
Subject: Re: My Own Experience - Chichikov


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:35:15 -0300
>Subject: Re: My Own Experience

<snip>

>Since then I've had discussions with military personnal about
>their experiences. Three were airborne encounters. That's why I
>take it seriously.

Don,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:21:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:34:33 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg


>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>To: UFO Updates" <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:47:17 -0600
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>Greetings to the Listarians:

>I've been thinking quite a bit about the RRR Group. How can
>researchers be sure that it isn't a stealth group of CSICOP
>infiltrating legitimate Ufology at the base level?

>Lots of markers on the RRR blog that begs the question.

>What does the List think?

>Wendy Connors

_I_ say, and only metaphorically, mind, while discomfiting
aggressive "R" Cubers have been quite _literal_ lately... and
disturbingly, if not certifiably so.

'Crush the enemy, kill the enemy... see the enemy driven
before you and hear the lamentations of his mousey slatterns.'

That said, I've decided my gloves are coming off. I'm done
treating dissembly with any civility what-so-ever. Some may ask
when I was _ever_ doing that. These will understand. Don't
trifle with the surface... lets go to the _bone_. Everybody
ready for that?

Covered up. Serious firefights, 'lurid duels of death' with
'aliens' from beyond? News at the eleventh hour... folks.
Sincerely.

We don't have time for Nicky-new-guy-naysaying, especially given
that the quality of the naysaying proffered is inconsistent,
invariably inconstant, and would seem to lack a required
fidelity in the opinion of this writer. I regret most of the
kindness ever extended.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                        Request From CBS Evening News

From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:36:19 -0400
Subject: Request From CBS Evening News


(On behalf of a non-subscriber. Please note that although she
does not say so in her e-mail, they are ideally seeking
interviews in either the Washington DC or Boston area, within
the next 2 or 3 days.)


To Whom it May Concern:

My name is Andrea Bruce and I am a producer for CBS Evening News
with Bob Schieffer. I am interested in doing a television news
story about the findings of a new book about alien abductions by
Harvard researcher Dr. Susan Clancy. I am hoping to interview
one, two or three people who have had an abduction experience.

I imagine abductees may be unwilling to share their experiences
on camera, as some media outlets have been less than balanced in
dealing with the subject. We are not looking to make fun of
anyone, rather, explore what Dr. Clancy says in light of what
abductees have experienced - but we need to hear from an
abductee (s) to do that. To protect shyer or skeptical
individuals, we could do the interview in profile/silhouette and
not use full names.

Please contact me at my newsroom in Washington at





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          RRR Group Seeks Attention

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:23:33 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:39:20 -0400
Subject: RRR Group Seeks Attention


Rich Reynolds will be interested to know that an obnoxious jerk
by the name of Christopher Jay sent me a private e-mail claiming
to be "Assistant to Rich Reynolds, RRRGroup."

This person flatly admitted that their purpose is to call





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:37:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Ledger


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>enough denialist.

>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an eager
>believer.


John, you've got to be kidding. What explanation[s]? So far
there are none. It's getting harder and harder to take you or
your position seriously. You bring nothing to the table unless
you consider negative, unsupported rhetoric as evidence. Since
you don't seem to want to either supply any evidence to the
contrary, just disdain and derision, why you are even on the
list? Rich, as bad as his attempts are to explain this case with
thinly disguised cosmetic, oft times silly, applications, does
offer up a position. On the other hand you offer nothing, not
even an opinion. You seem satisfied with just assigning
degeneratory motive to anyone not readily supportive of
ridiculous conjecture or theories.

Debate seems a useless tool when trying to get at the truth of
this phenomenon. Obviously the best debater would win, but
that's not the point. Winning an argument is a poor substitute
for proof if the facts suffer in the process. Debate is the
purview of courts and legislatures who often get it wrong.

The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance your
own position, not through the presentation of facts but by





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:45:04 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:44:46 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Aubeck


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:45:15 -0700
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:09:37 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:16:07 EDT
>>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:54:55 +0100 (BST)
>>>>Subject: The Term Mothership [was: Gill Sighting]

<snip>

>Chris, it could just as well be argued that because
>"mothership" was only occasionally associated with
>UFOs that Gill was likely unaware of its UFO
>association.

Yes, it could, but the circumstances and the date make
that possibility less likely than the contrary.

>My electronic searches of the NY and LA Times
>certainly do not support your assertion that there
>was a "strong association" with UFOs (I found only
>one such article out of 2600 with "mothership"

<snip>

I agree with you, see my other post. The newspapers didn't pick
up on that word too much. But for Gill to have come across the
idea he only needed friends or a radio to have heard of the
Adamaski phenomenon just enough to learn that one UFO term.

<snip>

>And as Jerry Clark pointed out, Gill when asked
>about this denied knowing about Adamski or much
>about UFOs in general prior to his sighting.

Yes, though you must admit that as the years rolled by he
probably couldn't recall why the word "mothership" ever popped
into his head in the first place. Could you perform such a feat
of memory about some word you once said or wrote? I know I
couldn't. In fact the right words for things I know nothing
about are often popping into my head, from somewhere.

<snip>

>As far as I can see, there is no difference between
>saying "mama disc" and "mother disc". Let's not
>split semantic hairs.

<snip>

Yeah, let's drop this whole thing. I don't really care one way
or another about Gill's sighting as it isn't pre-Arnold (my only
field of interest). I just thought that if anyone's going to
bring up a particular word as evidence for or against something,
we might as well do it seriously.

And for the record, though "mama" and "mother" really are not
used equally in figurative speech in the English language, my
point was that the combination "mother+ship" created a pre-
existing noun that Gill must have been aware of whether his
source was the war or flying saucer stories. Take your pick, the
right answer just isn't out there in this case, but the context
only leads in one direction.

Unthreading myself from the debate at this point, so good luck!


Chris





2003-2004 Archives and links

http://anomalies.bravepages.com/main.htm

2004-present Archives at the Yahoo Group Website

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magonia_exchange/

Other pages of interest:

http://caubeck.tripod.com/lang/

http://caubeck.tripod.com/the_sport_of_flying_saucers/index.html

http://caubeck.tripod.com/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                     Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Groff

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 21:53:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:46:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Groff


>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:31:31 -0700
>Subject: Terry Groff In Hospital

>Dear Listerions,

>Terry Groff was admitted to the emergency room at Parkland
>Hospital in Dallas two days ago. Looks like he's going to be
>okay, but will remain there a few more days.

>Please join me in wishing him well - a prayer, a positive
>thought, a kind word; whatever your thing is.

>Get well Terry...


To Frank Warren, V-J Ballester-Olmos, Nick Redfern and Ken Cherry
(Texas State Director for MUFON)

Thank you for your kind thoughts.

I was released from the hospital today (Thur. 10/27) with a
clean bill of health. I was kind of surprised that they released
me only a few hours after extracting an 18" tube from my chest.
I don't know exactly why my right lung collapsed but it could
have been for the same reason my left one collapsed nearly 30
years ago; namely infected scars from a previous bout with
severe Pneumonia.

The first one required surgery to repair but fortunately this
time surgery was not needed.

In any event I am home now and totally mobile again, just in time
for my favorite holiday... Halloween. BOO!

Frank, your, and all other, graphics should be restored now. It
turns out that the culprit was my Mother who thought she was
doing me a favor by shutting down my PC where all me sites and
graphics are hosted. It is all functioning normally again.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                     Sand Circles At Byron Bay Australia

From: Sheryl Gottschall <gottscha.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 15:33:14 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:47:41 -0400
Subject: Sand Circles At Byron Bay Australia


Hi List,

Some of you may be aware of the sand circles that appeared on
the beach at Byron Bay, Australia on the 13th September 2005.

All 3 images from the photographer who snapped these shots are
now up at the UFO Research Queensland web site:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:50:34 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:49:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Miller


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:02:06 -0700
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 15:52:29 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:31:27 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>Zamora saw what he said he saw, Stuart. I think that's the
>>>beginning and the end of it, right there.

>>>You?

>>He saw something that didn't quite make it back to White
>>Sands. Or had just left. Piloted by humans, regardless of
>>size.


Hello David,

>Easy to say, but is there one single bit of evidence to
>support this? Consider Zamora's description plus physical
>evidence left behind:

>1. Small, wingless, oval-shaped craft with landing gears.
>Likely weighed at least a few tons, based on landing pad
>impressions in hard soil.

>2. Capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL craft): did
>this with a loud roar emitting a peculiar "flame."

>3. Once aloft, switched to a completely silent propulsion
>mode.

>4. High performance vehicle: once aloft, silent propulsion
>system capable of accelerating vehicle to high (probably
>supersonic) speed within about 20 seconds. Vehicle also flew
>horizontally at high speed just above ground, all without
>visible wings, stabilizers, other control surfaces or external
>propulsion.

You are absolutely right; my comments were easy to say and I
thank you for a gentle reponse and for a succinct summary of the
relevant issues of the case.

I have no problem with the volume of evidence presented in this
case and respect the work done by many people, including Ray
Stanford. And I'm also aware of the inconsistencies in the
apparent abilities of the craft seen in relation to VTO
technology at the time and so on. I don't dismiss this.

We come back to an age old problem, which Don Ledger brought up
recently, which you allude to at the end of your posting and
which has dogged us consistantly; namely the discrepancy between
publicly known technology and the abilities of some observed
craft.

In our minds, it is a reasonable argument to assume that if one
section of the American military establishment has developed a
certain level of technology, then that expertise is shared and
distributed amongst other areas of the military where
appropriate.

I think we may be making a mistake in that assumption. I think
we may be underestimating the level of logic, secrecy, paranoia,
strange logic, stupidity and power mongering that goes on.

I'm not prepared to accept that just because, in 1965, the
Americans were not able to construct a craft with the
capabilities of the object that Lonnie Zamora saw that that
neccessarily means that the Americans were not capable of
building such a craft in 1965. You may regard that as very
peculiar logic but in the black world, I _might_ have a point.

As "positive" Ufologists, look at the logic confrontation we
face when, for example, we ponder why, initially, the American
government poured money into SETI. We are certain that the
United States government has had alien contact so why in God's
name stick public money into SETI when we already have the
answers? Apparently. You can even extend that argument to
question the very existance of NASA on that basis.

In looking at the Zamora case, I cannot get past what for me is
the initial hurdle, namely the location of the incident and its
proximity to White Sands. I just can't accept a coincidence like
that and dismiss it. We are left with two alternatives; either a
terrestrial or a non terrestrial craft. Given the location and
despite the contrary evidence, logic says, at least to me, that
a terrestrial solution is the likely answer.

I know that this will seem like a case of "Don't bother me with
the evidence; my mind is made up". I'm certainly not
intransigent about this and not only could, but would indeed
_love_ to be persuaded otherwise. At the moment, I'm not so.

>I don't know of any human vehicle then or now that even
>remotely fits such a profile. If we had such a vehicle over
>40 years ago, what happened to it? A craft with such
>characteristics would surely have replaced our jet aircraft,
>at least in some missions. So again, where is it?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:42:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:51:48 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Lehmberg


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:35:57 -0500
>Subject: Re: RRR Group - Connors

>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:44:30 -0600
>>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>>Greetings to the Listarians:

>>-----

>>From: <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: <fadeddiscs.nul>
>>Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:40 AM
>>Subject: Bitch

>>>While Rich Reynolds may tolerate your ignorant rants, the
>>>rest of the RRRGroup doesn't.

>>>Our primary consolation is that you will be dead soon.

>>>Look for some bashing at our blog, now that we've
>>>uncovered some interesting things from your past.

>>>Christopher Jay

>>-----

>>I rest my case on the RRR Group.

>>Wendy Connors

>I've written to Wendy and apologized profusely for Christopher's
>crude and obscene e-mail to her. (He will be taken down for it.)

>Wendy has responded and we hope the matter has been corrected.

Yeah -- but see, as I've pointed out before to you, it's always
a step 'back' to cover the two steps and a kick forward your
group invariably takes, with an ameliorating apology to cover
damage done, but too little too late by far.

I suspect it to be a device to you frequently used, a
manipulation, a control mechanism, an applied psychology, a
plausible deniability.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:42:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:53:26 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Shough


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31:29 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

><snip>

>>To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms
>>UFO + mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above
>>(at the largest commercial archive on the net). How many times
>>does it say the two words have coincided in print since 1947?

>>Fifteen. Think about that.

>Exactly, Chris. If any proof were needed of the disconnect
>between the UFO world and the mainstream world, that's it.
>"Everyone" does not think of motherships as disc-bearing ET
>visitors. To the contrary, only a very few of us do.

For some reason I didn't receive the List post to which Jerry is
replying here, but Chris's search result is a formidable
statistic!

This is the capstone on other recent posts and I've changed my
mind somewhat in favour of the presumption that Gill (very
likely) originated or echoed this phrase without conscious
awareness of its UFO connotations. But as I never leaned very





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                  'Remote Viewing' Training For Military &

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:01:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:01:52 -0400
Subject: 'Remote Viewing' Training For Military &




Source: The Amercian Chronicle - Beverly Hills, California, USA

http://tinyurl.com/8atzg

October 27, 2005


Expand 'Remote Viewing' Training For U.S. Military, Intelligence
Services Now

By Steve Hammons

The unusual human skill known as "remote viewing" could be an
important asset for our armed forces and national intelligence
resources.

Training in the application of remote viewing could be expanded
to benefit our military personnel and intelligence agencies in
ongoing tactical and strategic operations.

We can no longer afford to ignore this very powerful asset.

WHAT IS REMOTE VIEWING?

Remote viewing could just as easily be called "enhanced
instincts and intuition" or maybe "unconventional internal
perception." Remote viewing is the ability to use and improve
the "sixth sense" that most or all people reportedly have to
some degree.

Remote viewing has reportedly been used successfully in many
intelligence and reconnaissance efforts but its use has been
limited.

The official remote viewing program was variously under the
control of the CIA, Army Intelligence and Security Command, the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Air Force in the �70s,
80s and early 90s. Project STARGATE was only the last of a
series of code names for an effort also known as SCANNATE,
GONDOLAWISH, GRILLFLAME, CENTERLANE and SUNSTREAK.

Remote viewing is a skill that seems impossible, beyond belief.
However, remote viewing experts say years of research and
practical application of remote viewing in real-life operational
settings have proven that it works and works well. That which is
not known can become known.

Experts allege that successful application of these abilities in
a wide range of endeavors, including intelligence and
reconnaissance operations, has been proven beyond question.
Significant scientific research has reportedly validated many
aspects of remote viewing theory and practice.

A new book by retired Army major and former STARGATE officer
Paul H. Smith on remote viewing will soon be available. "Reading
the Enemy's Mind: Inside Star Gate - America's Psychic Espionage
Program" contains inside information on remote viewing, it�s
historical application in U.S. intelligence efforts and other
aspects of the government�s projects on this subject.

PROPOSALS FOR TRAINING

Remote viewing has reportedly been taught to some people within
Army Special Forces intelligence and the special operations
community.

It might be very helpful if training in this skill was quickly
expanded. Military and other intelligence training programs
could add courses in remote viewing in a short amount of time.
Experts in this field claim that people can develop these
abilities with a moderate amount of training.

Many current remote viewing experts are former Army intelligence
officers. They should be more fully utilized. Since 1995, when
remote viewing was declassified for all practical purposes, some
of the original Army intelligence officers and others who fine-
tuned remote viewing at Fort Meade have set up their own
companies to teach the skill.

Some of these are members of the original remote viewing unit at
Fort Meade. Although personnel changed over the years as
different officers and NCOs rotated in and out of the program,
some of the project participants were:

- Paul H. Smith, Remote Viewing Instructional Services,
www.rviewer.com

- Joe McMoneagle, Intuitive Intelligence Applications,
www.mceagle.com

- Lyn Buchanan, Problems Solutions Innovations www.crviewer.com

- Dale Graff, Baycliff Psi Seminars, www.dalegraff.com

- F. Holmes "Skip" Atwater,
http://satwater.www9.50megs.com/skipatwater.htm

DEPLOYMENT SCENARIOS

Could an intelligence or security expert involved in U.S.
homeland security remote view to perceive and understand a
terrorist threat? Could a platoon leader remote view over the
next hill to see an ambush? Could a U.S. interrogator "know"
that the person in his custody has terrorist connections, or
that he is innocent, or that he knows more?

Or, could those in the field use remote viewing operators
sitting somewhere else? Could a convoy route map be sent to the
remote viewer for a check for IEDs or ambushes? Could a map of a
target area be examined by a remote viewer to locate an enemy
base camp? There are unlimited potential applications that can
save lives and help accomplish missions now, and the missions to
come.

Maybe personnel with remote viewing training should be assigned
organizationally in the way medics, communications specialists,
intelligence specialists, supply officers or others are
assigned.

Remote viewing training could be made available to a wide range
of personnel and the skill could be spread as widely as there
were open minds.

TIMELINES OF REMOTE VIEWING DEVELOPMENT

1971: Experiments in remote viewing at Stanford Research
Institute (SRI). CIA conducts evaluations. CIA gives SRI $50K
experimental contract.

1971-73: Various experiments conducted.

1974: Research article on remote viewing published in journal
Nature.

1975: CIA terminates funding and involvement, officially-
overtly. Air Force Foreign Technology Division becomes primary
funding source.

1976-77: Research and operations continue.

1977: Army intelligence command forms RV unit at Fort Meade,
code-named Project GONDOLAWISH, then changed to Project
GRILLFLAME.

1978-79: Army intelligence selects RV candidates from within
Army and civilians.

1980: Air Force RV involvement terminated, officially, overtly.

1980-82: Research and operations continue

1982: Project name changed to CENTERLANE.

1984: Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) takes temporary control
of project.

1986: DIA takes formal control of project. Project name changed
to SUNSTREAK.

1990: Project name changed to STARGATE.

1991: Operations involving Stanford Research Institute are
transferred to Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC),
headquartered in San Diego.

1994: Project control is transferred from DIA to CIA.

1995: CIA officially, overtly cancels STARGATE.

---

Steve Hammons is author of two novels about a secret research
team investigating unconventional phenomena, the "Joint
Reconnaissance Study Group." Mission Into Light and the sequel
Light's Hand introduce readers to the ten women and men of the
"JRSG" and their interesting adventures. Hammons serves as a
research analyst at the "open source intelligence (OSINT)" Web
site, IntelDesk.com.

Visit the home page of his novels at the link below:

Author's web site:

http://navyseals.com/community/members/Ohio52






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                         Horse Death Mystery Solved

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:45:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:45:27 -0400
Subject: Horse Death Mystery Solved




Source: The National Meteorological Office - U.K.

http://tinyurl.com/c3brs

26 Oct 2005


Horse Death Mystery Solved

A veterinary investigation has found that 16 horses, which were
found dead and lying in a field last week, were killed by
lightning.

The incident, which occurred in El Paso County in the US,
sparked various rumours amongst the local community with regards
to the cause of death.

One resident was convinced the horses had been poisoned. He told
the Rocky Mountain News that one of the horses died resting on
its knees, which was "evidence the horse was sick from poison
and had just dropped to its knees and died".

From poisoning to ice bullets, the number of theories flying
around was endless, but now Dr John Heikkila has put an end to
the speculation.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          'UFO' Is Seen By Brothers

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:17:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:17:20 -0400
Subject: 'UFO' Is Seen By Brothers




Source: The Shropshire Star - Ketley, Telford, Shhhropshire, UK

http://www.shropshirestar.com/show_article.php?aID=38704

Oct 27, 2005


'UFO' Is Seen By Brothers

A man believes he may have seen a UFO after he saw a "ball of
bright white light" in the sky in Telford.

Tony Millward said he and his brother, Steve, were getting
groceries for their father when they saw a light flying in a
straight line above Attwood Terrace, Dawley, at around 6.30pm on
Tuesday.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

               Unidentified Lights Reported Over US West Coast

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:20:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:20:53 -0400
Subject: Unidentified Lights Reported Over US West Coast




Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

http://tinyurl.com/b4hwh

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Unidentified Lights Reported Over The West Coast
Chronicle Staff Report

Residents across California and people as far east as Las Vegas
reported seeing strange lights in the sky late Wednesday,
according to the Vandenberg Air Force Base on the central coast.

Base command staff at Vandenberg, Travis Air Force Base and
Edwards Air Force Base said there were no military aircraft in
the sky that would have caused the lights. The air force bases
also said there were no test missile launches Wednesday. Such
tests have, in the past, resulted in light patterns that can be
seen in across the California coast.

The bases did not send aircraft to check on the reports of
lights.

The Federal Aviation Administration's West Coast office had no
reports of the lights and no aircrafts were unaccounted for.

San Francisco resident Tim Sinclair said the lights appeared to
be near the cross at the top of Mt. Davidson Park. Sinclair, who
lives near the park, described them as a series of solid lights





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Spellbound By Sky Lights

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:23:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:23:40 -0400
Subject: Spellbound By Sky Lights




Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

Friday, October 28, 2005

Spellbound By Sky Lights

Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
or were they?

David Perlman
Chronicle Science Editor


Mysterious, bright lights in the night sky Wednesday that
alarmed or bemused scores of Bay Area residents were not
mysterious at all but most likely a pair of planets whose orbits
around the sun are carrying them close to Earth right now.

Others are not so sure.

Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at Foothill
College, said the lights were probably Mars and Venus, two
planets that currently appear close together and will probably
remain brilliant for another week or two until their orbits
begin moving them away from Earth again.

If they seem to take on unusual colors, twinkle or even move,
Fraknoi said, it's because of an optical illusion caused by
Earth's somewhat dense, moisture-laden lower atmosphere. Clouds
scudding by also may obscure them briefly before they reappear,
he said.

Residents across California and people as far east as Las Vegas
reported seeing the lights in the sky late Wednesday. Those who
called space officials at Vandenberg Air Force Base on the
Central Coast and the Federal Aviation Administration drew the
usual response Thursday: No, there were no missile launches, no
wandering airplane pilots had failed to file flight plans, no
military jets were aloft, and no one was suggesting UFOs.

No one except astronomers could offer an explanation.

Chronicle photographer Lance Iversen caught images of the
peculiar lights in his camera around midnight Wednesday, looking
east from Twin Peaks. Mars and Venus would have been visible in
the eastern skies at that time.

Iversen said that at one point he saw four distinctly separate
lights, but then saw only two that seemed to move in unison.

"They were just lights moving in the sky," he said. "They might
have been helicopters, although I couldn't see any fuselages,
but the lights were moving far enough and fast enough so they
couldn't have been planets -- and I know planets when I see
them."

But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation for
the lights.

In their orbits around the sun, all planets move at different
speeds, just as the Earth does, and periodically their varied
speeds cause them to catch up and overtake the Earth's orbital
flight and bring them closer to our home planet.

In fact, the Red Planet will be exactly 43.1 million miles from
Earth at 8:25 p.m. Saturday, and its orbit won't bring it that
close to Earth again until the summer of 2018, according to
astronomical calculations.

Venus, which orbits the sun inside Earth's orbital path, is now
about 106 million miles away -- no record, but close enough to
appear much brighter than usual.

According to Fraknoi, Mars now far outshines even the brightest
of all the stars in the sky, and when skies are clear, the
fourth planet from the sun could look even bigger than normal.
Its brilliance should be apparent above the eastern horizon soon
after sunset, but will appear even brighter as it climbs higher
in the sky during the night.

On the night of Nov. 7, Mars will be directly opposite the sun
in relation to Earth -- a position astronomers call opposition,
which means it will rise above the eastern horizon just at
sunset, climb higher and higher, and remain in the sky all night
until it sets at sunrise.

The Martian orbit last caught up with Earth's in August 2003,
and on that occasion it was even closer -- about 36 million





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                  Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:01:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:52:47 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Reynolds


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:23:33 +0000
>Subject: RRR Group Seeks Attention

>Rich Reynolds will be interested to know that an obnoxious jerk
>by the name of Christopher Jay sent me a private e-mail claiming
>to be "Assistant to Rich Reynolds, RRRGroup."

>This person flatly admitted that their purpose is to call
>attention to themselves. Rich, of course, will want to deny that
>this person is who he claims to be,  I'm sure.

Mr. Hall and Listers:

Yes, Christopher and the RRRGroup does seek attention, not from
UpDaters necessarily, but from media folks, whom we'd like to
entice into the UFO debate.

We sensationalize, because that's what attracts media. The bone-
dry debates in ufology won't get media attention I'm afraid.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: RRR Group - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:06:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:01:36 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Reynolds


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:42:00 -0500
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:35:57 -0500
>>Subject: Re: RRR Group - Connors

>>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:44:30 -0600

<snip>

>>>Wendy Connors

>>I've written to Wendy and apologized profusely for Christopher's
>>crude and obscene e-mail to her. (He will be taken down for it.)

>>Wendy has responded and we hope the matter has been corrected.

>Yeah -- but see, as I've pointed out before to you, it's always
>a step 'back' to cover the two steps and a kick forward your
>group invariably takes, with an ameliorating apology to cover
>damage done, but too little too late by far.

>I suspect it to be a device to you frequently used, a
>manipulation, a control mechanism, an applied psychology, a
>plausible deniability.

>Did you give CJ a 'real' good spankin'? Send the video.

Alfred:

I didn't give Christopher Jay a spankin' but I did try to slap
him around a little bit - he's bigger than I am, so I wasn't
too successful.

But I'm assured that e-mails will not go out that are as
offensive as that to Ms. Connors.

While I "direct" the RRRGroup, I'm not the dictator of it, since
it was set up by the boys and I've ended up being the primary
user of the blog by that name.

We're obnoxious I know... but then so are some here, in their





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                Re: Request From CBS Evening News - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:09:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:05:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Request From CBS Evening News - Lehmberg


>From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Request From CBS Evening News

>(On behalf of a non-subscriber. Please note that although she
>does not say so in her e-mail, they are ideally seeking
>interviews in either the Washington DC or Boston area, within
>the next 2 or 3 days.)

>To Whom it May Concern:

>My name is Andrea Bruce and I am a producer for CBS Evening News
>with Bob Schieffer.

>Please contact me at my newsroom in Washington at
>(202) 457-4385.


See... if you 'front' for the sociopathic, conflicted and
dissembling status-quo you can get begging attention from
mainstream media, even if you are a clueless insentient,
hideously uninformed, and the punchline for every blonde joke
I've ever heard.

Q: How long does it take Dr. Clancy to change a light bulb?

A: Forever, Dr. Clancy has no interest in changing lightbulbs as
she prefers to remain in the dark.

I wonder if "Bob n' Andrea" ever called on Dr. Mack...

Check out my blog - below - today, folks... it's a note to
'Suzy', too...





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                   Re: Horse Death Mystery Solved - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 15:04:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:06:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Horse Death Mystery Solved - Shough


>Source: The National Meteorological Office - U.K.

>http://tinyurl.com/c3brs

>26 Oct 2005

>Horse Death Mystery Solved

>A veterinary investigation has found that 16 horses, which were
>found dead and lying in a field last week, were killed by
>lightning.

>The incident, which occurred in El Paso County in the US,
>sparked various rumours amongst the local community with regards
>to the cause of death.

>One resident was convinced the horses had been poisoned. He told
>the Rocky Mountain News that one of the horses died resting on
>its knees, which was "evidence the horse was sick from poison
>and had just dropped to its knees and died".

>>From poisoning to ice bullets, the number of theories flying
>around was endless, but now Dr John Heikkila has put an end to
>the speculation.

>He told officials that tissue samples tested at the Colorado
>School of Veterinary Medicine did not yield any signs of
>dangerous food sources or poisons.

Dear List

Perhaps it's just me, but does anyone else wonder; 1) how this





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Mackay

From: Glennys Mackay <gem60.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:12:48 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:10:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Mackay

>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 21:53:21 -0500
>Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital


Terry I met you while lecturing at the MUFON Chapter in Dallas
in June...

Just want to tell you that you are in our Prayers. I had a
feeling we may have had that dinner together prior to my lecture
along with Ken Cherry, his lovely wife, also Jim Marrs and
family also some of the committee.

Take care.

Look forward to spending time with a great bunch of friends in
Dallas in 2006 when I return.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                   Re: Horse Death Mystery Solved - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:28:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:13:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Horse Death Mystery Solved - Kaeser


UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:

>Source: The National Meteorological Office - U.K.

>http://tinyurl.com/c3brs

>26 Oct 2005

>Horse Death Mystery Solved

>A veterinary investigation has found that 16 horses, which were
>found dead and lying in a field last week, were killed by
>lightning.

>The incident, which occurred in El Paso County in the US,
>sparked various rumours amongst the local community with regards
>to the cause of death.

>One resident was convinced the horses had been poisoned. He
>told the Rocky Mountain News that one of the horses died resting
>on its knees, which was "evidence the horse was sick from poison
>and had just dropped to its knees and died".

>From poisoning to ice bullets, the number of theories flying
>around was endless, but now Dr John Heikkila has put an end to
>the speculation.

>He told officials that tissue samples tested at the Colorado
>School of Veterinary Medicine did not yield any signs of
>dangerous food sources or poisons.

>[Thanks to Stuart Miller of http://www.uforeview.net for the lead]

I'm not sure if the reporter just didn't want to fool with
details and merely wanted closure, or if the spokesman really
felt that this information actually proved something, but I find
this article to be a little self-serving and didn't really
address the facts of the case.

From other posts I'm given the impression that there are no burn
marks on the ground and the horses were spread out over a large
area, so an explanation of how lighting killed the animals could





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:30:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:14:59 -0400
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Sandow


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31:29 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms UFO +
>>mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above (at the
>>largest commercial archive on the net). How many times does it say the
>>two words have coincided in print since 1947?

>>Fifteen. Think about that.

>Exactly, Chris. If any proof were needed of the disconnect
>between the UFO world and the mainstream world, that's it.
>"Everyone" does not think of motherships as disc-bearing ET
>visitors. To the contrary, only a very few of us do.

Often enough in the past I've noted how believers in the
psychosocial hypothesis ignore standard social science
methodology. All, of course, while claiming to be rational and
scientific.

They start with assumptions about how widespread UFO imagery and
ideas might be. Assumptions, of course, that they haven't
checked. They don't even think of seeking measurements of how
prevalent these things might be.

Then they make assumptions about how ideas and images spread,
and how they influence people. Assumptions, that, once again,
might have no basis in standard social science theory. They
don't think to check the literature to find out how social
scientists have theorized about these things, or how data may or
may not support particular theories.

And now, for a change, we have some actual research. Data!
Facts!

It's just amazing how cavalier skeptics can be about social
science, sociology, in particular. (Though their ignorance of
psychology - sometimes extending even to a lack of basic common
sense about people - is pretty notable, too. If psychology is a
social science, that is; not sure that's quite the proper
classification.). If I started blabbering about physics the way





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                          Re: Passive Radar - Smith

From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:36:11 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:17:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Smith


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:56:26 +0100
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:42:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

Thank you for your informed responses.
They ring true based on my readings.

>> I still wonder if their technology is basically
>>radar transparent (not even trying to hide) based on past
>>reports.

>Some of the best hard(ish) evidence that there is anything to
>track is radar evidence, so I don't see a general case for radar
>transparency based on those past reports. I read you as saying
>that there is no such radar evidence, and suggesting that this
>is because of "their technology". This seems convoluted
>reasoning to me. I would rather say that there is some evidence
>of some phenomena with some radar opacity.

I can't really talk in absolutes when it comes to UFOs. I can
only talk in percentages. Other folk have the databases of
cases. But my gut feel from many years of reading is that there
are a small number of radar/optical sightings. These are indeed
are very important. The Campeche "UFO fleet" was an excellent
example of how such a sighting could have impact. Since we may
be having various things causing TRUFO sightings, it hard to
catagorize them altogether. Although I think it is worth trying
radar (passive or active), I am somewhat pessimistic (based on
past case data) as to whether data proving ET sources can be
accumulated. If an unknown natural phenomenon, then I feel it is
much more likely to be able to gather proof.

>There are a few cases where there is persuasive visual evidence
>of some object that you'd expect to have been radar tracked, but
>wasn't. I'd say there are at least as many where a radar track
>is reported but nobody saw anything. Granted that there are
>genuine unknowns in both categories, and granted that some of
>these are sightings of "their technology", I think detection
>failure might still be explained in conventional ways because
>neither visual nor surveillance radar cover is 100% efficient
>for all kinds of reasons (non-luminosity, radar nulls and
>shadows, anti-clutter filters, staffing/reporting and other
>operational issues etc). You could argue reasonably that "they"
>probably _ought_ to have advanced stealth techniques, wherever
>they hail from. Maybe they do. This is why I made the point that
>known stealth techniques are more likely circumvented by passive
>than by active radar.

Yes, I agree that passive radar is harder to hide from than
active radar and I see no reason for ET tech to _have_ to be
radar transparent.

I have done no statistical study, just read too many reports,
and doesn't it seem that every time someone sights a UFO and
calls an airport or military base to ask if it was seen on
radar, they say "no". (In fact this week I have read a few
recent reports with this characteristic). The cases of where
there was an actual radar blip matching a TRUFO visual sighting
seem very small. Can we trust the airport responses? Who knows?
If you do trust them you end up with "mostly" stealth ET tech
(even given possible radar hardware/operational/conditions
problems). If you don't trust them, you have no data.

In the end, more data is required to see if it is justified to
use active or passive radar for UFO research since it is so
costly. It reminds me of "GhostHunters" where they have a very
expensive thermal imaging camera, but rarely get decent "ghost
images" from it. Since SciFi or RotoRooter is paying for this
nice equipment, then they have the luxury. Sadly, UFOlogy
doesn't. Its nice to have all these data streams, but unless a
legitimate science program is generating the data for a prosaic
use (and paying for the main cost), its a luxury for UFO
research.

>>Excuse me if I am too much a novice at these matters, but it
>>seems to me using a handheld radio that numerous weather effects
>>(and the ionosphere) play havoc on signal strengths. Sure you
>>can build a bigger, better antenna and amplify the signal, but
>>these signal effects must impact using field strengths. Can
>>f.s. really be relied upon in any way?

>We're all novices here, but according to what I've read the
>multi-aspect pattern matching of radar signatures has been
>studied and trialed, in simulation and using real-world data, by
>people who know what they're doing. Some of this is DARPA and
>NATO funded. There's the Automatic Target Recognition system
>developed with Lockheed-Martin's "Silent Sentry" passive radar -
> a commercial product. You can find open source papers on the
>net. If Fast Illinois Solver Code tables, Multipole analysis,
>Inverse Fast Fourier Transforms and Monte Carlo simulations are
>your thing then you'll understand the practical guts of this
>pattern-matching software better than I do! But the principles
>are plain enough.

Hummmm. Well, we shall see. RF has never been my strong suit. It
seems devilishly hard to use received weak signals. If you have
a nice clear channel source, then it would be much less of a
problem. I am sure the military has some nice systems, but they
can afford their own signal generator (at their own desired
signal design, deployed whereever they want).

>Meanwhile the issue of piggy-backing is worth thinking about. If
>you read Sars' proposal on the US/Dutch LOFAR system (anyone
>know whether this is getting built or not, by the way?) you'll
>see that he pitches it as a radioastronomy telescope and an
>instrument for detailed ionosphere studies, because the
>ionosphere gets in the way of the radioastronomy at VHF. So if
>ionosphere reflections defeat your radioastronomy goals well
>then you opportunistically turn the failure into a method of
>studying the problem!

>Maybe UFO studies could be parasitical on other fundable studies
>of geophysical phenomena in a similar way, if Peter Davenport or
>someone else can convince researchers to retain and share their
>data for re-examination. This may need something a bit like
>NARCAP's pitch, which imports the UFO problem on the back of the
>air safety issue. Maybe appeal to researchers from some "safe"
>position on moral high ground, like studying anecdotal radar
>evidence of anomalously severe temp/humidity gradients or
>possible unknown types of clear air turbulence.

This is a very sound recommendation in that it seems like
academic institutions are not going to help unless tied to "real
world" paradigms. Kyle King has mentioned addressing the search
for dangerous Near Earth Objects, but we needn't even be so
drastic. Just piggybacking off genuine "science" is good enough
and easier than a more blatant approach.

>As you say, although real-time is nice it isn't essential for
>evidentiary purposes. Re-using old radar data could be done in
>the same way (well, hopefully a better way!) as the Condon team
>used the Prairie Network cameras. If "we" know ahead of time
>that such data might be available then arrangements could be
>made in advance to monitor UFO reports in the coverage area
>during the study period, or auto cameras could be set up. There
>could be a lot of unused latent information in the passive radar
>data and recovering it would "only" take time, cunning and
>software skills, which could be paid for if we don't have them -
>cheaper than a lot of hardware anyway.

Good idea.

The interesting thing is that Davenport has gotten zero support
from deep pocketed folk and academic institutions have given him





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                           Re: RRR Group - Connors

From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:59:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:20:43 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Connors


Greetings to the Listarians,

Has anyone on this List actually met Rich Reynolds? Seen him in
a photo or on film?

I quote the so-called, Rich Reynolds:

"But my group of young guys - who call me Waldo - (Where's
Waldo? is their current having fun at my expense) - are a
cynical bunch, and hot-heads sometimes."

Seems Rich has a problem with keeping "my young guys," (what a
really strange way of phrasing...hummm), from following his
dictates as owner of the RRR Group blog.

Seems 'Capt. Bligh' of the RRR Group may be either MIA or a
figment of imagination. Read his "cynical... hot heads..." on
the Blog this morning with this statement to me of October 26,
2005:

"There is never going to be a harsh word about you or to you at
our blog or anywhere else."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                    BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:00:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:26:25 -0400
Subject: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions


BBC Radio 4's next Material World on Thursday Nov 3 is
supposed to be covering abductions.

For listening via the Web:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/thematerialworld.shtml

However, don't expect unbiased reporting from its jokey
presenter Quentin Cooper.

BBC's habit of defending status quo - recently heard "gravity
travels at light speed" on "Leading Edge", and much earlier they
gave us "ball lightning is an illusion"  from establishment
scientists - means we'll probably just get hyping of that recent
re-hash of "sleep paralysis" as explanation for all and every
report.


Cheers






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 28

                   Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:24:47 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:59:21 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Ledger


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:01:02 -0500
>Subject: Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:23:33 +0000
>>Subject: RRR Group Seeks Attention

>>Rich Reynolds will be interested to know that an obnoxious
>>jerk by the name of Christopher Jay sent me a private e-mail
>>claiming to be "Assistant to Rich Reynolds, RRRGroup."

>>This person flatly admitted that their purpose is to call
>>attention to themselves. Rich, of course, will want to deny that
>>this person is who he claims to be,  I'm sure.

>Mr. Hall and Listers:

>Yes, Christopher and the RRRGroup does seek attention, not from
>UpDaters necessarily, but from media folks, whom we'd like to
>entice into the UFO debate.

>We sensationalize, because that's what attracts media. The bone-
>dry debates in ufology won't get media attention I'm afraid.
>It's flag-waving on our part, which offends some here, but there is a
>method to our madness, and it seems to be working.


With jerks like Christopher on there you aren't doing the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Groff

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:27:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:22:10 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group Seeks Attention - Groff


>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:23:33 +0000
>Subject: RRR Group Seeks Attention

>Rich Reynolds will be interested to know that an obnoxious jerk
>by the name of Christopher Jay sent me a private e-mail claiming
>to be "Assistant to Rich Reynolds, RRRGroup."

>This person flatly admitted that their purpose is to call
>attention to themselves. Rich, of course, will want to deny that
>this person is who he claims to be,  I'm sure.


CJ is as he portrays himself. He is the real attention seeker yet
few know who the hell he is.

His tools are malice, acerbity, animosity, animus, antipathy,
bile, bitterness, despitefulness, dirt, enmity, hatefulness,
hostility, ill will, implacability, malevolence, maliciousness,
malignance, malignity, meanness, mordacity, rancor, repugnance,
resentment, spite, spitefulness, umbrage, vengefulness,
viciousness and vindictiveness.

Did I miss any?

This was very evident in a very long and totally erroneous
dissertation that he wrote about me a couple of months ago
concerning the UFO Blog Coalition
http://ufocoalition.blogspot.com/. The vitriolic post has since
been removed. He even tried to hijack the UBC from me and start
it anew. http://ufobc.blogspot.com. Of course, it failed.

Compared to Crissy Jay, Rich Reynolds is a lamb.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                          Re: RRR Group - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:44:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:26:05 -0400
Subject: Re: RRR Group - Reynolds


>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:59:18 -0600
>Subject: Re: RRR Group

>Greetings to the Listarians,

>Has anyone on this List actually met Rich Reynolds? Seen him in
>a photo or on film?

<snip>

For the curious, and Ms. Connors, there is a photo of Rich Reynolds
(me) online at our blog and links to others.

Persons who can't seem to get enough of me can find newspaper
articles (via archives) from The Detroit News, February 1st, 1970
and The (Fort Wayne) Journal Gazette, October 9th, 1994.

They will tell you much...too much perhaps.

Let the fun begin.

>Seems 'Capt. Bligh' of the RRR Group may be either MIA or a
>figment of imagination. Read his "cynical... hot heads..." on
>the Blog this morning with this statement to me of October 26,
>2005:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                       Re: My Own Experience - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:58:16 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:27:47 -0400
Subject: Re: My Own Experience - Ledger


>From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:48:08 -0400
>Subject: Re: My Own Experience

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:35:15 -0300
>>Subject: Re: My Own Experience

><snip>

>>Since then I've had discussions with military personnal about
>>their experiences. Three were airborne encounters. That's why I
>>take it seriously.

>Don,

>I believe that there is a complex phenomenon, at this time of
>an undetermined nature.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

               US Spy Agency's Patents Under Security Scrutiny

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:15:15 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:35:40 -0400
Subject: US Spy Agency's Patents Under Security Scrutiny

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=3Ddn8223

27 October 2005

US spy agency=92s patents under security scrutiny
Paul Marks

The hyper-secretive US National Security Agency =96 the
government=92s eavesdropping arm - appears to be having its patent
applications increasingly blocked by the Pentagon. And the
grounds for this are for reasons of national security, reveals
information obtained under a freedom of information request.

Most Western governments can prevent the granting (and therefore
publishing) of patents on inventions deemed to contain sensitive
information of use to an enemy or terrorists. They do so by
issuing a secrecy order barring publication and even discussion
of certain inventions.

Experts at the US Patent and Trademark Office perform an initial
security screening of all patent applications and then army, air
force and navy staff at the Pentagon=92s Defense Technology
Security Administration (DTSA) makes the final decision on what
is classified and what is not.

Now figures obtained from the USPTO under a freedom of
information request by the Federation of American Scientists
show that the NSA had nine of its patent applications blocked in
the financial year to March 2005 against five in 2004, and none
in each of the three years up to 2003.

This creeping secrecy is all the more surprising because as the
US government's eavesdropping and code-breaking arm - which is
thought to harness some of the world=92s most powerful
supercomputers to decode intercepted communications - the NSA
will have detailed knowledge of what should be kept secret and
what should not. So it is unlikely to file patents that give
away secrets.

Bruce Schneier, a cryptographer and computer security expert
with Counterpane Internet Security in California, finds the
development =93fascinating=94.

=93It's surprising that the Pentagon is becoming more secretive
than the NSA. While I am generally in favour of openness in all
branches of government, the NSA has had decades of experience
with secrecy at the highest levels,=94 Schneier told New
Scientist. =93The fact that the Pentagon is classifying things
that the NSA believes should be public is an indication of how
much secrecy has crept into government over the past few years.=94

However, at another level, the Pentagon appears to be relaxing
slightly: it seems to be loosening its post 9/11 grip on the
ideas of private inventors, with the number having patents
barred on the grounds of national security halving in the last
year.

In the financial year to 2004, DTSA imposed 61 secrecy orders on
private inventors, a number that had been climbing inexorably
since 9/11. But up to the end of financial 2005, only 32
inventors had =93secrecy orders=94 imposed on their inventions.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                      General Exon [was: Gill Sighting]

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:30:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:43:09 -0400
Subject: General Exon [was: Gill Sighting]


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Finally I have heard this "contemporaneous" nonsense from every
>>Roswell debunker I have ever read or debated. Basically the
>>argument is if it wasn't reported at the time then it isn't true
>>(unless it supports debunking arguments) and if it was reported
>>at the time then it must be true (unless it doesn't support
>>debunking arguments).

>Not at all. One thing that was reported at the time and is
>certainly false is that the disc was "loaned" to USAF higher
>headquarters. A clear case of a misheard word (should be
>"flown") by a copy typist over the phone. The error was then
>repeated from this. This error supports neither the believer or
>the debunking arguments.

Walter Haut explained the use of the word, "loaned" about 15
years ago. Originally the report had said flown, but people kept
asking how Marcel had known how to fly the craft (think of all
the questions that would have raised in today's world). To end
that confusion, Haut substituted the word loaned for flown.

So, that little mystery has been solved.

<snip>

>>E.g., initially the Eisenhower administration denied the U-2 was
>>a spy plane. Instead, they claimed it was an errant NASA weather
>>plane that crashed because the pilot passed out from oxygen
>>starvation. NASA went along with the scam, even manufacturing
>>phony transcripts of the pilot's last conversations. At Edwards
>>AFB, a U-2 was repainted with a NASA logo and phony ID number
>>and then shown to the press. Then the Soviets hauled out Francis
>>Gary Powers and the remains of the U- 2, including the spy
>>cameras. Checkmate. The U.S. government was caught red-handed in
>>flagrant lie, an elaborate cover story. But if the Russians
>>didn't have the evidence, you can bet the U.S. government would
>>have stuck with the cover story and government propagandists and
>>apologists would have repeated the party line for as long as the
>>government held to the story.

>>But such things couldn't have happened during the Roswell
>>incident. No way. The military absolutely told us the
>>unvarnished truth, even if the story was inconsistent and kept
>>changing, even back in 1947. And it's kept on changing, with
>>AFOSI mutating the 1947 singular weather balloon/radar target
>>(Ramey/Newton's description) into the present-day multiple
>>balloon/multiple radar target Mogul balloon plus the ridiculous
>>crash-dummies from the future.

>>>The stories of alien bodies did not emerge until the late 1970s,
>>>leaving plenty of time for ageing witnesses to become somewhat
>>>vague about when the incidents which they remembered occurred.
>>>No doubt when investigators assured them it must have been 1947
>>>they were not inclined to argue, as they had no way of checking.

>>No doubt you find it comforting to regurgitate the official
>>party line, which is what you are doing here, as do all
>>debunkers, as if reading from a common script. For all I know,
>>maybe you even believe that the U2 really was an errant NASA
>>weather plane, since that was the U.S.'s official story.

>Had the Russians not captured Gary Powers, the USAF or the CIA
>might have thought they could cover up the U-2 affair for
>several years, but it was very risky. Suppose, for example, that
>it happened again within a few months? Or even a third time?
>Would they still have tried to cover it up?

Actually, they would have. Absence of evidence to the contrary,
they would have kept the story going. They don't worry about
what they cannot control and operate as if they have complete
control over all the events.

It is a mindset of those who are charged with protection of
classified information and government secrets. If something is
compromised, they work from the premise that they can stop the
leak and explain the problem. They just don't think in terms of
what will happen if there is another crash. How do we end this
particular problem with the least damage to the overall secret.

So, yes, they would stick with the cover story just as long as
it worked.

>As for trying to cover up an ET crash, what if that also
>happened again, and again? Don't forget, they had no control
>whatever over ET crashes or in fact any ET actions. (They still
>haven't either). For all the USAF knew, ETs had already landed
>in Russia the year before!

But they wouldn't worry about what the Soviets had or what might
happen in a day, a week or a year. At that particular moment,
they could control the information.

>>Even the normally UFO cynical American press generally thought
>>the 1997 crash dummy report incredibly stupid and unbelievable.
>>Nobody would confuse 6 foot plastic mannequins with small,
>>rotting alien bodies. Nobody would confuse times like that (only
>>gullible, unthinking skeptics would swallow such preposterous
>>psychobabble explanations like "time compression"). And a number
>>of the body witnesses weren't even living in New Mexico when the
>>dummy and other tests were happening. Do you honestly think
>>General Exon's Air Force friends at Wright-Patterson who told
>>him about being personally involved and seeing the bodies were
>>telling him about crash dummies from the 1950s and 1960s?

>I think General Exon's testimony has been discredited by other
>writers, particularly Pflock. See p.124 of his book.

This one will be a matter of opinion based on my interactions
with General Exon. I'm not sure that you can dismiss all that
Exon said with a single paragraph calling Exon's testimony
rumors.

Let's be straight about this. Exon was a lieutenant colonel who
was stationed at Wright Field in 1947. He was interacting with
those who held positions of responsibility and in the course of
those interactions, was told several things. Those he trusted
said that there had been a crash and bodies had been recovered.
 Not exactly the rumors that Pflock suggests.

Exon also had first-hand knowledge of the crash, having flown
over the two sites in 1947. He could talk of those details in
the first person.

Personally, I believe that after I interviewed Exon, and after
Don Schmitt conducted a follow up interview (which, fortunately
we have most of on tape), Exon began to back away from what he
had told us, suggesting that we had given more weight to his
testimonies than we should.

I arranged to meet Exon at Wright-Patterson AFB when he returned
there. Stopped the gate, they insisted I call him to verify that
I was there to see him. Although I tried for thirty minutes, I
never was able to reach him. Finally I used my military ID to
get onto the base and drove to the VOQ. By coincidence, I was
knocking on his door as he came down the hallway. He looked
surprised to see me and then said he had forgotten all about our
appointment.

We went to lunch at the Officer's Club and discussed, at some
length, what he had been telling us. He refused to allow me to
record the conversation.

The upshot of this was that Exon had been at the base, had some
first- hand knowledge of the crash, had flown over the sites,
and knew some other things about UFOs. His colleagues and
friends filled in some details about the retrieval and bodies -
 not rumors they had heard, but actual events in which they had
participated.

Finally, I believe that between the time I first talked to Exon
and the time I saw him at the base, he had been talked to by his
friends. In other words, I think Exon was taken aback by the
controversy his words had started. I don't think he knew that
some of what he was telling us was still classified. I think he
made a mistake and began to backtrack a little because of that.
In the end, however, Exon confirmed all that he told us and even
provided a letter that said we had quoted him accurately. He
thought that we might have given his words more importance than
they deserved, but we had not misinterpreted anything he had
said nor had we spun them to our own point of view.

So, say what you will, but I don't believe Karl adequately
explained Exon's testimony, nor do I believe that it has been





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                             Spheres Over Mexico

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:15:00 -0400
Subject: Spheres Over Mexico


INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology October 27, 2005
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Source: www.analuisacid.com
Date: 10.27.05

SPHERES OVER MEXICO
by Ana Luisa Cid

A special program Esferas en Mexico (Spheres over Mexico),
recorded on October 25, 2005, presents filmed evidence that
allows us to state that not all of the spheres floating in the
sky are balloons.

The Filiberto Lopez video, taken in the year 2000 from Puebla
(Mexico) presents a pattern of behavior that can hardly be
reproduced through the mass launching of balloons.

This material shows how the witness records a fleet of spherical
objects moving in a northerly direction. Minutes later, this
contingent makes a rendezvous with another larger object of
undefined shape that rapidly absorbs the group of spheres,
subsequently heading toward the Popocatepetl Volcano.

There are many more witnesses to this event, which this author
interviewed for the aforementioned telecast.

Another noteworthy event was the one recorded on Sunday, October
23 of this year, when multiple reports of fleets traveling in
two contingents were reported. The first of them was in the
east, recorded by Lic. Efren Guzman (collaborator) and the
second in the municipality of Naucalpan in the state of Mexico,
recorded by Mrs. Monserrat Romero, a member of the "Los Ojos de
la Ciudad" ("Eyes of the City") association

We subsequently received reports that the groups in question had
dispersed and that only isolated spheres remained.

Some hours later, Salvador Guerrero and this author witnessed
several cube-shaped structures flying in the north region. What
we found most striking is that some of the spheres were rapidly
adhering to the sides of these objects, engaging in
uncoventional maneuvers. It was determined that there was no
apparent explanation for this event.

Mr. Guerrero presented this material as an exclusive for the
"Viva la Ma=F1ana" program.

When we, the aforemementioned are able to ascertain that the
events in question were the result of a mere flight of balloons,
we will then concede the point to others. Until this happens, we
will continue to document and state that not all spheres are
balloons in Mexico, nor are all balloons UFOs, and that no easy
explanation is available for all aerial phenomena.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Groff

From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:18:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:16:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital - Groff


>From: Glennys Mackay <gem60.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:12:48 +1000
>Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital

>>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 21:53:21 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Terry Groff In Hospital


>Terry I met you while lecturing at the MUFON Chapter in Dallas
>in June...

>Just want to tell you that you are in our Prayers. I had a
>feeling we may have had that dinner together prior to my
lecture
>along with Ken Cherry, his lovely wife, also Jim Marrs and
>family also some of the committee.

>Take care.

>Look forward to spending time with a great bunch of friends in
>Dallas in 2006 when I return.


Glennys,

Yes, we met twice on your last two visits to DFW. The second
time was unusual in that we had our dinner before the meeting
instead of after.

I appreciate your prayers and look forward to seeing you again
in 2006.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                     Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe

From: Greg Booone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:36:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:21:07 -0400
Subject: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe

-----

Source: One News - TV New Zealand

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411366/622605

Oct 27, 2005


Archaeologists Find European Pyramid

A team of American and Bosnian archaeologists claim to have
found two new pyramids buried under hills in Central Europe.

The scientists say they found ancient labyrinths and other sand
stone buildings under two unusually shaped hills in central
Bosnia.

They believe the ruins indicate the hills were once human
settlements, probably built by a stone age "super" civilisation
tens of thousands of years ago.

They are now trying to locate ancient stairs that would lead
them to the entry of the pyramids.

-----

Well, here's another scientific paradigm shot to shot.

I'm still betting we'll find out far more advanced cultures the
more we dig.

I still say some, some of our UFOs are products of these long
ago civilzations.


Best,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

               Re: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions - Pope

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 18:37:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:22:32 -0400
Subject: Re: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions - Pope


>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:00:49 +0100
>Subject: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions

>BBC Radio 4's next Material World on Thursday Nov 3 is supposed
>to be covering abductions.

>For listening via the Web:

>http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/thematerialworld.shtml

>However, don't expect unbiased reporting from its jokey
>presenter Quentin Cooper.

>BBC's habit of defending status quo - recently heard "gravity
>travels at light speed" on "Leading Edge", and much earlier they
>gave us "ball lightning is an illusion"  from establishment
>scientists - means we'll probably just get hyping of that recent
>re-hash of "sleep paralysis" as explanation for all and every
>report.

I'm appearing on this program and intend to argue for a
scientific and open-minded approach to the phenomenon.

This is one of numerous UFO-related features I'm doing at
present. I don't know who it was who said that ufology was dead,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:19:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:25:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>non- UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific.
>>There is no "very likely" connection between Adamski
>>and Gill in their use of "mothership."

>This is pretty feeble stuff.

Yes, John, your whole line of argumentation is pretty feeble stuff.

>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why
>Gill should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of
>submarines, naval supply ships, etc.

So it was a "fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon, used
almost entirely in the Royal Navy." Really? When I looked in two
large U.S. newspapers, the L.A. Times and N.Y. Times, using
electronic searches of millions of articles, I found over 2800
instances of "mothership" or "mother ship" dating from around
1900. These articles were rarely about the Royal Navy. They
could be about the American Navy, the merchant marine, fishing
fleets, mixed marine/aviation, pure aviation, and pure
aerospace. There was only one article about UFO motherships,
from 1955.

Also, for fun and out of curiosity, I did an electronic search
of Ruppelt's 1956 book, "The Report on Unidentified Flying
Objects." "Mother" was used twice in the book (once in reference
to "Mother Russia"), but no "motherships" could be found.

I also took a gander at Keyhoe's popular 1953 book, "Flying
Saucers from Outer Space," which actually has an index. Again,
no "motherships."

>To assume that a person, in describing a UFO incident, would
>use the word "mothership" via a naval analogy, rather than via the
>wealth of popular books, newspaper and magazine article which
>made the word familiar to most people even in the 1950s, shows
>an element of desperation which is extreme even for you,
>Jerry.

Perhaps John Rimmer could detail just how common this "wealth of
popular books, newspapers, and magazine articles" really were. I
certainly can't find any evidence of this overwhelming glut of
literature and newspaper articles on the subject over here in
the States. Neither can Chris Aubeck looking at another, even
larger electronic database.of 28 million articles, of which he
could find only 15 articles with "mothership" in a UFO context.

Then maybe Rimmer can actually document how "this made the word
familiar to most people even in the 1950s." E.g., can you
produce an opinion poll? I can produce a Gallup poll from 1950
demonstrating that 95% of the population already knew of the
term "flying saucer," but I'll be damned if I know of any poll
about UFO "motherships". Perhaps John Rimmer can enlighten us.
Or is it, as I suspect, he's simply making up his facts as he
goes along?

Gill said he knew nothing of Adamski or UFO motherships prior to
his sighting, and made up the term on the spur of the moment to
apply to his sighting situation. But Rimmer (and Klass and
Menzel and Christopher Allen) say they know better, that Gill
was obviously contaminated by UFO literature because he used
"mothership."

It is truly amazing how all of you can deduce this, knowing more
about what a witness was thinking or what he previously read
than the witness themself. This seems to be debunker mindreading
or remote viewing skills at work again. Or do you guys work with
Ouija boards and mediums?

>When Gill said "mothership" he meant mothership in exactly the
>way that Adamski and dozens of other contactees, ufologists,
>journalist and science-fiction writers used it at the time, and
>I do not see what you think you have to gain by trying to
>wriggle out of this obvious conclusion.

If Gill didn't read contactee, ufo, or sci-fi literature, which
he said he didn't, then why would he necessarily be familiar
with the term in those contexts? As for the "journalists",
Aubeck and I have already covered that with our electronic
searches. Use of the term in a UFO context is almost
nonexistent in the newspapers. When the term was used, it was
at least a thousand times more likely to be used in a completely
non-UFO context.

>>Again, I could respond only to what you wrote, not to what you
>>meant but did not express. Debunkers of the case, starting
>>withKlass, use the "mothership" reference to argue that Gill
>>was a UFO buff who read Adamski and others.

>Not a UFO "buff" (like you and me, Jerry) but someone who had
>at least a glancing familiarity with what was being written about
>UFOs in the popular press at the time. I find it amusing that
>you are so desperate to portray Gill as a UFO-naif, whose only
>contact with the word "mothership" would be through naval
>jargon.

And we find it amusing that John Rimmer is so desperate to show
that Gill knew about UFO motherships that he ignores what Gill
himself had to say about it, then makes up fantasies about how
English literature was somehow permeated with the term. Well
"mothership" was used a fair amount, according to electronic
searches of newspapers, but almost always in a non-UFO context.

>>Your assertion that Gill may have learned the term in
>>discussion with Cruttwell is hardly unreasonable. If
>>you had said that in the first place and made clear that
>>you did _not_ consider Allan's strange assertion about
>>Gill's immersion in saucer literature "very likely true,"
>>we wouldn't have had to go to the trouble of this exchange.

>Depends what you mean by "immersion". Some topics, flying
>saucers amongst them, were so widely discussed and reported
>in the late 50s, early 60s, that it would be impossible for any
>intelligent, well-read individual, as I'm sure Father Gill
>was, not to have absorbed at least some of the vocabulary
>of the subject. This is even without bringing up the subject
>of the "flying saucer vicars" who were such a feature of British life
>at the time!

>Cheerio, shipmates...






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                         Re: Passive Radar - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:32:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:27:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Passive Radar - Shough


>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:36:11 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:56:26 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:42:43 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>>Subject: Re: Passive Radar

>Thank you for your informed responses.
>They ring true based on my readings.

>>>I still wonder if their technology is basically
>>>radar transparent (not even trying to hide) based on past
>>>reports.

>>Some of the best hard(ish) evidence that there is anything to
>>track is radar evidence, so I don't see a general case for radar
>>transparency based on those past reports. I read you as saying
>>that there is no such radar evidence, and suggesting that this
>>is because of "their technology". This seems convoluted
>>reasoning to me. I would rather say that there is some
>>evidence of some phenomena with some radar opacity.

>I can't really talk in absolutes when it comes to UFOs. I can
>only talk in percentages. Other folk have the databases of
>cases. But my gut feel from many years of reading is that there
>are a small number of radar/optical sightings.

>These are indeed very important. The Campeche "UFO fleet"
>was an excellent example of how such a sighting could have impact.

Hi James

Please feel free to talk in percentages. You mention one case,
which as a radar case is not very interesting (Bruce Macabee did
a fine job on this - report of one aircraft-like uncorrelated
echo, no relevant visual) and is rather atypical.

<snip>

>I have done no statistical study, just read too many reports,
>and doesn't it seem that every time someone sights a UFO and
>calls an airport or military base to ask if it was seen on
>radar, they say "no". (In fact this week I have read a few
>recent reports with this characteristic).

Does it seem that way? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Depends
on your reading habits. Since we know that 90% of those
sightings where people see some light and call the airport are
going to end up as "knowns", then you are talking about a
corrupted population. You have to do some statistics to try to
isolate a reliable figure that would be relevant.

>The cases of where
>there was an actual radar blip matching a TRUFO visual sighting
>seem very small.

Really? How small? How many cases are there? Which cases? What
population are you starting from, and how have you arrived at
this residue?

>Can we trust the airport responses? Who knows?
>If you do trust them you end up with "mostly" stealth ET tech
>(even given possible radar hardware/operational/conditions
>problems). If you don't trust them, you have no data.

I'm sorry, but this all seems like excuses not to undertake
proper study of the data or the problem. I don't know anything
tangible about your "airport responses" or stealth ET. What I do
know is that we have credible and sometimes detailed reports of
radar and radar/visual events that I can't explain to my
satisfaction, and in context with the generality of Unknowns in
the database they argue that at least one "new empirical
phenomenon" (probably more) is likely. If I was one of Peter's
billionnaires, I'd fork over some cash.

>In the end, more data is required to see if it is justified to
>use active or passive radar for UFO research since it is so
>costly.

Yes of course data are required. We can't prove that the problem
is worth funding. This is Catch 22 because the purpose of the
experiment is to get the data to do this! We can only use
persuasion and good judgement. Peter Davenport has encountered
apathy or suspicion or both. But we have to argue the case
positively. Competition for funds constrains all areas of new
science.

>It reminds me of "GhostHunters" where they have a very
>expensive thermal imaging camera, but rarely get decent "ghost
>images" from it.

Since no work has even been planned yet isn't it a bit early to
talk in ruefully amused tones about the failure rate of passive
radar surveillance?

>Since SciFi or RotoRooter is paying for this
>nice equipment, then they have the luxury. Sadly, UFOlogy
>doesn't. Its nice to have all these data streams, but unless a
>legitimate science program is generating the data for a prosaic
>use (and paying for the main cost), its a luxury for UFO
>research.

I rather thought that was exactly what I said (see below).

>>>Excuse me if I am too much a novice at these matters, but it
>>>seems to me using a handheld radio that numerous weather effects
>>>(and the ionosphere) play havoc on signal strengths. Sure you
>>>can build a bigger, better antenna and amplify the signal, but
>>>these signal effects must impact using field strengths. Can
>>>f.s. really be relied upon in any way?

>>We're all novices here, but according to what I've read the
>>multi-aspect pattern matching of radar signatures has been
>>studied and trialed, in simulation and using real-world data, by
>>people who know what they're doing. Some of this is DARPA and
>>NATO funded. There's the Automatic Target Recognition system
>>developed with Lockheed-Martin's "Silent Sentry" passive radar -
>>a commercial product. You can find open source papers on the
>>net. If Fast Illinois Solver Code tables, Multipole analysis,
>>Inverse Fast Fourier Transforms and Monte Carlo simulations are
>>your thing then you'll understand the practical guts of this
>>pattern-matching software better than I do! But the principles
>>are plain enough.

>Hummmm. Well, we shall see. RF has never been my strong suit.
>It seems devilishly hard to use received weak signals.

Er... ? What else is radar but a device to use received weak
(incredibly weak!) signals? I don't understand you.

>If you have
>a nice clear channel source, then it would be much less of a
>problem. I am sure the military has some nice systems, but they
>can afford their own signal generator (at their own desired
>signal design, deployed whereever they want).

I don't think you grasp the nature of the opportunistic passive
radar systems that we've been talking about, the kind that have
been widely studied for research _and_military_ applications.
They don't use dedicated signal generators. They are _designed_
to use ambient "signals of opportunity" from commercial sources
- generally FM radio or TV. Multistatic active radar is another
ball-game.

<snip>

>>Maybe UFO studies could be parasitical on other fundable
>>studies of geophysical phenomena in a similar way, if Peter
>>Davenport or someone else can convince researchers to
>>retain and share their data for re-examination. This may
>>need something a bit like NARCAP's pitch, which imports
>>the UFO problem on the back of the
>>air safety issue. Maybe appeal to researchers from some "safe"
>>position on moral high ground, like studying anecdotal radar
>>evidence of anomalously severe temp/humidity gradients or
>>possible unknown types of clear air turbulence.

>This is a very sound recommendation in that it seems like
>academic institutions are not going to help unless tied to "real
>world" paradigms. Kyle King has mentioned addressing the search
>for dangerous Near Earth Objects, but we needn't even be so
>drastic. Just piggybacking off genuine "science" is good enough
>and easier than a more blatant approach.

>>As you say, although real-time is nice it isn't essential for
>>evidentiary purposes. Re-using old radar data could be done in
>>the same way (well, hopefully a better way!) as the Condon team
>>used the Prairie Network cameras. If "we" know ahead of time
>>that such data might be available then arrangements could be
>>made in advance to monitor UFO reports in the coverage area
>>during the study period, or auto cameras could be set up.
>>There could be a lot of unused latent information in the passive
>>radar data and recovering it would "only" take time, cunning
>>and software skills, which could be paid for if we don't have
>>them - cheaper than a lot of hardware anyway.

>Good idea.

>The interesting thing is that Davenport has gotten zero support
>from deep pocketed folk and academic institutions have given
>him the cold shoulder. Whether this is because of pressure due
>to the government wanting this technology "limited" . . .

I really think this is a nonstarter. The principles, hardware and
processing algorithms that we have talked about and referred to
are all public domain and have been for many years. Peter has
been trying to sell a project based on already-implemented
"white" technology and open source research. Obviously there is
classified work too but we don't have access to that and we
aren't talking about it.

>or whether they want "real UFO data" limited is unclear.

Government pressure to stop passive radar work in order to
corral UFO data? I hardly think so. It can't be stopped anyway.
R and D is going on all over the world, at an increasing rate,
in all sorts of civil and military applications that we know
about, never mind those that we don't. They might as well try to
stamp out the sale of binoculars to prevent aircraft
identification.

>The cheapest way is to use academic data streams somehow

Yes, as I said this might be done provided the pitch for access
or partnership is sufficiently cunning and done through the most
conservative of ufological channels.

>(hopefully it has not been TOO filtered).

Too filtered? More covert government censorship of academic data





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

               Re: Roswell - Case Closed [was: Gill Sighting]

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:31:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed [was: Gill Sighting]


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>The assertion that they could not have been the source of
>>>stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
>>>years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
>>>dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
>>>appeared in the news media at the time.

>>Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
>>clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
>>"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
>>strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
>>it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
>>tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
>>email to me).

>"Specifically mentions"?

Yes, you heard me right. It mentions Roswell "victims" in 1947.

>The phrase "victims of the wreck" makes no sense, and is bad
>English. You can have "victims of the crash", "victims of the
>hurricane","victims of the plague", etc. but "victims of the
>wreck" is a non-starter (unless Ramey's command of English was
>atrocious). So we can rule out this phrase, I think, from
>Ramey's infamous memo.

Stuffy Brit nonsense argument. As Jerry Clark points out in
another post, "victims of the wreck" (VOTW) is perfectly good
English. He found many such examples of its use in newspaper
stories. I did my own electronic search yesterday of the N. Y.
Times (electronic archive from 1851-2002) and L. A. Times
(archive 1881-1985) and found 175 other examples starting 1870
in the N. Y. Times and 1888 in the L. A. Times. The last such
example in the NYT was 1970 and the LAT in 1981.

When I compiled statistics I found that use of VOTW was most
popular between 1890 and 1910 (used about 90 times), and then,
for some reason, went into decline: used 43 times between 1910
and 1930, 17 times between 1930 and 1950 and only 12 times after
1950.

On the other hand, "victims of the crash" (VOTC) was hardly ever
used before 1920 (only 6 instances, all in the LA Times, vs. 110
instances of VOTW). But after 1920, VOTC, for some reason,
started to outstrip VOTW in popularity. Thus we find it used 42
times in the 1920s, 74 times in the 1930s, 56 times in the
1940s, etc.

Thus VOTW heavily dominated in use to disasters before 1920, and
was applied primarily to train and ship wrecks. I found VOTW and
VOTC used in reference to aviation disasters, starting only in
the 1920s (first instance, 1924). In the 1920s, just when multi-
passenger planes were first introduced creating the first
potential for major plane disasters, use of VOTW was in decline.
VOTW was applied to air disasters only 3 times between 1920 and
1930, and then I couldn't find another instance. On the other
hand, VOTC was applied to air disasters 10 times in the 1920s
(first use 1924 to a dirigible disaster, then 1928 to a plane
crash). In the 1930s it was used 37 times, and 41 times in the
1940s (as far as I compiled statistics on this).

So does this rule out "victims of the wreck" in the Ramey memo?
No, not at all. First of all, Chris Allen's original contention
that VOTW would never, ever have been used in the English
language is baloney (a point I notice he honestly concedes in a
post responding to Jerry Clark's research).

Second, VOTW was overwhelmingly the popular phrase before 1920,
and still being used often enough in the 1920's, including for
the new air disasters, all during Ramey's impressionable early
years (he was born in 1904, graduated West Point in 1928). Maybe
Ramey was just an old-fashioned guy and still using VOTW, even
though VOTC had mostly replaced it by the 1940s.

Third, does it really matter? An alternate interpretation of the
"wreck" word is "crash", which would make the phrase "victims of
the crash". Both mean the same thing, and the key word is still
"victims".

>In addition, I claim the "V" is just as likely to be a "Y", and

It's one thing to "claim," another to back up the claim. This is
typical of the simple-minded treatment of the memo's analysis I
have come to expect from debunkers. They try to treat every
letter in isolation, ignoring the obvious fact that letters
exist in words, the words in phrases and sentences, the
sentences in a message embedded in a historical context. In
short, they deliberately ignore the linguistic context, hoping
to cast doubt on the minutia, thus casting doubt on everything.
It's a divide and conquer stategy.

Yes the first letter of the "victims" word _in isolation_ could
also be interpreted as a "Y" instead of a "V". But what of the
rest of the letters and word? First of all we can count the
number of letters--there are 7. Second, the 2nd and 5th letters
are almost certainly "I's". So if the frst letter is really "Y",
a critical question is are there any 7-letter words in the
English that are YI??I?? and would make sense in the overall
historical context of the message (military message held by Gen.
Ramey while trying to sell the idea of a weather balloon found
at Roswell)?

So several years ago, I actually did word searches of the
English looking for suitable YI??I?? words that might fit. Did
nattering nay-sayers like Christopher Allen do this? Of course
not. That would have forced them to actually do a little work.
Research by proclamation is so much easier.

I used the search engine at onelook.com, which searches through
hundreds of online dictionaries and specialty lexicons. Only
four words pop up: YIDDISH, YIPPING, YI JING (variant spelling
of I CHING), and YINXIAN (an English spelling of a province in
China). Yeah, those make a lot of sense, don't they?

Since some have suggested E as the second letter, I also tried
than, thus YE??I?? as the search word. This yields 19 hits, but
all of them are as nonsensical in context as the four words
above, words like YELPING, YESSING, YERKISH, YESHIVA, YETTIES,
etc. Yeah, those make a lot of sense too.

So the reason to reject "Y" as the first letter is not because
of "crashed saucer bias" but because it has to be part of a
sensible word, and there are no sensible Y-words when one takes
into account the rest of the word and likely letters in it.
That's why treating letters strictly in isolation is a bogus,
inane, and dishonest approach.

On the other hand, if the letter starts with "V" and one tries
"VI??I??" or more limited searches like "VI??IN?, "VI??IM?,
"VI??I?S" (i.e., other likely discernible letters in the word),
then "VICTIMS" is the only sensible word that comes up given the
context. Other word hits like VIOLINS or VIRGINS just don't make
any sense.

>the "W" in wreck looks like a "G". This "W" in any case looks
>very different from the "W" in "weather", so they cannot both be
>"W".

More nonsensical arguments. The "THE" before "victims" also does
not look exactly like the "THE" before "wreck" which does not
look exactly like the "THE" before "disc". Yet the words are all
almost undoubtedly the simple English article "THE." Similarly,
the "OF" before "victims" does not exactly match the "OF" before
"weather", yet the words are almost unquesionably "OF". You
could play the isolationist game even further, comparing letter
against letter, arguing that they don't look exactly the same.

By Chris Allen's simple-minded argument, if words or letters
don't look the same "they cannot be" the same. How dumb can you
get? Of course they can be the same, just like people with
strong accents can say the same words even if they sound
different or somebody's handwriting has identical letters and
words that don't look the same. Again, one has to look at the
overall context in which individual letters, words, and sounds
are used to disambiguate what is being said or written. It's a
common signal-to-noise problem. We humans do this all the time
in reading bad handwriting or following the thread of
conversations in noisy environments or interpreting strong
accents. This can also be applied to reading noisy text like the
Ramey memo. Rules of the language and context can be used to
help disambiguate and give likely interpretations to very badly
formed letters and words.

Cryptographers use this technique, as do ordinary humans every
day to disambiguate ambiguous speech and writing. This isn't
100% perfect, but it's a far more scientific approach than
Allen's inane "discount letter-by-letter" debunkery.

I can never prove that the first letter in the "wreck" word is
really W because it is so badly formed. If it were G, then it is
incumbent upon Allen to come up with a sensible 5-letter "G"
word that probably ends in either "H" or "K". Let's see...
GREEK, GLORK, GROOK, GOPAC, GATCH, GRAPH, GIZEH, etc. See the
problem? Despite what armchair debunkers may think, it's not
that easy coming up with sensible words, phrases, and sentences.
This is a message written in the English language and one has to
assume it is reasonably coherent and sensible.

Now possibly Allen is partly right. Maybe it's a noisy "C"
instead of "G". Thus now we might search for C???H or C???K. If
one does that, then CRASH pops up as the only sensible word out
of about 200 hits that fits any sort of Roswell context. This
brings us right back to "victims of the wreck" or "victims of
the crash", both of which mean the same, and both still saying
that there were "victims" associated with Roswell.

>So where does this analysis of Ramey's memo lead us?
>Answer: nowhere. I suggest that unless some super-powerful new
>technology arrives, we drop the whole idea of ever being able to
>decipher this Ramey scrap of paper.

For super-powerful technology, Allen might start by using his
brain instead of absurd reductionist debunking arguments. The
human brain is still the most powerful pattern recognition and
deciphering machine in existence. That's why humans can easily
understand human language in it's many variant and ambiguous
spoken and written forms whilst the most powerful computers as
yet cannot.

>>It is also interesting that General Ramey back in 1947 went out
>>of his way to ridicule the idea that there was a crew, stating
>>that the object was "too lightly constructed to have carried
>>anyone." Then he "scoffed at the possibility that the object
>>could have been piloted." Why would Ramey bring the subject up
>>to begin with? Possibly it was a form of damage control against
>>rumors or speculation of bodies being involved.

>I believe 25 feet was the estimated diameter of one of the
>balloons. A likely over-estimate, but it was done from fragments
>of what was in Ramey's office.

How does one estimate the size of a balloon from "fragments"
anyway, even crudely? Maybe Christopher Allen can enlighten us.

In the meantime, instead of Allen's armchair, handwaving "I
believe," how about some actual contemporaneous quotes of what
the press was actually being told?

First, let's look at this very interesting quote from the
Washington Post of July 9:

http://roswellproof.com/Washington_Post_July9.html

"They got from Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey, Eighth Air Force
Commander, a description of the object. It was "of very flimsy
construction--almost like a box-kite", made of wood and with a
cover 'like tinfoil'... Ramey said he hadn't actually seen it
himself as yet. He went to take a look, and called back that it
was about 25 feet in diameter."

Nothing here from Ramey about rubber "fragments" or balloons,
only a "boxkite" covered with "tinfoil", which he instantly
deduces at a glance was "about 25 feet in diameter." Amazing.

AP, July 8:

http://roswellproof.com/LA_HeraldExpress_July8.html

"In talking by telephone to A.A.F. headquarters at Washington,
Ramey described the object as of 'flimsy construction, almost
like a box kite.' It was so badly battered that Ramey was unable
to say whether it had a disc form. He did not indicate the size
of the object. ...Ramey reported that so far as the A.A.F.
investigation could determine, no one had seen the object in the
air. Asked what the material seemed to be, A.A.F. officials here
said Ramey described it as 'apparently some sort of tin foil'"

"... Later the A.A.F. said that further information indicated
that the object would have had a diameter of about 20 to 25 feet
if reconstructed. Nothing in the apparent construction
"indicated any capacity for speed, and there was no evidence of
a power plant, the A.A.F. said. Construction of the disc seemed
too flimsy to have enabled it to carry a man, it was added."

or how about this AP story:
http://roswellproof.com/AP1_July9.html

"The material had been described as of flimsy construction about
25 feet in diameter, covered with tinfoil-like substance and
built on a framework of light wood. It was badly battered."

Earlier UP story:

http://roswellproof.com/UP_NevadaSJ_July9.html

"AAF spokesmen would say only that the 'saucer' was a flimsily-
constructed, kite-like object measuring about 25 feet in
diameter and covered with a material resembling tinfoil."

Later UP story:

http://roswellproof.com/Charleston_NewsCourier_July9.html

"Ramey informed his Washington superiors that the object was 'of
very flimsy construction--almost like a box kite'. He said it
had been smashed and apparently was made with a cover of some
kind of material like tinfoil . Reports from Ramey, AAF
spokesman in Washington, and Sheriff George Wilcox of Roswell
indicated that the object, if reconstructed, would have a
diameter of 25 feet,"

It is pretty obvious from these various stories that "the
object" being referred to "25 feet in diameter" "if
reconstructed" is the "kite" "covered with" "tinfoil," not the
balloon.

One rare Reuters storiy I found used the same boxkite, tinfoil,
20-25 foot description, but then added the following:

http://roswellproof.com/CeylonObserver_July9.html

"Army Air Force Headquarters said later that the officer who had
seen the object [probably Ramey] held a strong opinion that it
might be a meteorological device. 'There is some indication that
the object might have been attached to a balloon which squares
with the description of meteorological equipment we have in
use,' it was stated.

So "the object" of 20-25 diameter might have been attached to a
balloon, but again it was not the balloon.

Now against this we have Major Kirton, Ramey's intelligence
officer, speaking to Reuters and the FBI. saying he is quoting
Ramey, and applying a 20 foot description to the balloon:

Here are some later Reuters stories:

http://roswellproof.com/Reuters_Canada_July10.html

http://roswellproof.com/Reuters_TheHindu_Madras_July10.html

"It looks like a hexagonal object covered with tinfoil [or other
shining material] suspended from a balloon of about 20 feet
diameter.

FBI telegram:
http://roswellproof.com/FBI_Telegram.html

"The disc is hexagonal in shape and suspended from a balloon by
cable, which balloon was approximately 20 feet in diameter."

Interestingly, the battered, torn-up radar target which Ramey
was earlier quoted as saying he couldn't even tell if it was
disk-shaped was now specifically being described as "hexagonal,"
a very unusual description that would only apply to a
fully_intact_ radar target viewed from directly above or below.
So we have Ramey instantly deducing the radar "target box-kite"
"tinfoil" "object" was about 25 feet across if reconstructed,
but also he couldn't tell if it was disk-shaped because it was
so "battered", and now he was supposedly deducing it was also
"hexagonal."

Then Kirton comes along speaking for Ramey, and now it is the
balloon that is about 20 feet across. The press was being told
all sorts of things.

Anybody else smell a highly inconsistent, shifting cover story?
Maybe it's because they never did bother to get the story
straight or maybe they thought that putting out multiple,
conflicting stories would be more effective because it would
just confuse people and improve the cover. This is a common
strategy of counterintelligence, to put out some facts but also
deliberately confuse truth with fiction by flooding the story
with disinformation.

>Lydia Sleppy's story has 'improved' considerably with time and
>retelling. Her original tale to Stanton Friedman made no mention
>of the FBI, and was far simpler than the later, embellished,
>versions. It appeared in a 1974 issue of SAGA magazine. The FBI
>mysteriously entered the the Sleppy-McBoyle story years later. I
>cannot dig up all the references now.

As usual Christopher Allen can't provide the specifics. As far
as I know, Sleppy has always told pretty much the same story.
Part of her story about McBoyle phoning in the story and them
not being able to get the story out was also corroborated by her
and McBoyle's boss Merl Tucker when he was interviewed by Randle
and Schmitt:

"[Tucker] was out of town. When he got back, he was upset to
hear that Johnny McBoyle, his station manager, and Lydia Sleppy,
his secretary, had tried to put a story out over the wire.
Tucker was sure that he was going to get into trouble over it.
 ...he knew that McBoyle had tried to get out to the site of the
crash and that he had been intercepted by the military. Once
McBoyle returned to Roswell, the sheriff went to see McBoyle and
told him not to talk about it. Tucker mentioned that McBoyle had
been giving infomration to Sleppy over the phone, that he had
talked about a 'crushed' dishpan and about burn spots on the
ground. But when Tucker asked him about it specifically, McBoyle
said he couldn't talk about it..."

Now why couldn't Sleppy get the story out over the wire unless
it was as she said? The bell on the teletype rang indicating a
request at the other end to cease transmission and to place the
teletype into receive mode to receive further instructions. Once
in receive mode she received the FBI message to cease all
further transmission of the story.

It is also interesting that knee-jerk debunkers like Allen are
totally unconcerned about clear embellishment of stories if they
believe it supports their side. E.g., we have Mogul engineer
Charles Moore obviously engaging in some lying an hoaxing to
support a Mogul crash. Allen e-mailed out of the blue about 2
years ago, immediately called me "incompetent" because I
supposedly didn't understand had Moore had done his calculations
(this regards Moore's bogus calculation of Flight #4's
trajectory taking it "exactly" to the Brazel ranch). When I
boxed Allen into numerous mathematical corners and
contradictions, his hypocritical and disingenuous "defense" then
became that it "didn't matter." That's how these guys operate.
As Stan Friedman says, don't confuse them with facts because
their mind is already made up.

>>Finally I have heard this "contemporaneous" nonsense from every
>>Roswell debunker I have ever read or debated. Basically the
>>argument is if it wasn't reported at the time then it isn't true
>>(unless it supports debunking arguments) and if it was reported
>>at the time then it must be true (unless it doesn't support
>>debunking arguments).

>Not at all. One thing that was reported at the time and is
>certainly false is that the disc was "loaned" to USAF higher
>headquarters. A clear case of a misheard word (should be
>"flown") by a copy typist over the phone. The error was then
>repeated from this. This error supports neither the believer or
>the debunking arguments.

Although I agree with this specific instance, Allen is also
trying to trivialize the point I was making. Guys like Allen
will quote very selectively from "contemporaneous" sources to
make their debunking case and deliberately ignore anything
contradictory. More detail below.

>The differing accounts of when the disc was discovered, i.e.
>"last week", "three weeks ago", and "a few days ago" can be
>explained by the various reporters getting confused over when
>the disc was first discovered and when it was recovered.
>(Something I have pointed out before). Haut's original press
>release was based on rushed information before he had time to
>get the story correct. He never got it first hand from Brazel
>anyway and, as far as I know, never saw the recovered 'disc'.

More spin. Haut got the information from Col. Blanchard. Haut
didn't spontaneously make it up. Further, as Haut himself told
me, any press release of any import was going to be reviewed
personally by Blanchard or his adjutant, before it went out.
Blanchard likely got his information from Marcel and Cavitt,
both of whom spent a day with Brazel. Marcel 30+ years later was
quite clear that the actual crash had happened only a few days
before. And that's how it was _initially_ reported in the press
release, as "sometime last week." (In his last interview, Marcel
was more specific and correlated the crash with the Wilmot
sighting of July 2, since Wilmot's son told him his parents had
also seen their sighted disk explode in the distance toward the
Foster Ranch, and Brazel subsequently reported finding the
debris field after an explosion.)

But immediately after the press release, the military changed
the story. Sheriff Wilcox, who admitted to AP that he was
"working with those fellows at the base," couldn't make up his
mind which story to tell. He told AP that Brazel "made the
discovery" "some days before" or "two or three days before" but
told UP that Brazel found the disk "about three weeks ago."

http://roswellproof.com/AP5_July9.html

http://roswellproof.com/UP_ClovisNMPress_July9.html

http://roswellproof.com/United_Press_Telexes.html

In Fort Worth, Gen. Ramey also changed the story to about 3
weeks before. Marcel, under direct orders from Ramey, also told
a balloon story, as reported by AP, again saying:

"It had been found three weeks previously by a New Mexico
rancher, W. W. Brazell [sic], on his property about 85 miles
northwest of Roswell. Brazell, whose ranch is 30 miles from the
nearest telephone and has no radio, knew nothing about flying
discs when he found the broken remains of the weather device
scattered over a square mile of his land. He bundled the tinfoil
and broken wooden beams of the kite and the torn synthetic
rubber remains on the balloon together and rolled it under some
brush, according to Maj. Jesse A. Marcel, Houma, La., 509th Bomb
Group intelligence officer at Roswell, who brought the device to
Fort Worth." On a trip to town at Corona, N.M., Saturday night,
Brazell heard the first reference to the "silver" flying disks,
Maj. Marcel related. Brazell hurried home, dug up the remnants
of the kite(s) and balloon on Sunday, and Monday headed for
Roswell to report his find to the sheriff's office."

Now what's fishy about this story? Well for one thing, Marcel
reports the device was scattered "over a square mile." Does the
weather balloon and few pieces of foil and balsa sticks in
Ramey's office look like they would have been scattered over a
square mile?

Brazel was then to report this all happened 7 or 8 miles from
his ranch house. Brazel's "contemporaneous" story also _directly
contradicted_ the one Ramey had Marcel tell in Fort Worth.
Brazel said he merely found the debris back on June 14, but "At
the time Brazel was in a hurry to get his round made and he did
not pay much attention to it. ...on July 4 he, his wife, Vernon
and a daughter, Betty, age 14, went back to the spot and
gathered up quite a bit of the debris. The next day he first
heard about the flying disks, and he wondered if what he had
found might be the remnants of one of these."

So in Brazel's story, he didn't gather the debris until the day
before he first heard about the saucers (and also didn't gather
all of it). But Marcel's story suggests that Brazel bundled it
all up and threw it under some brush back when he first found it
3 weeks before, then gathered it back up _after_ he found out
about the saucers. That would also agree with what local
ranchers say Brazel would have done to protect his livestock
from eating foil/paper and rubber debris, which could prove
fatal to them. He wouldn't have let it sit out there for 3
weeks.

Brazel's "recent recovery" story is also inconsistent with the
condition of the debris shown in Ramey's office. The weather
balloon in the photos would have been reduced to a black,
brittle ashlike condition after sitting in the hot sun for a
month (remember this was supposedly the remains of the June 4
Mogul Flight #4). That's not me saying that. It's Charles Moore,
who has also demonstrated how this happens after only 2 or 3
weeks exposure in the N.M. sun. But the balloon in the F.W.
photos is obviously still pliable and mostly in one piece.

Also if you look at the white backing on the radar target in 1st
generation prints, it is absolutely clean and bright white. But
we learned independently from Marcel and Brazel Jr. that Brazel
Sr. said he found the material the morning after hearing a huge
explosion in the middle of a violent thunder and lightning
storm. So where's the weathering on the white paper after
sitting out in the elements for a month, being rained and dewed
on, and dragged through the dirt?

Further, a check of weather records shows zero thunderstorm
activity in central New Mexico until late June and early July
(July 2 and July 4 to be precise) Thus there was no storm
activity back when Brazel supposedly first found the material in
mid-June, but there was such acitivity in early July, which
squares with the "sometime last week" and the Wilmot families
disk of July 2 seen to explode in the distance.

The point is, even if we restrict ourselves to only the
contemporaneous stories, the various stories are usually
completely inconsistent with one another. If Haut's press
release with its "sometime last week" was inaccurate because it
was supposedly based on "rushed information," then what are we
to make of Marcel's still later recovery story that directly
contradicts what Brazel told the press even later? Allen wants
to argue that because the "three weeks before" came later and is
"less rushed," that somehow makes it more accurate. But that
being the case, then why do the later Brazel and Marcel stories
so strongly disagree with one another in crucial details? Allen
obviously wants to have it both ways, picking and choosing what
details he wants to label true and ignoring the contradictory
ones.

<snip>

>See above. A lot of the contemporary press reports are likely to
>be error-prone in places, due to the desire to 'be firstest with
>the mostest'. There is only one actual date for the discovery
>given anywhere, and that is June 14, which came directly from
>Brazel.

Isn't it remarkable that Brazel would remember exactly the day
he first supposedly discovered the debris, yet considered it so
unimportant that he supposedly didn't collect it for another 3
weeks? No, Brazel didn't say "about 3 weeks ago" or "mid-June".
He had it down to the exact day. That's not impossible, but it's
not very likely either, and just another indication that the
story was fed to him before hand.

>The rest are all semi-vague phrases like those I list
>above. I agree with Karl Pflock that June 14 is therefore very
>likely the true date. To those people who still insist that the
>USAF planted that date in Brazel's mind I refuse to debate the
>matter any further.

Of course not.

>The claimed differences in size were probably due to confusion
>in the press over the balloon portion and the radar target(s).
>Carelessness can explain a lot. You do not need cover-ups or
>damage limitation exercises to account for it.

More wing-flapping and unthinking skeptical spin. How about the
actual quotes? The press was initially very clearly told that
the 20-25 foot size referred to the "box-kite" covered with
"tinfoil", i.e., the radar target. In fact, the initial stories
mention nothing about a balloon. Then one of Ramey's intel
officers changed it to the balloon. It wasn't the press that was
confused. The stories they were being given were simply
inconsistent.

<snip details of U-2 incident cover story of errant weather plane>

>Had the Russians not captured Gary Powers, the USAF or the CIA
>might have thought they could cover up the U-2 affair for
>several years, but it was very risky. Suppose, for example, that
>it happened again within a few months? Or even a third time?
>Would they still have tried to cover it up?

I fail to see what point Allen is trying to make here. My point
is that governments often flagrantly lie and put out elaborate
cover stories. What the press is told isn't necessarily true,
therefore "contemporaneous" stories aren't necessarily the most
trusted source, despite what debunkers usually argue. Often the
real facts may not emerge until decades later. It all depends on
how successful they might have been in burying the real story to
begin with.

>As for trying to cover up an ET crash, what if that also
>happened again, and again? Don't forget, they had no control
>whatever over ET crashes or in fact any ET actions. (They still
>haven't either). For all the USAF knew, ETs had already landed
>in Russia the year before!

???? Well I guess, this is Allen's usual dumb point that
governments can't possibly keep secrets, so if there were
repeated crashes we would know about them despite all efforts of
the government to keep them secret.

Well, here's a news flash. We do know about some of them other
than Roswell, incidents like Kecksberg and Shag Harbor which are
pretty well documented. Various witnesses have been talking
about them for years. Thus they aren't exactly secret. What
remains in place is the official denial, both by governments and
their debunker apologists

The accusations of cover-up do not just come from "UFO buffs"
but from various military officers like Gen. Exon, Gen. Lovekin,
Gen. Dubose, Sen. Goldwater, former CIA director Adm.
Hillenkoetter, the French generals on the recent COMETA panel,
and one closer to Allen's UK, Lord Hill-Norton, former chief of
the British Defense staff. In the U.S., that would be like Colin
Powell publicly coming out and accusing the U.S. government of a
massive UFO coverup.

>I think General Exon's testimony has been discredited by other
>writers, particularly Pflock. See p.124 of his book.

Basically all Pflock says as that Exon's testimony is mostly
second-hand, which hardly "discredits" it. Exon wasn't some
goat-herder passing on rumors from fellow goat-herders. He was
an Air Force general, stationed at Wright-Paterson in 1947 at
the time of the crash and C/O of Wright-Patterson in the mid
1960s. This placed him in direct contact with people who said
they dealt directly with both the debris and bodies. Thus Exon's
second-hand "rumors" are particularly credible.

Second-hand testimony from a credible witness like this would be
perfectly admissible in a murder trial. No historian worth
anything would ignore it. But if you are a UFO debunker, you
pretend such testimony "has been discredited" and has no
probative value.

[regarding the Air Force "crash dummy" body explanation and time
compression theory, which I said even the American press thought
unbelievably stupid...]

>There is an interesting example of time distortion/compression
>in Magonia 65 (Nov 1998). In it Peter Rogerson gives an example
>of a witness, the chief stewardess to the June 1954 BOAC
>Stratocruiser sighting over Goose Bay, who alleged in the 1990s
>that she and the two pilots were hypnotically regressed by a
>psychiatrist soon afterwards, whom she met at the Air Ministry.

>In fact these witnesses were never regressed, and the man she
>had met (a Dr Stephen Black) was someone she was interviewed by
>years later, in 1968, in a BBC documentary on UFOs. She had
>recalled his name correctly but got the date wrong by 14 years!
>Hypnosis was mentioned during the documentary, but that is all.
>She had become confused when she recounted the story for Jenny
>Randles in a book published in the 1990s, i.e. some 35-40 years
>after the UFO event had occurred.

>Now tell us that there is no such thing as this "preposterous"
>time compression!

Thus one lousy anecdote and Christopher Allen rests his case.
What psychological mechnism accounts for identical "time
compressions" to multiple witnesses? How does "time
compression" explain identical confusion between 6-foot plastic
human mannequins and small, rotting alien bodies? How does
"time compression" explain universal confusion in locations?
 And how does "time compression" explain what Air Force
personnel were personally telling Gen. Exon about what really
happened at Roswell?

Any psychologist trying to pull this at a psychology convention
would be hooted off stage if they tried to use such nonsense to
explain something conventional. But with UFO debunkery it seems
anything goes, no matter how absurd.

Example from just today: People saw strange moving lights in
the sky over Nevada and California late Wednesday night. Today
the S.F. Chronicle has an article where an astronomy professor
proclaims that these were almost certainly Venus and Mars. One
Big Problem: The lights were seen from San Francisco toward the
east near midnight and Venus set in the west at 7:30 p.m. Thus
Venus wasn't even visible. But no matter. If an authority
figure like an astronomer says it's Venus then it's Venus. And





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:27:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:37:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:23 AM
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights


>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

>Friday, October 28, 2005

>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
>or were they?

>David Perlman
>Chronicle Science Editor

>Mysterious, bright lights in the night sky Wednesday that
>alarmed or bemused scores of Bay Area residents were not
>mysterious at all but most likely a pair of planets whose orbits
>around the sun are carrying them close to Earth right now.

>Others are not so sure.

>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at Foothill
>College, said the lights were probably Mars and Venus, two
>planets that currently appear close together and will probably
>remain brilliant for another week or two until their orbits
>begin moving them away from Earth again.

Ha, ha, ha. This is particularly rich coming from an astronomy
professor and a science reporter. Venus and Mars are not
"currently close together" but practically 180 degrees apart.
Venus is setting in the west as Mars is rising in the east.
Further Venus sets at around 7:30 p.m., but see below where a
Chronicle photographer was photographing the lights in the east
around midnight.

>If they seem to take on unusual colors, twinkle or even move,
>Fraknoi said, it's because of an optical illusion caused by
>Earth's somewhat dense, moisture-laden lower atmosphere. Clouds
>scudding by also may obscure them briefly before they reappear,
>he said.

But around midnight, Venus is invisible, having set 4-1/2 hours
before, and Mars is high in the night sky where there is usually
very little atmospheric turbulence. It is when stars or planets
are near the horizon and we are looking through a lot more
atmosphere that we tend to see a lot of twinkling and maybe
color distortions.

>Residents across California and people as far east as Las Vegas
>reported seeing the lights in the sky late Wednesday.

Note, late Wednesday. Venus was invisible.

>Those who
>called space officials at Vandenberg Air Force Base on the
>Central Coast and the Federal Aviation Administration drew the
>usual response Thursday: No, there were no missile launches, no
>wandering airplane pilots had failed to file flight plans, no
>military jets were aloft, and no one was suggesting UFOs.

>No one except astronomers could offer an explanation.

Except it's not a real explanation. How can a planet not even in
the sky explain anything?

>Chronicle photographer Lance Iversen caught images of the
>peculiar lights in his camera around midnight Wednesday, looking
>east from Twin Peaks. Mars and Venus would have been visible in
>the eastern skies at that time.

More ha, ha, ha. Venus set _in the west_ 4-1/2 hours before.
Venus is always near the sun and would only be seen rising in
the east before sunrise, and then only if it were on the
opposite side of the sun from where it is now.

And Mars is not exactly "east" right now around midnight,
instead being near the zenith.

>Iversen said that at one point he saw four distinctly separate
>lights, but then saw only two that seemed to move in unison.

Even ignoring movement, Venus and Mars were far apart, Venus by
now being invisible, leaving only Mars all by its lonesome. That
hardly explains 2 or 4 lights, moving or not.

>"They were just lights moving in the sky," he said. "They might
>have been helicopters, although I couldn't see any fuselages,
>but the lights were moving far enough and fast enough so they
>couldn't have been planets -- and I know planets when I see
>them."

>But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation for
>the lights.

I would say the mere photographer is a helluva lot smarter than
the astronomy professor and the science reporter.

>In their orbits around the sun, all planets move at different
>speeds, just as the Earth does, and periodically their varied
>speeds cause them to catch up and overtake the Earth's orbital
>flight and bring them closer to our home planet.

>In fact, the Red Planet will be exactly 43.1 million miles from
>Earth at 8:25 p.m. Saturday, and its orbit won't bring it that
>close to Earth again until the summer of 2018, according to
>astronomical calculations.

>Venus, which orbits the sun inside Earth's orbital path, is now
>about 106 million miles away -- no record, but close enough to
>appear much brighter than usual.

Just padding the story with irrelevant details, probably to make
"Venus and Mars" sound more impressive. However, the important
detail about Venus setting in the west at 7:30, and thus being
invisible, somehow doesn't make it into the laundry list of
"impressive" astronomical facts.

>According to Fraknoi, Mars now far outshines even the brightest
>of all the stars in the sky, and when skies are clear, the
>fourth planet from the sun could look even bigger than normal.
>Its brilliance should be apparent above the eastern horizon soon
>after sunset, but will appear even brighter as it climbs higher
>in the sky during the night.

Right, Mars in east near horizon at sunset, Venus in west near
horizon at sunset, hardly "close together" and can hardly
account for multiple lights seen close together. And as Mars
climbs during the night high in the sky away from the horizon,
it would shine as a steady light. At midnight when it is
practically directly overhead, it is unlikely to be described as
a light in the "east."

>On the night of Nov. 7, Mars will be directly opposite the sun
>in relation to Earth -- a position astronomers call opposition,
>which means it will rise above the eastern horizon just at
>sunset, climb higher and higher, and remain in the sky all night
>until it sets at sunrise.

>The Martian orbit last caught up with Earth's in August 2003,
>and on that occasion it was even closer -- about 36 million
>miles away. It won't come any closer than that for another
>60,000 years, NASA astronomers have calculated.

More irrelevant padding. Science writer David Perlman is usually
pretty good, but he has his head up where Venus don't shine on
this one. How he and the astronomer could both think Venus and
Mars were close together in the east or how they could ignore
Venus being invisible after 7:30 are real puzzlers. It's hard to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:48:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:40:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak


>From: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul>
>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:23 AM
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

>Friday, October 28, 2005

>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
>or were they?

>David Perlman
>Chronicle Science Editor

>Mysterious, bright lights in the night sky Wednesday that
>alarmed or bemused scores of Bay Area residents were not
>mysterious at all but most likely a pair of planets whose
>orbits
>around the sun are carrying them close to Earth right now.

>Others are not so sure.

>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at
>Foothill College, said the lights were probably Mars and Venus,
>two planets that currently appear close together and will probably
>remain brilliant for another week or two until their orbits
>begin moving them away from Earth again.

<...>

>But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation
>for the lights.

As I just pointed out my previous post, Fraknoi's "explanation"
is impossible. Venus and Mars are currently not "close together"
in the sky but on opposite ends of the sky. Further Venus sets
below the horizon around 7:40, and thus invisible at midnight,
when a S.F. Chronicle photographer photographed multiple lights
(also part of article--see above url for multiple photos).

Who the heck is this guy Fraknoi, a supposed professional
astronomer? I googled the guy, and guess what? He's a proud,
card-carrying Fellow of CSICOP.

http://www.foothill.fhda.edu/ast/afraknoi.htm

Further it says he "specializes in debunking astrology."
Obviously he also specializes in debunking UFOs, and doesn't
care whether his explanations are scientifically impossible.
Some scientist.

Ironically his bio also states, "Fraknoi has a strong interest
in helping to improve the way science is taught in the nations's
schools." If that were the case, he could start by getting his
astronomical facts correct first.

I was so mad, that I just sent the following letter-to-the-
 editor off to the S.F. Chronicle. We'll see if it gets
published or we get a public apology from science editor Perlman
or Fraknoi.

Bogus Astronomy

To the editor:

Regarding the story "Spellbound by Sky Lights" in Friday's
Chronicle by science editor David Perlman. It is literally
impossible, as Perlman and astronomy professor Andrew Fraknoi
claim, for Venus and Mars to be close together in the eastern
sky and thus explain the multiple lights seen by many moving
together and which Chonicle photographer Lance Iversen also
photographed around midnight on Wednesday night. At sunset, Mars
is currently rising in the east while Venus is setting in the
west. They are on opposite sides of the sky. Venus sets at
around 7:40 p.m. and is completely invisible at midnight.
Further Mars is almost directly overhead at midnight, not near
the horizon where Iversen photographed his lights. Stars and
planets do not move relative to one another, as Iversen's
photographs clearly show these lights as doing. I don't know
what the lights were, but I do know Perlman and Fraknoi should
do some simple fact checking before proposing absurdities like
an invisible planet and then trying to portray this as a
scientific explanation. Maybe they both need to take remedial
astronomy courses.


David Rudiak







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 29

                      Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:44:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Rimmer


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>>enough denialist.

>>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an eager
>>believer.

>John, you've got to be kidding. What explanation[s]? So far
>there are none.

Are you saying no UFO case has ever been explained. There are
people who seem to think that - 'eager believers' - but I hadn't
previously put you amongst them!

>It's getting harder and harder to take you or
>your position seriously. You bring nothing to the table unless
>you consider negative, unsupported rhetoric as evidence. Since
>you don't seem to want to either supply any evidence to the
>contrary, just disdain and derision, why you are even on the
>list? Rich, as bad as his attempts are to explain this case with
>thinly disguised cosmetic, oft times silly, applications, does
>offer up a position. On the other hand you offer nothing, not
>even an opinion.

I suggest you go back in the archives and read my previous
posts. On second thoughts, no, there are just too many of
them, and packed full of opinions (and sometimes even facts).

>You seem satisfied with just assigning
>degeneratory motive to anyone not readily supportive of
>ridiculous conjecture or theories.

>Debate seems a useless tool when trying to get at the truth of
>this phenomenon. Obviously the best debater would win, but
>that's not the point. Winning an argument is a poor substitute
>for proof if the facts suffer in the process. Debate is the
>purview of courts and legislatures who often get it wrong.

>The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
>derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance your
>own position, not through the presentation of facts but by
>ridiculing of the presenter of the facts. It's an old ploy but
>it simply amounts to tripe.

Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times over,
to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List seems to be
to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone who attempt to
take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO problem. Perhaps
if you were to take a similar admonitory attitude to him - which
nobody on this List appears to be willing to do - I might be
prepared to take your comments above more seriously.

What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology? Does he
publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
related magazines? Has he written a serious book on UFO
abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
first hand or through studying the literature? What does he
'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
rhetoric'? Has he ever tried to do anything other than 'attempt
to win points through derision'?

Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
elaborately worded ramblings.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                         Langley AFB's Ad Censorship

From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:29:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 08:48:23 -0500
Subject: Langley AFB's Ad Censorship


To: dodgcweb.nul
Cc: william.haynes.nul
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:29:13 -0500
Subject: Langley Air Force Base's Ad Censorship


TO:  Hon. William J. Haynes, II
     General Counsel
     U. S. Department of Defense
     The Pentagon
     Washington, DC 20301

FROM: Larry W. Bryant
      3518 Martha Custis Drive
      Alexandria, VA 22302

DATE: October 28, 2005

As you can see from the below-quoted e-mail exchanged between me
and certain officials at Langley Air Force Base, Va. (in which
the base public affairs office announces its decision to bar my
proposed classified advertisement "Blow the Whistle on the Neo-
UFO Whistleblowers!" from being published in the LAFB "Flyer"
newspaper), I hereby serve notice upon you that -

(1) Langley's censorship of my ad violates the consent decree
issued by the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia (Alexandria Division) in the First Amendment lawsuit of
Larry W. Bryant v. Caspar W. Weinberger, et al. (1987) That
decree expressly prohibits any USAF personnel from interfering
with my right to have my UFO-related ads printed in such U. S.
military newspapers as the Langley "Flyer."

(2) The rejected ad in question recently has been approved by
the public affairs office at Arnold Air Force Base, Tenn., for
publication in Arnold's newspaper (the "High Mach"). This
Langley-banned ad happens to reflect a series of such "UFO-
cover-up-whistleblower" solicitation ads already published since
1987 in various other post/base newspapers (including the ad
"Blow the Whistle on 'Hostile Aerial Craft'" - published in the
April 18, 2003, issue of Fort Myer's "Pentagram").

(3) If you fail to order, no later than Nov. 22, 2005, a
complete reversal of Langley's censorship, I plan to instruct my
attorney to pursue, on my behalf, a show-cause order as to why
the Secretaries of Defense and Air Force should not be held in
contempt of court for this violation of the subject consent
decree.

(4) The sought-for show-cause order will seek from the U. S.
government full reimbursement of my litigation costs in this
matter, along with all appropriate monetary damages.

Please advise me, in writing, as soon as you take the remedial
action requested by this e-formatted letter (a signed printout
of which is being sent to you by snail-mail).


LARRY W. BRYANT

Copy furnished to: U. S. Attorney for the Eastern District of
Virginia (Alexandria Div.)

         TEXT OF THE BRYANT-LAFB E-MAIL AT ISSUE:

Subject: RE: Fwd: Submission of An Ad for Publication in the
Langley AFB "Flyer"
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:56:46 -0400
From: "Rothwell Deborah L Civ 1 FW/IG"
<Deborah.Rothwell.nul>
To: "overtci.nul" <'overtci.nul'>
Cc: "1 FW/IGQ IG Complaints" <1fw.igq.nul>


Good Morning Sir,

Here is the response to your inquiry concerning your ad-review
submission of May 9, 2005. With the termination of Project Blue
Book, the Air Force regulation establishing and controlling the
program for investigation and analyzing UFOs was rescinded.
Documentation regarding the former Blue Book investigation was
permanently transferred to the Modern Military Branch, National
Archives and Records Service, and is available for public review
and analysis. The newspaper contract Langley AFB has with
Military Newspapers stipulates, in section 4, Line "d" that the
publisher shall not accept for publication advertisements that
are worded or phrased to give the reader impressions that the
Department of the Air Force in any way endorses, guarantees or
sponsors any product or service. Section 4, line "k" states that
the editorial staff will review advertisements to identify any
that are contrary to law, Air Force or Department of Defense
instructions, or that may pose a danger or detriment to Air
Force members or their families, or that interfere or detract
from the command or the installation's mission. Based on results
of Project Blue Book, it is clearly not within our scope to
publish material contrary to the government interest. Thanks for
your consideration. Requests for copies of records and general
information about Project Blue Book should be sent to: Modern
Military Records, National Archives, 8601 Adelphi Rd, College
Park, MD 20740-60001, (303) 71307250. If you have any questions,
regarding this response, please feel free to contact Maj
Patricia A. Traynor, USAFR, Chief Public Affair, 757-764-2018.
If the 1 FW/IG can be of any further service, please don't
hesitate to give us a call.

Deborah L. Rothwell, Civ, USAF
Deputy Inspector General
DSN: 574-5162/6782
deborah.rothwell.nul
Privacy Act - 1974 as Ammended applies-if this email
contains personal
information, it must be protected IAW DoD 5400.11R, and is
for Official
Use Only (FOUO)

---Original Message---
From: 1 FW/IG
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 10:18 AM
To: 'overtci.nul'
Subject: RE: Fwd: Submission of An Ad for Publication in the
Langley AFB
"Flyer"

Good Morning Sir -

I have received you complaint. The complaint is being referred
over to PA for resolution as to why your article for not
accepted for submission to the FLYER. I will let you know as
soon as I receive the response. If I can be of any further
assistance, please don't hesitate to give me a call. Thanks.

Deborah L. Rothwell, Civ, USAF
Deputy Inspector General
DSN: 574-5162/6782
deborah.rothwell.nul
Privacy Act - 1974 as Ammended applies-if this email
contains personal
information, it must be protected IAW DoD 5400.11R, and is
for Official
Use Only (FOUO)

---Original Message---
From: overtci.nul [overtci.nul]
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 12:58 AM
To: 1 FW/IG
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: Submission of An Ad for Publication in
the Langley
AFB "Flyer"

TO: Inspector General of the Headquarters, 1st Fighter Wing
(Langley Air Force Base, VA 23665) (June 3, 2005):

Your command's public affairs officer (Capt. Glenn) apparently
has chosen to ignore my below-quoted ad-review submission of May
9, 2005. In doing so, he has exceeded his authority. I therefore
request that your office (1) investigate this managerial
irregularity; and (2) report to me, promptly, your resultant
findings and recommendations. Please tell me the name and
contact information of the I.G. official to whom you plan to
assign this case. - Larry W. Bryant

--- Forwarded Message ---
From: "overtci" <overtci.nul>
To: 1fw.paedit.nul
Subject: Fwd: Submission of An Ad for Publication in the
Langley AFB "Flyer"
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 02:04:55 -0500

DEAR CAPTAIN: Please tell me the name and e-address of the USAF
official to whom I may appeal your apparent decision to ignore
my request for your prepublication review of my below-quoted ad
submission. - Larry W. Bryant

--- Forwarded Message ---
From: "overtci" <overtci.nul>
To: 1fw.paedit.nul
Subject: Submission of An Ad for Publication in the Langley
AFB "Flyer"
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 20:49:52 -0500

TO:  Capt. Jeff Glenn
     Public Affairs Officer
     Langley Air Force Base, Va.

FROM: Larry W. Bryant
       3518 Martha Custis Drive
       Alexandria, VA 22302

DATE: May 9, 2005

Please have the text of the following classified ad undergo your
standard prepublication review/clearance prior to my submitting
it direct to the printer of your base newspaper, the "Flyer":

  BLOW THE WHISTLE ON THE NEO-UFO WHISTLEBLOWERS!

Two members of a reinvigorated crop of reputed UFO-coverup
whistleblowers - former USAF intelligence officer Robert M.
Collins and former USAF-OSI agent Richard C. Doty - have teamed
up to produce a brand-new book, titled "Exempt from Disclosure:
The Disturbing Case About the UFO Coverup"

http://www.ufoconspiracy.com

Does the book constitute a confirmable case of insider knowledge
of what our government knows (and when it knew it) about UFO
reality? Or does its foray into the bowels of the world's
Deepest Secret merely regurgitate a form of official
disinformation - "disUFOmation" - made (in)famous back in the
1980's via the Kirtland AFB's Bennewitz Affair? If you (or
someone you know) reliably can corroborate or discount the
Collins-Doty revelations, please contact me at: Larry W. Bryant,
3518 Martha Custis Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302; e-mail:
overtci.nul .





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:12:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 08:52:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 2:48 PM
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>From: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul>
>>To: "- UFO UpDates Subscribers -" <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:23 AM
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r
>>Friday, October 28, 2005
>>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
>>or were they?

>>David Perlman
>>Chronicle Science Editor

>>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at
>>Foothill College, said the lights were probably Mars and
>>Venus, two planets that currently appear close together and
>>will probably remain brilliant for another week or two until
>>their orbits begin moving them away from Earth again.

>><...>

>>But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation
>>for the lights.

>As I just pointed out in another post, Fraknoi's "explanation"
>is impossible. Venus and Mars are currently not "close
>together" in the sky but on opposite ends of the sky. Further
>Venus sets below the horizon around 7:40, and thus invisible
>at midnight, when a S.F. Chronicle photographer photographed
>multiple lights (also part of article - >see above url for
>multiple photos).

>Who the heck is this guy Fraknoi, a supposed professional
>astronomer? I googled the guy, and guess what? He's a proud,
>card-carrying Fellow of CSICOP.

><snip>

>>I was so mad, that I just sent the following letter-to-the-
>>editor off to the S.F. Chronicle. We'll see if it gets
>>published or we get a public apology from science editor
>>Perlman or Fraknoi.

>Bogus Astronomy

>To the editor:

>Regarding the story "Spellbound by Sky Lights" in Friday's
>Chronicle by science editor David Perlman. It is literally
>impossible, as Perlman and astronomy professor Andrew Fraknoi
>claim, for Venus and Mars to be close together in the eastern
>sky and thus explain the multiple lights seen by many moving
>together and which Chonicle photographer Lance Iversen also
>photographed around midnight on Wednesday night....

Quick update:

I also sent off an email to David Perlman and he emailed me back
within minutes. He apologized for the errors and said he was
correcting them "ASAP."

Judging from his instant response, my guess is that he got an
earful from a lot of people besides me and is probably rather
embarrassed about being taken in by CSICOPian Fraknoi. As I said
before, Perlman is usually a very good science writer and seems
fair and level-headed. On the other hand, his evil science





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                       George Knapp On Vegas Sighting

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:02:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:02:15 -0500
Subject: George Knapp On Vegas Sighting




Source: KLAS-TV - Las Vegas, Nevada, USA

http://www.klastv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4045253&nav=168Y

Oct 29, 2005

Friday Phenomena: UFO Sightings
George Knapp
Investigative Reporter

By definition, UFOs are just unidentified things in the sky, not
necessarily alien aircraft. One Las Vegas man has captured a
curious array of photos and videos of weird stuff he's seen
flying over his house. He shared his material with the I-Team's
George Knapp.

UFO witness, "The first thing I started seeing were odd-shaped
things that changed colors and just darted across the screen at
phenomenal speeds."

Have you ever wanted to see an honest to goodness UFO? This Las
Vegas man sees them all the time. He worries about being labeled
a UFO wacko, so we agreed to hide his identity. Call him Bob. "I
started seeing them at night, and they're balls of light, not
aircraft or jets," he explained.

Bob lives in a central Las Vegas neighborhood and for the past
two years has been seeing and photographing weird objects in the
skies over his home. He started with still photos, and then
switched to video to record the movements of things like this
opaque pretzel shaped.

Bob continued, "They started making aerial maneuvers and then a
dead stop, and then start up again, like they were searching for
- they were like ants."

The objects appear at different times and at different points.
Few of Bob's neighbors seem to have noticed the aerial ballet
above their rooftops. Raul has an extra advantage with 20/10
vision, he says, which allows him to pick out objects in the sky
that others might overlook.

It's hard to believe that no one else noticed this tandem of
dark spheres that danced around on a recent afternoon. One
looked like a big plastic bag caught in the wind, but it stayed
up there - way up there - for more than an hour. They aren't
satellites because satellites don't stay put for 4 hours as this
one did.

Colonel John Alexander said, "UFOs are real. What are they?
That's the question."

Col. Alexander, an author and retired Army intelligence officer
who worked in highly classified military research programs,
watched some of Bob's footage. "That one looks like the one they
show down in New Zealand."

But he isn't sure what he is seeing. He doubts they are anything
from, say, Area 51. "It's quite possible that things might fly
in this area. However, they would not be extremely sensitive
things. You don't test advanced technology where it's going to
be available over major metropolitan areas. That's what they do
out in the desert."

This is a computer-enhanced freeze-frame of an odd object. On
video, the three-orbed thing looks a lot like balloons tied
together, but these orbs seem to be tumbling over each other in
flight, and the object has a twin. If they are moving with the
wind, why do they move in different directions?

Bob said, "You can't have two craft with wind draft coming down
and then almost colliding, the one almost bending over. If you
slow it down, it bends over. It's like they're interacting. This
one is stationary and this one is jamming up. Man, look at that
separation."

Within seconds the two objects put a huge distance between
themselves. Maybe they're balloons, maybe not. This one was
frozen in the sky for a while, and then zipped behind the clouds
- very un-balloon-like behavior. Bob is convinced there's a lot
of stuff in the sky that we can't recognize, but we can see them
if we try.

The National Weather Service launched two weather balloons each
day over the Las Vegas Valley, but we aren't sure if that's what
some of these are. We've sent the footage to an optical
physicist for analysis and will have the results for you soon as
part George's "Friday Phenomena."







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

              Corrales Discusses Newest Book Unusual Profession

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:06:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:06:50 -0500
Subject: Corrales Discusses Newest Book Unusual Profession




Source: The Bradford Era - Bradford, Pennsylvania, USA

http://tinyurl.com/bllfd

10/28/2005


Corrales Discusses Newest Book, Unusual Profession
by Marcie Schellhammer - Era Reporter


Bradford resident Scott Corrales speaks about his feelings on
UFOs and the paranormal without worry of being dismissed as
"nuts." After all, among those who seek his counsel are The
Discovery, National Geographic and The History television
channels.

The author of several books, including his most recent release
"Flashpoint: High Strangeness in Puerto Rico," deals with
skepticism with a hearty sense of humor.

"You have to have a terrific sense of humor," he explained
Friday. People will send alien stickers in the mail, or small
"E.T." figures to him.

"It's become a little sub-order of study," Corrales said with a
laugh.

Known in several countries as an expert in the field, Corrales
has been a guest on numerous radio shows and submitted articles
to magazines - as well as having been interviewed for
television.

On Aug. 21, a crew from National Geographic came to Bradford to
talk to him about chupacabras. The show will air in December.
Today, he will have a visit from The Discovery Channel about the
"goat-suckers," an entity reported in Puerto Rico, Mexico and
the southern U.S. which attacks livestock and drains their
blood.

"It's an inclusive 10-year anniversary blowout to interview
field researchers," Corrales said. He had written the first of
his three books on chupacabras in 1995. He was selected because
he is considered an expert.

"I'm moderately well-known as a troublemaker in the field," he
said with a laugh. He explained that not all of the people
involved in researching paranormal phenomena welcome information
about activity elsewhere, and thus consider him a troublemaker
in his quest to disseminate information.

"To constantly feed people information . . . it is well received
by some and considered a nuisance by others," Corrales
explained.

Some other information he plans to share with the television
audience is on the history of UFOs.

He will be interviewed for The History Channel, which "wants me
to discuss a history of UFO sightings going back to the first
wave in the Americas in the 1500s ... in the Aztec Empire.
They're interviewing researchers."

And that's what he considers himself, a researcher and a writer
- a journalist whose "main interest is letting people know"
about the subject of UFOs.

The most common questions he gets go something like this: Have
you ever seen a UFO? "I never have," Corrales responds. Well,
then, how do you know they exist? "I've never been to Australia,
but I believe it exists," he says with a smile.

"Until you have a UFO that you can give to scientists, it cannot
become a field of study," he explained. The UFO phenomenon is
not predictable or repetitive - but during the 1970s and 1980s,
it was frequent.

In the book "Flashpoint: High Strangeness in Puerto Rico," which
was published in 1998 in England and is available now for the
first time in America through Amazon.com's British counterpart,
amazon.co.uk., Corrales explores that activity.

"It tries to give an objective chronological perspective on UFO
activity in the Caribbean island of Puerto Rico," Corrales said
of the book. "It's a prequel to 'Chupacabras.' "

Corrales explained that during the 1970s and 1980s, UFO activity
was at its peak.

"It was widespread worldwide," he said. "The Caribbean, Mexico
and Europe were rife with sightings."

While others enter the realm of speculation to explain the
existence of the unidentified flying objects, Corrales does not.
What are they? "No one knows and don't ever let them tell you,"
he replies with a laugh.

"We are gathering the information, creating a worldwide database
on UFOs that will be useful to scholars and scientists 200 or
300 years from now," he said, explaining his view of UFO
research. "In fact, you are tilling a field for the future."

He encourages anyone who has seen any UFO to report it to an
organization, many of which are available on the Internet. That
information could prove useful, he said. The phenomenon, while
currently unexplained, may prove to be related to weather or
earthquakes or volcanic activity or something - and the more
information, the better.

"People should at least respect the people who come forward,"
Corrales explains, saying that it takes courage for a person to
speak out about a paranormal experience.

"People would rather not have the unknown thrust upon them," he
said, adding that making fun of a witness is hurtful.

"UFOs exist. We don't know what they are," he said, adding that
he doesn't necessarily feel there's anything otherworldly to
them.

"Given the vast distances involved ... it leads me to think the
UFO explanation is a lot closer to earth," he said.

"When it comes to UFOs, you don't have them to study. You have
people to study," Corrales said, explaining information must
come from witnesses.

While in Puerto Rico researching for his book, he came across
witnesses who told of their experiences "in case there was a
greater danger to the community."

And, he recalled with a smile, he encountered at least one
skeptic. Stopping at an open air food stand or lunch, he was
asked by the waitress what he was doing there. When he told her
he was researching UFOs, she told him they didn't exist.

"Why not?" he asked.

"Because if they did, they would eat here," she replied with a laugh.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                3 More Reasons To Attend UFO Crash Conference

From: Ryan S. Wood <majesticdocuments.nul>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:22:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:37:33 -0500
Subject: 3 More Reasons To Attend UFO Crash Conference


Three More Reasons To Attend 3rd Crash Conference
Friday, November 4th =96 Sunday, November 6th, 2005
Las Vegas, Nevada

Broomfield CO Friday October 28, 2005 What does the super-secret
government cabal managing the UFO program desperately want to
hide from the public? It is the direct physical evidence that
there have been scores of UFO crashes since 1897 with an
aggressive program to exploit and reverse engineer the
technology all at taxpayer expense.

The UFO Crash Retrieval symposia continues to hammer away at the
notion of a single Roswell UFO crash with more and more credible
evidence of multiple UFO crashes and subsequent military
recoveries.

Let me share with you five compelling reasons to attend this
years 3rd Annual UFO Crash Retrieval Symposium.

- Its the people. Not only do you have tremendous direct access
to a host of world-class experts of ufology you have access to
the audience. The attendees are the cream of the crop, the
people that realize that the cutting edge of the phenomenon is
in researching the recovery, analysis and exploitation of real
physical objects and hardware.

- Its the after hours meetings and hallway discussions. At
present, I know of three very provocative after-hour meetings.
For example, the MJ-13 initiative, with the goal to have all
knowledge about UFOs integrated into a single on-line searchable
database. Included are thousands of books, periodicals, and
broadcast conference video and audio along with deep-web mining
of relevant UFO topics.

- Its the speakers with their unique experiences and expertise.
Where else can you go to a cocktail party and talk with world-
class investigative reporters like Jim Marrs and Linda Moulton
Howe? Or National Security guru Richard Dolan, or police officer
Ken Storch, or reverse engineering expert William Hamilton? Let
alone the Rendlesham forest expert Peter Robbins and Dr. Tom
Valone antigravity and UFO propulsion expert? Or Nick Redferns
extensive knowledge of the UFO subject, or my fathers 35 years
of experience in the field of ufology?

There is no time to delay, act now and sign up now at
www.ufoconference.com, or call me and we can do it over the
phone, faxes and mail work too. If you need more information or
would like to talk with me personally please call 720-887-8171.

Looking forward to seeing you there and having a great time.


Sincerely,

Ryan S. Wood

Conference Chairman

rswood.nul

14004 Quail Ridge Drive
Broomfield, CO 80020
FAX: 720-887-8239





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                        Woman's Tale About Abduction

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:41:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:41:36 -0500
Subject: Woman's Tale About Abduction




Source: The Capital, Annapolis, Maryland, USA

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2005/10_28-12/TOP

October 28, 2005

Woman's Tale About Abduction At Center Of Conference
By Elizabeth Leis, Staff Writer

Anna Jamerson always found ways to explain away her nosebleeds,
or her inability to account for periods of time, or why she woke
up with her nightgown on backwards.

But it wasn't until a six-month period in 1992 that she and a
friend with similar symptoms starting keeping journals,
researching and undergoing hypnosis. Their conclusion: They had
been abducted by aliens.

"I remember lying on single-footed tables with beings over me,"
Ms. Jamerson said. "I remember them poking and prodding with
various instruments and their hands and being completely
terrified."

The Virginia author's story will be at the center of "Mysteries
of Space and Sky II" tomorrow, a conference at Anne Arundel
Community College.

Since exchanges about alien abductions can become heated,
conference organizer S. Peter Resta, a psychology professor and
practicing psychotherapist in Pasadena, said this forum is meant
to be educational and friendly.

"I'm all for debate," Dr. Resta said. "But I've seen some
exchanges that can get nasty."

Other speakers will be scientists who will present history and
analyses of unidentified flying objects, including Temple
University professor Dr. David Jacobs' response to a recent
theory that alien "abductees" are victims of only sleep
paralysis.

According to that theory, postulated by a Harvard psychology
fellow, the brain is out of deep sleep but the body is unable to
move. As a result, victims often hallucinate, sense a presence,
or feel like they are floating.

Ms. Jamerson, 56, and all the other conference participants
reject that theory.

"Everyone would like to find a dif-ferent explanation than
abductions and so would I," said Ms. Jamerson, who uses the
penname Anna Jamerson to protect her family. "(Sleep paralysis)
doesn't explain it when I am abducted from my car. Sleep
paralysis doesn't cause scars on my body."

She's also resigned herself to not caring when people doubt her,
she said. Although she's happy today, there are times she has
despaired, she said, starting to cry.

"I know it's as real as sitting here talking to you," she said.
"For other abductees it's (also) very very real. Don't tell me
it's not real."

Sue Swiatek, the Virginia director of the Mutual UFO Network and
a conference speaker, agrees the sleep paralysis theory is not
scientific enough. She sees the UFO debate as "another culture
war."

"At least reserve judgment," she said. "When a person at a
cocktail party says 'I've been abducted,' say, 'You've had an
experience that's real to you and science needs to study that.'
"

Ms. Swiatek will present information on recent UFO sightings,
while her husband, Rob Swiatek, will present photographic
evidence.

"In UFOs over the years, fewer than 20 stand up to rigorous
analysis," he said. "But those 20 or fewer show clearly
structured objects after you rule out obvious hoax attempts."

Ms. Jamerson said she hasn't seen the "gray guys" for about two
years, which she believes may be due to finishing menopause.

She avoids talking a lot about her experiences, she said.

"If (people) know about (Beth and I) and want to talk about it,
it's fine, but as a general rule don't tell anybody," she said.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                Humans Born From Aliens New Book Reveals All!

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:44:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:44:40 -0500
Subject: Humans Born From Aliens New Book Reveals All!




Source: The News Tribune

http://tinyurl.com/7c6ow

October 28th, 2005

Humans Born From Aliens New Book Reveals All!

Bill Hutchens - The News Tribune

What is it? "Bat Boy Lives! The 'Weekly World News' Guide to
Politics, Culture, Celebrities, Alien Abductions and the Mutant
Freaks that Shape Our World" ($12.95, Sterling Publishing). On
bookstands this week.

Finally! The truth! At least, it's "the truth" for anyone overly
suspicious of mainstream science and media outlets.

Sneak a peak: You read the tabloid headlines in the supermarket
checkout line anyway. Why not get it all in one 198-page guide
organized by WWN editors?

Organized? Take the page on evolution, for example, in Chapter
1: "Killer Androids Breeding Like Flies! Revealing Reports on
Science & Technology." According to WWN, God/George Burns and
aliens begat microbes. Then we got bacteria, giant mutant bugs,
mermaids, talking coconuts and the occasional three-breasted
woman (Homo sapiens triboobis).

More questions than answers: Such as, "COULD Buddha's frog
guardian know the winning lotto numbers?"

What else? Helen the Bigfoot prostitute centerfold; Hillary
Clinton's "hot nights" with alien advisor P'lod; Saddam and
Osama's gay wedding; six-inch nose hairs and the flesh-eating





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                      Re: My Own Experience - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:12:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:48:35 -0500
Subject: Re: My Own Experience - Chichikov


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:58:16 -0300
>Subject: Re: My Own Experience

>Pavel,

>May I ask, what-you-think may be behind it?


Don,

I really don't know, except to say that beyond the considerable
residue of hoaxes and misapprehensions that there is something
real happening, and it is not simple in nature.

For one thing, it's unlikely that physical science for the rest
of time is going to be a mere gloss on the physics of the year
2005. It's undoubtedly true that our understanding of the cosmos
is still rudimentary.

I believe that the universe is filled with intelligence - both
my faith and my instincts tell me so. I find it difficult to
accept that some form of cosmic quarantine has forever prevented
these minds from communicating with one another.

I would tell you how my faith assures me of this, but this is
not the venue for such explanations.

As for other evidence - I don't think we as a species have the
intellectual and emotional equipment to adequately evaluate it.

If beings from other worlds, other places were to directly
manifest themselves, I think that would be devastating to our
species as a whole. As an analogy, think of what has happened to
many small indigenous cultures on our own world, and multiply
that many times.

Years ago I had a friend who spent two years with a group of
remote indigenous people in the Peruvian Amazon, as part of her
doctoral thesis in anthropology. There were less than 90 of
these people, their numbers having been previously reduced by a
smallpox epidemic.

Almost every evening the men would take ayahuasca (a powerful
psychotropic), and then hallucinate. If the general mood was a
good one, they would see beautiful women and children adorned in
feathers and paint, dancing toward the village. If the mood was
anxious, they would see Peruvians coming up-river with shotguns
to kill them.

I think there may be an analogy there with our own situation.

Best wishes,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                      Re: Roswell - Case Closed - Shell

From: Bob Shell <bob.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:34:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:52:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed - Shell


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:29 -0700
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>Since some have suggested E as the second letter, I also tried
>than, thus YE??I?? as the search word. This yields 19 hits, but
>all of them are as nonsensical in context as the four words
>above, words like YELPING, YESSING, YERKISH, YESHIVA, YETTIES,
>etc. Yeah, those make a lot of sense too.

Yep, makes sense to me. The disk was piloted by Abominable Snow
Midgets so busy yelping in Yerkish that they lost control and
crashed. Yessir, the mystery has been solved at last. Oh, and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                     Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:38:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:55:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses - Lehmberg


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>>The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
>>derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance your
>>own position, not through the presentation of facts but by
>>ridiculing of the presenter of the facts. It's an old ploy but
>>it simply amounts to tripe.

>>Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times over,
>to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List seems to be
>to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone who attempt to
>take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO problem.

Singularly pointed and very non-sarcastic (Oh - I can do _that_
in a fashion to water your eyes, Sir). And if you would
laughably use yourself as a ready example of a "moderate [and]
skeptical approach to the UFO problem..." You should disabuse
yourself of that ridiculous notion with all deliberate speed.
You are not, Mr. Rimmer. I suspect that I am not remotely alone
in that contention.

>Perhaps
>if you were to take a similar admonitory attitude to him - which
>nobody on this List appears to be willing to do - I might be
>prepared to take your comments above more seriously.


Are you joking, Sir. Clark, Sandow, Hall, and _yourself_, et sig
al, have taken me to considerable task over the years.

>What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology?

What contribution am I required to make, in your 'non-biased'
estimation, Mr. Rimmer? Forgetting hundreds of papers, poems,
and a considered commentary, forgetting focused and respectful
attention on the community, forgetting my tireless advocacy for
'real' truth seeking? What contribution would _you_ require?

>Does he
>publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
>related magazines?

A spineless rag of insouciant negativism and sneering
pelicanistic elitism?

>Has he written a serious book on UFO
>abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
>first hand or through studying the literature?

Yes, I have, Sir. And, unlike you, you won't have to first pay
to be disappointed by _my_ explications. Moreover, you can
access it 24 hours a day. Happy reading!

>What does he
>'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
>rhetoric'?

What do you bring to the table, Sir, but sneering pomposity, the
negativity already mentioned, and two steps back for every step
you only pretend to take forward?

>Has he ever tried to do anything other than 'attempt
>to win points through derision'?

That, Sir, is _your_ function, and this churlish little note
from you is only evidence of same.

>Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
>for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
>no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
>rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
>elaborately worded ramblings.

It would appear that you have had enough of them at any rate,
step (rather deliciously!) from defilade to express anxiousness
about them, and only encourage the continuance of same, Sir.
 Good Show!

>If you are prepared to challenge that, I might be prepared to
>'debate' with you further, but I don't suppose you'd be to
>bothered if I didn't, which may well be your loss.

Now "loss" is to be defined by you as apart from and ignored by
you? What awesome, if thoroughly ridiculous hubris, Mr. Rimmer!

Ignore me if you can, Sir! Metaphorically, "I struggle to the
last with thee; from Hell's heart I stab at thee; I spit my last
cross breath at thee..." You just encourage me. And thanks!

With regard to you? Mr. Ledger has been there and done that,
Sir, and I suspect, is immune to your pouty ultimatum. But I
shan't presume to speak for him.

That said, I suspect I have a quality you lack, Mr. Rimmer
keeping me 'alive' at UpDates. It is a quality lost in your
dissemblely and pomposity and arrogant expression, Sir.

It is sincerity. That's all that is truly required in a
'contribution', Mr. Rimmer.

Have a _good_ week-end.

alienview.nul





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

               Re: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions - Hale

From: Roy Hale <roy.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:54:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:56:56 -0500
Subject: Re: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions - Hale


>From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 18:37:13 +0100
>Subject: Re: BBC's 'Material World' On Abductions

<snip>

>I don't know who it was who said that ufology was dead,
>but they forgot to tell the media here in the UK!


Hi Nick,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

              UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's Eyeglasses]

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:39:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:07:57 -0500
Subject: UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's Eyeglasses]


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>>>enough denialist.

>>>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an eager
>>>believer.

>>John, you've got to be kidding. What explanation[s]? So far
>>there are none.

>Are you saying no UFO case has ever been explained. There are
>people who seem to think that - 'eager believers' - but I hadn't
>previously put you amongst them!

>>It's getting harder and harder to take you or
>>your position seriously. You bring nothing to the table unless
>>you consider negative, unsupported rhetoric as evidence. Since
>>you don't seem to want to either supply any evidence to the
>>contrary, just disdain and derision, why you are even on the
>>list? Rich, as bad as his attempts are to explain this case with
>>thinly disguised cosmetic, oft times silly, applications, does
>>offer up a position. On the other hand you offer nothing, not
>>even an opinion.

>I suggest you go back in the archives and read my previous
>posts. On second thoughts, no, there are just too many of
>them, and packed full of opinions (and sometimes even facts).

>>You seem satisfied with just assigning
>>degeneratory motive to anyone not readily supportive of
>>ridiculous conjecture or theories.

>>Debate seems a useless tool when trying to get at the truth of
>>this phenomenon. Obviously the best debater would win, but
>>that's not the point. Winning an argument is a poor substitute
>>for proof if the facts suffer in the process. Debate is the
>>purview of courts and legislatures who often get it wrong.

>>The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
>>derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance your
>>own position, not through the presentation of facts but by
>>ridiculing of the presenter of the facts. It's an old ploy but
>>it simply amounts to tripe.

>Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times over,
>to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List seems to be
>to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone who attempt to
>take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO problem. Perhaps
>if you were to take a similar admonitory attitude to him - which
>nobody on this List appears to be willing to do - I might be
>prepared to take your comments above more seriously.

>What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology? Does he
>publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
>related magazines? Has he written a serious book on UFO
>abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
>first hand or through studying the literature? What does he
>'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
>rhetoric'? Has he ever tried to do anything other than 'attempt
>to win points through derision'?

>Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
>for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
>no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
>rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
>elaborately worded ramblings.

>If you are prepared to challenge that, I might be prepared to
>'debate' with you further, but I don't suppose you'd be to
>bothered if I didn't, which may well be your loss.


Oh, Oh... John Rimmer makes some valid points, but they'll be
lost after an expected barrage from Mr. Lehmberg I suspect.

For some reason acrimony prevails here at UpDates and the UFO
phenomenon gets lost in the maelstrom of epithets from regulars:
stupid, pelicanist, silly, et cetera.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 07:41:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:09:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Hatch


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:27:21 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights


>>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

>>Friday, October 28, 2005

>>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
>>or were they?

>>David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor

>>Mysterious, bright lights in the night sky Wednesday that
>>alarmed or bemused scores of Bay Area residents were not
>>mysterious at all but most likely a pair of planets whose orbits
>>around the sun are carrying them close to Earth right now.

>>Others are not so sure.

>>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at Foothill
>>College, said the lights were probably Mars and Venus, two
>>planets that currently appear close together and will probably
>>remain brilliant for another week or two until their orbits
>>begin moving them away from Earth again.

>Ha, ha, ha. This is particularly rich coming from an astronomy
>professor and a science reporter. Venus and Mars are not
>"currently close together" but practically 180 degrees apart.

<snip>

Good catch David!

As much as I like the Chronicle (their devilish crossword puzzle
especially) they blew it this time, and so did Fraknoi, assuming
he is correctly quoted.

Seeing your message above, I ran my Astronomical Clock routine
and found the Geocentric Longitude of Venus at 263.1 degrees,
versus 47.2 degrees for Mars .. poles apart.

In terms of "right ascension", same thing. 17:29 hrs RA for
Venus versus 3:00 hrs RA for Mars.  [ Readings as of 0738 hours
PDT in California on Saturday 29OCT05. ]

I don't want to malign any experts, but even they can and do
slip up from time to time.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:18:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:11:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Hatch


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:48:16 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

>>Friday, October 28, 2005

>>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -

>>David Perlman
>>Chronicle Science Editor

>>Mysterious, bright lights in the night sky Wednesday that
>>alarmed or bemused scores of Bay Area residents were not
>>mysterious at all but most likely a pair of planets whose
>>orbits
>>around the sun are carrying them close to Earth right now.

>>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at
>>Foothill College, said the lights were probably Mars and Venus,
>>two planets that currently appear close together and will probably
>>remain brilliant for another week or two until their orbits
>>begin moving them away from Earth again.

><...>

>>But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation
>>for the lights.

>As I just pointed out my previous post, Fraknoi's
"explanation" is impossible. Venus and Mars are currently not
"close together" in the sky but on opposite ends of the sky.

<snip>

>Who the heck is this guy Fraknoi, a supposed professional
astronomer? I googled the guy, and guess what? He's a proud,
card-carrying Fellow of CSICOP.

>http://www.foothill.fhda.edu/ast/afraknoi.htm

>Further it says he "specializes in debunking astrology."
>Obviously he also specializes in debunking UFOs, and doesn't
>care whether his explanations are scientifically impossible.
>Some scientist.

<snip>

Hello again Dave:

I forgot something. Two things really.

The name Fraknoi rang a bell. I flashed on 'Fraknoi's Complaint'
but that's a movie with a different name. (Portnoy?) It looks
like I did remember the name but lost the context.

The other thing was a curious blip in the visitor statistics to
my website. A relatively obscure page suddenly got busy:

 http://www.larryhatch.net/SFTRAJ.html

That page shows a simple map of the San Francisco Bay region
with red arrows indicating UFO direction of travel.

The search phrases for the last day or so are full of queries
like "San Francisco UFO". I wondered what the fuss was about,
and this explains it all. I hope visitors like the red arrows.
One of them practically goes over this house.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                  Re: UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:19:21 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:16:03 -0500
Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times
>over, to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List
>seems to be to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone
>who attempt to take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO
>problem. Perhaps if you were to take a similar admonitory
>attitude to him - which nobody on this List appears to be
>willing to do - I might be prepared to take your comments
>above more seriously.

Maybe John, engaging with Jerry Clark in mind numbingly boring
threads that last months that have nothing to do with getting at
the truth and everything to do with point scoring might have
seared into Alfred's brain a certain subset of attitudes towards
you that may take some time to shake off. It's also just a tad
hypocritical of you to complain about "pointless, sarcastic
comments" when it could be argued, as Don has, that you do the
same thing yourself from time to time.

>What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology? Does he
>publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
>related magazines? Has he written a serious book on UFO
>abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
>first hand or through studying the literature? What does he
>'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
>rhetoric'? Has he ever tried to do anything other than
>'attempt to win points through derision'?

Whoa there big fella. Congratulations; you've just managed to
dismiss out of hand the majority of people in Ufology, sceptics
'n all.

Alfred is a "character" and without people like him in Ufology,
we'd be left with dull, grey men in dull grey suits, who do dull
grey things for their day jobs. He adds to the colour and the
culture of the subject and has also probably written more on and
around Ufology over the last few months, via his blog, than you
most likely have.

>Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
>for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
>no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
>rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
>elaborately worded ramblings.

You seem to want, by your comment above and previously, for us
to do something about Alfred, to take him in hand and sort him
out. You want us to challenge him, it would appear.

OK.

Alfred leave John Rimmer alone please. Try it for a month, if
you can. If you can't manage it Alfred for that short period
then you have an addiction problem and will need to see
someone.....

That might do it John. Alfred always listens to me and does
everything I ask of him, and with a jump in his step as well.
Alternatively, you could try sorting him out yourself, safe in
the knowledge that however long and rambling his postings may
be, you will only have at the most, half a dozen sentences to
respond to, the rest being unintelligible.

I can see the irritation value from your point of view because I
do accept that you can't even cough on this List without drawing
a response from him but surely you can see he is harmless and
from your perspective, should just be ignored. Ignore him for
long enough and eventually, and it could be a long time, he will
go away.

I am quite sure that the majority of us here John do not want
you to quit this List. I guiltily admit that I might have had
similar thoughts to Don in the past and may even have voiced
them, but they were short lived and pointless.

I agree with your own description of yourself as a moderate
sceptic and as such, I view your presence here as a positive
thing, providing balance and an alternative point of view, as
well as occasionally grounding us when we look set to take off
into the stratosphere. But you are outnumbered and inevitably





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:40:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:18:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Borraz


>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:31:54 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:44:07 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

On Rev. Gill probably misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959

>>on the "negative" side, since Gill also stated that "I
>>identified it as one of these objects", it casts serious doubts
>>on Gill's ability to identify Venus.

>Well, as I said, I'd agree that it reflects on Gill's and
>others' predisposition _as_of_July_6_ to _interpret_ Venus as
>"one of these objects". In terms of the descriptions, though,
>neither Durie nor Gill report anything inconsistent with a
>binocular observation of Venus setting - a small bright disc
>on the horizon "coming down" slowly through broken cloud.
>There is really nothing there that suggests a propensity to
>extreme fantasy.

><snip>

Rather than Gill's predisposition to interpret Venus as
something extraordinary, I was considering here his inability to
identify it in the first place. Just another argument for not
discarding that he might have taken Mercury for Venus on 26
June.

>>- Venus was pointed out by Gill separately in the sky (what
>>about Mercury?).

>This is possible too.

><snip>

>>- Whereas Venus had set by about 9 PM on June 26, it is a
>>flatout physical impossibility for Venus to have remained
>>visible until past 10:30 PM (but don't forget that, by the end,
>>the sighting was in fact discontinuous...).

>It was. Gill's log seems to show that the "mother"
>disappeared at 2130, not 2230. However this is still about
>40 minutes too late to have been Venus. As I suggested it is
>possible that Venus was lost in thick cloud to the west and
>set without them noticing, whilst they transferred their
>attention  some slightly higher star - maybe Regulus, the only
>star brighter than about mag +3 anywhere near the right area.
>Regulus would have set about the time that the "mother"
>finally disappeared. But Regulus is still a very dim star,
> bearing no comparison to Venus. Venus at the time was more
> than 100 times as bright!
>Also, although Gill's log only indicates the mother
>disappearing "across sea to Giwa - white, red, blue, gone"
>which is a bit ambiguous and could suggest strong
>scintillation of a star on the point of setting, his narrative
>accounts appear to describe a large angular motion "across
>the bay" for a distance estimated at 30 miles.

- Venus at the time was more than 100 times brighter than
Regulus:

An observer thinking that there was a unique object would
interprete this just as a displacement to a position some 10
times further away (approx.). Right?

- Large angular motion "across the bay" when disappearing: No
hint of such an angular motion. Rev. Gill explained (Gill's
talk, Oct. 28, 1959):

"The maximum speed was, I said, about less than a second, about
3/4 of a second or 1/2 of a second, across the bay 30 miles
wide. It just _zoomed_ into the distance and disappeared in that
fraction of a second."

>>- The UFOs were seen descending and ascending "through"
>>the clouds according to Gill (it seems that Venus "did" the
>>same on July 6).

>Strictly, on July 6 Venus is described by Gill as descending
>through clouds, evidently in the sense of passing between
>bands of cloud near the horizon, _not_ ascending.
><snip>

How did Gill know that the objects were descending and ascending
"through" the clouds? Let's see what Gill said about it:

"As U.F.O's were often below (under) clouds and their glow gave
off a wide halo of light reflected on clouds, it follows that
U.F.O's descended to below 2,000 ft." [approx. height of clouds
at the time] (Gill's report, Jul. 14, 1959)

"When they [the objects] were stationary, they were a dull
yellow, perhaps slightly orange in colour. The luminosity was
not as bright, and that made their shape stand out very
distinctly. However, as they moved, they became more intense in
luminosity, in brightness, and as they went up and became more
bright, they did appear as they got higher, at one glance, like
a bright planet, or something like that. And that was the reason
for mistaking it for Venus, confusing it with Venus, that first
night." (Gill's talk, Oct. 28, 1959)

Clearly, the perceptual clues were luminosity changes and the
presence/absence of "halos" around the objects, just possible
effects of clouds upon the light from bright stars and planets,
if these were involved.

>So, despite some frustrating aspects, I still vote: Unknown.

><snip>

Is there a confirmed explanation for the sightings of Boianai?

Not yet.

Nevertheless, to say "Unknown" falls a little short. I think
that we should also try to answer the following questions:

Is this case "one of the most convincing on report" as stated
time and again (except by Brad Sparks)?

Are there any hints as to the nature of the sightings?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                          Re: General Exon - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:57:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:20:18 -0500
Subject: Re: General Exon - Rudiak


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:30:04 EDT
>Subject: General Exon [was: Gill Sighting]

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>Even the normally UFO cynical American press generally thought
>>>the 1997 crash dummy report incredibly stupid and unbelievable.
>>>Nobody would confuse 6 foot plastic mannequins with small,
>>>rotting alien bodies. Nobody would confuse times like that (only
>>>gullible, unthinking skeptics would swallow such preposterous
>>>psychobabble explanations like "time compression"). And a number
>>>of the body witnesses weren't even living in New Mexico when the
>>>dummy and other tests were happening. Do you honestly think
>>>General Exon's Air Force friends at Wright-Patterson who told
>>>him about being personally involved and seeing the bodies were
>>>telling him about crash dummies from the 1950s and 1960s?

>>I think General Exon's testimony has been discredited by other
>>writers, particularly Pflock. See p.124 of his book.

>This one will be a matter of opinion based on my interactions
>with General Exon. I'm not sure that you can dismiss all that
>Exon said with a single paragraph calling Exon's testimony
>rumors.

>Let's be straight about this. Exon was a lieutenant colonel who
>was stationed at Wright Field in 1947. He was interacting with
>those who held positions of responsibility and in the course of
>those interactions, was told several things. Those he trusted
>said that there had been a crash and bodies had been recovered.
>Not exactly the rumors that Pflock suggests.

<snip>

>So, say what you will, but I don't believe Karl adequately
>explained Exon's testimony, nor do I believe that it has been
>discredited. It certainly deserved more than a paragraph in
>Karl's book.

It's very simple. Karl Pflock is a debunker, or as Sheridan
Cavitt said in his Air Force interview, "our debunker, I lean
toward him." I'm not the only one who thinks Pflock's former (?)
CIA intel history has something to do with it.

Exon got almost no mention and then a flippant dismissal because
that's the way debunkers like Karl operate with very important
witnesses. Either they slime them with character assassination
(like Marcel), treat them like nobodies, or try to trivialize
what they had to say (Exon was repeating mere "rumors").

Pflock similarly dismissed all the second-hand testimony about
Pappy Henderson, labeling his statements the product of a
"practical joker."

At least Pflock told his readers something about Generals Dubose
and Exon. The Air Force in their Roswell report treated both of
them as complete nobodies and nothing of their testimony was
presented, except perhaps as the fantasies of people who write
UFO books. E.g., Dubose was never identified by name, but his
story of a secret shipment of debris to Washington D.C. was
briefly mentioned, but then said to be the story of "crashed
saucer promoters," not one of their own generals.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                     Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:24:36 -0500
Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?


I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far collected
are:

The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.

I can't figure out why they're the only ones I've acquired so
far. Not documentaries, just films.

Hence, the question came to mind, if I had my druthers which
UFO based movie would I show to a curious public or newbie to
the subject?

Just one film of fiction.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind comes to mind as foremost as
it has some well rounded UFO info, yet to me it's probably the
scariest danged movie ever made if Dr. Jacobs' hypothesis is
correct.

Roswell is more disturbing than scary. The scariest part of the
film is that things like this are supposed to have happened and
to this day we're still not being treated fairly about it as is
due our birthrights as citizens.

The Day The Earth Stood Still is an all time favorite. It's a
powerful film that was daring enough to delve into the social
issues of the day. It's got that extra kick to it that we may
not be the biggest kids on the block. What's an extra tickle is
that not too long ago legendary director Robert Wise passed on
and here in Hollywood the day he went on to his reward there was
a major electrical failure/blackout. Things came to a grinding
halt. We all mused how it reminded us of the film of note. Later
that day the news of Mr. Wise's passing was announced and we all
looked at one another with that 'Twilight Zone' feeling.

I aim to get Howard Hawks' The Thing soon and if memory serves
that was one of the first UFO flicks I saw as a kid when my mom
kept me up one night watching horror movies.

As for the documentaries, any single one would you pick?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                     Re: UpDates List Politics - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:45:09 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:31:04 -0500
Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics - Ledger


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

<snip>

>>>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an
>>>eager believer.

>>John, you've got to be kidding. What explanation[s]? So far
>>there are none.


>Are you saying no UFO case has ever been explained. There are
>people who seem to think that - 'eager believers' - but I
>hadn't previously put you amongst them!

Once again we are back into debating mode. I believe the point I
was making was about the Zamora case, not all of them. After all
that's the subject heading of this thread. I would not classify
myself as an eager believer, so for a change, you are right.

>>It's getting harder and harder to take you or your position
>>seriously. You bring nothing to the table unless you
>>consider negative, unsupported rhetoric as evidence. Since
>>you don't seem to want to either supply any evidence to the
>>contrary, just disdain and derision, why you are even on the
>>List? Rich, as bad as his attempts are to explain this case
>>with thinly disguised cosmetic, oft times silly,
>>applications, does offer up a position. On the other hand
>>you offer nothing, not even an opinion.

>I suggest you go back in the archives and read my previous
>posts. On second thoughts, no, there are just too many of them,
>and packed full of opinions (and sometimes even facts).

I have read your stuff, but you have a penchant for debunking
cases that many of us don't take seriously to begin with. There
is much to read and so little time. I applaud you for offering up
facts, however.

>>You seem satisfied with just assigning degeneratory motive
>>to anyone not readily supportive of ridiculous conjecture or
>>theories.

>>Debate seems a useless tool when trying to get at the truth
>>of this phenomenon. Obviously the best debater would win,
>>but that's not the point. Winning an argument is a poor
>>substitute for proof if the facts suffer in the process.
>>Debate is the purview of courts and legislatures who often
>>get it wrong.

>>The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
>>derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance
>>your own position, not through the presentation of facts but
>>by ridiculing of the presenter of the facts. It's an old
>>ploy but it simply amounts to tripe.

>Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times
>over, to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List
>seems to be to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone
>who attempt to take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO
>problem. Perhaps if you were to take a similar admonitory
>attitude to him - which nobody on this List appears to be
>willing to do - I might be prepared to take your comments
>above more seriously.

Al is a big boy. He can look after himself. While not speaking
for him, I suspect he is the product of 30 years of repressed
military dogma [You know, yes sir, no sir, pulling on his
forelock, following orders] and he's now a pendulum which has
swung back to other way and he's busting loose. I know Al
personally. He's a talented artist and a really nice person.
He's protecting his turf and usually mine, by association. But
Al can speak for himself, and he probably has/will.

>What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology? Does he
>publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
> related magazines? Has he written a serious book on UFO
>abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
>first hand or through studying the literature? What does he
>'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
>rhetoric'? Has he ever tried to do anything other than
>'attempt to win points through derision'?

>Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
>for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
>no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
>rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
>elaborately worded ramblings.

Hey, stay focused. You and me. I was referring to your
dismissive statement, "And there can be no explanation
convincing enough for an eager believer.", which in the context
of the thread was concerning the Zamora incident. I realize your
comment was to Al's comment but since I invested some time
arguing the merits of the Zamora case, I jumped in as an
"injured party".

>If you are prepared to challenge that, I might be prepared to
>'debate' with you further, but I don't suppose you'd be to
>bothered if I didn't, which may well be your loss.

Lately I've noted your attempts to be more reasonable in your
arguments and questions-the latter not as loaded with sarcasm. I
don't expect you to blindly see my side, or acquiesce to my
paradigm, that would be foolish and and in the broader sense
across the field of the phenomenon, dangerous. I don't think
anyone wants that, at least I don't.

But again with the debating. I spent 34 years listening to
debate in a legislature modeled after the British Parliament.
Debate is for politicians seeking re-election. They call it free
debate but often the best debater wins [and more importantly,
the party with the most seats] but the truth suffers.

Debating dictates that both sides take opposite sides of the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                          Re: General Exon - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:50:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:34:08 -0500
Subject: Re: General Exon - Sandow


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:30:04 EDT
>Subject: General Exon [was: Gill Sighting]

>>I think General Exon's testimony has been discredited by
>>other writers, particularly Pflock. See p.124 of his book.

>This one will be a matter of opinion based on my interactions
>with General Exon. I'm not sure that you can dismiss all that
>Exon said with a single paragraph calling Exon's testimony rumors.

>Let's be straight about this. Exon was a lieutenant colonel
>who was stationed at Wright Field in 1947. He was interacting
>with those who held positions of responsibility and in the
>course of those interactions, was told several things. Those
>he trusted said that there had been a crash and bodies had
>been recovered.

>Not exactly the rumors that Pflock suggests.

I can back Kevin here. I've heard the tapes of his first
interview with Exon. Exon says exactly what Kevin summarizes
here, which is also what Kevin and Don Schmitt wrote in their
book(s). (Don't remember if the Exon testimony is in one or both
of them.) Neither here nor in the book does Kevin exaggerate,
distort, or take out of context anything that I heard Exon say
on the tape. Nor did Kevin lead the conversation in the
directions some people might think he wanted it to go.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:56:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:36:03 -0500
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31:29 -0500
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

><snip>

>>To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms
>>UFO + mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above
>>(at the largest commercial archive on the net). How many times
>>does it say the two words have coincided in print since 1947?

>>Fifteen. Think about that.

>Exactly, Chris. If any proof were needed of the disconnect
>between the UFO world and the mainstream world, that's it.
>"Everyone" does not think of motherships as disc-bearing ET
>visitors. To the contrary, only a very few of us do.

It is in the interest of people who wish for UFOs to remain a
mystery to attempt to downplay the degree to which UFO imagery
and language has entered the popular domain - although I agree
that it might be that sometimes psycho-social ufologists may
overplay the argument. As Sigmund Freud didn't say: sometime a
phallic symbol is just a cloud-cigar.

I'm greatly impressed by the on-line indexing tools which allow
you and others to do word searches amongst numerous obscure
newspaper articles. However, I suspect (and please show me, if
I'm wrong) that the newspapers indexed here are probably not the
ones which would have most of the speculative articles about
flying saucers in them.

A lot of the popular UFO material in the 1950s and 1960s came
out in weekly magazines such as (in Britain) Reveille and
Titbits which combined mild cheesecake with celebrity and movie
gossip, and general weird news of the type which now fills the
first half-dozen pages of Fortean Times. I doubt that these
publications are indexed in your fearsome search engines.

You might argue that it is unlikely that a respectable Church of
England clergyman would be browsing even the mild glamour of
Reveille (if you had a particularly unworldly view of clergymen)
but it is likely that they may have read some of the popular
tabloids such as the Daily Dispatch and the News Chronicle which
were around in the 50s and carried UFO stories, including,
incidentally the famous Birch and Derbyshire photographs which
were also publicised prominently by the Sunday Dispatch and
Illustrated, both widely circulating weeklies which I suspect
are also not indexed in your search engines.

I don't know whether Gill read Adamski (he said he didn't, fair
enough) but it is ludicrous to say that somehow he would have
been insulated from the flying saucer material which was being
published in popular newspapers and magazines in the 1950s.

The idea that you have to be part of a small in-group of UFO
buffs to be exposed to words like "mothership" may suit the
agenda of those who wish to portray UFO witnesses as 'saucer
virgins' whose accounts could be taken at face value because
they have not been 'contaminated' by reading about the subject;
but I think it shows a bit of a 'disconnect' between the real
world of people who read about flying saucers in their
newspapers and magazines, and the UFO world which thinks that
its subject is too arcane for the laymen to understand anything
about it.

I'll save you the trouble of writing the first line of your
reply, Jerry:





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                  Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Dickenson

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 22:56:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:40:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Dickenson


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:48:16 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:23 AM
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r

<snip>

>As I just pointed out my previous post, Fraknoi's "explanation"
>is impossible. Venus and Mars are currently not "close together"
>in the sky but on opposite ends of the sky. Further Venus sets
>below the horizon around 7:40, and thus invisible at midnight,
>when a S.F. Chronicle photographer photographed multiple lights

<snip>

Good for you David,

if anyone else wants instant confirmation of sky-views at any
date or time there's John Walker's on-line Orrery at:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Solar/action?sys=-Sf

(which needs maybe a little concentration but I enter "solar
system / equal orbits" and substitute date / times to make sure
don't get wrong format)

or maybe easier to check John Walker's on-line "Your Sky" at:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Yoursky

for an optical view (you just name the planets / stars you want
visible - otherwise you get them all)


Cheers





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                          Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 23:09:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:41:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:19:51 -0700
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:35:14 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>And it is equally reasonable to conclude that this articulate,
>>>non-UFO-book reader drew the term from his knowledge of
>>>nautical terminology, with which he was presumably familiar as
>>>both Brit and resident of an island in the South Pacific.
>>>There is no "very likely" connection between Adamski
>>>and Gill in their use of "mothership."

>>This is pretty feeble stuff.

>Yes, John, your whole line of argumentation is pretty feeble stuff.

>>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>>familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
>>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why
>>Gill should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of
>>submarines, naval supply ships, etc.

>So it was a "fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon, used
>almost entirely in the Royal Navy." Really? When I looked in two
>large U.S. newspapers, the L.A. Times and N.Y. Times, using
>electronic searches of millions of articles, I found over 2800
>instances of "mothership" or "mother ship" dating from around
>1900. These articles were rarely about the Royal Navy. They
>could be about the American Navy, the merchant marine, fishing
>fleets, mixed marine/aviation, pure aviation, and pure
>aerospace. There was only one article about UFO motherships,
>from 1955.

>Also, for fun and out of curiosity, I did an electronic search
>of Ruppelt's 1956 book, "The Report on Unidentified Flying
>Objects." "Mother" was used twice in the book (once in reference
>to "Mother Russia"), but no "motherships" could be found.

>I also took a gander at Keyhoe's popular 1953 book, "Flying
>Saucers from Outer Space," which actually has an index. Again,
>no "motherships."

Have a look at Keyhoe's account of the December 6, 1952 Gulf of
Mexico radar-visual case (in chapter IX). He refers to
"mothership" at least three times. Twice it appears as two
words, in the third instance it is a hyphenated word. (UK
paperback edition). In his next book "The F.S. Conspiracy",





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

               Re: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe - White

From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:29:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:59:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe - White


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:36:22 EDT
>Subject: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe

<snip>

>I still say some, some of our UFOs are products of these long
>ago civilzations.

That cave in the Caucusus Mountains with stalagmite-covered
vents issuing humming sounds and hot air suggests that
possiblity. So does the 8,000 year old city site in Inda which
was turned to glass by some huge thermal even.

(Sorry - I don't have instant doc for these, but I've heard
about them repeatedly.)


Eleanor White

-----






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                  Local UFO Expert To Sponsor Film Festival

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:10:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:10:48 -0500
Subject: Local UFO Expert To Sponsor Film Festival




Source: The Gallup Independent - Gallup, New Mexico, USA

http://www.gallupindependent.com/2005/oct/102805ufoflm.html

October 28, 2005


Local UFO Expert To Sponsor Film Festival
Believes he has debris from crashed saucer


By Darrel Beehner
Staff Writer

GALLUP =97 Over the last 60 years, New Mexico has been a magnet
for unidentified flying objects.

Besides the infamous Roswell incident, another perhaps even more
spectacular crash is reported to have occurred in July of 1947
on the Plains of San Agustin, south of the area now known as the
Very Large Array. According to accounts from the time, a U.S.
Soil Conservation Service engineer came across a disk-shaped
object with four small bodies nearby.

The engineer and other witnesses said the bodies were human-like
but were shorter with large heads and slanted eyes. Before they
could conduct a through examination of the bodies and the craft,
U.S. Army trucks spirited the craft and bodies away.

Now the incident seems nothing more than folklore, except to a
handful of people who believe they have uncovered parts of the
craft during digs in recent years.

Among those who claim to have uncovered debris from the downed
spacecraft is Gallup resident Chuck Wade.

Wade, who is sponsoring a UFO film festival Saturday at El Morro
Theater, said he learned of the crash site while attending a UFO
crash retrieval conference in Las Vegas, Nev., two years ago.
During the conference he met Art Campbell, one of the
presenters. In subsequent meetings with Campbell, who had
allegedly found the crash site years before, Wade learned of the
location.

Since then, Wade has returned to the site and unearthed dozens
of pieces of metallic material he believes are remenants from
the crash. He as several gray-colored pieces of light-weight
material, some only .0011 of an inch thick, with a silicon
coating on both sides.

"It damn sure's not a burrito wrapper," he said as he shows the
various-sized pieces of material. "This stuff is put together."

Wade has sent several pieces of the material away to have it
tested by an independent group of nine scientists. He's still
awaiting their analysis.

Other thicker pieces are composed of iron and aluminum with a
silcon coating, he said.

"It's not homogeneous," Wade said. "It's like adding raisins to
a cake mix, it doesn't blend."

While some labs have expressed great interest in the material,
others Wade said, feel the metal is nothing to get excited
about.

"The scientists I've got working on it will go into isotopic
ratios, which will tell if it is Earthly in origin."

Wade has an number of other items from the dig site that he will
share during Saturday's UFO film festival. As part of the
festival, Wade has invited people from the Standing Rock and
Crownpoint areas who recently reported UFO sitings to offer
tales of their encounters with the audience.

Saturday's festivities begin at 5:30 p.m. and include several
speakers, a documentary on crop circles and a video presentation
of UFO activities in Mexico.

Cost to attend the festival is $5 for adults, $3 for seniors and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                          Black Holes May Not Exist

From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:49:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:13:28 -0500
Subject: Black Holes May Not Exist


Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss

http://www.science-frontiers.com

SCIENCE FRONTIERS, No. 162, Nov-Dec 2005, pp. 1 & 2


ASTRONOMY

Black holes may not exist!

Black holes have long been essential to modern cosmology and
science fiction. An aura of magic surrounds them, as if Alice
had found an infinitely long rabbit hole. The adjective
"infinite", however, trips up black-hole believers. The
mathematics describing them leads to singularities - points of
infinite density - which are logically indigestible and usually
sloughed off and ignored.

Nevertheless, black holes survive in the armamentarium of many
cosmologists because they do possess some explanatory value.
 What is needed is a cosmological entity with many of the useful
black-hole properties sans those troubling singularities.

G. Chapline has described a worthy substitute on nature.com

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050328/full/050328-8.html


Chapline thinks that the collapse of massive stars, long
believed to generate black holes, actually leads to the
formation of stars that contain "dark energy", the latest
cosmological fad. From outside the collapsed body, the object
would act similar to expectations for a black hole, having
strong gravity while emitting little light. But on the inside,
the dark energy overpowers gravity, as it appears to do for the
universe at large, and drives matter outward again.

Thus, dark energy prevents the formation of singularities.

(Ball, Philip; "Black Holes 'Do Not Exist'" *Nature Online*,
March 31, 2005. Quotation and review by Tom Van Flandern in
*Journal of Scientific Exploration*, 19:319, 2005)

Comment. One fad (dark energy) may now replace an older fad (the
black hole)! When will cosmology become fad-free?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                   Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 08:57:50 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:16:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Gehrman


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:48:16 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>Regarding the story "Spellbound by Sky Lights" in Friday's
>Chronicle by science editor David Perlman. It is literally
>impossible, as Perlman and astronomy professor Andrew Fraknoi
>claim, for Venus and Mars to be close together in the eastern
>sky and thus explain the multiple lights seen by many moving
>together and which Chonicle photographer Lance Iversen also
>photographed around midnight on Wednesday night. At sunset, Mars
>is currently rising in the east while Venus is setting in the
>west. They are on opposite sides of the sky. Venus sets at
>around 7:40 p.m. and is completely invisible at midnight.
>Further Mars is almost directly overhead at midnight, not near
>the horizon where Iversen photographed his lights. Stars and
>planets do not move relative to one another, as Iversen's
>photographs clearly show these lights as doing. I don't know
>what the lights were, but I do know Perlman and Fraknoi should
>do some simple fact checking before proposing absurdities like
>an invisible planet and then trying to portray this as a
>scientific explanation. Maybe they both need to take remedial
>astronomy courses.

David, List, EBK,

Yes, for once David and I agree. I was an eye witness to these
amazing lights along with my daughter, her boy friend, and Jim
Martin, publisher of Flatland magazine. We were all staying at
my daughter's home in Potter Valley CA which is about 130 miles,
as the crow flies, from San Francisco. It was about 10:35 and
Jim and I had just gone to bed after an evening of good
conversation and competitive eight-ball. I hadn't even closed my
eyes when my daughter came running into my room and told me to
come outside to see the strange lights they saw while having a
late night smoke (tobacco). We all went outside and viewed this
strange phenomenon. There were three lights about the size of a
quarter at arm's length, quite large. They seemed to be moving
in unison around a central point, and there was a blue beam
coming from them like they were from a spotlight from a used car
lot but were twenty miles from the nearest car lot. I can't
explain what I saw but it certainly wasn't Mars or Venus.

These lights seemed to be moving to the south and since it was





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                        New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey

From: Jim Houran <gemamant.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 15:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:19:32 -0500
Subject: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey


A Search For Meaning In The Ramey Document From The Roswell UFO
Case by James Houran, Ph.D. (2005, Fund for UFO Research,
www.fufor.com)

I'm pleased to announce that the FUFOR recently published the
results of a new and unprecedented study of the Ramey document
by outside and impartial experts in digital imaging, which I
facilitated with the Fund's assistance. This project, which was
purposely kept silent from other investigators, has been about
two years in duration. I urge anyone interested in the Ramey
document controversey, as well as the broader Roswell case to





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

                       Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:47:23 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:29:32 -0500
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:56:34 +0100
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:31:29 -0500
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

>>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:37:32 +0100 (BST)
>>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:57:35 -0700
>>>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>>To illustrate, I've just tried a massive search with the terms
>>>UFO + mothership in those 27.8 million pages I mentioned above
>>>(at the largest commercial archive on the net). How many times
>>>does it say the two words have coincided in print since 1947?

>>>Fifteen. Think about that.

>>Exactly, Chris. If any proof were needed of the disconnect
>>between the UFO world and the mainstream world, that's it.
>>"Everyone" does not think of motherships as disc-bearing ET
>>visitors. To the contrary, only a very few of us do.

>It is in the interest of people who wish for UFOs to remain a
>mystery to attempt to downplay the degree to which UFO imagery
>and language has entered the popular domain - although I agree
>that it might be that sometimes psycho-social ufologists may
>overplay the argument. As Sigmund Freud didn't say: sometime a
>phallic symbol is just a cloud-cigar.

>I'm greatly impressed by the on-line indexing tools which allow
>you and others to do word searches amongst numerous obscure
>newspaper articles. However, I suspect (and please show me, if
>I'm wrong) that the newspapers indexed here are probably not the
>ones which would have most of the speculative articles about
>flying saucers in them.

Patient and gentle Listfolk,

If you're interested in what else John Rimmer has to say, go
back to his original post. (I've clipped the rest to save space
and patience.) You will see that in response to clear and
specific evidence about the rare use of "mothership" in
mainstream discourse, he offers up yet more unverifiable
speculation and engages in continued shameless guesswork and
arm-waving mind-reading.

If you want to know why I am not a pelicanist, read my posts
(and Chris Aubeck's, David Rudiak's, and Greg Sandow's) in this
and the Gill Sighting thread. Then read John's words, and then





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

               Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:02:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:32:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Ledger


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

>I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
>DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far
>collected are:

>The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
> Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.
>I can't figure out why they're the only ones I've acquired so
> far. Not documentaries, just films.

<snip>

>As for the documentaries, any single one would you pick?

Unidentified Flying Objects [BTW - If that's out on DVD, I'd
appreciate a heads-up]

>So, what are your choices and why?

Try The Disappearence of Flight 412 starring Glenn Ford. It's
a B-movie but with a thread running through it that sounds





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 30

              Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Reynolds

From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:02:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:33:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Reynolds


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

>I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
>DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far collected
>are:

>The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
>Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.

<snip>

>The Day The Earth Stood Still is an all time favorite. It's a
>powerful film that was daring enough to delve into the social
>issues of the day. It's got that extra kick to it that we may
>not be the biggest kids on the block. What's an extra tickle is
>that not too long ago legendary director Robert Wise passed on
>and here in Hollywood the day he went on to his reward there was
>a major electrical failure/blackout. Things came to a grinding
>halt. We all mused how it reminded us of the film of note. Later
>that day the news of Mr. Wise's passing was announced and we all
>looked at one another with that 'Twilight Zone' feeling.

Greg:

The Day the Earth Stood Still is a metaphor for the Jesus story.

A messenger from the heavens comes to earth to warn humans of
their "sins" (nuclear wars et cetera).

He performs some miracles (making the Earth stand still), is killed
by mankind (the military), revived by God (Gort), and ascends
back into the heavens.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

              Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:04:26 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:54:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Balaskas


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

>I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
>DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far collected
>are:

>The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
>Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.

<snip>

>As for the documentaries, any single one would you pick?

>So, what are your choices and why?

<snip>


Hi Greg!

On September 12, 2001 I got an e-mail from a UFO investigator
who wanted to know further details about the film documentary
'Alien Technology' (NYIIFVF Award Winner, LA 2001) which was
scheduled to be shown in Manhatten (about 4 miles north of WTC)
tonight. A very small advertisement in The Living Arts section
of the 'The New York Times', for Monday, September 10, 2001
titled 'Item' had this to say:


Despite Federal Government attemptes via the National Security
Act to prevent its first public screening, "Alien Technology" 48
minute Documentary hosted by Stacy Keach will commence as
scheduled on: Wednesday, September 12th, 7:00 PM at: Clearview
Theater 239 E. 59th St. (between 2nd and 3rd Ave.) Admission $10
Nyfilmvideo.com Ticketweb.com 1(866) 468-7619


According to this same UFO investigator, 'Alien Technology'
(directed by Scott McClintock) includes vintage newsreel footage
and interviews with Pentagon insiders. Harvard's psychiatrist
and alien abduction expert, the late Dr. John Mack, is also
interviewed.

When I phoned Clearview Theater in New York City after the 911
attack at the nearby WTC complex and the Pentagon in Washington,
D.C. (coincidence or government cover-up?) to ask if the showing
of this UFO documentary would be resheduled, no one there I
spoke with knew anything about the 'Alien Technology' film
documentary!

You can try to order a copy directly from the producer (Scott
McClintock at Nile River Productions Inc.) but I have never got
my own copy of this film in the mail after I ordered and pre-
paid for it in June of this year. In case my original order was
lost in the mail, I have just reordered this film. Since I have
now paid for two copies of 'Alien Technology', if I get two I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

              Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Friedman

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 13:14:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:57:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Friedman


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

<snip>

>As for the documentaries, any single one would you pick?

>So, what are your choices and why?


I still like my UFOs ARE Real from 1979 and still available.

It includes interviews with Betty Hill, Marjorie Fish, Travis
Walton and Mike Rogers, Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Dr. George Mitchell
(Ohio State U. Astronomer), Dr. James Harder, Dr. Richard
Haines, Major Jesse Marcel Sr., Colonel Lawrence Coyne, myself,
stuff about the Iranian Jet Case, Astronaut Gordon Cooper,the
Catalina Island and 4 corners footage, a number of stills, a
nuclear rocket in operation as well as the electromagnetic
submarine in motion etc., etc. I tried to keep out the Billy
Meier segment, the only one I didn't endorse. I was co-script
writer, consultant, travel planner, on location, etc.

This film covers a great deal of ground with outstanding people
and was filmed in California, Arizona, Louisiana, Ohio,
Tennessee, New Hampshire, etc. I like it better than my 2 volune
"Flying Saucers ARE Real", though it is now available as a 2
volume DVDand includes footage shot at the Kennedy space center.

Another TV documentary I liked was "The UFO Incident" with James
Earl Jones and Estelle Parsons playing Barney and Betty Hil as





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                      Re: Roswell Case Closed - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:17:00 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:10:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Case Closed - Shough


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:29 -0700
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>The assertion that they could not have been the source of
>>>>stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
>>>>years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
>>>>dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
>>>>appeared in the news media at the time.

>>>Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
>>>clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
>>>"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
>>>strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
>>>it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
>>>tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
>>>email to me).

>>"Specifically mentions"?

>Yes, you heard me right. It mentions Roswell "victims" in 1947.

<snip>

>On the other hand, if the letter starts with "V" and one tries
>"VI??I??" or more limited searches like "VI??IN?, "VI??IM?,
>"VI??I?S" (i.e., other likely discernible letters in the word),
>then "VICTIMS" is the only sensible word that comes up given
>the context. Other word hits like VIOLINS or VIRGINS just
>don't make any sense.

<snip>

>By Chris Allen's simple-minded argument, if words or letters
>don't look the same "they cannot be" the same. How dumb can you
>get? Of course they can be the same, just like people with
>strong accents can say the same words even if they sound
>different or somebody's handwriting has identical letters and
>words that don't look the same. Again, one has to look at the
>overall context in which individual letters, words, and sounds
>are used to disambiguate what is being said or written. It's a
>common signal-to-noise problem. We humans do this all the time
>in reading bad handwriting or following the thread of
>conversations in noisy environments or interpreting strong
>accents. This can also be applied to reading noisy text like
the
>Ramey memo. Rules of the language and context can be used to
>help disambiguate and give likely interpretations to very badly
>formed letters and words.

>Cryptographers use this technique, as do ordinary humans every
>day to disambiguate ambiguous speech and writing. This isn't
>100% perfect, but it's a far more scientific approach than
>Allen's inane "discount letter-by-letter" debunkery.

>I can never prove that the first letter in the "wreck" word is
>really W because it is so badly formed. If it were G, then it is
>incumbent upon Allen to come up with a sensible 5-letter "G"
>word that probably ends in either "H" or "K". Let's see...
>GREEK, GLORK, GROOK, GOPAC, GATCH, GRAPH, GIZEH, etc. See the
>problem? Despite what armchair debunkers may think, it's not
>that easy coming up with sensible words, phrases, and
>sentences. This is a message written in the English language
>and one has to assume it is reasonably coherent and sensible.

Hi David

I agree with all that you say about context, whilst adding that
one should also allow for some degree of reasonable
_incoherence_ in that context. One point I'm sure you must have
taken account of, but which I haven't seen mentioned here, is
the possibility of grammatical gaffes or typos or
inconsistencies due to haste or whatever.

They aren't uncommon in official teletypes and your transcript
does allow for a couple already - the inconsistent spelling of
"disc"/"disk" for example, or the odd construction of the phrase
with "missstates". Ad hoc abbreviations are also possible. These
are difficult to allow for aren't they?

Your argument based on contextualising 7-letter alternatives for
VICTIMS is quite convincing. But can we rule out the possibility
that this is a mis-spelling of a 6- or 8-letter word (say, for
_illustration_of_the_point_only_, "the VIOLENCE of the
wreck/crash") or a contraction of a longer one?

>>So where does this analysis of Ramey's memo lead us?
>>Answer: nowhere. I suggest that unless some super-powerful new
>>technology arrives, we drop the whole idea of ever being able
>>to decipher this Ramey scrap of paper.

>For super-powerful technology, Allen might start by using his
>brain instead of absurd reductionist debunking arguments. The
>human brain is still the most powerful pattern recognition and
>deciphering machine in existence. That's why humans can easily
>understand human language in it's many variant and ambiguous
>spoken and written forms whilst the most powerful computers as
>yet cannot.

Your point about the sophistication of the human brain for
pattern recognition is well made, but doesn't get to the root of
the problem for critics like Christopher Allen as long as
different human brains persist in seeing different patterns, or
in having different levels of confidence in the same possible
patterns. Some way of approaching this objectively is needed.
But I'm not sure that we need "superpowerful technology" to at
least start doing that.

One crude way of quantifying the likelihood of different
readings would be to stage a large scale lab experiment using
subjects known to have had no prior exposure to the issue. Of
course in the extreme case totally naive subjects might look at
the message as a shopping list, or a love letter, and we can't
get away from the importance of context in restricting the range
of likely vocabulary. So the briefing of subjects and other
aspects of the protocol would have to be thought out very
carefully. But properly done this is respectable scientific
method and amenable to quantitative analysis.

There might also be a "hard" science method, which is probably
more difficult but with less ambiguity in the protocol. If
enlarged images of all letters that occur more than once in your
best-guess "translation" could be normalised by appropriately
rescaling and skewing, to correct for the perspective
distortion, then superposition of these images should tend to
improve the signal/noise ratio if you are correct, or degrade it
if you are not correct. (I think I'm right in saying that
according to information theory, the ratio improves in
proportion as the square root of the number of samples.)

The question is how to measure this. I think this might be done
by digital densitometry of high resolution scans which could
then be analysed pixel by pixel, or for more practical
computation cell by cell where a cell is an average density over
some small equivalent region of each image (the resolution might
need to be varied to find the scale on which the test is most
sensitive).

The first step would be to assemble matrices of density values
for each individual occurrence of the apparent letter "S" (say)
- call these the individual test matrices. Next you'd need to
generate from these, by summing the negative or positive
contributions in each cell, another matrix which represents the
total noise and the total signal in the superposition of all
apparent "S"s - call it the group test matrix. Finally you'd
need a matrix generated by scanning a perfect noise-free telex
"S" character at the same scale - call this the control matrix.
Now you can analyse the result statistically.

The simplest method would be cell-by-cell correlation analyses
of different pairings of these matrices. This would be done by
taking, in each matrix, the differences (+ or -) of each of the
values from an arbitrary origin. You tabulate a set of sums of
differences and their squares for each matrix, and find the
standard deviations of each set of values. You then take the
product of the means of the two sets away from the summed
products of the differences, multiply by the reciprocal of the
number of cells and divide by the product of the two standard
deviations. This gives you a product moment correlation
coefficient between -1.0 and +1.0 indicating a degree of
negative or positive correlation. This can then be tested and a
level of significance read off from standard tables.

By this procedure you can quantify the correlation between 1)
the group test matrix and the control matrix, and 2) any
individual test matrix and the control matrix. If the
correlation found in 1) exceeds those found in 2) then you have
shown evidence consistent with improving the sign/noise ratio by
aggregating all examples of apparent "S"s, which in turn argues
that your identification of these characters as "S"s is probably
more reliable than not, in the aggregate.

To take the case of "VICTIMS", there are only a couple of "V"s,
but about eight "M"s and plenty of "I"s, "S"s and "T"s. The
results might not be very striking given the sheer amount of
noise and the relatively small samples (a dozen superposed
examples should improve the signal correlation by a factor of
only three or four), and it may seem like a lot of work; but it
would be objective evidence at least, and if it worked it could
add weight to other methods of interpretation in the case of at
least some letters, and by extension to others also in the
manner of a crossword puzzle.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: UpDates List Politics - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:21:04 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:12:46 -0500
Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics - Lehmberg


>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:39:04 -0500
>Subject: UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's Eyeglasses]

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:30:47 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:08:24 -0500
>>>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>>>There can be no investigation thorough enough for an ardent
>>>>>enough denialist.

>>>>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an eager
>>>>believer.

<snip>

>Oh, Oh... John Rimmer makes some valid points,

Does he? Does he really? Or does he perhaps prosecute the same
old hubristically obtuse tedium that he _always_ prosecutes,
much to the delight of dwindling base of similarly homocentric
and ufologically constipated like-minders?

_I've_ read Mr. Rimmer's posts on Updates for years and years,
and they are almost identical to each other no matter the
subject or UFO case. Each time he addresses a case with his
usual, pseudo sociological approach (most of which have no basis
in logic or in fact), various respected researchers take turns
explaining why these approaches just don't work for each and
every sighting.

Anyone who has seen his reviews of at least a case or two can
predict the subject of his posts -- eyesight, cultural bias,
perceptual difficulty, or mental instability. This goes on over,
and over, and over, and over... and each and every time he spews
his cognitive "M" Cubed detritus , he demands the same amount of
respect for his uninspired views. Can't we expect that after
six or seven years onlist, and even if he hasn't done any
independent reading elsewhere, that he'd learn something new?
 Can't we expect that after all the attention he's demanded for
his half-baked phony baloney explanations for UFOs that have
been utterly defeated by fact-based argument, that he improves
himself in some small way? No, I suspect... because that is not
what he's really about I suspect...

>but they'll be
>lost after an expected barrage from Mr. Lehmberg I suspect.


Mr. Reynolds! Metaphorically, lest you begin to feel that I
would compare myself with same, predicting that the sun is going
to come up in the morning to dispel the night is not a
prediction, Sir. It is taking advantage of a certainty...
...which won't keep the sun DOWN, at all... will it!

>For some reason acrimony prevails here at UpDates

Right, Mr. Reynolds. Your watched pot finally boiled like it was
not due in part to your feeble attentions and sputtering,
inconstant or inconsistent little "gadfly's" Zippo.

>and the UFO
>phenomenon gets lost in the maelstrom of epithets from regulars:
>stupid, pelicanist, silly, et cetera.

Your lot best buckle-up, Mr. Reynolds. Your well betrayed
opportunity to provide commentary in any way substantive or
considerable has likely passed for the remainder of the decade.
Good work.

>When the RRRGroup does this at our blog, UpDaters get livid.

That would only have been back when we were reading, Mr.
Reynolds. I suspect that number is dwindling and getting smaller
with every day gone by.

>When David Rudiak, Alfred, or the milder Don Ledger do it here,
>no one chastises them. Why not?

Mr. Lehmberg, Sir. Our momentary congeniality is expired Mr.
Reynolds...

Why not? ...I suspect because the expressions of the three you
mention are considered, honest, efficacious, and sincere and in
at least two of the three... educated, experienced, and
connected. You "R" Cubers seem to fail in _all_ categories.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

             Breakthroughs In Genetics Leads To Secret Of Aging

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:22:35 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:15:40 -0500
Subject: Breakthroughs In Genetics Leads To Secret Of Aging


http://pub.ucsf.edu/magazine/200305/kenyon.html

http://elixirpharm.com/index.html

I'm in admiration of Dr. Cynthia Kenyon of UCSF.

She's got more kudos than Luke Skywalker.

Any of you following the advances in genetics and biochemistry
should know of her groundbreaking work in uncovering the genetic
mysteries of aging. She has literally broken the code and proved
by adjusting two genes DAF-2 and DAF-16 that she's been able to
increase health and life span by 6X in worms and further
experimentation extended health and life in mice and other
creatures.

You can read all about it at the URLs above.

She was spotlighted on ABC News recently during their look into
aging.

She has absolutely nothing to do with UFOs so I hope no smart
asses start inundating her with questions about her viewpoints
on Roswell or Betty and Barney Hill.

Her research is rapidly changing our future as a species and
perhaps in years to come her discoveries will actually increase
our health and life spans to remarkable ranges. This isn't dream
technology, she's been able to prove it time and again and the
foundations of these new technologies are here now.

The reason I bring this up in relation to Ufology is in relation
to the ETH and or past super civilization theory.

My point being that the first thing an advanced civilization is
going to do with their technologies is what life is always
trying to do: Stay alive as long as it can.

Why? That's a simple answer. Alive and healthy longer is better
than dead and miserable sooner.

Our advances in cloning, stem cell, and the legendary work of
Dr. Kenyon are here now and one day soon will be applied and a
sort of immortality will be at hand. Maybe 10 or 20 years from
now or maybe sooner, but it will arrive if we don't blow
ourselves up or create some super germ or some other disaster
befalls us.

Suppose a civilization did or does achieve this and beings live
to incredible ages and health, that changes the focus of what to
do with all that time on one's hands. We may, may be dealing
with beings who don't think in such miniscule spans of time like
decades as we do but in terms of millenia or longer to achieve
goals. The mind boggles to imagine perhaps mindsets that think
in eons.

If you've got forever to get around to something you have the
luxury of taking your time to make sure things are done right.
We think of terraforming planets but that doesn't happen
overnight. Could take an eon or less or more. We think of star
travel and if you've got forever to get where you want to go 10,
20, 50 years may be to an immortal being likened to our waiting
for the dryer to finish it's cycle.

We need to stay on top of the new technologies coming forth and
make sure we don't abuse them. It's going to be tricky but I'm
sure we'll make it.

BTW Dr. Kenyon is pretty too!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: UpDates List Politics - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:37:11 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:20:38 -0500
Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics - Lehmberg


>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:19:21 +0100 (BST)
>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

><snip>

>Alfred leave John Rimmer alone please. Try it for a month, if
>you can. If you can't manage it Alfred for that short period
>then you have an addiction problem and will need to see
>someone... ..

>That might do it John. Alfred always listens to me and does
>everything I ask of him, and with a jump in his step as well.
>Alternatively, you could try sorting him out yourself, safe in
>the knowledge that however long and rambling his postings may
>be, you will only have at the most, half a dozen sentences to
>respond to, the rest being unintelligible.

Must... resist... mind meld... imperative... from... Stuart...
Miller... must... resist... must... resist... must...

Ahhh...

Sorry Stuart, disapproved... resubmit in 30 days for final
disapproval. But by all means, Mr. Rimmer, do try to sort me out
yourself. Everybody else, Buckle-up, it's the law.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                         Christopher Jay & RRRGroup

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:08:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:08:08 -0500
Subject: Christopher Jay & RRRGroup




What a nasty piece of work Christopher Jay of Rich Reynolds'
group is.

Not content with spiteful attacks on Wendy Connors and Richard
Hall, Jay Google'd Alfred Lehmberg and found Alfred's name in
a search results page for a site at:

www.horriblemonster.com/things/search_200301.html

Jay sent his search 'results' to myself and others, noting that
most of the page gives stats for child-porngraphy and asking
that Alfred "...explain why his name is listed for usage at the
child porn site?".

Jay also included _most_ of the page's header. "Most", because
he carefully omitted the word "string" from that header, below:


Usage Statistics for horriblemonster.com
Summary Period: October 2002 - Search String
Generated 01-Nov-2002 01:03 EDT


The page is obviously a stats-report of search queries via an
engine/engines either off-site or one that was installed on the
horriblemonster.com site in 2002. Stats that can generated via
_any_ website's log-file, should the webmaster use readily
available software to do so.


The 'incriminating' entry:

         Hits      Search String
----------------  ----------------------

<snip>

2          0.13%  alfred lehmberg

<snip>

What this tells me is two searches were made via
search-engine/engines which included Alfred's name - not that
Alfred had _visited_ the site, as Jay's viscious e-mail,
suggests. And certainly not Alfred's _"usage"_ of the site.

Jay is also forwarding his search 'results' to the FBI office in
Montgomery, Alabama. I trust the FBI will take a dim view of
Jay's attempt to smear Alfred and act accordingly.....

Frankly, enough is enough, and since Rich Reynolds is not
capable of reining-in Christopher Jay I'm removing the rrrgroup
address from the List.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                      Re: The Term Mothership - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:39:48 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:29:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Rimmer


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 09:47:23 -0600
>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Clark

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:56:34 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The Term Mothership

>>It is in the interest of people who wish for UFOs to remain a
>>mystery to attempt to downplay the degree to which UFO imagery
>>and language has entered the popular domain - although I agree
>>that it might be that sometimes psycho-social ufologists may
>>overplay the argument. As Sigmund Freud didn't say: sometime a
>>phallic symbol is just a cloud-cigar.

>>I'm greatly impressed by the on-line indexing tools which allow
>>you and others to do word searches amongst numerous obscure
>>newspaper articles. However, I suspect (and please show me, if
>>I'm wrong) that the newspapers indexed here are probably not the
>>ones which would have most of the speculative articles about
>>flying saucers in them.

>Patient and gentle Listfolk,

>If you're interested in what else John Rimmer has to say, go
>back to his original post. (I've clipped the rest to save space
>and patience.) You will see that in response to clear and
>specific evidence about the rare use of "mothership" in
>mainstream discourse, he offers up yet more unverifiable
>speculation and engages in continued shameless guesswork and
>arm-waving mind-reading.

>If you want to know why I am not a pelicanist, read my posts
>(and Chris Aubeck's, David Rudiak's, and Greg Sandow's) in this
>and the Gill Sighting thread. Then read John's words, and then
>know why the rest of us have rejected psychic ufology as a
>useful research tool.

If people can be bothered to go back over this increasingly
life-sapping thread to see what my previous post said, they will
note another superb example of "Clarkian Snippery", in which,
when replying to a post, the serious question, which most





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:11:19 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:30:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:40:56 +0200
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:31:54 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:44:07 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>On Rev. Gill probably misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959

>>>on the "negative" side, since Gill also stated that "I
>>>identified it as one of these objects", it casts serious
doubts
>>>on Gill's ability to identify Venus.

>>Well, as I said, I'd agree that it reflects on Gill's and
>>others' predisposition _as_of_July_6_ to _interpret_ Venus as
>>"one of these objects". In terms of the descriptions, though,
>>neither Durie nor Gill report anything inconsistent with a
>>binocular observation of Venus setting - a small bright disc
>>on the horizon "coming down" slowly through broken cloud.
>>There is really nothing there that suggests a propensity to
>>extreme fantasy.

>><snip>

>Rather than Gill's predisposition to interpret Venus as
>something extraordinary, I was considering here his inability to
>identify it in the first place. Just another argument for not
>discarding that he might have taken Mercury for Venus on 26
>June.

Well you just snipped my discussion relevant to these issues so I
won't bring it all up again.

>>So, despite some frustrating aspects, I still vote: Unknown.

>><snip>

>Is there a confirmed explanation for the sightings of Boianai?

>Not yet.

>Nevertheless, to say "Unknown" falls a little short. I think
>that we should also try to answer the following questions:

>Is this case "one of the most convincing on report" as stated
>time and again (except by Brad Sparks)?

I'm certain there are others than Brad who have not made this
statement! I've never expressed or held such a view myself.

>Are there any hints as to the nature of the sightings?

Of course there are possible clues to possible explanations. We
have spent some time discussing them haven't we? I'm not
convinced. But maybe I don't officially qualify as a
participant; I don't appear on Jerry's recent approbatory list





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: The Term Mothership - Rogerson

From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:52:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:36:58 -0500
Subject: Re: The Term Mothership - Rogerson


The use of the term mothership has to be looked at in context,
and here it is used to describe a large object with satellite
objects, as used in popular UFO literature. Why go to all these
convoluted lengths to try to find other origins.

I think the extent to which ufology had permeated popular
culture, as far back as the mid 1950s, is underestimated. My
first encounter with the term was as a tiny child when there
were flying saucer kiddy rides in the Lewis's department store
in Manchester (c late 1953 to early 1955)

Americans may not realise that, unlike in the States, George
Adamski's first book was a runaway best seller in the UK, and
was serialised and featured across the press. Donald Keyhoe's
second book was another big seller, especially in the mass
market Arrow edition.

If these cases are so weak as Don suggests, why is so much time





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                  Re: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey - Boone

From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 13:21:07 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:39:38 -0500
Subject: Re: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey - Boone


>From: Jim Houran <gemamant.nul>
>To: ufoupDates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 15:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey

>A Search For Meaning In The Ramey Document From The >Roswell UFO
>Case by James Houran, Ph.D. (2005, Fund for UFO Research,
>www.fufor.com)

>I'm pleased to announce that the FUFOR recently published the
>results of a new and unprecedented study of the Ramey >document
>by outside and impartial experts in digital imaging, which I
>facilitated with the Fund's assistance. This project, which was
>purposely kept silent from other investigators, has been about
>two years in duration. I urge anyone interested in the Ramey
>document controversey, as well as the broader Roswell case to
>obtain a copy of this 67-page monograph.


Doc, I'm pleased to announce I can't find the link to the report
mentioned. Mayhaps I've overlooked something on the site but
could you post a direct link to where this new report is located
on your site?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                      Re: Roswell Case Closed - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:47:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:41:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Case Closed - Rudiak


>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:34:15 -0400
>Subject: Re: Roswell Case Closed

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:29 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Since some have suggested E as the second letter, I also tried
>>than, thus YE??I?? as the search word. This yields 19 hits, but
>>all of them are as nonsensical in context as the four words
>>above, words like YELPING, YESSING, YERKISH, YESHIVA, YETTIES,
>>etc. Yeah, those make a lot of sense too.

>Yep, makes sense to me. The disk was piloted by Abominable Snow
>Midgets so busy yelping in Yerkish that they lost control and
>crashed. Yessir, the mystery has been solved at last. Oh, and
>don't forget the mess caused by the escape of their pet
>pelicans.

Nice try Bob, but it was yeshiva rabbinical students yelping in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:06:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 11:43:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Rudiak


>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 23:09:20 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:19:51 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

<snip>

>>I also took a gander at Keyhoe's popular 1953 book, "Flying
>>Saucers from Outer Space," which actually has an index. Again,
>>no "motherships."

>Have a look at Keyhoe's account of the December 6, 1952 Gulf of
>Mexico radar-visual case (in chapter IX). He refers to
>"mothership" at least three times. Twice it appears as two
>words, in the third instance it is a hyphenated word. (UK
>paperback edition). In his next book "The F.S. Conspiracy",
>Keyhoe refers to the sighting as "The Gulf of Mexico Mothership
>case" when conversing with a skeptic.

Well for once Christopher Allen is right and I stand corrected.

However, this still doesn't change the fact that Gill denied
reading UFO literature and "mother ship" in a UFO context was
very rarely used in mainstream newspapers in the U.S. This is
based on electronic searches of newspapers, not proclamations of
fact backed up by nothing from the likes of Rimmer and Allen.
Like I said previously, their "evidence" amounts to little more
than reading Gill's mind and somehow knowing that Gill was





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

             Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Chichikov

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 14:57:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:14:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Chichikov


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

>I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
>DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far collected
>are:

>The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
>Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.


One, two and four of the Alien series, if only for its
skeptical, clear-eyed attitude toward human motives. When one of
the characters asks, in so many words: How many of 'them' do you
see betraying one another for personal advantage? - he asks an
important question for all of us. The films are about monsters,
including the ones in the mirror.

I saw Alien One, for about the third time, in a big movie
theater on Pushkin Square in Moscow, almost fifteen years ago.
At that time at least the Russians were dubbing the dialogue,





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                       Re: Roswell Case Closed - Allan

From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:42:20 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:24:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Case Closed - Allan


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:49:29 -0700
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Allan

>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:09:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:38 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Roswell - Case Closed (was Gill Sighting)

>>>>From: John Harney <magonia.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 20:09:15 +0100
>>>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>>>The assertion that they could not have been the source of
>>>>stories of aliens from crashed saucers because they started some
>>>>years after 1947 is nonsense. No reports of aliens, alive or
>>>>dead, were made in 1947, only the reports of the wreckage which
>>>>appeared in the news media at the time.

>>>Well, John, actually General Ramey was photographed in 1947
>>>clutching a telegram in his hand, which specifically mentions
>>>"the victims of the wreck" along with "the 'disc'". That's the
>>>strong consensus reading of what is there, not just my take on
>>>it. Even Phil Klass admitted the word "victims" was there (but
>>>tried to spin "the victims" into "no victims" in a personal
>>>email to me).

I have replied to, and conceded, the point about the supposed
"victims of the wreck" in the answer to Jerry Clark. No further
response is necessary.

>For super-powerful technology, Allen might start by using his
>brain instead of absurd reductionist debunking arguments. The
>human brain is still the most powerful pattern recognition and
>deciphering machine in existence. That's why humans can easily
>understand human language in it's many variant and ambiguous
>spoken and written forms whilst the most powerful computers as
>yet cannot.

I think this Ramey memo has been exhaustively debated before in
this forum, so decline to get involved any further. If others
want to stoke the flames of this debate they can do so.

>>Lydia Sleppy's story has 'improved' considerably with time and
>>retelling. Her original tale to Stanton Friedman made no mention
>>of the FBI, and was far simpler than the later, embellished,
>>versions. It appeared in a 1974 issue of SAGA magazine. The FBI
>>mysteriously entered the the Sleppy-McBoyle story years later. I
>>cannot dig up all the references now.

>As usual Christopher Allen can't provide the specifics. As far
>as I know, Sleppy has always told pretty much the same story.
>Part of her story about McBoyle phoning in the story and them
>not being able to get the story out was also corroborated by her
>and McBoyle's boss Merl Tucker when he was interviewed by Randle
>and Schmitt:

Oh yes I can provide the specifics.

Have a look at the article by Stanton Friedman & B. Ann Slate in
SAGA Magazine winter 1974. It is entitled "UFO Battles the Air
Force Couldn't Cover Up" Page 60 contains the relevant quote
from STF's interview with Lydia Sleppy (her name is omitted).
"As the woman began typing out the fantastic news item over the
teletype to their other two radio stations, a line appeared in
the middle of her text, tapped in from somewhere, with the
official order: 'do not continue this transmission' ". The
station manager is mentioned, again not by name, as having seen
pieces of the UFO being carried into a waiting Air Force plane.
We do not know how much text she managed to type before the
interrupt.

That's the original article. At that time Sleppy was already
recalling events 27 years old. Nothing whatever about the FBI,
and how did Sleppy know it was an official order anyway?

By 1980, however, in the "Roswell Incident" (Berlitz & Moore)
the story has improved. Here it is (p.24). The alleged interrupt
message was: "Attention Albuquerque: DO Not Transmit. Repeat Do
Not Transmit This Message. Stop Communication Immediately".
Still no FBI.

In Bill Moore's paper "Crashed UFOs, Evidence in the search for
proof" (1985) we get another version: "Attention Albuquerque.
Cease Transmission. Repeat. Cease Transmission. National
Security Item. Do Not Transmit. Stand By." Moore says it was
Berlitz, his co-author (surprise!) who got the text wrong in the
Roswell Incident book. Note how the phrase "national security
item" has crept in. Starting to suggest FBI involvement?
Perhaps.

Later versions embellish the story further, but David Rudiak can
search out these himself. I have said enough.

So by 1985 there was still no FBI mention. So please tell me,
and others, just when the FBI became involved in this alleged
story. I repeat: when did Sleppy first relate the story about
the supposed FBI involvement? I suggest that someone planted
this absurd idea in her head at some point. Either that or some
ufologist else has 'introduced' the FBI to puff up the whole
incident.

By 1992, in the Friedman & Berliner book "Crash at Corona" the
FBI had certainly appeared. See the Sleppy tale as given
therein, which says, among other thngs: "This is the FBI, you
will cease transmitting".

If you want to place any credence on this overblown, embellished
example of ufoology (sic) by all means do so.

>Now why couldn't Sleppy get the story out over the wire unless
>it was as she said? The bell on the teletype rang indicating a
>request at the other end to cease transmission and to place the
>teletype into receive mode to receive further instructions. Once
>in receive mode she received the FBI message to cease all
>further transmission of the story.

See above. The FBI involvement is highly suspect and probably
fictitious.

How far did Sleppy get with transmitting her story?

Or were the FBI (or some other official spies) so psychic that
they read her mind before she finished typing so much as one
word? And what about all those UP wires collected by Frank Joyce
from 1947? These are in Karl Pflock's book. There are quite a
number of them, but absolutely no suggestion of FBI (or any
other agency) involvement in suppression of them, or
interruptions during their original transmission.

>It is also interesting that knee-jerk debunkers like Allen are
>totally unconcerned about clear embellishment of stories if they
>believe it supports their side. E.g., we have Mogul engineer
>Charles Moore obviously engaging in some lying an hoaxing to
>support a Mogul crash. Allen e-mailed out of the blue about 2
>years ago, immediately called me "incompetent" because I
>supposedly didn't understand had Moore had done his calculations
>(this regards Moore's bogus calculation of Flight #4's
>trajectory taking it "exactly" to the Brazel ranch). When I
>boxed Allen into numerous mathematical corners and
>contradictions, his hypocritical and disingenuous "defense" then
>became that it "didn't matter." That's how these guys operate.
>As Stan Friedman says, don't confuse them with facts because
>their mind is already made up.

I did not use the word 'incompetent'. Rudiak is confusing me
with another critic, possibly David Thomas.

How 2 years can affect people's memories!

For the record, whilst I do accept Moore's analysis, I also
accept that his 'exact' trajectory chart and table do contain
several instances of dubious data.

Also, my own one derogatory word was met by about ten times as
much abuse in David Rudiak's response. (Assuming my own memories
after 2 years are correct).

>>See above. A lot of the contemporary press reports are likely to
>>be error-prone in places, due to the desire to 'be firstest with
>>the mostest'. There is only one actual date for the discovery
>>given anywhere, and that is June 14, which came directly from
>>Brazel.

>Isn't it remarkable that Brazel would remember exactly the day
>he first supposedly discovered the debris, yet considered it so
>unimportant that he supposedly didn't collect it for another 3
>weeks? No, Brazel didn't say "about 3 weeks ago" or "mid-June".
>He had it down to the exact day. That's not impossible, but it's
>not very likely either, and just another indication that the
>story was fed to him before hand.

>>The rest are all semi-vague phrases like those I list
>>above. I agree with Karl Pflock that June 14 is therefore very
>>likely the true date. To those people who still insist that the
>>USAF planted that date in Brazel's mind I refuse to debate the
>>matter any further.

>Of course not.

I stick to my guns. Either you prove Brazel was forcibly fed this
date (and give a coherent reason why) or find another precise
date for the initial find. The fact that Brazel did not bother to
collect the stuff for nearly 3 weeks is powerful evidence that he
did not think it had any significance. He paid little attention
to it because he was in a hurry to get round his ranch.
Yet 32 years later the first civilian investigators were desperately
trying to prove it was pieces of a crashed alien spaceship.

The only reason people like you keep saying the USAF put this
date into Brazel's head is because they want to show it was all
part of the grand cover up, a cover-up that (allegedly) exists
to this day. None of you can, or will, accept that Brazel did
remember the exact date, as well as three or four other dates of
what happened at the ranch and in Corona and Roswell. You still
insist that memories of other witnesses anything from 30 to 50
years afterwards are preferable to the memory of the prime
witness only 3 weeks afterwards.

>>The claimed differences in size were probably due to confusion
>>in the press over the balloon portion and the radar target(s).
>>Carelessness can explain a lot. You do not need cover-ups or
>>damage limitation exercises to account for it.

>More wing-flapping and unthinking skeptical spin. How about the
>actual quotes? The press was initially very clearly told that
>the 20-25 foot size referred to the "box-kite" covered with
>"tinfoil", i.e., the radar target. In fact, the initial stories
>mention nothing about a balloon. Then one of Ramey's intel
>officers changed it to the balloon. It wasn't the press that was
>confused. The stories they were being given were simply
>inconsistent.

And I suppose the stories given between 30 & 50 years afterwards
are consistent. The whole point is that they are not.

>>Had the Russians not captured Gary Powers, the USAF or the CIA
>>might have thought they could cover up the U-2 affair for
>>several years, but it was very risky. Suppose, for example, that
>>it happened again within a few months? Or even a third time?
>>Would they still have tried to cover it up?

>I fail to see what point Allen is trying to make here. My point
>is that governments often flagrantly lie and put out elaborate
>cover stories. What the press is told isn't necessarily true,
>therefore "contemporaneous" stories aren't necessarily the most
>trusted source, despite what debunkers usually argue. Often the
>real facts may not emerge until decades later. It all depends on
>how successful they might have been in burying the real story to
>begin with.

>>As for trying to cover up an ET crash, what if that also
>>happened again, and again? Don't forget, they had no control
>>whatever over ET crashes or in fact any ET actions. (They still
>>haven't either). For all the USAF knew, ETs had already landed
>>in Russia the year before!

>???? Well I guess, this is Allen's usual dumb point that
>governments can't possibly keep secrets, so if there were
>repeated crashes we would know about them despite all efforts of
>the government to keep them secret.

I never said governments can't keep secrets. I am merely telling
you that they could not, repeat not, keep this particular secret
(i.e. of an ET visit to planet earth) secret for 60 years. Got
it? By all means believe in Stan Friedman's Cosmic Watergate. I
am merely saying it is fantasy. However, I do concede that there
are plenty of classified papers still about that you and others
can always point to as evidence of government secrecy.

>Well, here's a news flash. We do know about some of them other
>than Roswell, incidents like Kecksberg and Shag Harbor which are
>pretty well documented. Various witnesses have been talking
>about them for years. Thus they aren't exactly secret. What
>remains in place is the official denial, both by governments and
>their debunker apologists

Pretty well documented? I am happy that Kecksburg was nothing
more than a bright fireball. Most of the surrounding story
sounds like a Roswell copycat. Shag Harbor I don't know about.
"Well documented" does not imply anything other than that some
ufologists have compiled documents taken either from
contemporaneous interviews or interviews conducted years later.
Where are the official investigation results of Kecksburg, like
the one at Socorro? Did Blue Book (or the CIA, etc) conduct any
investigation into Kecksburg? Or is that also Top Secret?

I'll repeat myself: No government could, or would, keep such an
important scientific discovery secret for nearly 6 decades.

>>Now tell us that there is no such thing as this "preposterous"
>>time compression!

>Thus one lousy anecdote and Christopher Allen rests his case.
>What psychological mechnism accounts for identical "time
>compressions" to multiple witnesses? How does "time
>compression" explain identical confusion between 6-foot plastic
>human mannequins and small, rotting alien bodies? How does
>"time compression" explain universal confusion in locations?
>And how does "time compression" explain what Air Force
>personnel were personally telling Gen. Exon about what really
>happened at Roswell?

You said the time compression was "preposterous". I gave you an
example of one instance that did actually occur. I did not
attempt to explain all the other oddities you give. Others can
try their hand at that if they so desire.

What psychological mechanism can account for identical "time
compressions" to multiple witnesses? Suggestibility by
interviewers is one answer. Otherwise known as cross-
 contamination during the interview process. How many of these
multiple witnesses remember the actual year of the events they
tried to recall? Probably none at all. Even Jesse Marcel didn't,
at least not until many months after his first interview and not
until other evidence came forth. Therefore (as was made plain in
the McAndrew Report) they may well be guilty of combining
memories of events separated in time by several years, and then
assuming they all took place in 1947. People are very often
forgetful in remembering dates of past events, especially if
they did not keep any notes or diaries.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:51:16 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:28:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:12:42 -0700
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 2:48 PM
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>>From: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>To: "- UFO UpDates Subscribers -" <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 7:23 AM
>>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>>Source: The San Francisco Chronicle - California, USA

>>>http://tinyurl.com/dt39r
>>>Friday, October 28, 2005
>>>Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>>Bright twinklers were nearby Mars and Venus, say astronomers -
>>>or were they?

>>>David Perlman
>>>Chronicle Science Editor

>>>Andrew Fraknoi, chairman of the astronomy department at
>>>Foothill College, said the lights were probably Mars and
>>>Venus, two planets that currently appear close together and
>>>will probably remain brilliant for another week or two until
>>>their orbits begin moving them away from Earth again.

>>><snip>

>>>But Fraknoi said Venus and Mars remain the best explanation
>>>for the lights.

>>As I just pointed out in another post, Fraknoi's "explanation"
>>is impossible. Venus and Mars are currently not "close
>>together" in the sky but on opposite ends of the sky. Further
>>Venus sets below the horizon around 7:40, and thus invisible
>>at midnight, when a S.F. Chronicle photographer photographed
>>multiple lights (also part of article - >see above url for
>>multiple photos).
>Quick update:

>I also sent off an email to David Perlman and he emailed me back
>within minutes. He apologized for the errors and said he was
>correcting them "ASAP."

Perlman and the Chronicle issued the following partial
retraction yesterday (Saturday) under "Corrections":

"A story Thursday [actually Friday] on mysterious lights in the
sky mistakenly attributed one of the lights to the planet Venus,
which actually sets in the west each evening, on the opposite
side of the sky from Mars."

I felt this didn't go far enough, since it still leaves the
impression that Mars had something to do with it. I emailed
Perlman again and reiterated the reasons why Mars should be
discounted as well (it was in the wrong part of the sky and
doesn't move, like the multiple objects in the Chronicle
photographer's photographs obviously did). I said further
clarification was needed from the Chronicle. I copied this to
the reader's rep who handles the "corrections". This time I've
heard nothing back.

In my email, I also again pointed out that Fraknoi is with
CSICOP and has a history of UFO debunkery. UFOs, in true
CSICOPIAN fashion, he labels "pseudoscience," along with such
things as astrology and creationism. (The guilt by association
tactic.) I also pointed out to Perlman that this wasn't the
first time CSICOP reps have used misplaced or invisible planets
to debunk UFO sightings, and specifically mentioned the 1986 JAL
Alaska incident where Phil Klass and CSICOP initially claimed
the UFOs were Mars and Jupiter.

>Judging from his instant response, my guess is that he got an
>earful from a lot of people besides me and is probably rather
>embarrassed about being taken in by CSICOPian Fraknoi. As I said
>before, Perlman is usually a very good science writer and seems
>fair and level-headed.

However, I suspect he is just going to let things stand as they
are and not issue any further retractions. I doubt Perlman
belongs to CSICOP, but he did write a puff-piece on them a few
years ago on their holy crusade against "pseudoscience":

http://tinyurl.com/c7f5a

>On the other hand, his evil science
>writer twin at the Chronicle, Keay Davidson, can be a really
>rabid UFO debunker.

For an example of Davidson's debunking handiwork, see:

http://tinyurl.com/bm7bu

This was about N.M. governor Bill Richardson saying back in 2003
that the truth still hadn't come out about Roswell. The three
"experts" Davidson quoted to ridicule Richardson were Andrew
Fraknoi yet again, Dave Thomas, and, of course, Phillip Klass.
All are CSICOP fellows, which makes me think Davidson almost
certainly belongs to CSICOP if these are the only critics he can
find to quote.

Fraknoi's claim that Venus and Mars explain this latest UFO
sighting is a Klassic example of CSICOPIAN pseudoscience in
action yet again. I'm against true pseudoscience as much as the





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: UpDates List Politics - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:21:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:32:02 -0500
Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics - Rimmer


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:45:09 -0300
>Subject: Re: UpDates List Politics [was: Zamora's Eyeglasses]

>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:38:10 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:21 -0300
>>>Subject: Re: Zamora's Eyeglasses

><snip>

>>>>And there can be no explanation convincing enough for an
>>>>eager believer.

>>>John, you've got to be kidding. What explanation[s]? So far
>>>there are none.

>>Are you saying no UFO case has ever been explained. There are
>>people who seem to think that - 'eager believers' - but I
>>hadn't previously put you amongst them!

>Once again we are back into debating mode. I believe the point I
>was making was about the Zamora case, not all of them. After all
>that's the subject heading of this thread. I would not classify
>myself as an eager believer, so for a change, you are right.

I wonder why you are so opposed to the idea of debating? I
thought this was one of the main functions of this List.

>>>It's getting harder and harder to take you or your position
>>>seriously. You bring nothing to the table unless you
>>>consider negative, unsupported rhetoric as evidence. Since
>>>you don't seem to want to either supply any evidence to the
>>>contrary, just disdain and derision, why you are even on the
>>>List? Rich, as bad as his attempts are to explain this case
>>>with thinly disguised cosmetic, oft times silly,
>>>applications, does offer up a position. On the other hand
>>>you offer nothing, not even an opinion.

>>I suggest you go back in the archives and read my previous
>>posts. On second thoughts, no, there are just too many of them,
>>and packed full of opinions (and sometimes even facts).

>I have read your stuff, but you have a penchant for debunking
>cases that many of us don't take seriously to begin with. There
>is much to read and so little time. I applaud you for offering up
>facts, however.

How interesting. I wonder what the cases are that "many of us
don't take seriously"? I think the case I have discussed most on
this List, and the one I have spent most time in learning about,
is Trindade. Is this one of the ones you mean?

>>>You seem satisfied with just assigning degeneratory motive
>>>to anyone not readily supportive of ridiculous conjecture or
>>>theories.

>>>Debate seems a useless tool when trying to get at the truth
>>>of this phenomenon. Obviously the best debater would win,
>>>but that's not the point. Winning an argument is a poor
>>>substitute for proof if the facts suffer in the process.
>>>Debate is the purview of courts and legislatures who often
>>>get it wrong.

I still cannot understand what you mean by this. Do you deny
that debate is a very valuable tool for arriving at the truth?
The best debater can only win if they also have the facts and
evidence behind them. I do not see that there is any
contradiction between winning the argument and presenting the
facts. I don't agree that debate is the sole prerogative of
courts and legislatures. In fact I think that the times when
they get it wrong are mostly the times when true debate is
curtailed.

>>>The "eager believer" comment is an attempt to win points by
>>>derision and thereby hopefully weaken a case and enhance
>>>your own position, not through the presentation of facts but
>>>by ridiculing of the presenter of the facts. It's an old
>>>ploy but it simply amounts to tripe.

No, the 'eager believer' comment was a response to a silly
comment intended to denigrate those of us who actually want to
dig a little deeper than facile assumptions - and I'm sure that
includes you.

>>Everything you have said above applies, one hundred times
>>over, to Alfred Lehmberg, whose only function on this List
>>seems to be to make pointless, sarcastic comments to anyone
>>who attempt to take a moderate, sceptical approach to the UFO
>>problem. Perhaps if you were to take a similar admonitory
>>attitude to him - which nobody on this List appears to be
>>willing to do - I might be prepared to take your comments
>>above more seriously.

>Al is a big boy. He can look after himself. While not speaking
>for him, I suspect he is the product of 30 years of repressed
>military dogma [You know, yes sir, no sir, pulling on his
>forelock, following orders] and he's now a pendulum which has
>swung back to other way and he's busting loose. I know Al
>personally. He's a talented artist and a really nice person.
>He's protecting his turf and usually mine, by association. But
>Al can speak for himself, and he probably has/will.

I suppose I can understand that, having spent more than thirty
years as a public service librarian - it's just the same: yes
sir, nor sir, anything you say sir - you do sometimes long to be
just not nice any more! However I thought this list was intended
for discussion and, yes, debate, on a wide range of UFO-related
issues, and not as a cathartic way of releasing thirty years-
worth of frustration.

>>What contribution has Lehmberg ever made to ufology? Does he
>>publish one of the world's oldest continuously published UFO-
>> related magazines? Has he written a serious book on UFO
>>abductions? Has he actually investigated a UFO case, either
>>first hand or through studying the literature? What does he
>>'bring to the table' other than 'negative, unsupported
>>rhetoric'? Has he ever tried to do anything other than
>>'attempt to win points through derision'?

>>Lehmberg has been ridiculing presenters of facts on this List
>>for years, not through winning the debate, but simply because
>>no-one appears to be willing to challenge his... I would say
>>rhetoric, but that is too flattering of his crude, though
>>elaborately worded ramblings.

>Hey, stay focused. You and me. I was referring to your
>dismissive statement, "And there can be no explanation
>convincing enough for an eager believer.", which in the context
>of the thread was concerning the Zamora incident. I realize your
>comment was to Al's comment but since I invested some time
>arguing the merits of the Zamora case, I jumped in as an
>"injured party".

I didn't take the context as being explicitly about the Zamora
case, one on which I have no explanation to offer and do find
genuinely puzzling. I think Lehmbergh was making a more general
proclamation which I felt had to be challenged.

>>If you are prepared to challenge that, I might be prepared to
>>'debate' with you further, but I don't suppose you'd be to
>>bothered if I didn't, which may well be your loss.
>
>Lately I've noted your attempts to be more reasonable in your
>arguments and questions-the latter not as loaded with sarcasm. I
>don't expect you to blindly see my side, or acquiesce to my
>paradigm, that would be foolish and and in the broader sense
>across the field of the phenomenon, dangerous. I don't think
>anyone wants that, at least I don't.

I regard sarcasm as a tool, to be used when required, but not
otherwise.

>But again with the debating. I spent 34 years listening to
>debate in a legislature modeled after the British Parliament.
>Debate is for politicians seeking re-election. They call it free
>debate but often the best debater wins [and more importantly,
>the party with the most seats] but the truth suffers.

No, I'm sorry, but again I cannot agree. Debate is essential for
the free flow of ideas, for uncovering facts and for presenting
challenging concepts. Just because politicians use it (with
varying degrees of honesty) is no reason to condemn it.

>Debating dictates that both sides take opposite sides of the
>question, one side of which is wrong. I just wonder why you





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                  Walien Invasion MoD Probes UFO Sightings

From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:20:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:55:17 -0500
Subject: Walien Invasion MoD Probes UFO Sightings


Source: Wales On Sunday

http://tinyurl.com/dqxll

Oct 30 2005


Walien Invasion: MoD Probes UFO Sightings
Matt Withers
Wales on Sunday

Wales is being invaded by little green men, with the Ministry of
Defence probing a new UFO sighting every six weeks. MoD records
handed to Wales on Sunday show 28 official reports of UFO
sightings over the past three years. They include objects with
legs spinning over the Valleys, a flying disc over Newport and a
large black object hovering above Rhyl. The MoD says there are
probably "rational explanations" for the sightings, but it would
be a waste of money to examine further. But alien experts say
many of the sightings cannot be explained so easily and need
examining.

The figures, released under the Freedom of Information Act, show
seven sightings in 2002, eight in 2003, four in 2004 and nine so
far this year. All but one were spotted in the south of the
country - a large black object sighted over Rhyl in March 2004.

Julie Monk, director of air staff at the MoD, said they examined
UFO reports only to check if foreign aircraft had entered UK
airspace. She said: "Unless there is evidence of a potential
threat to the UK from an external source, and to date no UFO
report has revealed such evidence. we do not attempt to identify
the precise nature of each sighting reported to us. "We believe
that rational explanations, such as aircraft lights or natural
phenomena, could be found for them if resources were diverted
for this purpose, but it is not the function of the MoD to
provide this kind of aerial identification service. "It would be
an inappropriate use of defence resources if we were to do so."

But Cardiff-based UFO boffin Chris Fowler said there were
facilities available to probe the sightings. He said: "Some of
them I think straightaway sound like it's misidentification of
planes, but some of them sound quite interesting. "Some of them,
possibly most of them, could be explained away. "The people who
pilots report sightings to are called UK Airprox, who are
staffed by a mixture of civil and military experts in their
fields, so they actually have got the facilities to look into
these things. "There are credible sightings. And either these
are ours, which mean we've got technology far more powerful than
the ones we know about, or they're somebody else's. I don't know
more than that."

Earlier this year it emerged a spate of UFO sightings in Wales
prompted a secret Ministry of Defence investigation. The clamour
around the possibility of aliens visiting Pembrokeshire forced
Government officials to look into the situation in the late
1970s. matt.withers.nul

Sightings include...

November 11, 2002: Two objects of different colour were spotted
moving up and down above Cardiff docks. January 15, 2003: A
large round disc "slightly smaller than the moon" was seen over
Cowbridge in the Vale of Glamorgan. It was creamy white, before
changing to green. July 12, 2003: Two round black objects with
legs were sighted spinning over the Rhondda Valley. February 18,
2002: A "large black object" was seen in the sky above Rhyl at
4pm. January 31, 2005: An orange ball of light with "spiderish
legs" spotted over Port Talbot.

[End Quote]

Note: Rhyl is on N Wales coast, the other locations are in area
of S Wales' old mining valleys.

Cheers
Ray D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                         Re: Gill Sighting - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:20:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:58:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Sandow


>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 00:15:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>>Yes, John, your whole line of argumentation is pretty feeble
>>stuff.

>I doubt that a Church of England clergyman would be overly
>familiar with a fairly specialised piece of maritime jargon,
>used almost entirely in the Royal Navy. I see no reason why
>Gill should be assumed to have any detailed knowledge of
>submarines, naval supply ships, etc.

Did John Rimmer really write this? Makes me sad. It's such rigid
thinking, and completely misunderstands what we humans actually
are like. Would I _assume_ a Church of England clergyman would
know maritime jargon? No, of course not. But does that mean that
I should now assume he _wouldn't_ know this terminology? No way.
There's no telling what might interest any person, clergyman or
not. John, if I remember correctly, is or was a librarian. I
don't know if his work brought him into contact with the public,
but if a Church of England clergyman appeared at the library and
asked for books on naval matters, would John have said, "Oh, no,
you couldn't possibly be interested in that"?

Just to show how silly this kind of thinking can be, here are
some examples from my own life. Should I assume that Dave, the
contractor who built my country house, wouldn't know naval
terminology because his profession for 30 years has been
building houses in the Hudson Valley, 50 miles north of New York
City? That would be a dreadful mistake. Dave owns a boat, and
for years spent half his life sailing in the Caribbean.

Should anyone assume that, because I've been in the classical
music business for 30 years, I know the Bruckner Symphonies?
(This sort of thinking is often used in the positive as well as
the negative - because someone lives in contemporary America,
they _must_ know UFO terminology.) No. I've never liked
Bruckner, and I've never been a classical music critic on a
daily newspaper, where you have to go to concerts nearly every
night, and have little choice about what you hear. So for 30
years I've avoided Bruckner, and can't tell his symphonies
apart. (God, don't tell this to the orchestras that hire me as a
consultant!)

And because I've been in the classical music business all that
time, should John Rimmer or anyone else assume I don't know
anything about hiphop? That would be wrong. I used to be a pop
music critic; I was the first to write about the once-famous Los
Angeles gangsta rap group N.W.A.; I was, for better or worse,
the acknowledged hiphop expert among Los Angeles rock critics in
the late '80s, and also in the Time, Inc. magazine company in
the early '90s.

Now turn _that_ one around. Just because I was the acknowledged
hiphop expert in these two places, should we assume I actually
know much about hiphop? I'm laughing now. California rock
critics knew nothing about it, for whatever reason. It was easy
to pass for an authority. The Time, Inc. magazine company - or
at least the top editors who used to call on me for advice -
couldn't tell one black pop musician from another. It was easy
to pass for an authority there, as well.

Since my wife moved to Roswell when she was in high school, has
visited there constantly since because her parents still live
there, and wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal about the
sudden UFO craze in her home town - because of all this, should
we assume she knows all about the ins and outs of the Roswell
UFO case? Sorry. She doesn't. It didn't interest her; the piece
was more about how it felt to live in a town that had never been
famous for anything before, and suddenly find it talked about in
all the media.

One last example. My wife and I have a house in Warwick, in the
southern part of New York state. Before we moved there, I'd
rented houses in two different towns in southern New York. I'd
driven extensively around the region. You could easily assume,
then, that I would have heard of Warwick, a town that turns out
to be fairly well known, for all kinds of reasons. It pulled
itself out of a long decline without attracting chain stores or
building malls; it's still quite rural, even though it's close
to New York City; it's regularly cited in the regional newspaper
as a perfect little gem. (That last thing sets residents' teeth
on edge, including ours.) It's the home town of the man who won
the Grammy award for polka music almost every year for the last
two decades. (I'm not making that up.) It's very close to Pine
Bush, where I'd driven several times to look for UFOs.

But no. I'd never heard of it. If my wife hadn't seen the
property we bought listed on the Internet, we'd never have gone
there.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                  Re: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:26:11 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:00:49 -0500
Subject: Re: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey - Hatch


>From: Jim Houran <gemamant.nul>
>To: ufoupDates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 15:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: New FUFOR Monograph On Ramey

>A Search For Meaning In The Ramey Document From The Roswell UFO
>Case by James Houran, Ph.D. (2005, Fund for UFO Research,
>www.fufor.com )

>I'm pleased to announce that the FUFOR recently published the
>results of a new and unprecedented study of the Ramey document
>by outside and impartial experts in digital imaging, which I
>facilitated with the Fund's assistance. This project, which was
>purposely kept silent from other investigators, has been about
>two years in duration. I urge anyone interested in the Ramey
>document controversey, as well as the broader Roswell case to
>obtain a copy of this 67-page monograph.


Hello Jim:

I clicked on the FUFOR link above and got their main entry page.
There is no obvious link to the monograph.

Do you have a URL that will take us directly to that?

Hopefully there will be a summary of the findings shorter than
67 pages. Either way, how do we obtain the monograph?





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                    UFO Wave Continues Over Oruro Bolivia

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:20:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:04:59 -0500
Subject: UFO Wave Continues Over Oruro Bolivia


INEXPLICATA
The Journal of Hispanic Ufology
October 30, 2005
================================================================


Source: La Patria
Date: October 30, 2005

BOLIVIA: UFO WAVE CONTINUES OVER ORURO

"Oruro is undergoing an unidentified flying object (UFO) flap",
said UFO specializt Alvaro Munguia Becker after witnessing and
evaluatiing the recordings and photographs provided by
journalists and citizens alike, taken since October 8. The
ufologist reached our capital city yesterday in order to
evaluate and study this phenomenon. Journalists and citizens who
took photos visited the Federacion de Empresarios Privados de
Oruro (FEPO - Private Business Federation) where they met with
the expert to glean his knowledge.

Munguia expressed admiration over the quality of the images and
for those who took them.

"This causes the images to be more credible. I say more credible
because tricks and montages abound, and this results in the
belittling of any UFO investigation. However, what I was able to
see were varied images that have similarity [to each other]," he
said.

The ufologist did not venture if whether these were beings from
other worlds or alien vessels or from other dimensions. However,
similar images have been analyzed in Spain, the UK and the USA.

"They fully match, and in closing we can say that the images
taken by a varied group of individuals must be digitally
analyzed in order to determine the number of pixels, color, heat
and everything that these images might represent, eliminating
all atmospheric or meteorological phenomena, ballistic missiles
or advanced technology aircraft," he added.

"This can be analyzed, but what strikes one most is the
phenomenon's continuity in Oruro. I understand that this
situation commenced on October 8 and we are now on the 28th and
29th of October. This makes it approximately 20 days that the
sightings have occurred, confirmed by citizens and journalists.
The phenomenon continues, and this gives us the guidelines to
say that a UFO flap is taking place over Oruro," he explained.

Source:

http://tinyurl.com/9rsa7

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






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:42:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:08:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights - Rudiak


>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 08:57:50 -0800
>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:48:16 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Spellbound By Sky Lights

>>Regarding the story "Spellbound by Sky Lights" in Friday's
>>Chronicle by science editor David Perlman. It is literally
>>impossible, as Perlman and astronomy professor Andrew Fraknoi
>>claim, for Venus and Mars to be close together in the eastern
>>sky and thus explain the multiple lights seen by many moving
>>together and which Chonicle photographer Lance Iversen also
>>photographed around midnight on Wednesday night. At sunset, Mars
>>is currently rising in the east while Venus is setting in the
>>west. They are on opposite sides of the sky. Venus sets at
>>around 7:40 p.m. and is completely invisible at midnight.
>>Further Mars is almost directly overhead at midnight, not near
>>the horizon where Iversen photographed his lights. Stars and
>>planets do not move relative to one another, as Iversen's
>>photographs clearly show these lights as doing. I don't know
>>what the lights were, but I do know Perlman and Fraknoi should
>>do some simple fact checking before proposing absurdities like
>>an invisible planet and then trying to portray this as a
>>scientific explanation. Maybe they both need to take remedial
>>astronomy courses.

>David, List, EBK,

>Yes, for once David and I agree. I was an eye witness to these
>amazing lights along with my daughter, her boy friend, and Jim
>Martin, publisher of Flatland magazine. We were all staying at
>my daughter's home in Potter Valley CA which is about 130 miles,
>as the crow flies, from San Francisco. It was about 10:35 and
>Jim and I had just gone to bed after an evening of good
>conversation and competitive eight-ball. I hadn't even closed my
>eyes when my daughter came running into my room and told me to
>come outside to see the strange lights they saw while having a
>late night smoke (tobacco). We all went outside and viewed this
>strange phenomenon. There were three lights about the size of a
>quarter at arm's length, quite large. They seemed to be moving
>in unison around a central point, and there was a blue beam
>coming from them like they were from a spotlight from a used car
>lot but were twenty miles from the nearest car lot. I can't
>explain what I saw but it certainly wasn't Mars or Venus.

>These lights seemed to be moving to the south and since it was
>about midnight when they were seen in SF then it appears they
>were moving at a slow rate of speed.

Thanks to Ed for reporting the sighting. I live in the area, but
wasn't outside and didn't see anything. Damn!

I've checked a number of websites for California and Nevada





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                Re: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe - Koch

From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:21:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:09:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe - Koch


>From: Greg Booone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:36:22 EDT
>Subject: Scientists Find Pyramids In Europe

>-----

>Source: One News - TV New Zealand

>http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411366/622605

>Oct 27, 2005

>Archaeologists Find European Pyramid

Hi Greg, Hi List,

I found a small video clip about that on:

http://www.infocast.dk/jp/jp.php?id=1172


All the best,






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                         Re: Gill Sightings - Borraz

From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:57:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:14:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Gill Sightings - Borraz


Let's examine some other details of the Boianai sightings
of Jun. 26, 1959, and following days.

To my knowledge, there are three sketch maps made at the time
(Gill's report, Jul. 14, 1959).

Two of them show the positions of UFOs "at 8.28 p.m. and 9.15
p.m." on Jun. 26. The second one shows details of only four of
the five UFOs observed on this occasion.

The third sketch map shows the approx. positions of the 8 UFOs
observed at 11.00 p.m., on Jun. 28.

If we compare these sketches to the appropriate astronomical
charts showing only the brightest stars and planets we must
conclude that:

- It is possible to establish more or less evident
correspondences between supposed UFOs and celestial bodies.

- But the more important thing is that_the_positions_of_the_
two_main_UFOs_match_quite_well_the_positions_of_the_two_
brightest_ (by far)_heavenly_bodies_ that could be observed,
that is, Venus and Jupiter.

Quite a "coincidence", isn't it?

On the first sketch map, we find the "mother ship" in the NWW,
just where Venus was located. On the other hand, the "overhead
UFO" appears to be towards the SEE or SE on the first two
sketches (Jun. 26) and the SWW on the third one (Jun. 28),
matching reasonably well the positions of Jupiter, whose angular
elevation was high indeed (around 80=BA on Jun. 26, and 60=BA -
 that's also "overhead" for most observers- on Jun. 28).

So the story repeats again with Jupiter. The "overhead UFO"
could be directly identified as Jupiter if it were not for being
described on Jun. 26 as a sort of disk having 5 panels of bright
"windows" on near edge and a total apparent size of 1 inch
across (at arm's length)...

Concerning the estimates of size, we must consider the
following. Remember that these estimates have been one of the
"hard" arguments against an astronomical background for the
sightings.

We are said that, in the seventies, Father Gill estimated the
object with waving occupants to have the width of five moons
lined up end-to-end. This amounts to approx. 1 inch at arm's
length. But in 1959 Gill's notes, this UFO with the "men"
onboard was "full hand-span at arm's length (8 inches) when
U.F.O's at closest", while the "overhead UFO" cited above had an
apparent size of 1 inch across and the smaller objects had 1/2
inches across.

There is still a third estimation of angular size. The next day
to the sighting, Gill worked out the dimensions of the big UFO
assuming the figures on it were our size. In daylight, he got
four men to stand away until they reached about the size that
the "men" in the UFO appeared to be. Finally, he concluded that
the object was about 450 feet away (when closer) and some 35
feet across.

Though not stated by Gill, this implies an angular size of
4.45=BA, that is, almost 9 moon's widths or 1.75 inches at arm's
length. Note the differing values. All in all, I see no reason
to be confident of Gill's estimates of angular size.

Another interesting detail is that all the objects (even the
smaller "disks") had four legs, just as the "mother ship". This
has a curious effect on the interpretation of the sightings. I
think that it prevents to hold hybrid explanations as the
possibility of _some_ of the UFOs being misidentified celestial
bodies. Either we had a happy family of four-legged flying disks
and saucers, "mother ship" and "father ship" (overhead)
included, that haunted Boianai from Friday to Monday or the
events were related in some way to astronomical bodies, ant
those "legs" had to do with the diverging rays seen in stars as
imperfect images formed by the eye, as it has already been
suggested.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                           Crop Circles Spellbind

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:35:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:35:21 -0500
Subject: Crop Circles Spellbind




Source: The Times Argus - Rutland, Vermont, USA

http://tinyurl.com/b6tx3

October 31, 2005

Crop Circles Spellbind, Thrill Weekend Conference-Goers

By Robin Palmer
The Times Argus

PLAINFIELD =97 Organizers of a weekend-long conference at Goddard
College weren't pointing directly to extraterrestrials as the
makers of crop circles, but they were calling some of them
geometric phenomena that couldn't have been created by humans.

About 120 people from around the country and Canada gathered at
the rural Plainfield school Friday through Sunday for the fourth
U.S. East Coast Crop Circle Conference organized by Starksboro
couple Glenn and Cameron Broughton.

Crop circles are patterns in farmers' fields, where crops have
been laid flat, often overnight. Most believe them to be hoaxes,
but the way speakers told it, some are too geometrically precise
and the crops too intact to have been done by humans or farm
machinery.

"There are unexplainable crop circles, numerous unexplainable
crop circles that couldn't have been made by man," Cameron
Broughton said. She also described scientific anomalies said to
occur within crop circles, including electromagnetic field
changes and molecular changes to the crop itself.

The idea for a U.S. conference on the topic that is little-
discussed here began after Glenn Broughton, originally of
England where crop circles of beautiful circular designs are
more prevalent, was asked to speak at Vermont libraries on the
subject. The couple also takes people on crop circle tours
during the summer in England.

A visiting friend asked the couple if she could give a Vermont
talk on the subject and the Broughtons, knowing there was
interest at least at libraries in the state, organized the first
conference with a single speaker four years ago at Champlain
College, said Cameron Broughton.

The following year it grew to three speakers and a day-long
lecture at University of Vermont. And the last two years, the
event has been held at progressively minded Goddard.

Last year, there were five speakers, and this year there were
nine, plus yoga, a choir, dancers and more spread out over three
days.

Among the speakers was Jeffrey Wilson, who Saturday gave the
crowd gathered rather fittingly in a former barn at the school a
rare glimpse at U.S. crop circles, often overlooked due to
interest in more compact England where about 100 crop circles
appear each summer in three southern counties.

"It's an area that a lot of us don't know very much about at
all," Cameron Broughton said introducing Wilson's talk on U.S.
sightings.

Wilson of Ohio is director of the Independent Crop Circle
Researchers' Association, an organization that records and
investigates crop circles in the United States and Canada. His
research has found more than 500 reports of crop circles in the
United States from 1880 through 2004. Most (343) have been in
the last couple of decades, from 1990 to 2004, and 21 crop
circles have been spotted so far this year.

Wilson said many more crop circles occur than are reported
because while some are quick to report "bright lights" the night
before strange patterns appear in fields, many farmers are
hesitant to attract the media and spectators.

The first U.S. crop circle was reported in 1847 by Henry
Schoolcraft, who was employed by the U.S. Bureau of Indian
Affairs and was told of "the magic circle in the prairies" by an
American Indian.

What made it magic was what the American Indian had experienced
once he stepped inside. On Saturday, speakers described blinding
headaches, blocked ears and irritability while inside the
circles, which according to Wilson have high radiation levels in
the days after they first occur.

U.S. crop circles have been reported in 49 states, but have been
concentrated in the first the Great Lakes area, then Iowa and
Missouri along the Mississippi River, and thirdly in California
and the West Coast. Ohio and Iowa have had the most crop
circles, and July is the most common month they are found,
Wilson said.

Wilson knew of two Vermont crop circles since 1880, but could
readily name only one =97 it was in Bridport in Addison County in
July 1993 and was a single circle with a ring around it.

The crop circles occur in everything from intricate patterns, or
large geometric pictograms, to simple circles and what Wilson
called "randomly down formations." These are when crops are lain
down in random patterns, such as a simple jagged square. In the
United States, wheat is the crop in which they are most often
found. Grass and corn follow.

"You can name the medium and we've seen it here in the United
States," said Wilson, noting the list includes ice.

U.S. crop circles are typically found near power lines with
transformers, water sources, in the lowest point of a field and
often near American Indian or other archeological sites. His
research has also shown when mapped, they occur annually in
lines even if many miles and many states apart, he said.

Wilson's talk veered into biblical, philosophical and
mythological references. He showed mathematicians work to
replicate the patterns and even had turned them to musical notes
that were played. He called them a convergence of art, music,
science and geometry.

"These are new ways of knowing," he said, calling the patterns
"incredible works of geometry and mathematics that are providing
us a new source of knowledge."

It was that new knowledge that most intrigued conference
participant Brady Katzman-Rooks of Waterbury. Katzman-Rooks said
she traveled to Hawaii for a conference involving dolphins and
extraterrestrials and heard about Vermont's crop circle
conference there.

The Vermont conference could have accepted 180 people but at 120
had attracted 40 more than last year, noted Cameron Broughton,
calling the turnout a success.

"The people who are here are very intelligent people. They're
grounded," Cameron Broughton said. "They're people who are
interest in the phenomena and they're interesting in expanding
their knowledge on our own reality, which can be limited at
times."

Katzman-Rooks called attending the Hawaii conference and this a
"coming out of the closet" of sorts for her.

"I'm trying to make sense of my own experiences in connection to
this," Katzman-Rooks said, but wouldn't say what her experiences
had been.

She was also looking to meet similar-minded people, which she
had found in Mary Stringos of East Montpelier.

"It's very exciting that there are so many people who came to
meet people of similar spiritual pursuits," said Stringos, an
energy healer by trade.

Stringos said she had attended out curiosity following a trip to
England this summer and Saturday had learned more about crop
circles than she ever thought possible.

Her theory was that crop circles were a gentle reminder from
extraterrestrials that they existed.

"Maybe we have extraterrestrial friends," Stringos said.
"Someday they'll show up, but this is our precursor."

"There are others out there, and they have been making these
contacts," Katzman-Rooks agreed.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

               Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Watson

From: Nigel Watson <nigelwatson1.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:30:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:01:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther? - Watson


>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:39:00 EDT
>Subject: Which UFO Movie Would You Druther?

>I'm sitting here at my desk looking at the ever growing row of
>DVDs and noticed the the only UFO based movies so far collected
>are:

>The Day The Earth Stood Still by Robert Wise, Roswell by Paul
>Davids and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind by Spielberg.

<snip>

Greg:

It's worth getting Spielberg's E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
as it is a kind of sequel to CE3K.

It tackles the issue of how we would deal with E.T. visitors and
comes down harshly on scientists and the authorities. Like The
Day the Earth Stood Still, E.T. has been interpreted as a Jesus-
like figure who is resurrected and returns to 'heaven'.

Although it does not feature UFOs, Kubrick's 2001: A Space
Odyssey is an equally profound and  pretentious cinematic
appraisal of what would happen if we had contact with aliens.
This again has many religious overtones and has had a great
influence on science fiction films ever since.

So far this List has mentioned the 'big' UFO movies but as
Kottmeyer has pointed out it is the small B-movies that often
feature elements that have unwittingly infiltrated abduction and





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 31

                             One More Experience

From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:12:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:03:49 -0500
Subject: One More Experience


This is distinctly third-hand but reasonably reliable.

A friend of mine who recently passed away (God bless her soul),
told me, seven years ago, about her brother's experience. He's a
well-known computer scientist and one of the founding minds of
the Internet (I've checked his bona fides and they are genuine).

When he was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Air Force decades ago,
he had occasion to have one of those 'alien in a tank' moments,
in which, on a military base in the southwest, he briefly saw
what looked like an alien body floating in some sort of
preservative fluid.

I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my friend. This is