UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Oct 1999

  Oct 1:

   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Terry Evans [18]
   Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage - Steve Neill [188]
   What's New At Magonia - Mark Pilkington [13]
   Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_ - Michael Christol [62]
   Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On Roswell - Stig Agermose [152]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [66]
   Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor? - Jacqueline Cosford [13]
   Re: Get Real - Martin Murray [31]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Gildas Bourdais [42]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [26]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Kenny Young [56]
   Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again? - Amy Hebert [13]
   Re: The Challenge - John Velez [155]

  Oct 3:

   10/1: This Week on Destination: Space - Diana Botsford [70]
   NASA Speaks in English but the Control Panel is - From: Jim Mortellaro
   [18]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [69]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - James Bond Johnson [93]
   Re: The Challenge - Kevin Randle [19]
   Re: Sightings Of Fast Moving Lights - Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland [48]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #319 - Alfred Lehmberg [86]
   UFO Desk - 'Witnessed' - Paul C. WIlliams [15]
   Filer's Files #39 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [411]
   Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond - James Easton [311]
   Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again? - Amy Hebert [10]
   Re: Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage - Jsmortell@aol.comFrom: Jim
   Mortellaro [71]
   Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_ - Jim Mortellaro [72]
   Re: Get Real - Jim Mortellaro [71]
   OZ Files 03.10.1999 - Diane Harrison - Keith Basterfield Network [179]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez & - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [47]
   Re: NASA Speaks in English... - GT McCoy [36]
   Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond - Donald Ledger [65]
   Re: Get Real - Terry Evans [40]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Terry Evans [57]
   Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond - Georgina Bruni [13]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Kenny Young [36]
   Abducted? - Sean Jones [43]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [94]

  Oct 4:

   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [76]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [93]
   Re: Abducted? - Jim Mortellaro [86]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [87]
   Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again? - Greg Sandow [17]
   Re: NASA Speaks in English... - Larry Hatch [34]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Dennis Stacy [75]
   Re: Britain's Astronomer Royal Publishes - Stig Agermose [66]
   Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_ - Michael Christol [27]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Dennis Stacy [62]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Kevin Randle [157]
   Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor? - Bob Young [15]
   Re: Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On - Bob Young [37]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [94]
   Steve Moreno: US Flap September '99 - Stig Agermose [326]
   Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez - Gavin A. J. McLeod
   [22]
   Re: Mechanics Illustrated Flapjack 1947 - John E.L. Tenney [12]
   Glennys Mackay In Hospital - Revista UFO [31]
   Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond - Roy J Hale [19]
   Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State - Asgeir W. Skavhaug [74]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Gildas Bourdais [40]
   Re: NASA Speaks in English... - Jim Mortellaro [53]

  Oct 5:

   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [129]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [112]
   Re: - Amy Hebert [49]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [46]
   Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again? - Wendy Christensen [34]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Mark Cashman [74]
   Re: Abducted? - Harry Miller [15]
   Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State - Steven W. Kaeser [57]
   Funny What You Can Find Near Bundoran... - Daev Walsh - Blather [494]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Steven Kaeser [32]
   Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State - Stephen MILES Lewis
   [25]
   UFO Engaged During Vietnam War? - Stig Agermose [41]
   Re: Get Real - Bob Young [24]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jenny Randles [108]
   Re: Abducted? - Jim Mortellaro [49]
   Re: Get Real - John Rimmer [45]

  Oct 6:

   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [72]
   Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again? - Will Bueche [29]
   Re: Get Real - Jim Mortellaro [92]
   Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War? - Steven J. Dunn [21]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Kenny Young [73]
   Re: Abducted? - Sean Jones [77]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bill Weber [59]
   Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War? - Stig Agermose [32]
   From Maxwell Burns - C. <xxxxx.net> [120]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [89]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [39]
   The Purpose Of Abductions - Henny van der Pluijm [129]

  Oct 7:

   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [377]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - bruce maccabee [146]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [36]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [40]
   Re: AIC Website - John Velez [33]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Neil Morris [95]
   Re: NASA Speaks in English... - Sue and John Strickland [42]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - UFO UpDates - Toronto [99]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Greg Sandow [32]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Pat McCartney [60]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [64]
   New 'Angel' Dead Sea Scroll Contains Astral - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [84]
   Re: Abducted? - Jim Mortellaro [119]
   Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War? - Nick Balaskas [44]
   Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999 - Nick Balaskas [49]
   Re: Get Real - John Rimmer [66]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Dennis Stacy [27]
   Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761 - Terry Blanton [6]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [70]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [61]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [31]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Roger Evans [71]
   Re: Review: 'Roswell' - Lesley Cluff [36]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Tim Matthews [48]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 24 - Joseph Trainor Masinaigan@aol.com
   [424]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jenny Randles [77]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Mark Cashman [107]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jenny Randles [77]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Neil Morris [47]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Neil Morris [47]

  Oct 8:

   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Gildas Bourdais [71]
   British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [162]
   Re: The Purpose Of Abductions - Sean Jones [21]
   Re: The Purpose Of Abductions - Asgeir W. Skavhaug [98]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [62]
   Max Burns - Let It Go - Mark Haywood [14]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Brian Cuthbertson [26]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Greg Sandow [20]
   Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999 - Ignatius Graffeo [25]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [97]
   Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761 - Nick Balaskas [26]
   Filer's Files #40 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [366]
   Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761 - Bob Young [16]
   TMP News: New Planet in Our Solar System? - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [37]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - David Clarke [84]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [17]
   Re: Tampa UFO Video Summary Report - Ignatius Graffeo [38]
   CPR-Canada News: Update 2 on Edmonton #2 Crop - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [50]
   Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War? - Kevin Randle [118]
   Re: The Purpose Of Abductions - Stephen MILES Lewis [51]

  Oct 9:

   Roy Hale's Site Updated - Roy J Hale [5]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [74]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Serge Salvaill [97]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [83]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [83]
   Re: RPIT - A Reminder - Neil Morris [98]
   Re: Get Real - Jim Mortellaro [95]
   Re: Max Burns - Let It Go - Jim Mortellaro [29]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [30]
   Re: Get Real - Jim Mortellaro [98]
   [UFOR] Re: Information Request (KGB UFO Files) - Francisco Lopez [14]
   SpaceViews -- 1999 October 8 - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto [679]
   'Planet X' Beyond Pluto? - Blair Cummins [114]
   NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters? - Michael J. Woods [141]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Sue Kovios [78]
   Re: The Purpose Of Abductions - Bruce Maccabee [60]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Dennis Stacy [39]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Dennis Stacy [19]
   Re: Max Burns - Let It Go - Roy J Hale [23]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Lesley Cluff [48]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - John Velez [65]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [146]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [55]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerry Black [158]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Amy Hebert [20]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Larry Hatch [61]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [93]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320 - Alfred Lehmberg [170]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [53]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [87]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Larry Hatch [47]
   Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto? - Larry Hatch [42]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [91]
   UFO Tower To Become A Reality In Valley - Stig Agermose
   <stig.agermose@get2net.dk [82]

  Oct 10:

   New UFO Pics From Istanbul - Erol Erkmen [8]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jim Mortellaro [105]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - John Rimmer [36]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [102]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jonathan Dyton [62]
   Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto? - Nick Balaskas [39]
   UFOR: Project Paperclip/Overcast - Francisco Lopez [191]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [43]
   Re: The Purpose Of Abductions - Larry Hatch [70]
   Re: NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters? - Terry Blanton [12]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Larry Hatch [13]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320 - Jim Mortellaro [61]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Tim Matthews [101]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [148]
   Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs - Amy Hebert [56]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Lynne Bishop & - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [46]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Amy Hebert [37]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jim Mortellaro [164]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [54]
   Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto? - Stan Friedman [40]
   Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated - Michael Christol [17]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [58]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Sue Strickland [66]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Martin Phillips [21]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Andy Roberts [51]

  Oct 11:

   Alfred's Odd Ode #320 - Alfred Lehmberg [170]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Dave Baker [29]
   Re: Get Real - Brian Cuthbertson [36]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Martin Phillips [38]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [193]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Sue Kovios [55]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [193]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - John Rimmer [33]
   Aeribarque! - Kenny Young [18]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Serge Salvaille [120]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Kenny Young [30]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Joseph Polanik [69]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [36]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Henny van der Pluijm [39]
   Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated - Roy J Hale [12]
   Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs - Chuck Sutton [30]
   Alien Ineptitude - Joseph Polanik [54]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Joseph Polanik [245]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [165]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Sue Kovios [89]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Sue Kovios [54]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Greg Sandow [50]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Greg Sandow [43]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - John Velez [50]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [108]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Neil Morris [79]
   Nick Pope's Weird World - Georgina Bruni [121]
   Gary Schultz? - Philip Mantle [10]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [281]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened - Todd Lemire [36]

  Oct 12:

   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Erol Erkmen [24]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [37]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Jerome Clark [31]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Lesley Cluff [39]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Michel M. Deschamps [37]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Michel M. Deschamps [56]
   Re: Nick Pope's Weird World - Greg Sandow [26]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Greg Sandow [120]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Jim Mortellaro [56]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Lesley Cluff [63]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Brian Cuthbertson [22]
   Oz Base Nurrungar Closed - John Auchettl [51]
   Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof - John Auchettl [48]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [62]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Dennis Stacy [15]

  Oct 13:

   More TOP SECRET MAJESTIC UFO Documents - Ryan Wood [213]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - GT McCoy [70]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - John Velez [95]
   Re: Aeribarque! - Larry Hatch [30]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Rory Lushman [24]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Tim Matthews [15]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Tim Matthews [19]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Sue Strickland [83]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Christophe Meessen [109]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [54]
   Re: Get Real - Roy J Hale [14]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Andy Roberts [27]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [58]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [130]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jonathan Dyton [185]
   Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum - Sue Addison [16]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [60]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jenny Randles [64]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [50]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Mark Cashman [122]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [48]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Stan Friedman [43]
   Philip K. Dick [was: Re: Abductions: A Funny - Stephen Lewis [117]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stan Friedman [62]
   Re: Nick Pope's Weird World - Dennis Stacy [49]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Dennis Stacy [48]
   TMP News: The Millennium Forum Lecture Series - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [101]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - bruce maccabee [826]
   Trapper recounts UFO sighting - Stig Agermose [42]
   The Prophets Conference - Dr. Edgar Mitchell - prophets@maui.net [71]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - John Rimmer [30]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Larry Hatch [49]

  Oct 14:

   Re: Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof - Jenny Randles [59]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [93]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [51]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [73]
   Links For Web-Site - Roy J Hale [8]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Roy J Hale [36]
   Re: Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum - Roy J Hale [17]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Bruce Maccabee [115]
   Re: Get Real - Marc BelL [78]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [196]
   Re: Nick Pope's Weird World - Sean Jones [12]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [77]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Erol Erkmen [45]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - David Clarke [117]
   King Island UFO Search No Hoax - John W. Auchettl [65]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [22]
   Re: Philip K. Dick - Greg Sandow [52]
   (eS) Questioning the fundamentals - exoScience [32]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Roy J Hale [26]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Mark Cashman [57]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Greg Sandow [73]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Melanie Mecca [29]

  Oct 15:

   Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower - Don Allen [34]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Serge Salvaille [42]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Andy Roberts [60]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jenny Randles [92]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [76]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jenny Randles [65]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [86]
   Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower - Don Allen [34]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jenny Randles [76]
   Dr. Johannes Fiebag 1956 - 1999 - Sue Kovioss [27]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Mark Cashman [376]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Roger Evans [113]

  Oct 16:

   Electrogravitics Systems - Sue Kovios [23]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Bruce Maccabee [31]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [122]
   Filer's Files #41 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [350]
   CPR-Canada News: Formation #6 at Midale, - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [64]
   Electrogravitics Systems - UFO UpDates - Toronto [29]
   Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Stig Agermose [69]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [97]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [104]
   Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower - Kevin Randle [20]
   Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Bruce Mccabee [5]
   Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower - Larry Hatch [43]
   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 10-15-99 - Rense E-News [244]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [222]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Bruce Maccabee [75]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Roy J Hale [24]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Roy J Hale [16]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Sue Kovios [42]
   Re: Phoenix Police Helicopter Accosted By UFO - Stig Agermose [20]

  Oct 17:

   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 25 - John Hayes [308]
   Tornado Crash Puzzle - David Clarke [129]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #321 - Alfred Lehmberg [117]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Neil Freer - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [172]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - John Rimmer [38]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Amy Hebert [57]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Larry Hatch [14]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Jenny Randles [111]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Joseph Polanik [75]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Larry Hatch [57]
   Re: Cooper/Woods MAJESTIC Leak Grows Into Paper - Larry Hatch [26]

  Oct 18:

   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [75]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Roger Evans [205]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [50]
   Santilli Film Stills? - Philip Mantle - QUEST [23]
   'Alien Autopsy' Archive - Philip Mantle - QUEST [12]
   UFOIN - Announcement - Robert Moore [17]
   Re: Nick Pope's Weird World - Martin Phillips [53]
   ATIC Research Update - Wendy Connors [16]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Bruce Maccabee [19]
   Please Check Links - Roy J Hale [9]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Henny van der Pluijm [32]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Dennis Stacy [49]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Lesley Cluff [72]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Dennis Stacy [30]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Mark Cashman [19]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Joachim Koch [78]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Lesley Cluff [42]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Christophe Meessen [94]
   PRG/X-PPAC Programming Announcement - Stephen G. Bassett [50]
   [bwwma] BWWMA Flash! Firmage On TV Tonight - Bufo Calvin [32]

  Oct 19:

   RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash - James Bond Johnson
   <JBONJO@aol.com [47]
   NASA Report On 'Unidentified Visual Phenomena...' - Stig Agermose [20]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Greg Sandow [18]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Greg Sandow [23]
   MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work - Stig Agermose [105]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Henny van der Pluijm
   [30]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Greg Sandow [18]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Greg Sandow [23]
   A&E's 'Celebrity Close Encounters' - Lesley Cluff [64]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [109]
   Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers - GT McCoy [69]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [95]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [28]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Jim Mortellaro [136]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Larry Hatch [28]
   ATIC History Update - Wendy Connors [88]
   Researcher Presents Findings At University Of - Blair Cummins [27]
   Re: From Maxwell Burns - Pat McCartney [78]
   NASA Unveils New, Most Accurate Antarctic Map - NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
   [100]

  Oct 20:

   Polygraph Standards & Principles of Practice - Serge Salvaille [117]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Tim D. Brigham [55]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [390]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Paul C. WIlliams [36]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [52]
   Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work - Jenny Randles [118]
   Re: Colorado Professor To Present Seminar On - Stig Agermose [31]
   'The Abduction Enigma' - Thiago Ticchetti [38]
   Re: Santilli Film Stills? - James Easton [41]
   McDill AFB 1967 - Brian Cuthbertson [37]
   Missile Intercept Mistaken as UFO? - Blair Cummins [21]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Dennis Stacy [56]
   Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash - Rick Goldsmith [35]
   Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work - royjhale [25]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [87]
   Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe? - Ignatius Graffeo [18]
   RPIT More New Findings - Neil Morris [65]
   Correction: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe? - Ignatius Graffeo
   [23]
   Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers - Maurizio Verga [11]
   The Legend Of The Piri Reis Map - Erol Erkmen [40]

  Oct 21:

   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Jim Mortellarko [35]
   ATIC History Update #3 - Wendy Connors [49]
   Re: Get Real - Marc Bell [80]
   eS) Moon Mystery - exoScience [23]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Joachim Koch [23]
   PRG/X-PPAC Program Addendum - Stephen G. Bassett [16]
   WBAI's 'UFO Desk' [was: Ed Walters' Photos...] - Greg Sandow [20]
   Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case - Greg Sandow [35]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Greg Sandow [25]
   RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On - UFO UpDates - Toronto [65]
   The Missing Nozomi (Planet B) Probe - Gavin A. J. McLeod [4]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Roger Evans [81]
   Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers - GT McCoy [21]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [38]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Mark Cashman [59]
   Some Questions For Nick Pope - Tim Matthews [94]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [54]

  Oct 22:

   'The Grey Dude' - Brian Cuthbertson [6]
   Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004 - Ignatius Graffeo [139]
   Re: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe? - Perry Mick [10]
   Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris... - Neil Morris [49]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 26 - Joseph Trainor [255]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Bob Kathman [45]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Jim Deardorff [35]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [117]
   Re: RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On - Alfred Lehmberg [33]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [106]
   Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude - Amy Hebert [72]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [51]
   Re: RPIT More New Findings - Bruce Maccabee [34]
   Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..." - Stig Agermose [116]
   Laura Lee E-News - October 23, 1999 - webmaster@lauralee.com [122]
   Ice-Age Nanotechnology? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [152]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [56]
   Filer's Files #42 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [421]
   JJG Passes - More Than Swamp Gas - Jim Mortellaro [26]
   An Invitation To Messrs Black & Maccabee - UFO UpDates - Toronto [10]

  Oct 23:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [62]
   Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex - Joachim Koch [56]
   UFOcity.com Report 10/99 - Peter Robbins [347]
   Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out - Alfred Lehmberg [39]
   Re: RPIT More New Findings - James Easton [36]
   Alien Abduction: What's Going On? - Tara Wood [7]
   Jupiter, Saturn and Venus (and the Northern - Nick Balaskas [14]
   UFO Conference Oct. 30 & 31, 1999 - New Jersey - Tom Benson [32]
   Re: Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004 - Jim Mortellaro
   [154]

  Oct 24:

   Virginia Tech Prof Makes 'Out Of This World' - Stig Agermose [66]
   SETI@home Project Reaches Major Milestone - Stig Agermose [82]
   UFO Research - Focus On Nuclear Weapons Incidents - Stig Agermose [45]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Roger Annette Evans [127]
   'Cigarette-Smoking Man' A CSICOP Member - Speaks - Stig Agermose [100]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Stan Friedman & - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [46]

  Oct 25:

   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [49]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #322 - Alfred Lehmberg [79]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [54]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [57]
   Re: RPIT More New Findings - Neil Morris [46]
   Re: UFOcity.com Report 10/99 - Nick Balaskas [73]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - Joseph Polanik [70]
   Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In - Roy J Hale [14]
   Australian UFO Sighting Reports OZ Files 24.10.1999 - Diane Harrison
   [183]
   CPR-Canada News: WAIF Radio Interview - October - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [46]
   When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Stephen MILES Lewis [304]
   More Web Links - royjhale [10]
   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... - Stephen MILES Lewis [149]
   Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Stig Agermose [176]
   Re: RPIT More New Findings - neil morris [93]
   Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In - Andy Roberts [82]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [84]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Chris Kelly [8]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [86]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [226]

  Oct 26:

   Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy - Stig Agermose [188]
   Re: Alien Ineptitude - John Velez [108]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Tony Spurrier [76]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [191]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [32]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [18]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Stephen Lewis [70]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Pat McCartney [55]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [92]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [105]
   PRG/X-PPAC 'Beyond Little Green Men And SETIi's - Stephen G. Bassett
   [118]
   Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum - Karl T. Pflock [11]
   Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Scott Hale [19]
   Re: RPIT More New Findings - Bruce Maccabee [25]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [164]
   Top UFO News Stories of 1999 Poll Starts Today - Ignatius Graffeo [12]
   [canufo] UFS 10-24-99 Whitehorse, Yukon - UFO UpDates - Toronto [76]
   Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy - Robert Gates [28]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Rebecca Keith [13]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [88]
   AA Film In Popular Culture - Philip Mantle - QUEST [27]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [105]
   [lunascan] Re: Warning - Ted Phillips [32]

  Oct 27:

   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - David Clarke [18]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - UFO UpDates - Toronto [35]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [73]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [79]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [22]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [98]
   Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out - Jim Mortellaro [43]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos - Bruce Maccabee [28]
   Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum - Jerome Clark [17]
   Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Greg Sandow [61]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Thiago Ticchetti [18]
   Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Bob Young [11]
   Re: Get Real - Sue Kovios [74]

  Oct 28:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [81]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Henny van der Pluijm [49]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Henny van der Pluijm [47]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Robert Gates [348]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [206]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [68]
   Ways To Make Sight-Observations? - Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland [144]
   Top Events And Publications Ltd. - Philip Mantle - QUEST [57]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [63]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [63]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [52]
   New UFO Crash In Brazil Forest? - Thiago Ticchetti [83]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [16]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Neil Morris [64]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Jenny Randles [49]
   Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum - Karl T. Pflock [20]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [107]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [100]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [46]
   Federal Notice on Groom Lake/AREA 51 status, Oct. - Norio Hayakawa [94]
   Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Dennis Stacy [10]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Henny van der Pluijm [48]

  Oct 29:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [43]
   Re: Get Real - Amy Hebert [51]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Terry Blanton [29]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Roy J Hale [28]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 27 - Joseph Trainor [541]
   Heathrow 06-09-98 UFO Full Report - David Clarke [78]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [45]
   Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations? - Mark Cashman [15]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [36]
   'Chupacabra' Attacks Again - Thiago Ticchetti [22]
   Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies - Greg Sandow [10]
   Article: Marfa Lights - Blair Cummins [8]
   Ways To Ignore Reality - GT McCoy [32]
   CPR-Canada News: Another Formation - Viscount, - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [60]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Todd Lemire [25]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Todd Lemire [34]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Jenny Randles [38]
   Dark Object - Donald . Ledger [18]
   Re: - Steven M. Greer [37]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Steven M. Greer [37]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [34]
   Re: Get Real - Sharon Kardol [114]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [76]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [30]
   Sheriff Recalls 1966 UFO Encounter - Blair Cummins [123]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [91]
   Where's Bill Barry? - Karl T. Pflock [11]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Kim Burrafato [47]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Stefan Duncan [46]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Jim Mortellaro [139]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [194]
   Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy - Stephen G. Bassett [37]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - John Velez [75]
   Re: Get Real - Dave Bowden [35]
   Filer's Files #43 - George A. Filer [322]
   Cali/Colombia 1976 - Joachim Koch [46]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [180]

  Oct 30:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Todd Lemire [38]
   New Yorkers Watch Skies For UFOs - Blair Cummins [90]
   Re: Huge Fireball Leaves Canadians Puzzled - Don Ledger [31]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Jim Mortellaro [69]
   Re: Ways To Ignore Reality - Jim Mortellaro [47]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Amy Hebert [18]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Joe Murgia [39]
   Re: Cali/Colombia 1976 - Larry Hatch [62]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #323 - Alfred Lehmberg [108]

  Oct 31:

   New at Magonia - Mark Pilkington [21]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [44]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Robert Gates [101]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [268]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Serge Salvaille [40]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [132]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Tony Spurrier [28]
   'War Of The Worlds' Revisited - Blair Cummins [14]
   Aliens Stole My Title - Jenny Randles [56]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Bassett & - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [41]
   Whitley Striber to speak at MindScience Foundation - Stephen MILES
   Lewis [22]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [180]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [109]
   Re: Aliens Stole My Title - Karl T Pflock [18]
   FYI - Alien Base by Timothy Good - Lucius Farish [45]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [136]

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





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:06:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 02:37:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 12:51:54 -0400
 >>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:01:05 -0500

 >Patient and gentle listfolk:

<snip

Mr. Clark:

Your polemics are tiring.  You write for yourself. I no longer
read anything you write.

Terry Evans.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                   Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage

From: Steve Neill <neill@gte.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 11:20:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 15:08:43 -0400
Subject: Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage

[Non-Subscriber Post]

 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 07:35:01
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Strieber Rallies UFO Faithful, Rails Against 'Denial'

<snip>

 >A glowing sphere lopes across the night sky over Camarillo, CA,
 >on Thanksgiving, 1998. With a long rigid projection fixed at a
 >skewed angle and tipped with a smaller spherical projection, it
 >is unlikely to be a weather balloon. It teases the camera, then
 >explodes in a blast of flaming debris�.


To whom it may concern.

The video tape of the UFO over Camarillo was shot by me, Steve
Neill. Whitley doesn't bother to mention this and I alone with
Roger Leir as an observer video taped the UFO.

Whitley, months ago, asked for the tape to take for this lab and I
have not been able to get back the original tape. I'm being
avoided which puts Whitley in a worst spot light than he already
is. All I want is the tape back.

These kind of actions on his part are not good. Thought you
should know. It's this kind of thing that caused my departure
from the UFO community for good. If you didn't see my message
attached is a copy.

Sincerely,
Steve Neill

STEVE NEILL FX


-----


SIGHTINGS


Steve Neill, Renowned
UFO Researcher and
Artist, Quits UFOlogy
 From Steve Neill <neill@gte.net>
5-15-99

After being involved in the most serious UFO research and direct
experiences with ET all my life, the behavior of most of the UFO
community has become such a disgrace, so vile and demented, that
I have decided to withdraw from the field permanently.

All the petty, infantile mudslinging and politics, the
backstabbing and throat-slitting, the egos and the liars, the
radio cult figures, the betrayal of 'friendships' have all
overshadowed the critical issues at hand...and have often made a
virtual laughing stock of anyone who innocently tries to tell
the truth.

The UFO 'community' is its own worst enemy. Any respect this
field might have had or been due to receive has been destroyed
by the actions of many, if not most, of the key players
involved. I say *most* involved because there are some very good
professional people in the field...but they are a relative few
and maintain low profiles for the most part.

After many, many years of involvement and serious study, I have
regrettably had to accept that many of the good people who come
into contact with this subject are often destroyed by it, and
can lose family, friends and even their careers because of the
fighting and manipulation and treachery running rampant.

Perhaps the people who designed and implemented the 50 year UFO
cover-up are right. Perhaps they know exactly what they were -
and are - doing. Perhaps they realized it by simply watching the
behavior of the UFO 'community' and knew better than to give
this biggest secret of all to the masses. Without doubt, if the
world at-large acted like the UFO 'community'...the world might
well stop...the engine of society gagging itself to a dead stall
after choking on the outrageous lies, deceit, fraud, hate, and
hoaxes that so permeate the UFO 'culture' these days.

In retrospect, perhaps some of my own actions have been
irresponsible and may have unwittingly contributed to the stress
and downfall of some...in the sense that my experiences
terrified them and set up an opportunity for hustlers to play on
the underlying current of exaggeration, fear, and anxiety that
hearing these experiences can bring about. Somewhat naievely, I
thought it was important that people know and that it might help
some of them. But for all those I helped, I may have done a
disservice to many more.

It can be reckless to alarm the public, even if you do have
proof. We should think more of what the 'truth' could do to
those who hear it...instead of what it can do for we who know.
This isn't a warning about pollution or some social injustice
but of an invasion by beings from another world(s) who have
*total control* over us. And we, as a species, haven't a clue.
That kind of knowledge can destroy one's ambition, social
parameters, and, in some extreme cases, even the will to live.
This we cannot allow to happen. Certainly, many humans may be
'ready' for the 'truth' but given the current state of the
world...and the strangle hold on over half the world's
population by organized 'religion'...the results would be
catastrophic.

Finally, it would be a much better use of our time if we pursued
issues we CAN control in order to provide a real future for our
children...those who can still think for themselves.

Have any of you talked to a 16 year old lately? Many of our own
children, tomorrow's 'leaders,' have very little hope for the
future. They often live for the moment and the next high (drugs
or otherwise) and their heroes are all too often dark
'movements,' and dark rock bands with their dark and ugly
lyrics, dark video games of death and terror, and dark thought
which is spawned and nurtured in their young minds by the
greed-obsessed 'entertainment' industry and other mass-mind
control mechanisms. What happened to the The Beatles and John
Glenn? What happened to at least the idea of morals and positive
values? Responsibility? Accountability? What happened to the
concept of 'giving'?

The same egomania and self-aggrandizement that fuels the morons
who top the pop music charts is found in the UFO 'community' as
well. Oh yes, the vocabulary is a little more astute but don't
kid yourself, it's the same old rocket-to-stardom "I wanna be a
star" syndrome.

In the UFO 'community' theft of others' research has replaced
the real thing. Many 'researchers' go to conferences and on
radio programs and simply spew various mixtures of other
peoples' data...begged, borrowed, and just plain stolen. When is
the last time you heard someone unique...who actually said
something 'new'? It doesn't happen very often.

It's time to try to reach back to being the great beings we
were...and are...so that we may reach ahead and make it to that
future which holds so much promise. We went to the Moon over 30
years ago and what a proud moment it was.

Now it's time to journey to Mars...and the stars beyond...where
one day WE will become the aliens. Let's give the world
something positive for a change. For starters, let's stop
knocking NASA. Sure, every agency has its problems but overall
they've done more to help this planet and its people then any of
you UFO folks will ever hope to do. It's stupid to make an enemy
out of the very people who have the keys to our own Starship.

I know some of you will be offended by my actions and my words.
You wouldn't expect it from Steve Neill of all people. Well,
it's time to wake up and smell the coffee, you don't know 10% of
what you think you do. After all, there is life after UFOs and
it's a great one I plan on living. My efforts at this point are
to shift back to what I was doing before all this started...to
promoting manned space exploration anyway I can. You will
already see examples of this redirected energy on my website and
there will be more to come.

All the Universe or Nothingness.

The choice is ours.



-Steve
Neill <neill@gte.net

www.alienfx.com


A brief comment on one Robert A. M. Stephens. If you strip away
the foul language (which he claims to use only to respond to
people who abuse him), you might just see the UFO community's
own karma coming home to roost. The chances of this man 'just
happening' to stumble into this arena are about zero. If nothing
else, he has exposed many of the biggest frauds and egos, and
most guilty corruptors of reality. He has also held up a mirror
to UFOlogy...forcing it to look at it's own ugly face. He has
shown how it has defiled its own opportunity to make an orderly
and intelligent advance into our immediate future. Robert A. M.
Stephens is a symptom of serious trouble...and, just perhaps, he
is the bitter medicine that could start a cure. Only time will
tell.


----

Commentary

Mr. Neill,

Four years ago I went to work for a company that supplied its
software engineers with access to the internet. I began reading
alt.aliens.visitors at that time. This was about the time that
the Alien Autopsy film was debuting. Also there was Bob Lazar
and the tunnels and Jim Lear's stories. For the first time I was
able to see a large piece of the picture as I have been a UFO
follower since the '50s when I was a boy. Since then I have an
internet connection in my home as well and my first web page
each day is the Jeff Rinse Sightings page. I have never listened
to Jeff's radio programs as they are not available in this area
(DFW), but the type of news his page reports is what I'm
interested in. Current events including the UFO news! If it were
not for people like yourself in the UFO field dedicated to the
truth, I would not be as informed as I am today in these
matters. Truly it must be very frustrating to have to deal with
the liars, thieves and debunkers, but somehow we the public
thinkers can pretty well tell who is lying and who is not. We
have time on our side and can watch the communities credible
member's reactions and wait 'til the dust settles. We are not
stupid! I have known for years that the alien presence is here,
don't ask how, I just have known. Call it a slow arousal from a
deeper sleep, call it higher concious- ness or whatever, the
point is most thinking people know the truth. I want to take
this opportunity to thank you for your effort in this field and
wish you the best in the future. Mars is an exciting next step
and I have been aware that NASA's effort has redoubled toward
it. Thinking back a few years, the thing that stands out in my
mind is that panoramic composite picture sent back from the tiny
Mars rover. Incredible! The problems that plague our world are
gripping to say the least. Such varying awareness spans the
planet, from primitive natives to sophisticated engineers and
technicians, from the spiritually deprived to corrupt
politicians. The span is great, but time is on our side, time
has a way of bringing birth to new thoughts, to new beginnings
and peace.

Have a nice day,

Woody Pope Engineer, guitar player and UFO buff





SIGHTINGS HOMEPAGE






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            What's New At Magonia

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 23:55:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 03:52:55 -0400
Subject: What's New At Magonia


http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/newmag.htm

01/10/99

     Roger Sandell memorial competition
     �100/$160 prize

     Winter book reviews by Peter Rogerson
     Keep your head down for the millennium passover period

     Untangling "The Abduction Conundrum"
     Magonia answers critics of the psychosocial school
Mark Pilkington

"A heathen perhaps, but not, I hope, an unenlightened one."
Lord Summerisle
------------------------------------------------
Magonia Online



http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

               Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 15:17:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 03:29:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:49:57 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Steven J. Dunn writes:

 >>In April 1998, NASA released imaged of the Cydonia region and
 >>the "face on Mars" that looked to most, including this humble
 >>correspondent, to be a very natural formation.  The "face" was
 >>dead.

 >The MGS shot of the "Face" on Mars was handled horribly from the
 >beginning--by the news media, predictably, but also by NASA, who
 >released an unprocessed version of the Face to the media in an
 >arguable attempt to kill the issue before any intelligent
 >discourse could materialize.

 >In a way, NASA was being honest: it released the first halfway
 >intelligible image it had right away, killing the otherwise
 >inevitable attempts to shout "cover-up"!  But for an agency who
 >publicly claimed a "neutral stand," the horrid April image was
 >used as a "straw man" by the very geologists who insisted it was
 >a non-issue and not worthy of discussion.

<snip>

 >Sadly, NASA has also informally retracted its earlier promise to
 >rephotograph the site "until everyone is satisfied."  It wasted
 >a perfect opportunity to do just this on Aug. 26--a chance to
 >get a clean overhead shot of the Face under good light and
 >weather conditions (even NASA grudgingly conceded that the April
 >'98 image was taken through a layer of atmospheric haze).

 >Our next chance is in November.

 >The Face and its associated landforms represent a legitimate
 >scientific anomaly, and one that can be falsified--but only with
 >good data!  A failure to pursue this mystery, whether out of
 >cowardice or bureaucratic apathy, may well turn out to be the
 >defining intellectual catastrophe of our era.

 >--Mac Tonnies


NASA is supposed to be a "public funded" organization, receiving
it's money from Congress and supported by tax payers.

Since NASA chooses to "exclude" the very people who are funding
their space exploration, why do we continue to support them and
request Congressional funding???

If they feel we are not entitled to "know" what their machines
along with the "sensors and cameras," are detecting, then why
should we "collectively," not demand of Congress a complete
cut off of "public funds?"

I personally feel and have felt for over 25 years that most of
the work done by NASA was for the Military Complex anyway.
When you understand that the majority of astronauts have been
Military Test Pilots in the past, then I think this may support
my contention.

I realize there are more civilians involved with the "shuttle"
missions now, but still, who is reaping the benefits from NASA's
budgets?

Do we really want to know what they have kept from us over the
years?  If so, then let us demand it now or forever "shut up!"

I am the first to admit I am a "dunce."  The fact that I have
sat idlely by for all these years and said nothing should
prove that.

REgards, Mike

  Download ICQ at http://www.icq.com/
  ICQ#:7508455
  BBS: (270) 683-3026
  Fax: (270) 686-7394
  Home: (270) 683-6811
         ---






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

              Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On Roswell

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 01:56:11
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 03:55:07 -0400
Subject: Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On Roswell


Source: 'space.com'

http://www.space.com/area51/marcel_990930.html

Stig

***

Marcel's Last Words on Roswell Crash

By Robert Scott Martin
Staff Writer

Sep 30 1999 12:21:09 ET

**

[Images:
Jesse Marcel, late in his life. Click to enlarge.

Marcel unfurls a sheet of unidentified debris in 1947 (credit:
Fort Worth Star-Telegram). Click to enlarge.]

According to a previously unknown 1981 interview, Jesse Marcel,
the Roswell Air Force Base intelligence officer who transformed
UFO history when he recovered pieces of an unidentified object
in the desert, maintained to the end of his life that the object
was no weather balloon.

Linda Corley, who interviewed Marcel five years before his
death, closed the 1999 National UFO Conference with a largely
impressionistic portrait of the man's last years in Houma, LA,
where she still lives.

Corley contacted Marcel after a college professor told her class
to interview "an interesting person." The resulting four-hour
conversation between Marcel, his wife, Viaud, and Corley took
place around the Marcels' kitchen table on May 5, 1981, and was
recorded on an inexpensive student cassette player.

One of the most significant details to emerge from the
discussion, believed to be Marcel's last in-depth public
statement on the Roswell affair, was the fact that Marcel firmly
denied having seen alien corpses in the wreckage.

"Had there been bodies of aliens in the debris, I would have
picked them up and brought them in," Corley quoted him as
saying.

The absence of corpses flies in the face of orthodox Roswell
crash mythology. Stanton Friedman, author of Top Secret/MAJIC,
Crash at Corona and other UFO exposes, has previously stated
that other sources told him that both debris and bodies were
recovered from the crash site, and the possible existence of
alien passengers in the crashed object has been one of the main
factors fuelling the Roswell industry.

Theoretically, of course, Marcel could simply have been unaware
of any alien bodies, which may have been taken away before he
toured the wreckage. However, this is unlikely. Why would a
super-secret effort to recover any bodies before Marcel arrived
on the scene leave the strange wreckage behind? Why not take
everything?


Not a balloon


Even in the absence of aliens, Marcel remained convinced that
the wreckage was not, as the Air Force has since maintained,
part of a downed top-secret balloon.

"The material was unusual," Corley said he told her. " It
couldn't have been a balloon. It was porous, it couldn't hold
air."

To the best of Marcel's knowledge, the military kept all of the
strange metallic fabric that predominated the debris, along with
the structural elements that looked like wood but didn't burn.

He had little patience for either the original explanation that
the "flying disk" recovered from Roswell was part of a weather
balloon, or the official story of a highly classified Mogul spy
balloon that emerged later.

The infamous photograph of Brigadier General Roger Ramey
displaying the wreckage was unquestionably a fake, he said,
staged later "strictly for the press."


"Publicity is not what I want"


Significantly, Marcel does not come across in the Corley
interview as a man making up an outlandish story to get
attention and possibly money as well, as skeptics have claimed.

"Publicity is not what I want," she quotes him as saying. "I
feel like I'm a nobody and I'm going to stay a nobody � talk
about these things and they get a net after you."

Nor was he a "true believer" interested in spreading his story
to win public support for the UFO cause.

"I became disinterested" with UFOs, he said. "There's something
wrong with me -- I'm still curious, but I'm not reading."


Patriotism, silence and their rewards


Marcel described himself as a young man to Corley as being
extremely ambitious, "like ten cats on a hot tin roof," a
characterization borne out by more than 8 years of active
military duty.

Still, he left the army at a relatively young age in 1950,
whereupon he learned he had received a "stealth promotion" to
the rank of lieutenant colonel in December, 1948. The file
explaining the promotion had been misplaced, he told Corley.

Corley now says Marcel felt unable to tell her everything he
knew about certain subjects, quoting him as saying, "I left the
service, but remain loyal to the country and a vow I took to
keep my mouth shut."

That very vow may explain why he called her a few weeks after
the interview in a "frantic" mood to tell her that everything he
had said had been a lie. He insisted that she not release the
information to the press, and so she kept the interview out of
the public eye for more than a decade, not even turning it in as
part of her school assignment.

"My heart really went out to him because he sounded so scared,"
she said.


Even Memorex fades


Instead, she kept the tapes on the shelf, unplayed but preserved
as a testament to the possibly "unique information" they held.
By the time Stanton Friedman heard of the interview and asked
Corley to release the tapes, they had already decayed and were
of dubious use to him.

"It seemed I had waited too long," she said. Instead, the faded
recordings forced her to transcribe the interview herself, she
said, using her likewise transitory memories to fill in the
gaps. She also made use of a new cassette player that "cleaned"
the tapes during playback.

Although Friedman returned two of the three tapes to her in 1995
and the third in 1996, Corley held back on releasing the
material until Mrs. Marcel's recent death, she said.

Working with the tapes evidently stirred a profound wave of
nostalgia in Corley, as she waxed rhapsodic about the feeling of
listening to the innocent and enthusiastic voice of her girlhood
after all the years. She framed the afternoon with the Marcels
as an almost holy moment, an event somehow set outside time by
her own proximity to the golden age of flying saucers and the
catastrophic interruption of Roswell.

Corley named the trees in the Marcels' backyard, showed slides
of the suburban house and the elderly couple slouched over their
kitchen table. The event has so ingrained itself in her
emotional makeup that she has spent apparently vast amounts of
time and energy doodling the "pink and purple" marks -- often
called an example of some alien alphabet in the literature -- in
various patterns and color schemes.


Earnestness or artifice?


If Corley can exude such apparent yearning and personal
attachment to a hoax, then her hoax is one of extraordinary
complexity. Her somewhat formal public speaking style and
outsider's willingness to retrace details that are common
knowledge in the Roswell field may be the marks of an authentic
novice thrust by circumstance into the eye of UFOlogy, or they
may be only an artful mask designed to draw attention away from
an interview that never took place.

What motivation could she (or, in theory, Friedman) have in
going to such extreme lengths to sugar-coat a hoax?

Her prepared speech -- of a dozen NUFOC speakers, she is the
only one I remember reading from pre-written sheets -- wandered
down blind alleys of recollection with all the apparent
earnestness of the college psychology paper that it was once
meant to be. Would a brilliant deception of the kind required to
fake such earnestness even stoop to such a pose?

Complicating the issue is Corley's newfound desire to publish a
book -- presumably to at least a small material gain --
containing her transcripts of the tapes, which are of course
sadly no longer readily useable by independent researchers.

The book will reportedly focus on Marcel's patriotism and his
recollections of his own golden youth at the dawn of the saucer
age, but the question of why she would make the material
available for wide release now after letting the tapes fade for
so long remains to be adequately answered. Until that answer
emerges (or more independent parties evaluate the tapes), her
story must sadly remain at least a little suspect.

**

Copyright �1999 space.com, inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. You can
read our terms of service








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:38:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 04:03:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 09:49:22 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Last night while my kids were flipping through the channels
 >searching for something to watch, they happened across "Close
 >Encounters Of The Third Kind" so we watched the last hour of the
 >show.  Remember the part where a "mother ship" lands, or hovers,
 >whatever, and a huge ramp lowers? After a suspenseful pause,
 >these people who were abducted 50, 40, 30 years ago or just last
 >week come walking down the ramp in a daze. Onlookers are shown
 >smiling these great big smiles and one technician comments, "He
 >hasn't aged a day.  I guess Einstein was right."

 >Now, what is wrong with this picture?

 >Abductees, taken from their lives years ago, are finally
 >returned by their abductors and everyone thinks this is just
 >hunky-dorey.  These abductees may not have aged a day since they
 >were abducted but their lives have been totally disrupted.  Most
 >of their family and friends, if still alive, have continued to
 >age in their absence.  They have no jobs, their education would
 >be out of date compared to today's standards and they will have
 >to adjust to a very changed world.  So why is everyone smiling?

 >No one knows what was done to these abductees yet these UFOs and
 >"aliens" are welcomed with open arms.  It doesn't seem to matter
 >that citizens of this planet were taken against their wills and
 >returned years and years later.  To hell with the abductees, we
 >have made _contact_!

 >Then to top it off (this one really got me), we give them _more_
 >humans to take with them....no questions asked!!!

 >(ROFL...and crying)


Amy,

I sympathize with abductees and experiencers.  This is
happening in the Real world, you're right.  Close Encounters
was made 23 years ago, before the general public really
knew what abduction was all about.  It wasn't really until
'Communion' that people became aware of the reality (even
though there were many who already knew, those being the
abductees).

I'm sure the intention of the movie was not to discredit the
reality of abduction.  It is not based on a true story, although
some of it may have been indirectly, it is fantasy/sci-fi.  Is it
wrong for someone to imagine what it could be like?

CE3K is more of a kids movie.  The scenario you refer to is
meant for children.  If it contained scenes such as some in Fire
In The Sky, it would not have been as successful as it was.
Spielberg caught the attention of the world.  I think that was a
good start, don't you? Perhaps there were many people who came
forward because of this movie.  It's not horrific, new age or
totally unbelievable.  And it may even be comforting to a child
that has been abducted allowing him/her to talk about something
that may have happened to them.

I can see how some would see it doesn't reflect reality, but it
wasn't intended to.  Which would you rather have your child
watch, CE3K or Fire In The Sky?  Let kids see something good out
of all this.  Next we'll be picketing in front of Spielberg's
home protesting for Human Rights.  Then I'll say 'Get Real' or
'Get a Life' or 'Go back to your day job'.

It's a PG13 movie.  I don't believe I'm even responding to this.
I'm going to play with my stuffed ET now, the real one, not the
fake furry one. (That's a joke and no Dr.J I don't mean EBK.)
And no, I'm not making a joke of all this, I take it seriously,
to an extent, but sorry this is too much.

Did you realize Spielberg, Stephen King, Letterman? were born in
1947 and Demi Moore (who is an amazing acrobat) is from Roswell?
Why _does_ Letterman like his theatre so cold?

Sue





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                        Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 22:40:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 04:27:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:31:47 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?

 >http://dsaing.uqac.uquebec.ca/~mhiggins/MIAC/fireball.htm

 >Nick Balaskas



Thanks for the hot tip on the Canadian Fireball Reporting
Centre, unfortunately their server is down and I can't submit
the report! heheh...always the way!  It's quite an interesting
site though and I plan to read up on the subject. For those of
you who didn't see the previous post I've left the link on this
letter.

Jacquie






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                                Re: Get Real

From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 15:52:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 10:29:47 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >To our perceived captors, we may be so low down on the sentient
 >pole as to be animals in the field by comparison with their
 >intellects and technologies.

 >Should this be the case (it's a theory which I do not favor, but
 >admit to the possibility), what makes a difference is our
 >intellectual level. It does not permit such invasion.  Again,
 >should this be the case, in order for the alien to be righteous,
 >he (she or it) just have to have one hell of a good reason(s).

 >If not, I and people like me, should remain pissed to the gills.


Hi Jimmy and all!

My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.
They are not all that much brighter than us, nor are they better
than us. In many ways we humans are far superior to them. They
can never have or experience many of the things that all of us
take for granted every day. They lack our emotions, our
passions, and our ability to think and act as individuals.
Computers are able to process incredible amounts of information
in seconds, yet are they intelligent, or smarter than a human
being? I think not. The more I learn the less these beings
impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
they think gives them the right to do what they do.

Take care,
Marty







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:18:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:45:32 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 16:12:30 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


Dear Neil,

Thanks again for answering me.

You say:

 >I've no doubt the pouch flight _did_ take place, my only query
 >is as to the date it happened and by what means Dubose managed
 >to linked it to a specific day/date, Tuesday July 8th.

Please listen to me !!

What I have been supposing (I am not 100% sure of course) is
that there was _another_ flight with another pouch.

General DuBose, for his part, described _two_ different flights:

- the one in his affidavit. Sealed pouched directly sent
to Washington, presumably on Sunday evening (he does not give
the date in his affidavit).

-the one he describes in the Shandera interview: the canvas
pouch with balloon debris which he received from a B-29, carried
and displayed on Ramey's floor. Presumably on Tuesday, although
he did not specify the date, but it had to be the date since the
debris was displayed after the visit of Marcel do Ramey.

So, if we pay attention to what general DuBose said, he
described _two_ different flights with a pouch.

Why did he mention only one in his affidavit?

Possibly because the second one was much less important to him.
Sufficed to say in his affidavit:

"The material shown in in the photographs... was a weather
balloon".

On the other hand, he did not describe the flight carrying the
real debris, carefully wrapped, with Marcel and other officers,
because he was not there at the arrival of the plane. It does
not mean he was ignorant of that flight: he just did not witness
it.

All this seems clear enough to me!

Let me add this. We may suppose that, if General DuBose had been
entirely "in the loop" of the whole operation, he probably would
never have said a word about it. He may assume the same for
Major Marcel. Both men knew only part of it.

Remember how Cavitt refused to show Marcel his report,
if that is true?

Gildas Bourdais






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 13:12:18 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:48:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:06:58 -0500
 >From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT

 >>>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 12:51:54 -0400
 >>>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:01:05 -0500

 >Your polemics are tiring.  You write for yourself. I no longer
 >read anything you write.

Translation: You know you lost the argument but can't bring
yourself to offer the apology I would happily accept.

I don't think you're a bad guy.  I can tell as much from other
posts you've made, unrelated to our dispute.  It's my judgment
you simply stepped into something without realizing what you
were getting into.  I guess the old warning applies: Look before
you leap.

Jerry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 11:57:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:46:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT

 >Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >What does Mr. Young mean by "private investigators"? Private
 >detectives?  Does he think that witnesses ought to be treated as
 >potential criminals?  I guess so, since he tells us that
 >"polygraph tests" -- judged virtually useless by an army of
 >critics in criminology and science -- are "a major part of
 >investigations."  Along the way he perpetuates the tired and
 >mindless slander  that ufologists are in it for the money.

Jerome Clark;

It seems as if you are now accusing me of perpetuating �tired
and mindless slander.� Gosh! I wonder why this is the case,
especially since I have not previously entered the Gulf Breeze
discussions. Wasn�t my message simply a brief commentary on your
previous vitriolic approach to those who you are in dissent
with?

I am quite humored how you go on to charge that �like the self-
righteous everywhere,� I [and fellow associates] want to �dish
it out without having to take it.�  Well, I don�t know what I
have dished out which I couldn�t take, except to illustrate an
overbearing and sordid level of discourse that you have mustered
out in the past few days. Recall that I sought to address
certain comments from Brian Straight regarding your alleged
�voice of reason� while in dispute, only instead, I find myself
cast as one who �demonstrates what happens when ufology is
treated as an excuse to short-circuit real debate by trashing
those with whom one disagrees.�

Further, I find myself affiliated with �character assassins,�
accused of  �coming on as a judge, juror, and executioner,�
again, I stress, without ever having said a word about the
current discussions [except some past non-specific comments from
several months back in a separate thread where I possibly eluded
to a general skepticism of the Gulf Breeze affair], and am also
charged with being �baffled and outraged when my intended
victims complain about the unfairness of a trial� and am further
said to �show the bankruptcy of the prosecution's case.�

I am unimpressed with such juvenile vitriol.

Hmm� where are you, Brian Straight, and what do you think of
your officer of civility during UFOlogical dissent? Mr. Clark
sounds more like someone who obsessively attacks anyone for no
purpose when in dispute mode, whether or not that person has
voiced any issue-related comments or not.

Perhaps Mr. Brian Straight, who has since slightly clarified his
original comments on dissent in UFOlogy vs. dissent in
astronomy, might reconsider his earlier comments and offer a
gentle illustration of how the UFO field is comprised of
mud-flingers who promote personal attacks that are beneath the
esteem of respected science. If so, maybe he can begin his list
with Jerome Clark.

Respectfully,
Kenny Young
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                  Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 03:24:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:50:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 00:21:48 -0400
 >From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

 >Poor Whit! He's really lost it... Whitley Strieber has never won
 >"a Caldecott award" in 1985 or any other year. Either he
 >misspoke, someone misreported or the greys have really taken
 >control of poor Whit's brain cells more than even he assumes!

Actually, Wendy, anyone who knows James Moseley and his
newsletter, Saucer Smear, would know that being honored as
"UFOlogist Of The Year" is a tongue-in-cheek award. ;>

Amy

Home Page: "http://members.tripod.com/TheVanguard"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 1

                              Re: The Challenge

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 16:58:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 17:58:12 -0400
Subject: Re: The Challenge

 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:17:40 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Challenge
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 16:48:43 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Lynne Bishop <lynnebishop@softhome.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Challenge

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 12:09:42 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: The Challenge
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 10:28:51 -0700>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Lynne Bishop <lynnebishop@softhome.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: The Challenge

 >>>John Velez said <snipped for brevity>:
 >>>Everyone should take the time to write to Budd Hopkins, David
 >>>Jacobs, John Mack, Ray Fowler, John Carpenter et al and -ask
 >>>them- to collectively contribute any materials they may be in
 >>>possession of that may help to advance what little is known
 >>>about UFO abductions. If it turns out that they _don't_ have
 >>>anything of value in stock then that fact should also be known.
 > ______________________________
 >>>KRandle responded:
 >>>I think you might have found the problem. There is nothing in
 >>>stock of value.
 > ______________________________


Kevin wrote:

 >Okay, since this is the comment that has evoked the majority of
 >the responses, let us revisit it.
 >
 >John Velez suggested that if there was nothing of value in the
 >hidden data of the abduction researchers, then we should know
 >it, meaning, I believe, that all information should be shared.
 >John, if I have misinterpreted your meaning here, I apologize.
 >
 >The key words are "all information." And I didn't try to weight
 >it all to one side, or to paint it all one color. I meant, after
 >an independent analysis of any materials gathered, the results
 >(whether fer or agin) should be made known to the general
 >public. It would be nice to see the results of such a study
 >published in an 'acknowledged' academic journal. In your
 >original response you had admonished me to be ready to  face the
 >possibility that there is nothing of value (or nothing at all)
 >in the evidence bins of the more well known authors and
 >investigators. That's fine. But, as Lynne has already pointed
 >out, the possibility that there -may be- 'something' there is
 >just as credible at this early stage. A point that you neglected
 >to mention in your first response.

Kevin, what I had hoped would happen was that folks would begin
to think about ways to get the people who claim to have this
physical evidence to finally -do something- with it. As in,
having an independent analysis performed. Unless pressure is
brought to bear on these individuals, there is simply no way
it'll ever happen on its own. "Someone" has to get the ball
rolling on this one. The debate/argument over abduction has
raged on for over 20 years. Isn't about time somebody -not
connected to the abduction authors and investigators- finally
took a close and thorough look at this material? That, was the
"Challenge."

With this I agree. However, I added the condition that the
researcher who discovered the information be allowed to reveal
it for the proper credit. Those who have conducted the research
are certainly the ones who should determine when, where and how
it will be revealed.

It's been twenty+ years Kevin. So far, no one has stepped up to
the plate and volunteered their data for independent analysis.
Of course -all- credit and acknowledgement should go to those
who collected it. I even mentioned that they could all be
invited to submit individual 'White Papers' to be included in
the final published version of the analysis results.

"Proper credit" is not the issue. 'Voluntary participation' in
such a study is. How long is the public supposed to wait to find
out what, if anything, these folks have in terms of 'hard
evidence.' Frankly I grow weary of waiting for it to happen by
itself.

If past is prologue, then I believe you'd have a better shot at
seeing Hell freeze over before any of them voluntarily submit
their data for analysis by third party!

I then added the comment that I believed that John might have
discovered the problem and that was that there were no hidden
data that would answer our questions. This means, quite simply,
that there may not be any evidence of a conclusive, independent,
and scientific nature that would lead to the extraterrestrial,
or any of the other hypotheses, that surround the tales of
abduction. I meant, quite simply, that this might be the reason
that nothing has been revealed because there is nothing to
reveal.

No Kevin. I went out of my way not to weight it one way or the
other. -Both- possibilities exist with equal chance. They 'may'
or 'may not' have anything. The point (once again) is that no
one knows because these guys haven't submitted any of it for
testing! Until/unless -public pressure- is applied I don't see
them voluntarily submitting it themselves.

If it turns out as you say, that they have nothing at all, then
that fact will become very clear early in the proceedings. We
will have gotten some answers to important questions (ie; do
they have any physical evidence) immediately. And with a minimum
of expended effort. If they do have materials to submit for
testing, for God's sake let's see it and find out if has any
value as "proof" for a physical phenomenon.

Here, until all the data are in hand, we have little more than
speculations.

Now you're coming around to where I started out at! I was hoping
that folks would begin to brainstorm what it would take to make
such a thing happen. (Strategy)

It was my speculation that the reason here was that the
physical, independent, corroborative data simply did not exist.
That would be the reason that nothing had been revealed. There
was nothing to reveal.

I -could have- speculated that there may be hard evidence there.
I refrained from it. You should have done the same. The object
would be to remove the element of 'speculation' by replacing it
with proven/known fact. "Speculations" (whichever way they are
slanted) is about all we've had since the beginning. (Re;
abductions)

Hey man, I thought you were the Dr! Why am -I- telling -you- all
this!  <eg>

Does this mean that we shouldn't look? Of course not. We always
have to look, because the one time we don't might be the one
time that there is something of substance there. I would not
advocate a position of refusing to look.

Yet you give voice to speculations that there is nothing there
without giving equal time to its opposing possibility. Think
about that Kevin. It's why Lynne responded to the thread
originally.

So, not to put too fine a point on it, I was merely speculating
that John might have been right when he suggested that if there
was nothing of value in these hidden files, we should learn
that. I was suggesting that the reason the files have not been
made public is because there was nothing of value in them...
meaning that the evidence would not be conclusive. It was a
speculation based on prior experience and was a suggestion that
we not be too disappointed if nothing new was learned.

Let's all band together and -find out- once and for all! I
"challenge" you and anyone else who reads this to do what they
can (I suggested writing to the investigators as one possible
course of action) to make a study of this material a reality.
Unless everyone gets involved and the demand made with a
collective strong voice there is simply no motivation for them
to comply on their own.

Hit em in the book sales and conference attendance and watch how
rapidly they become willing to participate! I'm an -activist-
Kevin. I didn't want to spark another 'debate.' I was hoping to
rouse folks to -action.- We desperately need some answers to
basic questions. Unless all of us grab the bull by the horns and
shake it out, it will not be forthcoming on its own.

I hope this clears up any questions you may have had as to what
I did or did not mean.

John Velez, abductee/experiencer
________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
                     ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                             http://www.if-aic.com/
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                    10/1: This Week on Destination: Space

From: Diana Botsford <Diana_Botsford@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 20:38:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:08:07 -0400
Subject: 10/1: This Week on Destination: Space


***JPL declares Mars a dead planet. Again.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/
On the heels of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) admitting to
'pilot error' on yet another unsuccessful robotic mission to
Mars (the Climate Orbiter), JPL has decided to rescind any of
its earlier support for the wet Mars theory.

Look for an announcement later this week from Destination: Space
regarding our hosting an upcoming chat event with NASA and
independent Mars scientists to discuss the Dead Mars/Wet Mars
theories in detail. And why JPL is really backtracking to its
earlier position on the red planet's past.


***The Great Space Race Goes Private?
In decades past, the only race off the Earth was between the USA
and the USSR.  But in the world of private finance, this may all
change as entrepreneurs such as Bigelow Aeronautics and Rotary
Rockets put their money where their dreams are.

Destination: Space is currently developing a detailed section on
the privatization of Space Exploration which will premiere later
this fall.  In the meantime, we recommend listening to The Laura
Lee Show (http://www.lauralee.com) this Saturday evening as Bob
Bigelow will be on to discuss his organizations plans to get Mr.
& Mrs. Regular Person into space.


***The Politics of UFOs
Chat with UFO Lobbyist Stephen Bassett
Sunday, 6pm, PT / 9pm, ET

Political activist Stephen Bassett will begin a new series with
Destination: Space this Sunday on the path to UFO Disclosure.
This Sunday join him along with DS's UFO Editor Bill Stockstill
for an important update on the political process.  According to
Bassett, there will also be several "surprises" he intends to
discuss.

Bassett's organization is The Paradigm Research Group
(http://www.paradigmclock.com).  He is also the founder of the
Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee
(http://www.x-ppac.org/).

See below for more information on how to access our chats.


***STAR TREK VOYAGER CHAT SERIES ON DESTINATION: SPACE
Every Wednesday
Starts at 9pm, East Coast Time
Ends at 10pm, Pacific Coast Time

Join the Destination: Space SciFi staff for a weekly chat on the
latest Voyager episode.  The chats will start at 9pm, ET and run
until 10pm, PT so everyone can join the chat and talk about the
night's episode.

EPISODE TITLE: "Barge of the Dead" SYNOPSIS: Torres confronts a
dark side of her Klingon ancestry when she asks a skeptical
Janeway to allow doctors to induce a coma-like experience that
will allow her to aid her condemned mother who is held aboard a
mythic Klingon death barge.

A note on our chats:  As the Destination: Space website
continues to develop, we are beginning to test a web chat system
(java) that is useable by all operating systems and browsers.
You therefore have two ways of entering the chat:

1)Using IRC software.
Chat server: chat.solarcafe.com
channel: #briefing

2)Using our web chat system (please note that there is no
special design to this section yet - it is still in the
developmental phase).  Just go to
http://www.destinationspace.net and click on the bottom right
portion of the screen where it says "web based chat".

We look forward to seeing you online.


Diana Botsford
Producer
Destination: Space
http://www.destinationspace.net

- - - - - -
"To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
Beyond the utmost bound of human thought . .
To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield."
Tennyson's Ulysses







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               NASA Speaks in English but the Control Panel is

From: From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 21:49:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:14:06 -0400
Subject:  NASA Speaks in English but the Control Panel is


"NASA said confusion over whether measurements were made in
metric or English units led to the crash of a $125 million
spacecraft as it approached Mars last week."  According to the
New York Times today (10-1-99).

Am I the only idiot who thinks this "mistake" is the most lame
sort of none sense ever perpetrated on US since the president
sinned?

How two major Military and NASA contractors can each work in
different systems boggles this Gripple brain big time.  I cannot
imagine such an error folks.

I've worked for several NASA contractors as well as at NASA
Goddard Spaceflight Center, and knowing (less than some of you
do) what I do, it just can't happen.

It's like Jethro Bodine cypherin to the base ten while everyone
else is doin it to another base _and_ in metric!

The new NASA call sign: "Help!  It's fallen down and I can't get
it up..."

Jim Mortellaro







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:46:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 11:57:04 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT


 >>What does Mr. Young mean by "private investigators"? Private
 >>detectives?  Does he think that witnesses ought to be treated as
 >>potential criminals?  I guess so, since he tells us that
 >>"polygraph tests" -- judged virtually useless by an army of
 >>critics in criminology and science -- are "a major part of
 >>investigations."  Along the way he perpetuates the tired and
 >>mindless slander  that ufologists are in it for the money.

 >It seems as if you are now accusing me of perpetuating �tired
 >and mindless slander.� Gosh! I wonder why this is the case,
 >especially since I have not previously entered the Gulf Breeze
 >discussions. Wasn�t my message simply a brief commentary on your
 >previous vitriolic approach to those who you are in dissent
 >with?

Nope.  You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also pointed out
to you), that I was responding to vile accusations against my
character -- accusations, moreover, that were hurled without a
shred of supporting evidence. Apparently, in these things, it's
the victim, not the perpetrator, who's the guilty party.  I'm
certainly glad you're not a cop.

 >I am quite humored how you go on to charge that �like the self-
 >righteous everywhere,� I [and fellow associates] want to �dish
 >it out without having to take it.�  Well, I don�t know what I
 >have dished out which I couldn�t take, except to illustrate an
 >overbearing and sordid level of discourse that you have mustered
 >out in the past few days. Recall that I sought to address
 >certain comments from Brian Straight regarding your alleged
 >�voice of reason� while in dispute, only instead, I find myself
 >cast as one who �demonstrates what happens when ufology is
 >treated as an excuse to short-circuit real debate by trashing
 >those with whom one disagrees.�

I stand by what I said, and I remain appalled at your defense of
the judge, jury, and executioner school of ufology.  Maybe it's
high time, guy, that you did some serious soul-searching.  My
contributions to ufology are out there for anybody to see.  What
are yours, besides to apologize for the most degraded sort of
discourse in this field, where people's good names are out there
to be trashed?  And when they defend themselves in richly
merited tones of outrage, why can you only hurl yet more
baseless charges against them?


 >Further, I find myself affiliated with �character assassins,�
 >accused of  �coming on as a judge, juror, and executioner,�
 >again, I stress, without ever having said a word about the
 >current discussions [except some past non-specific comments from
 >several months back in a separate thread where I possibly eluded
 >to a general skepticism of the Gulf Breeze affair], and am also
 >charged with being �baffled and outraged when my intended
 >victims complain about the unfairness of a trial� and am further
 >said to �show the bankruptcy of the prosecution's case.�

 >I am unimpressed with such juvenile vitriol.

Apparently, in your Kafkaesque world, the innocent are expected
meekly to plead guilty. If they insist on setting the record
straight and turning the tables on their accusers, that only
proves that somehow they were guilty in the first place.  I am
not impressed.

Juvenile vitriol, alas, is all we hear from you. What is this
strange obsession you have with character assassination?

Back in the '60s we used to say, "If you're not part of the
solution, you're part of the problem." You're part of the
problem, Mr. Young.

Jerry Clark










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:46:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:50:15 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:18:49 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 16:12:30 +0100
 >>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

 >Dear Neil,

 >Thanks again for answering me.

 >You say:

 >>I've no doubt the pouch flight _did_ take place, my only query
 >>is as to the date it happened and by what means Dubose managed
 >>to linked it to a specific day/date, Tuesday July 8th.

 >Please listen to me !!

 >What I have been supposing (I am not 100% sure of course) is
 >that there was _another_ flight with another pouch.

 >General DuBose, for his part, described _two_ different flights:

 >- the one in his affidavit. Sealed pouched directly sent
 >to Washington, presumably on Sunday evening (he does not give
 >the date in his affidavit).

 >-the one he describes in the Shandera interview: the canvas
 >pouch with balloon debris which he received from a B-29, carried
 >and displayed on Ramey's floor. Presumably on Tuesday, although
 >he did not specify the date, but it had to be the date since the
 >debris was displayed after the visit of Marcel do Ramey.

 >So, if we pay attention to what general DuBose said, he
 >described _two_ different flights with a pouch.


Gildas, Neil and List:

Perhaps my foggy memory can add a bit of illumination here.

I was in AAF pilot training at Sheppard Field, Texas, when the
atomic bombs were dropped on Japan on August 6th and 9th, 1845.
Japan surrendered on the 14th. I was up flying and heard the
wonderful news when I landed. All AAF flight training was halted
immediately. While waiting to be discharged on October 29, 1945,
I worked in the base post office. We used those large heavy
canvas mail sacks common to every post office. They were about
four feet long and about 18 inches wide at the top. They were
secured with a big keyed brass lock.

One of those mail sacks likely could have held all the packages
that were brought to General Ramey's office by Major Marcel on
July 8, 1947. As I reconstruct that scene I believe there were
at least five packages wrapped in meat wrapping paper. The
largest would have held the "long sticks" and "foil sheets". Two
others held the "miscellaneous" broken beams and other pieces
and two were still unwrapped and are seen on the floor in the
Ramey office photos that I took. > >Why did he mention only one
in his affidavit?

Please don't rely too heavily on the details of any affidavit
executed more than 40 years after an event. I know I was
confused as to how many shots I had taken until I had an
opportunity to review the pictures again in 1997. I suspect
that General Dubose, who was about 20 years older than
I am and who had not seen the photos from 1947 until he
was interviewed by Jamie Shandera 40+ years later, also
would have been unclear on many details.
 >
 >Possibly because the second one was much less important to him.
 >Sufficed to say in his affidavit:
 >
 >"The material shown in the photographs ... was a weather
 >balloon".

If General Dubose actually said that then he was continuing the
original AAF cover-up, if the official Air Force published
reports of 1994-95 of a MOGUL train are to be believed!

 >On the other hand, he did not describe the flight carrying the
 >real debris, carefully wrapped, with Marcel and other officers,
 >because he was not there at the arrival of the plane. It does
 >not mean he was ignorant of that flight: he just did not witness
 >it.

But he certainly was around when the debris was being unpacked
and spread out on the floor in General Ramey's office. Remember,
it was Colonel Dubose who met me in General Ramey's office and
informed me that the general was not there but expected to
return momentarily. Does that help to clarify things?

 >All this seems clear enough to me!

 >Let me add this. We may suppose that, if General DuBose had been
 >entirely "in the loop" of the whole operation, he probably would
 >never have said a word about it. He may assume the same for
 >Major Marcel. Both men knew only part of it.

If you knew how the AAF operated you would know that the Chief
of Staff of the 8th Air Force was the "pivotal" figure on the
staff. All staff actions must cross the desk of the CofS. He is
the hub of the operation! Remember that General Ramey had just
been promoted from that same job a few weeks before when General
McMullen, former 8th AF commander, was promoted and reassigned.
As the Intelligence Officer for the elite 509th "Atomic Bomb"
Group Major Marcel had not just fallen off a turnip truck
either.

 >Remember how Cavitt refused to show Marcel his report,
 >if that is true?

Cavitt was a CIC type and not in the same chain of command as
Major Marcel. He would have had no reason to show any report to
Marcel.

 >Gildas Bourdais







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                              Re: The Challenge

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 08:58:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:52:07 -0400
Subject: Re: The Challenge


 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 16:58:52 -0400
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Challenge

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:17:40 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Challenge
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<major snip>


John, List, All -

We seem to be on the same page here. Yes, we should look. Yes,
we should have the information now. Yes, we should demand to see
all the "hidden" evidence. All of this would advance research
and answer questions. And yes, I suspect that had the evidence
existed, we would have seen it by now, rather than be
entertained by Derrel Sims' box of alien and CIA implants, or
shown pictures of an empty beach and the like. But count me in.
Let's get to the bottom of this.

KRandle









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                     Re: Sightings Of Fast Moving Lights

From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 19:04:22 +0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 03:06:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Sightings Of Fast Moving Lights


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 13:48:04 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Sightings Of Fast Moving Lights
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Sightings Of Fast Moving Lights
 >>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 16:31:36 +0300

 >>Jim, could you please tell me a bit more, in detail? Did you see
 >>one light at the time, or many lights? If only one light at
 >>the time, me and some of my acquaintances saw the same thing.

 >There was only one light at any time I witnessed this phenom
 >here in Lower Westchester County (Lower NY State) and one only
 >in the upper part of our county, when witnessed by another
 >person.

 >Thank you Minna.  The thinking is excellent, but what we saw was
 >(we think) not a meteor, and for several reasons.

 >First, the light was so pure white, with no trail (and no sound,
 >which I usually 'hear' 70% of the time a meteor appears).
 >Secondly, the light curved sharply and reversed it's direction,
 >then curved sharply again and continued it's travel, all while
 >we were watching it.  The thought struck that I might have moved
 >my eyes in an attempt to focus and/or track the light, and in
 >doing so, may have confused the movement of my eyes and/or head,
 >with the movement of the light.  However this was not so, as the
 >other witness saw the same track as I did.  We compared notes.
 >Also, it happened the same way too many times for coincidence,
 >we think.

<snip>


Hi Jim, hi Erroll, hi listmembers!

Thank you Jim for more details.

In Finland a UFO research group publishes the reports they
have during each year as a book. Now 6 has been published, and
there are some alike cases. The light I saw made its zigzag
up-down way, not left-right or right-left way. One of these
cases denied the publishing, but was still interesting: it was
seen before satellites were on the space, sometimes during 50`s.

One explanation could indeed be some optcial error, but as a
meteor, satellite etc. they all are hypothesys. I don�t think
it`s a flying saucer, but I do also think it would be nice to
find out what is it. I�m living now with a man, who knows the
stars and the wonders of the space much better than me. Some
evening, when we are on our daily walk I hope I�m so lucky to
see this odd light again, so I could ask what he thinks about
it. If we�ll get any reasonable solution I�ll share it with you
Jim. And if you Jim, will find a explanation before me, would
you share it with me, too?

Asks Minna from Finland








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #319

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 12:38:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 03:08:22 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #319


Apology to MW #319 (For October 2, 1999)

You can walk the song filled hallways as the music wraps around
you. It can whisper from the portraits you may pass. You can
step off from an edge and fall through space to sighing
fountains. You can hear peculiar music. It's a gas! Call it
candy for the eye attached to verse you've never seen, and
please, try to keep your bearings on the way. One way trips all
seem so final as you click the colored signs, and the way back's
hard to find I'm pleased to say.

You can wander in the gardens that you only dream about, or fly
to real castles in the sky. You can float along astonished while
the pictures curl and dance, you can warp to other places if you
try. You can almost smell the greenness of the lushly crafted
leaves as they move around in winds you almost feel. You can
almost taste the flowers that are growing under bushes that are
spread out like they may as well be real.

This is real as some golf course that you over-fertilize, and so
poison all the wildlife downstream. Rather, satisfy an urge to
get away from all that hassle, for awhile, and just wander in
your dreams. Jump through *holes* in space to see its alternate
dimensions, and then walk, amazed, distracted by the sights.
Visit links you click on for a different kind of view, and be
_thankful_ for a conscience starting fights.

And, yes, you may be _lucky_ if I poke you in the eye, or I
*scare* you with the stories I might tell. The fact they MAY be
real is a fact you might consider if you snort and swell up big
-- get mad as hell! Remember the proportion of your rage may
coincide with suggestions that you're grossly incorrect. I'm
right, it makes you angry, you lose your bearings, and your
focus, so descend to crass attacks . . . and disrespect?

I just stroll the halls (the parapets of airy castles) I have
built, with a but a gesture and a nod! Convenience is a virtue
when not kept to just the *few*, so I'll build these odd
realities that might question Christian gods. I rake muck (to
make my point) on shiny shoes of *greater* persons (who would
sooner shut me up, or put me out). Elitists have their way; they
write the rules; they ARE foreclosure; they are sum and tat and
total, and they SHALL NOT go without.

Stand atop a pillar that is placed there for your use, and then
vent your righteous spleen on what you'd feel. I can take it, or
can leave it, but I'm better for the hearing, and the same would
go for you, so that's the deal. Care to hear a sunrise? Then a
visit to my grotto is the coolest place you'd ever think to be.
Run and spread your arms to warp or fly, but cleave the heavens
that are spreading wide like curtains, yes! You're free!

Build your own and we'll be neighbors -- an idea marketplace,
where the usual laws of physics won't apply. Unhindered by the
*rules* you're freely thinking for the first time, and then
thinking for yourself the reasons why. Don't believe the priests
and kings that bother and distract you with convenient rules
they make to stay on top. Learn to take your counsel from the
mirror of your life -- then learn to wonder why, and learn to
cop.

And this, a tiny plot of all the places you can wander that
provide their own *distraction*, I admit. But who is making
money when you cash out buying in and begin to see who profits
_most_ by it. Come on in and talk, leave a message, walk the
walk, and we'll share out all the things that we have found.
Come and look and you might find that it's your culture strikes
you blind, and the teachings that you've _scorned_ are more
profound.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

It's as real as you want it to be, can link to anywhere, and can
do it right now. Additionally, it's going to get a lot better --
a LOT better. Own a little paradise. Don't buy a few packs of
something harmful or frivolous (to provide the fundage) -- take
a chance. Buy in. But come to wander, that's as free as it gets.

Restore John Ford!

--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 2 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                           UFO Desk - 'Witnessed'

From: Paul C. WIlliams <paulw@escape.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 09:10:06 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 03:13:01 -0400
Subject: UFO Desk - 'Witnessed'


All,

Sorry about last week, had technical problems. Tonite at one am
eastern drop by the UFO Desk website and hear the interview I
conducted with Bud Hopkins, Linda Cortile, John Velez, Eugenia
Macer Story, and Greg Sandow. Link to webcast is word "here".
Hope you can drop by. There are some problems with recording,
gaps as tape had to be turned, all that will be worked out in
future. I wll be online so please drop email or ICQ during
webcast. Much thanks to all.

Paul Williams
Executive Producer UFO Desk
http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk
Kewl ufo posters, books, and sci-fi videos at my store.
http://shop.affinia.com/paulw/store
ICQ# 32519151









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                          Filer's Files #39 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:41:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 03:20:16 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999


Filer's Files #39 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,   Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
September 30, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com

The purpose of Filer's Files is to enlighten and give the reader
insight into the real world around them.  My computer crashed
this week and it was only the kindness Robert Kocher, Chuck
Warren, and Camelot Computers that were able to get me up and
running with a better system.  These men deserve thanks and
recognition as modern Knights in our search for truth.  Without
their help you would not be reading these files.

This week, we have numerous sightings and we'll cover a half
dozen of the best ones.  I also have some very disturbing news
from the Falun Gong organization whose 100 million practitioners
follow a regimen based on self-control and Buddhist
enlightenment.  Their leaders continue to be arrested in China.
They have sent me the following excerpt from a speech by their
leader, Master Li.   His revelations are perhaps the reason our
news media has failed to reveal information on UFOs.  He
explains his amazing beliefs concerning extraterrestrials and
their goals.  Without financial support I'm unable to verify his
statements.  However, I'm very concerned that the Communist
Chinese government continues to arrest thousands of Falun Gong
practitioners.

FALUN GONG RESPOND TO MY COMMENTS ABOUT CHANGE IN CHINA

Dear George: Thank you very much for your concern of situation
in China towards Falun Gong practitioners.  We hope more and
more kind hearted people would be interested to know the true
story about Falun Gong and the truth of the universe.  After
reading your report, we cannot help smiling at the same time
being concerned because we feel that your understanding of the
Falun Dafa has not touched its essence. If you don't mind, may
we suggest you read Zhuan Falun again from the first to the last
word?  We hope you would obtain deeper understandings of the
universe far beyond of UFOs.  Again, we should emphasize that
Falun Dafa can solve all of the mysteries in this universe, but
if we want to know the truth, we must cultivate ourselves to
assimilate to the cosmic character of
Truth-Compassion-Forbearance.  With filthy thinking in mind we
will never see the truth of the universe.  Thanks again for your
report and with best wishes,  info@falundafa.ca.  During Master
Li's lecture at the Frankfurt Conference in Europe he was asked
this question about extraterrestrials.  Question: Is there any
channel to communicate with intelligent beings outside the
earth?  Master Li responds,

"It seems that your attachment is still quite sizable.  Many of
the questions today are raised by those who have come for the
first time.  Man, having seen many movies, having read many
imaginary stories, having been gradually influenced by many
things in society, developed a metamorphosed thinking that
indulges in fantasy. You asked how to communicate with
intelligent beings. Let me tell you all that an ordinary person
cannot do such a thing nor is he able to.  If you indeed can
communicate with intelligent beings, yet you are not a
cultivator yourself without any energy, you are then in danger.
You may lose your life at any time.  Besides, you will see those
gruesome spirits but none of the higher lives because your level
is too low and is limited only to that of the human.  Thus it is
a terrifying circumstance.  It is even more terrifying if you
want to communicate with intelligent beings outside the earth.
Lives outside the earth are no more than lives on other planets
within this material dimension that our human eyes can perceive.

These lives, however, do not regard man as human.  They think
man is a beast, a kind of animal.  They willfully slaughter man
and willfully experiment on you.  They kidnap people to their
planets, lock them in cages as animals, and put them on display
for their people.  Many of the people missing on earth were
captured by them.  In addition, I tell you that the present-day
science of mankind was produced by them.  Why have these aliens
assembled this present-day science for man?  That is because
what they have on their planet is something of this sort.  They
plan to bring it to this planet and eventually substitute man.
They discovered that the human body is most perfect and the
best.  Therefore, they covet the human body and want to
eventually replace man.  In one of the planes of human molecule
cells, they have added their substances. By now, this has been
done and has been formed on a large scale. Therefore, for me to
save you today, not only do I have to deal with the issue of
purging all attachments and karma that you have to relinquish,
but I also have to clean up these things for you. The
development of mankind is quite dreadful. One day, computers
will control humans. It has already developed to this tendency.
Man will become the slaves of computers and machinery, and
eventually will be replaced by aliens. Why has the computer been
developed so quickly and the human brain suddenly become so
active? All of this has been carried out by aliens when they
have controlled the human mind. Aliens have cataloged and
assigned a number to everyone who operates a computer. This is
absolutely true. For our students, I have cleaned it all up for
them. When you use computers, you will not be interfered with by
them.

Why are there aliens? Some aliens originated from those planets.
Why do some aliens always come to the earth? Because they were
once humans on earth. But, it was not the earth of our time. It
was the previous earth that existed in the same location as this
earth. The earth has been replaced many times. Every time it was
replaced, there was a portion of lives, living beings created by
God with different appearances, that were relatively good at the
time and were then preserved. They were not destroyed. Some were
similar to the present-day humans; some were various forms of
lives created. However, they were not allowed to enter the
period of human development on the next earth and were thus sent
to another planet. It was done this way every time. Meanwhile,
this has left a historic record for the universe, for they were
humans on earth in different time periods. It serves such a
purpose. However, due to the slackening in overseeing them, they
have developed. Through scheming, they have created a variety of
scientific approaches, including the one currently present on
earth and some other types, a variety of modes of development.
Of course, they do not use the term "science." The name they use
belongs to their languages, their concepts. These things have
deteriorated further and further. Following the deviation of
Dafa of the universe, they have become worse and worse. That is
why all aliens are in the process of being completely cleaned
up. The entire universe is cleaning them up. At present, those
up there have been cleaned up.  What's left are those who have
come to the earth.  Some have sneaked into people; some have
possessed the human body.  There are still some other types.  I
am watching all of them. Let them commit their terrible deeds
for the time being. It won't be long before they will be
eradicated.  The deterioration of mankind is also directly
associated with them.  This is evil and, therefore, must be
eradicated." (see www.falundafa.ca/works/eng/frankfurt.htm).
Thanks to the Falun Gong.  Editor's Note:  Master Li indicates
the aliens are evil and kidnapping people!  Yesterday, I walked
into Wal Mart store and there were 29 pictures of missing
persons.  I contacted the State of New Jersey missing persons
and they explained each year about 50,000 people are missing in
this state, but about 49,000 are eventually found.  About 1000 a
year disappear forever.  I wonder where all these people have
gone including my wife's cousin Bruce Konigsfeld?

GEORGIA  DISCS

MCDONOUGH � On September 23, 1999, the witness was traveling on
I-75 North and at the Jonesboro Rd exit spotted a perfect
"saucer" shape object.  The metallic silver object descended
about 250 feet then moved to the left towards Hampton, GA and
stopped and hovered.  The witness stated, "This object was
definitely an UFO to me as there was absolutely no tail or wings
or propeller visible."  It struck me as a perfect saucer shape.
I am a skeptic but to me this was an UFO.  I told a few of my
friends and one of them reported her experience on Wednesday,
the previous day.

JACKSON -- She and two co-workers went outside for a smoke break
at 3:00 PM and saw a very "saucer"-like black object hovering
over the trees behind her office in Butts County.  She said that
they went inside to get more witnesses and when they returned
the object was gone.

FLORIDA FLYING TRIANGLE OR SPACE JUNK

TAMPA -- Ignatius Graffeo writes that he has obtained a video
tape of the FOX-13 Tampa September 7th, UFO news report.  Seeing
it again confirmed my original impression that it was definitely
not a disintegrating rocket booster or a meteor!! The video
clearly shows a close-up of a huge gun-metal-gray "V,"
triangular or wedge-shaped craft.  It is perhaps the best video
ever taken of this type of sighting.  It is not a bright light
or a flash across the sky like space junk claimed by NORAD.
It's an unbelievable videotape of a slow moving and stealthy
huge craft.  It looks like a surveillance type of UFO or Black
Project plane.  The report does not say who took the video, but
it is very impressive!  I am amazed how such a sighting could be
mistaken for anything else but a UFO.  It is truly frightening
how this type of craft can flaunt itself in our skies and be
explained away as space junk.  I will try to post a good photo
of the craft within the next couple of days.  Meanwhile I did
get the audio portion transferred to RealAudio (289K).  Listen
carefully! Ignatius Graffeo Ufoseek@aol.com UFOSEEK.org
http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/ ORLANDO � On August 21, 1999,
three witnesses saw glowing circular objects above them at 11:45
PM.  "We were sitting outside in the drive way when my Mom
looked up and said what is that?"  I stood up and observed two
objects then one appeared out of no where. Now there were three
criss crossing each other erratically in the sky very rapidly.
They just disappeared after twenty minutes.  Thanks to Morgan
Clements Director World Wide Reporting Center,
uforeports@aol.com

MONTANA LIGHTS

GALLATIN NATIONAL FOREST - There is UFO activity in the
beautiful state of Montana.  I recently took a four day back
packing trip to Gallatin park.  On all three nights little
satellite like lights could be seen.  At first they just seemed
like satellites and cruised at the same speed and light
intensity across the sky.  Little by little I started to see
more objects.  Some UFOs could be seen stopping and changing
direction. Others could be seen following one another across the
sky.  I did not see any move at extremely fast speeds, but they
seemed to be at the edges of our atmosphere.  They would move
extremely fast from the two to ten o'clock position in the sky
in three seconds.  Still others seemed to flash and then just
disappear. These sightings occurred between August 28th and 31st
at approximately 11:00 at night.  In the spring and summer of
1997, I was living in Missoula, Montana and my friends and I had
similar experiences in the Bitteroot Mountains and the Lolo
National Forest.  One night in particular, I was with three
friends and we all saw activity like UFO dog fight.  The lights
were moving at incredible speeds circling around one another and
chasing one another across the entire sky.  You can see them on
any clear night.  Thanks to Jeffrey M. Smith;  hippisjs@aol.com.

OREGON

SHERIDAN -- Jerry Burgess writes when I was twelve years old,
some fifty years ago I had a sighting. On September 10, 1999,
five family members were involved with a new dramatic sighting.
I was visiting my daughter and son in law 37 miles southwest of
Portland.  My daughter's home is on a hill top that gives a
panoramic view of the surrounding country side at about 7:15 PM.
We were sitting on the front patio, when my grandson pointed out
an object low in the northeast sky about 15 degrees above the
horizon. The object was dark in color and seemed to be
stationary and bobbing up and down like a cork on water.  My
son-in-law and I both retrieved our 10X50 binoculars.  Through
the glasses the object appeared to be a narrow triangular shape.
Even though there was plenty of sunlight the object did not show
any reflection or lights.  It hovered in one place for 15
minutes, then it started to move at approximately 15 miles per
hour directly west toward our location against a ten mph wind.
Suddenly the object put on amazing burst of speed going from 20
degrees off the horizon to almost directly over head in a matter
of seconds.  It slowed down again and hung almost stationary.
The object was triangle in shape and about the size of two 747's
or perhaps larger.  There was no markings or lights visible.
The object seemed to be drifting with the wind when suddenly it
just winked out and was gone.  It didn't seem to accelerate out
of sight.  One-second it was there the next it was gone.  The
object was about the size of a dime at arm's length.  It was
much higher than the normal 11,000 foot aircraft approach
altitude traffic into Portland Airport.  Thanks to MUFON�s Jerry
Burgess

ARIZONA

RAINBOW VALLEY -- CAUS reports that John Edmonds and his wife
saw a strange object on September 22, 1999.  An unidentified
object was seen hovering in the foot hills about a mile west of
195th Avenue and Ray Road at 9:33 PM. John was cleaning his pool
when he observed an object with a bright light in the center
with six smaller indirect pulsating white lights on the outer
edge.  Twice in four minutes the smaller lights went off
completely and then turned on again.  A nonsynchronous pattern
was detected.  A large red orange cloud of smoke was noticed
soon after object blinked out. When John attempted to drive
toward the object, it blinked out at a distance of 800 feet.
John said, "The glare of the object was so bright he could not
discern a shape." The next night, on September 23, 1999, three
small groups of triangular craft were sighted heading southwest
into the Goldwater air artillery range at 9:18 PM.  Three
minutes later the sky lit up with the deafening roar of
afterburners as F-18 fighter jets passed over in pursuit. The
jets attempted to pursue the triangular objects at a sound
breaking pace, but the pursuit was futile.  Shortly a pair of
attack helicopters began sweeping the desert floor for an
unidentified target without success. Thanks to Peter A. Gersten
Director CAUS and John Edmonds --rottijohn@earthlink.net.

POSSIBLE PHOTOGRAPH OF ALIEN OBTAINED

Early in September of 1999, Marilyn Ruben of Alien Abduction
Experience and Research (AAER) received a possible photograph of
an alien. Marilyn asked we inform our readers about the amazing
photographs.  The photo was taken outside at night by an
abductee.  The alien's body glows in a plasma like electrical
light showing its right arm and side.  The entity appears to be
standing still or almost still as the arms appear to hang in a
resting position at its sides.  There is an orange glow around
the alien's head, neck, shoulders, and backside of its body, but
the front of the alien does not seem to glow.  The glow may be
from the alien's energy field that is picked up by the film, but
may not be apparent to the photographer.  The alien appears
muscular in structure and very different from humans.  The skin
appears to have a red orange striping.  Due to the cloudiness
surrounding the striping, it could also be part of the alien's
energy field.  Thanks to Marlyn Ruben.  If you have any further
information or comments please contact me or AAER at
abductions@aol.com.  These spectacular photographs can be
observed at www.filersfiles.com or
http://www.abduct.com/aaer2/r2.htm

CANADIAN WITNESS SAW ENTITIES

GRAND MERE, QUEBEC -- Robert Leblond reports the Association
Quebecoise d'Ufologie, (AQU) is investigating a case where two
small alien beings in white were surveying a garden. Mrs. H.
coming out of her shower, saw two biological entities completely
covered in white from head to toe similar to astronaut' clothing
on October 24, 1998.  They wore some kind of helmet and were
picking specimens off the ground.  The entities seemed to float
rather than walk.  Their size and physical appearance were
similar to humans." About 75 feet behind them, there was a thick
brown fog made up of different bright colors with a bright glow
about 27 feet in diameter.  She watched for three minutes before
leaving the window.  When she returned, the entities had
disappeared and the fog was moving away.  There were ground
traces noted by the investigators that were examined and
photographed.  There were four traces; two measured twelve
inches in diameter and two were ten inches.  Soil samples were
taken and are being analyzed.  The investigators discovered
several holes two inches in diameter and eight inches deep
filled with dirt that was different from the rest of the garden.
AQU commented the soil texture inside the holes was brown in
color and seemed to have been sieved. The dirt outside the holes
was of a thick consistency and rich like normal garden black
earth.  Some footprints that seem to correspond to club-feet
were also noted.  Thanks to Michel M. Deschamps ufoman@ican.net
and Louise A. Lowry World Of The Strange Weekly Newsletter.


AZERBAIJAN

BAKU -- The Moscow newspaper 'Komsomolskaya Pravda' has
published an article concerning a UFO seen above Baku, the
capitol of Azerbaijan.  A huge glowing rotating UFO was escorted
by three small 'classic' flying saucers according to a witness
who is a Doctor of Sciences in Baku.  The Doctor was able to
capture 40 minutes of video on his hi quality digital Sony
camcorder with 300 x zoom magnification.  Some 5000 frames are
available and the full 3-D picture of the UFO, is clearly seen.
Thanks to Anatolij.

AUSTRALIAN JELLYFISH UFOs

Barry Taylor comments,  the recent UFO sightings are strange.
The size and color are the same as the huge daylight sighting of
a blue and orange 'cluster' on June 26, and July 6, 1999.  When
the object took-off at around 3,000 klm/hr they seemed to be the
same type of objects.  The one video taped on September 15, had
a strange dangling 'ribbon,' that was not seen on the others.
The ribbon seems more like a 'special' device for use in what
ever they are doing.  It could be some type of 'antenna' or
'information gathering' device.  I now have a 2x telephoto lens
for my video camera so hope to get a closer look if one comes
around again.  Thanks to Barry Taylor

UNITED NATIONS WARNS OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS

The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), paints a grim
picture of the environmental crisis facing humanity at the turn
of the millennium and places prime responsibility for both
problems and remedies squarely upon the world's most developed
nations.  Based on contributions from UN agencies, 850
individuals and 30 environmental institutes, GEO-2000 outlines
problems and points to serious new threats. Its key finding is
that "the continued poverty of the majority of the planet's
inhabitants and excessive consumption by the minority are the
two major causes of environmental degradation.  The present
course is unsustainable and postponing action is no longer an
option." UNEP's Executive Director Klaus Topfer said, "Despite
successes on various fronts, time for a rational, well-planned
transition to a sustainable system is running out fast.  In some
areas, it has already run out.  In others, new problems are
emerging which compound already difficult situations." The world
water cycle seems unlikely to be able to cope with demands in
the coming decades.  Land degradation has negated many advances
made by increased agricultural productivity.  Air pollution is
at crisis point in many major cities.  And global warming now
seems inevitable.  Tropical forests and marine fisheries have
been overexploited, while numerous plant and animal species and
extensive stretches of coral reefs will be lost forever --
thanks to inadequate policy response by national governments and
international agencies.  Thanks to Richard F. Haines more
details at (http://www.unep.org).

ANOTHER NASA MARS ORBITER LOST IN SPACE

PASADENA, CA.--  Our $125 million Mars Climate Orbiter that
traveled 416 million miles to Mars vanished September 23, 1999.
It was entering orbit when for the second time in six years a
NASA satellite was lost just as it reached Mars.  The Russian
Phobus satellite was lost in a similar mishap a few years ago.

UNDERGROUND VAULTS AT WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB?

Robert Collins has collected a great deal of information
concerning alleged vaults at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.
The 'Vault Report' is just the tip of a greater iceberg that
contains "truths" from many sources that the government chooses
not to reveal.  The 'Vault Report' includes information from
many dedicated UFO researchers as well as our government which
is reported to have enough Sensitive Compartment Information
(SCI) documentation to fill a full size Mayflower moving van
from front to back, bottom to top. For amazing information go to
the URL
http://www.pufori.org/researchers/rmc_sanctuary_ot_birds.htm

BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT -- All real
estate agents are not the same?  Some real estate agents or
sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced.  Others
are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities.  When
you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you
have the best real estate agent working for you before you make
any important financial decisions on one your biggest
investments!  Remember, the majority of people do not know the
right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major
problems.  Picking the right real estate agent can be a
wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big
mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands! Find
out, "What you need to understand prior to hiring any real
estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not
want your to ask. Learn how you can obtain the best real estate
agent for your needs.  To get a free copy of this report, just
call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com.

U.S. GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO
Alert at Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign
Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now
available for distribution to the public.  Lunar Astronaut Dr.
Edgar Mitchell was at Edwards the night the UFO chase occurred.
The 6th person to walk on the moon said, "The night it happened
I investigated it myself and this was a real event."  Sam
Sherman's audio documentary tape called THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE
BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual
voice recordings provided by the Air Force.  During this event
12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down
low over the runways at Edwards AFB.  Tower operator Sgt. Chuck
Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command.  Sgt.
Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment
where he verifies the event as it is heard on the archival
recordings.  The UFOs are described and a decision is made to
launch F-106 fighter interceptors.  You are there for an
important part of UFO history.  Hear it for yourself, its the
best UFO tape ever made.  Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00
for shipping -- total $16.95 --(for overseas orders- out of US -
add $6.00 shipping cost - total - $20.95) you can send either a
personal check or money order to: Independent International
Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New Jersey 08857.

MUFON JOURNAL For more detailed investigative reports subscribe
by contacting Mufon@aol.com.  Filer's Files Copyright 1999 by
George A. Filer, all rights reserved.  Readers may post items
from the Files on their Websites provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue
that the item appeared.  Send your letters to me at
Majorstar@aol.com. If you wish to keep your name confidential
please so state.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                 Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 05:47:53 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 03:37:30 -0400
Subject: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond


Voyager Newsletter - Issue No. 8

* Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond *


On 7 August, 1999, I published the following:

'An Open Letter to Nick Pope'

Dear Nick,

In the July issue of 'NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD', you wrote:

"Over the past few months I'd been becoming more bullish in my
response to certain people within ufology who'd been sniping at
me over the years. Nobody likes criticism, and I'd been getting
a fair bit - little of it constructive in nature. If people were
criticising my views on, say, Roswell, then fine. I wasn't
there, and so my view probably counts no more or no less than
anybody else who's followed the case with a reasonable degree of
interest. But it rankled when outsiders who'd probably never
even visited MOD Main Building started casting doubts on my
knowledge about - and access to - government and military UFO
files. I've worked for the MOD for over fourteen years now, and
three of those were spent researching and investigating UFO
sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations
and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way".


I trust I'm not one of the aforementioned 'critics' and perhaps
you can help clear up some of the confusion which surrounds a
number of claims.

To recap; your appointment with the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
was as an Executive Officer. To clarify for the 'uninitiated'
(I'm a former Civil Servant), the standard grading hierarchy is
clerical assistant - clerical officer - executive officer -
higher executive officer - and upwards.

Although your affirmation clearly gives the impression of being
HM Government's full-time investigator of "UFO sightings, alien
abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations", etc., I
understand that was not the situation.

Weren't your duties varied and 'UFO etc. reports' only one
aspect? In possibly the first 'promotional' interview you gave,
to 'UFO Magazine' (UK) on 5 May, 1996, it was stated:

UFO Magazine: When did you join this office, and indeed, were
you aware of its function?

Nick Pope: I've been in the Ministry of Defence since 1985. We
are just 'posted around' every two or three years to acquire
experience. I had just finished various duties associated with
the Gulf War and it just so happened that there was a vacancy
which cropped-up. Also in this office was a chap I had worked
with quite closely with Gulf War duties and he offered me the
job. I was aware that UFO research was one of its functions.

UFO: Was this the reason you switched departments?

Nick Pope: I was certainly interested, it sounded fascinating,
but I was quite keen to get out of my old job. [End]

As you said, "UFO research was one of its functions".

Can you please clarify what the job title was and its other
functions?

What percentage of your appointment was actually spent on 'UFO
etc.' related matters?

Was it, for example, a situation where the 'UFO etc.' duties
took up, approximately, 75 percent of your time, 50 percent, or
did they only perhaps demand a few hours per week, maybe even,
over a period of three years, average a few hours each month?

It's obviously of interest to know how much emphasis our
government put on this and whether it continues to do so.


On the question of any 'cover-up', you helpfully confirmed and
have maintained this had no substance whatsoever. Typical of
your response was the one given to Michael Lindemann, editor of
'CNI News', on November 17, 1996, during a 'UFO conference' at
Blackpool.

Lindemann asked, "This seemingly irrational denial of
significant UFO events could be interpreted as evidence of a
deliberate cover-up. What are your views on that?".

To which you replied, "I found no evidence to support a cover-up
in Britain. I think, without trying to sound too arrogant, that
I would have gotten a few hints in three years if there had been
someone doing my job but on a covert basis, not least because
the one thing they would have needed beyond anything else was
access to the raw data of the witnesses, and never once in three
years had any witness complained that I had sent someone around
to the house".

 >From your experiences, the Ministry of Defence's opinion on the
subject was emphasised in the 'UFO Magazine' interview. Asked,
"One gets the impression that the MoD consider the UFO phenomenon
totally irrelevant?", you accepted, "That's correct".

Naturally, this included the 1980 'Rendlesham forest' case,
where it's now proven from the original witness testimonies I
obtained, that the 'UFO' sightings involved a two mile pursuit
of a light which turned out to be the Orfordness lighthouse
beacon.

Your assessment on the MoD's reaction to Col. Halt's 'UFO'
report was again perhaps best clarified in that pivotal 'UFO
Magazine' interview:

"My best assessment of what happened next is - absolutely
nothing! The report was written on the 13th January and when it
arrived at Whitehall, whoever was doing the job didn't have the
faintest idea what to do with it, probably took one look at it
and said, what am I supposed to do? I am afraid to say it simply
ended up in a file".

Also from that interview:

UFO Magazine: Was there a cover-up?

Nick Pope: No. Not in the MoD - I think the MoD's response was
just ineffective.

UFO Magazine: That's a very big statement?

Nick Pope: Yes, but if something of that magnitude was reported
and simply placed on file, then what else can you say?
[End]

As you may know, there will be a book published on the
'Rendlesham' case next year, with the stated intention of
exposing a grandiose cover-up, witnessed threatened, etc.

We trust your 'inside knowledge' is a more reliable appraisal
and you can be called on to testify to same, although it has
been stated you will be writing the foreword to this book, which
seems difficult to equate. Does that imply you maybe didn't have
access to the 'secret' information after all, or is it simply
that any cover-up didn't involve the MoD?


One comment you made to 'UFO Magazine' was, "There is not some
great mysterious organisation which is actually getting on with
the bread and butter of investigation, whilst I sent out
standard letters".

In a later interview, given to Clas Svahn of UFO Sweden and
published in 'Narkontakt', you reportedly stated, "And I get the
impression that, too use a coin of phrase - the X-Files has been
closed down. They've gone back to the bad old days where they
just send out standard letters and I think the investigation
they do now is at absolute minimum".

If you were sending out standard letters, what had changed?

I'm sure you will agree that our Government's position on 'UFO
research' would benefit from overall clarification and
Secretariat(Air Staff)2a1a have been asked to comment on these
points, especially how much time has been and remains allocated
to, as you put it, "researching and investigating UFO sightings,
alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations and any other
weird and wonderful reports".


It would be remiss not to take this opportunity to attempt one
final elucidation. In the 'Narkontakt' article, it's noted:

"Nick Pope is now completing the manuscript of his next book. The
theme is 'abduction'.

And we have information that the crescendo of the book will be
Nick Pope's own abduction. The previous defence-expert suspects
that he as well as his girlfriend was taken aboard a spaceship
when the passed a car-toll some years ago".

The transcript of an on-line question and answer conference
dated 23 May 1998, records that that your response to the
question 'why did you think you had been abducted by aliens',
was, "I don't recall ever claiming that I had been!"

Apparently _someone_ claimed you had been and the story was
included in the draft manuscript for your 'alien abductions'
book.

As you can imagine, a number of people are confused by this
paradox.

Is there an emphatic denial that this story was ever in the
draft manuscript?


I trust this are all reasonable and relevant questions.

Your reply would be greatly appreciated and certainly not only
by myself.

Please feel free to reply directly.


Best wishes,

James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ukonline.co.uk
[END]


Although Nick Pope hasn't to my knowledge responded to these
questions and is of course absolutely under no obligation to, I
have now received a reply from 'Secretariat(Air Staff)2a'
concerning some of the aforementioned questions.

The Ministry state:

"Mr Pope was employed as an Executive Officer in Secretariat
(Air Staff) 2. His post was designated Sec(AS)2a.

The main duties of the post concern non-operational RAF
activities overseas and diplomatic clearance for military
flights abroad".

It would therefore appear that Nick Pope's principal function
was generally more mundane than "researching and investigating
UFO sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal
mutilations and any other weird and wonderful reports that came
my way".


On the significant question of how much emphasis is placed on
'UFO' related matters in the post which Nick Pope occupied, the
Ministry confirm:

"A small percentage of time is spent dealing with reports from
the public about alleged 'UFO' sightings and associated public
correspondence".


Asked if they would please comment on Pope's publicised claim
that, "I've worked for the MOD for over fourteen years now, and
three of those were spent researching and investigating UFO
sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations
and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way", the
Ministry write:

"The Ministry of Defence has not investigated a case of alien
abduction, crop circle formations or animal mutilation".


Seemingly greatly at odds with Pope's recollections of his
tenure, one can only surmise how this can be reconciled, as with
his own 'abduction by aliens', which it has been verified was
seen in the draft manuscript of Pope's book on 'alien
abductions', yet for some reason didn't appear in the subsequent
publication.


My extreme gratitude to the Ministry for responding to enquiries
and providing an unprecedented clarification, especially as they
are normally reticent to commit such information to print.

Having hopefully established a congenial rapport, I have asked if
they could additionally clarify whether any 'UFO' or related
reports are currently handled outwith 'Secretariat(Air Staff)2a'
and if so, could they please provide full details.


Consequent to the Ministry of Defence's official statements, some
may surmise that Nick Pope's memoirs, together with his literary
agents' presumably approved promotion of same, require to be
reviewed in perspective.

Perhaps now able to be fully appreciated in this new, directly
MoD involved context, is the following, posted to the 'UFO
UpDates' mailing list:

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 07:38:08
To: updates@globalserve.net
From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Subject: Nick Pope's New Book

A press release by KULTURE SHOCK (sic!) of Norwich, England.

Source: 'uk.rec.ufo'.

From: who@kulture.demon.co.uk (Kulture Shock)
Newsgroups: uk.rec.ufo
Subject: UFO SPECIALIST APPEARING
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 00:00:17 GMT

KULTURE SHOCK
10-12 St Benedicts Street, Norwich. NR2 4AG
Tel: 01603 625557 Fax: 01603 625558 email:
info@kulture.demon.co.uk

SUNDAY 10TH OCTOBER 1999

MAIL ORDER AVAILABLE

PRESS RELEASE

'Operation Thunder Child'
by Nick Pope

Although ostensibly a techno-thriller, the Ministry of Defence
insisted on seeing the manuscript and making some changes. They
had the book for three months - longer than for most of the
books written by former SAS soldiers - before giving it final
clearance to publish.

Nick Pope has dipped into the 'real x-files', and packed the
book with references to formerly classified UFO events
investigated by the MOD.

Many of the events are thinly disguised versions of the real
events. Fictionalisation is the only way that MOD official Nick
Pope can talk about some of the more controversial incidents.

Examples of reality disguised as fiction include:

1 The Rendlesham Forest incident, which appears in the prologue,
inspired some of, and reflects, what Nick Pope was told by
United Nations Air Force officers.

2 The alleged downing of an RAF Lightning by a UFO in 1970,
which inspired some of the aerial battles that appear throughout
the book.

3 The UFO briefing that the Minister receives in chapter four is
based on a brief Nick Pope gave to a Defence Minister in 1982.
All the incidents described actually occurred.

4 The potential biological hazard from extraterrestrial contact
as described in chapter nine was an issue that Nick Pope raised
with his MOD bosses while on the UFO desk.

5 The descriptions of the shape and capabilities of the UFO's,
and the physical description and behaviour of the aliens are
based on actual UFO reports and alien abduction claims
investigated by Nick Pope as part of his official MOD duties.

Many scenes give insights into 'spin-doctoring' techniques,
showing how Governments manipulate Parliament and the public,
and manage the media.

Nick Pope has worked for the Ministry of Defence for fourteen
years. As well as a tour of duty spent researching and
investigating UFOs he has been involved in highly classified
work on the Gulf War, Bosnia and Kosovo.

This book contains a wealth of authentic detail about rules of
engagement, weapons systems and tactics although some details
have had to be changed for national security reasons.

Nick Pope will be appearing at KULTURE SHOCK on Sunday 10th
October 1999, from 12.30 when he will be talking about his work,
answering questions and signing copies of his books.

Advance booking is advised!

Contact DAVID for further details
[END]


Some notes:

"Examples of reality disguised as fiction include:

1 The Rendlesham Forest incident, which appears in the prologue,
inspired some of, and reflects, what Nick Pope was told by
United Nations Air Force officers".

The 'Rendlesham Forest' incidents primarily involved a
misidentification of Orfordness lighthouse, as documented in the
original witness statements I obtained during 1998.

See:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/enigma.htm

Nick Pope is aware of this.


"5 The descriptions of the shape and capabilities of the UFO's,
and the physical description and behaviour of the aliens are
based on actual UFO reports and alien abduction claims
investigated by Nick Pope as part of his official MOD duties".

Pope's alleged investigation of 'alien abductions' [does this
include his own, reported, 'abduction by alien entities'?] "as
part of his official MOD duties" is now formally refuted by the
Ministry.

Perhaps Nick Pope could comment on these fundamentally
controversial claims.


"Many scenes give insights into 'spin-doctoring' techniques,
showing how Governments manipulate Parliament and the public,
and manage the media".

Some might say that 'spin-doctoring' and media management is
particularly the domain of 'book promotion' press releases!


"Nick Pope has worked for the Ministry of Defence for fourteen
years. As well as a tour of duty spent researching and
investigating UFOs...".

Seems it was more a 'tour of duty' which required his attention
to "non-operational RAF activities overseas and diplomatic
clearance for military flights abroad".


"Nick Pope has dipped into the 'real x-files', and packed the
book with references to formerly classified UFO events
investigated by the MOD.

Examples of reality disguised as fiction include..."


Alternatively... are Nick Pope's claims now proven to be fiction
disguised as reality?

You might think so, I couldn't possibly comment on that.



James Easton,
Editor.

E-mail: voyager@ukonline.co.uk
Voyager On-line: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/

(c) James Easton
October 1999







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:07:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 09:38:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

---

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 16:25:45 -0400
From: Will <willb3d@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?
To: yelorose@swbell.net


I don't seem to see a way to post messages to the UFOMIND site,
but I wanted to relate that Strieber's Caldecott was probably
for his children's book about nuclear winter, 'Wolf Of Shadows'.

I know it won several awards but I do not know the particulars.

Maybe you could post that for me? Thank you.


Home Page: "http://members.tripod.com/TheVanguard"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                 Re: Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage

From: Jsmortell@aol.comFrom: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 00:24:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 09:52:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 11:20:00 -0700
 >From: Steve Neill <neill@gte.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Strieber & Ventura Country UFO Footage

 >[Non-Subscriber Post]

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 07:35:01
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Strieber Rallies UFO Faithful, Rails Against 'Denial'

 ><snip>

 >>A glowing sphere lopes across the night sky over Camarillo, CA,
 >>on Thanksgiving, 1998. With a long rigid projection fixed at a
 >>skewed angle and tipped with a smaller spherical projection, it
 >>is unlikely to be a weather balloon. It teases the camera, then
 >>explodes in a blast of flaming debris….

 >To whom it may concern.

 >The video tape of the UFO over Camarillo was shot by me, Steve
 >Neill. Whitley doesn't bother to mention this and I alone with
 >Roger Leir as an observer video taped the UFO.

 >Whitley, months ago, asked for the tape to take for this lab and I
 >have not been able to get back the original tape. I'm being
 >avoided which puts Whitley in a worst spot light than he already
 >is. All I want is the tape back.

 >These kind of actions on his part are not good. Thought you
 >should know. It's this kind of thing that caused my departure
 >from the UFO community for good. If you didn't see my message
 >attached is a copy.

 >Sincerely,
 >Steve Neill

 >STEVE NEILL FX

 >-----

 >SIGHTINGS

 >Steve Neill, Renowned
 >UFO Researcher and
 >Artist, Quits UFOlogy
 >From Steve Neill <neill@gte.net>
 >5-15-99
 >Snipped respectfully

Dear Steve and List;

I was extremely and overly critical of your leaving UFOlogy.
First words out my mouth (or in this case, fingers) is that I
apologize for being so critical.

I was less critical of you, or of anyone who has worked hard and
done something positive in this business, than I was of this
business.  That there are some really selfish bastards, some
mean hearted, some cruel, some just plain stupid and a few
really sincere but on the wrong frequency, in this business, is
a given.  But to give in to them is a sin in my book.

Well, since your announcement, I've had my own bunch of bitter
pills to chew on before swallowing.  While I don't know what
lies ahead, I do know that I will never give in to bastards, no
matter who they may be.  In my 56 years I've NEVER given in to
those who would deny not merely truth, but their own truth, some
of which is distorted.  I merely pack my bags and go somewhere
where what I have to offer, is appreciated.

I hope that you someday change your mind.  Because when anyone
who wears a white hat gives in to the selfish bastards, the
self-serving and the just plain stupid, then they win.  And
that's a shame.

When Velez issued the challenge, I was hoping that something
would come of it.  Maybe something will, but only when the
aliens drop happy gas.  Which is why I feed them Gripple.

So, I am sorry I was critical of you.  I've learned a lot since
then.  But I will never let the bastards wear me down.  My motto
used to be "Make it happen!"  My new motto is "Illigitimum non
carborundum est!"  Loosely translated, this is pig Latin for
what I wrote above, "Don't let the bastards wear you down."

Bastards should never win, Steve.  They should lose.

With great respect, and to quote my Dylan yet again, I admire
you for "Doin' what you did and gettin' free."

Only the best,

Jim Mortellaro









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 00:34:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:19:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 15:17:38 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

 >>From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:49:57 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Steven J. Dunn writes:

 >>>In April 1998, NASA released imaged of the Cydonia region and
 >>>the "face on Mars" that looked to most, including this humble
 >>>correspondent, to be a very natural formation.  The "face" was
 >>>dead.

 >>The MGS shot of the "Face" on Mars was handled horribly from the
 >>beginning--by the news media, predictably, but also by NASA, who
 >>released an unprocessed version of the Face to the media in an
 >>arguable attempt to kill the issue before any intelligent
 >>discourse could materialize.
 >
 >>In a way, NASA was being honest: it released the first halfway
 >>intelligible image it had right away, killing the otherwise
 >>inevitable attempts to shout "cover-up"!  But for an agency who
 >>publicly claimed a "neutral stand," the horrid April image was
 >>used as a "straw man" by the very geologists who insisted it was
 >>a non-issue and not worthy of discussion.
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 >>Sadly, NASA has also informally retracted its earlier promise to
 >>rephotograph the site "until everyone is satisfied."  It wasted
 >>a perfect opportunity to do just this on Aug. 26--a chance to
 >>get a clean overhead shot of the Face under good light and
 >>weather conditions (even NASA grudgingly conceded that the April
 >>'98 image was taken through a layer of atmospheric haze).
 >
 >>Our next chance is in November.
 >
 >>The Face and its associated landforms represent a legitimate
 >>scientific anomaly, and one that can be falsified--but only with
 >>good data!  A failure to pursue this mystery, whether out of
 >>cowardice or bureaucratic apathy, may well turn out to be the
 >>defining intellectual catastrophe of our era.
 >
 >>--Mac Tonnies
 >
 >
 >NASA is supposed to be a "public funded" organization, receiving
 >it's money from Congress and supported by tax payers.
 >
 >Since NASA chooses to "exclude" the very people who are funding
 >their space exploration, why do we continue to support them and
 >request Congressional funding???
 >
 >If they feel we are not entitled to "know" what their machines
 >along with the "sensors and cameras," are detecting, then why
 >should we "collectively," not demand of Congress a complete
 >cut off of "public funds?"
 >
 >I personally feel and have felt for over 25 years that most of
 >the work done by NASA was for the Military Complex anyway.
 >When you understand that the majority of astronauts have been
 >Military Test Pilots in the past, then I think this may support
 >my contention.
 >
 >I realize there are more civilians involved with the "shuttle"
 >missions now, but still, who is reaping the benefits from NASA's
 >budgets?
 >
 >Do we really want to know what they have kept from us over the
 >years?  If so, then let us demand it now or forever "shut up!"
 >
 >I am the first to admit I am a "dunce."  The fact that I have
 >sat idlely by for all these years and said nothing should
 >prove that.
 >
 >REgards, Mike


You've already done something.  You said something.  Now, all
you must do is say it again, and again and again.  And to some
folks who you helped elect.  It's still a free country.  It's
still a place where you may more easily than ever, communicate
with your erected.l... uh, sorry, "elected," representatives via
the Internet no less.

Just do it.  This is one time and one place where if it feels
good, you can and should do it.

See!?  You aint no dunce.  You've managed to stay way from
Gripple haven't you?

Jim Mortellaro






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                                Re: Get Real

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 02:15:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:22:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 10:29:47 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>To our perceived captors, we may be so low down on the sentient
 >>pole as to be animals in the field by comparison with their
 >>intellects and technologies.

 >>Should this be the case (it's a theory which I do not favor, but
 >>admit to the possibility), what makes a difference is our
 >>intellectual level. It does not permit such invasion.  Again,
 >>should this be the case, in order for the alien to be righteous,
 >>he (she or it) just have to have one hell of a good reason(s).

 >>If not, I and people like me, should remain pissed to the gills.

 >Hi Jimmy and all!

 >My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.
 >They are not all that much brighter than us, nor are they better
 >than us. In many ways we humans are far superior to them. They
 >can never have or experience many of the things that all of us
 >take for granted every day. They lack our emotions, our
 >passions, and our ability to think and act as individuals.
 >Computers are able to process incredible amounts of information
 >in seconds, yet are they intelligent, or smarter than a human
 >being? I think not. The more I learn the less these beings
 >impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
 >they think gives them the right to do what they do.

 >Take care,
 >Marty

Hi Marty, Errol and List members, some of whom are gentle...

Of course all of which you speak may be true.  No one really
knows what the truth is.  Or if they do, they do not appear to
be sharing their knowledge with the rest of us.

In any case, there is a hypothesis (since there are trivial
and/or inadequate grounds for anything but speculation) that
these entities may not be the real alien.  That perhaps, they
are entities genetically designed to do a specific series of
jobs.  Some of these jobs are to withstand time, space and the
otherwise emotional strain of doing what they do to us without
going Postal.

In other words, living machines, capable of making on the spot
decisions without having to "call home" for instructions on how
or what to do next to their "guests."

This may explain the lack of emotion which many have described
as having experienced during an abduction. Just a theory of
course. By now there must be ten zillion theories.

However my point is that people who perceive that they are
abductees generally share a great deal in common, relative to
their personalities, or lack of same.  Some are extremely
sensitive to the feelings of others.  It may be overcompensation
for the lack of sensitivity they received from their abductors.
Others seem to be oblivious to how they affect the feelings of
others.

Pain is relative.  Physical pain is not what I am referring to.
It's the pain of the emotions.  Emotional pain is what each of
us share, we who perceive we've had such experiences.  And since
each of us is different, we suffer our pain in different ways.

As for the entities, I prefer them completely inebriated, the
little bastards, preferably one who (or "which") has consumed
mass quantities of my special "Little Alien Bastard Corn
Squeezins!"  Makes them very mellow.  I've colored the stuff
yellow.  I should have called it "Yellow Mello."

Gosh, what a song title that would make, eh?

Jimmy Morte de Fam
(It's a Sicilian thing, you wouldn't understand)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                             OZ Files 03.10.1999

From: Diane Harrison - Keith Basterfield Network <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 17:26:23 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:28:33 -0400
Subject: OZ Files 03.10.1999


Australian Sighting Reports OZ Files 03.10.1999

Hi Everyone

Well the reports keep coming in the Hotline is running hot. Our
Australian Independent UFO Researchers & AUFORN Reps have been
busy investigating all kinds of sightings. EG: Airship the Blimp
to Venus to Orange balls and yes some UFObjects.

Keep up the Great work everyone

 >From The "A Team" in Australia


Regards Diane Harrison

Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Skywatch Director

______________________________________

FOLLOWUP Peter Johnson AUFORN South Australia

Hi Di, the initial report for callin 00309 14.09.1999
is as follows:

I rang Beverly B of Parafield Gardens Adelaide
13:30 Thursday 16.9.99

Beverly said :
My son (20) came inside and said "Come and have a look at this
so Beverly (48) and her other son (22) and husband (52) went
outside to see two bright glowing yellow balls of light about
the size of a golf ball at arms length and about 12 inches apart
at arms length moving across the night sky directly above their
house. The objects made no noise, at one stage a smaller light
moved of at right angles from one of the larger objects, and one
picked up speed in relation to the other one. Beverly said the
lights were perhaps a little higher than cloud level ? but could
not be sure how high they were. She went inside to ring
Parafield airport to see if they had any explanation but they
said they were probably balloons, (typical) she said if that
were the case then how come one of them had a light shoot out
from it? When she came outside after ringing the airport the
objects were gone

Beverly lives near the Parafield airport and is quite used to
seeing all sorts of planes, but said the objects did not have
any navigational lights just they were just a bright glowing
yellow.

She also rang Colin Norris and he said that he had received
another report from a gentleman on Monday night of the same
description.

~~~~~~~~~/////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1800 Callin Code: 00315 to 00321. 22.09.1999
FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN
1800 Callin Code:00315 to 00321

Report: by Diane Harrison

Date: 19.09.199
Time Observation: 7.45pm
Location: Boronia Victoria in a North Easterly direction
Shape: No clear shape Star Like
Size: 5 cent piece
Objects: 3
Colour: Dull orange
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Duration: 1 minute or so.
Witnesses: 1
Reportee: Chris Sh

Report By Diane Harrison AUFORN

Christen said she was walking her dog on Sunday evening when she
saw 3 strange looking lights in the sky. At first she thought
they were stars but they were in a V formation. I was scared of
what I saw and went straight home. That's when I called 013 and
they gave me your number.

These objects things moved apart then they moved back
together then they formed a perfect V formation.
and traveled away getting smaller.

(Q) Do you think they could have been the RAAF or some kind of
plane?

(A) "No" I have lived here for quite a while and have never seen
planes with those kind of lights before. Any way when they went
away they formed a straight line and faded off in the distance.

Report form sent out.

~~~~~~~~~/////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1800 Callin Code: 00321.26.09.1999
FOLLOWUP by Keith Basterfield SA for AUFORN
1800 Callin Code: 00321.26.09.1999

Date:     26/9/99
Time:     9 p.m. CST
Location: North Plympton, Adelaide suburb, SA
Witnesses: Robert & Lisa

Report: by Keith Basterfield

Robert was outside looking at the night sky when he noticed an
object "as high up as a star." It was in the SW sky, "going
round in right hand circles." It flashed quickly several times,
stopped flashing, then flashed again 2 or 3 times. After about 2
minutes, he then went inside his house to fetch his wife Lisa,
who came out. She also saw the same light.

Whereas Robert though the colour of the light was white, Lisa
felt that it was orange. They watched it for some 5 minutes,
then both went inside to fetch their daughter. However, when the
3 of them returned outdoors the light had gone.

Regards
Keith Basterfield>parklake@camtech.net.au
GPO Box 1894, Adelaide, South Australia 5001

~~~~~~~~~/////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FOLLOWUP Robert Frola AUFORN
1800 Callin Code: 00321 25.09.99

Date: 25.9.99
Day;  Saturday
Time Reported: 1:52am
Source: Kerry B
Location: Laverton & Pointcook. Victoria
Tel: 03 9369
Report given to rep  Robert Frola AUFORN

Date: 24.09.199
Day: Friday
Time of Observation: 9.55pm
Location: Laverton Pointcook
Shape: No clear shape
Size: 50 cent piece
Objects: 1
Colour: Dull orange
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Duration: 3 minutes or more
Witnesses: 4
Reportees: Kerry , 2 chefs 1 security officer

Kerry stated: I had just finished work and was walking
to my car when one of the chefs I work with called out to
me to look up.

This was when l saw what he was looking at. It was this
huge orange ball of light. It was very high up the size of 50cent
piece at arms length I guess.

The chef I worked with that night called out to the security
guard to come outside and have a look at the object. He came out
with another chef and we all watched this thing "I didn't know
what it was" and they didn't .

We all watched it and I tell you I thought I was a scared but
the guys stood there trying to work out wether to run back
inside "big brave men" ha!!.

I have be honest I just wanted to hide but the funny thing about
it all we didn't move from the spot.

(Q) Could it have been one of the RAAF planes ?

Kerry stated: "Hell no" we all watched it and tried to figure
out what hell it was.

We all figured out what it wasn't (it was NO plane) we all work
out near the Laverton RAAF base and we see their planes coming
and going all the time (so we do no our planes).

We did observe a plane fly under the object, the plane looked
quite small. The pilot of that plane must have seen the object
I'm sure. When I got home I called the police but they hadn't
had any ca lls but they informed me I could call your hotline so
I did.

Can you tell me what we saw because it scared the hell out of
us.


Still under investigation

Report
By Robert Frola AUFORN

~~~~~~~~~/////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please welcome Matt Pearce
Ghost.who.Walks@Bigpond.com

The New member of AUFORN Alice Springs
Matt will be helping Keith Douglass with UFO
investigations in Outback Australia
"Pine Gap" Area.

Report from Matt

Hi All,

Matt from Ayers Rock here, Another report from a few months ago
has just come to my attention, and would just like to share it
with y'all.


This sighting occurred on the morning of the 11th of June, at
5.55 am (seems to be a bit of a trend in time and direction) in
the east.

The witnesses reported seeing to objects moving together at
quite close range, jiggling up and down as they went. They
then split up in and sped off in opposite directions. One going
North and one heading south, at quite a speed and then vanished.
Now in June sunrise is quite late, and therefore the chances of
being any satellites reflecting light is slim. (mind you I
haven't seen too many satellites perform such manoeuvrers)

The jiggling motion could have been contributed to atmospheric
distortion, except June mornings are freezing, the images of all
objects in the sky are very clear.

Also the objects were 70 degrees above the eastern horizon
heading east, and therefore at that angle the atmosphere is
quite thin. Therefore it can only lead me to place this
unexplained phenomena into my X-files, which is getting quite
thick quite fast.

E-Mail tkbnetw@fan.net.au
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new
http://www.powerup.com.au/~ufologist
UFO Australian Research Network Hot Line Number
1800 77 22 88 Free Call











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez &

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:37:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:37:46 -0400
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez &

   ---------------
  /// John Velez
---------------

� Has been actively and very publicly trying to raise the
public's awareness and consciousness about the reality of UFOs,
their occupants, and more importantly, the reality of the
intervention of these beings, into our own lives.

� It is his 'belief' that each one of us carries around a small
piece of the puzzle. A little piece of truth. Maybe by sharing
and communicating with each other we can begin to put those
pieces together and build a foundation for future generations.
If what we suspect is happening is true,...then this is very
serious business and should be treated that way.

� He has a background in human services with ten years
experience as a crisis intervention counselor and Senior
addiction specialist in New York City. Sixteen years as a
graphic artist and currently works freelance. Plays the drums
and a little guitar, other peoples electric guitars. Hobbies
include oil painting, drawing, photography, hot-rodding and is
also one fine chess player

� This is a man I first met outside the stage-door of the
'Shirley Show' here in Toronto. A man who after his experience
on that show made a beeline for me, saying "I need a hug!". He
got it. He'd just been subjected to the way media typically has
treated people who stand up and say "I'm an abductee!". He'd just
been jeered and laughed at on a TV show that promised him
compassion, understanding and a platform to tell his story. And
that got him pissed enough to start and fight back against
'them' and against the way abductees have been treated in our
society - ebk.


   ---------------------
  /// Michael J. Woods
----------------------

Mike Woods works in the newsroom of a local Toronto TV station
and has some very definite views on UFOs and the phenomena
surrounding them and is not shy about expressing them -
listen.....

Join John Velez, Mike Woods, Jonn Kares and I this evening as we
discuss these Strange Days... Indeed on:

CFRB 1010 AM - 50,000 watts 'Clear-Channel'

6070khz Shortwave

you can also listen via Media Player at:

www.cfrb.com/

You'll need to access the site using Internet Explorer since
Media Player seems to choke using any version of Netscape -
thanks Mr. Bill!


To call the program dial:

On-Air     416-872-1010
            1-800-561-CFRB [all over North America]
            *TALK [local mobiles]

Errol Bruce-Knapp









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                        Re: NASA Speaks in English...

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 06:25:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:13:44 -0400
Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...


 >From: From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 21:49:02 EDT
 >Subject: NASA Speaks in English but the Control Panel is in Cyrillic Ubangy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Hello, List ,Jim

Jim Wrote:

 >"NASA said confusion over whether measurements were made in
 >metric or English units led to the crash of a $125 million
 >spacecraft as it approached Mars last week."  According to the
 >New York Times today (10-1-99).

 >Am I the only idiot who thinks this "mistake" is the most lame
 >sort of none sense ever perpetrated on US since the president
 >sinned?


The Metric system is the measurement of science has been
literally for centuries-No body of science like NASA would use
the english system in planetary navigation . I have a friend who
used to work for JPL, on the Mariner Missions and Surveyor Moon
Missions.

If I can track him down, (The Salmon are running - it may be a
few days) I'll bet he confirms that this is, at best, the
Ruptured Duck of Excuses-worse than lame.

 >How two major Military and NASA contractors can each work in
 >different systems boggles this Gripple brain big time.  I cannot
 >imagine such an error folks.

 >I've worked for several NASA contractors as well as at NASA
 >Goddard Spaceflight Center, and knowing (less than some of you
 >do) what I do, it just can't happen.

 >It's like Jethro Bodine cypherin to the base ten while everyone
 >else is doin it to another base _and_ in metric!

 >The new NASA call sign: "Help!  It's fallen down and I can't get
 >it up..."

I agree.

"It's not so much they are trying to do it, it's the credit
they're giving our intelligence!"

-from an old 'Garfield' comic.-

GT McCoy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 09:57:58 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:16:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 05:47:53 +0100

 >Voyager Newsletter - Issue No. 8

 >* Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond *

 >On 7 August, 1999, I published the following:

 >'An Open Letter to Nick Pope'

 >Dear Nick,

 >In the July issue of 'NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD', you wrote:

 >"Over the past few months I'd been becoming more bullish in my
 >response to certain people within ufology who'd been sniping at
 >me over the years. Nobody likes criticism, and I'd been getting
 >a fair bit - little of it constructive in nature. If people were
 >criticising my views on, say, Roswell, then fine. I wasn't
 >there, and so my view probably counts no more or no less than
 >anybody else who's followed the case with a reasonable degree of
 >interest. But it rankled when outsiders who'd probably never
 >even visited MOD Main Building started casting doubts on my
 >knowledge about - and access to - government and military UFO
 >files. I've worked for the MOD for over fourteen years now, and
 >three of those were spent researching and investigating UFO
 >sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations
 >and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way".

 >I trust I'm not one of the aforementioned 'critics' and perhaps
 >you can help clear up some of the confusion which surrounds a
 >number of claims.

 >To recap; your appointment with the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
 >was as an Executive Officer. To clarify for the 'uninitiated'
 >(I'm a former Civil Servant), the standard grading hierarchy is
 >clerical assistant - clerical officer - executive officer -
 >higher executive officer - and upwards.

Snipped for brevity.....


Hi James and List,

I know little about Nick Pope and his involvement with the
British Government, but to suggest that any government is not
associated with spin doctoring when in fact it is probably 75
percent spin doctoring, if not more, indicates a naive view of
how government works. So-called democratic governments usually
work on the myopic 4-5 year plan, or whatever term they have in
office and worry little about the long term.

They channel most of their energies into getting re-elected, and
controlling information is part and parcel of how they do it.

Having worked myself for a government for nearly 30 years, I have little
hesitation in endorsing that view. Public relations and spin doctoring
are not the sole property of the media.

To suggest that once assigned to a department or specific job
that other duties cannot be added to your original duties in
government is a seeming lacking of understanding of the trade,
or a misrepresentation of same.

Your defence of the British government in this regard is
touching, but in keeping with your views on the UFO subject.
Like the government I find that your suppositions are often
straw dogs supported by little evidence other than your own and
your dogged determination to repeat them over and over as the
solution. This is a ploy often used by government. I was
prepared a year or so ago to accept your explanation as to the
causes of the Rendlesham Forest sighting but since then your
proofs on other cases have left me cold and wondering. I am sure
that again you will repeat them over and over to whomever will
listen. Whether indeed there is anything to Rendlesham is yet to
be seen, however I now look upon that case as unresolved.

Also, James, you stated that you worked for the British
Government. Do you still?

Don Ledger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                                Re: Get Real

From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:29:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:19:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 10:29:47 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>To our perceived captors, we may be so low down on the sentient
 >>pole as to be animals in the field by comparison with their
 >>intellects and technologies.

 >>Should this be the case (it's a theory which I do not favor, but
 >>admit to the possibility), what makes a difference is our
 >>intellectual level. It does not permit such invasion.  Again,
 >>should this be the case, in order for the alien to be righteous,
 >>he (she or it) just have to have one hell of a good reason(s).

 >>If not, I and people like me, should remain pissed to the gills.

 >Hi Jimmy and all!

 >My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.
 >They are not all that much brighter than us, nor are they better
 >than us. In many ways we humans are far superior to them. They
 >can never have or experience many of the things that all of us
 >take for granted every day. They lack our emotions, our
 >passions, and our ability to think and act as individuals.
 >Computers are able to process incredible amounts of information
 >in seconds, yet are they intelligent, or smarter than a human
 >being? I think not. The more I learn the less these beings
 >impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
 >they think gives them the right to do what they do.

 >Take care,
 >Marty

Excellent points. One comment. My wife is an abductee, and one
thing that she commented on was that she felt that she was being
monitored and "they" wanted her emotions, they somehow were
experiencing whatever she felt.


Terry Evans.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:59:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:24:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 13:12:18 PDT

 >>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:06:58 -0500
 >>From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT

 >>>>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 12:51:54 -0400
 >>>>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>>From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:01:05 -0500

 >>Your polemics are tiring. You write for yourself. I no longer
 >>read anything you write.

Ooops. This slipped through. Guess I'll respond. Lucky
you.

 >Translation: You know you lost the argument but can't bring
 >yourself to offer the apology I would happily accept.

You are funny. Ever thought about taking your act on the
road?

 >I don't think you're a bad guy. I can tell as much from other
 >posts you've made, unrelated to our dispute. It's my judgment
 >you simply stepped into something without realizing what you
 >were getting into. I guess the old warning applies: Look before
 >you leap.

(You are even condescending when you feign niceness.)

First, I don't care what you think of me, caring what someone
thinks comes when you respect that person. I don't respect you
any longer. (I know, Booo hooo).

Second I stand by what I said before and let me tweak it up
a bit.

You are part of the problem with Ufology not the solution.

There has always been a private elite within Ufology who have
controlled who did what, and what information was released back
to the to the field investigators who did most of the
collection. This was mostly MUFON. As for CUFOS, I know from
past personal experience, that there is a clique.


Third, I have no idea who you are talking about, but the person
you think is my "source" is not my source on you and Gulf
Breeze. My source was then and is now, a CUFOS insider. (Part of
the non- existent clique.)


Fourth, I firmly believe that you did not want to step on Dr.
Maccabee's toes regarding Gulf Breeze. (That should probably
include Mr. Hopkins since he wrote a chapter.) Dr. M was then
and still is a major player in the Fund. And while the Fund is
supposed to be non-partisan its not nice to piss off people who
someday you might need.


Fifth, I know exactly what I stepped into.

Terry Evans.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

               Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 19:49:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:51:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 05:47:53 +0100

<snip>

 >Perhaps Nick Pope could comment on these fundamentally
 >controversial claims.

Perhaps you should write to him via his publisher, I understand
he always replies to his letters. You know full well he does not
have an e-mail address and yet with that knowledge you continue
to write open letters attacking him.

In fact you may like to post the entire reply from the MOD
instead of your usual selective quotes.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:53:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT

 >You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
 >you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also pointed out
 >to you), that I was responding to vile accusations against my
 >character -- accusations, moreover, that were hurled without a
 >shred of supporting evidence.

Mr. Jerome Clark;

I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
example?

By all means, I would speak out against any character digs
against you if you could demonstrate that which you claim.

 From my recall of the Gulf Breeze discussions, Jerry Black has
afforded you inclusion in his "Old Boy's Network." Could this be
what has caused you to think yourself the victim of a 'vile
accusation against your character?'

If so, then it might be your thin-skinned interpretation of
issue-related discourse that has left you feeling hurt. Your
interpretation of issue- related dissent and the usual posturing
that accompanies such discourse does not justify your
mean-spirited defensiveness and abrasive name-calling.

While lamenting others for being judge, jury and executioner in
ufology, you seem to have no problem tackling such a position
yourself.

Perhaps, Mr. Clark, your hot-dog hostility through this bizarre
episode has left you as first among the wounded resulting from
Black's exposure of this "Old Boy's Club."

Thanks,

Kenny Young
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                                  Abducted?

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:17:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:54:37 -0400
Subject: Abducted?


Hi John, James, Errol and any others that might be interested.

I have had an interesting discussion with someone about other
things but my interest in all things ufological is well known
and he posed me a question.

This is not a direct quote, but along the lines of what he said.

As a small child I had "dreams" of floating through walls and
pipes and when I got a little older they stopped. I was five or
six at the time. As a teenager I read a lot about astral
projection and put it down to that. Also as a teenager I always
had the feeling that I was being watched, or followed but this
never amounted to anything. In my early twenties some times when
I woke up I felt as if I had not been to sleep. Another time I
felt as if I should be missing some time, but wasn't. In my
thirties I found out about abductions and the like from having
my curiosity roused by watching Fire in the sky and reading a
few books. Then I wondered if any of my previous experiences
might have been something to do with being an abductee.

So the question is, have I been abducted?

I asked him more questions about his "astral projection"
*dreams*, as he is an honest chap I believe his answers about
his memories being somewhat fragmented and he can only clearly
recollect one instance, but he is sure that he "did it" many
times. I asked him more about his feelings of being watched all
the time, or being followed, to which he can only recollect the
feeling nothing else. I asked him about his lack of missing time
and he said it was like waking up and thinking that he should be
missing time, days even one a few occasions, but he never was
actually missing any time, he couldn't really put into words
exactly just how he felt about this. I asked him about his not
feeling like he had slept and he said its like when you go to
bed and it seams like you only switched the light out minutes
before, when the alarm clock sounds.

I suggested that many children can astrally project themselves,
and that astral projection is a verified thing. I suggested that
his teenage feeling where paranoia, and that his early twenties
could have been his pace of life. All are possible I said but
not conclusive.

He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
niggling feeling.

--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 3

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 17:57:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:12:22 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 22:38:13 GMT

 >>Why is it that we _assume_ that one phenomenon (UFOs) has
 >>anything to do with the other (abduction/contact experiences)?

 >>There is a widespread willingness to consider evidence that
 >>radar contact has been made with objects (presumably craft) not
 >>produced on Earth.

 >>There is a lesser, but growing, willingness to consider that
 >>something extraordinary is happening to so-called abductees and
 >>contactees.

 >>Where is the willingness to soberly evaluate the evidence as to
 >>whether one phenomena is related to the other, and, if so, how?

 >We (Russ Estes, Bill Cone and I) have tried to do this in 'The
 >Abduction Enigma'.

Maybe you could explain a little more specifically, Kevin, how
you and your co-authors attempted to evaluate the evidence
for/against the alleged link between UFOs as physical craft and
Alien Abduction Experiences, AAEs. As I see it, "The Abduction
Enigma" treated the AAE as a hallucination associated with sleep
paralysis or regurgitated birth memories, or as a false memory
imposed by unethical or incompetent therapists and researchers.

Once its reality status was assumed to be that of an illusion,
there was no need to consider whether there was an actual
evidence of a link between AAEs and UFOs.

There _was_ considerable insightful analysis of the relationship
between _reports_ of abduction experiences _reports_ of Satanic
Abuse. It may be that differences in the theoretical
perspectives of abduction researchers and satanic abuse
researchers have led to classifying a single phenomenon into two
categories depending on who is doing the investigating. However,
the possibility that we might be able to consolidate these two
areas of research doesn't automatically mean that both groups of
researchers were investigating an illusory experience rather
than a real one.

Consider an analogous situation involving research into cattle
mutilations. For better or for worse, I live in the Bible belt
and we just don't see many dead cows mutilated by aliens. Bible
belt cows are much more likely to be mutilated by satanic
ritualists. (My theory is that around here the sheriff's deputy
who takes a report about a cattle mute calls a researcher
specializing in satanic rituals rather than a researcher
specializing in aliens harvesting genetic material.)

In any event, we might say differences in theoretical
perspectives among researchers explain why the phenomenon of
cattle mutilation is divided into two categories. But even if we
eliminated the artifical distinctions between the two field, we
still have to admit that both groups were investigating a real
phenomenon.

There really were dead cows.

 >>Is there any evidence that would selectively discriminate
 >>between these theories:

 >>1. That the same off-world beings that pilot the craft are also
 >>perpetrating the abductions.

 >>2. That abductions are Out-of-Body Experiences, Lucid Dreams or
 >>cases of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that are unrecognized
 >>or incompletely recalled.

 >You have left out sleep paralysis, vivid dreams, hoax,
 >psychological manipulation by hypno-therapists and a couple of
 >other explanations.

Did I leave out sleep paralysis or did you leave out Awareness
during Sleep Paralysis?

Sleep paralysis by itself explains nothing. Since we all
experience sleep paralysis 4 to 6 times each night as we cycle
into REM sleep, the presence of sleep paralysis does not
discriminate between those who report abductions and those who
do not.

What _may_ discriminate between these two groups is the presence
of _Awareness_ during Sleep Paralysis, ASP.

I don't mean to belabor the semantics of the situation, but I
think we should distinguish between a physiological state (sleep
paralysis) and a state of consciousness (Awareness of the
physiological state)

 >>I know that there are advocates of each point of view. But if we
 >>were to sit down to soberly sift the evidence available now, do
 >>we find any that is simultaneously consistent with one theory
 >>but inconsistent with the other?

 >We find that abduction stories have existed since humans began
 >recording their thoughts. We find parallels in pop culture. We
 >find parallels in the tales of Satanic Ritual Abuse and tales of
 >Multiple Personality Disorder.

We find that there are historical precedents for reports of
abduction experiences and for reports of UFOs. This establishes
that both phenomena are old. It doesn't say whether they are
related.

Joseph Polanik
_____________________________________________________
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:52:57 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:07:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999

 >>Is there any evidence that would selectively discriminate
 >>between these theories:

 >>1. That the same off-world beings that pilot the craft are also
 >>perpetrating the abductions.

 >>2. That abductions are Out-of-Body Experiences, Lucid Dreams or
 >>cases of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that are unrecognized
 >>or incompletely recalled.

 >>I know that there are advocates of each point of view. But if we
 >>were to sit down to soberly sift the evidence available now, do
 >>we find any that is simultaneously consistent with one theory
 >>but inconsistent with the other?

 >Very lucid thinking. To me, though, there are some intermediate
 >stages -- are abductions physical experiences at all? And if
 >they are, how do we know they involve the same beings
 >responsible for UFOs?

Some abductees say that they suffered a psychic or spiritual
abduction. I take this to mean that they believe that their Soul
or spiritual essence was taken but that their physiological body
was left behind in bed or in the car where it was before the
abduction.

Consequently, we would want to ask: What is the nature of the
abduction currently under consideration (as not all abductions
may be of the same type)? Do we have any evidence that this
abduction involved other beings? And, if so, what sort of
beings? Human covert agents? Temporally displaced humans?
Physically embodied aliens? Spiritual/Demonic? Interdimensional?
etc.

 >I understand Joe's point, though. These two theories are the
 >main ones out there. One hurdle in answering Joe's question, of
 >course, is to know what "evidence" is. Abductees claim, with
 >abduction researchers seconding them, that they have marks on
 >their bodies that can't be explained, that they wake up in
 >clothes they didn't go to bed in, that they wake up with
 >unexplainable stains on their bodies. Are these claims -- and
 >the visible marks, and garments still bearing the stains --
 >"evidence"?

If we were talking about a kidnapping, would we consider marks
on the body and these other items as evidence? If so, then what
rational reason would we have to deny that these items are
evidence just because we're talking about an abduction?

Certainly these items are evidence. Evidence of what, that is
the question?

 >If we accept these assertions, then abductions would
 >seem to be real experiences, not lucid dreams or awareness
 >during sleep paralysis. (Unless we want to assume that the marks
 >are like stigmata, generated by the mind.)

I wouldn't want to assume that the marks are generated by the
mind, but I might want to consider that and similar
possibilities.

 >Then there are many abductees who claim to remember abductions
 >in which they're taken away in UFOs. The Hill case is only the
 >most famous of these. Often enough abductees claim to remember
 >these abductions without hypnosis. Are these accounts
 >"evidence"? If they are, then they establish an apparent
 >connection between abduction experiences and UFOs,

Yes, experiencer reports do establish an apparent link between
abduction experiences and UFOs. Those who wish to deny that
there is a real link between the two would have to explain why
there is an apparent link. If someone claimed it was due to
intentional deception by human covert agents and/or demonic
beings, we'd expect him/her to present some evidence.

If someone said that the apparent link is due to a real link
between the two phenomena, we should also expect to see a
presentation of evidence.

But we don't.

Joseph Polanik


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 17:46:43 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:15:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:59:02 -0500
 >From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 13:12:18 PDT

 >>>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:06:58 -0500
 >>>From: Terry Evans <tevans@tranquility.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:30:23 PDT

 >>>>>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 12:51:54 -0400
 >>>>>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>>>From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>>>Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:01:05 -0500


Mr. Evans, with apologies to patient and gentle listfolk:

 >>I don't think you're a bad guy. I can tell as much from other
 >>posts you've made, unrelated to our dispute. It's my judgment
 >>you simply stepped into something without realizing what you
 >>were getting into. I guess the old warning applies: Look before
 >>you leap.

 >(You are even condescending when you feign niceness.)

Actually, it wasn't meant condescendingly. I guess that's what I
get for trying to be a nice guy.  Okay, I've learned my lesson.

 >First, I don't care what you think of me, caring what someone
 >thinks comes when you respect that person. I don't respect you
 >any longer. (I know, Booo hooo).

I am crushed.  Life has now lost all meaning and purpose.  How
can I go out into the world and admit to people that ... uh,
what was your name again? ... oh yeah, Terry Evans ... doesn't
respect me?  I guess I'll just have to crawl into a cave.

 >You are part of the problem with Ufology not the solution.

Nah, I don't think so.  As far as I can tell, you're neither.
I'd never even heard of you till this exchange began.  Exactly
what _have_ you done for this field, by the way, besides trash
those who really have tried, in their admittedly imperfect human
ways, to advance ufology?  Want to match credentials with Bruce
Maccabee and me? Or are you going to try to argue that having no
credentials at all affords you superior virtue?

 >There has always been a private elite within Ufology who have
 >controlled who did what, and what information was released back
 >to the to the field investigators who did most of the
 >collection. This was mostly MUFON. As for CUFOS, I know from
 >past personal experience, that there is a clique.

I'm afraid the meaning and significance of the above are unclear
to me.  Unless you're reviving that ancient paranoid fear that
"elites" within ufology suppress information in an effort to
keep all others in the dark, no doubt at the behest of their CIA
or New World Order masters. (Yes, we elites in ufology have
fleets of black helicopters at our beck and call.  Next time you
go out the door, it might be a good idea to scan the skies.
We'll be watching you.)

Simple fact of the matter is this:  It is both the glory and the
tragedy of our field that anybody (even you) can call him- or
herself a ufologist and find a forum, whether a newsletter, a
website, an e-list, or a media interviewer who will quote the
self-described expert.  Under these circumstances -- full, even
anarchic, free expression, in other words -- everything and
anything gets said, printed, broadcast, and otherwise
circulated, even if overwhelmingly it is ... uh, silly stuff.

 >Third, I have no idea who you are talking about, but the person
 >you think is my "source" is not my source on you and Gulf
 >Breeze. My source was then and is now, a CUFOS insider. (Part of
 >the non- existent clique.)

You know what?  Since none of what your alleged source alleges
happened, I can state with supreme confidence that  I don't
believe you for a second. I think you're making this up.  In
fact, I am certain of it. That makes you a big ... uh, fibber.

 >Fourth, I firmly believe that you did not want to step on Dr.
 >Maccabee's toes regarding Gulf Breeze. (That should probably
 >include Mr. Hopkins since he wrote a chapter.) Dr. M was then
 >and still is a major player in the Fund. And while the Fund is
 >supposed to be non-partisan its not nice to piss off people who
 >someday you might need.

If you believe that, you'll believe anything, so long as it
suits your purposes, even if it does not correspond in any
recognizable way with events in the real world. And you expect
me -- or anybody who knows better -- to take you seriously?  Is
it your position that just because you "firmly believe"
something, it must be true?

 >Fifth, I know exactly what I stepped into.

And I know exactly what's on the bottom of your shoes, and
believe me, it doesn't smell like roses.

Jerry Clark











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                                Re: Abducted?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:16:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:18:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Abducted?


 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:17:58 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Abducted?

 >Hi John, James, Errol and any others that might be interested.

 >I have had an interesting discussion with someone about other
 >things but my interest in all things ufological is well known
 >and he posed me a question.

 >This is not a direct quote, but along the lines of what he said.

 >As a small child I had "dreams" of floating through walls and
 >pipes and when I got a little older they stopped. I was five or
 >six at the time. As a teenager I read a lot about astral
 >projection and put it down to that. Also as a teenager I always
 >had the feeling that I was being watched, or followed but this
 >never amounted to anything. In my early twenties some times when
 >I woke up I felt as if I had not been to sleep. Another time I
 >felt as if I should be missing some time, but wasn't. In my
 >thirties I found out about abductions and the like from having
 >my curiosity roused by watching Fire in the sky and reading a
 >few books. Then I wondered if any of my previous experiences
 >might have been something to do with being an abductee.

 >So the question is, have I been abducted?

 >I asked him more questions about his "astral projection"
 >*dreams*, as he is an honest chap I believe his answers about
 >his memories being somewhat fragmented and he can only clearly
 >recollect one instance, but he is sure that he "did it" many
 >times. I asked him more about his feelings of being watched all
 >the time, or being followed, to which he can only recollect the
 >feeling nothing else. I asked him about his lack of missing time
 >and he said it was like waking up and thinking that he should be
 >missing time, days even one a few occasions, but he never was
 >actually missing any time, he couldn't really put into words
 >exactly just how he felt about this. I asked him about his not
 >feeling like he had slept and he said its like when you go to
 >bed and it seams like you only switched the light out minutes
 >before, when the alarm clock sounds.

 >I suggested that many children can astrally project themselves,
 >and that astral projection is a verified thing. I suggested that
 >his teenage feeling where paranoia, and that his early twenties
 >could have been his pace of life. All are possible I said but
 >not conclusive.

 >He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
 >all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
 >niggling feeling.

Hi all;

This is an issue which carries extreme importance to the
potential abductee.  I refer to the question of whether or not
the person has been abducted.  This must be an intellectual
conclusion, not an emotional one.

It is crucial for this person to accept only his own opinion,
and that opinion must be based on his own research. That
research must be based on the best information available from
multiple, dependable sources.  He should spend his time doing
everything he can to study information already written and
prepared by the best authorities, pro and con.  There are places
on the Internet he can go in order to help him with this study.

In the opinion of many, including myself, this person should
avoid hypnosis until such time as he has reached an honest and
firm conclusion regarding his experiences and is having
difficulty living a normal healthy life.  Only then should he
consider hypnosis, if at all.

The "Abduction Information Center" is a good place to start.
Frankly, I have found that in my experience at least, _no one_
person or entity can tell you whether or not you are an
experiencer.  Only you can do that.

 >From what I've read above, your friend has experienced some of
what I and many others have experienced.  Means _nothing_!

The only one who can make the decision is him, and only after
knowing himself.  That's the tough part.  Further, he must be
prepared to learn and accept that he may or may not have had
these experiences and be satisfied with that conclusion to the
extent that it does not cloud or distort his ability to think
clearly and objectively on the subject.

Some perceived abductees, on finding that it was merely a piece
of undigested beef, go completely the other way in their belief
system. If they thought they were abducted and find they were
not, they then become lunatics when it comes to anyone who
believes he has been abducted.  The opposite is true.

It takes a strong person to understand the truth about himself,
whatever that truth may be.  And stronger still to accept the
truth of others in similar situations.  Capeesh?

There are others monitoring this list, members, who can better
advise than I.  I suggest that one or two of you answer this
post.  For I may only speak for myself.  And everyone knows, I'm
nuttier than aunt Mary's fruitcake, eh?

Jim Mortellaro









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:20:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT


Mr. Young, with apologies to patient and gentle listfolk:

 >>You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
 >>you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also pointed out
 >>to you), that I was responding to vile accusations against my
 >>character -- accusations, moreover, that were hurled without a
 >>shred of supporting evidence.

 >I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
 >that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
 >accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
 >you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
 >example?

Do you know what the adjective "disingenuous" means?  If not,
suffice it to say that you have just provided a living example.
And if you aren't being disingenuous -- which I find hard to
believe -- and genuinely did not know what the discussion is
about, why did you join it at all?

 >By all means, I would speak out against any character digs
 >against you if you could demonstrate that which you claim.

 >From my recall of the Gulf Breeze discussions, Jerry Black has
 >afforded you inclusion in his "Old Boy's Network." Could this be
 >what has caused you to think yourself the victim of a 'vile
 >accusation against your character?'

Self-appointed judge, juror, and executioner Jerry Black began
this whole sorry business with an attack on Bruce Maccabee.  Its
focus, as you should know (did you even read it?), was less on
Maccabee's Gulf Breeze analysis -- which Black had every right
to take issue with -- than on Maccabee's character -- which is
another matter altogether.

Black conjured up what struck me as a paranoid, even laughable,
vision of an "Old Boys' Network" of intellectually corrupt
"leaders" (this field has leaders?) who covered for each other
and who, according to Judge Black, are nothing but lying, craven
opportunists driven by unsavory, self-serving interests.
Maccabee was one, I was another, Walt Andrus  a third. I don't
recall the others, but you can look them up in the archives if
you wanted to.  I recall that for the most part they were people
not well acquainted or even actively antagonistic to each other.

I am not corrupt.  I don't belong to an Old Boys' Network, and I
don't cover for others.  I have always been forthright in
stating my views, even when they disagreed with those of good
friends.  As I've said before, I don't know Bruce all that well,
though I like and respect him.  Walt Andrus and I aren't even on
speaking terms and haven't been for years.

Yeah, I don't like being at the receiving end of nasty slurs,
and anybody who is going to throw them my way is not going to
like my response.  Nor do I like to see the good names of
hard-working, honest, conscientious investigators like Bruce
Maccabee trashed, either.

You inserted yourself into the middle of this discussion by
making it appear as if the victims of the slurs were the
slurers.

 >While lamenting others for being judge, jury and executioner in
 >ufology, you seem to have no problem tackling such a position
 >yourself.

Nah, I don't think so.  Not my style, personality, temperament,
or intellect.  I guess that's why I get riled when I have the
misfortune of running into those who act that way.

 >Perhaps, Mr. Clark, your hot-dog hostility through this bizarre
 >episode has left you as first among the wounded resulting from
 >Black's exposure of this "Old Boy's Club."

In so doing, I'm afraid, Black exposed himself not only as
self-appointed judge, juror, and executioner but also as a man
with a wild imagination not much constrained by mundane reality.
And you have exposed yourself as his apologist.

Let me put it this way:

If I were going to make unprovoked charges which cast serious
doubt on the integrity of a colleague, I would make damned sure
I had my facts right. I would not level the charges casually.
And when challenged, I could defend myself by citing chapter and
verse.  I would think any decent human being would operate by
the same set of principles.

What we've gotten from your pal Mr. Black, and from your attempt
to change the subject from his baseless charges to my response
to them, is a depressing recklessness, a supreme indifference to
the reality of well-meaning, honest colleagues whose only sin is
to hold views different from Black's.

Is this any way to run ufology?  Is it any way that an honest
man would want to conduct himself?  I certainly hope not.

Jerry Clark










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:27:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:21:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?


 >Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:07:36 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I don't seem to see a way to post messages to the UFOMIND site,
 >but I wanted to relate that Strieber's Caldecott was probably
 >for his children's book about nuclear winter, 'Wolf Of
 >Shadows'.

 >I know it won several awards but I do not know the particulars.

"Wolf of Shadows" may have won awards, but not a Caldecott. I
was curious to know the truth when the first post here
questioned whether Strieber had won, so I went to the Caldecott
website, http://www.ala.org/alsc/caldecott.html. According to
the lists posted there, no Strieber book has ever won the
Caldecott medal or been named one of the runnerups (the
Caldecott "honor books").

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                        Re: NASA Speaks in English...

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 16:52:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:24:48 -0400
Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...


 >From: From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 21:49:02 EDT
 >Subject: NASA Speaks in English but the Control Panel is in Cyrillic Ubangy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >"NASA said confusion over whether measurements were made in
 >metric or English units led to the crash of a $125 million
 >spacecraft as it approached Mars last week." According to the
 >New York Times today (10-1-99).

 >Am I the only idiot who thinks this "mistake" is the most lame
 >sort of none sense ever perpetrated on US since the president
 >sinned?

 >How two major Military and NASA contractors can each work in
 >different systems boggles this Gripple brain big time. I cannot
 >imagine such an error folks.

 >I've worked for several NASA contractors as well as at NASA
 >Goddard Spaceflight Center, and knowing (less than some of you
 >do) what I do, it just can't happen.

 >It's like Jethro Bodine cypherin to the base ten while everyone
 >else is doin it to another base _and_ in metric!>

 >The new NASA call sign: "Help! It's fallen down and I can't get
 >it up..."


Dear Jim:

I agree it sounds fantastic, like accelerations in furlongs per
second squared.

The last I saw any physics done in english units was in high
school, early 1960s.  All the college physics, chemistry.. any
science whatever was in metric.

Maybe an archeological dig in the USA will go down so many feet,
and yes pilots still report altitude in hundreds or thousands of
feet, but this is rocket science! Literally!

Could it be that this is a cover for a different human error,
i.e. something even dumber?

If so, I haven't a clue what that could be.

- Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 19:33:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:30:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:12:22 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Maybe you could explain a little more specifically, Kevin, how
 >you and your co-authors attempted to evaluate the evidence
 >for/against the alleged link between UFOs as physical craft and
 >Alien Abduction Experiences, AAEs. As I see it, "The Abduction
 >Enigma" treated the AAE as a hallucination associated with sleep
 >paralysis or regurgitated birth memories, or as a false memory
 >imposed by unethical or incompetent therapists and researchers.

 >Once its reality status was assumed to be that of an illusion,
 >there was no need to consider whether there was an actual
 >evidence of a link between AAEs and UFOs.

<snip>

 >Joseph Polanik

Not to speak for Kevin, but once upon a time in UFO Land
abductions tended to follow a straight line from the sighting of
the UFO to the physical abduction itself, viz. Villas-Boas, the
Hills, Herbert Schirmer, Travis Walton and so on. In other
words, a distant UFO was seen which drew nearer and disgorged
alien beings, who summarly hauled the unwilling Earthling into
the bowels of the UFO. Pretty straightforward stuff, when you
think about it.

But I think I'm also safe in saying that that's not the way most
abductions are reported (or experienced) nowadays. True, the
insides of what is alleged and what appears to be a UFO is
frequently described, but in many cases no UFO is seen or
reported from an external point of view, either coming or going.

This raises questions for both the sleep paralysis and literal
abduction camps. In the case of the sleep paralysis school, why
the introduction of the insides of a saucer to the experience?
Why couldn't the medical exam (and any accompanying ET sexual
hanky-panky) simply take place right there in the familiar
surroundings of the victims' bedroom?

On the other hand, if ET is virtually omnipotent, why not simply
beam the victim up to the examining room and be done with it?
Why first send aliens down to scare the bejabbers out of people
in their bedrooms and _then_ beam the victim up? In the same
vein, given the technology that would be required to transport
people through solid objects, you'd think by now that those
selfsame superintelligent little greys would have come up with
some handy, transportable medical devices like the ones we've
all seen on endless episodes of Star Trek and its several
sequels for the last couple of decades. You know, the handheld
Full Body Scanner Mark IV, the Sperm Extractor VI, and the Ovum
Incubator Series V, maybe even the Anal Probe Number Nine?
There's some serious scale of inefficient energy expenditure or
transfer here that simply doesn't compute.

For that matter, why not coordinate the transport beam on the
desired sperm and ova and beam _them_ up, leaving all that
extraneous biological material lying on the bed, no one the
wiser that they've been visited and sexually robbed in the
night.

Of course this leads to the next obvious question: After a few
extractions of this sort, why the need for any further
repetitions of same, let alone reputed millions of repetitions
over decades or centuries? Wouldn't the supersmart, space-faring
greys have figured out how to clone or replicate human DNA by
now? Wouldn't they already be churning out far better, purer
stuff to work with than the defective product we keep producing
on a daily basis the old-fashioned, labor-intensive way via the
old in and out?

The only explanantion I can think of for a literal
interpretation of the abduction phenomenon as presently and
popularly presented is that we've been invaded by a race of
creepy old ET voyeurs, senile but still somehow horny. (Think of
them as Venusians on Viagra.) Just our luck! No wonder we
evolved sleep paralysis. Otherwise we'd lie awake all night
thinking about this stuff.

Dennis









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Britain's Astronomer Royal Publishes

From: stig.agermose@get2net.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:46:03 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:32:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Britain's Astronomer Royal Publishes


Britain's Astronomer Royal Publishes Controversial Book On
Multiple Inhabited Universes

Source: The Sunday Times.

Stig

***

Sunday October 3 1999

NEWS: BRITAIN

Answer to the meaning of the universe is six

Jonathan Leake
Science Editor

THE astronomer royal has boldly gone where few astrophysicists
have dared to go before. Sir Martin Rees has unveiled a new
theory that we live in a Star Trek-style cosmos in which our
universe is just one of millions existing in parallel - many of
which could harbour other forms of life.

In a new book, which has caused controversy even before
publication, he has also suggested that there is no such thing
as empty space; that our universe could exist in a bubble
destined to be crushed by the implosion of a much larger
universe surrounding it; and that future civilisations could
find a way of creating miniature black holes, within which
entirely new universes could grow. He also hints at universes
populated only by insects.

Rees, professor of astronomy at Cambridge University, is
internationally renowned, but is generally seen as conservative.
His book shows this is a mistake. "I know not everyone will
agree with my ideas," he said this weekend, "but a lot of people
will talk about them."

Even the title of his book, Just Six Numbers, is provocative. It
claims the essence of the universe is determined by six
constants - all of which have to be right to allow a universe in
which life was possible.

The numbers include the relative strength of the forces binding
atoms compared to that of gravity. If gravity had been even a
fraction stronger, he argues, our universe would probably have
lasted a short time before imploding. If life had evolved in
that time, it would have been restricted to the size and shape
of insects, the only organisms able to withstand high gravity.

In a profession in which suggestions that the universe may owe
its existence to a benign creator are often treated with
derision, Rees also notes that the fact that all six numbers

are so "finely tuned" may be the first real evidence collected by
astronomers for the existence of God.

He is, however, careful not to go too far down that road,
preferring an alternative, but equally controversial, suggestion
that there is an infinity of other universes, most of which are
sterile. More are being continually created, he suggests.

According to this theory, the huge number of universes created
meant that sooner or later one of them would have the "six
numbers" at exactly the right values. He calls his new vision of
the cosmos the "multiverse".

He argues: "Our big bang may not have been the only one.
Separate universes may have cooled down differently, ending up
governed by different laws. This is a natural deduction for some
(albeit speculative) theories and opens up a new vision of the
universe as just one 'atom' among an infinite multiverse."

Dr Victor Clube, an astrophysicist at Oxford University, said
Rees's theories were merely a fashionable construct that would
not stand the test of time. "There is no evidence for other
universes. He is just using the theory as a way to explain our
existence without recourse to religion. But, without evidence,
believing in other universes is just as unscientific as
believing in God."

**

Copyright 1998 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on
Times Newspapers' standard terms and conditions. To inquire
about a licence to reproduce material from The Times, visit the
Syndication website.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

               Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 20:20:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:07:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 00:34:16 EDT
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


<snip>

 >You've already done something.  You said something.  Now, all
 >you must do is say it again, and again and again.  And to some
 >folks who you helped elect.  It's still a free country.  It's
 >still a place where you may more easily than ever, communicate
 >with your erected.l... uh, sorry, "elected," representatives via
 >the Internet no less.

 >Just do it.  This is one time and one place where if it feels
 >good, you can and should do it.

 >See!?  You aint no dunce.  You've managed to stay way from
 >Gripple haven't you?

 >Jim Mortellaro

Grin...Thanks Jim.

Now if we can just get our voices in harmony we can raise them
to the point that they are not "noise" but "Harmony!"

Let each of us here sound with a loud "Trump!"

I'm putting the hat in the corner for now. <G>

REgards, Mike

  Download ICQ at http://www.icq.com/
  ICQ#:7508455
  BBS: (270) 683-3026
  Fax: (270) 686-7394
  Home: (270) 683-6811
         ---







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:40:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:17:39 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:18:49 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Remember how Cavitt refused to show Marcel his report,
 >if that is true?

 >Gildas Bourdais


Yes, and does everyone remember that Marcel described only two
types of recovered debris in the last interview he gave? No
fiber-optic cables, no memory-retaining metal, and, most
importantly of all, no goddamned bodies!

In other words, an interstellar spaceship made up of only two
types of material: short beams and some sort of cloth-like
material, whatever it's alleged extraordinary properties. That's
it. Period. Nothing more.

Now, can someone please explain how only two types of debris, in
whatever quantity, can be re-engineered into a flying spaceship
of a circular, disc-like shape? No, you can't.

Even if we throw in a third, bake-lite material, the basic
problem remains: This stuff doesn't constitue a spaceship that
anyone can conceive of and no amount of wishful thinking renders
it otherwise. It doesn't even suggest a saucer shape, for that
matter. For all we know the material that Marcel recovered could
just as easily have been shaped like a box-kite, a flying wing,
or a balloon as opposed to a flying disc.

The so-called extraordinary nature of the material stems from
Marcel's subjective impressions of same, which may or may not be
reliable, or reliable to different degrees. However much weight
one wants to assign Marcel's own 40-plus years memory of events,
it is a leap of faith to equate Marcel's vocal remembrances with
unequivocal proof of extraterrestrial visitation, any way one
wants to slice it. The two simply don't amount to one and the
same, never have, and never will.

This applies equally to charges of cover up leveled against
DuBose and Ramey, the assumption being that if they were
covering up something it had, ipso facto, to be the
extraterrestrial nature of UFOs in general and specifically the
one that crashed at or near Roswell, maybe in three, four, five
or more separate places (what the hell), strewing some limited
debris here and bodies and other kinds of debris there. Oh, what
a web we weave!

Multiple flights with multiple bags. Multiple crash sites with
multiple recoveries of multiple debris and multiple bodies, and
all of it absolutely true, Corso, too!  (Where is Rudiak now
that we really need him?)

Yes, I believe in Roswell, and the recovery of extraterrestrial
technology and bodies in New Mexico in the summer of 1947 that
ultimately led to us winning the Cold War against the Soviet
Union, never mind that no government cover up could ever
guarantee that another saucer (or two, three or four) couldn't
crash near or just outside Moscow or in downtown Cincinatti,
Paris, London, Berlin, or Cleveland. I also believe that the
same ignorant grey fools who crashed in the New Mexico desert
are to this day conducting millions of abductions per year,
using their selective invisibility techniques and their ability
to beam living organisms through solid objects to their
advantage. All covered over worldwide by MJ-12. In fact, I
believe any and everything, just as long as orthodox ufology
tells me it's so. And as long as it dates to Roswell, New
Mexico, June (or is it July?), 1947.

Dennis Stacy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:49:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:37:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:12:22 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 22:38:13 GMT

 >>>Why is it that we _assume_ that one phenomenon (UFOs) has
 >>>anything to do with the other (abduction/contact experiences)?

 >>>There is a widespread willingness to consider evidence that
 >>>radar contact has been made with objects (presumably craft) not
 >>>produced on Earth.

 >>>There is a lesser, but growing, willingness to consider that
 >>>something extraordinary is happening to so-called abductees and
 >>>contactees.

 >>>Where is the willingness to soberly evaluate the evidence as to
 >>>whether one phenomena is related to the other, and, if so, how?

 >>We (Russ Estes, Bill Cone and I) have tried to do this in 'The
 >>Abduction Enigma'.

 >Maybe you could explain a little more specifically, Kevin, how
 >you and your co-authors attempted to evaluate the evidence
 >for/against the alleged link between UFOs as physical craft and
 >Alien Abduction Experiences, AAEs. As I see it, "The Abduction
 >Enigma" treated the AAE as a hallucination associated with sleep
 >paralysis or regurgitated birth memories, or as a false memory
 >imposed by unethical or incompetent therapists and researchers.

The original assumption, as has been played out first in The
October Scenario (1989), Faces Of The Visitors (1997) and
finally in The Abduction Enigma (1999) reveals an evolution in
thought. My first magazine article on abductions appeared in the
mid-1970s, and the main thrust was that the case represented a
real abduction. The Abduction Enigma is the result of the long
study, not only by me, but by Russ Estes and Bill Cone. Estes,
as he interviewed over 150 abductees (in the beginning) began to
see some things that suggested to him, that the answer to
questions might lie, not in space, but on Earth.

We nave never endorsed the idea of birth trauma as an
explanation for an abduction experience. We agreed with Lawson's
conclusion on the Garden Grove abduction was probably hoax, but
his birth trauma theory failed for a number of reasons, not the
least of which is infantile amnesia. He couldn't answer the
simple question of how the fetus knew what it looked like
because there are no reflective surfaces in the womb, and
certainly no light.

 >Once its reality status was assumed to be that of an illusion,
 >there was no need to consider whether there was an actual
 >evidence of a link between AAEs and UFOs.

But that link had already been broken by the lack of undisputed
physical evidence, a failure to produce, during our study,
anything independently, that would link UFOs to abduction other
than the testimony of those who claimed abduction, and the
realization that other answers provided the keys.

 >There _was_ considerable insightful analysis of the relationship
 >between _reports_ of abduction experiences _reports_ of Satanic
 >Abuse. It may be that differences in the theoretical
 >perspectives of abduction researchers and satanic abuse
 >researchers have led to classifying a single phenomenon into two
 >categories depending on who is doing the investigating. However,
 >the possibility that we might be able to consolidate these two
 >areas of research doesn't automatically mean that both groups of
 >researchers were investigating an illusory experience rather
 >than a real one.

Not initially, no. But once we began to examine Satanic Ritual
Abuse (SRA), we saw the same forces operating. Little in the way
of conscious memories, but a whole range of horrifying tales
told under the influences of the researchers, hypnotic
regression, and even various drugs. However, when the search for
physical and corroborative evidence began, the tales started to
fall apart. A major difference between abduction and SRA is that
there are more recanters in SRA. Yes, there are a few in
abductions.

 >Consider an analogous situation involving research into cattle
 >mutilations. For better or for worse, I live in the Bible belt
 >and we just don't see many dead cows mutilated by aliens. Bible
 >belt cows are much more likely to be mutilated by satanic
 >ritualists. (My theory is that around here the sheriff's deputy
 >who takes a report about a cattle mute calls a researcher
 >specializing in satanic rituals rather than a researcher
 >specializing in aliens harvesting genetic material.)

 >In any event, we might say differences in theoretical
 >perspectives among researchers explain why the phenomenon of
 >cattle mutilation is divided into two categories. But even if we
 >eliminated the artifical distinctions between the two field, we
 >still have to admit that both groups were investigating a real
 >phenomenon.

 >There really were dead cows.

Which is a form of physical evidence. However, isn't it true that there
is a disagreement about the cause, or causes, of that physical
evidence?

With abductions, the little bit of physical evidence that
exists, say the alien implants, produce little in the way of
corroboration. That's why we looked at that as well and were
left with nothing in the way of a scientific finding, except for
negative results.

John Velez was right when he called for a release of the "hidden
proof." If it exists, is should be brought out into the light of
day for independent and scientific examination instead of
parceled out to one or two researchers who have a vested
interest.

 >>>Is there any evidence that would selectively discriminate
 >>>between these theories:

 >>>1. That the same off-world beings that pilot the craft are also
 >>>perpetrating the abductions.

 >>>2. That abductions are Out-of-Body Experiences, Lucid Dreams or
 >>>cases of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that are unrecognized
 >>>or incompletely recalled.

 >>You have left out sleep paralysis, vivid dreams, hoax,
 >>psychological manipulation by hypno-therapists and a couple of
 >>other explanations.

 >Did I leave out sleep paralysis or did you leave out Awareness
 >during Sleep Paralysis?

 >Sleep paralysis by itself explains nothing. Since we all
 >experience sleep paralysis 4 to 6 times each night as we cycle
 >into REM sleep, the presence of sleep paralysis does not
 >discriminate between those who report abductions and those who
 >do not.

 >What _may_ discriminate between these two groups is the presence
 >of _Awareness_ during Sleep Paralysis, ASP.

 >I don't mean to belabor the semantics of the situation, but I
 >think we should distinguish between a physiological state (sleep
 >paralysis) and a state of consciousness (Awareness of the
 >physiological state)

But the problem is little more than semantics. Without
awareness, there is no report. And remember, we suggested that
only some of the abductions were the result of sleep paralysis,
not that all of them were.

 >>>I know that there are advocates of each point of view. But if we
 >>>were to sit down to soberly sift the evidence available now, do
 >>>we find any that is simultaneously consistent with one theory
 >>>but inconsistent with the other?

 >>We find that abduction stories have existed since humans began
 >>recording their thoughts. We find parallels in pop culture. We
 >>find parallels in the tales of Satanic Ritual Abuse and tales of
 >>Multiple Personality Disorder.

 >We find that there are historical precedents for reports of
 >abduction experiences and for reports of UFOs. This establishes
 >that both phenomena are old. It doesn't say whether they are
 >related.

With which we would agree. We believe that there is no
connection between UFOs and abduction reports. We are suggesting
that abduction, in different forms have existed throughout human
history but that these reports can be explained in terms of
Earth bound traditions rather than extraterrestrial
intervention. The evidence for alien abduction is not
persuasive. When it failed to lead to the extraterrestrial, we
began to look in other directions, just as have John Mack and
David Jacobs. Both have suggested, indirectly, that the
therapist or researcher retrieves the type of experience that he
or she believes to be core of the report. We agree, suggesting
that dreams, sleep paralysis (or awareness during sleep
paralysis) among other factors are responsible.

KRandle






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                        Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:34:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:10:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?


 >From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 22:40:31 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 04:27:46 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Can You 'Hear' A Meteor?

 >Thanks for the hot tip on the Canadian Fireball Reporting
 >Centre, unfortunately their server is down and I can't submit
 >the report! heheh...

Ladies & Gents:

The International Meteor Organization's Fireball Data Center
accepts on-line reports at:

http://www.imo.net/fireball/index.html


Also, the North American Meteor Network has report forms at:

http://www.imo.net/fireball/index.html

Clear skies,
Bob Young








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                Re: Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:45:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:12:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 01:56:11
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 03:55:07 -0400
 >Subject: Marcel's Previously Unknown Last Words On Roswell

 >Source: 'space.com'

 >http://www.space.com/area51/marcel_990930.html

 >Marcel's Last Words on Roswell Crash

 >By Robert Scott Martin
 >Staff Writer

 >Sep 30 1999 12:21:09 ET

<snip>

 >Linda Corley, who interviewed Marcel five years before his
 >death, closed the 1999 National UFO Conference with a largely
 >impressionistic portrait of the man's last years in Houma, LA,
 >where she still lives.

 >Corley contacted Marcel after a college professor told her class
 >to interview "an interesting person." The resulting four-hour
 >conversation between Marcel, his wife, Viaud, and Corley took
 >place around the Marcels' kitchen table on May 5, 1981, and was
 >recorded on an inexpensive student cassette player.

 >One of the most significant details to emerge from the
 >discussion, believed to be Marcel's last in-depth public
 >statement on the Roswell affair, was the fact that Marcel firmly
 >denied having seen alien corpses in the wreckage.

<snip>

 >That very vow may explain why he called her a few weeks after
 >the interview in a "frantic" mood to tell her that everything he
 >had said had been a lie. He insisted that she not release the
 >information to the press, and so she kept the interview out of
 >the public eye for more than a decade, not even turning it in as
 >part of her school assignment.

 >"My heart really went out to him because he sounded so scared,"
 >she said.

Did I read this correctly?  Marcell later called her up and told
her that it was all a lie?

This was in May, 1981? __Holy Cow__

Bob Young







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:24:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT

 >>You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
 >>you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also pointed out
 >>to you), that I was responding to vile accusations against my
 >>character -- accusations, moreover, that were hurled without a
 >>shred of supporting evidence.

 >Mr. Jerome Clark;

 >I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
 >that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
 >accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
 >you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
 >example?

<snip>

 >Kenny Young


Dear Gentlle Listfolk,

For whatever reason(s), Jerry Clark seems to have become a
lightning rod for personal criticism on this list. I've been
trying to figure out why this is so, and here are a couple of
tentative thoughts (as opposed to ultimate solutions) on the
matter.

As an authority figure (UFO historian & encyclopediast), Clark
is assumed to have the answers, all the answers, and nothing but
the answers when it comes to ufological matters. When it comes
to the lack of an answer, or no answer at all, however, others
with their own answers to a particular case or aspect will
naturally disagree, as will those with answers different than
the ones Clark does supply. Nothing preternatural or unusual
about this.

The emotionalism of the dispute, then, has to be attributed to
something else other than a simple difference of interpretation
about this or that case, or this or that aspect of the
phenomenon. It has to do with issues of chuminess and
conclusions. Critics seem to wonder whether the two are as
easily separable as Clark says they are.

The Gulf Breeze case may serve as an example. On the one hand,
Clark says that he remains personally suspicious (or dubious) of
the Ed Walters pictures and of Walters himself as a reliable
witness. On the other, he professes faith in Bruce Maccabee both
as a friend, fellow ufologist, and photoanalyst. In the end,
Clark seems to say, we've simply agreed to disagree about the
nature (and ultimate reality) of Gulf Breeze, differences of
opinion being permitted among all honorable ufologists.

What drives Clark's critics to extremity, I think, is precisely
this perceived disconnect between a difference of opinion and
the evidence allegedly at hand. After all, Maccabee is either an
accomplished photoanalyst -- or something less in that
particular field. If Maccabee _is_ an accomplished photoanalyst,
by Clark's own admission, then upon what other doubts are his
own dismissal of the Walters' photos based? Similarly, if Clark
has serious doubts as to the authenticity of the Walters'
photographs, then he must have at least something less than
total confidence in Maccabee's resounding analysis of same as
the real thing. So which is it? Clark raises the ire of his
critics by continually maintaining that it's neither one nor the
other. Maccabee is a dutiful, reliable photoanalyst -- I just
happen to have a different opinion of his conclusions and the
case as a whole. Which some may interpret as begging the
question.

If ufology wants to stand on scientific footing, then we
wouldn't normally expect the assessment of particular cases to
be based on the agreement, or disagreement, of opinion, or the
presence or absence thereof, but on the evidence itself. Did
Maccabee supply same in the case of Gulf Breeze or not?

On the other hand, if one disagrees with Maccabee's photoanlysis
of the Gulf Breeze case, upon what feeling or opinion will his
next photoanalysis be accepted or dismissed? Is the man the real
thing, or are his analyses subject to which way the wind (and
other evidence) happens to be blowing on any given day?

One can't have it both ways. Without being criticized left and
right. Just as one can't conveniently consign Roswell to benign
neglect. Either Roswell happened as advertized, thus initiating
the cover up, or it didn't, in which case a helluva lot of
people are lying and exaggerating, and the subsequent testimony
regarding same is demonstrably worthy of a sociological study in
myth-making. (Your statement that Roswell wasn't worthy of its
own entry in your UFO encyclopedia also seems somewhat curious,
given the space IUR has devoted to the subject over the last few
years, not to mention the individual books devoted to same. How
so?)

Roswell and Gulf Breeze are not amountable or equatable to
differences of opinion among honorable ufologists; they are
fundamental to ufology if ufology is to be anything other than a
difference of opinions among individuals. If it can't resolve
either of these cases, then it's hard to see how it can resolve
much of anything else -- without a difference of opinion -- in
which case nothing has been resolved at all.

Dennis








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                     Steve Moreno: US Flap September '99

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 01:46:33 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:15:48 -0400
Subject: Steve Moreno: US Flap September '99


Source: Steve Moreno, Founder & Managing Director of Psi APPLICATIONS,


http://psi-app.com/SeptSightingA.htm

The second part of my e-mail is taken from 'alt.ufo.reports'.

Stig

***


SEPTEMBER 99' FLAP

IN DEPTH STUDY & ANALYSIS


CONTENTS

I.   Introduction
II.  Local Sighting Report
III. September Flap Stats, Data, & Queries
IV.  Florida & West Africa Data
V.   Analysis & Assessments

  I.    INTRODUCTION

The following research report was inspired by a sighting
reported in my local home town area of Fairfield, located aprox.
60 miles north of the San Francisco Bay Area in California.
Fairfield is located adjacent to Travis A.F.B. My residence is
aprox. 2 miles from Travis's main gate and I can actually view
the control tower from my back yard deck.

This local sighting occurred during a 1/2 hour flap which
occurred on September 1st from aprox. 9:00 P.M. to 9:30 P.M.
Numerous eye witness accounts, details, events, explanations,
and the interpretations thereof have occurred since that
evening. To this date there has been no coordinated correlation
of these details and data done by any researcher or
organization.

Additionally there appears to be related flaps which occurred on
the east coast in the Florida area, and also in the West Africa
region up to over a week later. This report will focus on the
West Coast activity but will leave an open door on these other
related areas. This open door respectfully invites the research
efforts of other researchers or organizations to contribute into
this coordinated effort. Please contact me if interested.

This report's format will consist of information and data drawn
from the efforts and work of other independent researchers and
organizations. Permission has been received for the use of
other's work and full credit is indicated to the originating
parties who produced it. This report will be available to the
general (non-UFO) public and media in an effort to raise
awareness and knowledge of this event.


II.  LOCAL SIGHTING REPORTS


1ST WITNESS REPORT

This sighting was reported to me on September 2nd by my 13 year
old neighbor Ben. Having witnessed the object the prior evening
on the 1st, he handed me a detailed diagram indicating all
pertinent information any investigator would begin to ask for.
At that point I had no knowledge of the overall events that had
occurred on the 1st.

It was clear he was adamant over what he saw, and his mother
verified his claim, in that she witnessed his extreme
exhilaration, and also saw the last seconds of a dark object
before it just disappeared. She was vague about seeing this
object however and without any other firm witnesses I could not
help but be amused, and reserved, at the same time. As with most
reports I began by checking my online services for any other
reports for that evening. I was amazed at what I saw within 2
minutes of going online. It appeared that some type of flap had
occurred during this exact time across the 3 state western
region of California, Orgeon, and Washington. As I looked at my
neighbor's sketch I began to analyze similar details and aspects
related to other reports. I began to realize this was a very
significant sighting within this recent flap of activity.

Click *here to see the original report as accounted to me
personally by Ben.


INVESTIGATIVE QUERRIES

The next day I began my trek to locate any other possible
reports of this sighting. I contacted all local law enforcement
agencies only to come up empty. I contacted Lt. Seydel at Travis
A.F.B. and solicited her interest in checking out the control
tower and Rap Com for any anomalous returns or awareness of the
issue. She was interested in receiving a copy of the sketch with
all details that were gathered up to that point. My last avenue
to explore was our local paper the Daily Republic. They had
helped me before in these types of matters so I initiated
contact and got the ball rolling.

Lt. Seydel got back to me within 3 days with a negatory on any
officially acknowledged radar returns or awareness of this
object. She also stipulated that it was not any type of craft
which belonged to Travis. My only hope at this point was with
the Daily Republic. Through several correspondences they became
aware of the significance this sighting's synchronism with the
anomalous events of that evening.

At that point in time there had been existing investigative
queries with a resulting statement and explanation from
N.O.R.A.D. However considering some of the existing eyewitness
accounts and particularly this local incident, it all didn't
quite match up. A major problem with the local case was its
strength without a strong secondary witness, at the very least.
It was clear if this sighting occurred as indicated by Ben, that
someone else most certainly would have witnessed its occurrence.
So in the interest of the investigation the Daily Republic ran
the following article on September 17.

Click *here to see the actual eye witness sketch and front page
article.

Please note:

The D.R. article is in minor error in the statement, "These
sightings were publicized on the Art Bell radio show 9:30 p.m.
the night of the alleged sightings -- two nights before Moreno's
neighbor shared his account with him, Moreno said."  My neighbor
shared his account with me on the evening of the 2nd, the night
directly after the sightings.

Additionally after further interview with my neighbor Ben, he
realized his comparisons in dimensions were related to a
football field. He meant for footage to actually represent
yardage, meaning that the craft represented in his sketch was
actually 3X larger!

**

Online archives from the Fairfield Daily Republic. Starting
April, 1999  September 16, 1999

Boy, 13, documents backyard UFO

By Inga Miller

FAIRFIELD -- Bright blue lights reportedly seen in the Fairfield
sky two weeks ago have once again shed light on that ever
looming question.

Is it a flying saucer? A rocket? Or a plane off its course?

Local UFO expert Steve Moreno says it's too early to tell, but
that he won't be surprised if the craft spotted near Travis Air
Force Base turns out to be a UFO reportedly witnessed gliding
across Oregon, Washington, and into Utah the same night.

"This is a pretty significant sighting," Moreno said of an
account given to him by a 13-year-old neighbor.

The 13-year-old described to Moreno an airborne craft flying 300
feet above. He estimated it was 300 feet long and trailed 75
feet of glowing blue flame as it sailed silently through the
night sky.

"It's got to be either something the (Air Force) base made or a
spacecraft from a different world," the neighbor told the Daily
Republic. "There were huge blue flames coming out of a
triangular object. It looked like it was heading for the base,
but it wasn't like any type of airplane I've ever seen around
here."

Down the road under his own roof at the time, Moreno said he had
no idea that anything unusual was transpiring in the sky above.

The neighbor visited Moreno the next night to describe how the
stars disappeared in a large, moving space, and how he could
just barely see the dark gray craft as it moved towards
Vacaville. It was stripped of all the regular plain stuff, the
neighbor said, as if the color had been scraped away with a
potato peeler, leaving pipes its only decorations.

It was Thursday, Sept. 2, and Moreno got on the computer
immediately to see what he could find.

"When I checked with my online services, his report correlated
really well with what was noticed that same night through
Oregon, Northern California, and even into Utah."

Moreno said residents of Oregon experienced a black-out the same
night, and enthusiasts have linked it to the unidentified craft.

"The only reason I've pursued this sighting this far is because
a major flap occurred at the same time," Moreno said.

These sightings were publicized on the Art Bell radio show 9:30
p.m. the night of the alleged sightings -- two nights before
Moreno's neighbor shared his account with him, Moreno said. But
Moreno stressed that he believed the account his neighbor gave
is true. He added that two local accounts, one from Napa and
another from Novato, were included in the ones faxed to the
radio show.

UFO commentators speculate the UFO was part of a Russian rocket
falling from space. But the young Fairfield resident has a
different idea. He compared what he saw to the Blue Falkin in
"Star Wars."

"I ran inside to get my mom, and she came out and leaned against
the railing, but she didn't get a good look at it," the neighbor
said.

The Tower Command at the base had few clues to offer, either.

"Nothing abnormal was logged that evening," said Lt. Carie
Seydel.

Just two types of planes are housed at the base -- the C-5
Galaxy, which is a cargo plane, and the KC-10 Extender, a
refueling craft. Neither fits the description of the triangular
craft the 13-year-old described.

Reports of bright lights and shadowy crafts are nothing new in
Solano County. UFO sightings date back to the 1960s when
hundreds of Rio Vista residents reportedly witnessed a red glow
stream from an unidentified craft, the legend goes.

Steve Moreno urges anyone who thinks they have spotted a UFO to
contact him at 434-1212.

**

The same day the article ran 13 calls came in. 11 of those calls
were related to other previous non related UFO reports. 2 were
messages with no return number, which did indicate multiple
witness observation of the 9-1 sighting. However with no return
call they remained unsubstantiated.


2ND WITNESS REPORT

The remaining call resulted in a very strong and credible
secondary witness. The time and location of his sighting placed
him in the projected proximity of the object, based upon its
last observed flight path. His description mirrors the first
witness's account in many ways, yet he carefully explains and
examines any possible variables. Ironically he is a reporter for
a Bay Area newspaper. That along with the fact he has never had
a prior interest in UFO's, and is well versed in conventional
USAF aircraft makes his report very strong. It is clear he
experienced something very unusual as he was moved to stop his
vehicle despite the fact he was running late.  This allowed for
a concentrated stationary observation, so he could make sure
this was not a jet or a trick of light.

His report is further validated by the fact he revealed this
sighting to work associates, when he arrived at work, later that
evening. Since their response was  humorous non-believing
sarcasm, he intended to not pursue it any further, and to just
keep it to himself. However he was astonished to see the image
and article on the front page of the Daily Republic 2 weeks
later.  Similarities within the sketch and article inspired him
to call and grant me a full interview and report. He expressed
his certainty as being so strong that it could bear testimony in
a court of law. ( as an example)

He expressed valid concerns over possible repercussions his
credibility and reputation as a reporter might suffer. Yet he
also expressed a willingness and courage to allow his identity
to be revealed. As I fully respect and understand his concerns
we decided to utilize his first name, John, with reference to
his employer as a local Bay Area newspaper. This will be the
reference to this secondary witness in the general distribution
of his sighting report. However he has agreed to confidentialy
release his identity for verification purposes to appropiate
querries, so his identity and occupation may be a checked out
and authenticated.

Click *here to see the original report as accounted to me
personally by John.

Click *here to see a map or the sighting area & objects
trajectory path.


{more work to continue.....will be updated soon}


Psi APPLICATIONS home page link.

*******

From: Haunter@castles.com (Haunter) Newsgroups:
alt.fan.art-bell,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.ufo.reports,uk.rec.ufo
Subject: Sept.1st Sightings-Western U.S. Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999
11:40:01 GMT Organization: AlteredState Imaging/Psi App/WCS

Gentlemen,

To the disappointment of some the story goes on. I have finally
acquired a very substantial secondary witness, named John, to a
very significant local sighting which occurred on 9-1 between
21:13 and 21:30. Our secondary witness is a reporter for a S.F.
Bay Area newspaper and he confirms our first 1st witness's
sketch and details.

What makes this significant gentlemen is the fact it appears to
be the only solid object which was witnessed at this close
range. Also it appears to be one of the only singular objects
witnessed, yet it has characteristics which were reported in so
many of the other sighting reports. In particular the streaming
sparkling trail behind it. It is clear from the detailed reports
that this is not a returning rocket booster.

Please take a moment to review the detailed report at

http://psi-app.com/SeptSightingA.htm

- you won't be sorry.

I showed Peter Davenport, Virgil Staff, and Peter Gersten this
diagram down in San Mateo at the U.F.O. Expo, however I waited
to file this report until I could locate another witness. Our
local paper ran a front page article which helped net this very
strong secondary witness. I have filed the reports on Peter's
online database forms, with links to the fully detailed reports
on our site. These were two unrelated witnesses to the same
'craft'. Please check out the map which shows the plotted
trajectory, passing right by the outskirts of Travis A.F.B., and
a Naval Radio Station on a government reservation.

In view of all of this, combined with the heated ongoing
debates, I have elected to embark on a detailed report on the
ENTIRE September flap. I will concentrate primarily on its
relationship to the West Coast incidents, however I am seeking
investigators in the Florida and West Africa areas to help fill
in those gaps also.

My embarking on this project is inspired by our local sighting,
which literally passed right by my bedroom window while I was
lying in bed.)-:  I have also been prompted by Virgil Staff
(Mufon's Western Regional Director), and Ruben Uriarte
(California State Director). I have been in contact with Jerry
Rolwes, Space.Com, Peter Davenport and others regarding this
project, the use of their materials, opinions, input etc...

I plan to create a graph which will depict the characteristics
of the various sightings reported through this flap. We will
also plot all sightings with there directional coordinates on a
Western Region Map. I will then call N.O.R.A.D. to ask them a
series of questions which will stipulate what typical
characteristics a returning rocket booster would display. I will
also be very interested to engage in a dialog with John Locker
and his associates on his information, and opinions within these
regards. Then eventually perhaps we can match up the data and
see what it may reveal.

This reporter (John) has agreed to talk publicly. It would be
great for a public venue (Art or Jeff ??) to present such
positive examples in journalism. Both the local paper which
helped us out, and this reporter whom as our secondary witness,
has no fear to speak out. Perhaps it would motivate other
reporters to get on with their job, and report the facts with
"no fear". It is very interesting to hear John's take on why the
media is hushed. It is also interesting to hear his fascination
over his experience, as prior to that event he had no
inclination or interest in UFO's.

Sorry to add 'hot sauce' to the pot gentlemen, however as I
stated to Jerry Rolwes, I can not avoid this hand just because
it has the wild cards. In fact to the contrary I believe this to
be a very relevant case which may blow the rocket booster story
(at least as a 100% explanation) out of the water.

Don't get me wrong here, cursory examination of reported data
shows it very possible that indeed both events may have occurred
at the same time. Obviously there was hard data out there which
existed early on, in full anticipation of plundering space
debris. In some cases debris did plunder and disintegrate.
However it appears a higher majority of reports stipulate
multiple 'lights' traveling in formations, in slow controlled
trajectories, on parallel courses with the earth, etc... Now I
admit I am using logic here, not an astrophysics degree, so
perhaps there is something I am missing. That's where the
experts come in.

The similarities of the 'tails' or 'trails' is amazing.
Particularly with this local sighting which appears to be the
only singular 'object' observed as a near close encounter, yet
it displays this peculiar 'star-dust' sparkling effect in its
tail. Additionally it appears to have a semi-cloaking ability,
as the reports reveal.

If anybody has anything productive, or further information to
add to this investigation, please email me or call me at
707-249-7065. I am particularly interested in talking with
anyone who is an investigator or witness in the Florida or West
Africa events. Any investigators whom may wish to help with this
small project please contact me. Full credit will be given to
contributions.

We are all here to seek truth in mutual cooperation. That is why
I salute organizations like MUFON and Skywatch International.
Eventually I hope to do the same with Psi APPLICATIONS, only
across the entire paranormal spectrum, from which I believe many
cross-correlations, and discoveries will be found.

Updates will follow as this investigation progresses.


Looking Forward......


--


To Truth & Advancement

Steve Moreno
Founder & Managing Director
Psi APPLICATIONS
Humanity's Right To Know !!

http://psi-app.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

              Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez

From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@bc.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:21:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:31:27 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John Velez


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :;>
 >Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 12:37 PM
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - John
 >         Velez & Mike Woods


 >Joining Co-Host Jonn Kares and I on 'Strange Days... Indeed'
 >tonight will be:

 >   ---------------
 >  /// John Velez
 >---------------

<snip>

Hi Errol:

I listened to the show tonight for the first time. I loved it!

Regarding our search for the truth.

I think that there are two assumptions that are being made
regarding the abduction phenomena.

1. That our minds are capable of comprehending the total
phenomenon.

2. That we can do anything about the phenomenon even if we could
comprehend it.


My opinion for whatever it's worth:

1. Probably not (the aliens are really really alien).

2. Almost certainly not. (they have total control)

Gavin McLeod









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                   Re: Mechanics Illustrated Flapjack 1947

From: John E.L. Tenney <jelt2000@email.msn.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 04:15:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:33:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Mechanics Illustrated Flapjack 1947


For anyone interested.

The full Mechanics Illustrated article on the Navy's "FlapJack
Airplane" from the May 1947 issue can be downloaded from :

http://members.tripod.com/~ufoseti/mi51947.pdf

The file is just over a meg in size so it will take a few
minutes to download.

You will also need Adobe Acrobat to view it.

If you have any problems downloading it please contact me.

Thanks.

John E.L. Tenney
Michigan Anomalous Information Network
http://members.tripod.com/~mainorg









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                         Glennys Mackay In Hospital

From: A. J. Gevaerd (Revista UFO) <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:39:41 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:41:03 -0400
Subject: Glennys Mackay In Hospital


Dear Friends:

I am attaching the message I just received from George Mackay,
husband of Glennys Mackay [glenmack@thehub.com.au], informing
that she has had a heart attack.

Most of you know that Glennys is one of the leading UFO
researchers in Australian and that she has been doing a great
work in this field for decades. She organized two extraordinary
congresses in Brisbane in 1996 and 1997, has been invited
speaker in several conferences all over the world, including
Brazil.

So I thought that you may want to say a prayer or send her a
message. George can certainly deliver the message to her while
she is in hospital.

Thanks.

A. J. Gevaerd, editor
Brazilian UFO Magazine
www.ufo.com.br
gevaerd@ufo.com.br


 > Greetings to you all,
 >
 > Just thought I would let you know that Glennys Mackay
 > of Brisbane is in hospital after suffering a heart attack
 > and is also being treated for blood clots, has been
 > in hospital for ten days now and is recovery well
 > the doctor who is treating her Dr. Sinnathamby of Auchenflower
 > Private hospital here in Brisbane is pleased with her progress. She
 > will be in for a few more weeks yet. Knowing Glennys
 > and her determination, will not let this beat her, her
 > progress is good. Please place her in your prayers.
 > Kind regards,
 >
 > George Mackay.
 > Brisbane, Australia.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

               Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 03:19:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 17:45:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond


James Easton- wrote:

 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Nick Pope - The Ministry of Defence Respond
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 05:47:53 +0100

 >Voyager Newsletter - Issue No. 8

 >I trust I'm not one of the aforementioned 'critics' and perhaps
 >you can help clear up some of the confusion which surrounds a
 >number of claims.


Hi All,

I met Nick only once at a local lecture he was giving in town at
the time, and he drew quite a crowd. Seemed a decent chap to
talk to.

For the life of me I can't recall the name of the present MOD
UFO desk occupier (if there is one) but obviously tack has
changed down the line, no books as yet!

I take it UFO sightings in the UK have carried on regardless of
who sits in the chair?

Roy..                     Keep smiling!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State

From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 21:58:04 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:02:20 -0400
Subject: Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 02:40:32 +0100 (MET)
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:09:57 -0500

 >Subject: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington StateSource:

 > http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/CB990225.htmlStig

 >***

 >National UFO Reporting Center Case Brief
 >February 25, 1999

 >Elk Abduction in Washington State
 >NUFORC Home Page

 >**

 >On Monday, March 01, 1999, the National UFO Reporting Center
 >(NUFORC) received a call over its telephone Hotline
 >(206-722-3000) from an individual who identified himself as an
 >employee in the forestry industry in Washington State.  The
 >individual left a message, in which he reported that a team of
 >forestry workers allegedly had been witness to an incident on
 >Thursday, February 25, 1999, during which time an elk was lifted
 >off the ground and carried away by a very peculiar, disc-shaped
 >object.

<snip>

 >The witnesses stated that once the object had started to ascend
 >and had climbed to an altitude above their vantage point, they
 >no longer could see the animal suspended below the craft.  Their
 >presumption was that the animal had somehow been taken into the
 >craft, although the witnesses could discern no "door," or any
 >kind of aperture through which the animal might have been
 >conveyed into the craft.

 >The witnesses also stated that following the incident, the herd
 >of elk remained in the same general area, although remained more
 >closely huddled to one another than had been the case earlier in
 >the morning. The workers added that they, too, had remained
 >closer to one another until their departure from the area at the
 >end of the work day.

 >Investigation summary prepared by Peter B. Davenport, Director,
 >National UFO Reporting Center, and Robert A. Fairfax, Director
 >of Investigations, Mutual UFO Network, for the Washington State


Hello List,

I also came across this story in the Sept/Oct issue of UFO
Magazine, and I think this story requires some comments (from a
skeptic), and some important questions should be raised, such
as:

- Most important: Did the witnesses, or someone else, tell the
police about this alleged elk abduction? I guess the first thing
they (or someone) should be thinking of was to call the police,
and not the UFO Hotline! After all, something illegal was
apparently going on! (I guess this was not taking place during
the elk hunting season, and it seems to me that this was a
rather unusual and illegal hunting method.)

   In case they did call the police, this should add _some_
   credibility to their story, as they should have made the
   report under oath. Else the whole story sounds more like a
   fairytale; a science fiction story.

   The police should threfore also conduct some investigations.

- Apparently they knew the UFO Hotline telephone no. (!?) Could
it be that this was this just an elaborate hoax, conspiracy and
collusion, created during some boring lunch / spare time at work
in the forest?

(I've been doing something similar myself, using my mobile
phone, during some boring time when having a night watch in a
military excercise, in the local Home Guard....)

Maybe the workers were inspired by the following (manipulated??)
photo from Brunchillii, N. Australia. March 28, 1992,
(manipulated??) by Neil Godfried:

http://www.eldisco.com/

(click on Archives on the left side of the page, and click on
the photo down at the lower, left corner of the photo
collection.)

Washington state is also known for the location for Arnold's
UFO sightings in 1947, and maybe some inspiration also came from
the Arnold stories....

- Apparently, the elk "fell off", the craft, did the workers go
to search for a possible dead elk among the trees?



Best regards,

Asgeir







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:09:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:06:49 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:46:35 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

To J Bond Johnson, Neil Morris and List,

Thank you again for your answer.

The accumulation of contradictory testimonies tends to obscure
things more and more.

What remains clear in my opinion is this: on the photographs,
at least those with Ramey and DuBose, what we see is balloon and
radar target debris.

DuBose and Marcel stated clearly that the balloon story was a
cover up.

DuBose says that he never saw the real debris.

If I quoted the Shandera interview, it is not that I trust him
particularly, very far from that, but it seemed to me that it
contained some elements of interest: when General DuBose said
he took delivery of the pieces of "garbage" in a canvas pouch
and carried it himself to Ramey' office.

Now I have read again this long interview, and I realize that I
may have stretched its meaning. Perhaps the purpose of Shandera
was to promote the idea that the real debris had been shown in
Ramey's office. And, since everyone can see on the photos that
it was balloon debris: Roswell case closed!

Which brings me to the question: who was Jaime Shandera, who
knows him, can he be contacted, what is his curriculum ?

He popped up on the UFO scene with the MJ 12 film received in
his mail box, he was supposed to be a sort of film producer but
according to a friend he did not produce much of anything.

He teamed with Moore who confessed having cooperated on
disinformation operations, and spying on APRO for AFOSI.

He appeared with Moore on the peculiar TV show UFO Cover-Up Live
with two masked agents. Last but not least, rumors say that he
was a CIA agent, although Stan Friedman has told me he has no
proof of that. Now he has apparently completely withdrawn from
the UFO scene, without leaving an address.

What was his agenda?

Who can tell more about Jaime Shandera?

Gildas Bourdais







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 4

                        Re: NASA Speaks in English...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:07:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:10:06 -0400
Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 16:52:10 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...

 >>From: From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 21:49:02 EDT
 >>Subject: NASA Speaks in English...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>"NASA said confusion over whether measurements were made in
 >>metric or English units led to the crash of a $125 million
 >>spacecraft as it approached Mars last week." According to the
 >>New York Times today (10-1-99).

 >>Am I the only idiot who thinks this "mistake" is the most lame
 >>sort of none sense ever perpetrated on US since the president
 >>sinned?

 >>How two major Military and NASA contractors can each work in
 >>different systems boggles this Gripple brain big time. I cannot
 >>imagine such an error folks.

 >>I've worked for several NASA contractors as well as at NASA
 >>Goddard Spaceflight Center, and knowing (less than some of you
 >>do) what I do, it just can't happen.

 >>It's like Jethro Bodine cypherin to the base ten while everyone
 >>else is doin it to another base _and_ in metric!>

 >>The new NASA call sign: "Help! It's fallen down and I can't get
 >>it up..."

 >Dear Jim:

 >I agree it sounds fantastic, like accelerations in furlongs per
 >second squared.

 >The last I saw any physics done in english units was in high
 >school, early 1960s.  All the college physics, chemistry.. any
 >science whatever was in metric.

 >Maybe an archeological dig in the USA will go down so many feet,
 >and yes pilots still report altitude in hundreds or thousands of
 >feet, but this is rocket science! Literally!

 >Could it be that this is a cover for a different human error,
 >i.e. something even dumber?

 >If so, I haven't a clue what that could be.

 >- Larry Hatch

Me neither.  Not a clue.  But I do know this, the odds of this
kind of "error" happening at NASA and/'or their contractors is
beyond what is normally considered remote.  If it was an error
(Hah!) then this particular "error" just destroyed every single
probability formula that ever was.

And yes, I concur that it is a cover for something.  And it may
have been something stupid. Or something worse.  But good gosh
almighty, that this did not draw more derision here, there and
everywhere, is a sure sign of the deterioration of intellect in
this country.  Lemmings all.  Believe what they tell you or just
don't give a crap.

Hey Errol, maybe we should repair to Toronto.  You guys seem to
be a little better off than us. Except in the area of your gun
laws, you got a little more Motts than we do.

J. Jaime Gesundt, With portfolio.  I just got one.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:46:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 19:33:42 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:12:22 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Maybe you could explain a little more specifically, Kevin, how
 >>you and your co-authors attempted to evaluate the evidence
 >>for/against the alleged link between UFOs as physical craft and
 >>Alien Abduction Experiences, AAEs. As I see it, "The Abduction
 >>Enigma" treated the AAE as a hallucination associated with sleep
 >>paralysis or regurgitated birth memories, or as a false memory
 >>imposed by unethical or incompetent therapists and researchers.

 >>Once its reality status was assumed to be that of an illusion,
 >>there was no need to consider whether there was an actual
 >>evidence of a link between AAEs and UFOs.

 ><snip>

 >>Joseph Polanik

 >Not to speak for Kevin, but once upon a time in UFO Land
 >abductions tended to follow a straight line from the sighting of
 >the UFO to the physical abduction itself, viz. Villas-Boas, the
 >Hills, Herbert Schirmer, Travis Walton and so on. In other
 >words, a distant UFO was seen which drew nearer and disgorged
 >alien beings, who summarly hauled the unwilling Earthling into
 >the bowels of the UFO. Pretty straightforward stuff, when you
 >think about it.

Good Lord!  I had no idea there were rules of abduction at any
given point in time.  Thanks Dennis.  I mean, for the
information.  Now I am certain that in 1945, when I perceived I
was invited to join some short little duds, uh, sorry, dudes (I
was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite) I was mistaken.
Or was I?  Maybe back then your "once upon a time rule was
different.

At that time, I did not see a saucer come or go.  I just wound
up in some bowel, eh?  The one you were referring to. Or is that
just a warm wet place where the sun don't shine?

 >But I think I'm also safe in saying that that's not the way most
 >abductions are reported (or experienced) nowadays. True, the
 >insides of what is alleged and what appears to be a UFO is
 >frequently described, but in many cases no UFO is seen or
 >reported from an external point of view, either coming or going.

Whew!  Good news again.  Now I won't have to worry whenever I
see an object I cannot identify.  It's when I don't see one and
wind up in that bowel again. Say, and I am quite serious, did
you know that I suffer from Irritable Bowel Syndrome?
Coincidence of Consiracy!?  Or maybe my bowel just gets
irritable when folks speak from a similar orifice.

 >This raises questions for both the sleep paralysis and literal
 >abduction camps. In the case of the sleep paralysis school, why
 >the introduction of the insides of a saucer to the experience?
 >Why couldn't the medical exam (and any accompanying ET sexual
 >hanky-panky) simply take place right there in the familiar
 >surroundings of the victims' bedroom?

Yet again, your logic is evident.  You establish a methodology
for abduction which just happens to coincide with a reason it
doesn't exist.  Take any round hole and place any square peg in
it, just ream the hole from round to square and you got it made
in the shade.  Have you noticed all the similarities and
coincidences in your theories?  Bowels, reaming, holes, etc.

 >On the other hand, if ET is virtually omnipotent, why not simply
 >beam the victim up to the examining room and be done with it?
 >Why first send aliens down to scare the bejabbers out of people
 >in their bedrooms and _then_ beam the victim up? In the same
 >vein, given the technology that would be required to transport
 >people through solid objects, you'd think by now that those
 >selfsame superintelligent little greys would have come up with
 >some handy, transportable medical devices like the ones we've
 >all seen on endless episodes of Star Trek and its several
 >sequels for the last couple of decades. You know, the handheld
 >Full Body Scanner Mark IV, the Sperm Extractor VI, and the Ovum
 >Incubator Series V, maybe even the Anal Probe Number Nine?
 >There's some serious scale of inefficient energy expenditure or
 >transfer here that simply doesn't compute.

Well of course, there is an answer to at least one of these
questions. ET's don't watch Startrek.  Makes 'em laugh and
everybody knows they can't laugh. No emotions!  A little like
Spock only shorter and skinnier.

On the other hand, since you've considered the possibility that
ET may be omipotent, then there is no way a mere mortal such as
you can understand their methodology or motivation, is there?

And maybe as in Dune, these jive turkeys are not allowed to use
machines.  Maybe it's against their religion or something.
Maybe them tall aliens, the ones who look so intelligent, are
really Mentats. Say, you wouldn't have a picture of yourself so
we could see if your ears are pointy would you?

 >For that matter, why not coordinate the transport beam on the
 >desired sperm and ova and beam _them_ up, leaving all that
 >extraneous biological material lying on the bed, no one the
 >wiser that they've been visited and sexually robbed in the
 >night.

What a silly question that one is!  Now listen up bub, what kind
of fun would that be, beaming up sperm and ova?  When you
could get it the fun way?  Silly boy.

 >Of course this leads to the next obvious question: After a few
 >extractions of this sort, why the need for any further
 >repetitions of same, let alone reputed millions of repetitions
 >over decades or centuries? Wouldn't the supersmart, space-faring
 >greys have figured out how to clone or replicate human DNA by
 >now? Wouldn't they already be churning out far better, purer
 >stuff to work with than the defective product we keep producing
 >on a daily basis the old-fashioned, labor-intensive way via the
 >old in and out?

Boy that sure was a next obvious question.  Let me address it.
Just suppose, for purposes of this argument, that you are
correct in your estimation of their intelligence. Then how in
the name of sanity can you assign or attribute your puny human
logic to such massive intelligence?  Huh?  If true, they are
aliens and are abducting us, then please tell me how it is that
anyone may assign human attributes, reasoning and/or intellect,
to theirs?  Maybe, just maybe, you are correct. That makes you
real smart do it not?

 >The only explanantion I can think of for a literal
 >interpretation of the abduction phenomenon as presently and
 >popularly presented is that we've been invaded by a race of
 >creepy old ET voyeurs, senile but still somehow horny. (Think
of >them as Venusians on Viagra.) Just our luck! No wonder we
 >evolved sleep paralysis. Otherwise we'd lie awake all night
 >thinking about this stuff.

If that's the only explanation you can think of for a literal
interpretation of the abduction phenomenon, then I take back
everything I said about your being so smart.

I gotta hand it to you, Dennis.  Unfortunately, it's illegal.

Jim Mortellaro







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:51:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.

<snip>

 >The more I learn the less these beings
 >impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
 >they think gives them the right to do what they do.

My point exactly - what is it they think gives them the right to
do what they do?

I got several messages in response to the comments I made in the
original "Get Real" post explaining to me that the movie was
only fiction (allegedly) and was not intended to reflect
reality.  The fact that so many reacted only to the surface
connotation of the movie and my post indicates how little
thought is given to the subliminal messages and cues we put out
and take in every day.

I began researching abductions in 1992.  Over the years I have
noticed all kinds of trends in how abductions are perceived.  On
the one hand, some people perceive abductions as "for our own
good" or for "their" good but it must be OK because they are so
advanced and we are not dead yet.  On the other hand, there are
those who view abductions as horrific experiences perpretrated
upon minds, bodies and souls and a gross violation of human
rights.

For many years I tried to understand the abduction enigma and
tried to decide if abductions were OK or not OK.  Some assumed
abductees claimed their abduction experiences were terrifying at
first but later they came to view them as "enlightening" and
since they couldn't stop the process, they learned to relax and
just accept the situation.  Some assumed abductees claimed they
were "chosen", "special" and trained by the abductors to "help
save the earth".  And always there were those who found nothing
redeeming about being taken against their wills and only wanted
the abductions stopped.

One day I got tired of sitting on the fence and decided to make
up my mind as to whether abductions were right or wrong.  I
found my answer in the very word used to describe these
experiences - "abductions".  I asked myself, "Is it OK to abduct
someone or something?", "When is it OK to abduct another person
or another being?", "Who has the right to abduct others?", etc.
When I thought of abductions, I thought of what it _means_ to be
taken by someone or some being against one's will. My decision
was easy.  All I had to do was _listen_ to the words being used
to describe abductions.

Day after day I listened to people discussing abduction
experiences on lists, at meetings and in support groups (local
and on-line). People seemed to spend more time debating what
abductions were, whether or not they were really happening, who
was being abducted by whom and what they meant than they spent
acknowledging the fundamental violations of rights we take for
granted in this country.

I have interviewed and investigated enough individuals who claim
to have been abducted to know that people _are_ being abducted.
I have seen the scars, the marks, the fear these individuals
experience.  Saddest of all, I have talked with the children who
must endure being ripped from the security of their families and
homes and subjected to "alien" environments and procedures in
every sense of the word.  When it comes to the children, my
anger boils and I become able to fully understand the extent of
these violations.  _No_ child should _ever_ have to endure these
atrocities. It's the pictures the children draw, the nightmares
they must live and the inability to feel safe...anywhere...that
makes the true nature of abductions horribly clear.

If we spent as much time debating the meaning, purpose and
intent of abductions, murders and rapes as we spend debating the
rights of aliens or governments to abduct humans, our prisons
would be empty and there would be even more politicians.  (Ah,
'tis nearly so.)  If we do not tolerate abductions, murders or
rapes of citizens in our countries and laws, then we must not
tolerate _any_ beings, human or otherwise, who commit these acts
on our planet for _any_ reason.

No offers of advanced technology, spiritual "enlightenment" or
alleged world peace is worth even one human being's rights to
freedom, self determination and free will.  I don't care if
these abductors believe they do have the right to abduct humans,
animals and earth's resources, I, for one, refuse to give up my
rights or the rights of others for their presumed rights to
abduct whomever whenever they please.  If they need something
from us, let 'em ask and make darned sure they get our
permission and cooperation first.  And I don't mean "clearance"
by the few who have set themselves above and apart from other
humans but consent from _all_ human citizens on the face of this
planet.

The Abductors and their allies (human or otherwise) know that as
long as we remain confused, awed and afraid in the face of
"superior" technology, we believe ourselves powerless, impotent
and therefore, will not resist or defend our rights.  As long as
we remain focused on whether or not abductions are real, who are
the Abductors - government, aliens or demons and who has the
right to abduct, we do nothing.  The contingency for our
ambivalence has always been part of the abduction agenda.

The movie, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, reflects the
state of indecision and complacency in which humankind slumbers.
As long as we can look forward to "contact" little else matters.
As long as the final climax results in confirmation of our
beliefs about other life in the cosmos, the irradication of our
citizens, abductions of men, women and children and "forced
intercourse" with our minds is...but a trivial concern.  Let us
not think upon these concepts and the issues too long or we will
lose our ability to submerse our minds in vats of alcohol and
illusion.  Bring on the popcorn and fantasies so that we may
escape reality and make no commitment to react.


"Sssqqqqqhhhhhhhshshsh" (loud static) - We apologize for this
temporary interruption of the Coma and now return you to your
regularly scheduled programs...

;>
Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                     Re:

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 19:11:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 10:10:25 -0400
Subject: Re:


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:38:20 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >I can see how some would see it doesn't reflect reality, but it
 >wasn't intended to.  Which would you rather have your child
 >watch, CE3K or Fire In The Sky?  Let kids see something good out
 >of all this.

Sue, I'd rather have my children watch both movies and they
have. I prefer to let them make up their own minds than to
present a biased opinion of either "good aliens" or "bad
aliens".  However, since Close Encounters of the Third kind was
not based on reality and Fire In the Sky presented more fantasy
than the true story it was based on, I have supplemented my
children's educations with material from my own investigations,
the investigations of others and take them with me to UFO
conferences, meetings and lectures.  They have seen the good,
the bad and the ugly and are growing up informed citizens
capable of drawing their own conclusions and suppositions
without being told what to believe or not to believe.

I do not want my children to "see something good out of all of
this", I want them to see the _reality_ of the situation.  I do
not want my children growing up as I did believing all kinds of
BS as presented by the government, the entertainment industry
and the religious institutions by which we are so heavily
influenced.  I teach my children to enjoy fantasy and reality
but above all, to know the difference between the two.

My daughters can now indicate, point by point, most of the
subliminal messages aimed at every level of the human psyche
ejected by commercials, news reports and political campaigns.
They can read between the lies in history books, sit coms and
movies.  And every day we struggle to free ourselves from those
who would have us view the world through rose-colored glasses
with polorizing lens.

 >It's a PG13 movie.  I don't believe I'm even responding to this.
 >I'm going to play with my stuffed ET now, the real one, not the
 >fake furry one. (That's a joke and no Dr.J I don't mean EBK.)
 >And no, I'm not making a joke of all this, I take it seriously,
 >to an extent, but sorry this is too much.

Obviously, Sue, my post was not stated within the parameters of
your perceptions.  I apologize for not making my point more
decipherable.

 >Did you realize Spielberg, Stephen King, Letterman? were born in
 >1947 and Demi Moore (who is an amazing acrobat) is from Roswell?
 >Why _does_ Letterman like his theatre so cold?

Thank you for enlightening us with these tidbits of theatrical
trivia.

;>

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 99 19:04:33 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 10:13:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT


Mr. Stacy, with apologies (again) to patient and gentle lisfolk:

I guess it was too much to ask for you to come to my defense.  I
guess it's easier to join the lynch mob.  Thanks a lot.

I'm glad that you feel you have all the answers to the abduction
phenomenon, Roswell, and all else, as you continually remind us
on this list and elsewhere.  From now on, when people want the
final answers to everything, I will refer them to you.  I'm
afraid I don't have them.

I see nothing that baffling about anything I've said about Bruce
Maccabee, Gulf Breeze, Roswell, or whatever.  I should think it
wouldn't be that difficult for you to figure out. Ever heard of
tolerance of ambiguity?  Ever heard of intellectual modesty?
Intellectual tolerance?  The feeling that there are some things
for which no easy answers -- or maybe no answers at all -- are
findable?  The sense that about some things -- Gulf Breeze,
Roswell, the UFO phenomenon itself -- reasonable people can come
down on different sides, even as none of us (all huffing and
puffing aside) really knows for sure?

Or maybe even conceding that when it comes to photoanalysis,
optical physics, and the like, Maccabee knows a hell of lot more
than you, I, Jerry Black, and Kenny Young put together (probably
with much to spare), and that therefore only comparably educated
colleagues are in any position to agree or disagree
meaningfully?

I am always amazed to read the absolute certainty with which you
decry people, ideas, and cases that don't mean the Stacy
Standard of Obvious Truth.  Me, I'm just going to stay confused
-- and respectful of those with whom I may disagree but who make
their arguments thoughtfully and even plausibly.

I am _utterly_ baffled by your equation of what I wrote in The
UFO Encyclopedia and of what appeared, written by other persons,
in IUR about Roswell.  And you're an editor?  Or maybe just a
guy who's in hard pursuit of a despised heresy?

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 21:04:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 10:37:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?


 >Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:07:36 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I don't seem to see a way to post messages to the UFOMIND site,
 >but I wanted to relate that Strieber's Caldecott was probably
 >for his children's book about nuclear winter, 'Wolf Of
 >Shadows'.

 >I know it won several awards but I do not know the particulars.


No, no, no.

Whitley Streiber, whether or not he actually penned a children's
book, has _never_ won the Caldecott award, has _never_ been a
Caldecott honoree, has _never_ won a Newbery medal, has _never_
been a Newbery honoree. These are facts. I have no doubt the man
has won some awards(s). But one award is not interchangeable at
will with other awards. My purpose in pursuing this is, if
Whitley Streiber is willing to 'mis-speak' or 'mis-remember' and
not correct his mis-statement, upon which other matters can he be
trusted, or not trusted?

The Caldecott Award is the highest honor in children's book
illustration. It is neither bestowed nor acceptd lightly. The
Newbery Medal is the highest award in children'e book writing.
Likewise. The winners of these prestigeous prizes worked hard
for them and are justly proud. They are no more amused at seeing
random claimants to their hard-won professional recognitions
than real USNavy SEALS are to see all the fake psuedo-seals
running around bragging about their exploits. Misrepresentation
is misrepresentation. It is not excusable. The fact that
Strieber actually wrote a children's book does NOT give him
license to somehow imagine a Caldecott for it into being. How
many other things, we might wonder, has Streiber imagined into
being? And for what purposes?

Purrrrrs...
Wendy Christensen








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 22:20:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 11:30:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >The Gulf Breeze case may serve as an example. On the one hand,
 >Clark says that he remains personally suspicious (or dubious) of
 >the Ed Walters pictures and of Walters himself as a reliable
 >witness. On the other, he professes faith in Bruce Maccabee both
 >as a friend, fellow ufologist, and photoanalyst. In the end,
 >Clark seems to say, we've simply agreed to disagree about the
 >nature (and ultimate reality) of Gulf Breeze, differences of
 >opinion being permitted among all honorable ufologists.

 >What drives Clark's critics to extremity, I think, is precisely
 >this perceived disconnect between a difference of opinion and
 >the evidence allegedly at hand. After all, Maccabee is either an
 >accomplished photoanalyst -- or something less in that
 >particular field. If Maccabee _is_ an accomplished photoanalyst,
 >by Clark's own admission, then upon what other doubts are his
 >own dismissal of the Walters' photos based? Similarly, if Clark
 >has serious doubts as to the authenticity of the Walters'
 >photographs, then he must have at least something less than
 >total confidence in Maccabee's resounding analysis of same as
 >the real thing. So which is it?

Actually, it shouldn't be difficult to understand Jerry's
ambiguity on this case - but perhaps I find it easier because I
share it.

On the one hand, experience tells us that multiple encounter
cases, especially when accompanied by photos are _typically_
hoaxes. Further, the extension of these encounters across an
extended period is suspicious. Also, there are many aspects of
the UFO itself which differ from what we might expect -
especially in regard to the configuration and presentation of
luminosity on the object. Finally, the reporting of a case to
newspeople rather than police is yet another suspicious
indicator.

At the same time, photoanalysis poses some real problems.
Attempts to construe these photos as double-exposures have not
survived additional tests. Attempts to discover a motive for a
hoax have not found one. Attempts to find model making equipment
and expertise have foundered. A model found in a house was
discovered under controversial circumstances. The stereo photos
are even more difficult to hoax than the original photos,
especially when compared with the Nimslo photos.

Ultimately, Bruce can have done an excellent job of analysis,
failed to find a way to hoax the photos, and then it might turn
out that a slightly different way of looking at things can show
how this could be done. No fault of Bruce's or even his
methodology.

For instance, imagine that, instead of trying to determine if a
set of UFO photos are fake, we are trying to reverse engineer a
scene from a Hollywood movie or a modern commercial. The image
might be of real objects, it might be a montage, it might be
computer generated imagery - but it is possible that photo
analysis would not be able to tell which.

Photoanalysis of UFO photos can never be conclusive. The
photoanalyst operates in a context of available information and
uses his imagination to contrive ways to fake what he has
available in such a way as to not violate any of the
characteristics of the photos themselves. But his imagination
may be unable to find the method the hoaxer found.

In other words, the analyst can be competent and the photos
can still be faked. This isn't so strange. Every science has
multiple voices speaking about the same data. Not all of them
are right, but it doesn't mean that those who are wrong are
incompetent.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------
Content-Type: application/rtf
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Beyond.rtf"
X-BeyondMail: rtf1

[] Beyond2.rtf







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                Re: Abducted?

From: Harry Miller <Airknight@webtv.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 01:22:59 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 11:52:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Abducted?


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:16:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abducted?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:17:58 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Abducted?

I think it is the missing-time thing that bothers me the most.
Hell, biology, anatomy, physics... we're learning.

My problem is trying to figure out how I _really_ lost an hour.

The bruise on my neck, above the left carotid artery,
quarter-sized as it was, went away after 10 days or so...

Dreams?  Hell!, they are _all_ bizarre!

But, this missing-time thing...







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 07:53:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:04:11 -0400
Subject: Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State


 >From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 21:58:04 +0200

<snip>

 >Hello List,

 >I also came across this story in the Sept/Oct issue of UFO
 >Magazine, and I think this story requires some comments (from a
 >skeptic), and some important questions should be raised, such
 >as:

 >- Most important: Did the witnesses, or someone else, tell the
 >police about this alleged elk abduction? I guess the first thing
 >they (or someone) should be thinking of was to call the police,
 >and not the UFO Hotline! After all, something illegal was
 >apparently going on! (I guess this was not taking place during
 >the elk hunting season, and it seems to me that this was a
 >rather unusual and illegal hunting method.)

 >   In case they did call the police, this should add _some_
 >   credibility to their story, as they should have made the
 >   report under oath. Else the whole story sounds more like a
 >   fairytale; a science fiction story.


 >   The police should threfore also conduct some investigations.

 >- Apparently they knew the UFO Hotline telephone no. (!?) Could
 >it be that this was this just an elaborate hoax, conspiracy and
 >collusion, created during some boring lunch / spare time at work
 >in the forest?

The points you raise are valid, but make hidden assumptions.

While this has been covered on Peter Davenport's UFO Hotline, I
would like to have greater detail regarding who had reported it.
My understanding is that the witnesses were hispanic, and don't
speak english.  The report was (I believe) submitted by someone
else who had heard their story, which prompted UFO researchers
in that part of the northwest to investigate it further.
Unfortunately, I believe the language barrier, and the mobility
of those workers has impacted that effort.

But I have read at least one article which describes an
interview with the workers and it appears that they honestly
viewed something that they cannot explain.  These workers have
been identified and do, indeed, exist.

Contrary to World opinion (created in part by the popular
media), not everyone in the US has a cell phone, or access to
one.  There are also many who don't watch the popular media, and
some who are still existing at a level that hasn't changed in
decades.  One would also have to take into account the education
and economic levels of the witnesses, as it is unlikely that
someone who is working very hard just to make ends meet is
likely to take the time to construct an elaborate hoax.

I honestly don't know if this was reported to authorities, as
I'm not one of the on-site investigators.  But I would not find
it surprising if the witnesses didn't want to become involved in
something that they couldn't explain by contacting the police.
But they obviously told someone and the story reached the
Internet, as well as the UFO Reporting Center.

This is an interesting tale, but certainly not a major event.
The lack of physical evidence, and the annecdoal nature of the
incident, makes it less than ideal.

Steve







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Funny What You Can Find Near Bundoran...

From: Daev Walsh - Blather <daev@blather.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 01:05:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:01:28 -0400
Subject: Funny What You Can Find Near Bundoran...

______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
October 5th 01999, Dublin, Ireland   Vol 3. No. 6
_______________________________________________________

MALCONTENTS:

1.  Are we totally wired to the Perseids?
  (  Blather gives more stuff away)
2.  Blather's 100th issue competition results
3.  De Editorial
3b. Plug
4.  Funny what you can find near Bundoran...
5.  'Extraterrestrial Intelligence: A Reality'
6.  Black Rays!
7.  UFOs over Atha Cliath?
8.  News just in - ABC in Belfast?
9.  Strange noises from Norwegian lakes

_______________________________________________________

ARE WE TOTALLY WIRED TO THE PERSEIDS?

WIN STUFF! AGAIN!
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html

Yes, Blatherskites, we're giving 'more' stuff away. Actually, to
be more precise, Blather is facilitating the giving away of
stuff by other people, and this time there will be 'three'
winners, each of which will win one of three prizes:

PRIZE ONE
'The Complete Books of Charles Fort'

This 401 page weighty tome contains THE four Fortean classics,
'The Book of the Damned', 'LO!', 'Wild Talents' and 'Strange
Lands', an dispensable addition to any Blatherskite's bookshelf.
'The Complete Books of Charles Fort' was kindly donated by
Phyllis Benjamin of INFO (International Fortean Organization)
who are, incidentally, putting on 'Fortfest 01999', November
5-7th:

Fortfest:
http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/frtfst9.html
http://www.blather.net/fortfest.html

INFO: http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/info

PRIZE TWO

'Everything Is Under Control: Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-Ups'
By Robert Anton Wilson & Miriam Joan Hill

RAW has kindly seen fit to donate his 'Encyclopedia of Conspiracy
Theories', a tongue-in-cheek, but incredibly useful guide to
worldwide weirdness. It's all in here folks, Kennedy, Oswald, Men in
Black, The Holy Order of the Lemon, Jesus and Mary Magdalene's
illegitimate child, 'government as criminal conspiracy', Mothman,
Freemasons, Robert Calvi and the Vatican, greys, James Jesus
Angleton, UFO/Satanic Conspiracies, you name it, it's
in here.

Check out RAW's site at http://www.rawilson.com/

Read an excerpt of 'Everything Is Under Control'
http://www.rawilson.com/undercontrol.html

Buy it at:
http://www.rawilson.com/bookstore.html
or
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0062734172/qid=938710929/sr=1-2
9/002-9925397-9238019

Or enter the competition. Fnord.

PRIZE THREE
'1900'
By Mike Jay & Michael Neve

'An anthology of the 19th-century "fin-de-siecle" focusing on
late-19th-century versions of the end as broadcast within the social
sciences. It presents attempts to categorize the varieties of human
failing related to heredity, sexual perversity, race, atavistic
regression, insanity and criminality.' Mike Jay has been good enough
to toss a copy into the Blather swagbag... we've been
dipping into it here at Blather HQ, and we give it the thumbs up.

Read more about it, or purchase '1900' at:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0141180838/qid=935690365/sr=1
-1/026-4856908-7573657

Mike Jay is also the author of 'Blue Tide: The Search for Soma':
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1570270880/qid=938711640/sr=1-2
/002-9925397-9238019

WIN STUFF! AGAIN!
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html
_______________________________________________________

BLATHER'S 100TH ISSUE COMPETITION RESULTS

And there was a winner - Robert Kirbo, Arroyo Grande, California
was the lucky winner of $50 of prizes from D. Scott Apel of The
Impermanent Press (http://www.impermanentpress.com). The
questions were:

1) In August 1998, Blather's Dave Walsh attended a 'monster
hunt' on Lake Seljord. In which country is Lake Seljord
situated?

ANSWER: Norway
NOT: Sweden
NOT: Turkey

2) Philip K. Dick's 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' was
made into a 1982 sci-fi movie, starring Harrison Ford. What was
this movie called?

NOT: Raiders of the Lost Ark
NOT: Star Wars
ANSWER: Bladerunner

3) 'In what European city was Robert Anton Wilson's play
'Wilhelm Reich in Hell' first performed?

ANSWER: Dublin
NOT: Zurich
NOT: Prague

There wwere a mere 130 entries, 82 of which were correct.
Congratulations to Robert, and commiserations to MD Christenson
who was too late to enter, but wants to know if we 'Know anybody
who'd want to trade an autographed copy of "Cosmic Trigger" for
a live owl?' MD doesn't elaborate as to which one he owns.
Contact: dr.pinky@hotbot.com

Again, thanks to D. Scott Apel of The Impermanent Press
(http://www.impermanentpress.com) - check out the site for lots of
Philip K. Dick, Robert Anton Wilson, B-Movie guides, and more.

http://www.impermanentpress.com

WIN STUFF! AGAIN!
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html
_______________________________________________________

DE EDITORIAL
Some observant readers may notice that we don't release Blathers
quite as regularly as we used to. This is due to a number of
factors including other commitments, and a decision to publish
Blather when we feel like it, rather than on arbitrary dates,
e.g. weekly, and so aiming for quality rather than quantity. And
so, it seems like months - nay, it 'is' months - since we last
touched on the subject of UFO reports in Ireland. In fact it's
only a few issues back, but there's been a plethora of reports,
media coverage and bizarre tales in recent
times, inspiring Blather to comment on at least some of them.
_______________________________________________________

PLUG
Oh, and a small announcement before we hand over to ourselves -
this Blatherskite will be stumbling onto the podium of
'Octocon', the 10th Irish National Science Fiction Convention on
Saturday 9th of October, to take part what appears to be a
plethora of panel discussions on various topics during the
afternoon. At 16:00, for instance, we're pitted against one Alan
Sewell of the Irish Centre for UFO studies in 'UFOs Exist. A
debate'. Where's it happening? The Royal Marine Hotel, Dun
Laoghaire, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Be there, we have to be.

Read yet more at:
http://www.iol.ie/~jshields/octocon/
_______________________________________________________

FUNNY WHAT YOU CAN FIND NEAR BUNDORAN...

It seems that there has recently been a split in the ranks of
IUFOPRA (Irish UFO and Paranormal Research Association), which
has lead to the formation of UPRI (Ufo & Paranormal Research
Ireland), seemingly involving Dermot Butler and Karl Nally.

The original lead cast of IUFOPRA seem to be still enthroned,
i.e. Pat Delaney & Co. Blather hasn't heard a peep from them in
nearly two years, since we received a badly written erroneous
letter from them, laden with spelling mistakes, accusing us of
writing a nasty article about them in a certain print
publication. In fact, we had only mentioned them once, and that
was in Blather, and it was merely a review of a conference they
had organised in November 1997. This was pointed out to them by
return post, and we never heard a thing since. But we digress...

Blather has received a photocopied 'UPRI Newsletter', issue
2,01999. The page has two subtitles - 'Views herein are personal
ones, and are not "official policies" of UPRI', and 'Independent
and objective research'.

The newsletter deals with one story - with a large picture
beside it, of yes, you may have guessed it, 'something' in a
jar. UPRI seemingly tracked down the story in the 'Mirror'
tabloid newspaper, after hearing 2FM's Ray D'Arcy joking about
it on his breakfast show. We haven't seen the 'Mirror' article,
but UPRI tell us that it was on June 15th, titled 'Is This a
Baby Alien?', and penned by Robert Cullen and Lynne Kelleher.
The article told of a butcher, Gerry Condon, who lives in Co.
Donegal, who was driving south to his premises in Sligo, and was
passing by Finner Army Camp, between Bundoran and Ballyshannon.
Finner is situated at the mouth of the River Erne - a waterway
mentioned in the last issue of Blather...

The newsletter says that Mr. Condon saw a flash of light
overhead, and thought something had crashed, so he stopped and
entered a field beside the base. There he apparently found the
'creature', in a hollow, covered in soot. He is said to have
taken it to the local Garda station where, unsuprisingly, they
'could shed no further light on the mystery'. It's not really
the kind of thing taught to recruits in Templemore now is it?
Oddly enough, Templemore 'was' the centre of attention in 1920,
when in the home of Thomas Dwan, statues and holy pictures began
to bleed. The alleged phenomenon centred around 16-year old
Thomas Walsh (no, no relation). Templemore went berserk, with
thousands of pilgrims arriving from all over, including from
Britain. Charles Fort, in 'Lo!' (1931), Part 1 Chapter 6, covers
the story in some detail, exploring other factors in the matter,
such as the War of Independence. But we're digressing again, and
wildly so.

The newsletter winds up by expressing doubts about the story,
especially the alleged labeling of the 'creature' by 'a' Belfast
University as "Alien embryo - origin unknown".

Oddly enough... or perhaps not that odd at all, when this
Blatherskite was delivering a synopsis of the tale to our
esteemed colleague, the Hon. John Maguire, Mr. Maguire pointed
out that one can purchase mass manufactured 'aliens in jars' at
several Dublin city centre retail establishments, complete with
"Alien embryo - origin unknown" labels. In fact, 'aliens and
jars' come in all kinds of wonderful shapes sizes and pigments,
as can be seen by the smattering of links foraged from
five minutes with a search engine. Buy one today!

Aliens in Jars:
http://www.alienwave.com/
http://www.nightmarefactory.com/alienmsk.html
http://www.ukwebs.co.uk/aliens/dynamic/prodserv.htm
http://www.telalink.net/~chamber/86150.jpg
http://locutus.ucr.edu/cool/Alien.html

Charles Fort, 'Lo!',Part 1 Chapter 6
(http://www.aracnet.net/~fortean/lo106.htm)

Watching the Skywatchers (Review of IUFOPRA conference from ages
ago)

http://www.blather.net/archives/issue1no27.html

_______________________________________________________

'EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE: A REALITY' On a very wet
Saturday 18th September, while mooching about the stalls of the
Dublin Food Co-op, who did we bump into but our old acquaintance
Eamon Ansbro of PEIR (Programme for Extraterrestrial
Intelligence Research), oft mentioned, if not criticised in this
publication. We had an affable enough discourse, even though he
did reassure me that there was an awful lot more to the 'Alien
Embryo' story than meets the eye. Quite.

He was flogging a new 30-page booklet, 'Extraterrestrial
Intelligence: A Reality', co-written with his wife, Catherine.
It seems to be a form of concise autobiography, illustrating, as
Eamon told us, where he's 'coming from' his background in
meteorology and astronomy, and how he got involved in the whole
UFO thing. In essence, it tells us where he 'came from', but not
really where he's 'coming from', going no further to explain the
leaps of logic that we notice in many extraterrestrial claims,
and thus leaving us none the wiser. In fact, Eamon told us that
the Roy Dutton's 'Astronautical Theory' is so complicated that
he's not surprised that others don't understand it.

Astronautical Theory is the methodology used by Ansbro, and
others, to 'predict' UFO appearances along 'flight paths'
criss-crossing the Earth's surface. Part 2 of 'Extraterrestrial
Intelligence: A Reality', however, seems to cover new ground.
Written by Catherine Ansbro - an acupuncturist, and Zero
balancer - and titled 'Relationship with Extraterrestrial
Intelligence - A Healthy Foundation', a short treatise on
physical, environmental and spiritual well-being, an interesting
departure from traditional ufology. We've got to admit, we did a
bit of head-scratching over this bit, never before having come
across ufological documentation which advises the reader on
health and nutrition.

To purchase a copy of 'Extraterrestrial Intelligence: A Reality'
(we paid the princely sum of IEP�3.00), write to:

P.O. Box 6284
Dublin 3
Ireland

See http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no32.html for more fun.
Dublin Food Co-Op:
(http://www.clubi.ie/dfc/)

_______________________________________________________

BLACK RAYS!

Joseph Trainor's UFO Roundup (Volume 4, Number 21, September
16th, 01999) reported - thanks to Northern Irish ufologist Miles
Johnston - that UFOs had been sighted over Ulster's Lough Neagh.

Apparently - according to Johnston, on August 15th, around 11
p.m., telephones at Armagh Planetarium and RUC (police) stations
in Northern Ireland were ringing off the hook with reports of
UFOs and 'strange phenomena' over Lough Neagh. If we may quote;
'according to Miles Johnston, the flap continued for five
straight days, ending on Monday, August 22nd, 01999'.

Surely five days after the Sunday the 15th was Friday the 20th?
Besides, the 22nd was a 'Sunday'. Good grief Miles, get your
dates right, please.

Anyhow, apparently each bunch of overflights "began at 11 p.m.
each night and ended at 4 o"clock the following morning", with
the alleged sightings including "large rings of light, with
inner rings, over a several-hundred-square-mile area," not to
mention "groups of flying discs flying in formation", as well as
a reported "U.S. Air Force AWACS plane accompanied by two red
triangular aircraft," which "flew over Northern Ireland at only
4,000 feet".

As if that wasn't mad enough, Johnston reports '"rays of black
light" streaming down from the night sky and "some illuminations
identical to the Aurora Borealis but due south" of Lough Neagh'.

Any readers in the North care to corroborate 'any' of this?

- By the way, we would like to point out that the best of the
annual meteor showers, the Perseids, takes place between July
23rd and August 20th, the peak, or maximum of which was expected
for August 13th, but as 'Astronomy & Space' magazine tells us,
'don't just view on the night of the maximum. There are good
Perseids to be seen for several nights either side of Maximum
date.

'Astronomy & Space', August 01999
UFO Roundup, Volume 4, Number 21, September 16th,
01999 (http://216.71.21.191/roundup/v04/rnd04_21.html)
_______________________________________________________

UFOS OVER ATHA CLIATH?

Blather was recently invited to a showing of a video of "UFOs
Over Dublin", footage taken from somewhere, seemingly on the
northside of the city, possibly towards Fairview or Drumcondra,
around the Royal Canal. This little movie is apparently causing
a fantastic frenzy amongst UK-based UFO groups.

The footage, all taken at night (except a daylight reference
shot, for comparison), shows the skyline of the city, with a
partially illuminated tower crane, and Liberty Hall peeking
above the buildings.

Several apparent light sources can be seen rising or falling
over or around Liberty Hall, passing into clouds, flying in
formation parallel with the river. Some are slow, some are
fast...

It's very impressive stuff, not least the voice recordings of
the film makers, whose hilarious cacophony of profanities seems
to suggest that they were genuinely convinced of what they were
filming. If all of the material had been taken on one night, we
may have been more impressed - instead it was filmed on the 29th
and 31st of July, and the 1st and 2nd of August.

It has been pointed out to us by a colleague that the camcorder
used is 'very low light sensitive', and that the objects
recorded may not have been as bright as they appear on tape.

Blather would suggest - and we're not alone in this suggestion -
that at least some of the objects are merely seagulls wheeling
about above the river, their feathers reflecting the strong
floodlights trained on buildings such as the Customs House. Some
of the footage, in particular the footage taken on the 29th of
July, shows one or two objects moving close to a floodlight
within 'metres' of the film - apparently in the yard of the
building that they're filming from. The objects then hover, just
a little bit away from the light... moths, anyone?

Liberty Hall, Dublin
http://www.blather.net/images/featured/libertyhall.gif

_______________________________________________________

NEWS JUST IN - ABC IN BELFAST?

Some time ago - January of this year in fact, Blather talked
about the Belfast Telegraph's coverage of an alleged Alien Big
Cat (ABC) on the loose in Co. Tyrone. Now, one of our northern
Blatherskivers, Iain Bryson, was in touch with the latest news
from the 'Belly Telly'. As might realise, 'alien' in this sense
means merely 'out of place', rather than 'extraterrestrial.

In a 27th September article by Martin Breen, it was reported
that a 'puma-like animal' was on the loose in the outskirts of
Belfast, and the police had been warning people to stay away
from it. Sightings had taken place around a quarry on the
Ballygowan Road at 5:50pm on the 26th, and again at 10:45 in a
children's play area in Ballygowan village, six miles from the
earlier sighting. Subsequent police searches had been fruitless.

Witness reports suggest that the 'dark black animal is between 6
and 10 feet long and four feet in height', but the newspaper
holds that 'zoological experts', including Belfast Zoo manager
John Strong, have been expressing some scepticism.

'Belfast's big cat may be a shaggy dog...', Belfast Telegraph
27th September 01999
(http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/today/sep27/News/fatcat.ncml)

Blather, 'Furry Cat Stories', January 8th, 01999
(http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no34.html)
_______________________________________________________

STRANGE NOISES FROM NORWEGIAN LAKES

We recently received email from one Torfinn Oermen, mentioned a
couple of Blather issues from a year and a half ago, when he was
criticising Jan-Ove Sundberg's claims of lake monsters in Lake
Seljord. Long-ailing readers will recall that this daft writer
ended up on Lake Seljord last year, and subsequently on
Discovery Channel and Channel 4 in the UK and Ireland (see links
below for details). Meanwhile, Jan-Ove has released recordings,
apparently made of 'Selma', the name that seems to have stuck to
the alleged monster in Lake Seljord. Read all about, hear the
recording... and make up your own minds!

http://www.bahnhof.se/~wizard/gust/index1.htm

And as if that wasn't enough, GUST 2000 is already being wheeled
out! http://www.bahnhof.se/~wizard/gust/

__________________

From: Torfinn Oermen
Email: torfinn.ormen@toyen.uio.no

I just discovered your articles about Jan-Ove Sundberg's
expedition to Seljord, and too late or not I have to set matters
straight.

Unfortunately I have no control over how I am quoted in the
media. A press agency can botcher a story completely. Of course
I didn't personally debunk the "Suldal monster", nor did I ever
claim so. But the "monster" was proven conclusively to be other
than animal: People rowed out to examine it closely. What looked
like the slimy back of a large animal was actually a huge mat of
rotting sawdust and algae. The mat was kept floating for a short
time by an enormous bauble of methane. The "monster" had been
observed each spring for many years before someone had the
courage to take a closer look. I don't know if the "monster" was
observed again later, and I never said anything about it.

The 250 years spate of observations of serpents in Norwegian
lakes coincides with the increase in the sawmill industry, and
it does not seem far fetched that more lakes than Suldalsvatn
owe their monsters to fermenting saw dust. (Without the saw dust
connection I agree my arguments sound like gibberish.)

And I suppose that the press report also failed to mention that
I am a member of the International Society of Cryptozoology and
have time after time been presenting the "cryptozoological
cause" in interviews and public lectures... The press asked for
my opinion regarding Jan-Ove's expedition since I am Norway's
only "public" and university employed cryptozoologist. I wish
Jan-Ove luck, but I am not optimistic. -But to quote myself in
numerous interviews: one is allowed to hope, and I would love to
be proved wrong in this.

Regards
Torfinn Oermen
__________________



'GUBU Norge'
http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no16.html

'A Monster Hunting We Will Go'
http://www.blather.net/archives/issue1no42.html

See 'Layman's Privilege' at:
http://www.blather.net/archives/issue1no43.html




Dave (daev) Walsh
October 5th 01999

______________________________________________________

BLATHER GOES STATESIDE!

FortFest '99-29th annual conference on anomalous phenomena

When: November 5-7, 1999

Where: Grand Ballroom, Holiday Inn, College Park, Maryland USA
(fly into DCA-Washington-National Airport or BWI-Baltimore
Washington International Airport in order to link up with cheap
subway! Check the airlines for cheapie fares on sale until Sept.
2. Cheap domestic airlines include Metrojet (especially
Manchester, New Hampshire to BWI),

Southwest from the West Coast, USAIR for bargain go on Sat.
morn. and return Sun. eve. fares, Air Canada into BWI from
Toronto , Midway into DCA from Chicago.  Best fares from the
U.K. are on Virgin from LHR to IAD (Washington-Dulles). $65
round trip bus available from NYC. Accommodations: $79, free
parking and subway (the Metro) pick-up, indoor pool and group
jacuzzi Rates: to be announced.  Always cheap!

Who: featuring John Michell on both Saturday and Sunday (new
book on sacred geometry of Jerusalem and the celestial
connection), Budd Hopkins on Invisibles, John Keel (The Grand
Daddy-O of Forteana), Dr. Michael Grosso on Near Death
Experiences (NDEs) and Miracles, Blather's Dave Walsh on
Hell-Fire Clubs and Accidental Satanism, Ivar Zapp from the
University of Costa Rica on the Atlantean Origins of the
Alphabet, Fate columnist Antonio Huneeus on Soviet and other
rare UFO sightings and evidence, Doug Skinner with a hilarious
talk on the Scientific Method, and other soon to be announced
surprises!

Includes Friday nite Ultimate Connection-networking party,
Saturday Luncheon Buffet, Saturday Banquet with Entertainment
and 'till the wee hours gab fest, Sunday Proper Breakfast
Buffet, The I-Would-Almost-Sell-My-Mother-Giant-Sale of New and
gently Used Books! Questions?: Call us at 301-294-4315 and leave
the best time to call back, email at davesvideo@aol.com and also
send a copy of it to be sure to pucabob@aol.com.  Or write us at
INFO, P.O. Box N, College Park, MD 20740, USA.  Flyers with
rates, descriptions and directions will be available around
Sept. 8.  Send for yours today and close out the
twentieth-century with the BEST time of your life!

The International Fortean Organization
http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/info

Fortfest Details:
http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/frtfst9.html

______________________________________________________


HIGH-TEMPERATURE LINKS:
http://www.resurgence.org/
"There is too much to read and too little time, so choose
reading that carries value for the future - Resurgence" - James
Hillman

______________________________________________________

Octocon X

The Tenth National Irish Science Fiction Convention

Guest of Honour:
Robert Rankin
Bestselling author of
The Brentford Trilogy and Apocalypso

Other Guests Include:
Eugene Byrne, Storm Constantine,
Maggie Furey, Robert Holdstock,
Graham Joyce, Tom Mathews, Ian McDonald,
Kim Newman, Geoff Ryman, Michael Scott,
Brian Stableford and Dave (daev) Walsh

9-10 October 1999
Royal Marine Hotel
Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin, Ireland



http://www.iol.ie/~jshields/octocon/
______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net
_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:


http://www.blather.net/archives/index.html
_______________________________________________________


SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<list@blather.net>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<list@blather.net>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email admin@blather.net
_______________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:32:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:12:09 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:40:39 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

<snip>

 >>Remember how Cavitt refused to show Marcel his report,
 >>if that is true?

 >>Gildas Bourdais


 >Yes, and does everyone remember that Marcel described only two
 >types of recovered debris in the last interview he gave? No
 >fiber-optic cables, no memory-retaining metal, and, most
 >importantly of all, no goddamned bodies!
 >
 >In other words, an interstellar spaceship made up of only two
 >types of material: short beams and some sort of cloth-like
 >material, whatever it's alleged extraordinary properties. That's
 >it. Period. Nothing more.
 >
 >Now, can someone please explain how only two types of debris, in
 >whatever quantity, can be re-engineered into a flying spaceship
 >of a circular, disc-like shape? No, you can't.

<snip>

Dennis- If your goal here is to point out the fact that there
are a variety of stories related to Roswell that are in conflict
with one another, you've made the point.

Is there anyone who really believes that all of the witnesses
are accurately describing the event, whatever it was?

I understand your frustration in dealing with "true believers",
and the popular media certainly hasn't help the situation.  But
let's not lower our standards to that of CISCOP and simply lump
it all in one big pot and indicate that we have to either accept
it _all_, or accept the fact that it's all nonsense.  This is a
tactic that is used far too often, and doesn't deserve much
bandwidth.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 08:34:38 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:07:23 -0400
Subject: Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State


 >From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington State
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 21:58:04 +0200

Below is the specific URL code to go directly to the
(obviously faked) UFO photo to which Asgeir is referring:

http://www.eldisco.com/showslide.cfm?ID=53

 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 02:40:32 +0100 (MET)
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:09:57 -0500

 >>Subject: NUFORC: Elk Abduction in Washington StateSource:

 >>http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/CB990225.htmlStig

 >>***

 >>National UFO Reporting Center Case Brief
 >>February 25, 1999

 >>Elk Abduction in Washington State
 >>NUFORC Home Page

 >Maybe the workers were inspired by the following (manipulated??)
 >photo from Brunchillii, N. Australia. March 28, 1992,
 >(manipulated??) by Neil Godfried:

 >http://www.eldisco.com/

 >(click on Archives on the left side of the page, and click on
 >the photo down at the lower, left corner of the photo
 >collection.)

http://www.eldisco.com/showslide.cfm?ID=53








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                       UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:34:10
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:14:03 -0400
Subject: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

Stig

***

From: smurf345@webtv.net
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Anybody else heard this
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:38:16 -0500 (CDT)


I first heard this while attending a Navy school back in 76. A
Vietnam War movie on earlier in the week triggered some
memories, this is one.

**

Supposedly two F-4's had a dogfight with an UFO over South
Vietnam.

The UFO made a controlled crash landing in the middle of a
firefight between a squad of American M-60 tanks and an
undetermined number of NVA/Viet Cong.

Things sort of stopped for awhile until the NVA/VC fired a RPG
[rocket propelled grenade] at the UFO. The first RPG had no
affect, so more were fired.

The UFO somehow neutralized the RPG's and started attacking the
NVA/VC.

At this point the American tanks opened fire on the UFO.

The UFO could not stop the 90mm tank rounds and was destroyed.

The NVA/VC broke off and left.

The Americans found several alien bodies and at least one
survivor in the UFO wreckage.

When the American commander, a Major, called for a medivac, he
was told nothing was available. Everything was being in used in
the search for the UFO.

He told them he had it and a chopper was immediately sent.

When it arrived, the CIA type in charge refused to take the
wounded American GI's onboard. Instead insisting he would only
take the aliens.

At this point the Major, shot the surviving alien and had his
tanks grind the wreckage and bodies into the ground.

The chopper pilot overruled the CIA type and medivaced the
wounded.

**

After this was told, two of my classmates claimed to have seen
the message traffic about this. One of them had been a crypto
tech on the OKLAHOMA CITY which was usually the flagship. This
meant that he had access to everything that came in, even the
"EYES ONLY" material.

Anybody else ever hear anything about, or related to, this?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                Re: Get Real

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 11:05:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 12:15:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:51:16 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

<snip>

 >I have interviewed and investigated enough individuals who claim
 >to have been abducted to know that people _are_ being abducted.
 >I have seen the scars, the marks, the fear these individuals
 >experience.  Saddest of all, I have talked with the children who
 >must endure being ripped from the security of their families and
 >homes and subjected to "alien" environments and procedures in
 >every sense of the word.  When it comes to the children, my
 >anger boils and I become able to fully understand the extent of
 >these violations.  _No_ child should _ever_ have to endure these
 >atrocities. It's the pictures the children draw, the nightmares
 >they must live and the inability to feel safe...anywhere...that
 >makes the true nature of abductions horribly clear

Dear Amy:

What if you are wrong, and the "alien" interpretation of these
events is terribly wrong?  What if this interpretation is
encouraging and stimulating this thing?  What would you tell
these children, then?

Clear skies,

Bob Young








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 17:33:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 13:10:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


Hi,

I have been following this debate but trying to keep out of its
personal edges as I don't wish to say anything that might offend
people that I consider friends. When in truth I don't have
fundamental disputes with Bruce, Dennis or Jerry.

However, I guess I should say my piece about Gulf Breeze. I
think it is pretty reflective of views amongst many UK
researchers given what I have heard in various debates.

Like Jerry I have serious reservations about this case. Have had
from day one. My reasons are many and varied, but as a for
instance I know (from first hand investigation of similar cases)
that a lot of video taken from there depicts home made balloons.
You can even see the plastic dribbling down. Subsequent hoaxes
does not mean the starting case was a fake, of course. But there
is sufficient contradictory evidence to be at least open to
doubt. If asked about the case I usually say, to my mind
truthfully, that Gulf Breeze is not an encounter I would cite as
part of a strong scientific defence of UFO reality. And really
that is the only fair assessment. It is not proven nor disproven
but (unlike McMinnville for instance) far more in the balance to
be unduly optimistic and so not, for me, a case I would ever
base any conclusions around. One day the truth may out. I
somehow suspect that this will prove more embarrassing to the
believers than to those being cautious. But that is merely my
assessment of the evidence I have seen.

What is certainly true with Gulf Breeze, like any other widely
touted incident, is that its hype is bigger than its value to
science. But also the PR is sure to have trawled in some local
cases that we might never have heard about and that may be in
the long run of more interest.

I find this, for instance, with the hype of the Bonnybridge,
Scotland 'window'. In my research into the genesis of this area
it is no such thing even though Japanese and American tourists
are flocking there on weekend vacations right now as if it were.
The way this small town was promoted is a great example of UFO
PR but its not a reflection on its true status as a window area.
This came about through an interesting combination of social
circumstances that is indeed useful as a way to see the
difference between what we might call real windows (which I do
believe exist) and pseudo windows that come about for reasons
not directly connected with the UFO phenomenon. Yet even in
Bonnybridge the phenomenal hype has ensured that quite a few
good cases have come to light we would never have discovered
without the belief that the location is special. I think the
same is true of Gulf Breeze. We may have more good cases from
here because of the (incorrect) assumption that it is a special
place.

This occurs largely because if you take any place - call it
Anytown - this might, for instance, have 100 sightings per year.
Research shows that at best 5 of these will be publicly
reported. The rest will not for fear of ridicule etc. If that
happens Anytown looks like, well any town. But if through social
factors Anytown is made into a special case circumstances
combine to up the percentage of cases reported. Anytown might
thus produce 50 cases in the next year -  ten times the norm and
ten times the level of other similar places. It looks special
but in truth it isn't. Yet we gain from its false specialness
because we obtain cases we might not see.

As such Gulf Breeze is not a simple case of real or fake, its a
maelstrom of different forces at work. It is proper not to be
totally committed to one view or another for this reason.

As for Jerry distrusting the essence of the main Gulf Breeze
case but trusting Bruce Maccabee. I don't find that odd. I feel
the same way. Bruce clearly knows his stuff. I listen to what he
says about photo cases. Like Jerry I don't always agree with his
findings, but I sure do respect them as I would any person with
a proven track record that is clearly an expert in a field. Thus
to me there is no dichotomy here. The case is a confusion. The
evidence is in parts conflicting. I know how I feel
instinctively about its status from a summation of that
evidence. But I also recognise that Bruce is better able to
judge photographs than  I am and to simply wave that away
because I don't feel at ease with the case would not be objective
investigation. It is proper to give his assessment due weight,
without having to make it the basis for total belief in any
case.

Exactly this is true of the Ilkley alien case that occurred
contemporary to Gulf Breeze (something I have always pondered ).
This photo just looks all wrong (an image of a little green man
for goodness sake!) Even the MIT symposium pulled my paper from
'Alien Discussions' - so far as I know the only paper given at
the event that was not to appear in the proceedings. I guess
this might partly be that they felt an analysis of a LGM photo
was not going to enhance scientific aims.   If so I totally
understand. But the truth is that - regardless of this ill at
ease sense I have about the photo, despite my inner suspicion it
must be a hoax, despite some negative evidence to point that
way, the majority of evidence is pro the case and I find it very
hard indeed to distrust this witness. It is an invidious
position for an investigator - which led to me and colleague
Peter Hough spending a decade trying to show the case was a
hoax. We failed. Bruce was a big help and did not seek to say
more about the photo than was possible through its grainy
structure - unlike a few daft ufologists who have pontificated
about all manner of tosh. How they can see a baby alien in the
backpack on the main figure. How goblin ears are visible (in
their mind perhaps). And so on.

Ufology is not often a precise science. It is possible to have a
gut feeling about a case, to weigh the totality of evidence and
suspect one thing but not to be able to prove such a suspicion.
When that happens you do as I believe Jerry is here suggesting.
You listen to what everyone says. You believe what nobody says.
You weigh up in your mind what you think. And you comment
publicly in defence of only what can be shown beyond reasonable
doubt to be true. I don't find that an unreasonable philosophy
to live by.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                Re: Abducted?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 12:42:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 13:12:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Abducted?


 >From: Harry Miller <Airknight@webtv.net>
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 01:22:59 -0400 (EDT)
 >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)
 >Subject: Re: Abducted?

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:16:55 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abducted?
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:17:58 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Abducted?

 >I think it is the missing-time thing that bothers me the most.
 >Hell, biology, anatomy, physics... we're learning.

 >My problem is trying to figure out how I _really_ lost an hour.

 >The bruise on my neck, above the left carotid artery,
 >quarter-sized as it was, went away after 10 days or so...

 >Dreams?  Hell!, they are _all_ bizarre!

 >But, this missing-time thing...

You are not alone.  When I lived in the Bronx and was a very
young boy (I was _too_ a young boy!) of about five or six, I
never strayed more than a half block from home.  And since my
mom could wake the dead at two blocks (truth!), I was in that
safe zone where she could break an eardrum and ensure my
presence within nonoseconds of the first scream.

Also, I was never brave enough to explore the woods around our
home. There were virgin woods (but no virgins), streams, wild
berries and waterfalls.  Yup.  The Bronx in 1948.  And we lived
in the northernmost part of it in a place called "Wakefield."

One day right after lunch, I went out to play.  The next thing I
remember it looked like late afternoon, and I was walking up the
side entrance to our house, my mom in tears asking, "Jamey,
where have you been."  It was the very first time I ever saw her
in tears.  She was so freightened, she wasn't even yelling.

I had been gone for more than 2 and a half hours, no one could
find me, the neighbors were all looking, the next step was to
call the police.  I lived in the 47th pct. where I volunteered
my services as an AP for years.  IT had the lowest crime rate in
the City of NY in those days.  No one ever figured out where I
was, and neither could I.  Because I had just finished lunch and
went out to the front of the house to play and just decided to
come into the back yard.  To me, only a couple of seconds had
passed.

One night I went to bed and closed my eyes, only to open them a
second later, less than a second later, and it was morning. I
was in the same position I was in when I closed my eyes.  The
little scumbuckets are not often that accurate.

You are not alone.

Jim






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 5

                                Re: Get Real

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 13:30:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >>To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >>My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >>in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >>we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >>that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.

 ><snip>

 >>The more I learn the less these beings
 >>impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
 >>they think gives them the right to do what they do.

 >My point exactly - what is it they think gives them the right to
 >do what they do?

Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
point.

Quite apart from the fact that any extraterrestrial aliens that
might be hanging around are probably not very bothered by the US
Constitution (for all we know their own Constitution might
specifically *give* them the right to abduct off-planet life
forms), it does suggest that many Americans have an incredibly
parochial view of the universe, of which they seem to consider
themselves the centre, and where their Constitution has the
status of universal Holy Writ.

The powers of the American Constitution do not run beyond the
borders of the USA, and even the UN Declaration of Human Rights
does not extend far beyond the surface of this planet.

If aliens are coming from another planet, they can do what the
hell they like to us, except in as much as we have the physical
power to stop them. To talk about a "right" not to be abducted
by aliens is as absurd as talking about a "right" not to be
killed in an earthquake or drowned by a tidal wave.

Scary thought. Makes you glad no aliens have ever landed here,
doesn't it!

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 13:35:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 04:24:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 99 19:04:33 PDT

 >>Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Mr. Stacy, with apologies (again) to patient and gentle lisfolk:

 >I guess it was too much to ask for you to come to my defense.  I
 >guess it's easier to join the lynch mob.  Thanks a lot.

<snip>

 >Jerry Clark

Calling All Patient & Gentle Listfolk Everywhere!

Dear People,

Jerry Clark is a personal friend of mine.

We have already kissed and made up offline.

I was attempting to explain what I see as the Clark Problem, but
see that I mucked up rather badly.

The Clark Problem is this: Jerry has explained himself and his
thinking numerous times on this list, both eloquently and
emotionally. Yet he gets flamed more than I do when I'm trying
to pick an e-mail spat, more than any of us, in fact.

Clark is an authority figure in the field, and that
automatically makes him a lightning rod for criticism by those
who disagree with some of his actions, or, conversely, some of
his non-actions. In other words, he's in a no-win situation,
damned if he does, damned if he doesn't, according to the
dammer.

If he calls for a tolerance of opinion and ambiguity, he's seen
as either wishy-washy or protective of friends all as venal and
vile as he sometimes made out to be.

Jerry Clark is not a perfect person, but I don't remember him
ever claiming to be. In fact, that person has yet to log onto
this thread last time I looked.

Jerry and I do not agree on everything (and everyone) in this
field, never have, never will. If we did, it would probably make
for a pretty boring friendship. It certainly wouldn't make for
much in the way of mental stimulation.

As a fellow writer and editor, I, more than most, am aware of
the restraints and conditions under which one labors in this
field, low pay on which to support a family being hardly the
least of it. I have a complaint or two myself about his UFO
encyclopedia, but I stand absolutely in awe of the mountainous
amount of time, energy and research that went into its writing.
It's not the encyclopedia I or anyone else would have written by
definition. But if the world were waiting for my encyclopedia at
the beginning of the second millennium, they'd probably still be
waiting for it at the ending of the third.

Clark's career has been long and encyclopedic, too. With such a
prodigious output (and assuming the encyclopedia itself wasn't
channeled), it would be an unheardof miracle if he hadn't made
his fair share of  honest mistakes here and there. That's the
nature of the beast, and a burden we all bear, whatever activity
we're engaged in.

In closing this little sermonette, let me repeat a story told
about a famous TCU football coach whose name escapes me. They
were playing Texas and all afternoon the Texas tailback, James
Saxon, ran off long sweeps around the TCU left defensive end.

The coach approached the bench. "Jackson!" he yelled. "Get in
there for Billy Joe and stop Saxon on those sweeps!"

"I'll try, coach," Jackson said, pulling on his helmet.

"Sit down, Jackson," coach said. "Hell, Billy Joe's _trying_!"

Jerry Clark tried. If he hasn't gotten everything right each and
absolutely every time out, who among us could? At least he had
his helmet on, and not all of us benchwarmers can say that.
Agree or disagree with him, but Clark has been defending our
right to play this game for decades now.

So let's stop the clipping and blindsiding. Just because you put
on the pads doesn't mean you have to get personal.

Anyone ever heard of a level playing field?

Dennis Stacy






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                  Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

From: Will Bueche <willb3d@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 08:08:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 09:46:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?


[Non-subscriber post]

 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 00:21:48 -0400
 >From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Strieber Won A Caldecott? Come Again?

<snip>

 >The Randolph Caldecott medal is awarded annually to an
 >illustrated children's book. There _is_ an illustrated
 >childrens' book about alien abduction, called "Ceto's New
 >Friends." But Whit didn't write it or illustrate it and, in any
 >case, it's not exactly Caldecott material.

<snip>

ALA seems to be the group that presents the Caldecott. That may
partially explain the confusion, for it seems that Wolf of
Shadows was honored by the ALA.

You said that the Caldecott is for an illustrated children's
book. Wolf of Shadows has no illustrations (besides the cover
art) so it wouldn't make sense to intentionally claim that
award. But if we look back fourteen years to the time Whitley
Strieber was thinking of, we see reason for confusion:


Wolf of Shadows
Published 1985

Awards:

- Outstanding Children's Book of the Year by the American
   Library Association,

- 1986 Olive Branch Award as the outstanding book of the year
   for young people on the subject of world peace,

- Outstanding Science Book for Children by the National Science
   Teacher's Assoc.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                                Re: Get Real

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:13:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
 >>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >>>To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >>>My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >>>in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >>>we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >>>that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.

 >><snip>

 >>>The more I learn the less these beings
 >>>impress me, and I would certainly love to know what it is that
 >>>they think gives them the right to do what they do.

 >>My point exactly - what is it they think gives them the right to
 >>do what they do?

 >Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >point.

It is an American thing, this emphasis on whether or not aliens
have the "right" to do this or that.  Especially when the "this
or the that" is stalking, abducting and performing medical
intrusions on our bodies. Actually, it should be a human thing,
as Americans are not the only ones in this world with rights as
human beings.  In the UK, there are, I presume, safeguards
against the violations of your human rights, are there not?

"Are there no prisons, and the workhouses, I presume they are
still in operation?"  Cripes, John, even Dickens had a little
troube with human rights, eh?

 >Quite apart from the fact that any extraterrestrial aliens that
 >might be hanging around are probably not very bothered by the US
 >Constitution (for all we know their own Constitution might
 >specifically *give* them the right to abduct off-planet life
 >forms), it does suggest that many Americans have an incredibly
 >parochial view of the universe, of which they seem to consider
 >themselves the centre, and where their Constitution has the
 >status of universal Holy Writ.

In the United States, the Constitution _is_ the holy writ, John.
It is the basis of everything having to do with government here.
This Constitution also contains our Bill of RIghts and
Amendments which are designed by the fathers of our country, to
protect us then, now and in the future.  Most Americans live by
it, quote it and refuse to bargain with it.  Which may be why
you hear so much about "RIGHTS" by Americans.

There are other words you may hear often spoken and written
by Americans.  One word is freedom.  It is applied to many
different thingies, like the freedom to speak out, the freedom
to gather, to practice the religion of our choice, etc.

There is one word you don't hear a lot of from Americans, that
is these days.  That word is "responsibility."  Which is too
bad. But we're working on that.

 >The powers of the American Constitution do not run beyond the
 >borders of the USA, and even the UN Declaration of Human Rights
 >does not extend far beyond the surface of this planet.

Uh huh.  So?

 >If aliens are coming from another planet, they can do what the
 >hell they like to us, except in as much as we have the physical
 >power to stop them. To talk about a "right" not to be abducted
 >by aliens is as absurd as talking about a "right" not to be
 >killed in an earthquake or drowned by a tidal wave.

If you feel compelled to give in to Aliens, John, then I suspect
you may feel compelled to give in to other forms of alien.  As I
understand it, the European Common Market is the precursor to
the Country of Europe.  Presumably, as time goes by, you guys
are gonna be happy over that.  Perhaps such is inevitable.

It is likely inevitable here in North America.  But see, the
difference between US and the ROW (the United States and the
Rest of the World) is that it's gonna take one hell of a longer
time for us to feel compelled to give up or give in... t aliens,
or to anyone person, or entity who decides that our Constitution
precludes someone else's right to mess with me or mine.

 >Scary thought. Makes you glad no aliens have ever landed here,
 >doesn't it!

The really scarey thought from my perspective, is that someone
has such little respect for his rights as a human being, let
alone a Brit, or a Yank, or Gort from Mongo.

Get real, John.  You do have rights.  Even if you don't depend
on a piece of paper for them.  And if you choose to forgo those
rights, there are places on this planet you may go to live and
have very few rights indeed.

You don't need aliens as an excuse to give in.

With all due respect,

Jim







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                     Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 12:11:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:29:04 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:34:10
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

 >Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

 >Stig

 >***

 >From: smurf345@webtv.net
 >Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
 >Subject: Anybody else heard this
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:38:16 -0500 (CDT)

 >I first heard this while attending a Navy school back in 76. A
 >Vietnam War movie on earlier in the week triggered some
 >memories, this is one.

 >**

 >Supposedly two F-4's had a dogfight with an UFO over South
 >Vietnam.


List:

The "incident" described is the plot of the David Drake story
"Contact!" which can be found in _The Military Dimension Mk II_
put out by Baen Books.

It is a excellent story, but it *is* fiction.

Steven.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT

 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
 >>that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
 >>accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
 >>you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
 >>example?

 >Do you know what the adjective "disingenuous" means?  If not,
 >suffice it to say that you have just provided a living example.
 >And if you aren't being disingenuous -- which I find hard to
 >believe -- and genuinely did not know what the discussion is
 >about, why did you join it at all?

Mr. Jerome Clark,

You have been given the opportunity to support some of the wild
charges that you have made in the past few days concerning
'character assassination' attempts that you claimed to have
dealt with, and from your message to UFO UpDates (dated October
3, 1999), you have failed to clarify your comments or uphold
those wild allegations.

For the record, Jerome Clark, let's take note of this failure
and of your apparent 'ducking' of this fair issue, for as I have
authenticated, your rabid approach to those you disagree with
and your issuance of unsupportable charges renders you in the
same light that you seek to cast onto your opponents. Your
demonstrable chest-beating, trashing of opponents and hurling
specious comments through argumentation has caused me to think
of you in a new and unfortunate manner.

You sought to deflect my fair questions to you by stating a
'disingenuous' motive behind the challenge, and obfuscated the
issue by again reverting to vague and ambiguous charges said
perpetrated by Jerry Black, which you were felt were 'paranoid
and laughable visions.'

But let's take a moment to further explore some pertinent items
that all of this will ultimately lead to.

You said, "If I were going to make unprovoked charges which cast
serious doubt on the integrity of a colleague, I would make
damned sure I had my facts right." (UFO Updates, October 3,
1999) Yet why, Jerome Clark, do you support the integrity of a
colleague whose facts you believe to be totally amiss?

As Dennis Stacey keenly pointed out, your personal (and publicly
professed) suspicion of Ed Walters and Gulf Breeze has not
inhibited you from heartily endorsing colleague Bruce Maccabee,
the same one who has actively worked to promote Ed Walters and
Gulf Breeze.

This flaming double-standard serves as a top-notch example of
everything that is wrong with ufology, for it incisively
highlights your lack of ideological strength and your inability
to stand behind the research of the one you promote.

Although there is nothing wrong with being a personal friend of
a fellow researcher (who may be 'in the wrong'), I see it as a
mistake to promote that researcher on a professional or
conjectural level while in fundamental disagreement. In other
words, I do not believe that the promoter of what you suspect to
be a 'hoax' can be also be a competent investigator that can be
endorsed and promoted.

There is something gravely wrong with this picture.

Whether or not you would like to admit your inclusion in an "Old
Boy's Club", from this we can see that you are a partaker by
your actions, willful or otherwise.

Now, Jerome Clark, perhaps it is time for you to get off the
fence and stand behind the research of Bruce Maccabee, who you
have so heartily promoted, or give us some other reason why
anyone should pay serious attention to your future comments.

Thanks again,
Kenny Young
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                                Re: Abducted?

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 20:53:42 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 11:02:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Abducted?


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:16:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abducted?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Hello young James

Please be reminded of this point.

 >>He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
 >>all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
 >>niggling feeling.


 >Hi all;

Err ditto <g>

 >This is an issue which carries extreme importance to the
 >potential abductee.  I refer to the question of whether or not
 >the person has been abducted.  This must be an intellectual
 >conclusion, not an emotional one.

Would you care to elaborate please.

 >It is crucial for this person to accept only his own opinion,
 >and that opinion must be based on his own research. That
 >research must be based on the best information available from
 >multiple, dependable sources.  He should spend his time doing
 >everything he can to study information already written and
 >prepared by the best authorities, pro and con.  There are places
 >on the Internet he can go in order to help him with this study.

I will point him to A.I.C. I have looked at this site created by
John and I think it is superb.

 >In the opinion of many, including myself, this person should
 >avoid hypnosis until such time as he has reached an honest and
 >firm conclusion regarding his experiences and is having
 >difficulty living a normal healthy life.  Only then should he
 >consider hypnosis, if at all.

I totally agree.

 >The "Abduction Information Center" is a good place to start.
 >Frankly, I have found that in my experience at least, _no one_
 >person or entity can tell you whether or not you are an
 >experiencer.  Only you can do that.

I tried to convey that to this person.

 >From what I've read above, your friend has experienced some of
 >what I and many others have experienced.  Means _nothing_!

I'm sorry what do you mean by this?

 >The only one who can make the decision is him, and only after
 >knowing himself.  That's the tough part.  Further, he must be
 >prepared to learn and accept that he may or may not have had
 >these experiences and be satisfied with that conclusion to the
 >extent that it does not cloud or distort his ability to think
 >clearly and objectively on the subject.

 >Some perceived abductees, on finding that it was merely a piece
 >of undigested beef, go completely the other way in their belief
 >system. If they thought they were abducted and find they were
 >not, they then become lunatics when it comes to anyone who
 >believes he has been abducted.  The opposite is true.

 >It takes a strong person to understand the truth about himself,
 >whatever that truth may be.  And stronger still to accept the
 >truth of others in similar situations.  Capeesh?

So if I read this correctly, if this person works out for
himself, using his brain not his emotions that he is the subject
of abduction, then he must have the strength of character to
deal with it?

 >There are others monitoring this list, members, who can better
 >advise than I.  I suggest that one or two of you answer this
 >post.  For I may only speak for myself.  And everyone knows, I'm
 >nuttier than aunt Mary's fruitcake, eh?

Why Mary's I thought Farmhouse fruitcake was best?

 >Jim Mortellaro

Thank you for your thoughts on this Jim. I would like to point
out.

 >>He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
 >>all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
 >>niggling feeling.

A point I pointed out at the start of this post.

At the moment he is unsure of his experiences. I have offered
him _some_ _possible_ answers but at the end of the day
_I_don't_know_ if he is the victim of an abduction experience.
He thinks that he probably is not, _but_, and its a big but, he
still has this niggling feeling. -- In an infinite universe,
infinitely anything is possible.

Sean Jones
http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bill Weber <koran@cchat.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:31:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:54:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT

 >>>You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
 >>>you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also
 >>pointed out to you), that I was responding to vile
 >>accusations against my character -- accusations, moreover,
 >>that were hurled without a shred of supporting evidence.

 >>Mr. Jerome Clark;

 >>I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
 >>that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
 >>accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
 >>you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
 >>example?

 ><snip>

 >>Kenny Young

 >Dear Gentlle Listfolk,

 >For whatever reason(s), Jerry Clark seems to have become a
 >lightning rod for personal criticism on this list. I've been
 >trying to figure out why this is so, and here are a couple of
 >tentative thoughts (as opposed to ultimate solutions) on the
 >matter.

Hi,

Here are some other thoughts as well. Ufology's legitimacy
doesn't hinge on Jerry Clark's complete agreement with
Maccabee's protocol for saucer picture analysis. (I thought that
since photos could be hoaxed, photographer credibility is a
factor in photo analysis as well. That is an issue on which
reasonable minds may differ. Yes? No?)

Clark has produced what in any other area would be standard
issue texts, and edits the best scholarly review on the subject
I know of. He has steadfastly refused to support the paranoid
wing of Ufology and he hasn't hesitated in pointing out the
unique stupidity and hypocrisy of pelicanists and psychosocial
skeptism. All in all, it makes him an easy target for the ego
challenged and both sides of a particularly wacky Ufological
isle. Not only that, Jerry Clark is supremely communicative and
approachable (if you don't begin an introductory letter with a
string of insults), and with all due respect for people like
David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins, both of whom seem like admirable
people, I don't see either of them on an open list taking any
hits for their work. Clark, on the other hand, makes himself
accessible.

Brian Straight nailed it when he called Clark "the voice of
reason" in this most recent fracas. I'd hate to think Clark is a
lightening rod for personal attacks simply because he _is_
reasonable, rational and accessible, but I'm beginning to think
it's true.

Best,

Bill









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                     Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 03:24:08
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 13:49:28 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:34:10
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

 >Stig

 >***

 >From: smurf345@webtv.net
 >Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
 >Subject: Anybody else heard this
 >Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:38:16 -0500 (CDT)

<snip>

An illuminating post from 'alt.ufo.reports'.

Stig

***


***

From: john708@webtv.net (John Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Re: Anybody else heard this
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 00:42:40 -0500 (CDT)


Hey Smurf

Let me guess, you were at ET C-7 in San Diego the first part of
76, right.

Several of us there then were scifi fans and regularly read all
the magazines.

One of them [I want to say Analog, but I'm not sure] featured a
story just like what you recounted.

Names escape me, it has been over twenty years, but a couple of
guys in my class decided to see if they could fish anybody in.
One would tell the story, then the other would chime in with the
'I saw the message traffic' routine.

It lasted about three weeks, we even talked about it during our
class leader meeting once. ETCS thought it was hilarious.

Hope this jogs your memory some more.

jay

***************








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                             From Maxwell Burns

From: C. <xxxxx.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 14:03:04 -0400
Subject: From Maxwell Burns


Posted for Maxwell Burns

-----

To UFO UpDates:

This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

On the day of the trial the co-accused Suzanne Bradley and
Louise Goodison cut an immunity deal with the police and turned
'Queens' evidence which meant they gave evidence for the crown.
On the stand Goodison admitted under cross-examination that she
had previously lied and accused her housemate Bradley of lying.

Bradley took the stand and accused Goodison of lying. My
barrister then listed a large list of convictions that Bradley
has already (this was unknown to me and incidentally Bradley's
ex-fellow, the father of her son, has just finished a 14 year
sentence for heroin importation).

These previous convictions include four offences of theft,
handling stolen goods and, 1 month before she was arrested with
me, a drug-raid at her home found her in possession of cocaine.
She admitted to being the target of Operation Morph (the name
given to the operation during which I was arrested). Before this
time the police had never heard of me.

One amazing thing about this case is the complete lack of
forensic evidence. Four police officers (whose statements all at
one point or another contradict each other) claim I handled this
large plastic bag which I supposedly touched with both hands
without gloves and then pushed under the cars handbrake. Yet not
one fingerprint was found on it. Not one unique little
fingerprint on a bag I was supposed to have held and then pushed
between two car seats. My barrister in light of this fact asked
if I had seen or handled this bag. I replied no.

He asked all four officers if they had seen me with the bag and
they said yes. My barrister asked if the bag had been sent for
testing - it had. Now for fingerprint evidence to be admissible
in court 14 reference points are required but there were none.
My barrister asked all of the officers if I had been wearing
gloves or if gloves had been found in the car. They had not.

The bag was tested and no prints were found. So how could I have
handled it? My barrister accused all four men of lying and
attempting to fabricate evidence.  He directly asked the officer
in charge of the case if my fingerprints had been found, they
had not!

Now all I have just said is a matter of public record in a court
of law. I have been convicted with no evidence, the four police
officers had only conflicting stories to back up their
allegations. No one in the car was wearing gloves, whoever
placed the package in the car either was wearing gloves or was
very careful. I could say more but I am in the process of
putting together an appeal.

When DC [Detective Constable] Guite - the officer in charge took
the stand my interview tapes were played in full from 2 years
ago, DC Guite was one of the officers who had questioned me at
the time during all three of the interviews. My barrister asked
Guite "my client answered every single question you asked him
during questioning didn't he?" Guite replied yes.

My barrister then asked "My clients version of events did not
waiver at all in the three interviews did it?"

Guite replied "No it did not"

Guite admitted on the stand that I had supplied details of the
second hand car dealer who I had arranged to meet that night,
the one the crown barrister had stated did not exist.

Under the law in a police investigation it is the investigating
officers' duty to follow all the leads supplied by a defendant
even if the finger of guilt may lead away from the defendant
because of it.

I had supplied the phone number of the man while detained so
that the police could verify my story. My barrister asked if
they had contacted the car dealer, to check out the information
supplied by me. Guite replied that he had not and had to admit
that he had not followed up this lead effectively breaching
operating procedure.

In fact all four officers had to admit that they had breached
procedure in investigating and bringing this case to court.

Now whilst you read this next paragraph keep in mind that in
sentencing the judge said I am high up in the drugs world, a
'wholesaler'.

My barrister asked Guite if he had carried out a full financial
check on myself to discover if I had any secret stashes of
money, gold, cars, share, houses etc. that could be confiscated
in the event of a conviction. Guite replied they had. My
barrister asked if they had found any of the trappings
associated with such a lifestyle, he replied they had not.

My barrister asked Guite if I had any previous convictions or
cautions. Guite replied that I did not.

My barrister asked about the search of my home and whether any
evidence such as drugs, money, lists of names or scales had been
found. Guite replied that they had not found any evidence at my
home but when prompted admitted they had found drug dealing
paraphernalia at the home of Suzanne Bradley.

There was no evidence offered to back up the allegations of four
police officers (who all admitted breaching procedure) and the
two co-defendants. There is no evidence and I should not have
been found guilty.

Here is an interesting thought for all of you who have been
following the Sheffield case. Do you think that it would be a
big break in deciding the true facts about the incident if
someone were to produce an audio cassette of the launch of the
Tornado jets from the base. All the jet-to-base chatter and the
pilot-to-pilot chatter and all the police-radio chatter between
Ecclefield police station and officers on the ground that night
- recorded by a radio ham? It would certainly settle the matter
or whether the jets were scrambled on red alert or were just on
a training mission, wouldn't it? Watch this screen!

I am due for release on the 19th December 2000 if I do not win
the appeal. Those of you in ufology who know me know I am not a
drug dealer, anyone who would like to keep in touch with me and
maybe send me some reading material or articles etc. for which I
would be very grateful can do so by writing to:

Maxwell Burns
DL8712
HMP Oultcourse
Higher Lane
Fazakerley
Liverpool
L9 7LH

I remain and am most sincerely

Maxwell Brierley Burns
Convict DL8712

(As relayed via letter to a trusted friend)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 22:30:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 14:23:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 19:11:30 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 20:38:20 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>I can see how some would see it doesn't reflect reality, but it
 >>wasn't intended to.  Which would you rather have your child
 >>watch, CE3K or Fire In The Sky?  Let kids see something good out
 >>of all this.

 >I do not want my children to "see something good out of all of
 >this", I want them to see the _reality_ of the situation.  I do
 >not want my children growing up as I did believing all kinds of
 >BS as presented by the government, the entertainment industry
 >and the religious institutions by which we are so heavily
 >influenced.  I teach my children to enjoy fantasy and reality
 >but above all, to know the difference between the two.

Does this mean there is no good in any experiences?  The
government denies everything, the entertainment industry is just
that, entertainment, and religious institutions believe in a
God.  Where's the BS (except for maybe the govt.)? I hope your
children teach you to enjoy fantasy and realty so you know the
difference between the two.  Is that why you criticized an
entertaining fantasy movie?  The logic confuses me, but then
again ask anyone, it doesn't take much.

<snip>

... And every day we struggle to free ourselves from those
 >who would have us view the world through rose-colored glasses
 >with polorizing lens.

Being one of those struggling to be free, there is little truth
or accountability left in the world.  But this is not a subject
the whole world is ready for and if we are being conditioned in
a mild manner with toys and movies like 'My Stepmother Is An
Alien', getting a little less subtle with 'Fire In The Sky', then
eventually we will 'all' be ready and someone out there will say
"ok, it's time".

My girlfriend wouldn't see Fire In the Sky because she was
afraid it would give her nightmares and she's 38. Do you think
she's ready?

You and your's may be ready and educated in this field, but take
the 80% of the planet that isn't.  You've experienced the horror
of it, that 80% hasn't.

I'm not saying it's something that should be accepted as good
because I know it's not. I know JV, I know he's telling the
truth and I'm sure you are just as strong in your convictions as
he is.

But where's the productivity in ripping apart a fantasy movie?
Perhaps Spielberg will now do a CE3K, The Sequel, based on the
facts and if it ever happens, I hope for all the abductees'
sakes, he interviews everyone who has been abducted to get the
facts straight because, this time, it will be for real.

 >Obviously, Sue, my post was not stated within the parameters of
 >your perceptions.  I apologize for not making my point more
 >decipherable.

 >Amy
 >Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"

I meant no disrespect, but why do people have to disect something
that was not based on reality at the time?  If we assume it was based
on reality because we know it is real, then I guess we can start
criticizing the Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, Lost in Space, My
Favourite Martian, Back to the Future, ET, Casper the 'Friendly'
Ghost... take your pick.  My parameters are often alot broader
than others.

I'm also sorry you could not see the direction of my message and
for what it's worth, I wish you success in your endeavours.  And
I wish the world was as Norman Rockwell painted it.  I know it
could be, but it ain't that rosey either.  But he saw the good in
life and I call that 'humanity damage control'. He also saw and
experienced the horrors of life but didn't shove it down our
throats because alot of people didn't want to see it.

Saving Private Ryan, The Cold War Series, Trinity, Unit 731...
the timing of these is called 'anger control'.

Picture the world 50 years ago knowing and, more importantly,
seeing the 'facts'.  It's a pathetic tool the governments use
until the threat, horror and pain have eased over time to become
less a threat to their own accountability.  "Oh yah, that
happened but you can't do anything now, it's history."  The more
something becomes public knowledge the more likely the
governments will eventually confess they knew all along.
They've proven that they were not totally honest or open on alot
of issues and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they fess up
someday about aliens and abductions, etc.  I hope it's in our
lifetime.  I _am_ on your side.

Sue


"Truth is a shining goddess, always veiled, always distant, never wholly
approachable, but worthy of all the devotion of which the human spirit is
capable." -Bertrand Russell








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 23:08:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:18:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 11:05:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 09:51:16 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>I have interviewed and investigated enough individuals who claim
 >>to have been abducted to know that people _are_ being abducted.
 >>I have seen the scars, the marks, the fear these individuals
 >>experience.  Saddest of all, I have talked with the children who
 >>must endure being ripped from the security of their families and
 >>homes and subjected to "alien" environments and procedures in
 >>every sense of the word.  When it comes to the children, my
 >>anger boils and I become able to fully understand the extent of
 >>these violations.  _No_ child should _ever_ have to endure these
 >>atrocities. It's the pictures the children draw, the nightmares
 >>they must live and the inability to feel safe...anywhere...that
 >>makes the true nature of abductions horribly clear

 >Dear Amy:

 >What if you are wrong, and the "alien" interpretation of these
 >events is terribly wrong?  What if this interpretation is
 >encouraging and stimulating this thing?  What would you tell
 >these children, then?

 >Clear skies,
 >Bob Young

Perhaps the 'alien' interpretation is that humans can and do
endure all kinds of pain and suffering.  If they've been
watching us, they must know we can and we do.  As they have
small and tall ones, perhaps they can't differentiate between
children and adults.  Or perhaps they're dissecting us because
we did it to them first or because they see us doing it to our
own.

Perhaps it's of our own fault these things are happening to us.
Heaven forbid we would have an influence on our celestial
neighbours.  Maybe if we stopped hurting each other, they would
stop hurting us.

Just another ramble from Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 6

                          The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:21:42 -0400
Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

Hi listfolk,


In the thread 'Get Real' a debate was started about what right
the 'aliens' had to abduct people. This debate touched upon the
question what the purpose of abductions really was.

A remark by Terry Evans struck me. His wife had told him: "It
seems like they are stealing my emotions."

I have a suspicion this goes some way toward understanding what
'abductions' are about.

Anyone who has read the abduction stories by Strieber, Mack,
Hopkins et al. will note that 'abductees', once they are brought
inside the spaceship, are being fed images of apocalyptic
scenario's. The earth explodes, the moon breaks up, the ocean
level rises, shit will happen in the future.

Many 'abductees' come back from these sessions believing that
the aliens are in their own way trying to warn us of impending
disaster. If we go on like this we will destroy the earth. The
rain forest will disappear, climatic changes will happen in such
a way that the earth will become inhabitable, etc.

Many 'abductees' have asked their abductors why they have been
abducted. The response by the aliens has always been something
in the sense that the 'abductees' were 'chosen'. 'Chosen' was
never specified. Chosen for what?

An assessment of the purpose of abductions can start with an
evaluation of what we know about the apocalyptic visions that
the abductees were being fed. Have they happened? Are they
happening? Will they happen?

The answer to those questions is in all three cases no.

Has the world come to a virtual end? No, of course not. Things
have been improving steadily for most of the world's population.
This while abductions seem to have been going on for decades.
According to anecdotal testimony in any case, the first
abductions started before World War II at least.

Is the world as we know it going to end in the foreseeable
future? In the last months I have taken up an interest in all
things environmental. The brief, and somewhat blunt, conclusion
I have drawn from the articles I have read about various
environmental topics is that there is literally nothing that
indicates that the earth's ecosystem is going to be out of
balance in the coming decades or that natural fossils will dry
up before alternative energy resources are available.

There is enough oil, natural gas and coal to fuel the world for
decades to come. New reserves are being found as quickly as old
reserves are being used up. Alternative energy resources, like
solar electricity and wind energy, can take over large parts of
energy consumption even in our age should the necessity occur.

All kinds of measures have been taken against chemical
pollutants, like led in gasoline, CO2s, CFC's. Advanced filters
can filter even the tiniest particles of pollutants out of gas
emissions. Some decades from now most western countries will
have their gasoline consuming cars replaced by cars with fuel
cells. California and Iceland have introduced legislation to
start this process a few years ago in their respective areas.

Furthermore, the greenhouse effect has never been demonstrated
to exist, the ozone layer is growing again and, most important
of all, the growth in world populations is likely to stall
somewhere in the middle of the 21st century. And the western
security regime based on 'mutual assured destruction' (you throw
an A-bomb at us, you get one back) has ceased to exist.
Worldwide corrupt governments are being replaced by
democratically elected ones.

Hardly evidence that the world is going in the tank. To the
contrary, the world is a far better place than it was, say 50
years ago, and things will have improved considerably 50 years
from now.

So the 'aliens' have been feeding their abductees total bogus.
Many abductees don't seem to realize this. Strieber is a prime
example. His writings (books, website) contain somber material
about changes in the earth's climate, material that Strieber
thinks is information that he should convey to the world, in his
way trying to help fending off real disasters that lie in the
future.

Strieber is apparently buying the notion that he was 'chosen' to
do a certain kind of work that will help save the world. But the
real purpose of his 'abductions' was IMO only to study his
emotions. Strieber himself gives a clue to this in his earliest
work 'Communion'.

At one point he is shown the image of his son in a remote,
silent place. He gets the feeling that 'his son is dead'. Now of
course, his son hasn't died, has grown up and is an adult now.
In other words the image of his dead son, like the apocalyptic
images, was bogus. While Strieber observed the various horror
scenario's - end of the world or dead son - the aliens did only
one thing: they watched and observed.

Now my suggestion is that this observation of emotions lies at
the core of the purpose of abductions. Many 'abductees' and
students of the phenomenon have concluded that 'we' have
something and 'they' want it. The suggestion that they want our
emotions seems to be the answer.

That could also explain an observation that several researchers
have made. When studying the characteristics of abductees
several students have noted that abductees tend to be working in
professions that require some amount of artistic creativity, in
other words the skill of expressing emotions in an artistic
product. For that, one has to 'understand' emotions. Other
researchers noted that abductees have higher than average
empathic skills. In other words, the ability to 'feel what
another person feels'. So abductees seem to have a richer
emotional life.

Furthermore, one could also assume that this category of people
has a higher potential for telepathic reception, the means of
communication that the 'aliens' employ.

This 'Quest for Emotions' hypothesis also ties in with another
reported aspect of the abduction scenario: reproductive
interbreeding. Instead of simply copying human sperm and ova to
crossbreed with alien DNA, the aliens continually insist on
involving the 'donor' in the reproductive process, so to speak.
The result seems to be that the 'parent' is aware, during the
abduction at least, of his or her own offspring and develops an
emotional bond with the child. Again the aliens 'get' some of
our emotions.

Now most of the previous has been expressed in some form or
another in various books and magazines. But when I realized that
most of the apocalyptic visions that have been shown to
abductees haven't materialized and, to all appearances, will not
materialize in the foreseeable future, some of the pieces of the
puzzle fell into place for me. Of course, I could be wrong, but
for the moment, I find it an attractive hypothesis.

One more thing. A recent article in a Dutch newspaper mentioned
a study that was done to compare the empathic abilities of the
Dutch compared to Americans. It appeared that the Americans were
on average far more capable of sensing another person's emotions
that the Dutch. I am not aware of any other studies in which
other nationalities were studied on this topic.

If the Quest for Emotions theory is right and if Americans score
better compared to other nationalities as well, this could yet
explain another aspect of the abduction phenomenon, namely that
so many reports come out of the US. Of course, the media factor
does certainly play a role here, but there might be other causes
as well.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 22:20:09 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >>Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 00:02:49 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>The Gulf Breeze case may serve as an example. On the one hand,
 >>Clark says that he remains personally suspicious (or dubious) of
 >>the Ed Walters pictures and of Walters himself as a reliable
 >>witness. On the other, he professes faith in Bruce Maccabee both
 >>as a friend, fellow ufologist, and photoanalyst. In the end,
 >>Clark seems to say, we've simply agreed to disagree about the
 >>nature (and ultimate reality) of Gulf Breeze, differences of
 >>opinion being permitted among all honorable ufologists.>

 >>What drives Clark's critics to extremity, I think, is precisely
 >>this perceived disconnect between a difference of opinion and
 >>the evidence allegedly at hand. After all, Maccabee is either an
 >>accomplished photoanalyst -- or something less in that
 >>particular field. If Maccabee _is_ an accomplished photoanalyst,
 >>by Clark's own admission, then upon what other doubts are his
 >>own dismissal of the Walters' photos based? Similarly, if Clark
 >>photographs, then he must have at least something less than
 >>total confidence in Maccabee's resounding analysis of same as
 >>the real thing. So which is it?

 >Actually, it shouldn't be difficult to understand Jerry's
 >ambiguity on this case - but perhaps I find it easier because I
 >share it.

 >On the one hand, experience tells us that multiple encounter
 >cases, especially when accompanied by photos are _typically_
 >hoaxes. Further, the extension of these encounters across an
 >extended period is suspicious. Also, there are many aspects of
 >the UFO itself which differ from what we might expect -
 >especially in regard to the configuration and presentation of
 >luminosity on the object. Finally, the reporting of a case to
 >newspeople rather than police is yet another suspicious
 >indicator.

 >At the same time, photoanalysis poses some real problems.
 >Attempts to construe these photos as double-exposures have not
 >survived additional tests. Attempts to discover a motive for a
 >hoax have not found one. Attempts to find model making equipment
 >and expertise have foundered. A model found in a house was
 >discovered under controversial circumstances. The stereo photos
 >are even more difficult to hoax than the original photos,
 >especially when compared with the Nimslo photos.>

 >Ultimately, Bruce can have done an excellent job of analysis,
 >failed to find a way to hoax the photos, and then it might turn
 >out that a slightly different way of looking at things can show
 >how this could be done. No fault of Bruce's or even his
 >methodology.

Those of you who have been following this increasingly
"exruciating" thread have no doubt noticed that, although this
discussion has been carried on "in my name" (see title above), I
have studiously avoided it and let poor Jerry take the slings
and arrows of cruel fate. Now we have Dennis and Mark trumping
in, so I guess I should make some comments.

First, note how the initial reason for this discussion has
evaporated into thin air... in fact a lot of hot air.
Recrimination has replaced scientific discussion.

Dennis brought back some sanity by pointing out the seeming
illogic in (a) accepting that I have some skills as a
photoanalyst while (b) doubting the results of my analysis. Or,
to be more specific, where is the logic in rejecting the
Walter's case as a hoax and yet being ambivalent about rejecting
my photoanalysis in the Walters (and other) photo case? After
all, if Walters hoaxed his photos, then photoanalysis should
prove the hoaxing....right? (wrong) Mark has pointed out that,
in a sense, both choices could be correct: I might be good at
photo analysis and my analysis might be correct, yet I might
have missed something.

However, it's not quite that simple, Mark, because, there is
also the "battle of the Titans" aspect. Black has declared
Titan Hyzer the winner. People who, for non- technical reasons,
doubt Ed's veracity (i,e, they don't know beans about
photoanalysis but base their "gut feels" on the circumstantial
evidence), would tend to agree with Black (who, himself is not
capable of deciding on technical grounds who is correct... in
spite of "years" of indirect instruction by me!). Unfortunately
I do not have a "shill" to stand up and declare me the winner.
But that's understandable. The pro-UFO position is always the
underdog.

So, what should the poor untechnical ufoloist do? Hand the
crown to the guy who screams the loudest (Black) or sit back and
wait.

Consider my approach to the Meier case. I can't say that Meier
never had a UFO sighting... and he might even be an abductee.
But I never use his sightings/photos as evidence that UFOs are
real....and, believe me, many people have asked why not? (The
answer is I have found faults with some of his films..and this
little statement will probably start yet another pro-Meier
discussion! PLEASE, NO!)

One could take the same approach to the Walters case: never use
it as evidence of ufo reality.

But, of course, it won't go away. And, for those who feel it is
a complete hoax, it becomes a matter of embarrassment. And I
suppose it is even more of an embarrassment to find that I have
supported the case. It is an embarrassment because if I endorse
an "obvious" (to the skeptic) hoax, then how can anyone trust
anything else I have done?

Consider one "serious" implication of doubting about my analysis
of the GB case (and by this I mean Ed Walters' sightings and
photos between Nov' 1987 and May 1988; there is MUCH MUCH never
gets discussed): if you can't trust my GB analysis, then you
can't trust my other analyses and that means that all the work I
have done in the past MUST BE REDONE BY SOMEONE OF COMPARABLE
(or greater?) COMPETENCE..... and there probably isn't someone
willing to undertake that job!

Well, I had the same problem of whom to believe when I was
"growing up." Back in the dark ages of the '60's and 70's
similar questions were raised but the names were different.
Could you believe Keyhoe? Could you believe Lorenzen? There were
arguments between Keyhoe/NICAP and the Lorenzens/APRO,
representing the largest UFO groups at the time. They disagreed
on certain cases. And then there was another entity, the absence
of which has caused the ire of ufologists to be turned against
each other. I refer, of course, to "The Government" as
represented by Project Blue Book. Without such a "universal
antagonist" ufologists have nothing to attack but each other.
Oh, yes, there are always the traditional skeptics, but they
just do not have the high profile that Blue Book did.

I should point out that I felt the sting of nearly universal
disapproval 11.5 years ago (!) when the GB case investigation
was underway but far c from completed.. And, I could understand
the reason for the disapproval: ufology and ufologists already
suffer the rejection of society in general (there are no
UFOs/ETs so ufologists are misguided, dreamers, con men or just
plain jerks) and so there is no need for another reason to be
rejected. There was plenty of desire to find "one great case"
that would justify ufology once and for all (by proving "UFOs
are real") but there was ABSOLUTELY NO desire for another hoax
that would make ufologists look ridiculous...again (for the nth
time, in the limit that n goes to infinity).

Therefore when the GB case came along looking like another
albatross to hang around the neck of ufology some people
apparently decided it was better to drown the bird immediately
than to give it a chance to fly. They concluded in short order
that the Walters case was a hoax and all the other reports were
part of the "me too"syndrome that often accompanies a UFO flap.
In other words, the other reports, if truly inspired by actual
sightings, were only misidentifications (and, perhaps a couple
of non-walters hoaxes). The public cry of "hoax" began in April,
1988, about 5 months after the first Walters photos. This was
before I had finished my investigation (and, of course, the
local GB investigators were still "on the job" nearly twenty
four hours a day). IUR took a leading position in promoting the
"hoax" theory based largely on the claims by Robert Boyd and
Willy Smith. MUFON, by contrast, took a neutral to pro stance
based on personal investigation by Walter Andrus (who visited GB
himself) and Budd Hopkins (who was the person who initially
contacted me to see if I could do a photo analysis; my initial
impression was that this was another Meier-type case; however, I
was not able to prove that impression). By the time I presented
the results of my investigation at the 1988 MUFON symposium....
in a 2 1/5 hour lecture Saturday evening to a packed
house....the "world" had neatly divided into two camps. The anti
camp was, I presume, aghast at the fact that I did not call the
case a hoax. The neutral to pro camp probably wasn't overjoyed
at the fact that I stated I couldn't prove it was a hoax,but I
couldn't positively establish reality either, but it was too
early to rule Ed out.

The investigation did not end with the July 1988 MUFON
symposium, It continued unabated through the following years.
And, of course, so did the sightings, by Ed and by hundreds of
others.

So, where do we stand now? If you look at J. Black's
pronouncements, it all comes down to photo 19. Is it a double
exposure or a photo of a real object "out there" over the road?
He claims that Hyzer has proved it a double exposure because
there is no reflection in the truck hood. This lack of a
reflection was first analysed in the summer of 1988, two years
before Hyzer and Black appeared on the scene, and the reason for
a lack of a reflection was discovered. That has been explained
numerous times but the explanation has not been accepted by
Black et al. SO, what is the onlooker to do? Appeal to another
authority? (The only photoanalyst other then myself to have Ed's
original photo to look at is Jeff Sainio, and he also rejects
the hoax hypothesis.) How about ignore photo 19 as an enigma and
look at other data?

Now, there's a neat idea. Note that Hyzer looked at 8 by 10
blowups (copies) of 10 or 12 of Ed's two dozen photos. He based
his analysis on these and did not study all the other
photographic and non-photographic information. Of particular
interest, as mentioned by Mark above, Hyzer did not analyze the
stereo photos of February (Nimslo camera) and May (SRS camera).
It was these sets of photos which put it over the top for me. I
managed to figure out how to hoax them AFTER Ed had taken the
photos. I also realized there was no way Ed would have figured
it out before I did. (You can't read about this stuff in
books..descriptions of stereo cameras such as Ed made just ain't
there!)

I also had done something that neither Black nor Hyzer had done:
I had talked to Ed for hours by phone, had visited his house,
had visited the sites of the photos, etc. I was always probing
for information that could break the case but I never found any.
I had done something else neither Black nor Hyzer had done: I
studied dozens of related sightings that had been investigated
by the local investigators and met many of the other witnesses
myself. (I also had a sighting of my own in GB in Sept. 1991)

Returning to Mark's writing:

 >Photoanalysis of UFO photos can never be conclusive. The
 >photoanalyst operates in a context of available information and
 >uses his imagination to contrive ways to fake what he has
 >available in such a way as to not violate any of the
 >characteristics of the photos themselves. But his imagination
 >may be unable to find the method the hoaxer found.

A lawyer once told me that a case is not made on physical
evidence because the physical evidence can always be disputed by
experts. The case is made on circumstantial evidence.

Here in the GB case the skeptics have put all their money on
proving that Photo 19 is a hoax . If they could prove this they
could argue by extension that all the photos are a hoax. They
would like to ignore the circumstantial evidence.

The also ignore the following counter argument: there are photos
which Ed took which contain photo information that rejects the
hoax hypothesis. That is, the simple double exposure hypothesis
which has been claimed by Hyzer and numerous others, CANNOT
explain some of the photos (neither can models, etc..... this is
all presented ad nauseum in my MUFON Symp paper). Does that mean
that the photos must, therefore be real? Note the asymmetry
here: if photo 19 has photographic information consistent with a
double exposure then it must be so, and all the other photos
(and sighting testimony, and video, and stereo photos) must be a
big hoax. On the other hand, if photographic information in
photo 19 cannot be shown to absolutely prove a hoax, and if
other photos have information that conflicts with the hoax
hypothesis, this does not prove that the photos were not hoaxed.
Why? Because IN PRINCIPLE, one can always escalate the assumed
complexity or difficulty of the hoax. This, of course, also
requires an escalation of the assumed capability of the hoaxer.
And here is where the CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence mentioned above
plays a key role.

I realized during my initial investigation (spring, 1988) that
the technical sophistication needed to produce the single
Polaroid photos as double exposure hoax photos did not seem at
all consistent with what I could determine to be Walters'
photographic' capability.... which was nearly nil! But, even
granted that he might have been figured out how to use the
Polaroid camera to create double exposures (which I proved could
be done with his camera by someone who knew what he was doing -
me - and I did it right in front of his face, but he didn't
realize when I was hoaxing him with a double exposure I made!),
I could not accept the idea that he knew enough to hoax the
stereo photos taken with the SRS camera..

Back to Mark:

 >In other words, the analyst can be competent and the photos
 >can still be faked. This isn't so strange. Every science has
 >multiple voices speaking about the same data. Not all of them
 >are right, but it doesn't mean that those who are wrong are
 >incompetent.


Yes, and based on what Mark says above, you can't trust photo
analysis to tell you anything EXCEPT, perhaps, to provide
positive evidence of a hoax. For example, a photo that shows a
UFO image with a fine straight line above it is probably a photo
of a model hanging on a string. To look at this another way,
anyone would be hard pressed to argue that such a picture was
real. On the other hand,the most perfect photo could, in
principle, have been faked.Therefore you need to study the
CIRCUMSTANTIAL INFORMATION in the case (testimony, etc.) to
arrive at a conclusion.

A perfect example of the failure of photoanalysis to take into
account the circumstantial evidence in the Walters' case is in
Hyzer's analysis of photo 1. Hyzer invented or discovered a
technique that could, in principle, result in a photo such as
photo 1 in which the UFO image is partially blocked by the
darker tree image. This could NOT be a simple double exposure of
the type Ed could do with his camera because in a simple double
exposure the image of the brighter UFO (model) would "bleed
through" the darker image of the tree. Hyzer knew this.
Therefore he invented a much more sophisticated technique, and
then implied that Ed has used that technique. In other words,
Hyzer was implying that Ed was as photographically sophisticated
as Hyzer, even though Ed had had NO training in scientific
photography and Hyzer had years of such training. When I learned
of Hyzer's technique I tried to duplicate it..and was unable to
do so because the requirements on brightness were so stringent.
(Then Sainio discovered a certain aspect of photo 1 which proved
that the brightness requirements of Hyzer's technique had not
been met at the time the photo was taken and that discovery
removed the Hyzer technique from consideration.... leaving the
photo as it was before, impossible to be a simple double
exposure). Of course, the bottom line is that the circumstantial
evidence played a role here: it pointed strongly against the
assumption that Ed would have had sufficient knowledge to
independently develop and use Hyzer's special double exposure
technique.

So where does this leave us?

I know a heck of a lot more about this case than all of the
skeptics combined and all this information tells me to gird up
my loins and stand pat. I'm not budging, barring some new and
convincing proof of a hoax (and, yes, I've already been through
the model and Tommy Smith, both of which have been thoroughly
discredited).

The anti-Ed faction will assume that I am doing this all for
money and because I am reluctant to admit I was wrong. Well, of
course I would be reluctant to admit I was wrong, but I see no
reason to at the present. Please keep in mind that I started out
as skeptical as some and more skeptical than most in this case.
Furthermore, I was in a unique position of being able to
investigate while things were happening and even to have an
effect on the types of photos taken (SRS stereo photos were my
idea). There were also numerous other investigators also running
around doing their own things and keeping the heat on. But most
important for my investigation was the fact that I asked Ed to
do many experiments with his cameras (Polaroid and SRS),
experiments that could have blown his case out of the water many
times over within the first couple of months of my investigation
had I detected any faking. But Ed was always very cooperative
and he did the experiments. I was left with the choice of
assuming that he was a supremely confident hoaxer with an
extremely good knowledge of the scientific principles behind
photography and was also a supremely good extemporaneous actor
who could construct, in a moments notice, the correct or logical
response to questions and comments that he could not foresee,
and who could present these responses as the natural responses
of a photographically uneducated person, and maintain the
consistency of the lies over a period of months (never
forgetting the tall tales he made up on the spot)...... or else
he was telling the truth, which is a hell of a log easier than
remembering a pack of lies. . I also spoke many times with his
then-wife, Frances. She backed Ed up 100%.

(NOTE: Frances was involved in several sightings herself, most
notably the "Frances and Blue Beam" event which Hyzer did not
analyze, but Sainio did. This photo shows Frances running in
through the left side of the door, from the perspective of the
camera, while a vertical blue beam is seen at the left side near
her right arm. Jeff discovered that the blue sweater Frances was
wearing had an odd, unexplainable glow on the right sleeve
closest to the blue beam, as if radiation from the beam had
caused this portion of the sweater to glow a bit. Sainio's
conclusion was based on analysis of the ORIGINAL photo along
with comparison photos made during several hours of attempts to
reconstruct the photographic scene with Frances wearing the same
sweater suit and Ed using the same camera and the same type of
film. I was present during these reconstruction photo tests and
could verify the amount of time spent and film used in trying to
get the reconstruction accurate. Had Ed and Frances hoaxed the
original photo I'm sure they would have refused to cooperate
with the extensive experimental "program" I put them through.
Photos of the sweater sleeve made during the reconstruction
attempts did not have an excessive glow. This work was presented
in Sainio's 1992 MUFON Symposium paper. This photo, to the best
of my knowledge, has never been mentioned by the skeptics....
and I can imagine why! It cannot be explained as a double
exposure or as some other kind of trick that Ed could have
carried off using the Polaroid camera.)

As a final clue, consider the following: Ed and Frances divorced
in late 1992. For about a year before that Frances was going
through an emotion state which caused her to talk to various
friends and acquaintances about her relationship with Ed. I have
talked to some of the people Frances talked to. Anyone who has
been through such a thing is aware that one person is likely to
say as nasty things as possible about the other under these
circumstances. I have been told that never once did Frances
imply that the UFO sightings had been made up be Ed. When asked,
she always asserted that the UFO events did happen as she and Ed
reported. The skeptics will say, "Well, of course she wouldn't
say anything. After all, she was getting part of the royalties
from the book!"

Well, guess what guys, the royalties were a trivial matter.
Certainly no more than a few K per year, if that much. Small
potatoes as compared to the $2M they split when they separated.
And most of that money had come from years of building houses,
not from selling a UFO book.


For those of you antiGB skeptics who question the accuracy of my
analysis of the New Zealand case, I should warn you to STAY AWAY
FROM a recent paper published in the Journal of Scientific
Exploration. the title is ATMOSPHERE OR UFO: A RESPONSE TO THE
SSE UFO PANEL. This is the only paper so far) to respond
directly to the disappointing UFO review panel that report
published in the JSE in the summer of 1998 (the review panel
took place 2 year ago) DANGER: this paper contains a discussion
of FILM (as well as radar ), so caveat emptor.

Another paper you should be wary of is PROSAIC EXPLANATIONS: THE
FAILURE OF UFO SKEPTICISM which can be found at www.isso.org
under "writings". This to contains (shudder) analysis of the New
Zealand film. So, BEWARE!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 17:33:24 +0100

 >Hi,

 >I have been following this debate but trying to keep out of its
 >personal edges as I don't wish to say anything that might offend
 >people that I consider friends. When in truth I don't have
 >fundamental disputes with Bruce, Dennis or Jerry.

 >However, I guess I should say my piece about Gulf Breeze. I
 >think it is pretty reflective of views amongst many UK
 >researchers given what I have heard in various debates.

 >Like Jerry I have serious reservations about this case. Have had
 >from day one. My reasons are many and varied, but as a for
 >instance I know (from first hand investigation of similar cases)
 >that a lot of video taken from there depicts home made balloons.
 >You can even see the plastic dribbling down.

Whoops. You must be referring to the "Bubba" videos taken
between Nov. 1990 and July, 1992. Whatever was "dribbling
down" was not melted/burning plastic.

The most reasonable conventional explanation would be burning
chemicals from flares. Keep in mind that some of these things
were videoed from as far as 5 miles away according to
triangulation. That placed them at high altitude and required
considerable brightness.

However, I have rejected the simple gas bag balloon/flare
hypothesis based on the fact that several of these objects were
determined to triangulation to have moved against the known wind
direction and in som cases at speeds over 30 mph. Tough job for
gas bag balloons. The only hoax hypothesis that meets the
technical criteria (the observed and recorded physical
phenomena) is the following: a motor-driven "blimp" of small
size with special pyrotechnic compositions that can change color
(white to red and then to white) and can flash white at a high
rate of speed (recorded on video; brightness changes from zero
to maximum in 1/30 sec or less) like fast strobe lights.


 >Subsequent hoaxes
 >does not mean the starting case was a fake, of course. But there
 >is sufficient contradictory evidence to be at least open to
 >doubt. If asked about the case I usually say, to my mind
 >truthfully, that Gulf Breeze is not an encounter I would cite as
 >part of a strong scientific defence of UFO reality. And really
 >that is the only fair assessment. It is not proven nor disproven
 >but (unlike McMinnville for instance) far more in the balance to
 >be unduly optimistic and so not, for me, a case I would ever
 >base any conclusions around. One day the truth may out. I
 >somehow suspect that this will prove more embarrassing to the
 >believers than to those being cautious. But that is merely my
 >assessment of the evidence I have seen.

So, Jenny states here what I have said about th Meier case in
another message: if you don't "believe" in it, don't refer to
it.

 >What is certainly true with Gulf Breeze, like any other widely
 >touted incident, is that its hype is bigger than its value to
 >science.

Yes, but even from a neutral point of view (don't know whether
real or not) one could say that if there were any scientific
value to it, that value has been severely compromised by the
controversy.

 > But also the PR is sure to have trawled in some local
 >cases that we might never have heard about and that may be in
 >the long run of more interest.

This is true, and happened. Unfortunately the skeptics are so
dead set against Ed that they find they have to throw out all
the GB cases in order to be consistent.

 >I find this, for instance, with the hype of the Bonnybridge,
 >Scotland 'window'. In my research into the genesis of this area

<snip>

 >without the belief that the location is special. I think the
 >same is true of Gulf Breeze. We may have more good cases from
 >here because of the (incorrect) assumption that it is a special
 >place.

There certainly are a lot of good non-Ed cases from GB, ranging
from Nov 1987 through recent years. However the "specialness" of
Gulf Breeze is now in the past. Although there have been bried
periods of multiple sightings, like a volcano that bursts forth
and castes its ejecta widely and then settles back for another
long nap, Gulf Breeze has returned to its previous condition of
.... a few good sightings a year.

 >This occurs largely because if you take any place - call it
 >Anytown - this might, for instance, have 100 sightings per year.
 >Research shows that at best 5 of these will be publicly
 >reported. The rest will not for fear of ridicule etc. If that
 >happens Anytown looks like, well any town. But if through social
 >factors Anytown is made into a special case circumstances
 >combine to up the percentage of cases reported. Anytown might
 >thus produce 50 cases in the next year - ten times the norm and
 >ten times the level of other similar places. It looks special
 >but in truth it isn't. Yet we gain from its false specialness
 >because we obtain cases we might not see.

Yes.

 >As such Gulf Breeze is not a simple case of real or fake, its a
 >maelstrom of different forces at work. It is proper not to be
 >totally committed to one view or another for this reason.

Yeah, and I nearly got stifled in that maelstrom!

 >As for Jerry distrusting the essence of the main Gulf Breeze
 >case but trusting Bruce Maccabee. I don't find that odd. I feel
 >the same way. Bruce clearly knows his stuff. I listen to what he
 >says about photo cases.

Gee, thanks.... but how would you know? Just because I say
things that SOUND or APPEAR logical doesn't mean they are.

 > Like Jerry I don't always agree with his >findings,

Are you referring to photographic findings? And by what logic do
you reject my photographic findings? Is is because what I say
does not seem consistent with non-photoraphic information from
other sources? Or are you able to independently evaluate my
photographic findings? And, if so, why pay any attention to what
I say?

(NOTE: I'm not trying to refer to a specific case here, but
rather to echo the cry of illogic brought up by Dennis ealier.
You say "he knows his stuff" and "I listen to what he has to say
about photo cases" and then you say you don't always agree with
my findings. Bad girl! Forty Lashes with a wet Noodle!)

 >but I sure do respect them as I would any person with
 >a proven track record that is clearly an expert in a field.
 >Thus to me there is no dichotomy here.

 >The case is a confusion. The
 >evidence is in parts conflicting. I know how I feel
 >instinctively about its status from a summation of that
 >evidence. But I also recognise that Bruce is better able to
 >judge photographs than I am and to simply wave that away
 >because I don't feel at ease with the case would not be objective
 >investigation. It is proper to give his assessment due weight,
 >without having to make it the basis for total belief in any
 >case.

Sometimes in an ambiguous situation, or at least a situation
that APPEARS ambiguous to an investigator, the only "solution"
is to agree to disagree.

<snip>

 >Ufology is not often a precise science. It is possible to have a
 >gut feeling about a case, to weigh the totality of evidence and
 >suspect one thing but not to be able to prove such a suspicion.
 >When that happens you do as I believe Jerry is here suggesting.
 >You listen to what everyone says. You believe what nobody says.
 >You weigh up in your mind what you think. And you comment
 >publicly in defence of only what can be shown beyond reasonable
 >doubt to be true. I don't find that an unreasonable philosophy
 >to live by.


Question Everything. Believe Nothing. And get Nowhere!
Ultimately you have only yourself to trust... and sometimes you
can't even trust yourself.

When confronted with an argument between experts in a field for
which you have no training, whatever that may be, you may have
to decide to ignore the situation and go elsewhere. That would
be my advice to kindly young Jerry Black: you've made your
point. Now go do something else.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 02:35:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 11:05:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >What if you are wrong, and the "alien" interpretation of these
 >events is terribly wrong?  What if this interpretation is
 >encouraging and stimulating this thing?  What would you tell
 >these children, then?


Me, wrong?  I suppose it could happen. ;>

As for the "alien" interpretation of these events, please note
that I refer to them as the "abductors" not as "aliens".  I
recognize them by what they _do_ not by what they are or are
not.

The Abductors have been described as everything from robots,
aliens and hybrids to humans, demons, angels and
multidimensionals.  I do not profess to know who or what they
are only that someone or something _is_ abducting people against
their wills.

I do not interpret who is doing the abductions or for what
reasons.  I focus on the behaviors and the events described.

I know full well the deceptive natures of the abduction
phenomena.  But until more information is forthcoming, I try not
to speculate too far beyond the obvious.   I know something is
happening to people and I study the phenomenon without drawing
premature conclusions or poo-pooing it.  Not all who claim to
have been abducted are actually abductees but some are. As a
psychotherapist, I know how the mind can deceive oneself and
others. I also know how hard we tend to fight to maintain
familiar paradigms in the face of the unknown.

I do not tell anyone they are or are not abductees nor do I say
anyone has or has not been abducted by aliens (or anything
else).  I do not tell the children anything now or at anytime.
I only listen and research.  How I can or anyone tell them
anything when we do not know what is really going on?


Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 03:11:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >If aliens are coming from another planet, they can do what the
 >hell they like to us, except in as much as we have the physical
 >power to stop them. To talk about a "right" not to be abducted
 >by aliens is as absurd as talking about a "right" not to be
 >killed in an earthquake or drowned by a tidal wave.


Dear John,

_If_ "aliens", beings, entities or some consciousness (I'm
trying to be more politically correct here) are encountered,
then we have only our time tested morals and laws to guide us in
relationships with other worldly beings.  It does not make sense
to allow beings with superior technology to automatically
override our own standards of conduct just because we feel
helpless or inferior.

To assume beings of other worldy or multidimensional origins
have the right to abduct people just because they have the might
does not give them the right to so no matter what you or anyone
may say.  Obviously you do not understand what rights are or
what they mean.

All beings of the universe have rights.  Whether they give up or
fight it makes no difference.  Neither superior intellect nor
superior technology can void one's rights to self-determination
and free will.  We all have rights whether we acknowledge them
or not.

Aliens or any beings that abduct are not acts of nature, they
commit acts upon others by choice.  Earthquakes cannot make
choices.  Nuf said.

Until we establish our rights within our _own_ consciousness as
well as to any beings we may encounter we may be abused and
discounted.  It is not that we do not have rights, only that we
have not upheld those rights for all.  Look at how we tolerate
our governments' lies claiming there is nothing we can do about
it.

We all have rights.  Whether or not we exercise those rights is
another matter entirely.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                               Re: AIC Website

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:52:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: AIC Website


Hello All,

Today I closed down the AIC Interactive e-mail list which was a
service I provided for those who suspected they were having
UFO/abduction related experiences. The website has always (up
until now) been a private resource for the members of AIC. I am
now opening it up to the general public. All are welcome to
peruse its contents and study the material that is archived
there. A couple of the pages have become disabled. (The
"Articles" pages and some of the Stewart Appelle articles) I am
working to correct it. In the meantime, some 90% of the site
-is- online and available.

Go to:

http://www.if-aic.com/AIC/Members/

A log on dialog box will appear asking you for a 'username'
and 'password.' Type in the following:

username: john

password: grey98

The dialog box is 'cAsE sEnSItiVe' so type it in _as_written_ or
it won't let you in.

AIC is too valuable an archive to remove from the web so I'm
opening it up to all. It will shortly become available
_exclusively_ on Jeff Rense's interactive, 3D website
"RenseWorld." I will post a public announcement when I have
completed construction. In the meantime, enjoy this offering on
the open Web.

Sincerely,

John Velez, Webmaster AIC
________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
                     ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                             http://www.if-aic.com/
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 16:23:11 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:09:51 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


Dear Gildas, and List.

 >>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:46:35 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >To J Bond Johnson, Neil Morris and List,

 >Thank you again for your answer.

 >The accumulation of contradictory testimonies tends to obscure
 >things more and more.

 >What remains clear in my opinion is this: on the photographs,
 >at least those with Ramey and DuBose, what we see is balloon and
 >radar target debris.

I respect your opinion, but I do ask you to seriously review the
following items which challenge this belief.

The attached image is taken from MarcelRight _but_ this same
piece of debris _is_ in the RameyDubose image though it has been
moved around somewhat.

(A) Points to a twisted piece of metalic debris, please note how
thick this metal sheet is, far thicker than the "foil" used on
the ML307 reflectors, also both sides of this sheeet, due to the
twist can be seen, _no_ backing paper in sight _if_ it were a
piece of reflector foil.

(B'-B") B' points to an embossed of stamped area on the debris
sheet, B" indicates a continuation of this further down the
sheet seen on the reverse side.

(C) Points to an obvious folded lip at the end of this sheet.

(E) On an associated piece of debris, more signs of stamping or
embossing seen in the regular patterning on this "box-section"?.

Points A,B,C and E _should_ _not_ be found on an ML307 style
radar reflector. For confirmation please check out the URL:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/mglcmpx.gif

This shows a section of the original engineering drawing used
for the ML307 series targets together with an image of them in
use by the NYU research group at Alamagordo, I also include a
selection of further items that shouldn't be in the FW debris
_if_ it were an ML307 target.

Oh...and (D), a small piece of metalic sheet that if you look
closely at the end of the pointer you should see the start of a
sting of raised symbols, the end one is a "3" style that crops
up several times on other pieces of the debris, that too
shouldn't be there if this is foil from an ML307 reflector.

Other items that "shouldn't be there but are" can be seen in the
following images:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/button.gif

This shows a metalic _button_ attached to a tassle in turn
attached to the alleged "balloon" rubber.


http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/theboss2.gif

This shows a variety of _hollow_ beams found in the debris,
remember _all_ the beams in the ML307 were wooden _and_ solid.
Speaking of wooden beams, has anyone noticed the variety of
sizes of beams in the FW picture, if you check out images and of
the ML307 you'll note that the struts used all seem to be of a
uniform thickness and cross sectional shape.

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/rdb_plug.gif

This curious object gives the appearance of a plug or fastener
attached to the end of a "ribbon cable", it is associated with
the foil panels in the RameyDubose image.

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


 >DuBose and Marcel stated clearly that the balloon story was a
 >cover up.
 >

I suspect the "balloon" story was not original to Ramey or
Dubose, recovered text from the Ramey Message appears to say on
line 7:

    ... THRY EVEN PUT FOR AF WEATATN BALLOONS RADAR WERE ...
      (theory)          (weather station)


 >DuBose says that he never saw the real debris.
 >

Ex CIC Capt Sheradon Cavitt says all that was found on the
Foster Ranch was a single Meteo Balloon and a single reflector
and he and Marcel picked it up, and returned to RAAF, he also
said the "sticks" they collected were made of bamboo!, end of
story... He _should_ know, he was there with Maj Marcel, so why
don't we believe _his_ _sworn_ testimony, close the book and get
on with lives?.

<section on Jaime Shandera snipped>

Bond might comment on this, he was interviewed by him.

Best Regards
Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive-> http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *

  Mr11pnl.jpg







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                        Re: NASA Speaks in English...

From: Sue and John Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 06:56:49 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:07:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 16:52:10 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA Speaks in English...

 >>>From: From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 21:49:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: NASA Speaks in English...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

Hi Jim, Larry, List Members,

Jim wrote (snipped for brevity):

 >And yes, I concur that it is a cover for something. And it may
 >have been something stupid. Or something worse. But good gosh
 >almighty, that this did not draw more derision here, there and
 >everywhere, is a sure sign of the deterioration of intellect in
 >this country. Lemmings all. Believe what they tell you or just
 >don't give a crap.

Correct me please, if I'm wrong List Members. It's not apathy or
ignorance that keeps the rest of us quiet... it's shocking
disbelief... that our government would really expect us to believe such
a ridiculous answer.

I worked for approximately 3 years typing NASA proposals, papers
for publication, grants, exams, lab manuals, etc. for 27
professors in the Physics & Astronomy Dept. at the Univ. of New
Mexico in the 80's. Not one (1) of those hundreds of thousands
of pieces of paper used English measurement. Always metric.
Always. And, that was a "tiny" department by comparison to JPL,
Goddard, or NASA's list of scientists.

I "know" as well as I can, the probability of such a mix-up
taking place. So do the rest of the List Members, I think. I
hesitate to speculate about what that "bigger" stupidity could
have been... but from experience in typing all those papers and
checking the 'obvious' math, I would guess it was a mathematical
error... a leaving out of some factor or function in an equation
(i.e. "What you do to one side of the equation, you must balance
on the other"). That I could see. I saw it a lot. But, thanks
for polling us and checking up, just to see if we're still out
here thinking clearly, or thinking at all. We are.

Hugs, Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:26:43 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 16:23:11 +0100
From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:09:51 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


Dear Gildas, and List.

 >>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:46:35 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >To J Bond Johnson, Neil Morris and List,

 >Thank you again for your answer.

 >The accumulation of contradictory testimonies tends to obscure
 >things more and more.

 >What remains clear in my opinion is this: on the photographs,
 >at least those with Ramey and DuBose, what we see is balloon and
 >radar target debris.

I respect your opinion, but I do ask you to seriously review the
following items which challenge this belief.

The attached image is taken from MarcelRight _but_ this same
piece of debris _is_ in the RameyDubose image though it has been
moved around somewhat.

(A) Points to a twisted piece of metalic debris, please note how
thick this metal sheet is, far thicker than the "foil" used on
the ML307 reflectors, also both sides of this sheeet, due to the
twist can be seen, _no_ backing paper in sight _if_ it were a
piece of reflector foil.

(B'-B") B' points to an embossed of stamped area on the debris
sheet, B" indicates a continuation of this further down the
sheet seen on the reverse side.

(C) Points to an obvious folded lip at the end of this sheet.

(E) On an associated piece of debris, more signs of stamping or
embossing seen in the regular patterning on this "box-section"?.

Points A,B,C and E _should_ _not_ be found on an ML307 style
radar reflector. For confirmation please check out the URL:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/mglcmpx.gif

This shows a section of the original engineering drawing used
for the ML307 series targets together with an image of them in
use by the NYU research group at Alamagordo, I also include a
selection of further items that shouldn't be in the FW debris
_if_ it were an ML307 target.

Oh...and (D), a small piece of metalic sheet that if you look
closely at the end of the pointer you should see the start of a
sting of raised symbols, the end one is a "3" style that crops
up several times on other pieces of the debris, that too
shouldn't be there if this is foil from an ML307 reflector.

Other items that "shouldn't be there but are" can be seen in the
following images:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/button.gif

This shows a metalic _button_ attached to a tassle in turn
attached to the alleged "balloon" rubber.


http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/theboss2.gif

This shows a variety of _hollow_ beams found in the debris,
remember _all_ the beams in the ML307 were wooden _and_ solid.
Speaking of wooden beams, has anyone noticed the variety of
sizes of beams in the FW picture, if you check out images and of
the ML307 you'll note that the struts used all seem to be of a
uniform thickness and cross sectional shape.

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/rdb_plug.gif

This curious object gives the appearance of a plug or fastener
attached to the end of a "ribbon cable", it is associated with
the foil panels in the RameyDubose image.

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


 >DuBose and Marcel stated clearly that the balloon story was a
 >cover up.
 >

I suspect the "balloon" story was not original to Ramey or
Dubose, recovered text from the Ramey Message appears to say on
line 7:

    ... THRY EVEN PUT FOR AF WEATATN BALLOONS RADAR WERE ...
      (theory)          (weather station)


 >DuBose says that he never saw the real debris.
 >

Ex CIC Capt Sheradon Cavitt says all that was found on the
Foster Ranch was a single Meteo Balloon and a single reflector
and he and Marcel picked it up, and returned to RAAF, he also
said the "sticks" they collected were made of bamboo!, end of
story... He _should_ know, he was there with Maj Marcel, so why
don't we believe _his_ _sworn_ testimony, close the book and get
on with lives?.

<section on Jaime Shandera snipped>

Bond might comment on this, he was interviewed by him.

Best Regards
Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive-> http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *

  Mr11pnl.jpg





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 12:34:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:33:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >As Dennis Stacey keenly pointed out, your personal (and publicly
 >professed) suspicion of Ed Walters and Gulf Breeze has not
 >inhibited you from heartily endorsing colleague Bruce Maccabee,
 >the same one who has actively worked to promote Ed Walters and
 >Gulf Breeze.

 >This flaming double-standard serves as a top-notch example of
 >everything that is wrong with ufology, for it incisively
 >highlights your lack of ideological strength and your inability
 >to stand behind the research of the one you promote.

This is totally, completely crazy.

Jerry has explained it. Mark Cashman, in his usual wise,
dispassionate way, has explained it even better.

The world is full of people who defend the integrity,
competence, and even the wisdom of those they disagree with.
You'll find this in science, the arts, even in politics. That
doesn't mean these people involved in an old boy network. It
means that they're honest. Honest, and I might add, not so in
love with their own opinions that they think they have to trash
everyone who disagrees.

Old boy networks (including old girls) really do exist, of
course, whether or not Jerry Clark and Bruce Maccabee belong to
one. And along with them comes another, related phenomenon, the
irrational, angry outsider, trembling with fury at a real or
imagined in-group, and so convinced of his or her own importance
that reason, common sense, and even common courtesy fly out the
window. Kenny Young and Jerry Black, it seems to me, are
stunning examples.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 13:31:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:43:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Mr. Jerome Clark,
 >You have been given the opportunity to support some of the wild
 >charges that you have made in the past few days concerning
 >'character assassination' attempts that you claimed to have
 >dealt with, and from your message to UFO UpDates (dated October
 >3, 1999), you have failed to clarify your comments or uphold
 >those wild allegations.

 >For the record, Jerome Clark, let's take note of this failure
 >and of your apparent 'ducking' of this fair issue, for as I have
 >authenticated, your rabid approach to those you disagree with
 >and your issuance of insupportable charges renders you in the
 >same light that you seek to cast onto your opponents. Your
 >demonstrable chest-beating, trashing of opponents and hurling
 >specious comments through argumentation has caused me to think
 >of you in a new and unfortunate manner.

  <merciful snip>

 >As Dennis Stacey keenly pointed out, your personal (and publicly
 >professed) suspicion of Ed Walters and Gulf Breeze has not
 >inhibited you from heartily endorsing colleague Bruce Maccabee,
 >the same one who has actively worked to promote Ed Walters and
 >Gulf Breeze.

 >This flaming double-standard serves as a top-notch example of
 >everything that is wrong with ufology, for it incisively
 >highlights your lack of ideological strength and your inability
 >to stand behind the research of the one you promote.

 >Although there is nothing wrong with being a personal friend of
 >a fellow researcher (who may be 'in the wrong'), I see it as a
 >mistake to promote that researcher on a professional or
 >conjectural level while in fundamental disagreement.

Oh, puh-leeze! This dissection of whether or not one UFO
researcher should denounce another researcher with whom he
disagrees has become incredibly tiresome. Thanks to Jerry
Black's intemperate assaults on the integrity of practically
everyone who has ever contributed to the field (or who hasn't
agreed to submit to a lie detector test from him) has spawned a
base, pointless exchange.

Kenny Young's principle of "no agreement/no respect" appears
closer in spirit to Torquemada or the Stalinist purges than a
realistic expectation of professionals or serious amateurs in a
field of study.

Would one physicist, say, who believes that quarks are the
fundamental particle of matter knock the ethics and
professionalism of a mathematician espousing the string theory?

Or more pointedly, should a left-leaning ideologue denounce the
principles of a colleague who mysteriously adopts a reactionary
position on a particular subject?

Choose your field, whether hard science or fuzzy social science,
progress is not made by tearing down the methods of others but
by explaining why something's right or explaining why something
is wrong.

The real goal in any field is to contribute original ideas that
stand the test of time. That is something which is sorely
lacking in this regrettable thread.


Regards,

Pat McCartney
Auburn, California







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 99 11:06:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:46:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT

 >>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >>>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >>Do you know what the adjective "disingenuous" means?  If not,
 >>suffice it to say that you have just provided a living example.
 >>And if you aren't being disingenuous -- which I find hard to
 >>believe -- and genuinely did not know what the discussion is
 >>about, why did you join it at all?

 >You have been given the opportunity to support some of the wild
 >charges that you have made in the past few days concerning
 >'character assassination' attempts that you claimed to have
 >dealt with, and from your message to UFO UpDates (dated October
 >3, 1999), you have failed to clarify your comments or uphold
 >those wild allegations.

Mr. Young, disingenuously or otherwise, is unable to come to
grips with any significant issue.  Even after I have repeatedly
explained my objections to the Black/Young approach -- and
nobody else who's remarked on the exchange has expressed the
slightest difficulty in understanding what I've said -- our
correspondent, arms waving, face reddening, blunders on.

 >You sought to deflect my fair questions to you by stating a
 >'disingenuous' motive behind the challenge, and obfuscated the
 >issue by again reverting to vague and ambiguous charges said
 >perpetrated by Jerry Black, which you were felt were 'paranoid
 >and laughable visions.'

As they are.

 >You said, "If I were going to make unprovoked charges which cast
 >serious doubt on the integrity of a colleague, I would make
 >damned sure I had my facts right." (UFO Updates, October 3,
 >1999) Yet why, Jerome Clark, do you support the integrity of a
 >colleague whose facts you believe to be totally amiss?

Again, as recent communications from such ufological luminaries
as Jenny Randles and Mark Cashman have made clear, my view of
Bruce Maccabee, including his Gulf Breeze investigations and
analyses, is not that difficult to grasp.  It's held by others
of good reputation and demonstrated achievement as well.

Mr. Young puts words into my mouth when he claims I believe
Maccabee's "facts ... to be totally amiss."  I said no such
thing, nor do I believe any such thing. Bruce is no doubt right
about many things in his Gulf Breeze work.  It's just his
conclusion that I disagree with.

The only thing of interest in Mr. Young's words above is his use
of the word "integrity" which, sad to say, proves my case: that
in the Black/Young approach it is not the opinion but the person
that's at issue.  Most of us, even Gulf Breeze doubters, would
never think -- it wouldn't even occur to us -- that it's Bruce's
_honesty_ that's in question.

 >Whether or not you would like to admit your inclusion in an "Old
 >Boy's Club", from this we can see that you are a partaker by
 >your actions, willful or otherwise.

Oh, grow up.

This exchange is growingly pointless, and I apologize to
listfolk for having to restate, yet again, the obvious.

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                 New 'Angel' Dead Sea Scroll Contains Astral

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 02:14:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 02:14:50 -0400
Subject: New 'Angel' Dead Sea Scroll Contains Astral

http://www.sightings.com/politics5/astral.htm

New 'Angel' Dead Sea Scroll Contains Astral Implications

By Barry Chamish <chamish@netvision.net.il>

10-5-99


A "lost" Dead Sea Scroll has reportedly been uncovered and if it
is proven authentic, it reveals a new understanding of how the
ancient Israelites viewed their God, his angels and their place
in the heavens.

Called the "Angel Scroll," it is a thousand lines long, was
purchased in Jordan in 1970 by a group of Benedictine monks and
spirited away to their German monastery. Upon his death in 1977,
one of the group, Father Gustav Mateus, bequeathed his
photographs and hand transcriptions of the scroll to an unnamed
Jerusalem college administrator. He handed the material over to
Stephan Phann, a member of the team of scholars translating the
scrolls held by the Israeli government, and his findings were
released to the newsmagazine The Jerusalem Report.

Phann has declared that, "If the scroll is a hoax, it's a very
good one. It's a serious literary work."

But others are more skeptical. The existence of Father Mateus
has not been proven and the Jerusalem Report, little more than a
source of disinformation for the Labor Party, is hardly a
reliable venue. That said, experts are in general agreement that
the text of the scroll so far released "feels" genuine.

What little of the scroll that has been released, reveals its
storyline is a journey to the heavens accompanied by angels.
According to Phann, the text is full of "divine chariot-throne
themes with elaborate details of angels ascending heaven's
multiple gates." And this should be of great interest to the
minions (most inspired by Von Danieken) who take a literal view
the bible's words, putting the many references to wheels within
wheels, flying scrolls, pillars of fire, etc. into a UFO
context.

Longtime Israeli ufologist, now a student of kabala, Mordechai
Spasser believes it would be a mistake to interpret the new
scroll from a UFO viewpoint. "What I've read appears to me to be
philosophy on an astral plane, or simply, Jewish mysticism."

Keeping that possibility in mind, or melding it with the popular
UFO readings of extant Jewish holy scriptures, here are two
passages from the Angel Scroll, with my literal interpretation
following both:

"And the Angel Pnimea said to me: "And son of man, lift up your
eyes and see all the secrets...that are in the fourth gate which
is the gate of birth. And I saw, and it was like the womb and
the chambers of the stomach, and its waters gush and roar like
the breakers of the sea on the wall of the cave, which cannot
withstand its fury. And here is a seed of life in the water
emanating from the seed of man and from the seed of the woman
for male and female that He created. And the seed that is joined
from the two seeds is not like a clean slate. It is written
inside and outside and it has within knowledge and understanding
before its creation and before its creation in the womb. And the
beginning of the child is not in the birth or in conception nor
is its end in death."

It appears that the narrator was shown an advanced real-time
version of our pathetic ultrasound technology. He stands before
a gate, or unknown to him, a monitor and sees male ejaculation
into the womb, including a closeup of sperm and egg. He
witnesses conception and is then told the secrets of DNA and
genes. Pointedly, God has created both within mankind.

"According to the plan of that day, the Voice went forth to me
and directed me and he drove me by the Spirit. And a vision was
revealed to me from the Most High, and Pancimeia, Prince of
Angels lifted me up in the Spirit and I ascended heavenward
above the high places of the clouds and he showed me the great
world and the image of the gods. And I pondered the appearance
round about and there was no time and no place and their
appearance from the dwelling places of light was like a rainbow
in the clouds. And they had no bodies and no bodily structure
and the dominion of darkness was over all of the earth round
about."

Now this is one accurate description of a trip in the Space
Shuttle. First the traveller passes above cloud level. He
observes the high places of the clouds, possibly those ridges
unseen at ground level. Then he sees the earth from space and it
is surrounded by darkness. He is shown images of the gods and
their homes on a control monitor and marvels at the fine color
quality and at the bizarre fact that there is no firmament to
the images on the screen.

That said and interpreted, I for one, am looking forward to
reading the full text of the Angel Scroll.

____________

The author's web sites are: http://members.tripod.com/~ufoisrael
http://www.webseers.com/rabin








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                                Re: Abducted?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:18:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 02:28:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Abducted?


 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 20:53:42 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Abducted?

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:16:55 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abducted?
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Hello young James

 >Please be reminded of this point.

 >>>He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
 >>>all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
 >>>niggling feeling.

 >>Hi all;

 >Err ditto <g>

 >>This is an issue which carries extreme importance to the
 >>potential abductee.  I refer to the question of whether or not
 >>the person has been abducted.  This must be an intellectual
 >>conclusion, not an emotional one.

 >Would you care to elaborate please.

I was not sure that I had been adbducted by aliens,  I am still
not sure.  I am, however, a lot closer to being sure.  I arrived
at this point (which normally resides on top of my head) by
studying the available data, going to AIC and other sources, by
reading, by being psychoanalysed (without telling the shrinks
about my experiences) to determine if I was nuttier than Aunt
Mary's fruit cake.  I spent time with other perceived abductees.
The goal was to find out what if any commonality I shared with
the others whose direct memory was better than mine, memory not
jogged by hypnosis or Gripple.

On being shrunk by shrinks, I found that I was more intelligent
than I realized and had no mental problems, no illness which
could be discerned, except some phobias (due, presumably, to my
not picking my nose when other kids were).  I was tested
thoroughly (umm, lemme think) about three or four times at my
own expense from age 20 something through about nine years ago.

So while this is a highly emotional issue, affecting one smack
in one's affectivity, it was difficult for me to seperate my
intellect from my emotions.  I tried to do that as much as
possible in coming to a conclusion regarding this issue and feel
that I accomplished this feat sufficiently enough to make the
best decision regarding my experiences.  Conclusion? I am Gort
from Mongo.   Just kidding.

 >>It is crucial for this person to accept only his own opinion,
 >>and that opinion must be based on his own research. That
 >>research must be based on the best information available from
 >>multiple, dependable sources.  He should spend his time doing
 >>everything he can to study information already written and
 >>prepared by the best authorities, pro and con.  There are places
 >>on the Internet he can go in order to help him with this study.

 >I will point him to A.I.C. I have looked at this site created by
 >John and I think it is superb.

It is probably the best compendium of data one can sift through.
After searching high and low, speaking on line with people who
were famous, infamous and otherwise supposedly smarter and much
more experienced than I in these matters, I found AIC to be the
best source, for me, it was definitive.

 >>In the opinion of many, including myself, this person should
 >>avoid hypnosis until such time as he has reached an honest and
 >>firm conclusion regarding his experiences and is having
 >>difficulty living a normal healthy life.  Only then should he
 >>consider hypnosis, if at all.

 >I totally agree.

 >>The "Abduction Information Center" is a good place to start.
 >>Frankly, I have found that in my experience at least, _no one_
 >>person or entity can tell you whether or not you are an
 >>experiencer.  Only you can do that.

 >I tried to convey that to this person.

 >>From what I've read above, your friend has experienced some of
 >>what I and many others have experienced.  Means _nothing_!

 >I'm sorry what do you mean by this?

I mean that just because one shares some of the "features"
and/or other experiences of abductees, does not necessarily mean
he or she is one... that is a _conclusion_ to be drawn by the
individual.

 >>The only one who can make the decision is him, and only after
 >>knowing himself.  That's the tough part.  Further, he must be
 >>prepared to learn and accept that he may or may not have had
 >>these experiences and be satisfied with that conclusion to the
 >>extent that it does not cloud or distort his ability to think
 >>clearly and objectively on the subject.

 >>Some perceived abductees, on finding that it was merely a piece
 >>of undigested beef, go completely the other way in their belief
 >>system. If they thought they were abducted and find they were
 >>not, they then become lunatics when it comes to anyone who
 >>believes he has been abducted.  The opposite is true.

 >>It takes a strong person to understand the truth about himself,
 >>whatever that truth may be.  And stronger still to accept the
 >>truth of others in similar situations.  Capeesh?

 >So if I read this correctly, if this person works out for
 >himself, using his brain not his emotions that he is the subject
 >of abduction, then he must have the strength of character to
 >deal with it?

Yup! In my view at least. But the emotions... whew!  Those are
tough birds to mess with. You know the old saw, "When reason
comes into conflict with emotion, emotion (or Gripple) wins."

 >>There are others monitoring this list, members, who can better
 >>advise than I.  I suggest that one or two of you answer this
 >>post.  For I may only speak for myself.  And everyone knows, I'm
 >>nuttier than aunt Mary's fruitcake, eh?

 >Why Mary's I thought Farmhouse fruitcake was best?

 >>Jim Mortellaro

 >Thank you for your thoughts on this Jim. I would like to point
 >out.

 >>>He said in the end, I can easily believe that it is a case of
 >>>all of these things being true but I can't help but have this
 >>>niggling feeling.

 >A point I pointed out at the start of this post.

 >At the moment he is unsure of his experiences. I have offered
 >him _some_ _possible_ answers but at the end of the day
 >_I_don't_know_ if he is the victim of an abduction experience.
 >He thinks that he probably is not, _but_, and its a big but, he
 >still has this niggling feeling. -- In an infinite universe,
 >infinitely anything is possible.

Whenever I niggle, I Gripple.  And speaking of Gripple, Aunt
Mary's fruitcake is sprinkled with Gripple Con Gas.  It keeps
for decades. In fact, I have one I just et which is twenty-five
years old.  (Hic!) Excuse me.

Jim








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                     Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:14:21 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 08:39:49 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 12:11:22 -0700

 >>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:34:10
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

<snip>

 >>From: smurf345@webtv.net
 >>Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
 >>Subject: Anybody else heard this
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:38:16 -0500 (CDT)

 >>I first heard this while attending a Navy school back in 76. A
 >>Vietnam War movie on earlier in the week triggered some
 >>memories, this is one.

<snip>

 >List:

 >The "incident" described is the plot of the David Drake story
 >"Contact!" which can be found in _The Military Dimension Mk II_
 >put out by Baen Books.

 >It is a excellent story, but it *is* fiction.

 >Steven.


Hi Steven.  Hi everyone.

A quick look at the Baen Books web page for the works of David
Drake produced many very recent titles including "The Military
Dimension: Mark II".  In a further search I discovered that
David Drake (born in 1945) is a Vietnam War veteran and had
several jobs before becoming an author.  Since all the books by
David Drake I could find are from the late 1990's, if the
"Contact!" story was also written around this time period then
the alleged UFO incident would predate it.  This could be
another example of fiction imitating fact.  Who knows, maybe
David Drake himself heard about (or was even involved in) this
UFO incident during his Vietnam days.

Talking about someone actually being involved in such a very
similar UFO incident during the Vietnam War, aliens included,
listen to the July 4 and August 30 1999 archived interviews by
Sergeant Clifford E. Stone, U.S. Army (retired) on Jeff Rense's
Sightings website.  If Clifford Stone's account is true, then
this could be another example of fact being even stranger than
fiction.

http://www.sightings.com/

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                        Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@postoffice.yorku.ca>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 18:30:08 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 08:37:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999

 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 12:41:35 EDT
 >Subject: Filer's Files #39
 >To: undisclosed-recipients:;

 >Filer's Files #39 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
 >George A. Filer,   Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
 >September 30, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
 >Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com

<snip>

 >FLORIDA FLYING TRIANGLE OR SPACE JUNK

 >TAMPA -- Ignatius Graffeo writes that he has obtained a video
 >tape of the FOX-13 Tampa September 7th, UFO news report.  Seeing
 >it again confirmed my original impression that it was definitely
 >not a disintegrating rocket booster or a meteor!! The video
 >clearly shows a close-up of a huge gun-metal-gray "V,"
 >triangular or wedge-shaped craft.  It is perhaps the best video
 >ever taken of this type of sighting.  It is not a bright light
 >or a flash across the sky like space junk claimed by NORAD.
 >It's an unbelievable videotape of a slow moving and stealthy
 >huge craft.  It looks like a surveillance type of UFO or Black
 >Project plane.  The report does not say who took the video, but
 >it is very impressive!  I am amazed how such a sighting could be
 >mistaken for anything else but a UFO.  It is truly frightening
 >how this type of craft can flaunt itself in our skies and be
 >explained away as space junk.  I will try to post a good photo
 >of the craft within the next couple of days.  Meanwhile I did
 >get the audio portion transferred to RealAudio (289K).  Listen
 >carefully! Ignatius Graffeo Ufoseek@aol.com UFOSEEK.org
 >http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/

<snip>

Hi George.

I read Ignatius Graffeo's account above and after viewing frames
of this celestial event on John Vye's home video found at the
web site mentioned above, I failed to see anything other than
what one expects to see when space junk burns up in the Earth's
atmopshere.  Unless my vision is going bad, I have to honestly
say that the "King is not wearing any clothes", especially if he
is wearing the now fashionable triangular styles in the popular
gun-metal-gray colour.  ;o)

Having seen many bright fireballs while observing the skies and
many more images of other re-entering space hardware, including
the famous and more spectacular Skylab re-entry which was not
suspected of being a UFO, I have to disagree with Ignatius and
conclude that I cannot see this object as being anything other
than our space junk at best.

Furthermore, I also fail to see how this alleged Russian booster
re-entry is connected to other very different UFO sightings
which were observed elsewhere and days apart.

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                                Re: Get Real

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 08:42:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real

 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >>not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >>concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >>aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >>elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >>point.

 >It is an American thing, this emphasis on whether or not aliens
 >have the "right" to do this or that.  Especially when the "this
 >or the that" is stalking, abducting and performing medical
 >intrusions on our bodies. Actually, it should be a human thing,
 >as Americans are not the only ones in this world with rights as
 >human beings.  In the UK, there are, I presume, safeguards
 >against the violations of your human rights, are there not?

<The rest snipped>

Of course there are safeguards against violations of our human
rights in Britain - you may have heard, for instance of Magna
Carta, which I believe still forms one of the bases of the
American legal code, and good on you for it. But these
safeguards, Constitutions, Bills of Rights (we have one, too)
and Human Rights Charters (there's one that covers Europe
including the United Kingdom), while they can be very effective
in defending individual rights against attacks by governments,
legal systems, corporations or other citizens, can't really be
invoked when you're dealing with natural or supernatural forces.

No Constitutional measures can defend anyone against their home
being destroyed in a hurricane, as happened in America a few
months ago, or against being killed in an earthquake, as in
Taiwan. Human Rights would seem a doubtful concept to invoke
against, say, a tiger which killed and ate someone.

No Constitutional force can prevent me being abducted by a
supernatural alien. We know they must be supernatural, because
they can transport people through walls, they can erase all
evidence of their existence and they can manipulate time and
space at will. Some people, Anne Druffel for instance, have
suggested ways in which alien attacks can be fought off. Some
people have suggested that prayer, or focussing one's psychic
energies, or just giving the creatures a good kick in the balls
(if they have any), can cause aliens to back off from abduction.
Well and good, and if I should ever face abduction I might give
one or all of them a try.

The one thing I won't be doing however, is waving the European
Convention on Human Rights at them, or sending them a lawyer's
letter, or getting my MP to raise the matter in Parliament. Yes,
if abductions do exist as physical events performed by aliens -
and I've spoken to enough abductees who themselves deny this, to
have grave doubts about that - it *is* a violation of my rights,
but I don't find that a particularly constructive attitude to
take. It seems as pointless as worrying whether my rights are
being violated by ghosts, vampires or the tooth-fairy.

Maybe I'll change my mind when one of America's celebrity
lawyers hauls an alien into the dock on a kidnapping charge, but
I think I'm in for a long wait. In the meantime, whinging about
"rights violations" when confronted by supernatural alien forces
just seems a little naive and, well... wimpish. Don't scream for
a lawyer, kick 'em in the balls!

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:38:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Good Lord!  I had no idea there were rules of abduction at any
 >given point in time.  Thanks Dennis.  I mean, for the
 >information.  Now I am certain that in 1945, when I perceived I
 >was invited to join some short little duds, uh, sorry, dudes (I
 >was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite) I was mistaken.
 >Or was I?  Maybe back then your "once upon a time rule was
 >different.

<snip>

 >Jim Mortellaro

Whatever you say, Jim.

I wasn't speaking of any "rules" of abduction, let alone my own
specific rules of abduction. I was referring to a progressive
change in abduction account and content as reported in the
available UFO literature. Argue with that if you want to, not
me.

Maybe if you'd reported your encounter earlier the existing UFO
literature wouldn't read and sequence the way it does. But you
didn't and it does. (How, incidentally, did you remember this
experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
three? Just curious.)

Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

Dennis







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                      Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 19:23:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:39:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

SPACEWARN Bulletin reports that 25761 actual re-entry was
9/2/99.  Weren't those sightings attributed to 25761 on 9/1/99?
See:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/spacewarn/spx551.html

item #4.

Terry








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:50:46 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:41:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:49:44 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT

 >>Maybe you could explain a little more specifically, Kevin, how you and
 >>your co-authors attempted to evaluate the evidence for/against the
 >>alleged link between UFOs as physical craft and Alien Abduction
 >>Experiences, AAEs.

 >The original assumption, as has been played out first in The October
 >Scenario (1989), Faces Of The Visitors (1997) and finally in The
 >Abduction Enigma (1999) reveals an evolution in thought. My first
 >magazine article on abductions appeared in the mid-1970s, and the main
 >thrust was that the case represented a real abduction. The Abduction
 >Enigma is the result of the long study, not only by me, but by Russ
 >Estes and Bill Cone. Estes, as he interviewed over 150 abductees (in
 >the beginning) began to see some things that suggested to him, that the
 >answer to questions might lie, not in space, but on Earth.

In moving beyond the extraterrestrial hypothesis, you've
apparently concluded not only that the 'abduction' is not a
physical event, but that it is not an abduction at all --- that
experiencers are hallucinating because of some psychological or
medical problem or because incompetent/unethical hypnotists have
implanted false memories.

Another possibility is that, while the abduction is not
physical, it is, nevertheless, a real abduction or a real
encounter with non-physical beings, most likely occuring during
an Out-of-Body Experience or some other psychic event. This is
the position of those who believe that the physical body remains
behind while the consciousness or Soul or Spirit of the
experiencer is 'taken'.

It is _this_ theory, not the hallucination theory, that is
supported by evidence relating to Awareness during Sleep
Paralysis.

 >>I don't mean to belabor the semantics of the situation, but I think we
 >>should distinguish between a physiological state (sleep paralysis) and
 >>a state of consciousness (Awareness of the physiological state)

 >But the problem is little more than semantics.

Who among us is not searching for new paradigms that will
faciliatate clarity of thought?

Perhaps the problem is nothing less than semantics!?
Wittgenstein once observed: The limits of my language are the
limits of my world.

To which I add: We can change our language.

 >Without awareness, there is no report.

A first class insight!

Let us pursue it, by asking "Awareness of what".

For those cases involving an experiencer laying down in bed
before falling asleep or immediately after awakening, the
paralysis reported in connection with the abduction is almost
certainly a sign that the experiencer was actually aware of the
physiological condition of his/her own body --- the sleep
paralysis naturally induced during REM-sleep.

And this is a *perception* not a hallucination.

Consequently, we are obliged to wonder if there is anything else
in the experiencer's report that might indicate an awareness due
to perception rather than a hallucination.

 >And remember, we suggested that only some of the abductions
were the >result of sleep paralysis, not that all of them were.

And I am merely suggesting that those abduction reports
indicating experiencer Awareness during Sleep Paralysis don't
fit into the two categories outlined above. They are not
completely physical events. And they are not completely illusory
events.

Joseph Polanik


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://trionica.com





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:43:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 19:33:42 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >... but once upon a time in UFO Land
 >abductions tended to follow a straight line from the sighting of
 >the UFO to the physical abduction itself, viz. Villas-Boas, the
 >Hills, Herbert Schirmer, Travis Walton and so on. In other
 >words, a distant UFO was seen which drew nearer and disgorged
 >alien beings, who summarly hauled the unwilling Earthling into
 >the bowels of the UFO. Pretty straightforward stuff, when you
 >think about it.

 >But I think I'm also safe in saying that that's not the way most
 >abductions are reported (or experienced) nowadays. True, the
 >insides of what is alleged and what appears to be a UFO is
 >frequently described, but in many cases no UFO is seen or
 >reported from an external point of view, either coming or going.

I think you are correct in noting that content of experiencer
reports has shown some evolution over the years. However, the
explanation for the evolution of abduction accounts may be
unrelated to the explanation for abductions.

One possible explanation of this sort is that, as the public (or
the definable subculture known as ufology) became more accepting,
experiencers were able to reveal more without increasing the risk
of ridicule. I remember the Joe Pine show from the early '60s. It
was a syndicated talk show. Joe Pine, the host, was mercilessly
sarcastic toward the contactees he had on his show. Today there
are other forums for those who feel compelled to tell the world
of their experiences. Back then there weren't any receptive
forums.

 >This raises questions for both the sleep paralysis and literal
 >abduction camps. In the case of the sleep paralysis school, why
 >the introduction of the insides of a saucer to the experience?
 >Why couldn't the medical exam (and any accompanying ET sexual
 >hanky-panky) simply take place right there in the familiar
 >surroundings of the victims' bedroom?

How reasonable is it to expect intruders to probe or examine the
experiencer in his/her own bedroom?

How many human doctors make house calls?

We go to the doctor's office or to the clinic or hosptial for
examination and treatment.

When human society perpetrates an involuntary commitment of
someone for a psychiatric examination, do we bring the
psychiatric hospital on wheels to the hapless victim? No. The
subject of the procedure is taken to the hospital.

 >On the other hand, if ET is virtually omnipotent, why not simply
 >beam the victim up to the examining room and be done with it?

Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
fix.

Bizzare.

Joseph Polanik



*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://trionica.com







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 19:22:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:44:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 18:24:25 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Martin Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >>To: "Errol Bruce-Knapp" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 03:22:53 -0400

 >>My own take on this is that although the beings may perceive us
 >>in the same way that we perceive the animals of this world that
 >>we capture and test, sometimes for their own good, they are not
 >>that much above us, despite their extremely advanced technology.

<snip>

 >One day I got tired of sitting on the fence and decided to make
 >up my mind as to whether abductions were right or wrong.  I
 >found my answer in the very word used to describe these
 >experiences - "abductions".  I asked myself, "Is it OK to abduct
 >someone or something?", "When is it OK to abduct another person
 >or another being?", "Who has the right to abduct others?", etc.
 >When I thought of abductions, I thought of what it _means_ to be
 >taken by someone or some being against one's will. My decision
 >was easy.  All I had to do was _listen_ to the words being used
 >to describe abductions.

<snip>

 >Amy
 >Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"

I'd love to be in the woods sitting on a fence listening to what
the animals have to say about the horrible creatures called....
humans.

Processed food for thought.

Sue









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:47:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Kenny Young
 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 >>From: Jerome Clark
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT

 >Previously, Jerry had written:

 >>Do you know what the adjective "disingenuous" means?  If not,
 >>suffice it to say that you have just provided a living example.
 >>And if you aren't being disingenuous -- which I find hard to
 >>believe -- and genuinely did not know what the discussion is
 >>about, why did you join it at all?

Mr. Young replied:

 >You have been given the opportunity to support some of the wild
 >character assassination' attempts that you claimed to have
 >dealt with, and from your message to UFO UpDates (dated October
 >3, 1999), you have failed to clarify your comments or uphold
 >those wild allegations.

<much needed snip of equally snippy remarks>

 >Now, Jerome Clark, perhaps it is time for you to get off the
 >fence and stand behind the research of Bruce Maccabee, who you
 >have so heartily promoted, or give us some other reason why
 >anyone should pay serious attention to your future comments.

Holy Cow!!!!

Sorry, Bruce, but the only words that come to mind are:

What a huge bunch of crap!

Time for a reality check, folks!

The chronology for this entire affair is butt-simple:

1. Jerry Black made unwarranted attacks on Dr. Maccabbee's
character.

2. Jerome Clark defended him.

3. Jerry Black then made unwarranted attacks on Jerome's
character in response.

4. Jerome Clark then defended himself.

5. Terry Evans then made unwarranted attacks on both Jerry and
Bruce.

6. They both defended themselves.

7. Then Kenny Young jumps in (obviously too lazy to look through
the archives to see what really happened and who started this
mess) and declares Jerome's appropriate responses to such
attacks as "rabid".

Crap. Nothing but Crap.

Jerome Clark and I have disagreed on issues in the past. But I
have never, ever seen him take the first slug at ANYONE. I have
read every posting regarding the Gulf Breeze/Maccabbee affair
and nothing Mr. Young, Mr. Evans, or Mr. Black has suggested as
truth even remotely passes the smell test.

The big question seems to be this:

How in the world can Jerome Clark regard Dr. Maccabbee as an
expert to be trusted on photo analysis if Jerome Clark's own
conclusions are in direct conflict with Dr. Maccabbee's
conclusions regarding Gulf Breeze?

The answer is very, very simple.

Mr. Clark understands Dr. Maccabbee might very well be right
about the Gulf Breeze photos even though his own instinct as a
researcher tells him otherwise. On the other hand, I have yet to
see Dr. Maccabbee say, "These objects are absolutely, without a
doubt, alien spacecraft." despite his inspections of the Gulf
Breeze photos. They recognize the tenuous nature of their
positions despite the confidence in their own skills. More
importantly, neither man is working within a framework of solid
information or facts, therefore, their results cannot be
conclusive nor should they be expected to "jive".

As gentlemen, they simply agree to disagree.

As Mr. Clark and I have in the past.

As a list member, I am embarrassed that Mr. Clark and Dr.
Maccabbee have had to endure such, uh... well... crap.

Sorry, again, Bruce.

later, Roger Evans








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                            Re: Review: 'Roswell'

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 00:11:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:56:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Review: 'Roswell'


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 02:38:24
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Review: 'Roswell'

 >Review: 'Roswell' easily one of the season's most appealing new
 >shows

 >Source: Star-Telegram,

 >http://www.star-telegram.com/news/doc/1047/1:ENTNEWS31/1:ENTNEWS31
 >100599.html

 >Stig

 >***


Just sat through the season premier of 'Roswell' the tv series.
How I wish this show had come out back when I was a teenager and
had a secret belief in people from other planets, no doubts in
my mind, though I had never personally witnessed anything.  It
successfully pulls off what I was sure would be an impossible
act of balancing between believable enough to be interesting,
yet with enough sense of reality in attitudes the young people
face to ring a bit true, like yeah, I could see these problems
as being real, if the premise is to be accepted as real for the
purposes at least of enjoying the program.

Trouble is, I'm not 16 anymore!  And now I have seem a couple of
anomalous things in the sky that blew me away, and when I was
old enough to know what was and what was not normal up there.

I'm very glad the show is on tv and I expect it will find a wide
audience in the younger age set.  Aliens aside, it, like the
best of Star Trek can also be viewed as a commentary on our
social prejudices and values and beliefs.  The use of aliens as
the target or central figures, instead of more readily
identified groups of humans, makes the message less personal in
a social sense, but very personal as it gets past specific
prejudices.

Good program, after one episode it gets four stars from me.
Need to catch a few more episodes before I would hit the all
time 5 star rating though. But as for my personal tv favourites,
I'm afraid I'm back to documentaries, the boring kind!  The rest
of the time I prefer my computer screen to the tv screen. Lesley










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 17:03:35 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000


 >Posted for Maxwell Burns

 >-----

 >To UFO UpDates:

 >This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
 >the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
 >like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
 >would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
 >have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

Have you ever read such nonsense?

Well, on UpDates the answer is probably yes! If anyone wanted
evidence of Burn's inability to face facts, to face reality,
then it's all shown below!

What he entirely fails to mention is that he was found guilty -
not by the Police but by a totally independent jury in one of
the more liberal cities in Northern England - Sheffield is well
known for its;' tolerance in many areas and this is perhaps
something to do with the two major Universities located there.

The judge said that Burns was "some way up the hierarchy" in
terms of drug-dealing in the area and Burns had been targetted
by the drugs squad for some time. Now that we know the truth we
know that Burns had been involved in this evil world for some
time - in other words well before his newly acquired interest in
Ufology.

Just because Burns chose to lie - and answered questions
consistently throughout his interviews with the Police - means
nothing. Just because he wore gloves to avoid finger prints on
the bag of drugs that he was found with by Police - means very
little.

What people should not forget is that in interviews with Dave
Clarke - an aware-winning local journalist (amongst other
things) - Burns admitted he was guilty. He said he expected to
go down for his drug-dealing.

To the moron world of Ufology - where aliens are all around -
Burns probably seems like an innocent man. That's a reflection
upon Ufology - not the criminal justice system in the UK.

Burns also engaged in a hate campaign against my wife and I.
This is a fact. Initially we didn't know who it was - until the
hapless Burns admitted it to another local researcher in a
'private' email.

I live around 15 miles North of the prison that Burns is in.
Perhaps I should drop by with some friends and picket the prison
demanding longer sentences for drug dealers.

We can be sure of one thing. When Burns comes out, I'll be on
his case......

Tim Matthews.

----------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 24

From: Joseph Trainor Masinaigan@aol.com
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 11:11:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 17:58:26 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 24


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 24
October 7, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

E-Mail: Masinaigan@aol.com

JAPANESE MILITARY SEALED
OFF TOKAIMURA FOLLOWING
NUCLEAR ACCIDENT

      On Thursday morning, September 30, 1999, workers
at the JCO Company plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki
prefecture, Japan accidentally started a nuclear
chain reaction that emitted lethal levels of
radiation.
      About 15,000 REMs (REM stands for Radiation
Equivalent Man--J.T.) were emitted at the uranium
processing plant, located about 112 kilometers
(70 miles) northeast of Tokyo.  The JCO Company
refines uranium so that it can be used in the
nuclear reactors of Japan's electrical industry.
About 33 percent of Japan's electrical power comes
from nuclear plants.
      "The accident occurred Thursday after workers
mistakenly put too much uranium into a" stainless
steel "bucketlike container, setting off an uncontrolled
atomic reaction that continued for hours and sent
radioactivity into the air."
      "Instead of relying on the high-tech equipment
that is standard at a nuclear facility, the workers
were using their hands to pour the potentially
deadly material (uranium oxide--J.T.) into the
container, company officials said."
      Overloading the bucket with uranium oxide
set neutrons interacting with each other, creating
a spontaneous nuclear chain reaction.
      Forty-nine factory workers were exposed to
the radiation, but only three were rushed to the
Tokyo University Hospital.
      One worker, Hisachi Ouchi, "had been exposed
to about 17,000 (REM) times what is normal for
annual exposure"
      "It was a lethal dose," said Dr. Kamihiko
Maekawa, Ouchi's physician, on Sunday,
October 3.  Dr. Maekawa added that "doctors
have decided to conduct a transplant of blood
stem cells sometime in the next few days.
Doctors hope the operation helps to restore
Ouchi's white-blood-cell count and prevent him
from losing the function in his blood-producing
bone marrow, which is keenly sensitive to
radiation exposure."
      Later that Thursday, a Chemical Warfare
Response Team of Japan's Ground Self-Defense
Force (GSDF) entered the JCO factory.  An
"off-limits zone" 200 meters in diameter was
established around the plant.
      That night, Masaru Hashimoto, governor
of Ibaraki prefecture, extended the perimeter of
the "off-limits zone" to 10 kilometers (6 miles)
and urged residents living within the zone to
remain in their homes and not venture outdoors.
      Within the "off-limits zone" were 310,000
civilian residents, affected by what was rapidly
becoming Japan's worst nuclear accident.
      The Japanese government also closed the
Joban line of the East Japan Railway Company,
cutting off rail access to Mito and Tsuchiura and
stranding thousands of commuters.
      Gov. Hasimoto also closed schools and
advised Japanese farmers not to harvest their
crops until a full survey of the radiation damage
has been completed.
      On Sunday morning, October 3, 1999, Akito
Arima, director of Japan's Science and Technology
Agency, told a news conference that the nuclear
mishap was being "seriously investigated" and
"We should take steps to ensure that nothing
like this ever happens again."
      On Saturday, October 2, 1999, the Japanese
government allowed the 160 people living next door
to the JCO plant, who had been evacuated on
Thursday, return to their homes.  (See Asahi
Shimbun for October 1, 1999.  See also USA
Today for September 30, 1999 and October 4,
1999, "Japan says nuclear leak contained" and
"Japan probes 'inconceivable' safety lapses at
plant.  Domo arigato to Miyuki Tamura,
UFO Roundup correspondent in Japan, for
the background information.)

BRIGHT UFO SIGHTED IN
SASKATCHEWAN

      On Wednesday, September 29, 1999,
"a resident of a rural area near Pike Lake
Provincial Park," located 30 kilometers
(18 miles) southwest of Sakatoon
(population 186,058) in western Canada,
"reported seeing a bright light in the sky
at about 6 a.m."
      The light changed colour several times.
What caught her attention was the way it
zipped over Saskatoon from the south,
then back again.  She took a videotape
of her sighting."
      The video was reportedly broadcasted
on STV in Saskatoon, an affiliate of Global
Television on Thursday evening, September
30, 1999.  (Many thanks to Darrell Noakes
for this news story.)

WHITE SAUCER SEEN IN
EAST DUNDEE, ILLINOIS

      On Wednesday, September 29, 1999, at
about 8 p.m., four people driving through
East Dundee, Illinois (population 2,721) saw
a strange object in the sky, which they first
took for "a blimp of some sort."
      "My wife, two children and myself were
driving westward on Route 72 approaching
Route 25 in East Dundee, Illinois," the
witness reported.  "My wife said, 'Guys, do
you see this?'"
      "I looked off in a southwesterly direction
and saw a huge lighted shape in the sky
moving less than 10 miles (16 kilometers)
per hour, almost appearing to rock...but kind
of stationary."
      The witness described the UFO as "a white
saucer, almost like a crystal but as big as a
f***ing house!"
      He added, "We pulled off the road to try to
understand what we were seeing...We observed it
for at least ten minutes.."
      East Dundee is on Highway 68 just south of
Carpentersville, about 36 miles (57 kilometers)
northwest of Chicago.  (Many thanks to Morgan
Clements, director of the World Wide UFO
Reporting Center for this report.)

UFO SEEN IN BROCKTON,
MASSACHUSETTS

      On Thursday, September 16, 1999, at
7:25 p.m., a female student at the high school
in Brockton, Massachusetts (population 92,788),
a city on Route 28 located about 25 miles
(40 kilometers) south of Boston, spotted a
bright light UFO in the twilight sky.
      "I was at band practice.  On the football field.
The way we were facing (west--J.T.), the sun was
directly in front of us," the witness reported.
"I saw something pass slowly by and disappear.
My first instinct is that it was the reflection of
the sun bouncing off and shining towards me.
Then I realized that the so-called 'plane' had
passed in between me and the sun, so it
couldn't have reflected at me."
      "I panicked.  I told my friend, but she didn't
believe me.  I was the only one who saw it."
(Many thanks to Morgan Clements, director of
the World Wide UFO Reporting Center for
this report.)
(Editor's Note:  The Brockton area has a long
history of UFO sightings dating back to the
Flynn/Prophett case of October 1908.)

ROD-SHAPED UFO SEEN
IN LEVITTOWN, NEW YORK

      On Saturday, October 2, 1999, at 8:45 p.m.,
Mike, age 38, and a friend "were standing on
the deck (outdoor balcony) to my apartment"
in Levittown, Long Island, New York state
when they spotted "a baton-shaped UFO" in
the northern sky.
      "The deck is attached to the upper level of
the house," Mike reported, "It's a really nice clear
night.  Lots of stars and a pretty good wind
blowing.  We were standing on the deck looking
at the northern sky and talking about football and
whatever."
      "After about five minutes out there, I lifted my
head a little higher, and out of nowhere, I saw this
thing moving from right to left (east to west--J.T.)
on an angle downward toward the treeline at an
incredible speed.  This thing was huge.  It looked
like a giant baton with a dimly-lit sphere on each
end.  I watched it for at least five seconds as it
headed from east to west."
      "As it hit the tree line, it made an exact
90-degree left turn, heading south, and blinked out.
I was really blown away.  It was huge.  It was silent.
It made a 90-degree turn into the wind, and its
shape was...shall we say, out of this world.  My
friend ran across the street to my sister's
(apartment) to tell her and my wife what happened."
      Levittown (population 53,286) is on Route 24
on Long Island, about 30 miles (48 kilometers)
east of New York City.  (Many thanks to Morgan
Clements, director of World Wide UFO Reporting
Center for this report.)

MOTORIST SEES A UFO NEAR
FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA

      On Monday, September 6, 1999, at 10:30 p.m.,
a motorist saw "a UFO in the western sky traveling
north.  It was cigar-shaped and made no sound and
had no lights..  But I could still see it because it
blocked out the stars.  It blocked out the last two
stars in the handle of the Big Dipper (also known
as Ursa Major--J.T.)  It traveled pretty fast and was
out of view very quickly."
      Fargo, N.D. (population 74,200) is on Interstate
Highway I-94 approximately 191 miles (305
kilometers) east of Bismarck, the state capital.
(Many thanks to Morgan Clements, director of the
World Wide UFO Reporting Center for this report.)

VIDEO AND PHOTOS OF
ECLIPSE UFOs SURFACE
IN UK AND FRANCE

      The last eclipse of the Twentieth Century took
place on August 11, 1999, but the event is still
having ramifications in the UFO community.
      According to ufologist Chris Evers, a video of
a UFO was shot during the eclipse at Hull,
East Yorkshire, UK by a 48-year-old amateur
astronomer.
      Hull is about 145 miles (232 kilometers)
north of London.
      On Sunday, September 26, 1999, Chris met
with the astronomer, whose first name is John,
at the latter's home in Hull.
      During the eclipse of August 11, Chris explained,
the witness "had his videocamera resting on an
angled piece of plastic, pointing it towards the
moving image of the moon across the sun.  He
used a welder's mask, with its distinctive green
frontpiece."
      "After watching the (video) clip for a few
seconds," Chris added, he saw "something small,
red and white, moving extremely quickly.  It flew
across the TV screen from centre right down the
screen to bottom left and below the sun's
position.  All in all, it (the UFO) only appeared
for three to four seconds."  (Email Interview)
      Two weeks ago, UFO Roundup was contacted
by a French amateur astronomer who reported that
he had seen photos taken of the mysterious sky
flashes seen over Fecamp during the eclipse of
August 11.
      "I was in Fecamp on the 11th of August, and I
have seen photographs of the several luminous
orange spheres that were seen several kilometers
(west) from Fecamp," he reported, "There was one
also over the Channel Islands and in Cornouaille."
(Email Interview)

SEVEN CROP CIRCLES
FOUND NEAR EDMONTON

      On Tuesday, September 21, 1999, a formation
of seven crop circles was found near Edmonton,
the capital of Canada's Alberta province.
      "The formation consisted of seven circles in
barley and is approximately 190 feet across.
All of the circles have a 'radial' lay pattern, with
the crop radiating out from the centre of the circles.,
not swirled as in the (usual) rotational lay pattern."
      "There are many stretched nodes on the plant
stalks within the formation."  The nodes appear
to be stretched 200 to 300 percent beyond normal,
according to researcher Nancy Talbott.  (Many
thanks to Paul Anderson of Circles Phenomenon
Research-Canada for this report.)

NASA SAYS FAULTY MATH
DOOMED THE MARS
CLIMATE ORBITER

      "NASA lost its $125 million Mars Climate
Orbiter last week because one set of engineers was
working with metric measurements while another
set worked with English measurements, officials
said Thursday," September 30, 1999.
      "The error caused the spacecraft to fly too
close to Mars, where it either burned or broke up,
just as it was beginning to orbit the planet after
a nine-month trip through space."
      "Two teams were responsible for determining
the spacecraft's course.  One was at Lockheed
Martin in Denver, which built the craft, while the
other was at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
in Pasadena, which controlled it."
      "In plotting the course for (Mars) Climate
Orbiter, Lockheed used English measurements--
standard for (USA) spacecraft builders--and passed
them on to JPL.  But JPL either assumed the
figures were already in metric terms or somehow
failed to make the conversion for them."
      "'Somewhere the translation got lost,' said
Doug Isbell, a NASA spokesman."
      "The error was embedded in the orbiter's
software from the beginning, NASA said, but was
not apparent to controllers until too late."
      "At issue was a critical calculation for the
orbiter's thrust (which Mars Climate Orbiter
needed to drop out of its flight path into a safe
orbit around Mars--J.T.).  Lockheed used an
equation relying on pounds and feet while JPL
wanted it in kilograms and meters."
      "A kilogram is 2.2 pounds and a meter is
39.37 inches, or just over three feet.  The
error caused the spacecraft to veer too close--
37 miles--to the Martian surface.  That's well
below the 53-mile minimum altitude at which
a probe could go and survive.  NASA had
wanted it to fly no closer than 87 miles."
      "'People sometimes make errors,' said
Ed Weiler, NASA's space science chief.
'The problem here was not the error, it was
the failure of...the checks and balances in
our processes to detect the error.'"
      "House Science Committee Chairman
James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) released a
two-word statement: 'I'm speechless.'"
(See USA Today for October 1, 1999,
"Bad math added up to doomed Mars
craft" by Paul Hoversten.)
(Editor's Comment:  If NASA is so certin
that the Mars Climate Orbiter crashed, then
why don't they use the Mars Global Surveyor,
which is already in orbit, to photograph the
crash site?  If there is a crash site, and
I doubt it.  Between the nuclear accident
in Tokaimura and NASA losing the Mars
Climate Orbiter, it's getting a little hard to
feel confident about the outcome of the
Y2K situation.)

ROUNDUP CORRIGENDA: The proper name
of the MCO in last week's issue is Mars
Climate Orbiter, not Mars Climate Observer.
UFO Roundup regrets the error.
      The Munising, Michigan UFO story in
volume 4, issue #22 should have been
properly attributed to Morgan Clements,
director of the World Wide UFO Reporting
Center.
      Readers, when you email us news
stories, be sure to list the source.  Thanks.

from the UFO Files...

1493: STRANGE ENCOUNTER
            ON MARTINIQUE

      Everyone has heard of the legendary voyage of
Christopher Columbus to the Americas in the autumn
of 1492.  But the man's later voyages through the
Caribbean Sea are less well-known.  Which is a
pity because the self-styled "Admiral of the Ocean
Sea" had a strange encounter in 1493.
      On March 4, 1493, Columbus wrote that he had
encountered "women warriors on the island of
Matinino (today it's called Martinique--J.T.)" who
"covered themselves with copper plates" and
used "bows and arrows made of sugar cane."
      Alfonso Ulloa, who accompanied Columbus on
all four of his voyages, mentions the mysterious
women warriors of Matinino in his book, Historia
del Senor Don Fernando Colombo, adding that
they were worshippers of the moon.
      "They related that the day was for the Sun,
and the night for the Moon; whence these women
told the time by the other stars, or when the
Great Bear rose, or another star set."
      "One of them (a Taino or Carib Indian--J.T.)
coming before the Admiral naked as as he was
born from his mother's womb, said in a loud
voice that he and the rest were Caribs, and that
the gulf (Caribbean Sea) cut off Hispaniola from
them.  He said that the island of Matinino was
peopled only with women to whom the Caribs
went on certain days of the year.  That the
women sent the boys to their fathers to be
brought up by them."
      If the Taino canoes arrived at Matinino
at the wrong time of year, the warrior women
were said to flee into "vast caverns" at the foot
of Mount Pelee that extended "deep into the
earth."
      Curiously, the first Spanish conquistadors
to reach Cozumel, an island off the coast of
Mexico's Yucatan peninsula encountered
the same legend of warrior women who
worshipped the moon and took refuge in
vast caves.  An island called Las Mujeres
(Spanish for the women) ws said to be their
home, and the island was supposed to have
large caverns running under the sea all the
way to Cuba!
      Vast underground caverns are a
persistent legend among all of the indigenous
people of the Americas.  One wonders if it
has any basis in fact.  (See Secret Cities of
Old South America by Harold T. Wilkins,
reprint Adventures Unlimited Press,,
Kempton, Illinois, 1998, pages 152 to 156.)
(Editor's Comment:  Imagine what would
have happened if Columbus had landed in
Mexico in 1492 instead of the Bahamas.
Chris's last voyage would have been up the
stone steps of the pyramid at Teotiahuacan.
Meanwhile, up at the top, the high priest of
the Aztecs, old Nezalhualpilli, whistles a
little tune to himself and sharpens his
obsidian knife.  One slab--no waiting.)

     Join us next week for more UFO news
from around the planet, brought to you by
"the paper that goes home," UFO Roundup.
Enjoy your Columbus Day weekend.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by
Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved.
Readers may post news items from
UFO Roundup on their websites or in
newsgroups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list
the date of issue in which the item first
appeared.
-------------------------------------------
eFax.com lets you receive all your faxes via
email at your existing email address - for FREE!
No more chasing paper - No more bulky hardware
machines - Increased privacy & confidentiality
Pick up your faxes as easily as you pick up email.

Go here:
http://www.directleads.com/creative/display_ad.html?ad_idx=420&affiliate=cd3
492
-------------------------------------------

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>

UFO Roundup: http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 13:41:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:09:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:07 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 17:33:24 +0100

 >>Hi,

 >>I have been following this debate but trying to keep out of its
 >>personal edges as I don't wish to say anything that might offend
 >>people that I consider friends. When in truth I don't have
 >>fundamental disputes with Bruce, Dennis or Jerry.

 >>As for Jerry distrusting the essence of the main Gulf Breeze
 >>case but trusting Bruce Maccabee. I don't find that odd. I feel
 >>the same way. Bruce clearly knows his stuff. I listen to what he
 >>says about photo cases.

 >Gee, thanks.... but how would you know? Just because I say
 >things that SOUND or APPEAR logical doesn't mean they are.

 >>Like Jerry I don't always agree with his >findings,

 >Are you referring to photographic findings? And by what logic do
 >you reject my photographic findings? Is is because what I say
 >does not seem consistent with non-photoraphic information from
 >other sources? Or are you able to independently evaluate my
 >photographic findings? And, if so, why pay any attention to what
 >I say?

Hi,

I dont wan't to drag this down further with needless argument.
Which is why I am stearing clear of many UpDate discussions that
I might otherwise get involved with. They can seem to end up
being personalised for no good reason. I prefer not to talk
people politics but ufology.

I dont understand if you view the above as criticism when I
clearly thought it was support for your approach.

I respect your views on photographic cases so I always listen to
them. They have at times made me think again about the doubts I
(often) have with photo cases. I am happy to say that. But I
cannot proclaim that I agree with everything you said just as I
would not expect anyone to say that about me. Independent
thought and views on a case is something we should cultivate. We
are Ufologists not Ewefologists (oops, sorry British irony humour
overload).

I approach a photo case expecting it not to be a real UFO but
being willing to be convinced that it is. Its the philosophy I
teach investigators here, as opposed to assuming the case is
real until that verdict is disproven. That subtle difference is
an important ethos to my mind but it is merely a practice and I
am not suggesting it is the correct approach - simply the one
that I follow.

 >From this premise I had to be persuaded that Gulf Breeze was
real, not unpersuaded that it was not. This probably imposes a
stricter requirement for evidence but I am happy to live with
that.

The truth is that any case is a summation of witness testimony,
physical evidence, photo analysis and gut feelings about its
rightness in the scheme of things. It is perfectly possible to
acknowledge your findings on photo analysis whilst not
necessarily sharing the empasis you are quite reasonably might
place upon them when making conclusions about a whole case. So I
say that in some cases I am more cautious than you seem to be,
not because I dispute your photo analysis (I would not presume
to do so) but because when I weigh this alongside the other
factors you have to take into account I dont necessarily regard
the full picture in the same light.

But I am not suggesting there are many cases of this sort. There
are not. Nor am I proposing that I am right and you are wrong in
those that do exist. Because the truth is we dont know. There
are no absolutes in UFOlogy just gradations of opinion. We all
have our balanced verdicts on specific cases. Sometimes they
will conflict. My point is that this does not conflict with my
ability to regard you as a skilled analyst whose views on a case
I regard as important reading because I know it to be based on
thorough assessment of the optics involved.

In case I have to explain it, that was meant to be a
supportative compliment not an attack.

Best wishes,

Jenny








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:01 -0400
From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Mark has pointed out that,
 >in a sense, both choices could be correct: I might be good at
 >photo analysis and my analysis might be correct, yet I might
 >have missed something.

Not so much missed something as not imagined something (to
imagine all of the techniques by which such photos could be
made is certainly possible, but it is also possible (though I would
say not probable) that there is some method which might meet
all of the requirements and yet not have been thought of except
by the hoaxer)).

Unlike many, I do not believe that all of the information
required to decide the reality of a UFO case is encoded in
photos of the UFO. Certainly, if a photo is able to be shown
certainly to be a hoax (i.e. a wire is visible in the image),
then the reality level of the photo is certain, as it is if the
hoaxer confesses. But if that information is not present, then
all photoanalysis can do is raise the bar of difficulty and
expense. One can come to a conclusion at some point that a hoax
is unlikely because the bar is so high.

For instance, in Gulf Breeze, there are several things which are
clear about a hypothetical hoaxer of the case...

1) He was highly skilled in model making. His models are not
only large and detailed, they are round (harder than
rectangular), use mostly original parts made for the model, are
lit, and, as shown in the videos, the lighting is animated. If
you've ever tried to build even a simple model from scratch,
you'll know this is hard. Lighted models are even harder, even
when all one is doing is adding lights to a kit model. Animated
lighted models are top of the art.

2) He had a special location to do model construction, and to
store the models, because even while the sightings were being
investigated, they were never found.

3) He had a special location to do the trick photography. This is
important, because much of this work world be experimental,
and would involve unusual lights and objects and possibly even
mechanical / optical systems. Again, this location was never
found.

4) He either understood typical flaws in UFO hoax photos or
accidentally avoided them (photos likely to be real typically
center the UFO in the frame - hoaxes or development / exposure
flaws typically do not, for instance; most GB photos are
centered).

5) He understood double-exposure or did enough experiments to
avoid telltale traces from the overprint.

6) He had a second camera for experiments, or he was able to
document/remember his experiments well enough to produce
multiple photos in a single run without telltale errors
(sequential numbering of photos was confirmed for many of GB
photos).

7) He kept all this hidden from investigators and friends, and
possibly his family, for an extended period of investigation and
media attention.

This is a pretty high bar. It is difficult to imagine a reason
for such intense effort on the part of a successful local
businessman. And, as yet, no such reason has been found.

Photoanalysis raises the bar still further:

1) The double-exposure claims have not been supported in
subsequent investigations. Indeed, the occultation experiments
by Hyzer used the wrong film, and his claimed technique
would not work with the actual film used.

2) The correlation between the size of the object in the sealed
Nimslo camera photos and the consistency between that size
and the size shown in the stereo photos, which, when linked to
the size of the "typical" GB object, supports the size estimate
of that object both in other stereo photos and in photos where
occultation or ground references allow size estimates, have not
been explained.

3) The smearing characteristic of the UFO and the environment
in the early photos are consistent, which they would not be
if the photos were double-exposures.

4) The intensity of the blue beam in the distant object / blue
beam photo does not have the characteristics of a double
exposure line.

5) The closeup blue beam photo does supply indications of an
unusual light source.

 >However, it's not quite that simple, Mark, because, there is
 >also the "battle of the Titans" aspect. Black has declared
 >Titan Hyzer the winner. People who, for non- technical reasons,
 >doubt Ed's veracity (i,e, they don't know beans about
 >photoanalysis but base their "gut feels" on the circumstantial
 >evidence), would tend to agree with Black (who, himself is not
 >capable of deciding on technical grounds who is correct... in
 >spite of "years" of indirect instruction by me!). Unfortunately
 >I do not have a "shill" to stand up and declare me the winner.
 >But that's understandable. The pro-UFO position is always the
 >underdog.

That's because "unidentified" is a much weaker contention than
"definitely faked". People like pure, unambiguous answers.

Ufology rarely offers unambiguous answers. People should get
used to it.

 >So, what should the poor untechnical ufoloist do? Hand the
 >crown to the guy who screams the loudest (Black) or sit back and
 >wait.

Continually rebalance probabilities based on new evidence and
the refutation of old evidence. As for the screaming - ignore
it.

One must do the work and deal with the results, even when they
make us uncomfortable. Science doesn't care about comfort.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 13:41:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:04:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:07 -0400
 >From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 17:33:24 +0100

 >>Hi,

 >>I have been following this debate but trying to keep out of its
 >>personal edges as I don't wish to say anything that might offend
 >>people that I consider friends. When in truth I don't have
 >>fundamental disputes with Bruce, Dennis or Jerry.

 >>As for Jerry distrusting the essence of the main Gulf Breeze
 >>case but trusting Bruce Maccabee. I don't find that odd. I feel
 >>the same way. Bruce clearly knows his stuff. I listen to what he
 >>says about photo cases.

 >Gee, thanks.... but how would you know? Just because I say
 >things that SOUND or APPEAR logical doesn't mean they are.

 >>Like Jerry I don't always agree with his >findings,

 >Are you referring to photographic findings? And by what logic do
 >you reject my photographic findings? Is is because what I say
 >does not seem consistent with non-photoraphic information from
 >other sources? Or are you able to independently evaluate my
 >photographic findings? And, if so, why pay any attention to what
 >I say?

Hi,

I dont wan't to drag this down further with needless argument.
Which is why I am stearing clear of many UpDate discussions that
I might otherwise get involved with. They can seem to end up
being personalised for no good reason. I prefer not to talk
people politics but UFOlogy.

I dont understand if you view the above as criticism when I
clearly thought it was support for your approach.

I respect your views on photographic cases so I always listen to
them. They have at times made me think again about the doubts I
(often) have with photo cases. I am happy to say that. But I
cannot proclaim that I agree with everything you said just as I
would not expect anyone to say that about me. Independent
thought and views on a case is something we should cultivate. We
are UFOlogists not Ewefologists (oops,sorry British irony humour
overload).

I approach a photo case expecting it not to be a real UFO but
being willing to be convinced that it is. Its the philosophy I
teach investigators here, as opposed to assuming the case is
real until that verdict is disproven. That subtle difference is
an important ethos to my mind but it is merely a practice and I
am not suggesting it is the correct approach - simply the one
that I follow.

 >From this premise I had to be persuaded that Gulf Breeze was
real, not unpersuaded that it was not. This probably imposes a
stricter requirement for evidence but I am happy to live with
that.

The truth is that any case is a summation of witness testimony,
physical evidence, photo analysis and gut feelings about its
rightness in the scheme of things. It is perfectly possible to
acknowledge your findings on photo analysis whilst not
necessarily sharing the empasis you are quite reasonably might
place upon them when making conclusions about a whole case. So I
say that in some cases I am more cautious than you seem to be,
not because I dispute your photo analysis (I would not presume
to do so) but because when I weigh this alongside the other
factors you have to take into account I dont necessarily regard
the full picture in the same light.

But I am not suggesting there are many cases of this sort. There
are not. Nor am I proposing that I am right and you are wrong in
those that do exist. Because the truth is we dont know. There
are no absolutes in UFOlogy just gradations of opinion. We all
have our balanced verdicts on specific cases. Sometimes they
will conflict. My point is that this does not conflict with my
ability to regard you as a skilled analyst whose views on a case
I regard as important reading because I know it to be based on
thorough assessment of the optics involved.

In case I have to explain it, that was meant to be a
supportative compliment not an attack.

Best wishes,

Jenny








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:24:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:16:00 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:40:39 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:18:49 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >The so-called extraordinary nature of the material stems from
 >Marcel's subjective impressions of same, which may or may not be
 >reliable, or reliable to different degrees. However much weight
 >one wants to assign Marcel's own 40-plus years memory of events,
 >it is a leap of faith to equate Marcel's vocal remembrances with
 >unequivocal proof of extraterrestrial visitation, any way one
 >wants to slice it. The two simply don't amount to one and the
 >same, never have, and never will.
 >

Dennis and List,

Maj Marcel _was_ excited by the properties exhibited by the
debris, Dr Marcel Jnr still has memories of this when recalling
his father's visit on his way back to the base on the night of
the 7th. _But_ Maj Marcel would not have had the final say as to
the next course of action to be taken, would that not have been
up to the base commander, Col Blanchard?.

Blanchard also would not just be reacting to Maj Marcel's word
alone, Maj Marcel would have been able to demostrate any of the
extraordinary properties he claimed for the debris, after all he
brought two vehicles-worth of it back from the site, and as by
his own account he and Cavitt spent many hours going over the
site on the 7th this recovered debris was most likly a very good
representative sample of what was out there on the ranch.

Had he not verified any claims made for the debris to Blanchard's
satisfaction do you think the matter would have gone any further?.

Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive-> http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 7

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:24:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 18:14:54 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:40:39 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:18:49 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >The so-called extraordinary nature of the material stems from
 >Marcel's subjective impressions of same, which may or may not be
 >reliable, or reliable to different degrees. However much weight
 >one wants to assign Marcel's own 40-plus years memory of events,
 >it is a leap of faith to equate Marcel's vocal remembrances with
 >unequivocal proof of extraterrestrial visitation, any way one
 >wants to slice it. The two simply don't amount to one and the
 >same, never have, and never will.
 >

Dennis and List,

Maj Marcel _was_ excited by the properties exhibited by the
debris, Dr Marcel Jnr still has memories of this when recalling
his father's visit on his way back to the base on the night of
the 7th. _But_ Maj Marcel would not have had the final say as to
the next course of action to be taken, would that not have been
up to the base commander, Col Blanchard?.

Blanchard also would not just be reacting to Maj Marcel's word
alone, Maj Marcel would have been able to demostrate any of the
extraordinary properties he claimed for the debris, after all he
brought two vehicles-worth of it back from the site, and as by
his own account he and Cavitt spent many hours going over the
site on the 7th this recovered debris was most likly a very good
representative sample of what was out there on the ranch.

Had he not verified any claims made for the debris to Blanchard's
satisfaction do you think the matter would have gone any further?.

Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive-> http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 12:20:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:04:09 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 16:23:11 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:09:51 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net


 >Dear Gildas, and List.

<snip>

 >The attached image is taken from MarcelRight _but_ this same
 >piece of debris _is_ in the RameyDubose image though it has been
 >moved around somewhat.

Dear Neil,

I have some admiration for your tenacity in your analysis of the
photographs. I have just looked at the attached file and I must
admit that the piece you analyse is rather peculiar.

Did other Roswell researchers give their opinion about it ? Y
would like to have those of Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, David
Rudiak, who are on this list, and also Karl Pflock, I suppose?
And why not the opinion of Dennis Stacy, Jerome Clark and
others? Or perhaps they have answered already on this List and I
am not aware of that ?

I would also like very much like to have answers to my
questions regarding Jaime Shandera. I am perplexed (again) at
the absence of answer to my question. Am I to understand that
Shandera does not interest anyone anymore ?

I also have a question to Dennis Stacy, in answer to his message
of 4 october. You mentioned the "last interview" of Jesse Marcel
Sr. Which one is it?

I know of several interviews, in which he described the pieces:

22 Feb 1978 with Stan Friedman (tel)
7 April 1978 with Len Stringfield and Steve Tom
(see Status report II, Case A-10, Jan 1980)
February, May and December 1979, with Moore and Friedman
(mentioned in the book of Bill Moore, 1980)
8  December 1979 with Bob Pratt reproduced entirely by Karl
Pflockin "Roswell in Perspective" (FUFOR, 1994)

And now we discover the Linda Corley interview of 5 May 1981.
Are you refering to this one or another one ?

Anyway, if we refer to the longest interview on record, the one
of Bob Pratt as published by Karl Pflock and the FUFOR in 1994,
Marcel describes much more varied material than you quote in
your post !

Besides, as you certainly remember, there are other witnesses.
Do we need to give the list ?

Regarding the Linda Corley interview, I would like to know wher
and when she spoke about it.

I it find significant that, a week later, Marcel called her to
deny everything, apparently very frightened: this happened not
very long after the book of Moore (1980), and the report of
Stringfield (Jan 80), where he appeared with his name. Any
comment on this, Mr Stacy ?

Gildas Bourdais






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


 >DuBose and Marcel stated clearly that the balloon story was a
 >cover up.

  I suspect the "balloon" story was not original to Ramey or
  Dubose, recovered text from the Ramey Message appears to say on
  line 7:

      ... THRY EVEN PUT FOR AF WEATATN BALLOONS RADAR WERE ...
      (theory)          (weather station)


 >DuBose says that he never saw the real debris.>

Ex CIC Capt Sheradon Cavitt says all that was found on the
Foster Ranch was a single Meteo Balloon and a single reflector
and he and Marcel picked it up, and returned to RAAF, he also
said the "sticks" they collected were made of bamboo!, end of
story... He _should_ know, he was there with Maj Marcel, so why
don't we believe _his_ _sworn_ testimony, close the book and get
on with lives?.

  <section on Jaime Shandera snipped>

Bond might comment on this, he was interviewed by him.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                      British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:04:09 -0400
Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
launched a bold initiative.

They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
in Britain.

UFOIN is a very different kind of UFO network. It is not a
membership group. It is not seeking to replace existing groups.
It will operate without bureaucracy, committees or rulers and
free of all politics. Its most basic principle is a commitment
to openness in all that it does. Its decisions will be taken by
a vote of all team members. Its actions will be open to public
scrutiny. Its publications and files will be accessible to all
participants for research purposes. Anyone who works with UFOIN
will feel part of a team, not apart from team leaders. Indeed
every UFOIN participant has equal status.

UFOIN will be run by investigators for investigators and with
100% of its resources devoted to this task. Nothing will be
spent pandering to enthusiasts, putting on lectures or printing
magazines. UFOIN will exist purely to conduct objective, in
depth investigations to well honed scientific principles . It
will also conduct new research that will seek to answer basic
questions about the UFO mystery.

Here are some of the decisions taken by the founders of UFOIN
for immediate implementation.

1: UFOIN is to be a union of ufologists with proven desire to
investigate objectively, research through scientific principles,
promote solutions to cases whenever they are found but to
recognise and speak up for unsolved data when discovered.

2: It will seek to work in harmony with each other and all other
responsible aspects of ufology .There will be no members,
membership fees, committees, rulers, hierarchy nor structure.
The team will be a UK network of people with similar principles
working towards a common goal.

3: A professionalised team of investigators will be based upon
proven expertise. Entry will be open to anyone who believes that
they can meet the rigorous standards. This requires the
submission of a recent case investigation report to prove skill,
competence, objectivity and a personal quest to find answers
behind a sighting. It also requires acceptance of the ban on the
use of hypnotic regression and signature to the code of
practice.

4: UFOIN will be highly selective in its investigation work -
focusing on in depth re-appraisals of important old cases and
seeking new reports that offer potential to add to our
knowledge. To this end the professional expertise of the team
will be offered to science and education. UFOIN will emphasise
the 90% track record in case solving as professed by serious
ufology and will play down the use of emotive terms such as UFO
and alien, focusing instead on anomalies, scientific puzzles and
using phrases such as IFO and UAP.  It will seek to work with
both open minded scientists and sceptics and handle UFO data
from a rational perspective, steering away from the extreme
views and ideologies expressed by parts of the old style UFO
community.

5:  Participants will benefit from working as part of a
professionalised, experienced investigation team whose only goal
will be truth, however mundane that may prove to be. Access to a
team of advisers, comprising scientists, MOD officials, etc, is
already in development. And a research fund will be offered for
use by the team. Grants from that fund for R & I work will be
speedily decided without cumbersome committees. Regular meetings
of the team will foster exchange of experience and UFO
information.

6: UFOIN will not produce a magazine. Publication policy will
involve a steady stream of special reports under the UFOIN
banner. These will comprise research projects, retrospective
case investigations and current case histories. They will be
compiled and produced to a common format by the investigator /
researcher directly involved in each project. All proceeds will
enter the central R & I fund - in turn allowing future projects
. UFOIN will aim for at least 3 - 4 reports per year. Assistance
and contributions from scientists and experts outside the UFO
field will be included to help make these progress reports more
definitive.  Diverse projects are already under development for
early publication.

7: One priority report will involve scientists and sceptics
assessing the strengths and weaknesses of UFO investigation to
provide UFOIN with guidelines on how to develop its objectives
to mutual advantage and furtherance of common goals.

8: Another new venture will be an annual research report. Each
January UFOIN members will define the topic for that year's
report. An initial briefing paper introducing the topic will
define the questions that most need answering within that field.
The briefing paper will be circulated widely to ufology and
beyond to professional agencies that might assist in fulfilling
its objectives. A series of research components will be
allocated so that all major areas of exploration are followed
within the defined topic. The book length report (a definitive
study of these questions) will then be published including all
research results and contributions before the year-end. The
following year a new research topic will be pursued on a similar
basis creating a momentum of ongoing work involving the UFOIN
team.

9: A high quality, user friendly web site is under professional
design. This will include many features of value to
investigators and researchers. Electronic copies of all UFOIN
reports will be published on the site after sale of hard copy
versions.  All local UFO groups who publish their own small run
magazines or independent journals are invited to participate in
a new electronic magazine here. Each month a selection of
highlighted material will be compiled (with full credit and
subscription details offered as free promotion to local groups).
The result will be both an Internet based 'best of British
ufology' digest with the major articles, case investigations etc
and a net based advertisement for high quality local UFO groups
and their studies. The basic web framework is already in
existence and will grow rapidly in the next few weeks. During
that time regular updates will be posted showing the response of
ufologists all over the world to this announcement. As part of
UFOINs ideals your ideas, comments, suggestions and constructive
criticisms will all be aired. UFOIN will listen to views of
fellow ufologists.

10: The R & I fund that will facilitate investigations, research
and publication will be the only money administered by UFOIN.
All proceeds from whatever origin (e.g. publication sales,
donations, and special ventures) will be devoted exclusively to
this fund. No money will be used on administration, organising
lectures, or other none R & I pursuits.

11: A number of ventures are to be reviewed to find rapid ways
to create and renew this fund.This will allow it to continually
fulfill its purpose without courting inactive UFOlogists for
membership fees:

A: Grant funding for an educational arm of UFOIN, that will
offer free lectures to schools, libraries and serve as an
information agency

B: Exploration of public services from which 100% of all
proceeds will go into the fund

C: Production of a series of objective UFO videos on the
realities of UFO research to be created and marketed by UFOIN
with 100% of proceeds into the R & I fund.

D: As a 'quick fix' to kick start the fund several members of
the UFOIN team (including David Clarke, Andy Roberts and Jenny
Randles) are to publish a commercial book that could raise
substantial funding . The ethos of this fund, disenchantment
with traditional ufology, the need to revolutionise serious
investigation and research and aims of the UFOIN project will be
used to help market the book.

The twelve people below who have founded UFOIN are convinced
that it is essential to progress ufology beyond its current
stasis. The above plans are being put into practice now because
an urgent need exists to coordinate UFO study in the UK towards
a more rational perspective.

As such a new style of ufology for the 21st century has now
arrived.

If you feel that you have got what it takes to join the fight to
reverse the fortunes of serious UFO study and prove that ufology
can be done objectively and scientifically, then what are you
waiting for?

UFOIN needs you. And if you share the sentiments above then you
need UFOIN.


Contact:

E-mail: enquiries@ufoin.org.uk

Snail mail: 1 Hallsteads Close,  Dove Holes,  Buxton,
DerbyshireSK17 8BS

Web site: www.ufoin.org.uk


Signed (in alphabetical order):

Andy Blunn (NARO), Dr David Clarke (IUN), Paul Devereux, Paul
Fuller, Rory Lushman (The Labyrinth), Lynda Matthews (LUFOS),
Tim Matthews (Beyond), Robert Moore, Jenny Randles (BUFORA), Bob
Rickard (Fortean Times), Andy Roberts (IUN), Mike Wootten
(SiteOne)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                        Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:58:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:04:09 -0400
Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >Hi listfolk,

 >In the thread 'Get Real' a debate was started about what right
 >the 'aliens' had to abduct people. This debate touched upon the
 >question what the purpose of abductions really was.

 >A remark by Terry Evans struck me. His wife had told him: "It
 >seems like they are stealing my emotions."

<snip>

Hi Henny, All

Well if your theory is correct that that could explain why there
are so little British abductions. Stiff upper lip, reserve and
all that dear chap. We British are not known for showing our
emotions, so perhaps this might add some more weight to your
hypothesis.

The only thing it begs however is; WHY?
--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                        Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:37:15 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:04:09 -0400
Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:21:42 -0400


 >Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >Hi listfolk,

 >In the thread 'Get Real' a debate was started about what right
 >the 'aliens' had to abduct people. This debate touched upon the
 >question what the purpose of abductions really was.
 >A remark by Terry Evans struck me. His wife had told him: "It
 >seems like they are stealing my emotions."
 >I have a suspicion this goes some way toward understanding what
 >'abductions' are about.

<snip>

 >This while abductions seem to have been going on for decades.
 >According to anecdotal testimony in any case, the first
 >abductions started before World War II at least.
 >Is the world as we know it going to end in the foreseeable
 >future? In the last months I have taken up an interest in all
 >things environmental. The brief, and somewhat blunt, conclusion
 >I have drawn from the articles I have read about various
 >environmental topics is that there is literally nothing that
 >indicates that the earth's ecosystem is going to be out of
 >balance in the coming decades or that natural fossils will dry
 >up before alternative energy resources are available.

<snip>

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

 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 03:28:23 +0100 (MET)
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 11:03:49 -0500


 >Subject: Betty Hill 'Coming In For A Landing'[List only]

 >Source: Foster's Online,
http://www.fosters.com/news99a/january/31/robinson0131a.htm

 >Stig
 >***
 >Portsmouth's Betty Hill, 'gran'-dame of UFOs,' may be coming infor a landing
 >By J. DENNIS ROBINSON
 >Seacoast Rambles

 >**
 >Betty Hill is sick of talking about UFOs. The story of her 1961
 >abduction by aliens in the White Mountains of New Hampshire is
 >old news. But the phone in her Portsmouth home never stopsringing.
 >"I bet I've done 250 radio interviews since last June," Betty
 >says. "They call from everywhere on Earth. I've done as many as
 >four and five talk shows in a day."

<snip>

 >A retired _social worker_ who will turn 80 in June, Betty leaps
 >from an elderly armchair like a gymnast. Actually, she was a
 >gymnast while a student at the University of New Hampshire
 >before the war. Back then her acrobatic act almost landed her a
 >summer job with the circus, but her conservative East Kingston
 >family did not approve.

<snip>


Henny and List:

It is allways interesting to know something about the background
of the persons reporting paranormal phenomena, and Betty Hill
should be no exception.

Thus, maybe it's worth mentioning that -- according to the text
referred to above -- Betty Hill's profession -- before retiring
-- was a social worker (she studied at the at the University of
New Hampshire).

Among the many subjects/courses within sociology (at least
today), we can also find such courses as, for instance:

- religion and societal change;
- space / time;
- media studies;
- environment;
- public policy;
- Marxism;
- religious nationalism;
- conversation analysis;
- sexuality;
- feminist and gender theory;
- social movements;
- popular culture;
- discrimination;
- lesbian/gay studies;
- social psychology;
- sex roles;
- small groups analysis;
- anthropology;
- race-ethnic relations;
- ethnomethodology;
- social stratification;
- comparative sociology;
- and -- hypnosis as a research tool(....)

(Ref.: http://www.catalog.ucsb.edu/97cat/l&s/soc.htm .)

(Sociology is the systematic study of social life. Through
empirical inquiry, sociologists seek to understand the process
by which societies, communities, institutions, and organizations
are created, maintained, undermined, and transformed, and the
ways in which social life shapes individuals.)

And we must assume that Betty Hill had, at least, the basic
knowledge of _some_ of these sociological subjects....

This doesn't need to mean anything, but....

I can't find anything on the background of Barney Hill. What we
do know from photos, however, is that he was a "Coloured"/Black
person.


Regards,

Asgeir








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 19:40:31 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:04:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >>>not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >>>concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >>>aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >>>elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >>>point.

 >>It is an American thing, this emphasis on whether or not aliens
 >>have the "right" to do this or that.  Especially when the "this
 >>or the that" is stalking, abducting and performing medical
 >>intrusions on our bodies. Actually, it should be a human thing,
 >>as Americans are not the only ones in this world with rights as
 >>human beings.  In the UK, there are, I presume, safeguards
 >>against the violations of your human rights, are there not?

 ><The rest snipped>

 >Of course there are safeguards against violations of our human
 >rights in Britain - you may have heard, for instance of Magna
 >Carta, which I believe still forms one of the bases of the
 >American legal code, and good on you for it.

That is of course correct, the Magna Carta was drawn up by King
John of England in 1215 and eventually became the basis for the
American constitution.

So I suppose in answer to the previous/previous posting... no it
is not an American thing, it's something us Brits have just
forgotten about.

eg:

The fifth amendment guarantees

No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law.

Whilst written more than 500 years earlier, Magna Carta declares

No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned, . . . or in any other way
destroyed . . . except by the lawful judgement of his peers.

To a being from another world this would probably mean squat,
local law that's all, stuff the prime directive.

 >they can erase all
 >evidence of their existence.

This may be getting off subject a bit but 'WHAT?' If as you say
they can 'erase all evidence of their existence' then how do you
explain the literally thousands of people world-wide who seem to
remember being abducted??

Maybe the aliens just haven't got the hang of that 'memory
erase' thang.

They can dance across the universe in the blink of an eye
apparently but when it comes to an implant... they always seem
to leave an incriminating mark, now doesn't that just strike you
as a teensy weensy bit odd?

Perhaps someone out there can answer those simple little
questions.

Answers on a postcard to:

Dave.

Wake up Jim, you're on.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                            Max Burns - Let It Go

From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 22:48:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:28:59 -0400
Subject: Max Burns - Let It Go


It's nice to see so many people wallowing in anothers person
stupidity or misfortune depending on where you stand.

I will not condone his actions or condemn them.  Unless you were
on that jury, you will not have received the full facts - you
will have received the facts how the media presented them.

I contacted my local newspaper after some sightings and was
given a very lengthy write-up.

It mentioned me seeing a UFO in America, it shining a beam of
light towards the ground at the back of the farm, where the
cattle were.  It mentioned my lecturing all over Europe.

Slight snag here.  I don't own a passport, never have been to
the USA and have only lectured in the UK.

Shall we get back to UFOs, folks?

Mark Haywood







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:10:27 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:34:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

<snip>

 >Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >fix.

 >Bizzare.

Imagine: You are an emissary from a race zillions of miles away,
who is observing the inhabitants of a planet that are slowly but
surely polluting the heck out their environment, and apparently
determined to cover the planet with asphalt and people.

You find that by monitoring substances inside the rectums of
cows, you can track progression of certain pollutants and their
increasing affect on mammals which are very similar, in many
ways, to humans.

Bizzare?  Inept?  Maybe not.

Brian Cuthbertson





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:11:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 16:58:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 >Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >fix.

 >Bizzare.


Or maybe you stay around, staging interactions with humans,
because you need something in their souls, and you need their
planet, too. Not so bizarre (and it's more or less that what
David Jacobs suggests in "The Threat")

Greg Sandow





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                        Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 19:14:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:05:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #39 -- 1999


To All,

Booster debris or space junk reetering and burning up in the
atmosphere do not have multi-colored signal lights flashing,
hover, then go straight up, nor are triangular-shaped,
level-flying objects. Numerous explanations have been given that
the sightings must be from the NORAD satellite or soon to be
falling debris catalog.

Frankly, these bits and pieces do not fit the picture decribed
by the actual eyewitnesses. Nor does it account for the object
in the Tampa home video taken by John Vye. The Fox-13 video tape
is much more clearer than the Avi and RealPlay conversions on my
website. This is a triangular craft (period!)

More plausibly, whoever is flying these triangular craft
probably KNOW about the falling rocket  booster and satellite
debris schedules and are using them as windows of opportunity
for their flight manuevers (as a cover).

Ignatius
http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/

Poll Results so far:

  What do you think the Fox 13 Tampa UFO video revealed?

  Rocket booster (5)               9%

  Triangular craft (30)           56%

  Bolide or meteor (2)             4%

  Not sure what it was (17)       31%

  http://apps3.vantagenet.com/zpolls/count.asp?id=991103156






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:04:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>Good Lord!  I had no idea there were rules of abduction at any
 >>given point in time.  Thanks Dennis.  I mean, for the
 >>information.  Now I am certain that in 1945, when I perceived I
 >>was invited to join some short little duds, uh, sorry, dudes (I
 >>was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite) I was mistaken.
 >>Or was I?  Maybe back then your "once upon a time rule was
 >>different.

 ><snip>

 >>Jim Mortellaro

 >Whatever you say, Jim.

 >I wasn't speaking of any "rules" of abduction, let alone my own
 >specific rules of abduction. I was referring to a progressive
 >change in abduction account and content as reported in the
 >available UFO literature. Argue with that if you want to, not
 >me.

 >Maybe if you'd reported your encounter earlier the existing UFO
 >literature wouldn't read and sequence the way it does. But you
 >didn't and it does. (How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >three? Just curious.)

 >Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

 >Dennis

That's the whole point of a number of my posts.  You haven't
been paying attention, at least to mine.  I've often said that I
can't remember where the hell I put my cell phone and sometimes
have to call it in order to hear the ring and follow the noise.

I can only _rarely_ remember dreams. And then for only a very
brief period of time.  The only dreams I can recall are those
which are recurring and I recognize these as dreams.  Ninety
nine percent of my dreams I cannot recall unless I wake up in
the middle of them and even these, I do not retain for long.
And, I know a dream when it is a dream and when it is a memory
of an event.  Always.

Getting it yet, Dennis?  Should I spell it out more clearly for
you?

I remember - make that - I _vividly_ remember every single
perceived abduction event as if it were milliseconds ago.  And
some of these occured in 1944, 1945 and subsequent.  I even
remember the times (each and every one) when the overhead lights
went out as I drove under them on the highway.  I remember
everything about every single detail surrounding a perceived
abduction event.  And as well, I know that there are many more I
cannot recall and may never recall.

Some were so vivid at the time, that even my mother and dad (who
thank God are still with us) remember my telling them what I
perceived happened that long ago.

I am not arguing rule changes, I am debating the fact that there
are no rules.

And of course, you are quite correct, I should have reported
these events to someone at the time they occured.  I mean other
than my mommy and daddy, perhaps I should have reported them to
the Army Air Corps, eh?  OK, OK, _I_ am now being sarcastic.

Until the very day I retired (at age 54 which was two years ago)
it was my intention to get to continue to earn sufficient funds
with which to pay off the mortage, feed my family and retire at
the early age of 54 so I could be with my wife the rest of our
life together.

Getting it now Dennis?  Same reason I did not come out of my
closet as so many.  I lived with it, bottled up inside until I
met Budd Hopkins and felt his kindness. And John Velez' wisdom.

And a few others I won't bother to mention... with whom even a
short conversation spoke volumes to me and my terrible suffering
over this sh*t all these years.  I remember a short conversation
with Michael Lindemann that he probably forgot, and a meeeting
with several others who reached out and helped me.  _Me_!

I shall retire to bedlam.

 >(How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >three? Just curious.)

Did I satisfy your curiosity sufficiently, Mr. Stacey?

 >Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

Thanks to the folks I've already mentioned and more, I already
got a Gripple, dude.  Thanks anyway.  May I suggest you get
a grip and open up your mind?  And if your pair of dimes
precludes doing that on the subject, then open up your heart,
dude.

 >Whatever you say, Jim.

No, Dennis.  Not whatever I say, nor even whatever you say.
It's how you say it, dude, that makes my skin crawl.  You sound
to me as if you've got all the answers and even if you don't,
you know what they aint.

You know a hell of a lot less than the "experiencer" knows
simply because you have not experienced this phenom. And less
than a researcher, because your mind is closed.

Now Dennis, am I wrong about you?  Or is it that you just sound
that way?

Love,
Jim





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                      Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:42:39 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:31:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 19:23:41 -0400
 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

 >SPACEWARN Bulletin reports that 25761 actual re-entry was
 >9/2/99.  Weren't those sightings attributed to 25761 on 9/1/99?
 >See:

 >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/spacewarn/spx551.html

 >item #4.

 >Terry

Hi Terry.

You are right that the UFO sightings in western U.S. (which were
attributed to re-entering Russian upper stage Proton-K) happened
on the evening of September 1, 1999.  What you overlook though
is that the times for all such re-entry events that occur around
the world are recorded in U.T., the time at Greenwich, England.
Although it was September 1 in western U.S., it was September 2
in England.

The UFO sightings in Florida which occurred in the morning of
September 7 can also be safely attributed to other Russian space
junk (Proton-K) as is recorded in the SPACEWARN Bulletin for the
same day.  If these two September UFO sightings were not Russian
space junk, it would be a big coincidence for two firey UFO
events to occur on the same days as two firey re-entering Russian
space junk events which should have also been witnessed by many.

Nick Balaskas







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                          Filer's Files #40 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 00:25:01 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:34:13 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #40 -- 1999


This weeks Filer's Files Sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

Filer's Files #40 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
October 7, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com.

The purpose of Filer's Files is to enlighten and give the reader
insight into the real world and the universe that surrounds us.
In a democratic society we have a right to know that numerous
Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO) are in our skies.  They
present an enormous challenge to expand our awareness of their
possible operations that may be responsible for cattle
mutilations, crop circles, abductions and even missing persons.
Millions of Internet users choose to read UFO sighting reports
from concerned citizens.  This interests makes UFOs the second
most popular subject on the Internet.  Sex is still number one.
Most of the following reports are the initial sighting reports
and whenever possible the sightings are investigated by trained
field investigators.  I'm convinced UFOs exist because I chased
one as an Air Force officer.  President's Carter and Reagan saw
and reported UFOs.  Representative Gerald Ford asked Congress to
investigate them in 1966.  Thousands have seen them and the
reports continue at over 200 each month with 300 during
September.  Astronaut Edgar Mitchell the sixth man on who
visited our moon told me, "UFO research is the most important
endeavor of humanity!"

GIANT UFO OVER LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK AGAIN

LEVITTOWN -- Saturday night, October 2, 1999, Mike and friend
were standing on the deck of his apartment, located not far from
Kennedy airport.  Mike states, "I lifted my head up and out of
no where, I see this thing moving at an incredible rate of speed
on an angle downward towards the tree line!  It's huge and
silent and looks like a giant baton with a very dimly lit sphere
on each end.  I watched it for at least five seconds as it
headed west.  At 8:45 PM, as it hit the tree line it made an
exact 90 degree left turn heading south and then suddenly
blinked out.  I was really amazed.  It made a 90 degree sharp
turn into the wind and the shape was out of this world?  The UFO
was at least the size of five jumbo jets in length and that
might be a conservative estimation!  I don't think words can
describe how incredible this was!  My friend and I ran across
the street to my sisters to tell her and my wife what happened.
Thanks to Morgan Clements Director, World Wide UFO Reporting
Center www.ufosightings.net.  Editor's Note: Nearby a large disc
was reported on Long Island on July 14, by the owner of a taxi
firm and his passengers.  On September 1, a college educated
family had a similar report.  Swiss Air pilots reported a near
collision of a UFO with their 747 in the same general area on
August 9, 1998.

AUSTRALIAN JELLYFISH SIMILAR TO NEW HAMPSHIRE'S UFO

GRAFTON � Australian Barry Taylor reports, "I got nine minutes
of a great bit of UFO footage on September 15, 1999.  At 10:55
AM, I saw an orange UFO trailing something under the object that
looked like a shiny 'ribbon.'  It was attached to a black thing
under the silvery main object and rotating like a tadpole
swimming. Joseph Haas writes that Filers Files  #39 carried
information on a strange dangling 'ribbon.' "Where can I get a
copy of the video?"  I would like to give copies to the
witnesses in Alexandria, New Hampshire USA  who saw a similar
UFO ten years ago.  The details are with Peter Geremiah of MUFON
NH.  The UFO with a ribbon was seen by a Deputy Clerk of the
Plymouth District Court and her spouse.  Thanks to Joseph Haas
in NH and Barry Taylor in Australia stingray@nor.com.au.
Editor's Note: I hope they can exchange data to determine if the
witnesses saw similar UFOs?

NEW HAMPSHIRE GREEN FIREBALL

Douglas and Kathleen Blair write,  "On Saturday, September 25,
1999, at approximately 11:25 PM,  I was driving on Route 89
North, and suddenly observed in my left peripheral vision, a
green fireball in the sky near Exit 13.  The color was a
startling neon green, or like the electric green color of a
Christmas tree light!  This was interspersed with a stream of an
"electric blue" colored "tail."  I definitely saw this fireball.
Thanks to Douglas and Kathleen Blair fhdm@together.net

CONNECTICUT

WEATHERSFIELD � Larry Clark has been in contact with Dean
Burgess who reports he was coming home from school on September
29, 1999.  We were at a dead stop on I-91 South because of
construction work at Exit 24.  Dean stated, "I noticed two state
police officers pointing at a triangle shaped craft around 100
feet off the ground."  It made no noise and hovered for the five
minutes. The craft had an intense light on it and a haze that
seemed to enclose around it.  There must have been thousands of
people who passed by and saw it.  Thanks to Dean Burgess and
Larry Clark . lclark@ibm.net (Larry Clark)

FLORIDA TRIANGLE

TAMPA � Several persons have reviewed the FOX TV Channel 13
video taken on September 7, 1999.  The video shows a colorful
object moving across the sky rather slowly at night.  Some
observers feel they saw a triangle shaped craft, others claim it
is a bolide.  NORAD claims the object was a piece of space junk.
Nick Balaskas wrote:  "The visual evidence does not support
Ignatius Graffeo's views that the object re-entering the Earth's
atmosphere was a UFO rather than a Russian booster.  Ignatius
responds, "The Fox TV Video tape will refute any ideas you have
about the object being a spent rocket booster since it would be
fiery, burning up, falling fast, and would not be displaying
blinking red, green and amber colored lights in a controlled
slow moving flight."  This object is characteristic of a
triangular craft, origin unknown.  Ignatius has taken a poll of
people who have viewed the Fox video.  The Poll results so far
reveal?  Rocket booster (3)  7%, Triangular craft (27)  61%,
Bolide or meteor (2)  5%, Not sure what it was (12)  27%. Thanks
to Ignatius Graffeo Decide for yourself at:
http://apps3.vantagenet.com/zpolls/count.asp?id=991103156.
Editor's Note: On my four inch viewing area, the object or
objects do seem to be falling from space.  It appears that the
object probably is space junk hit by an  unknown object causing
it to disintegrate at an unusually massive rate. ORLANDO � On
August 21, 1999, at 11:45 PM three of us were talking girl talk.
My mom looked up and said, "What is that?"  The three witnesses
saw glowing circular objects above their driveway.  We stood up
and observed two objects then another appeared out of no where,
and now there were three.  They were criss crossing each other
erratically in the sky very rapidly and disappeared after twenty
minutes. Thanks to WWUFORC http://www.uforeports.com. e-mail
uforeports@aol.com

WISCONSIN CROP CIRCLE

VERONA � Eric writes on October 3, 1999,  that there is a crop
circle just outside Madison along Highway 151 at Highway 69.
Thanks to Eric EHARTZ4U

INDIANA MANEUVERING LIGHTS

RIPLEY COUNTY -- Dan Mulford reports that a witness saw highly
maneuverable lights in the western sky on September 21, 1999.
Several lights, seemed like plane lights, but did not move in
linear or straight lines. They maneuvered all over the sky at
8:45 PM.  The witness called his wife, who counted ten lights to
the north,  So he phoned his Dad who lives farther north in
Osgood. His Dad said, "They move many times faster than any
aircraft and come to a complete stop." One clearly visible dove
to the ground and flew back up very quickly without any sound.
Their son, a high school senior, also saw the UFOs.  All are
familiar with fighter jets that frequent the area.  Thanks to
Dan Mulford danm@n2mail.com and Ken Young at UFO Fuse Net.

ILLINOIS

DUNDEE � On September 29, 1999, four witnesses saw a white
saucer lit up almost like a crystal, but as big as a large
house.  My wife, two children and myself were driving westbound
on Route 72 approaching Route 25.  At 8:00 PM my wife said,
"Guys do you see that?"  I looked up and saw a huge lighted
shape in the sky moving less than 10 mph.  The craft appeared to
rock, but was kind of stationary.  We pulled off the road to try
to understand what we were seeing.   We all assumed it to be a
blimp, but after observing it for at least ten minutes, we left
because we could not believe what we were seeing.  Later, my
wife sister a teacher told us that a local school  teacher had
written an article for a local newspaper about a UFO sighting
last night.   Thanks to Morgan Clements, World Wide UFO
Reporting Center

NORTH DAKOTA UFO CIGAR SHAPE SIGHTING

FARGO � On September 6, 1999, I saw a large cigar shaped object
in the night sky at 10:30 PM.  It was cigar shaped, and made no
sound and had no lights as traveled north.  I could see it the
western sky, because it blocked out the last two stars of the
handle of the big dipper.  It traveled pretty fast and was out
of view very quickly.  Thanks to e-mail WWUFORC-.
www.ufosightings.net. uforeports@aol.com

COLORADO

LOVELAND -- Morgan Clements Director, of the World Wide UFO
Reporting Center writes,  "We are working on a unique possible
abduction case with an experiencer who has been branded with a
special undeniable mark on her thigh."  We hope to find someone
who has seen this mark before.  On September 21, 1999, the
witness reported very strange dreams that were a little too real
to be dreams.  The witness states, "I'm not sure if there
actually was missing time but I  closed my eyes then I opened
them-and then it was the morning already.  Almost every night I
get a  very strange feeling that I'm going to get abducted, but
have not ever been before to my knowledge.  In my dream I am in
a very dark place that looks like the field about one half of a
mile from my house.  I see a  landed alien ship.  I blink my
eyes and the next thing I know I'm in a silver ship.  An
extremely bright  light was pouring from it as if it were
liquid-light.  Inside there was a bunch of TV monitors that
display images of what seemed to be  various sections of the
interior of the ship.  The creepiest thing I saw was an alien
with large oval shaped black eyes wearing a shiny blue suit.  He
seemed to paralyze me.  He was lying on  the floor and he didn't
have eye-lids so I couldn't tell if he was knocked out or just
resting.  I continued exploring the ship and saw a TV monitor
that showed the alien on the floor had disappeared .  I saw some
movement through the wall of the ship and realized that it was
that same being!  After everything is a freaked out blur.  In
the morning and I felt terrible and found two new scratches on
my upper lip.  Thanks to M. Clements uforeports@aol.com

OREGON TRIANGLES

ROSEBUD � Jerry Burgess reports that on September 22, 1999, my
wife stepped out to the back patio for some fresh air at 10:30
PM.  She saw something strange on top of the hill close to our
home.  At her plea I hurried out to see what was so urgent.  In
back of our home there is a six miles long ridge of hills with
electrical transmission lines on towers.  On top of the hill,
close to one of  towers there was a hovering set of brilliant
lights.  There seemed to be three small lights surrounding a
center light that blinked in red and green less than a mile
away.  I got my binoculars and ran next door to show my neighbor
the object.  My spouse and neighbor say they had the impression
the object was a truncated triangle.  The object moved slowly
along the hill top to the south without making any noise.  Then
suddenly it accelerated very fast and disappeared in a flash of
light. On returning to the house our computers had shut down
and some of the digital clocks needed to be reset.   However the
television sets remained on.  I have now seen three UFO's, two
in the last month. I saw the first one fifty years ago at the
age of twelve.  I am a member of MUFON and CAUS but a skeptical
person. However, after the last two experiences my skepticism is
shrinking rapidly.  I noticed there was a moderate breeze that
came up during the observation and died down on the departure of
the UFO.  Thanks to Jerry Burgess

WASHINGTON AND OREGON LOOKOUTS FREQUENTLY SPOT UFOs!

Jim Doerter a retired college professor writes that, I would be
happy to send my collection of sightings from fire lookouts.
They are mainly linked to US Forest Service (USFS) people.  In
1959, I personally had two dramatic sightings on my tower in
south central Washington.  One fluorescent blue shape was seen
over my tower.  Later that year we saw a 300 foot long craft
sail right past my tower near Mt. Adams.  It came from the Mt.
Hood area towards us.  It was silent and ringed with red and
white lights -- moving at high speed.  At the end of the summer
my family and I went to Penn State to work on my doctorate. Four
years ago, I told my experience to a meeting of lookouts and I
was surprised when others told me of their own experiences.
Since then I have collected 50 stories from USFS people mainly
in the Northwest.   It's difficult to find lookouts to talk to
since many are afraid to tell their stories since they might
lose their jobs.  There are fewer lookout jobs now and they do
not want to be left "off the list."  The main reason I started
my research was the naive idea that I would get the US Forest
Service to encourage people to report their sightings. The USFS
is not quite ready for all this so I got no help or
encouragement.  It's strange, I got your E mail recently and
only today saw you on an old 'Sightings" television program.  Up
until today I never saw your face.  This was a common situation
as a lookout you would contact people every day but never
actually meet them.  Thank you for all your hard work. Thanks
to: Jim Doerter, 80 -Scenic Drive, Ashland, Oregon 97520   PS- I
am better looking than you :- )

NEW MEXICO

ALBUQUERQUE -- Submedical writes,  "I felt it necessary to come
forward with my own 'encounter' in June of 1998.  I was driving
to work, when I noticed a saucer shaped disk hovering over the
Manzano Mountains next to Kirtland Air Force Base.  The 'odd'
thing I noticed is that it had U.S.A.F. markings on the craft.
Now I am an educated person with a bachelor's degree in
business, so don't think I'm a 'nut.'  I just wanted to tell
someone who is in the UFO business that I saw one with American,
Yes! American USAF on the side of the craft.  The craft has
great speed and was only there for a few seconds then, it just
disappeared.  I'm not sure if telling someone will get me into
trouble or not, I just wanted to make the public aware that the
US is now capable of building and flying saucers!  Thanks to
Submedical

BRAZIL STRANGE DISAPPEARANCES

I am an American who lives in Brazil and I have been doing
research here for twenty years.  I am always interested in
statistics that have to do with disappearing people like the
Falun Gong claim is happening in last weeks files.  Here in
Brazil, every three minutes a person disappears according to
last year's statistics and this year its even more alarming.
That's 175,000 missing people per year for Brazil alone!  People
disappear for various reasons to do with drugs, organ harvests,
abandoning family, etc.  However, there is the possibility (and
I say this because of ongoing research into the "UFO" scene)
that aliens ARE kidnapping people!  In Brazil, there are formal
and informal groups trying to discover what is going on.  People
disappear in the most mundane ways:  going to the corner for
cigarettes, walking to and from work.  These are ordinary people
not involved in drugs or with any mental/emotional problems or
other motives for disappearing.  Some may be kidnapped to remove
their vital organs for medical transplant purposes.  There seems
to be something else going on.  I find that whole families, once
there has been a UFO sighting, seem sensitized to all sorts of
phenomena.  One person I know went to a B.B.Q. in a residential
area and during the B.B.Q. she thought someone was calling her
from the garden.  She walked to the gate and was hit with a
strange light.  That's all she remembers.  She was suddenly
missing and everyone rushed around trying to find her.  Several
hours later, she was found some distance away, totally dazed and
traumatized curled up in the forest!  I know this girl well. She
is a teenager and a very sober person who is currently writing a
complete report for me.  She was returned, but how many people
do?  Her father has been abducted and even visited by strange
men in black here in Brazil.  I believe that the whole picture
is very complicated and may involve dimensional shifts.  I have
a lot of data that points to that explanation.    Um Abrao as
we say here, Thanks to Cynthia Newby Luce
cynthia@compuland.com.br

UFO HOVERS OVER THE CAPITAL OF AZERBAIJAN

BAKU � A respected Doctor of Sciences in geology and mineralogy
El'chin Hallilov has used an advanced Sony camcorder to capture
40 minutes of video of a hovering a huge glowing rotating UFO
over the capitol of Azerbaijan.  A conference of astronomers was
being held at the Shemahinskoj Astrophysical Observatory in
Azerbaijan at the same time.  The 50,000 frames of video was
taken to the meeting and viewed by astronomical experts who were
amazed by the hi quality digital video.  They were shocked by
the clarity and length of the film that seems to show a huge
hovering spaceship or a confidential American weapons system.
The video is considered sensational because it shows a large
flashing brightly lit blue craft hanging above the city for
several hours starting at 9:45 PM on September 24, 1999.  The
astronomers could not explain it away as a natural phenomena
such as plasma or a comet.  The film then shows the craft
magnified 300 times showing a surprising technical complex
device.  It consists of three main parts.  The front is in the
shape of a full sphere.  The rear of the craft rotates around an
axis passing all along the object.  It seems to radiate high
power heat and radiation.  The object turns and it is possible
to see its full length, and then it is a full-sphere with a
truncated bottom.   There are flashing lights and portions seem
to rotate showing two plate like objects.  At times it  appears
as an isosceles triangle and then forms into an eclipse and
disappears.  This is a rough translation of the Russian article
in the Moscow newspaper 'Komsomolskaya Pravda.'   The
astronomers agreed that natural objects do not take on these
shapes and hold stable for several hours.  The object was
obviously some type of technical object.  It was agreed to
create a commission to study the film and acquire data on
anomalous objects.  Thanks to Anatolij.

BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT -- All real
estate agents are not the same?  Some real estate agents or
sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced.  Others
are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities.  When
you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you
have the best real estate agent working for you before you make
any important financial decisions on one your biggest
investments!  Remember, the majority of people do not know the
right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major
problems.  Picking the right real estate agent can be a
wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big
mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands!  Find
out, "What you need to understand prior to hiring any real
estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not
want your to ask.  Learn how you can obtain the best real estate
agent for your needs.  To get a free copy of this report, just
call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com.

U.S. GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO
Alert at Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign
Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now
available for distribution to the public.  Lunar Astronaut Dr.
Edgar Mitchell was at Edwards the night the UFO chase occurred.
The 6th person to walk on the moon said, "The night it happened
I investigated it myself and this was a real event."  Sam
Sherman's audio documentary tape called THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE
BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual
voice recordings provided by the Air Force.  During this event
12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down
low over the runways at Edwards AFB.  Tower operator Sgt. Chuck
Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command.  Sgt.
Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment
where he verifies the event as it is heard on the archival
recordings.  The UFOs are described and a decision is made to
launch F-106 fighter interceptors.  You are there for an
important part of UFO history.  Hear it for yourself, its the
best UFO tape ever made.  Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00
for shipping -- total $16.95 --(for overseas orders- out of US -
add $6.00 shipping cost - total - $20.95) you can send either a
personal check or money order to: Independent International
Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New Jersey 08857.

MUFON JOURNAL For more detailed investigative reports subscribe
by contacting Mufon@aol.com.  Filer's Files Copyright 1999 by
George A. Filer, all rights reserved.  Readers may post items
from the Files on their Websites provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue
that the item appeared.  Send your letters to me at
Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to keep your name confidential
please so state.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                      Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 00:42:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:35:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761


 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 19:23:41 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 16:39:12 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Rocket Booster Re-entry 25761

 >SPACEWARN Bulletin reports that 25761 actual re-entry was
 >9/2/99.  Weren't those sightings attributed to 25761 on 9/1/99?
 >See:

 >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/spacewarn/spx551.html
 >item #4.

Dear Terry and List:

Times given in the SPACEWARN Bulletin seem to be given as UT, or
Universal Time, essentially the same as Greenwich Mean Time.
Thus, something which happens on September 1 between 8 PM and
Midnight, Eastern Daylight Time, would be   September 2, UT.

Clear skies,
Bob Young







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                  TMP News: New Planet in Our Solar System?

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 22:28:38 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:37:47 -0400
Subject: TMP News: New Planet in Our Solar System?


TMP News: New Planet in Our Solar System? - Possible "Mystery
Object" Found

TMP News Breaking News and Reports from The Millennium Project

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


New Planet in Our Solar System? - Possible "Mystery Object" Found


October 7, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Has evidence for a long-rumoured tenth planet been found? See
the following MSNBC news story for full details:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/320182.asp

The planet, if confirmed, is thought to be significantly more
massive than Jupiter, and much farther out than Pluto, as much
as an eighth of the distance to the next nearest star, possibly
a "rogue" planet or brown dwarf gravitationally captured by our
sun.

_____________________________


TMP News is the e-mail update service of The Millennium Project,
and is published periodically as breaking news develops, and is
available free by subscription; to be added to or removed from
the mailing list, send your request, including "subscribe TMP
News" or "unsubscribe TMP News" and e-mail address to:

psa@direct.c

Subscribers to The Millennium Report, the monthly e-mail
newsletter of TMP will also receive TMP News

TMP welcomes your reports and submissions. Forward all
correspondence to:


THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


� The Millennium Project, 1999






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 07:01:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:42:10 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000

 >Posted for Maxwell Burns

 >To UFO UpDates:

 >This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
 >the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
 >like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
 >would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
 >have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

The rules of evidence of this case are these:

A jury at Sheffield Crown Court during a four-day trial viewed
all the evidence - prosecution and defence. During the trial,
Burns declined to give evidence he is now prepared to provide to
Updates posters.

After deliberation the jury reached majority guilty verdicts on
both charges.

Sentencing, the Judge Robertshaw said to Burns:

"There is no explanation forthcoming from you which might have
placed this case into a context which might have provided some
mitigation.

"This offence would have made a significant contribution to the
drug scene and the drug scene is one which decent people are
heartily sick and tired of.

"By pre-appointment and arrangement you were at this motorway
junction to pick up this sizeable amount of tablets and I have
no doubt that they would have been distributed to people who
would have used them upon themselves and passed them onto
others."

If Max is so sure of his innocence, why did he not take the
stand and explain these facts to the Jury which he is now happy
to communicate to Updates posters?

 >From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100

 >What people should not forget is that in interviews with Dave
 >Clarke - an aware-winning local journalist (amongst other
 >things) - Burns admitted he was guilty. He said he expected to
 >go down for his drug-dealing.

In actual fact Tim, Maxwell did NOT admit his guilt to me - he
simply said he "expected" to be found guilty and serve time. If
Max had pleaded guilty in court he would probably be a free man
today - performing community service.

That was his decision, and his right within British law. But by
pleading not guilty and being found guilty, he has to take the
penalty like anyone else in his position.

UpDates subscribers should note that despite the exchanges on
this list there was a time when Max used to ring me regularly
and paid at least one visit to the newspaper office where I
worked.

On those occasions he was quite open about the fact he had been
charged with a serious drug offence and was in a lot of trouble
with the police. He lost no time in connecting his drugs charge
with his investigation of what he calls the "Sheffield UFO
incident" in a number of public places many times.

He has said many times that he believes he was set up with the
drugs because of what he had discovered about the case. If that
is so why did he not use this claim in his defence, and take the
witness stand in court?

Taking all of this into account, that is is why I could not
understand how he and his cohorts could then accuse others of
using his personal life to attack his character.

If Max's drugs charge and his character have nothing to do with
his claims about UFO cases, then he should have kept his mouth
shut from the start.

You cannot have it both ways.

<snip>

 >Here is an interesting thought for all of you who have been
 >following the Sheffield case. Do you think that it would be a
 >big break in deciding the true facts about the incident if
 >someone were to produce an audio cassette of the launch of the
 >Tornado jets from the base. All the jet-to-base chatter and the
 >pilot-to-pilot chatter and all the police-radio chatter between
 >Ecclefield police station and officers on the ground that night
 >- recorded by a radio ham? It would certainly settle the matter
 >or whether the jets were scrambled on red alert or were just on
 >a training mission, wouldn't it? Watch this screen!

It certainly would be a big break and would solve the case once
and for all - and I would be the first to admit I was wrong..
But I predict that this audio cassette and its wonderful owner
who can apparently tune in to both police and RAF frequencies
simultaneously will, like the rest of Burn's "conclusive
evidence" on this case, never materialise.

As they say in this part of the world - "pigs might fly."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 01:47:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:44:49 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>launched a bold initiative.

 >>Nothing will be spent pandering to enthusiasts, putting on
 >>lectures or printing magazines.


Hi All,

This sounds so fantastic and to good to be true, but nobody
making money from ufology what is going on, surely a lot of
career researchers will be up in arms!

And pandering to enthusiasts? Blimey....

Now knuckle down and do as you're told boy!

Hurry up & land lads and put us out of our misery!!

Roy..                               Keep Smiling!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                     Re: Tampa UFO Video Summary Report

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:57:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:48:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Tampa UFO Video Summary Report


The Fox-13 TV 10PM news report of September 7th was perhaps the
best late prime-time news story broadcast in recent memory
concerning a UFO sighting. The two news anchors appeared serious
and concerned, presenting all sides of the sighting. However,
the story as a whole left the viewer somewhat confused and drew
a questionable conclusion saying it was "the rocket's red
glare." Definitely not so if you review the video.

Booster debris or space junk reentering and burning up in the
atmosphere do not have multi-colored signal lights flashing,
hover, then go straight up, nor are triangular-shaped,
level-flying objects. Numerous explanations have been given that
the sightings must be an item from NORAD's satellite "predicted
debris" catalog list. The Tampa video appears to be an object
that is under intelligent control, not a burning hunk of space
junk.

A more plausible explanation is whoever or whatever is flying
these triangular craft _know_ about the falling rocket booster
and satellite debris schedules and are using them as windows of
opportunity for their flight manuevers. This would explain the
multiple sightings and the irreconcilable discrepancies in the
eyewitness descriptions.

The Fox-13 video tape is much more clearer than the Avi and
RealPlay conversions on this page. However, the characteristic
triangular shape is evident even in the conversion copies to AVI
and _real_ format. You must not simply look at a "flat picture"
but perceive the subtle highlights and linear perspective of the
object in the video as it moves with the brighter areas. Watch
the 2 lights on the left side of the object very carefully.

Two photos and a video clip were selected from a portion of the
home video taken by John Vye on the morning of September 7th.
The video was shot in the early morning, just before sunrise.
The sky at the time of the event was still dark.

Check website for latest poll results.
What do you think the Fox 13 UFO video revealed?

Ignatius Graffeo

http://www.ufoseek.org

Mirror Site:
htttp://members.aol.com/ufoseek/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                CPR-Canada News: Update 2 on Edmonton #2 Crop

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 06:44:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:49:08 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update 2 on Edmonton #2 Crop


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


Update 2 on Edmonton #2 Crop Formation

October 8, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Update - October 8

By Paul Anderson


Judy Arndt has done a complete ground survey of the Edmonton,
Alberta #2 seven circle crop formation (September 21). A full
report with aerial and ground images and diagrams can be found
at the following link:

http://www.treasurehouseimports.com/cropcircles/edmonton99/edmontoncropformation
.html


Paul Anderson
Director
CPR-Canada

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1999.html

A reminder for all Canadian subscribers / readers - your
assistance is welcome and needed - ANY reports of other possible
circles this year, please do let us know as soon as possible!
See Reporting and Field Research Guidelines on the web site for
more information:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/reporting.html

REPORTING HOTLINE: 604.731.8522

_____________________________


CPR-Canada News is the e-mail update service of Circles
Phenomenon Research Canada (affiliate of Circles Phenomenon
Research International), and is published periodically or as
breaking news develops and is available free by subscription; to
be added to or removed from the mailing list, send your request,
including "subscribe CPR-Canada News" or "unsubscribe CPR-Canada
News" and e-mail address to:

psa@direct.c

CPR-Canada welcomes your reports and submissions.
Forward all correspondence to:


CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Circles Phenomenon Research International

Main Office

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4  Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


� Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 1999








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                     Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:59:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:55:19 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:14:21 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?


 >>From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 12:11:22 -0700

 >>>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:34:10
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>>Subject: UFO Engaged During Vietnam War?

<snip>


 >Talking about someone actually being involved in such a very
 >similar UFO incident during the Vietnam War, aliens included,
 >listen to the July 4 and August 30 1999 archived interviews by
 >Sergeant Clifford E. Stone, U.S. Army (retired) on Jeff Rense's
 >Sightings website.  If Clifford Stone's account is true, then
 >this could be another example of fact being even stranger than
 >fiction.

 >http://www.sightings.com/

 >Nick Balaskas

Nick, List, all -

I have thought long and hard about responding to this post. I
have found myself on the "wrong" side in too many debates and
have contributed to the ongoing discussions that could be
described as "character assassination," though I have attempted
to refrain from personal comments. I have not always been
successful in that, but I am aware of the difference between an
attack on the character of someone and the stating of fact as
opposed to rumor, half-truth, and innuendo.

That said, I cannot allow this nonsense by Cliff Stone go
unchallenged. I have known Cliff for ten years. I have visited
his home, been to dinner in his home, and listened as his
stories of his UFO related activities have evolved. If we
believe him, then he has been involved in every major UFO
sighting since before he was born... yes, he wasn't at Holloman
when the UFO alleged landed there in 1964, but he saw the films.
Somehow he was in a place to see the acorn-shaped UFO from
Kecksberg trucked into or out of a military base. He has been
consulted by high-ranking military and government officials,
been threatened, transferred, and nearly killed or imprisoned
... at least, according to him. And I have told him that I just
don't believe it. I told him that sitting in his living room,
after he had told his Vietnam tales of sneaking through the wire
to meet with the secret UFO people.

I have told everyone who asked, after I met Cliff, that I found
his stories to be... extreme. The very first day I met him,
while he was off duty, yet in his sergeant's uniform, he tried
to convince me of his... inside knowledge. After he paced in
front of us (Don Schmitt, Ralph Heick, Don Mitchell and me) for
a while, smoking a cigar and lecturing on the topic of UFOs,
Cliff said he had to go out to the car. He returned carrying a
bundle of papers and allowed us to glimpse the Top Secret cover
sheet on them. At that moment I knew that Cliff was putting us
on. If he had top-secret material, and if he left it in the car,
and if he was bringing them now, into the house to store, then
he was going to jail because that is not the way that top-secret
documents are treated. They are stored in a vault and there
wasn't one in Cliff's home office. Yes, I know because I have
been in the room.

Cliff also showed me a document, recovered through FOIA (and
there is no denying that he has worked the FOIA requests long
and hard retrieving some interesting material) that he said
showed the Chilean Air Force had attacked a UFO, hit it with
missiles, and did no damage to it. Well, the document actually
said that the Chilean Air Force had fired missiles without
results. We could interpret that to mean they missed. Cliff drew
a conclusion that wasn't proven by the facts he had. Not a big
thing, but it showed that his thinking wasn't as critical as it
could be. (And yes, I'm sure there are those here who would say
the same as me... but, I do know the difference.)

As we left that first night, more than ten years ago, Cliff
pointed to the military sticker on his car, which was blue, and
asked me, if he was just a sergeant, and officers had blue
stickers, why was his blue. I shrugged and said nothing, but I
did know the answer. About ten years before that (mid-1970s),
the Air Force changed their stickers so that everyone got a big
blue sticker that identified the car as registered on base, and
a much smaller, color coded one that identified the owner as an
officer, NCO, enlisted, retired, civilian, etc. The smaller
sticker was the proper color for an NCO but it told me one more
thing about Cliff.

There are other examples of this... exaggeration. He once showed
me a document listing a number of people, including him, that
provided their security clearances. Everyone had a secret
clearance except Cliff. He had a top secret. He thought this
unusual, or rather suggested to me it was unusual. I didn't
mention that my clerk/typist had a top-secret clearance as well,
not for any sinister purpose but because as a clerk he might be
exposed to top-secret material if we were deployed. Cliff's
having a top-secret clearance meant nothing.

So now we get to his Vietnam adventures. The first I had heard
of these was in UFO magazine. I was surprised that they would
publish the story. Don Ecker did write a companion piece that
suggested he didn't believe what Cliff was claiming. I talked to
Don about that and told him that I had a similar reaction. In
fact, all of those in the UFO field who are also Vietnam
veterans seemed to have a similar reaction. The story is not
true. You did not sneak through the wires are night without
getting shot at. This smacks of the wannabe stories we hear
today of clerks who, at night, sneaked through the wire to got
out in search of the enemy. It didn't happen.

This is a very long winded way to say that, basically, that
these tales now being told by Cliff are simply not true. I have
attempted to provide some evidence for my suggestion that they
are not true, and provide some background so that you all will
understand that I have been in a position to know how these
things work and they don't work the way Cliff has said they do.

This is not to say that Cliff hasn't contributed a great deal to
the field. His understanding of the classification systems, his
documenting of various activities, his work on Project Moon Dust
and Operation Blue Fly has provided some real insight into the
military and UFOs. These have been, and are, important
contributions. However, when he begins to speak of inside
knowledge and suggest that he has first-hand knowledge, I think
we need to leave the lecture.

KRandle





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 8

                        Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 09:31:31 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:57:35 -0400
Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:58:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >>Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >>Hi listfolk,

 >>In the thread 'Get Real' a debate was started about what right
 >>the 'aliens' had to abduct people. This debate touched upon the
 >>question what the purpose of abductions really was.

 >>A remark by Terry Evans struck me. His wife had told him: "It
 >>seems like they are stealing my emotions."

 ><snip>

 >Hi Henny, All

 >Well if your theory is correct that that could explain why there
 >are so little British abductions. Stiff upper lip, reserve and
 >all that dear chap. We British are not known for showing our
 >emotions, so perhaps this might add some more weight to your
 >hypothesis.

 >The only thing it begs however is; WHY?

This theory has been expressed within the UFO community in many
forms for a while now. It is a particularly dark take on the
"dog eat dog" Darwinian ecological perspective. Even Dr. Karla
Turner was expressing such a possible perspective before her
untimely death. Like Charles Fort, she had speculated that "We
are property."

Imagine if you will, a species of creature coexistant on earth
which is more energetic than corporeal. Now apply the known EM
effects upon human psychophysiology (see this bibliography:
http://www.vxm.com/bib.doc.html )

If you follow this line of thinking you can see a possible
species which has coexisted here with us and which seems to be
bound to us in some sort of ecological feedback loop. When I
contemplate this speculative hypothesis and wonder about the
_why_ it seems obvious: human emotional experience generates
concomitant bioelectrical and biochemical processes throughout
our bodies. If "they" are feeding off our emotions it is these
by products upon which they probably gain their sustenance.
[This very concept was expressed in The Matrix]

Isn't it interesting that it is these very bioelectrochemical
concomitants which may also play a heavy handed role in the
human psychic faculties (crisis telepathy/clarvoyance and
psychokinetics), ie-emotion has been shown to have an
amplification effect upon Psi.

Of course this is only one of a myriad of speculative hypotheses
that I entertain and it is not mutually exclusive to any of the
others.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                           Roy Hale's Site Updated

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 03:25:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 01:55:10 -0400
Subject: Roy Hale's Site Updated


Hi All,

Just to mention that I have updated my website.

http://memebers.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/

Regards,

Roy..








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 09:52:43 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:13:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>Good Lord!  I had no idea there were rules of abduction at any
 >>given point in time.  Thanks Dennis.  I mean, for the
 >>information.  Now I am certain that in 1945, when I perceived I
 >>was invited to join some short little duds, uh, sorry, dudes (I
 >>was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite) I was mistaken.
 >>Or was I?  Maybe back then your "once upon a time rule was
 >>different.

 ><snip>

 >Maybe if you'd reported your encounter earlier the existing UFO
 >literature wouldn't read and sequence the way it does. But you
 >didn't and it does. (How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >three? Just curious.)

 >Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

 >Dennis

Dennis is getting at the heart of the "earliest recovered
abduction narrative evidence" problem. So many abductees /
experiencers exclaim that they have been having these encounters
since childhood. I don't doubt or discount this possibility.
However, in the absence of confirmatory evidence of any sort (a
diary entry, a parents recall, something) it is very difficult
to take these assertions as 'chapter and verse' with regard to
the actual historic length of the modern bedroom visitation type
encounter phenomena. The evidence in consciousness, memory and
perception research surely casts much doubt on the validity of
this kind of 'recall.'

I myself have an image memory in my mind of a light moving
across the night sky from my youth. In my mind's eye memory I
can absolutely say for certain that, "I remember seeing this
light move in a slow straight non-ufo like line across the night
sky as I watched it with some other kids at the Summer Camp we
were attending. I remember saying then, wouldn't it be cool if
the light suddenly stopped and then did a 90 degree turn towards
the ground as if it were going to land?! Ever since that moment,
and I knew this upon making the statement at the time, I am
unable to recall the real light continuing on in a straight
line. My memory of it is endellably [sic] etched into the 'ufo'
movement."

Of course, if I add the coup de grace, some may immediately
decide I am in fact an abductee. "On one of the last nights at
this Summer Camp vacation I was awoken in the middle of the
night by a commotion. My memory of this is all pretty hazy.
Everyone in camp was walking off into the Texas underbrush. All
I really remember is being very tired and confused, walking
through the scrub brush and cedar trees for a distance over
typical rolling Texas hills. I started to hear more voices and
entered upon a bowl like depression clear of trees but
surrounded by cedars on the outer lip of the bowl. All the camp
is here and we are bathed in a golden yellow light from a ...
camp fire? I remember little else of this night; presenting of
bead awards or somesuch, but I don't remember the return to my
cabin. I awoke the next morning in my bed."

Ok ok, I'm not trying to trivialize the matter. Hardly anyone on
this list would seriously entertain the possibility that what I
described was at all ufo related. But I have had people suspect
the same for less. As someone profoundly interested in ufos I
can't express to you the sheer numbers of gullible people who
have come up to me and asserted "you're so interested in this
you _must_ have been abducted and you just don't remember it."

This is why I think a better examination of the "memory" of
these encounters, particularly the alleged early childhood ones,
should be undertaken. But there are obvious technical and
ethical considerations.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Serge Salvaill <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 11:19:55 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:30:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Kenny Young
 >>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 >>>From: Jerome Clark
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT

<snip>

 >Holy Cow!!!!

 >Sorry, Bruce, but the only words that come to mind are:

 >What a huge bunch of crap!

 >Time for a reality check, folks!

 >The chronology for this entire affair is butt-simple:

 >1. Jerry Black made unwarranted attacks on Dr. Maccabbee's
 >character.

 >2. Jerome Clark defended him.

 >3. Jerry Black then made unwarranted attacks on Jerome's
 >character in response.

 >4. Jerome Clark then defended himself.

 >5. Terry Evans then made unwarranted attacks on both Jerry and
 >Bruce.

 >6. They both defended themselves.

 >7. Then Kenny Young jumps in (obviously too lazy to look through
 >the archives to see what really happened and who started this
 >mess) and declares Jerome's appropriate responses to such
 >attacks as "rabid".

 >Crap. Nothing but Crap.

Adding your comments to the reactions of other interveners in
this thread draws a frightening picture of ufology.

The real crap starts at 7 where... on September 29... Kenny
Young wrote a reply to Brian Straight who had said, concerning
Jerome Clark:

 >Thanks for being the voice of reason here.

Kenny Young's reply:

 >Yes, it is unfortunate that personal attacks go hand in hand
 >with some of these ufological debates. But since you applauded
 >Jerome Clark for "voice of reason" during argumentation, let's
 >take a fresh look at some of his previous comments from this
 >discussion so that you and the friendly reader can decide
 >whether or not Clark has demonstrated himself as the keen
 >officer of courtesy and civility that you proclaim.

Kenny Young went on _demonstrating_ the basis of his opinion.

The story goes on where Kenny Young, for contesting
voice-of-reason Jerome, gets flamed by voice-of-reason Jerome,
and, in the process, put on the same stake as Jerry Black.

This well-established fact is what makes this affair
hair-raising: any member of the List should be familiar with Mr.
Young's work.  Kenny Young has proven in the past that he is a
reliable conscientious and very good UFO investigator.  He is
not a character assassin.  Go back on the List in the past 3
years.  Look for one post where Kenny Young indulges in personal
attacks.  You will find none.

On the other hand, Jerry's road sheet does not exactly make him
a Peace Nobel Prize candidate.

I do suggest you read the September 29 text, and please explain
to me where Kenny Young got it wrong?

Let's proceed to 8.

8. Obviously, Jerome Clarke's followers let there objectivity in
the locker room when they entered the jousts:

Pat McCartney - Wed, 6 Oct 1999 13:31:19 EDT:

<snip>

 >Kenny Young's principle of "no agreement/no respect" appears
 >closer in spirit to Torquemada or the Stalinist purges than a
 >realistic expectation of professionals or serious amateurs in a
 >field of study.

Greg Sandow - Wed, 6 Oct 1999 12:34:18 -0400

 >This is totally, completely crazy.

<snip>

 >Old boy networks (including old girls) really do exist, of
 >course, whether or not Jerry Clark and Bruce Maccabee belong to
 >one. And along with them comes another, related phenomenon, the
 >irrational, angry outsider, trembling with fury at a real or
 >imagined in-group, and so convinced of his or her own importance
 >that reason, common sense, and even common courtesy fly out the
 >window. Kenny Young and Jerry Black, it seems to me, are
 >stunning examples.


Roger Evans - Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500:

<snip>

 >As a list member, I am embarrassed that Mr. Clark and Dr.
 >Maccabbee have had to endure such, uh... well... crap.

9. To sum it up:

a. Atheist contests Pope.

b. Pope points at contester and yells: HERETIC.

c. People jump at the heretic and burn him to a stake.

d. Priest contests Pope.

e. Goto b.

f. Pope gets contested.

g. Goto b.


Basic.

Terrifying.

Hello mob.

Serge Salvaille









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:47:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:50:46 GMT

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:49:44 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 21:11:19 GMT

<snip>


 >>Without awareness, there is no report.

 >A first class insight!

 >Let us pursue it, by asking "Awareness of what".

 >For those cases involving an experiencer laying down in bed
 >before falling asleep or immediately after awakening, the
 >paralysis reported in connection with the abduction is almost
 >certainly a sign that the experiencer was actually aware of the
 >physiological condition of his/her own body --- the sleep
 >paralysis naturally induced during REM-sleep.

 >And this is a *perception* not a hallucination.

 >Consequently, we are obliged to wonder if there is anything else
 >in the experiencer's report that might indicate an awareness due
 >to perception rather than a hallucination.

 >>And remember, we suggested that only some of the abductions
 >were the >result of sleep paralysis, not that all of them were.

 >And I am merely suggesting that those abduction reports
 >indicating experiencer Awareness during Sleep Paralysis don't
 >fit into the two categories outlined above. They are not
 >completely physical events. And they are not completely illusory
 >events.

 >Joseph Polanik

Hi Joseph, Randle, listers...

The bulk of spontaneous and laboratory psi cases suggests that
altered states of consciousness play an important role in the
reception and perception of psychic information/experiences.

It seems to amplify the psychic signal in similar ways as
emotion (see my previous post re: The Purpose Of Abductions).
Considering all the evidence for dream telepathy it would seem
logical to consider these UFO / ASP ASCs as a probable
communications channel for many forms of consciousness besides
our own.

Perception research which encompasses the encountering of
apparitions, obes, abductions, ufos and other fantastic
phenomena, should show an appreciation for the contention that
our entire experience is a VR like hallucination which shows a
powerful ability to convince us of its contents being "physical
reality."

Therefore we should not be surprised to find a real signal and
source of the Others whom we encounter within this hypothetical
interface. If human laboratory tested dream telepathy is any
indication it would seem that other forms of intelligence or
consciousnesses could utilize these psi receptive states as a
sort of transpersonal communications channel. Especially if said
consciousnesses manifest a technology or physiology which
exhibits the EM effects evident in both the UFO literature and
the psychotronics literature.

See the bibliography on the psychoactivty of
electromagnetics here:
http://www.vxm.com/bib.doc.html

The person encountering such a communications "vehicle" would
necessarily "misperceive" _some_ of the imagery / experiencer
which was beyond the norm. The human mind eithers shuts off
(missing time?) or fills in the extraordinary perception with
something from its memory banks. It should then also not
surprise us that the degree of fear experienced is so high since
our society has little in the way of cultural experience with
these realms beyond the psychedelic experimentation of the
sixties.

Other cultures which have had an ongoing dialogue with these
entities incorporate a special class of individual with whom
they interact as middleman; clergy vs layperson. We now have our
own abductee / shamens. If only the would better incorporate the
types of evidence I am speaking of here. We would all be better
served by such a take I think.

It is always with great joy that I find experiencers who haven't
automaticly taken the standard modern ET mythos literally. I
think an open minded acceptance of ambiguity is ultimately the
safest route to integration for the abductee/experiencer.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:32:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:55:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 >>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 19:33:42 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>... but once upon a time in UFO Land
 >>abductions tended to follow a straight line from the sighting of
 >>the UFO to the physical abduction itself, viz. Villas-Boas, the
 >>Hills, Herbert Schirmer, Travis Walton and so on. In other
 >>words, a distant UFO was seen which drew nearer and disgorged
 >>alien beings, who summarly hauled the unwilling Earthling into
 >>the bowels of the UFO. Pretty straightforward stuff, when you
 >>think about it.

 >>But I think I'm also safe in saying that that's not the way most
 >>abductions are reported (or experienced) nowadays. True, the
 >>insides of what is alleged and what appears to be a UFO is
 >>frequently described, but in many cases no UFO is seen or
 >>reported from an external point of view, either coming or going.

 >I think you are correct in noting that content of experiencer
 >reports has shown some evolution over the years. However, the
 >explanation for the evolution of abduction accounts may be
 >unrelated to the explanation for abductions.

 >One possible explanation of this sort is that, as the public (or
 >the definable subculture known as ufology) became more accepting,
 >experiencers were able to reveal more without increasing the risk
 >of ridicule. I remember the Joe Pine show from the early '60s. It
 >was a syndicated talk show. Joe Pine, the host, was mercilessly
 >sarcastic toward the contactees he had on his show. Today there
 >are other forums for those who feel compelled to tell the world
 >of their experiences. Back then there weren't any receptive
 >forums.

This is akin to both varieties of "researcher bias": firstly as
the researcher usually looks for reports of a certain type and
secondly as the experiencer will seek out those who have had or
are researcher similar experiences. When early era ufo groups
wouldn't fully deal with the occupant reports they began
receiving, they necessarily delayed the public emergance of this
encounter aspect a good decade at least. Once groups started
publicly reporting these encounters, others with similar
experiences (and of course a handful of fakers) would start
reporting events which had previously been unreported (this
again goes to the issues raised in the other thread of this re:
Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened... in which Dennis addresses
the "emergance of memory" problem).

This also bares relevance to Vallee's hilltop theory of
UFO reporting; the stranger the experience the less likely
anyone is to report it. If they do report it, it will be to
an increasingly limited peer group. And tho Vallee's theory
doesn't address this, I think it safe to say that until a
type of experience is reported publicly it is less likely to
be reported at all. (This also touches on researchers who
withold details of narrative accounts as a form of validity
test applied to newly reported cases)

as a related aside  ....

An interesting comparison study could be attempted by cross
examining several important fact/fiction authors who have helped
create a following of like experienced or like interested
people; Richard Shaver, Philip K Dick, Whitley Strieber to name
but three. Each of these people was a fiction writer. Each at
some point became professed experiencers of the machinations of
strange Others. Richard Shaver's writings triggered a flood of
like experienced letter writers. So have Streiber's writings.
And what of PKD? Before his death he concluded he would never
have a definitive answer to his experiences, perhaps
consequently, he doesn't seem to have developed the same kind of
experiential following. Tho there certainly is a cult of fans
for him as an sf author. There are some reports of PKD like
encounters. But mostly his influence has been in the acceptance
of ambiguity within certain anomaly communities.


SMiles
http://www.elfis.net


[PKD experienced a series of events which attracted the
attentions of such luminaries as Jacques Vallee, Robert Anton
Wilson, Timothy Leary and a host of others. PKD's experiences as
chronicled in his fiction and non-fiction are an amazing
chronology of his wrangling with the multitude of possible
explanations for his contact experiences.

(for more on PKD see:
  http://www.ufomind.com/people/d/dick/  )

I think even UFO UpDates venerable Greg Sandow met PKD.]









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                            Re: RPIT - A Reminder

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:45:56 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 03:02:02 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 12:20:38 EDT
 >Subject: Re: RPIT - A Reminder
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


Dear Gildas and List,

 >Dear Neil,

 >I have some admiration for your tenacity in your analysis of the
 >photographs. I have just looked at the attached file and I must
 >admit that the piece you analyse is rather peculiar.


As you found the last image of interest I attach a further
sample of debris that "should not be there", again from
MarcelRight.(and hope Errol will forward this as it might also
prove of interest to the list.)

Please note the images I have forwarded _are_ _not_ computer
enhanced, just sections from high resolution scans of my own set
of 11x14 prints.

The attached image shows at:

(A) What seems to be a "loom" of wires or cables, these seem to
be associated or attached(unseen) to a beam.

(B) This curious piece of debris is just peeking out from
behaind the foil sheet held by Maj Marcel, but unlike most of
the debris which consists of sheet foil/metal and beams, it
seems to be a solid piece of "manufactured" something, as a
technician it reminds me very much of a "fan caseing", the
output port towards the camera.

The other telling feature in this image is the left foot of Maj
Marcel. Please note well it's appearance and reflect, this man
is in the private office of his Commanding General.

The boot (not regulation footware) is dirty, dusty and well
scuffed, the turn-up at the bottom of the pant's leg has on it a
bad mark possibly of dried on dirt/mud and threads are also seen
where the fabric has been plucked. Here we have a man who has
been out in the field and shows it, we can also infer that his
journey from RAAF to Fort Worth was made in such great urgency
that he had no time to spruce himself up _even_ for his
Commanding General! let alone a newspaper photographer.

 >Did other Roswell researchers give their opinion about it ? Y
 >would like to have those of Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, David
 >Rudiak, who are on this list, and also Karl Pflock, I suppose?
 >And why not the opinion of Dennis Stacy, Jerome Clark and
 >others? Or perhaps they have answered already on this List and I
 >am not aware of that ?

Kevin has consistantly maintained the photographs show nothing
more than "balloon/reflector" debris, I hope I have shown that
there are a number of items within the images to _do_ challenge
this belief and warrent a re-evaluation of that stance.

There has been a continuing lack of comment from many quarters
on the findings that both I and the rest of the RPIT have placed
on our websites, the data is there to be viewed and _if_
interested parties wish to replicate our findings we encourage
them to do so, the only response we do seem to get is of the
"why bother, we _aready_ know it's nothing more than balloon
debris" type, the AF have done a wonderful job of drumming this
mantra home.

A number of groups including our own, are continuing to try and
"crack" the text of the Ramey Message, To this end Stanton
Friedman went to some expence to have one of the original
negatives scaned for his further research.

I guess this is a less controversial topic than the "hot
potatoe" of the debris itself.


_IF_ the problem for further research into the FW photographs is
technical, ie obtaining original prints and scanning them, I am
willing to offer the original scans I produced for the RPIT on a
set of CDROM's (3), the files are huge and you will require a
"useful" computer to handle them with something like Photoshop,
Please contact me directly to discus this further, there would
have to be a charge to cover costs and postage of 15UKP($25US).

 >I would also like very much like to have answers to my
 >questions regarding Jaime Shandera. I am perplexed (again) at
 >the absence of answer to my question. Am I to understand that
 >Shandera does not interest anyone anymore ?


I have suggested to JBJ that he might comment on the interviews
Jaime Shandera conducted with him, but as Bond will shortly be
away for a few days, you may have to wait for a reply.

<snip>

 >Regarding the Linda Corley interview, I would like to know wher
 >and when she spoke about it.

 >I it find significant that, a week later, Marcel called her to
 >deny everything, apparently very frightened: this happened not
 >very long after the book of Moore (1980), and the report of
 >Stringfield (Jan 80), where he appeared with his name. Any
 >comment on this, Mr Stacy ?


My own information is that the "request" to scrub the interview
came _far_ sooner than a week after it took place.


Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                                Re: Get Real

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 14:06:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:07:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 19:40:31 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>>Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >>>>not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >>>>concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >>>>aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >>>>elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >>>>point.

 >>>It is an American thing, this emphasis on whether or not aliens
 >>>have the "right" to do this or that.  Especially when the "this
 >>>or the that" is stalking, abducting and performing medical
 >>>intrusions on our bodies. Actually, it should be a human thing,
 >>>as Americans are not the only ones in this world with rights as
 >>>human beings.  In the UK, there are, I presume, safeguards
 >>>against the violations of your human rights, are there not?

 >><snip>

 >>Of course there are safeguards against violations of our human
 >>rights in Britain - you may have heard, for instance of Magna
 >>Carta, which I believe still forms one of the bases of the
 >>American legal code, and good on you for it.

 >That is of course correct, the Magna Carta was drawn up by King
 >John of England in 1215 and eventually became the basis for the
 >American constitution.

 >So I suppose in answer to the previous/previous posting... no it
 >is not an American thing, it's something us Brits have just
 >forgotten about.

Just my opinion, but most people with such protections under
their laws consider this to be either a local thing, or just do
not consider them.  Americans consider it to be universal.  So
sue us.

 >eg:

 >The fifth amendment guarantees

 >No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property,
 >without due process of law.

 >Whilst written more than 500 years earlier, Magna Carta declares

 >No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned, . . . or in any other way
 >destroyed . . . except by the lawful judgement of his peers.

 >To a being from another world this would probably mean squat,
 >local law that's all, stuff the prime directive.

 >>they can erase all
 >>evidence of their existence.

 >This may be getting off subject a bit but 'WHAT?' If as you say
 >they can 'erase all evidence of their existence' then how do you
 >explain the literally thousands of people world-wide who seem to
 >remember being abducted??

 >Maybe the aliens just haven't got the hang of that 'memory
 >erase' thang.

 >They can dance across the universe in the blink of an eye
 >apparently but when it comes to an implant... they always seem
 >to leave an incriminating mark, now doesn't that just strike you
 >as a teensy weensy bit odd?

 >Perhaps someone out there can answer those simple little
 >questions.

 >Answers on a postcard to:

 >Dave.

 >Wake up Jim, you're on.


(Ummm, sniffle, snort, Hic, yawn) Sorry, I was just nipping, I
mean napping.

Uh, Magnums eh?  Yup, we sell Magnums, but only to adults over
32 years of age with specially marked livers. And it only comes
in Gripple Dripple.

Uh, what was we talkin' aboot?  Oh, I remember now.

Aliens.  As I argued with Dennis, uh, I forgot his last name. Oh
yah, Menace!   No, Stacey!  That's it, Stacey.  Anyway, there
appears to no rule.  Why some of us remember and some of us do
not remember as much or perhaps at all is part of the conundrum.

That things "tend to be going this way or that" is a waste of
Dennis' boundless energy... at least in my view.  And one good
reason fro this is that people, many people, have experiences
which they never report, at least not as being either anomalous
or related to UFO's or abduction.

In addition, that there appears to be a change in the manner in
which most of these events occur (i.e., with or without sighting
a UFO, etc.) what the hell difference does this make in light of
the _faster_ changing level of technology, communications and
reporting of these events faster than spit in a vacuum.  What's
changed more is the technology. Therefore, it becomes difficult
to draw conculsions as to the methods used by "them," assuming
there are any "them."

Kin I go back to sleep now, Dave?

Jim Mortellaro






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                          Re: Max Burns - Let It Go

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 14:13:18 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:10:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Max Burns - Let It Go


 >Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 22:48:13 +0100
 >From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Max Burns - Let It Go

 >It's nice to see so many people wallowing in anothers person
 >stupidity or misfortune depending on where you stand.

 >I will not condone his actions or condemn them.  Unless you were
 >on that jury, you will not have received the full facts - you
 >will have received the facts how the media presented them.

 >I contacted my local newspaper after some sightings and was
 >given a very lengthy write-up.

 >It mentioned me seeing a UFO in America, it shining a beam of
 >light towards the ground at the back of the farm, where the
 >cattle were.  It mentioned my lecturing all over Europe.

 >Slight snag here.  I don't own a passport, never have been to
 >the USA and have only lectured in the UK.

 >Shall we get back to UFOs, folks?

 >Mark Haywood

That is what it was all about to begin with Mark. It was about a
guy who disagreed with some other guys and got his ars in a
sling... much to the amusement and personal (apparently)
satisfaction of the offended, who turned out to be the
offendee(s).

That's the part that angered Gesundt.

Take our president, please.  Now there is a guy who never
inhaled and never put it someplace it didn't belong.  They let
him be and continue to be, president.  See?

Me neither.  Oh well, back to the oral awfice.

Jim Mortellaro







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 14:46:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:12:42 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >launched a bold initiative.

 >They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >in Britain.


<snip>

 >Contact:

 >E-mail: enquiries@ufoin.org.uk

 >Snail mail: 1 Hallsteads Close,  Dove Holes,  Buxton,
 >DerbyshireSK17 8BS

 >Web site: www.ufoin.org.uk

 >Signed (in alphabetical order):

 >Andy Blunn (NARO), Dr David Clarke (IUN), Paul Devereux, Paul
 >Fuller, Rory Lushman (The Labyrinth), Lynda Matthews (LUFOS),
 >Tim Matthews (Beyond), Robert Moore, Jenny Randles (BUFORA), Bob
 >Rickard (Fortean Times), Andy Roberts (IUN), Mike Wootten
 >(SiteOne)


Dear Jenny, List Errol and other entities lurking;

I applaud the effort.  I am a skeptic when it comes to
researchers who claim to know the truth.  When it comes to an
honest effort at arriving at truth, I support such to the Nth
degree.  From what I've read, albeit quickly, your project
sounds like just what the doctor ordered for Ufology.  I wish
you luck and success.

Jim Mortellaro






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                                Re: Get Real

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 14:37:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:02:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >>>not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >>>concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >>>aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >>>elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >>>point.

 ><snip>

 >Of course there are safeguards against violations of our human
 >rights in Britain - you may have heard, for instance of Magna
 >Carta, which I believe still forms one of the bases of the
 >American legal code, and good on you for it. But these
 >safeguards, Constitutions, Bills of Rights (we have one, too)
 >and Human Rights Charters (there's one that covers Europe
 >including the United Kingdom), while they can be very effective
 >in defending individual rights against attacks by governments,
 >legal systems, corporations or other citizens, can't really be
 >invoked when you're dealing with natural or supernatural forces.

 >No Constitutional measures can defend anyone against their home
 >being destroyed in a hurricane, as happened in America a few
 >months ago, or against being killed in an earthquake, as in
 >Taiwan. Human Rights would seem a doubtful concept to invoke
 >against, say, a tiger which killed and ate someone.

 >No Constitutional force can prevent me being abducted by a
 >supernatural alien. We know they must be supernatural, because
 >they can transport people through walls, they can erase all
 >evidence of their existence and they can manipulate time and
 >space at will. Some people, Anne Druffel for instance, have
 >suggested ways in which alien attacks can be fought off. Some
 >people have suggested that prayer, or focussing one's psychic
 >energies, or just giving the creatures a good kick in the balls
 >(if they have any), can cause aliens to back off from abduction.
 >Well and good, and if I should ever face abduction I might give
 >one or all of them a try.

 >The one thing I won't be doing however, is waving the European
 >Convention on Human Rights at them, or sending them a lawyer's
 >letter, or getting my MP to raise the matter in Parliament. Yes,
 >if abductions do exist as physical events performed by aliens -
 >and I've spoken to enough abductees who themselves deny this, to
 >have grave doubts about that - it *is* a violation of my rights,
 >but I don't find that a particularly constructive attitude to
 >take. It seems as pointless as worrying whether my rights are
 >being violated by ghosts, vampires or the tooth-fairy.

 >Maybe I'll change my mind when one of America's celebrity
 >lawyers hauls an alien into the dock on a kidnapping charge, but
 >I think I'm in for a long wait. In the meantime, whinging about
 >"rights violations" when confronted by supernatural alien forces
 >just seems a little naive and, well... wimpish. Don't scream for
 >a lawyer, kick 'em in the balls!

Greetings and salivations to you, Sire.... Sir...

Of course I agree with most everything you wrote.  Only a
Gripple headed looney bin would disagree.  My point was meant to
be more of an intellectual, attitudinal and mind set objections
to your original post.  Except for you sarcasm but then, I am
guilty of that on rare occasion, eh?

What I perceived when I read your post about "rights" was
something a young lady once told me about rape.  She said, and I
quote: "If God forbid it happens, I will merely lay down and
spread my legs with not a whimper or a struggle.  It's better
than getting killed or badly hurt."

When I heard that I thought that I should turn away, for fear
that my stare would stop her heart from beating.

I do hope you will excuse me for screaming, yelling and fighting
about my rights as a human and their obligations at being living
entities whilst they are probing my whatsis for my sperm.  "MY"
sperm!

I read a comment once, and darned if I can recall where it was.
It was a comment ostensibly made by an alien when the male "it"
was taking sperm from objected on the grounds that it was his
body. The alien said (or thought) a comment, which was something
to the effect that men wasted their spem all the time, why
should they object to taking it this way.  Or something of that
nature.

Both stories need no response, nor do they require an
explanation, at least from my perspective.  If it pleases you to
greater acceptance, in lieu of stating anything about my
"inalienable (excuse the juxtaposition of woids) rights" then
let me use the statement that whether I am an American, a Brit,
or just a bum sampling Gripple on Canal street, I have power and
control over me.  It's why I live here.  Although I must admit
to getting a tad nervous these days.

No one controls me except me. As long as I follow the rules I
helped establish and/or enforce.  As long as the Constitution
rules here, I think I'll hang around.  But don't do anything to
me that is illegal, immoral or fattening.  I can take care of
that all by myself, thank you!

J. Jaime









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

               [UFOR] Re: Information Request (KGB UFO Files)

From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 15:42:24 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:06:04 -0400
Subject: [UFOR] Re: Information Request (KGB UFO Files)


From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com>

[Note from the UFOR Editor: This is a response to a request from
Geoff Wheeler regarding KGB UFO Files material. Graham W.
Birdsall is the Editor of UFO Magazine, UK.]

* George Knapp travelled to the Siberian site some years ago.
The debate rages as to whether the mysterious metals originated
from a Soviet rocket programme or came from elsewhere.

Michael Hesemann told the audience at Leeds Conference that the
KGB Files was a hoax - full stop.

He did offer some details but we didn't tape his lecture. I'll
write to Michael and see if he can put together an article for
the mag.

Best regards,


Graham






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                        SpaceViews -- 1999 October 8

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:20:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:20:26 -0400
Subject: SpaceViews -- 1999 October 8



There are many subscribers who will find the following
interesting. This is a one-time posting of this news
letter. UpDates subscribers who would like to receive
SpaceViews on a regular basis should make their own
arrangements.

ebk

=====


Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:34:07 -0700 (MST)
Subject: SpaceViews -- 1999 October 8
From: jeff@spaceviews.com
To: undisclosed-recipients:;


                             S P A C E V I E W S
                              Issue 1999.10.08
                               1999 October 8
                   http://www.spaceviews.com/1999/1008/


*** News ***
        ISS Service Module Launch Delayed
        Conference Committee Restores NASA Budget
        Shuttle Launches Delayed Again
        New Observations Eliminate Asteroid Impact Threat
        House Passes Launch Indemnification Bill
        X-34 Completes Test Flights for Year
        Delta 2 Launches GPS Satellite
        Taxpayers Group Calls for NASA Privatization
        Mars Images Show No Evidence of Ancient Ocean
        SpaceViews Event Horizon
        Other News

*** Articles ***
        Thinking About Mars

*** Cyberspace ***
        The Astronomy Net
        SpaceWatch
        Astrobiology at NASA
        Hubble Heritage Project


Editor's Note:  We have completed the transition to a new mailing list
server that has proven to be much faster than our old one: you should
now receive each issue within hours of its publication!  If you wish
to unsubscribe, send a message to:

majordomo@spaceviews.com

with

unsubscribe spaceviews

in the body of the message.  Be sure to use the address above, as
other, older addresses are no longer valid.

We'd also like to welcome subscribers from thespaceport.com's mailing
list, who will now receive issues of SpaceViews through an agreement
with thespaceport.com's owners.  If you don't want to receive future
issues, please send an unsubscribe message as described above.  If
you're having problems unsubscribing, or have any other questions or
comments about SpaceViews, please contact me personally.

Ad astra,
Jeff Foust
Editor, SpaceViews
jeff@spaceviews.com




                               *** News ***

                     ISS Service Module Launch Delayed

        International Space Station partner nations have agreed to
delay the launch of the Zvezda service module until no sooner than the
end of December, more than a month later that previously planned, NASA
announced Friday, October 1.

        NASA and Russian Space Agency officials concluded during a
Joint Program Review that "it is no longer prudent to proceed with the
current service module schedule," according to a NASA statement.
Instead, the launch has been pushed back from November 12 to between
December 26 and January 16.

        The reason why Zvezda will not be ready for a November launch
was not clarified in the NASA release.  However, there had been
unofficial reports of issues with American software that would be used
on the module, as well as concerns that Russian officials would not
have completed all the testing of the module.

        An exact date for the launch of the module is expected to be
announced later in the month, after a General Design Review goes over
the status of the module and can more accurately assess its readiness
for launch.

        The delay is the latest in a string of setbacks for the
module, which was originally set for launch more than a year and a
half ago.  Delays with the assembly of the module, variously
attributed to a lack of funding as well as to technical challenges,
pushed back the launch of the first modules for more than a year, from
late 1997 to late 1998.

        This latest delay should have little impact on the rest of the
station assembly schedule, though, NASA officials said.  The shuttle
launch schedule was already in flux because of delays caused by wiring
inspections and Hurricane Floyd, and the next shuttle mission to ISS
was not scheduled for launch before January 22.  Any adjustments in
the assembly schedule caused by shuttle delays were already in the
works before the decision to delay the Zvezda launch was made.

        The announcement of the launch delay comes just one day after
the American restaurant chain Pizza Hut announced a deal to have its
logo painted on the side of the Proton rocket that will launch the
module from Baikonur.  There was no word whether this launch delay
would have any effect on that deal.



                Conference Committee Restores NASA Budget

        A House-Senate conference committee decided Thursday, October
7, to restore NASA's fiscal year 2000 budget to the levels requested
by the President, averting potentially disastrous budget cuts faced by
the space agency.

        The conference committee, working to resolve differences
between the House and Senate versions of an appropriations bill that
includes NASA, decided on a final figure for NASA's 2000 budget that
was actually slightly higher than requested.

        The committee settled on a final figure of $13.65 billion for
NASA in fiscal year 2000, which started October 1.  That figure is
about $100 million higher than what President Clinton requested for
the space agency in his original budget proposal and what was approved
by the Senate last month.  It is about $1 billion higher than what the
House passed in late July, though.

        The committee did keep the transfer of $120 million out of the
space science budget to fund future space transportation studies, as
well as earmarks within the space science account, but mitigated those
losses by adding $75 million in extra funding fpr space science.  The
committee also added $25 million to fund shuttle safety upgrades.

        The Associated Press, though, reported that the compromise
bill included a provision against Triana, the controversial
Earth-observing mission proposed by Vice President Al Gore.  While
funding for Triana was retained in the budget, NASA is prohibited from
launching the mission before January 2001, easing Republican concerns
that Gore might use Triana for personal political benefit during his
2000 presidential campaign.

        Despite this provision, this version of the budget will likely
be signed into law by the President.  Clinton had earlier threatened a
veto after the House version of the bill, which also includes funding
for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban
Development as well as other independent agencies, slashed funding for
a number of programs, including NASA.

        "The president is likely to sign it," White House budget
spokesperson Linda Ricci told Reuters. "A significant number of the
administration's concerns were raised and were resolved in a positive
way."

        The conference committee report must first be approved by the
House and Senate, normally a formality.



                      Shuttle Launches Delayed Again

        Continued wiring inspections and other work on space shuttle
orbiters have once again pushed back the launch dates of the next
three missions, shuttle managers announced Thursday, October 7.

        Managers decided to push back the launch of the shuttle
Discovery on mission STS-103, a Hubble Space Telescope servicing
mission, to the early morning hours of December 2.  The mission had
previously been scheduled for launch no earlier than November 19.

        The following mission, the STS-99 radar mapping mission of the
shuttle Endeavour, has been pushed back to January 13, 2000.  No firm
launch date had been officially planned for STS-99, although it had
appeared unlikely the shuttle could launch before the end of December.

        The following mission, the launch of Atlantis on mission
STS-101 to the International Space Station, was pushed back from late
January to no earlier than February 10.  The continuing series of
delays caused by wiring inspections has pushed the launch back from
its original early December date.

        The primary reason for the delays has been ongoing wiring
inspections of Discovery and Endeavour when damage was discovered to
wiring on the shuttle Columbia after the STS-93 mission in July.
Those inspections should be complete on Discovery by the end of the
week and are 90 percent complete on Endeavour, shuttle managers said.
Inspections of Atlantis are just getting underway.

        Engineers are also replacing a valve in Discovery's right-hand
orbiter maneuvering engine pod.  The valve was the source of an
oxidizer leak discovered in the pod last month.

        "Our number one priority for the space shuttle is to fly
safely, and that is why we delayed our launch preparations and have
performed comprehensive wiring inspections and repairs," space shuttle
program manager Ron Dittemore said. "As a result of our inspections,
we've made significant changes in how we protect electrical wiring. We
believe those changes, along with changes to the work platforms and
procedures we use in the shuttle's payload bay, will prevent similar
wire damage from recurring."

        Delays in the shuttle schedule contributed to the decision
October 1 by Russian and American officials to delay the launch of the
next major segment of the International Space Station.  With no
shuttle mission to the station planned now before February, officials
saw no need to rush and launch the Zvezda service module as planned
November 12.



             New Observations Eliminate Asteroid Impact Threat

        New observations of a near-Earth asteroid have eliminated the
extremely small risk reported earlier this week that the object could
collide with the Earth next century.

        Astronomers had reported earlier this week that asteroid 1999
RM45 had a less than 1-in-100 million chance of striking the Earth in
either 2042 or 2050.  That prediction was based on about a week's
worth of observations after its mid-September discovery by the LINEAR
telescope in New Mexico.

        However, Rob McNaught, an astronomer with the Australian
National University, was able to recover the asteroid after the
announcement of its potential impact risk.  The positions from those
observations have refined the orbit of the asteroid and eliminated any
probability of an impact in either 2042 or 2050.

        Such observations were the hope of astronomers who first
reported the impact hazard of 1999 RM 45.  "Such a very low
probability of impact means that the risk posed by RM45 is not of
serious concern to the public at large," said Steve Chesley of the
University of Pisa in a posting to a minor planets mailing list.

        "However," he added, "I think it is very important for the NEO
[Near-Earth Object] community to take all reasonable and practical
steps to ensure that this PHA [Potentially-Hazardous Asteroid] is not
lost, or at least to improve the orbit as much as possible before it
does become lost."

        The asteroid never went beyond a 0 on the Torino Scale, a
0-to-10 measurement of the threat posed by an asteroid unveiled
earlier this year. A 0 on the Torino Scale corresponds to an object
with a smaller probability of impact than that for a random
undiscovered object of similar size.

        Several asteroids have been discovered in the last two years
that, at least for a time, has a small possibility of a collision with
the Earth in the 21st century. In addition to the well-publicized 1997
XF11 affair in March 1998, asteroids 1999 AN10 and 1998 OX4 were found
earlier this year to have small impact probabilities. While 1998 OX4
has been lost, an impact by 1999 AN10 has been ruled out by other
observations.

        These discoveries, however, have convinced at least one
observer of the need for dedicated telescopes to follow-up NEO
discoveries.  "Given the faintness of RM45, it would appear that the
most important need for the NEO search community is to have at its
disposal a large telescope (specifically dedicated for NEO searches)
which is powerful enough to search faint objects such as RM45 (i.e.
mag 22-23-24) when such observations are really needed," noted Benny
Peiser, moderator of the Cambridge-Conference Network mailing list,
earlier this week.



                House Passes Launch Indemnification Bill

        The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation Monday,
October 4, that extends government indemnification of commercial
launches.

        The House approved by a voice vote H.R.2607, the Commercial
Space Transportation Competitiveness Act of 1999, during its session
Monday.  There was little debate on the House floor, and no arguments
against the bill, before the voice vote.

        The primary purpose of H.R.2607 is to extend government
indemnification of commercial launches, set to expire by the end of
the year, through 2004.

        The indemnification agreement requires commercial launch
companies to purchase several hundred million dollars' of insurance
coverage in the event of a launch accident. The government, in turn,
agrees to provide up to $1.5 billion in third-party excess liability
coverage in the event of a catastrophic accident that affects people
or property not related to the launch site.

        The bill also requires the federal government to study over
the next 18 months whether the current risk-sharing arrangement
between the government and commercial launches, dating back to 1988,
should be revised.  The bill also includes funding authorizations for
the Office of Commercial Space Transportation and the Office of Space
Commercialization, part of the Departments of Transportation and
Commerce, respectively.

        "America's space transportation industry is becoming very
dynamic, with many new reusable as well as expendable launch vehicles
under development," noted Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), sponsor of the
bill.  "Therefore, this legislation sets in place an independent
process to advise the Congress on how the government and private
sector should share the risk in future space transportation
activities."

        The commercial launch industry supported the bill but had
sought a ten-year extension of indemnification, though, fearing that a
shorter extension could create "market uncertainty" about American
launchers.

        The industry may still get their wish.  The Senate bill that
deals with launch indemnification, S.832, would extend indemnification
for ten years.  That legislation has passed through committee but has
yet to be considered by the full Senate.



                   X-34 Completes Test Flights for Year

        The X-34, a vehicle designed to test reusable launch vehicle
technologies, completed its last captive carry test flight of 1999
last month, NASA officials announced Monday, October 4.

        The X-34 vehicle A-1 completed an eight-hour test flight
attached to its L-1011 carrier aircraft on September 14, although the
flight was not announced by NASA officials until October 4 for
unspecified reasons.  The flight, conducted at the Dryden Flight
Research Center in California, was the latest in a series of captive
carry flights that started June 29.

        The captive carry tests are designed to test the flight
characteristics of the X-34 when attached to the Orbital Sciences
Corporation L-1011.  The X-34 remained attached to the L-1011 for the
entire flight.

        With this year's captive carry tests completed, the A-1
vehicle used for the tests will undergo a series of upgrades,
including avionics and hydraulics systems.  Redesignated the A-1A, it
will resume captive carry tests from Dryden in late January.

        Before then, though, it will undergo a series of at least 16
tow tests, as it is pulled down the runway by a tractor at speeds of
up to 80 miles an hour.  The tow tests will used to examine the
vehicles landing gear, brakes, and control and other systems.

        Meanwhile, the second X-34 vehicle, A-2, is still scheduled
for completion by early 2000.  The first powered version of the X-34,
the A-2 will test-fire its Fastrac engine during a series of ground
tests at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, in early 2000.

        While NASA officials said in August that the first powered
test flights of the X-34 would take place by mid-2000 from Dryden,
NASA officials said Monday that the location of the test flights --
either Dryden, Holloman, or Kennedy Space Center, Florida -- was
pending the result of environmental impact studies.

        The X-34 is one of three vehicles -- the X-33 and X-37 being
the other two -- NASA is working with industry to develop that will
test technologies and operational methods for reusable launch vehicles
that promise the lower the cost of space access below $2,200 per
kilogram ($1,000 per pound.)



                      Delta 2 Launches GPS Satellite

        A Boeing Delta 2 successfully launched a U.S. Air Force Global
Positioning System (GPS) satellite Thursday morning, October 7, from
Cape Canaveral.

        The Delta 2 lifted off at 8:51 am EDT (1251 UT), the beginning
of its launch window, from Pad 17A at Cape Canaveral, Florida.  Its
payload, a Block IIR Navstar GPS satellite, successfully separated
from the booster after a series of burns a little over an hour after
launch.

        The launch of the GPS satellite had been scheduled for May,
but was delayed when rain from a strong thunderstorm leaked through a
mobile structure surrounding the satellite on the launch pad during
launch preparations.  The rainwater caused an estimated $2.1 million
in damage to the satellite and delayed its launch until now.

        An investigation into the accident concluded that technicians
improperly assembled a plastic waterproof rain shroud over the
satellite, allowing water to pool on it until its weight caused the
shroud to collapse, spilling water onto the satellite.

        Since then the launch has been pushed back a few weeks because
of weather problems, including Hurricane Floyd, which threatened the
Cape Canaveral area last month.

        The Block IIR satellite is the third in a series of 21 such
satellites that will replenish the existing constellation of GPS
satellites that provide navigational data to civilian and military
users.

        The IIR satellites, built by Lockheed Martin, featured
improved performance and navigational accuracy as well as longer
autonomous operations.  "The GPS IIR satellites are designed to
provide significant improvements in the navigational services for
users of the system around the globe,"  said Len Kwiatkowski, a
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space vice president.

        Boeing has a contract to develop the next generation of GPS
satellites, designated Block IIF.  These satellites will be launched
starting in 2002 on the Boeing Delta 4 booster currently being
developed.



               Taxpayers Group Calls for NASA Privatization

        NASA's space shuttles and International Space Station should
be sold to private companies, and exploration programs replaced with
grants and tax credits, according to a recent report by a taxpayers'
group.

        According to the study by the National Taxpayers Union
Foundation, released Wednesday, September 29, NASA is a major obstacle
to the private development of space.

        "Americans are no closer to realizing the dream of living and
working in space today than they were thirty years ago," said NTUF
policy analyst and study author Jennifer DeButts. "The reason is
because NASA, the agency entrusted with the space program, is
stagnating."

        According to the study, NASA was an appropriate response to
the Cold War-era competition with the Soviet Union, but, because of
its need to justify its existence after Apollo, has hindered private
development of space by charging below-market costs for services,
among other things.

        The NTUF study analyzed a number of possible solutions,
ranging from a complete liquidation of the space agency through to a
model such as the one advocated by the Space Frontier Foundation,
where NASA explores the "far frontier" beyond the orbit of the Moon,
leaving the Moon and Earth orbit in the purview of private interests.

        The study chose a different route, calling for both a
privatization of near-Earth space and government incentives for more
distant exploration.  Under this plan, the space shuttle and
International Space Station would be sold to private companies for
commercial operation.

        However, instead of keeping NASA in place to explore the far
frontier, the study advocates a system of government grants and tax
incentives that would be used for missions and other projects beyond
the Earth until private industry grows to the point where is can
support such projects on its own.

        The study also concluded that the web of regulations
concerning space that span several government agencies should be
streamlined, preferably under the Department of Commerce's Office of
Commercial Space Transportation.

        "America cannot allow NASA to rest on its laurels," the study
concluded.  "Instead, private enterprise should lead the way to the
next millennium."



               Mars Images Show No Evidence of Ancient Ocean

        Images from the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft have turned up
no evidence of an ancient ocean of water that many scientists believe
existed early in the planet's history, NASA announced Friday, October
1.

        Scientists looking for evidence of shorelines from those
theorized oceans failed to find any in a particularly promising region
of the planet, but emphasize that the lack of any obvious shoreline
does not mean the planet lacked oceans.

        Project scientists examined high-resolution images of an area
northwest of the giant volcano Olympus Mons.  Lower-resolution images
from the Viking missions of the 1970s showed evidence of cliffs
between two land regions that scientists thought could be formed by
wave erosion from an ocean, similar to shoreline cliffs on Earth.

        The new high-resolution images, however, show that area is not
a "wave-cut" cliff, nor are any of the other features in the area
clearly associated with a shoreline.  "The newer images do not show
any coastal landforms in areas where previous researchers proposed
there were shorelines," concluded Kenneth Edgett, a staff scientist
with Malin Space Science Systems (MSSS), the company that provided the
Mars Orbiter Camera on MGS.

        "Even on Earth, looking for ancient shorelines from the air or
space is a challenge," said Michael Malin, principal investigator for
the camera at MSSS. "Despite these difficulties, we believe these
images of the proposed shorelines are of a high-enough resolution that
they would have shown features indicative of a coastal environment had
there been an ancient ocean on Mars."

        The new images strike a blow against the "ocean hypothesis"
first proposed in the 1980s, based on the putative shorelines seen in
the Viking data, that the northern regions of the planet were covered
by an ocean early in the planet's history, when the planet was warm
enough to support liquid water on its surface.

        However, scientists cautioned that the lack of any shorelines
visible in the images does not mean such an ocean did not exist at
all.  "While the suggestion that Mars at one time had oceans cannot be
ruled out, the foundation for the 'ocean hypothesis' developed in the
1980s on the basis of suspected shorelines appears now to have been
incorrect," said Malin. "However, it should be understood that there
is significant other evidence of water on Mars in the past, both from
Mars Global Surveyor and from previous missions."

        A paper by Edgett and Malin summarizing their work was
published in the October 1 issue of the Journal of Geophysical
Research Letters.



                        SpaceViews Event Horizon

October 10      Sea Launh Zenit 3SL launch of the DIRECTV 1R satellite
                from a  mobile platform on the equator in the Pacific
                Ocean, at 10:28 pm EDT (0228 UT Oct. 11)

October 11      Galileo flyby of Io

October 18      Soyuz launch of four Globalstar communications
                satellites from Baikonur, Kazakhstan

October 18      Ariane 4 launch of the Orion-2 communications
                satellite from Kourou, French Guiana

November 2-4    International Space Business Assembly, Washington, DC

November 13     "The Final Frontier: Open For Business" Space
                Enterprise Symposium, Seattle, WA

December 3-5    Planetfest '99, Pasadena, CA




                                Other News

Titan Launch Delayed:  The launch of a military weather satellite
aboard a Titan 2 booster has been delayed until December to repair
faulty electronics on the satellite, the Air Force announced October
5.   The Titan 2 was scheduled to lift off this week from Vandenberg
Air Force Base, California, and place into orbit the latest satellite
in the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP).  However, the
launch was pushed back, initially to late October, when problems were
detected in the spacecraft's electronics.  The problem was eventually
traced to a faulty chip in a solid-state data recorder on the
spacecraft.  Fixing the problem will push the launch back until
December.

Marshall Director to Head MCO Panel:  Arthur Stephenson, director of
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, was named by NASA October 6 to
head an independent review panel to investigate the loss of the Mars
Climate Orbiter spacecraft last month.  Stephenson's panel will report
its initial findings to NASA headquarters by November 3, one month
before the Mars Polar Lander arrives at the planet.  Two other review
panels, based at JPL, are also looking into the accident, which
preliminary accounts blame on differences in units -- metric vs.
English -- used by two spacecraft teams.

New Moon Weighs in on Asteroid Mass:  The discovery earlier this year
of a small moon around a main belt asteroid has provided new evidence
that some asteroids may be surprisingly light, astronomers announced
Wednesday, October 6.  The discovery of a small moon around asteroid
45 Eugenia, announced earlier this year, allowed a group of American
and European astronomers to measure the mass and density of the
asteroid.  The result:  a density of only about 1.2 grams per cubic
centimeter, far less than the 3 grams per cubic centimeter expected
for a solid, rocky asteroid.  "Either these objects are highly porous
rubble-piles of rock, or they are mostly water ice," said team member
Clark Chapman of the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI).  Searches
are ongoing for other asteroid moons which may help astronomers
understand how common or uncommon Eugenia's low density is.

The Battle of the (Galactic) Bulge:  The central bulges of different
types of spiral galaxies formed very differently, European astronomers
using Hubble Space Telescope images reported October 6.  The large
central bulges of tightly-wound spirals all formed at about the same
time early in the history of the universe, according to one group.
Another group noticed that the smaller bulges of barred spirals grow
over time as gas and dust from the bars flows into the bulge,
providing the raw materials for new stars to form.

Chips off Pluto:  Some bodies in the Kuiper Belt, a disk of icy bodies
beyond the orbit of Neptune, may be debris left over from a collision
that formed the Pluto-Charon system, astronomers announced October 6.
Astronomers at SwRI noticed that the orbits, sizes, and colors of some
Kuiper Belt objects known as "Plutinos" -- so named because they have
similar orbits to Pluto -- are consist with them being debris from a
collision between a proto-Pluto and another body that created Pluto
and its large moon Charon.  As the Kuiper Belt is also the source for
short-period comets that pass through the inner solar system, a "small
but significant" fraction of the comet that pass near the Earth may in
fact be pieces of the planet, the researchers concluded.

Briefly:  A new estimate of the age of carbonates in Martian meteorite
ALH 84001 is consistent with, but not necessarily evidence of, a
biological origin, scientists reported October 1.  The carbonates were
found to be 3.9 billion years old, and thus formed on Mars in
conditions conducive to the formation of life, although the dating
itself doesn't provide any additional evidence that they were in fact
formed by biological processes.  "It's another piece in the puzzle,"
said lead researcher Larry Nyquist... If Lucy wants to be in the sky
with diamonds, she should consider going to Uranus or Neptune, UC
Berkeley scientists concluded October 1.  Lab experiments show that
methane, exposed to the high temperatures and pressures believed to
exist in the interior of those two planets, breaks down and forms
diamonds, which then rain into the cores of the planets.  The
gravitational energy released by the falling diamonds on Neptune is
enough to explain its high heat flux, although this explanation fails
for Uranus, which lacks such a large heat flux.  Scientists plan to
see what those high temperatures and pressures do to other atmospheric
constituents, such as ammonia and water.



Correction: In the article in our last issue about the Space Frontier
Conference, we inadvertently misspelled the name of one of the
speakers, Brent Sherwood.  We apologize for the error.



                             *** Articles ***

                            Thinking About Mars
                               by Jeff Foust

        Why are there no humans on Mars today, and why it is likely
there will be no humans there for at least a decade or two to come?
Answers to this question usually come in one of two forms: "why" and
"how".  The "how" answers usually focus on the lack of technology and
infrastructure needed to accomplish a human Mars mission, while the
"why" answers note the lack of public and government interest in
funding the mission.  Yet, most of the technology needed for a human
Mars mission already exists, and Mars advocates can point to a wide
range of reasons, from scientific to societal, for going there.  We
are stopped by a fundamental disconnect between perception and
reality.

        One step in the elimination of that disconnect took place on
October 1-3, when over one hundred people gathered on the campus of
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) for the "Mars Week"
conference.  Sponsored by the "Think Mars" student group, which has
created an innovative plan for a "semi-commercial" human Mars mission,
the conference brought together experts to talk about the whys and
hows of Martian exploration.


Why Go?

        One of the most exciting reasons why to go to Mars has
centered on the possibility that the planet once harbored -- or might
still harbor today -- life.  Everett Gibson, a leading member of a
team of scientists in the center of the debate regarding evidence for
life in ALH 84001, believes that life still exists on Mars today.

        Gibson reviewed the several lines of evidence that he says
supports his group's conclusion that the meteorite contains evidence
of primitive, ancient life on Mars, including tiny features that
appear to be nanofossils like those seen in some terrestrial rocks.
He then went to two other Martian meteorites, Nakhla and Shergotty.
These meteorites are much younger than the 4-billion-year-old ALH
84001 -- Shergotty is only about 165 million years old -- yet these
meteorites also contain features that closely resemble nanofossils.

        If those features do turn out to be evidence of life, then it
would mean that life existed on Mars from 4 billion years ago, when
ALH 84001 was formed, until 165 million years ago.  Since Mars has not
been subjected to any major global catastrophes since then, Gibson
said this would mean that life would exist on Mars to this day in some
protected niche.

        There are plenty of other scientific reasons to explore Mars,
as explained by MIT planetary scientist Maria Zuber.  The discovery of
a relic magnetic field over portions of the planet has been the "major
surprise" of the Mars Global Surveyor mission to date, she said,
although there have been a bevy of other discoveries dealing with the
geology and topography of the surface.  She noted that those looking
for evidence of past oceans on Mars should look in the northern
hemisphere, given the asymmetric topography of the planet, but the
discovery of channels extending farther north into the putative ocean
basin than earlier known suggests that early Mars may have had a
network of channels, rather than a continuous, deep ocean.

        However, scientific arguments are neither the only reason to
support going to Mars nor necessarily the most important reason.
Outlining the philosophy described in his latest book, Robert Zubrin
said humanity needs new frontiers like Mars to continue to stimulate
human civilization.  Without them, he warned, "we are doomed to be
inhabitants of our society, not the makers."


Go How?

        Arguments in favor of human exploration of Mars lose their
appeal if there's no feasible way to go there.  Fortunately, there is
no shortage of proposals for such missions, ranging from the grandiose
-- and insanely expensive -- Space Exploration Initiative proposals of
a decade ago to much less expensive proposals like Mars Direct (which
Zubrin discussed at Mars Week) and variations.

        There is still room for other ideas, though.  Astronaut
Franklin Chang-Diaz discussed his concept, called VASIMR, a
constant-thrust engine that ionizes hydrogen and accelerates it out
the back with a magnetic field.  Such an engine could be used on a
spacecraft that can travel from Earth to Mars in as little as 90 days,
about half the best proposals for spacecraft injected on Mars-bound
trajectories by ordinary rockets.

        VASIMR is more than just a paper study.  Chang-Diaz and his
team of researchers at the Johnson Space Center have been working on a
number of small-scale designs.  They hope to fly a version of the
VASIMR engine on a spacecraft called the Radiation and Technology
Demonstrator (RTD), scheduled for launch in 2004.

        Once you get to Mars, what will you do and how will you live?
These are questions being answered by researchers who spend parts of
the last several summers on Devon Island, an uninhabited piece of the
Canadian arctic that closely resembles the Martian landscape.

        Scientists such as Pascal Lee of NASA's Ames Research Center
have spent parts of the last few summers at Haughton Crater, an impact
crater formed 23 million years ago.  Soon, he said, their temporary
tent homes will be supplanted by the Mars Arctic Research Station
(MARS), a larger facility in the form of Mars lander spacecraft.  MARS
is being sponsored and built by the Mars Society, and should be ready
by next summer.


Think Mars

        These answers to "why" and "how" still leave unanswered
arguably the most important question: "how to you pay for it?"  One
solution to that problem, one that involves "substantial" private
investment, was at the core of the conference; in fact, it was the
reason the conference took place to begin with.

        Think Mars grew out of a NASA student competition that started
a year ago.  Called "NASA Means Business", the content challenged
students to develop a business plan for a human mission to Mars.  A
team of MIT and Harvard students developed such a plan, and was one of
a half-dozen winning teams.

        Not content to stop with the end of the competition, the Think
Mars team, which grew to dozens of contributors at the two
universities and elsewhere, fleshed out the business plan even
further, talking with major players within NASA, Congress, and the
aerospace industry.  Another aspect of the group's efforts was the
Mars Week conference.

        The Think Mars business plan focuses on finding the money for
human Mars missions, not the technical details of the mission itself.
The plan identifies a number of commercial sources of revenue to fund
a mission, from Olympic-style sponsorship to selling crew slots on the
mission itself.  These funds would not necessarily pay for the mission
in total, but could "significantly offset" total costs, according to
Think Mars business plan manager Kevin Leclaire.

        The Think Mars leaders believe that this plan can establish a
partnership between the public and private sectors that can lower the
costs of the mission to the participating governments while increasing
public and political support.

        There are still plenty of risks to such a project, ranging
from the high cost of capital to uncertain regulations to the
necessity of establishing credibility, but Think Mars leaders believe
they have made a good first step.  They acknowledge the need to do
additional work identifying markets, products, services, and financing
issues, among many other things.

        It's a step in the right direction, although Robert Zubrin
noted that all this talk about Mars should not be construed as the
ultimate goal for space exploration and settlement.  "Mars is not the
destination," he said.  "It's the direction."


--
Jeff Foust is editor of SpaceViews.




                            *** CyberSpace ***

                             The Astronomy Net

The Astronomy Net is intended as a resource for various topics in
astronomy.  The key features of the site are discussion forums for
various astronomy topics, from amateur astronomy to black holes; and
an extensive list of astronomy-related Web sites.  You can also find
astronomy news and articles n the site as well as classified
advertising for buying or selling astronomy merchandise.

http://www.astronomy.net/


                                SpaceWatch

Looking for quality space and astronomy shows on TV?  Maybe you're
looking in the wrong medium.  SpaceWatch provides three shows -- two
weekly and one monthly -- about space and astronomy... on the Web.
The shows, viewable through RealVideo, cover a range of topics and
include guests such as former NASA astronauts.  You can view
previously-recorded shows or watch them live, with the opportunity to
pose questions to the guests during the show.   It's all free, too,
save for some commercials from the site's sponsor, the Omega Watch
Company.

http://www.spacewatch.com/


                           Astrobiology at NASA

Astrobiology (sometimes called exobiology), the study of life outside
the Earth, has become a hot topic in recent years, with a number of
NASA missions and projects devoted to it.  This Web site at NASA's
Ames Research Center provides an overview of astrobiology in general
and NASA's astrobiology efforts in particular.  In addition, the site
includes links to astrobiology-related news articles on other sites,
as well as conference and research resources.

http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/


                          Hubble Heritage Project

The Hubble Heritage Project is a project to build, in its words, "a
bridge between the endeavors of scientists and the public."  Each
month, a team of astronomers at the Space Telescope Science Institute
releases an image generated from data in the Hubble Space Telescope's
extensive archives.  The images are designed to be both aesthetically
pleasing and scientifically interesting.  The objects featured in the
stunning images range from Jupiter's Great Red Spot to nebulae and
distant galaxies.

http://heritage.stsci.edu/



========
        This has been the October 8, 1999, issue of SpaceViews.
SpaceViews is also available on the World Wide web from the
SpaceViews home page:

        http://www.spaceviews.com/

or via anonymous FTP from ftp.seds.org:

        ftp://ftp.seds.org/pub/info/newsletters/spaceviews/text/19991008.txt

To unsubscribe from SpaceViews, send mail to:

        majordomo@spaceviews.com

In the body (not subject) of the message, type:

        unsubscribe spaceviews

For editorial questions and article submissions for SpaceViews,
including letters to the editor, contact the editor, Jeff Foust, at
jeff@spaceviews.com

For questions about the SpaceViews mailing list, please contact
spaceviews-approval@spaceviews.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     ____                | "SpaceViews" (tm) -by Boston Chapter
    //   \ //            |       of the National Space Society (NSS)
   // (O) //             |  Dedicated to the establishment
  // \___//              |       of a spacefaring civilization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                          'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 13:18:23 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:54:44 -0400
Subject: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?


Greetings list -

Found this interesting article about a new scientific report
suggesting that there may in fact be a "Planet X" beyond Pluto.
Could be a boon to Sitchin's theories if validated.

From: http://msnbc.com/news/320182.asp

A mystery revolves around the sun Researchers suggest that huge
unseen object orbits on fringe of solar system

Oct. 7  -  Two teams of researchers have proposed the existence
of an unseen planet or a failed star circling the sun at a
distance of more than 2 trillion miles, far beyond the orbits of
the nine known planets. The theory, which seeks to explain
patterns in comets� paths, has been put forward in research
accepted for publication in two separate journals.

SPECULATION ABOUT the existence of unseen celestial companions
dates back far before the discovery of Pluto in 1929  - and even
figures in more recent fringe phenomena such as the 1997
"Heaven�s Gate" tragedy and talk of a new "Planet X." This
latest hypothesis, however, is aimed at answering nagging
scientific questions about how particular types of comets make
their way into the inner solar system.

Some comets, like Halley�s Comet, follow relatively short-period
orbits  - circling the sun in less than two hundred years. These
comets are thought to originate in the Kuiper Belt, a disk of
cosmic debris that lies beyond Neptune�s orbit.

The best way to think of the distances involved is in terms of
Astronomical Units. One AU is the distance from Earth to the sun
(93 million miles or 149.6 million kilometers). Pluto, the most
distant of the planets, is at 39 AU. The Kuiper Belt extends
from 30 AU to perhaps 1,000 AU.

Even further out is the Oort Cloud, a spherical haze of comets
surrounding the solar system at distances between 10,000 AU and
more than 50,000 AU. That�s where long-period comets such as
Hale-Bopp are thought to come from. For some time, astronomers
have noticed that the directional patterns of these comets are
not completely random. And after years of study, some
researchers are reporting that the patterns hint at something
big out there perturbing the cometary paths.

WHAT COULD IT BE?

No telescope has yet detected this object. But on the basis of
its gravitational effect, John B. Murray, a planetary scientist
at Britain�s Open University, speculates that the object could
be a planet larger than Jupiter, the biggest of the solar
system�s known planets. Murray puts the object�s orbit at 32,000
AU, or 2.98 trillion miles from the sun. His proposal appears in
the Oct. 11 issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society.

Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Louisiana at
Lafayette say the object could be a planet or brown dwarf  - that
is, a dark, failed star  - roughly three times the size of
Jupiter and orbiting at 25,000 AU. The researchers, led by
physicist John Matese, say their paper is to be published by the
journal Icarus.

Both studies acknowledge that other factors could influence the
pattern seen in long-period comets: for example, the Milky Way�s
gravitational tidal effects. But the Louisiana researchers say
the cometary patterns are best explained by the existence of "a
perturber, acting in concert with the galactic tide."

Matese said the proposed object should make one orbit around the
sun every 4 million to 5 million years. Murray said the object
he had in mind would make one orbit every 6 million years,
circling the sun in a direction counter to that followed by the
nine traditional planets.

The two researchers said they were familiar with each other�s
work but hadn�t taken a close look at each other�s studies. They
acknowledged that their estimates for the mass and orbit of a
mysterious object were similar, but couldn�t say whether they
were talking about the same object.

MORE QUESTIONS

How could such a massive object exist so far from the sun? The
researchers say a planet or dark star could have coalesced
during the formation of the solar system billions of years ago,
but more probably would be a passing celestial body that was
captured by the sun�s subtle gravitational pull.

Another question: Why hasn�t such an object been seen? Murray
says that even a Jupiter-scale planet could not be observed at
the immense distances involved. Matese and his colleagues say
that their hypothetical brown dwarf wouldn�t have been detected
even by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite, which surveyed the
heavens in 1983  - but that the yet-to-be-launched Space Infrared
Telescope Facility just might be able to pick it up.

All this may sound like science fiction, but an expert in the
field notes that the hypothesis has been a subject of serious
speculation for years.

"We�ve all wondered whether there was something out there," said
Brian Marsden, who heads the International Astronomical Union�s
Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams as well as the Minor
Planet Center at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.

However, Marsden also expressed some skepticism about the
evidence behind the latest research.

"I�m not convinced it is not due to chance," he told MSNBC in an
e-mail message. "In any case, the data may not be as good as one
would like."

If the research holds up, it could open the door for renewed
speculation on even spookier questions: Some theorists have
proposed that the gravitational effect of a massive unseen
object in a distant orbit  - nicknamed "Nemesis" or the "Death
Star"  - could set off periodic cometary storms, which would
increase the chances of a catastrophic impact with Earth.
Indeed, physicist Daniel Whitmire, a colleague of Matese�s who
is a co-author of the new research, laid out just such a
scenario in 1985 to explain mass extinctions on Earth, such as
the demise of the dinosaurs.

Matese also speculated back then about such an effect, but he
emphasized that the newly detected object didn�t fit the
doomsday profile.

"This object is not a Nemesis," he told MSNBC. "It does not
create comet storms."

He said his proposed object would cause a mere 25 percent
increase in the influx of comets from the Oort Cloud.

"It�s very modest, but we believe this very modest signal
requires a dynamical explanation," he said.

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                   NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters?

From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 17:02:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:18:33 -0400
Subject: NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters?


Dear List-ers, Lurkers and any other entities which have slipped
into this segment of space/time.

I recently had the opportunity to rant for 'five minutes', on the
excellent UFO program hosted by our lovely, talented but oh-so
modest moderator, Errol Bruce-Knapp, 'Strange Days... Indeed'.

For those of you who might have missed it (and if so, WHY did
you miss it? You can catch it on the web, on short-wave, hell,
you can probably catch it from a toilet seat. May you come down
with a bout of Gripple Gripe and be a prisoner in your bathroom
for a minimum 24 hours).

I am posting a slightly edited version, the language tightened
and some typos removed. Don't know if (or why) anyone would be
interested, but if nothing else, it might give you a smile!


NASA, The Red-Faced Agency

NASA has got to wonder what a space agency has to do to get a
little respect, and some exploring done at a neighboring planet.

Mars might be our near-neighbor in the solar system, but, boy,
does it like its privacy!

Russia wasted a pair of probes in the first wave of Mars
exploration back in the 70�s when they arrived during massive
sand storms and sent back almost zilch information.

But in the 90�s the red-planet has left NASA with a red face, having lost
two of its last three missions to Mars - at a cost of about one and a half
billion dollars.

The Mars Climate Observer was supposed to be the first weather satellite to
take station around another world, and provide a full Martian year of
weather observations. Instead, on Sept 23rd at 5 in the morning, as the MCO
was starting a 17 min burn to put it into orbit, NASA lost contact.

Late last week, NASA came up with its explanation for the loss of the
MCO - and I still don�t know whether to laugh or cry at the excuse.
HOUSTON, WE HAVE A MATH PROBLEM.

It seems the big brains at NASA, you know, the best minds on the
final frontier, Armageddon�s "smartest man on the planet, you
might want to listen to what he has to say" NASA, had a little
problem converting miles to kilometers so instead of coming at
Mars about 149 kilometers up, it came in at 59 kilometers above
the ground, too close to avoid the Martian atmosphere, what
there is of one. At the speeds the probe was traveling at,
contact with the atmosphere means it probably burnt up or broke
up.

Kiss a 125 million dollar satellite goodbye.

Makes you wonder, does NASA stand for Not A Science Agency? Not
Always Smart Asses?

Actually, its not too surprising. We Canadians have long known
that the metric system of measurement is a complete mystery to
Americans. You can see them driving at 100 mph on Canadian
highways, because the post speed limit is 100 kilometers an
hour. The big signs posted at the border crossing into the Great
White North, the ones that point out this difference between the
two nations are routinely ignored.

So, for the alleged rocket scientists at NASA, here�s a little
tip from a Frostback who admittedly has a slow leak in his head:

There are 1.6 kilometers in a mile or .62 miles in a kilometer
if you prefer.

Write that down. You might want to remember it next time you wander beyond
the boundaries of Kennedy Space Centre.

I think the one NASA spokes-geek that really ticked me off said
"We got millions of things right with this mission, and one
thing wrong, but we�ll learn from our mistakes and move on."

The equivalent: a pilot stumbles from the wreckage of a crashed
737 and says "I got most of the flight right, just one mistake
towards the end."

And what happened to triple redundancy and safe guards on safe
guards. I know budget cuts have forced NASA into a faster,
better, cheaper posture - but how about somebody check the math,
at least for the crucial stages.

Now, you might be thinking that this has got to stand as NASA�s
biggest mistake ever - but I wouldn�t agree.

No, that distinction goes to the NASA�s other failed mission to
Mars, the 1993 Mars Observer. That one and a quarter BILLION
dollar probe also died as it was about to fire its engines to go
into orbit. Unlike the MCO, mission control had to use a
hands-on approach to lose that satellite.

According to NASA�s official explanation, which wasn�t released
until months afterwards, the 1993 Mars Observer mission went
down the toilet when a mission controller turned off
communications with the probe just before the orbital rocket
burn. The reason he switched off: there was a remote possibility
vibrations caused by firing the rockets could knock out
communications.

So, to prevent loss of communications with its probe, NASA cut
off communications with its probe.

Huh?

This is very much like the U.S. military�s Vietnam-era mind set:
To save the village, we had to destroy it.

For those not clear on the workings of a satellite mission to a
distant planet - the satellite is basically a robot, remote
controlled by mission control back on earth. The satellite will
carry a full set of operating instructions within its computer
brain - but Mission Control is the final authority. Those
on-board instructions are the back-up. So, you�re controlling a
billion dollar plus satellite as it approaches a planet about
300 million kilometers away at a speed of over 20-thousand
kilometers an hour. You are entering the most crucial phase of
the mission, getting the satellite to its orbital destination -
so you shut down your remote-controller and go have a beer.

Again, HUH?

For some reason, the back-up on-board instruction didn�t get the
radio turned back on, either. Probably confused about how many
miles or kilometers away Mars was supposed to be.

No surprise, NASA never got hold of the Mars Observer, for all
we know it could be orbiting the red planet as we speak.

So what?

Well, the Mars Observer was sent equipped with the best cameras
ever, as the public interest in the "Face on Mars" was at fever
pitch. It was better equipped than the Mars Sojourner mission of
1998, which sent back the blank face pictures from Cydonia.

The paranoid can assume NASA took a secret, early look at
Cydonia and decided to slap the lid on it - .or that the
Galactic Overlord, in the final stages of Operation: Invade
Earth, decided to take care of the spy probe in its midst.

Whatever.

And finally, a short word on paranoia - its uses and abuses.

I can�t help but notice that in my years in the UFO field,
curiosity and paranoia seem to be the two main features of most
researchers.

We�re paranoid the government is covering up the TRUTH about
UFOs and alien intervention.

We�re paranoid other researchers are faking their facts, are
getting rich while we go broke or are undermining our own work.

We�re paranoid the public is too sheep-like in accepting the
government line.

We�re curious about the phenomena - and paranoid about aspects
of it.

So take note, [Canada's] Globe and Mail columnist Ian Dowbiggin
has written a book called 'Suspicious Minds - The Triumph of
Paranoia in Everyday Life'.

A fabulous read, not the least of which is because he DOESN�T
point out us UFO-types as the biggest paranoids - he says that
for political correctness and its fellow travelers.

But he writes a very intelligent response to the old line we all
like to trot out now and then, the one that reads, "Just because
you�re paranoid, doesn�t mean the world isn�t out to get you.

His response, which I am considering having tattooed on the
foreheads of some  overly suspicious members of the UFO
community - "Just because you have enemies, doesn�t mean you
have to get paranoid."

Amen, kiddies, amen.

Michael J. Woods


The truth can STAY out there,
send in a good fantasy!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:23:46 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100

 >>From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000

 >>Posted for Maxwell Burns

 >>To UFO UpDates:

 >>This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
 >>the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
 >>like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
 >>would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
 >>have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

 >Have you ever read such nonsense?

 >Well, on UpDates the answer is probably yes! If anyone wanted
 >evidence of Burn's inability to face facts, to face reality,
 >then it's all shown below!

 >What he entirely fails to mention is that he was found guilty -
 >not by the Police but by a totally independent jury in one of
 >the more liberal cities in Northern England - Sheffield is well
 >known for its;' tolerance in many areas and this is perhaps
 >something to do with the two major Universities located there.
 >The judge said that Burns was "some way up the hierarchy" in
 >terms of drug-dealing in the area and Burns had been targetted
 >by the drugs squad for some time. Now that we know the truth we
 >know that Burns had been involved in this evil world for some
 >time - in other words well before his newly acquired interest in
 >Ufology.

 >Just because Burns chose to lie - and answered questions
 >consistently throughout his interviews with the Police - means
 >nothing. Just because he wore gloves to avoid finger prints on
 >the bag of drugs that he was found with by Police - means very
 >little.

 >What people should not forget is that in interviews with Dave
 >Clarke - an aware-winning local journalist (amongst other
 >things) - Burns admitted he was guilty. He said he expected to
 >go down for his drug-dealing.

 >To the moron world of Ufology - where aliens are all around -
 >Burns probably seems like an innocent man. That's a reflection
 >upon Ufology - not the criminal justice system in the UK.

 >Burns also engaged in a hate campaign against my wife and I.
 >This is a fact. Initially we didn't know who it was - until the
 >hapless Burns admitted it to another local researcher in a
 >'private' email.

 >I live around 15 miles North of the prison that Burns is in.
 >Perhaps I should drop by with some friends and picket the prison
 >demanding longer sentences for drug dealers.

 >We can be sure of one thing. When Burns comes out, I'll be on
 >his case......

 >Tim Matthews.

Your bone to pick is with Burns.  If he's guilty or not, what if
he's telling the truth about his ufological issues?  Do we just
let it all slide through the prison bars and down the drain?  Or
has is all been fabricated as we all assume a 'druggy' would do?

Let's all condemn the man in all aspects of his existence and
deny him the right to share any truths that may exist that may
contribute to the rest of ufology's puzzle.

Would you disown a prostitute and her claims of having an alien
living in her basement, that well known researchers have
witnessed and spoken to in secrecy, being one of the most
compelling cases ever to exist, because she's a prostitute?
Probably.  If you found out I was a politician, would you not
care about my abduction or sighting experiences anymore?
Probably.

Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
stands.  How righteous.

I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone, but he was a
respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
it. At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
longer believable or not worthy of our attention?  When someone
else has a bone to pick with them?  I make up my own mind,
thanks. And what shall we find out about those so quick to
discredit? ;)

Sue

"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never simple"
                                               - Oscar Wilde








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                        Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 23:18:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:35:34 -0400
Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:58:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >>Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >>Hi listfolk,

 >>In the thread 'Get Real' a debate was started about what right
 >>the 'aliens' had to abduct people. This debate touched upon the
 >>question what the purpose of abductions really was.

 >>A remark by Terry Evans struck me. His wife had told him: "It
 >>seems like they are stealing my emotions."

<snip>

 >Hi Henny, All>

 >Well if your theory is correct that that could explain why there
 >are so little British abductions. Stiff upper lip, reserve and
 >all that dear chap. We British are not known for showing our
 >emotions, so perhaps this might add some more weight to your>
 >hypothesis.


".....stealing my emotions...."

In the opinion of Quentin Fogarty, who was on the airplane that
flew along the coast of New Zealand in December 1978, they are
"soul eaters". He got this impression while watching a
"performance" by unexplained lights off the coast of NZ. (He was
not an abductee.)

Yes, I know, Ed Walters is considered to be one of the lowest
forms of life by some on this list.

That's tough!

For those of you willing to listen, you ought to consider what
came out under hypnosis with Dr. Dan Overlade:

Ed was made to sit on a table and above his head was a "helmet"
consisting of semicircular bars that crossed perpendicular to
one another at the junction point at the top of this "helmet",
above the top of his head. This helmet was hanging from the
ceiling. When it was lowered onto his head it contacted at four
points: forehead, left right temples and back of the head.

(After the May 1 early morning event, and weeks before the first
hypnosis session, Ed reported to me that he found a red mark on
his forehead above his nose, red marks on his temples and a
small bump on the back of his head. These marks were confirmed
and photograped by Gulf Breeze investigators. At the time no one
knew the significance of these marks except that they were found
after a period of missing time that was precided by a sighting
and stereo photo).

A similar "helmet:" was then placed on a small alien creature
that was seated next to him. Suddenly he would start to relive
an experience. either a "real-life experience from his history
or an experience that the aliens had arranged for him just prior
to the use of the "helmet."

After he had relived the scene the small alien would be removed
from the helmet and another small alien would be placed in th
small helmt and Ed woul relive the same event again. Sometimes
this would happen with a number of aliens, as if he were a
videorecorder that was being repeatedly operated to shw the same
scene and events to many people.

Ed was given the impression that this was a way of "teaching"
the aliens about human emotions.

See "ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE" by Ed and Frances Walters, Avon, 1994






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 23:00:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:53:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:11:22 -0400

<snip>

 >Or maybe you stay around, staging interactions with humans,
 >because you need something in their souls, and you need their
 >planet, too. Not so bizarre (and it's more or less that what
 >David Jacobs suggests in "The Threat")

 >Greg Sandow


Yes, and Jacobs (with his unerring ear for who's doing this
hypnosis stuff right and who's not) would be more right than,
say, Mack, Sprinkle, or Strieber, or any other interpreter of
the phenomenon, including Kevin Randle?

You're starting to go soft on me, Greg. What you're really
implying is that no objections can be made, or questions asked
of the Jacobs scenario, because we can always ultimately refer
to alien intentions, desires, or whatever, when it has yet to be
established that these aliens that supposedly need our souls
and/or planet even exist as physical beings in the first place.

When people the least skeptical of such claims raise an
objection, the other side (you, in this case) responds by
saying, ah, but you can't judge alien psychology & logic by
reference to human psychology & logic -- and then proceeds to
promote your own interpretations of so-called alien psychology.
If we can't do it, then why should you and yours be allowed to?

Because of the "evidence"? But who's evidence?

Are aliens that, by most accounts, don't eat, shit, pee, or
screw, really in need of a planet of their own? What for? Are
they after our purple mountain's majesty and endless seas of
golden grain? What for? And what about those elusive souls of
ours? Times are when I wish I had one to spare. Last night, for
example.

So let's not raise any questions about alien abductions. Because
the aliens have all the answers. Just ask them. But choose your
asker carefully. Otherwise, your answer may vary. Bizarre, eh?

Apologies to Dr. Gripple, who really does have all the answers
because he told me I didn't.

Dennis Stacy











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 22:00:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:54:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >No, Dennis.  Not whatever I say, nor even whatever you say.
 >It's how you say it, dude, that makes my skin crawl.  You sound
 >to me as if you've got all the answers and even if you don't,
 >you know what they aint.

<snip>

 >Love,
 >Jim


Whatever you say, Jim. Others have had different experiences and
different interpretations. Would you agree?

Again, I was addressing the abduction literature as it exists.
Not establishing rules or insinuating anything about your own
experiences.

Sorry if you took it otherwise.

Dennis








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                          Re: Max Burns - Let It Go

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 17:10:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 11:59:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Max Burns - Let It Go


 >>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 22:48:13 +0100
 >>From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Max Burns - Let It Go

 >>It's nice to see so many people wallowing in anothers person
 >>stupidity or misfortune depending on where you stand.

 >>I will not condone his actions or condemn them.  Unless you were
 >>on that jury, you will not have received the full facts - you
 >>will have received the facts how the media presented them.

 >>Shall we get back to UFOs, folks?

 >>Mark Haywood

Hi All & Mark

I received a letter from Max the other day, and I can relay that
he is in good spirits and has been kept informed by many friends
across the globe on UFO affairs and the many kind & generous '
heart warming statements being released hither to!

I doubt very much if the fun is over yet for some people' in
fact it's just begun.

Ban blood sports I say...  Mind you them Fox's are clever
buggers......

Now who was the kid I knew in 76, stealing a mars bar out of the
corner shop..... Peace man!

Roy..                           Keep Smiling







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 00:26:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 12:12:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Maybe if you'd reported your encounter earlier the existing UFO
 >>literature wouldn't read and sequence the way it does. But you
 >>didn't and it does. (How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >>experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >>three? Just curious.)

The subject of early childhood memory ability is one of great
debate, but it seems if an event was sufficiently emotionally
charged (ie fear, rejection, abuse), the memory either stands
out clearly or maybe forgotten only to be recalled later.  (no I
am not talking about recovered memories under hypnosis)

One woman I know of, recalled an event and even her thought
concerning an action by her mother.  Years later as an adult,
she mentioned this piece memory fragment and asked about the
rest of the event.  All she knew was it was it was some kind of
emergency involving danger and she wondered why her mother
bothered to stop and pick up the bootie that had fallen of her
foot as her mother raced along a sidewalk holding her.  Her mom
was shocked that daughter recalled that event.  She too recalled
it.  It was in Glasgow, Scotland, during the German bombing of
the British island and mom was running to a bomb shelter as the
nightly raid began.  Daughter was about 6 months old.

I have a memory that goes back to before I could talk very much
- age 24 months.  My mom was shocked I recalled it.  I told her
what I was thinking as I screamed in that hospital room and she
told me about the agony she was experiencing just outside the
room listening to me!

I would tend to suspect that the experience of being taken by
strange little creatures out of my crib or tiny bed and into a
very strange place where strange being did hurtful things to my
body, might be even more traumatic, and from my experience,
would definitely leave a lasting detailed memory!  I do not
doubt Jim's memory!  And while I recall an event some 48 years
ago, I too have a terrible time trying to recall where I left
the portable phone and just about anything else if its too
recent!

Lesley








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 12:16:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:11:22 -0400

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 >>Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >>upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >>Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >>zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >>life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >>You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >>Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >>a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >>recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >>fix.

 >>Bizzare.

 >Or maybe you stay around, staging interactions with humans,
 >because you need something in their souls, and you need their
 >planet, too. Not so bizarre (and it's more or less that what
 >David Jacobs suggests in "The Threat")

 >Greg Sandow

Hi Greg, hi Joe, & All,

Re: cattle/humans

Anal fixations aside, I think you should switch your focus from
excised cow rectums to missing cow's -blood!-

We (modern science) use cow's blood to 'extract' some of its
substances for use in -transfusions- for human patients.
(Because of its unique compatibility with human blood.) Cows and
humans, what's the connection? You have only to look to the
(ubiquitous) lack of blood in the animals and on the scene when
they are discovered. Time and again one of the striking features
of reported cattle mutilations is the lack of blood at the scene
or in the animal itself. Even the taking of certain organs
during a mutilation may be a 'side issue' to the complete
removal of the animals blood.

There were some cases where the liquid portions of the blood
were missing altogether and all that was found was the powdery
remains in the vascular system and portions of the heart
chambers. (Re: autopsy reports from Linda Moulton-Howe's case
studies.)

The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
viewed in that light, do they?

I would be less disturbed at the possibilities if it were
otherwise. Even the cattle mutilations (as nonsensical and 'far
out' as they may at first appear to be on the surface) bespeak
an -intimate- knowledge of human chemistry and physiology.

Food for thought and something that should not be 'blown over'
lightly.

Just speculating.  :)

"To err is human, to forgive is ~bovine!~"  (Sorry!)

John Velez



________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 12:23:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 09:52:43 +0000
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >><snip>

 >>>Good Lord!  I had no idea there were rules of abduction at any
 >>>given point in time.  Thanks Dennis.  I mean, for the
 >>>information.  Now I am certain that in 1945, when I perceived I
 >>>was invited to join some short little duds, uh, sorry, dudes (I
 >>>was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite) I was mistaken.
 >>>Or was I?  Maybe back then your "once upon a time rule was
 >>>different.

 >><snip>

 >>Maybe if you'd reported your encounter earlier the existing UFO
 >>literature wouldn't read and sequence the way it does. But you
 >>didn't and it does. (How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >>experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >>three? Just curious.)

 >>Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

 >>Dennis

 >Dennis is getting at the heart of the "earliest recovered
 >abduction narrative evidence" problem. So many abductees /
 >experiencers exclaim that they have been having these encounters
 >since childhood. I don't doubt or discount this possibility.
 >However, in the absence of confirmatory evidence of any sort (a
 >diary entry, a parents recall, something) it is very difficult
 >to take these assertions as 'chapter and verse' with regard to
 >the actual historic length of the modern bedroom visitation type
 >encounter phenomena. The evidence in consciousness, memory and
 >perception research surely casts much doubt on the validity of
 >this kind of 'recall.'

Actually Stephen, I've already told the List in several posts
that my parents remember three of the more strange experiences I
had as a child in the mid forties.  They remember my story to
them the very next morning after it occured and they also
vividly remember hearing it for years afterward.  At age three,
I did not keep a diary.  So sorry. Neither did my mom or dad.
We have only our memories to go by.

There is great doubt over the validity of recall, most
especially at the age of two years or three.  But such must be
combined with and integrated into the greater history of the
individual, and without any such memory aid as hypnosis.  For
example ...

I very rarely recall dreams for more than a few moments after
I've awakened.

I have always been able to distinguish between a memory of an
event and a dream.  Certain dreams are recurring in the theme.
Most of us have them.  The history test is tomorrow and I've not
opened the book. Not only that, but I cut every class.  Ad
infinitum.

Last, the memories I recall are vivid in great detail for over a
half century.

 >I myself have an image memory in my mind of a light moving
 >across the night sky from my youth. In my mind's eye memory I
 >can absolutely say for certain that, "I remember seeing this
 >light move in a slow straight non-ufo like line across the night
 >sky as I watched it with some other kids at the Summer Camp we
 >were attending. I remember saying then, wouldn't it be cool if
 >the light suddenly stopped and then did a 90 degree turn towards
 >the ground as if it were going to land?! Ever since that moment,
 >and I knew this upon making the statement at the time, I am
 >unable to recall the real light continuing on in a straight
 >line. My memory of it is endellably [sic] etched into the 'ufo'
 >movement."

Cogito, ergo, so what?   With all due respect.... one memory
does not a theory make, not does it substantiate one.

 >Of course, if I add the coup de grace, some may immediately
 >decide I am in fact an abductee. "On one of the last nights at
 >this Summer Camp vacation I was awoken in the middle of the
 >night by a commotion. My memory of this is all pretty hazy.

My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
imprinted in my memory.

This particular ambulance took me up into the sky.

 >Everyone in camp was walking off into the Texas underbrush. All
 >I really remember is being very tired and confused, walking
 >through the scrub brush and cedar trees for a distance over
 >typical rolling Texas hills. I started to hear more voices and
 >entered upon a bowl like depression clear of trees but
 >surrounded by cedars on the outer lip of the bowl. All the camp
 >is here and we are bathed in a golden yellow light from a ...
 >camp fire? I remember little else of this night; presenting of
 >bead awards or somesuch, but I don't remember the return to my
 >cabin. I awoke the next morning in my bed."

You speak of hazy memories which someone may call UFO related. I
speak of vivid and (to my mind, my intellect and memory) - real.
You and I are speaking different languages.  We are on different
frequencies. What's your point?

 >Ok ok, I'm not trying to trivialize the matter. Hardly anyone on
 >this list would seriously entertain the possibility that what I
 >described was at all ufo related. But I have had people suspect
 >the same for less. As someone profoundly interested in ufos I
 >can't express to you the sheer numbers of gullible people who
 >have come up to me and asserted "you're so interested in this
 >you _must_ have been abducted and you just don't remember it."

And I can point you to many individuals who share my
distinctively real memory in the most intricate matched detail,
of things which I described to my parents 50 years ago.  So they
didn't write it down. So what?  This makes a difference?  Well,
maybe to you.  But not to me my friend out there in the ether.

Dennis understands his hell bent for leather view better than you may
imagine.  And yet, he understands little about the experiences which
he decries.
 >
 >This is why I think a better examination of the "memory" of
 >these encounters, particularly the alleged early childhood ones,
 >should be undertaken. But there are obvious technical and
 >ethical considerations.

I volunteer.  Any other takers?  Or is there going to be another
Challenge, as in the one Velez posed last week.

Come on folks. The one piece of evidence most avoided, most
referred to as "non evidence," is that of the experiencer's memories.
Doesn't matter who it is, postal worker or PhD.  IBM executive or
CEO of a fortune 100 corporation. Most don't accept this.  It's not
evidence.  To you.... not necessarily "you" personally, but the
collective "researcher you!"  AKA, yous.

John Velez asked that we all pull together with our evidence and
have it evaluated by independent scientists.  That goes for me
too when it comes to the so-called "anectotal" evidence.  The
testimony of people like me.  Which is as worthless to some
(all too many) researchers as swamp gas.  Which by the way,
has more validity in some circles.  Swamp gas.  Pelicans.

But witness testimony?

Nah!

Before I retired I was CEO of a company, my own, which did a
goodly volume with fortune ten companies.  Prior to that I was
director of marketing for  multimillion to multibillion dollar
firms. Does that make me a better witness to my own experiences?
Apparently not.

Ah the smell of it.  Stench is more like it.  And what stinks is
the truth which some people have in commone with others of their
clan.  Their truth.  Which is indisputable.  But not ours. Ours
sucks big time.

Sour grapes?  Of course.  We use that stuff in our best Gripple.

Jim Mortellaro








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:08:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 12:25:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

<snip>

 >The one thing I won't be doing however, is waving the European
 >Convention on Human Rights at them, or sending them a lawyer's
 >letter, or getting my MP to raise the matter in Parliament. Yes,
 >if abductions do exist as physical events performed by aliens -
 >and I've spoken to enough abductees who themselves deny this, to
 >have grave doubts about that - it *is* a violation of my rights,
 >but I don't find that a particularly constructive attitude to
 >take. It seems as pointless as worrying whether my rights are
 >being violated by ghosts, vampires or the tooth-fairy.

When I refer to rights, John, I am not talking about anything
written on a piece of paper or in law books - in _any_ country.
I refer to the rights to dignity, security in our own homes and
all the basic rights we claim not only as citizens of our
respective countries but as citizens of the earth, this galaxy
and the universe.  If we do not acknowledge our rights, we will
not have them.  If we forsake our beliefs, morals and ethics
when faced with realities and technologies we do not understand,
what's left?  Who are we if we lay down our rights, our needs,
our primitive but functional drives to survive even in the face
of all odds?

When we encounter beings from another planet/dimension, we need
to know ourselves, our beliefs and our standards for diplomatic
relations with alternate entities.  Should ET land and make open
contact tomorrow, we need not sign over the deed to earth, our
souls, our rights nor bow and worship them as gods.

This scenario may already be upon us.  Contact seems to be
occurring on many levels with many groups of people, covert and
overt.  It is time for us to discuss these issues and understand
our position when it comes to interactions with other worldly
beings.  Perhaps knowing who we are and where _we_stand on the
issue of rights will go a long way to helping other beings
understand us.  It's a lot better than giving up.

It doesn't matter whether or not some beings with advanced
technology recognize our rights.  What's most important is that
_we_ recognize and acknowledge our rights first to ourselves and
extend the same rights to other beings in the universe.  It may
not keep us from being abducted.  It may not keep us from being
used as guinea pigs.  But it does keep us from becoming like
those who may not acknowledge our rights and I think _that_ is
what makes all the difference.

Maybe it's time to decide just how far our rights extend.  Do
human rights extend only as far as our geographic borders,
earth's atmosphere, the moon, Mars, the next galaxy or to the
ends of the universe?  What's most important to us that makes us
who we are?  Are the rights of other beings more important than
our rights?  And most importantly, without rights, who are we?

It's time we grow up and out into a universe and reality greater
than we have yet perceived.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 01:11:15 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 13:42:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


To Bruce Maccabbee:

Mr. William G. Hyzer has staked his [and his son Jame's]
reputation on the analysis from a first-generation copy of
Photograph #19. And without a doubt, Photograph #19 is a
double-exposure due to the fact that there is no luminance seen
on the road, nor is there a reflection of the UFO on the hood of
the truck.

You, Bruce Maccabee, have contended that there was a dent in the
hood, or the top of the hood was muddy, or there were bricks in
the back of the truck causing it to be slanted in an upward
position near its front. I will again stress to you and those on
the internet that William G. Hyzer informs that even if all of
those things were true, there would still be a reflection of the
UFO on the hood of the truck. Likewise, there should still be
luminance reflecting from the highway.

You state, Bruce Maccabee, that all of these aforementioned
points concerning the condition of the truck are fact. But you
were not there that evening; you only have Ed Walters word
[which you have used so many times in the past without any
thorough investigation] that the hood of the truck was muddy and
there were numerous building bricks in the back of the truck. I
even question whether you had even seen a dent in the hood of
the truck. Had you seen this dent, you should have [as a UFO
investigator] taken a picture of this dent. If you cannot
produce for me a picture of this dent, then obviously sir, you
have never seen such a dent in the hood of the truck.

I have been aware, for years, of the testing that Bruce Maccabee
has done on Photograph #19, where the truck allegedly had a dent
on the hood. His findings were that the alleged dent in the hood
might cause there to be no reflection of the light from the UFO
on the truck. However, Hyzer has stated [during his testing of
Photo #19], that a dent in the truck would have no bearing on
the reflection that should have shown on the hood of the truck.

I stated that William G. Hyzer, with all of his sophisticated
equipment, has proven that there was no luminance seen on the
road on the famous "road-shot," Photograph #19.

Your feeble response was: "Wrong."

I will let the common sense of the people on the internet
dictate their decision.

We have here, a young man who was at the time of this analysis,
State Director of Wisconsin for the Mutual UFO Network. Sainio,
by his own admission, had NEVER investigated a UFO case. Yet he
was a State Director of Wisconsin of the Mutual UFO Network. So
here we have a gentleman with 12-years of experience in
photographic analysis claiming that he can see [with the naked
eye] on a first generation copy [the same that Hyzer had to work
with] luminosity coming down the road on Photograph #19, the
famous "road-shot." However, William G. Hyzer with 38-years of
experience, and his son James B. Hyzer, with 20-years of
experience at that time, using their sophisticated equipment,
can find no luminosity coming down the road.

So when you simply say "wrong" to this, Bruce Maccabee,
you insult our intelligence.

According to a letter you sent me some years ago, you stated
that you had received $20,000.00 for writing a chapter in a book
written by Ed Walters entitled: "The Gulf Breeze Sightings." You
stated that you had received checks from the book publisher in
January of 1989, and you further state that your investigation
was completed at that time, so in your mind, you feel you were
justified for writing in this book. However, the Ed Walters/Gulf
Breeze investigation was a continuing matter for years after you
had accepted this $20,000.00 for writing this chapter. While you
might state that your investigation was complete, a
re-investigation of the case was requested by Mr. Walt Andrus,
and Rex Salisberry had taken charge of that re-investigation
after you had accepted the $20,000.00 from the book publisher. I
still find this to be a conflict, as do others associated with
this case. I would also like to state that the $20,000.00 that
you had received for this chapter of the book came out of Ed
Walters' advance. The book publisher did not give you an
additional $20,000.00. You were paid directly out of Ed Walters'
pocket, not from the book publisher.

When I stated in my letter that each sighting or picture from
Gulf Breeze must be evaluated and handled on its own, you
replied as follows:  "I certainly agree that each case should
stand on its own."

How could you make such a ludicrous statement based on your past
record? The whole book, "UFOs Are Real, Here's The Proof," is
based upon other letters sent to Ed Walters from people claiming
to have seen an object similar to his, or other pictures or
video that was taken� yet you have the audacity to tell me that
you believe each case should be handled on its own?

Even as we explore further in this letter, you stated that
Fenner and Shirley McConnell reported seeing Ed's Craft [as you
state] with windows, hovering for several minutes near the
shore, not far from his home. So right away, you are again
referring to someone else's alleged sighting to attempt a
vindication of Ed Walters' photographs. You can't even go one
page without referring to someon else's sighting to confirm Ed
Walters' pictures. Even further down you go to reference a Mr.
Polack and two others of an egg-type that appeared in May of
'88. You just can't seem to stay away from using other people's
sightings or photographs to try to validate your good friend Ed
Walters. So don't embarrass yourself by making such ludicrous,
ridiculous statements that you believe each case should handled
on its own merits. You obviously do not believe that for one
minute.

Finally, Bruce Maccabee, you state that the explanation for
Photograph #1 was a very special type of double exposure which
William G. Hyzer "discovered." There is no way, you claim, that
Ed Walters could not have known about it. Now we both know that
is a false statement. You are trying to misinform the internet
readers that during Hyzer's analysis, he came across some
special way to double-expose photographs. That is incorrect.
Hyzer simply said that he discovered how this photograph, with
very little experimentation, could be double-exposed. You had
taken the word "discover" and made it sound like something he
had never came across or knew of before. That is a total lie,
and you know it to be a lie.

Hyzer has stated emphatically that Ed Walters, or anyone else,
would be able to produce Photograph #1 as it appears, with very
little experimentation.

And why, Bruce Maccabee, did Hyzer's analysis of Photograph #1
show signs and indications of double exposure? Yet you and Jeff
Sainio had never once implied that any photograph -much less
Photo #1- showed any signs whatsoever of double-exposure. Hyzer,
and his work with 10-photographs, explained in his preliminary
report how ALL of the photos showed signs of double-exposure.
You will have to explain why Hyzer, who you admit has more
expertise in photographic analysis [as well as his son James],
would make such a statement while you or Sainio have never once
mentioned anything at all that would indicate the photos were
double-exposed.

And on the stereo photographs, Bruce Maccabee, I don't ignore
them. Hyzer was sent copies of the stereo photographs, but
because he could not determine the distance between the cameras,
he decided that he did not want to do any analysis without
having the direct information for himself, to make a credible
analysis. He would not take the word of myself, you or anyone
else concerning the distances and rely on that.

Finally, Bruce Maccabee, you have claimed for years that Jeff
Sainio's analysis of Photograph #19 shows that there is
luminosity coming down the road. In fact, as I have reported to
the internet readers, Jeff Sainio told me that he could even see
this luminosity on a first-generation copy with the naked eye.
Now, for the record, I would like you to state what your
findings were on Photograph #19 concerning the luminosity coming
down the road. Obviously, when Hyzer's final report came out
declaring there to be no luminosity coming down the road and
that Photograph #19 was a double-exposure, you certainly should
have done your own analysis on this photo to determine for
yourself whether or not there was any luminosity coming down the
road. Certainly, even though Jeff Sainio was your good friend,
you would not have relied on his 12- years of experience when
you had more experience under your belt. It seems likely that
you would have done your own analysis and came up with your own
conclusions. Therefore, would you state to the internet reader
your analysis of Photograph #19 concerning the luminance on the
roadway?

If you have determined, through this analysis, that there was
luminance on roadway, would you also please tell us if you could
see luminosity on the first generation copy of Photograph #19
with your naked eye?

Sincerely,

Jerry Black

6276 Taylor Pike
Blanchester, Ohio 45107
(513)625-2613







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:26:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 13:46:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


At 04:41 PM 10/7/99 -0400, you wrote:
 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:50:46 GMT

<snip>

 >And I am merely suggesting that those abduction reports
 >indicating experiencer Awareness during Sleep Paralysis don't
 >fit into the two categories outlined above. They are not
 >completely physical events. And they are not completely illusory
 >events.

I'm curious, Joe.  How do you know they are not completely
physical and not completely illusory events?

How do you know when someone is really "aware" or just dreaming
they are aware?

Would you please describe, for interested readers,
investigators, researchers and therapists, the techniques you
use to validate and evaluate these experiences?

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:13:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 13:55:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >>>Good Lord!

<snip>

 >>>...  I was 2 or 3 at the time and couldn't speel rite ..

<snip>

 >>>Jim Mortellaro

 >>Whatever you say, Jim.

<snip>

 >>...  ( How, incidentally, did you remember this
 >>experience, which allegedly took place at the age of two or
 >>three? Just curious.)

 >>Meanwhile, get a Gripple, dude.

 >>Dennis

 >That's the whole point of a number of my posts.

<snip>

Having read about Jim's toddler memories reminded me of one of
my own. Nothing frightening or sinister,  but vivid nonetheless.

My Mom had taken me to the clinic, apparently for a routine
checkup. She and an attractive looking nurse, a brunette as I
recall,  were amusing me ( and no doubt themselves ) by shining
a thin penlight beam on my leg. I was wearing short pants, and
tried to "catch" the beam with my little hands.

They laughed. I recall the leg,  my leg. It was the leg of a
toddler, although that didn't seem strange to me at the time.

The only thing that bothered me was trying to talk. I didn't
know how!

I would estimate I was 2 or 3 years old at the time.

So yes, a few memories from even those early years can and
will surface, if they are somehow notable enough to the child.

I have another memory regarding ant poison from the same era.
Back to the clinic! (I didn't eat any)

Now. Anything as odd as an abduction scene, "real" or otherwise
perceived, would have stuck out like a sore thumb.

I have no doubt that a fellow aficionado of Gripple (or in my
case Fizzy Burple) and the Italian Opera as Jim is, could recall
such scenes vividly.

Otherwise, I wish to bow out of the entire abduction matter.

I'm not an experiencer, and I'm in no position to take sides;
other than to agree with Dennis that the huge numbers of alien
abductions some people claim seem insupportable.

<snip>

 >Some were so vivid at the time, that even my mother and dad (who
 >thank God are still with us) remember my telling them what I
 >perceived happened that long ago.

Sadly, my Mom passed away years ago. If she were here, I have no
doubt she would remember the ant-poison matter, but wouldn't
have a clue about the magic penlight in the doctor's office.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 13:51:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:01:45 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 01:47:13 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>>launched a bold initiative.

 >>>Nothing will be spent pandering to enthusiasts, putting on
 >>>lectures or printing magazines.


 >Hi All,

 >This sounds so fantastic and to good to be true, but nobody
 >making money from ufology what is going on, surely a lot of
 >career researchers will be up in arms!

 >And pandering to enthusiasts? Blimey....

 >Now knuckle down and do as you're told boy!

 >Hurry up & land lads and put us out of our misery!!

 >Roy..                               Keep Smiling!



Hi,

Too good to be true, maybe. But its true and it will be good, so
let time be the judge.

Nobody is suggesting this will change the world. Especially as
the world needs to want to change and we all know it doesn't. A
band of about 20 of us (likely to grow to 40 or so we expect) is
doing this and you can judge if it works or not by its results.
The web site is being developed now (its up and running) and
will have a lot of investigator friendly sections - eg IFO
Warnings, Investigator Tips, Ideas for what to do next, a free
posting of the code of practice, the six month investigator
training course and on line Q & A where experienced
investigators will offer help to newcomers. Most of the above
have emerged and been set up within days as a consequence of the
UFOIN team working as it is hoped to do in future. Having no
committees to report to or leaders to get permission from means
if someone in UFOIN has a good idea then they just tell the rest
of the team, ask for help and get on with doing it. Within days
(not weeks or months or sometime never) the thing is happening.
That's what UFOIN will be about.

Publications are also well advanced. The first is likely to be
an in depth study of the l967 UK wave - although at least three
other such special reports under the UFOIN banner are well
progressed and all should be out within six months or so.

We are setting the standards now for investigator recruitment
and UFOIN will have strict criteria. Elitist you might call it,
but that's not the point. There are dozens of groups that anyone
can join. UFOIN is open to any UK Ufologist to aspire towards
and their acceptance will not be decreed by their views on UFOs
(ETH supporters and outright sceptics are equally welcome and
there are likely to be some of each), The only thing that will
matter is their ability to conduct thorough, objective
investigations.

We know this idea can work because UFOIN is a name from British
Ufology's past. Between l977 and l981 it existed in similar form
to now, tied to FSR magazine under Charles Bowen and was
responsible for some in depth cases (many now famous in
Ufology's) - eg Aveley, Risley, Livingston etc. UFOIN became the
BUFORA NIC as a way to ease UFO politics and reduce 'rival
groups' and produced much good Ufology's. But it has now been
decided that the freedom of investigators working as
investigators whilst not tied to a membership group is worth
another try.

AS for telling anybody what to do, that's silly. This will be
the most open, democratic, individually free UFO team in Britain
- possibly the world.

By 'not pandering to enthusiasts' we are not decrying such
people. Most serious ufologists start that way. And many groups
and magazines exist to fill their needs. We are simply by
passing that aspect of ufology's to do pure R & I with no
distractions. But it wont stop me lecturing and writing for
enthusiasts or talking to them first hand or on updates or any
such thing. WE are not removing ourselves above and beyond
Ufology's  - just banding together as a partnership to get
things done we feel need to be done. That's all. We are doing is
creating a professionalism team to work on cases. It is in no
way aimed at destroying the current UFO structure - just adding
a missing link we perceived to exist.

And if career ufologists are upset - why? Nobody is asking them
to have anything to do with UFOIN. People will decide for
themselves where their priorities lie - and if their priorities
lie in doing good R & I working with similar minded people and
seeking to reflect high standards of scientific work that is
made freely available to all then they'll join UFOIN. If their
priorities are selfish - like making money, getting fame and
fortune and being a big fish in the little UFO pond, then they
wont. UFOIN wont be rushing to try to make them see things
differently. We are happy working simply with whoever agrees
that what we are doing makes sense - whether that is 10 people
or 1000. Although we already know which end of the scale its
going to be!

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:11:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:03:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320


Apology to MW #320 (For October 9, 1999)

I don't believe _in_ UFOs, and I'm not splitting hairs, but
*something* haunts the skies above, and shames us _well_ down
here. And not just _now_, but way back *when* 'twas flight was
just a dream. Yes, well before the pyramids that began it all,
it seems. Back before we sailed our seas we prayed to brutal
gods -- gods as thick as errant fleas to give that needed nod.
Back before, when just a few, we wandered plains in bands askew,
and we were *almost* innocent then, an uncorrupted kith and kin.
Back before we wrote in books, we scratched cave walls with
paint and soot, and we recorded saucers, flying, (scaring the
observers spying) -- pulsing inner lights in waves that we,
then, chipped in stone, OK?

Kings of fearful ancient times would see them hover there, and
scurry to their *high* priests, their witchdoctors, and sayers.
Pharos of old Egypt ran, and raised up armies that would stand
in fearful awe of flying craft that, silent (days long!) flew on
past! They could, even, smell their odors -- alien and acrid
motors! This was taken down (but hidden) by a man of some
*religion*, but the papyrus is real and good translation's solid
seal. I say this and _forget_ the Bible -- how all its stories
make it libel as a record of abduction, UFOs and piqued
destruction!

Consider Alexander as he strides his *conquered* planet, as he
crosses raging rivers to secure a grip upon it. His elephants
and horses and, yes, most of all his men were panicked by two
UFOs that _dove_ upon them, friend. They drove them from their
crossing (why?) these craft that sailed air; they flew like
massive birds of prey that owned the sky up there. Described as
silver shields spitting fire to the ground, they danced and
burned and threatened, but they did not make a sound. Squealing
like Ned Beatty, and (yes!) scared beyond his wits, Alexander
*wrote* it down, so he'd _remember_ it.

And sober (pre-Christ) Romans were observers, then, as well. Of
skies, well nigh, INFESTED are the tales they would tell.
Spectacles of "fleets of ships" would course through troubled
skies, they wrote it down as point of fact, and not as
*charming* lies. They would HEAR terrific noises, and the sky
would turn to gold. Men and women _trembled_ like they all had
gotten cold. Globes of fire fell to Earth and landed on the
ground. Taking off they'd go straight up and flash their lights
around. Described as brighter than the sun, these terrified
plain folks (who'd run) to hapless priests or scared officials
who'd write it down, and sign _initials_. Pliny wrote of burning
shields that danced across his eye, annealed. Others wrote of
missiles, then, that roared and soared their skies again.

The birth of Christ won't cure the air of errant flying craft.
Josephus wrote of phantom ships, and no one thinks he's daft.
Respected as a scholar, and revered as circumspect, he wrote of
flying chariots, and of beings WITHIN them yet! He wrote of
_armies_ of them that would course their way through clouds! He
wrote "surrounded cities" so there really is no doubt. He wrote
that all this happened in fullest light of day -- he wrote of
frightened peoples who went down on knees to pray. This wasn't
science fiction, but was well beyond his scope. He wrote it as
he saw it. All agree that he's no dope.

The Byzantine were not immune to unknown *flying* craft, they
wrote of ships called brilliant, more like burning globes -- as
fast. They hovered over cities (!), and presented beams like
swords; folks looked up and cringed in fear for judgement of
those lords! Nobles watched the pagans as the dark age was to
end, and reddish brown in color flying saucers flew again! They
hovered over churches, and they scared the people blind who ran
in "bug" confusion from the castles if outside. They had never
seen the like! They cowered in their awe. They _survived_ and
wrote it down. It sticks, yes (!), in your craw.

And what is seminal history, but Saint Gregory of Tours who
reported on one Alcuin, a biographer of stars. Charlemagne's
assaulted by a light-fast glowing globe! It flickers
inexplicably like a psychedelic strobe! It's so damned strange
it spooks his horse, which rears in the attack. Charlemagne, in
armor, is then thrown right off its back. This injures him
severely; he's dead in four more years, and kingdoms fall to
ruin as the Vikings bring their cheer.

The Japanese saw their fair share and they will not be excluded.
Yoritsumi saw the "flying lights" and here will be included.
Yoritsumi was a general with his army in the field, and he saw
them loop their circles in the sky like hurled shields. They
swung all night to morning light and then some hours still, so
he, then, asked his *wise* men who would shuck _their_ jive and
shill, "Be unconcerned, most gracious lord. Let smiles adjourn
your frown -- it's a typhoon, heaving mightily, to blow the
stars around."

This takes us from -- "way back" BC . . . to about the
thirteenth century. There's more to say another day -- eight
hundred years of saucers -- hey! Forgetting tablets Sitchin
translates, UFOs remain debated. History's a smoking gun that
people did _not_ write for *fun*. It was, then, too damned
expensive; they only wrote what common sense was. Written in the
words they _had_ in concepts they could understand, they wrote
that we are _not_ alone, and wrote that down in ink and stone!

Lehmberg@snowhill.con

No. I don't believe in UFOs. I _believe_ UFOs. The difference is
NOT that subtle. And what is there not to believe. Seriously --
it crawls _all_ over the written record, and yet collectively we
continue to laugh inappropriately up our damp sleeves.

Why? We can't let it disturb our future plans? Rofl!

And, what is it but our belief in a phony-baloney, and likely
unjust, *future* ((awarded to us if we stay our *profitable* but
world sodomizing course)) that allows the shimmering scales of a
court jester ufology to be glued to our hapless eyes in the
first place? Yeah! Phony -- baloney!

The conservative establishment smirks and continues to celebrate
a conservatism that is born out of the *satisfactions* it has
discovered in having *things* remain _just_ as they ARE. Further
-- it is an establishment that recently finds itself needing to
demonstrate some reinvention as a *compassionate* party, proof
of it's sociopathy! That future that we hope for (and that they
promise) is a red herring (for a carrot) on the end of their
long stick. And even IT evaporates (as a red herring is wont to
do) the moment they feel they HAVE to have another platinum
fixture on the downstairs bidet of their autumn home. In a
contrived and manipulated denouement that too few are availing
themselves of -- these few are very comfortable indeed. We are
embroiled in a gigantic and pyramidal ponsi-scheme for a
sociopathic minority.  This corrosive minority believes that
they will be able to insulate themselves from the very worst,
FORGETTING they are in a position to elevate the whole to truly
_cosmic_ levels. Free power, as example, has such a *problem*
NOT because there is nothing to it. Rather, a huge amount of old
(and new) money feels it has a lot *invested* in the early,
fossil, twentieth century concepts presently employed. Energy
problems in this country could be eliminated with an _incentive_
to generate power and supply it to a grid, presently, enslaving
us, but I digress.  <puff -- puff . . . deep breath> <g.>

This group (of the, ah, uh -- . . . conservatively minded) is
the same bunch that fills the trough for our news media and
mainstream science impetus. It is also the major proponent of a
campaign to keep ufology in the under-funded-court-jester status
it presently occupies. UFOs suggest change -- this is a change
that may not be compatible with the present ease of luxury and
control now enjoyed by selected persons presently disrespecting
_your_ individuality and quality of life. How much control _do_
you have?

No, we hang by threads. At the complete whim of the arbitrary,
we are song and danced by a cloying appeal to tradition and
ceremony. These traditions of Aristotle, and these ceremonies of
elitist convenience do nothing but beg the inevitable question;
however, a question largely unanswered but for a smirking retort
that maintains a status quo leading to an increasingly
exclusionary and suicidal dead end.

Somebody knows.

UFOs are, by definition, change, and point to worlds with much
more breadth and scope -- potential and expansiveness. It gets
no easier to maintain a faade of normalcy for the smirking
denial of these few, so fearlessly -- ask your own questions
though the answers (or the suggestions of answers) offend you,
shock you, or shame you. There is joy beyond the shame,
satisfaction beyond the shock, and fellowship beyond the
offense.

And it's real.

Restore John Ford!


--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 8 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 15:07:43 GMT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:05:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:10:27 -0500 (CDT)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 ><snip>

 >>Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >>upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >>Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >>zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >>life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >>You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >>Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >>a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >>recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >>fix.

 >>Bizzare.

 >Imagine: You are an emissary from a race zillions of miles away,
 >who is observing the inhabitants of a planet that are slowly but
 >surely polluting the heck out their environment, and apparently
 >determined to cover the planet with asphalt and people.

 >You find that by monitoring substances inside the rectums of
 >cows, you can track progression of certain pollutants and their
 >increasing affect on mammals which are very similar, in many
 >ways, to humans.

 >Bizzare?  Inept?  Maybe not.

This motivation may be less bizarre or it may just be different.
But the ineptitude remains.

Human scientists who monitor pollutants in the environment seem
capable of finding ways to do this without sacrificing so many
cows. Indeed, so far as I know (which may not be very far) there
is nopollutant known to human science which must be monitored in
bovine recta.

Consider human scientists who want to monitor the presence of
pollutants in human breast milk. They take samples of breast
milk from lactating females. Do they cut off the breast? Of
course not.

Consider all the other ways in which scientists and/or doctors
can take tissue and fluid samples from inside the body without
harming the subject. Biopsies, Spinal Taps, etc.

Consider proctologists and oncologists. These specialists can
inspect and take samples from the colon without harming the
patient.

But aliens don't seem to duplicate this finesse.

If they can't then their ineptitude speaks for itself.

If they can but just don't want to, then their ineptitude
consists in their inability to cover their tracks.

Joe Polanik


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 99 10:29:16 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:08:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Serge Salvaill <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 11:19:55 -0700

 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Kenny Young
 >>>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >>>Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 >>>>From: Jerome Clark
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT


Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >The real crap starts at 7 where... on September 29... Kenny
 >Young wrote a reply to Brian Straight who had said, concerning
 >Jerome Clark:
 >>Thanks for being the voice of reason here.

 >Kenny Young's reply:

 >>Yes, it is unfortunate that personal attacks go hand in hand
 >>with some of these ufological debates. But since you applauded
 >>Jerome Clark for "voice of reason" during argumentation, let's
 >>take a fresh look at some of his previous comments from this
 >>discussion so that you and the friendly reader can decide
 >>whether or not Clark has demonstrated himself as the keen
 >>officer of courtesy and civility that you proclaim.

 >Kenny Young went on _demonstrating_ the basis of his opinion.

Unfortunately, no.  What he displayed was an odd, self-righteous
disingenuousness which accomplished precisely nothing.

 >>The story goes on where Kenny Young, for contesting
 >voice-of-reason Jerome, gets flamed by voice-of-reason Jerome,
 >and, in the process, put on the same stake as Jerry Black.

This is an odd sort of revisionist history unsupported by a
reading of the thread, as other people have pointed out.

 >This well-established fact is what makes this affair
 >hair-raising: any member of the List should be familiar with Mr.
 >Young's work.  Kenny Young has proven in the past that he is a
 >reliable conscientious and very good UFO investigator.  He is
 >not a character assassin.  Go back on the List in the past 3
 >years.  Look for one post where Kenny Young indulges in personal
 >attacks.  You will find none.

False.

 >On the other hand, Jerry's road sheet does not exactly make him
 >a Peace Nobel Prize candidate.

What an odd remark.  I can only scratch my mind, and I think I
hear a whole lot of heads having the same done to them.

 >>Kenny Young's principle of "no agreement/no respect" appears
 >>closer in spirit to Torquemada or the Stalinist purges than a
 >>realistic expectation of professionals or serious amateurs in a
 >>field of study.

I thought this was a particularly insightful observation, as one
who knows something about the terrible history of Stalinism and
its bloody purges.

What Young and Black seek to do, sadly, is to reduce ufological
discourse to personal denuniciation. (It's instructive -- our
correspondent's attempt here to hide it in the memory hole
notwithstanding -- to go back to the strange Black screed that
started it all, to which Young,  "Evans," and our present
correspondent have never expressed the slightest whisper of
criticism.  Their quarrel is only with those who take exception
to it.)

It is not enough to disagree, in this approach, with Bruce
Maccabee's photoanalysis; one has to denounce Maccabee himself
as being dishonest and without integrity.  One has also to
denounce all others, including the undersigned, who may be in
some way implicated, however imaginative the leap must be, with
Maccabee's crimes.  And then one has to wax indignant when the
recipients of the slanders react angrily to outrageous charges
which they are unable to document, having to resort instead to
declarations of faith (as in "Evans's" "I firmly believe....").

It is this sort of dangerous and destructive self-righteousness
that I objected to, as did virtually all others who contributed
to the thread.  I'm sorry that our correspondent here disagrees
with what has struck most of us as the only sane course.

 >Terrifying.

Indeed.  Thank God, as we've seen from the good words we've had
from listfolk who observed what Black, Young, and "Evans" were
up to, most people have more sense. I hope that next time we
hear from Black and Young (as well as our present
correspondent), they have something more constructive to say --
presumably on another subject, presumably on actual UFO cases
and ufology, and presumably not on somebody else's pretended
venality.

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 09:04:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:13:17 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 14:46:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>launched a bold initiative.

 >>They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >>Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >>in Britain.

 ><snip>

 >>Contact:

<snip>

Dear Jim, Jenny, and others properly disinterested:

I hereby announce the formation of the RCFSHES which is the
Redwood City Flying Saucer Highly Exclusive Society.

According to International Director for Life  (Larry Hatch)
"Internal discord shall be held to an absolute minimum, as
membership is restricted to one person at a time. "

To prevent pandering to the masses, there simply are none.

The only publication will be the  *U* Database, which has
already earned the highly esteemed  Larry Hatch award, and is a
front runner for the Larry Hatch's Sister's award as well.

Internal disputes, should they arise, will be decided by an
executive committee of the president for life, and the sole
member, should he choose to attend the proceedings.

The RC (whatever) will establish no liaisons, official or
otherwise, with other UFO groups.

Annual dues are $150 per year;   the Director for Life is
officially exempted from these duties. . Oh! One last thing: No
cultists, contactees, reborn- religionists, publicists or
yogurt-excessive types are allowed within this highly
circumspect little group of old farts! Only one fart at a time,
that's the rule.

With the very snottiest (burp) intentions, I remain


-  Larry Hatch,  President-in-exile of Ananaguay,
    Discoverer of Bingo Beach Uruguay,  Gods gift to
    cash-poor Dutch and Deutch Breweries,  the first
    [ex] Catholic to complain about the taste of the
    next parishioners spit at Hooly Communion,
    and other noteworthy exploits and adventures,
    too dripping wet to recount.


PS:  This information appears as a public notice only.

= = = = = =







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                        Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:06:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:15:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?


 >From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?
 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 13:18:23 PDT

 >Greetings list -

 >Found this interesting article about a new scientific report
 >suggesting that there may in fact be a "Planet X" beyond Pluto.
 >Could be a boon to Sitchin's theories if validated.

 >From: http://msnbc.com/news/320182.asp

 >A mystery revolves around the sun Researchers suggest that huge
 >unseen object orbits on fringe of solar system

<snip>

There is a satisfying circularity to this, should it prove true.

One of my minor personal heroes is/was one Clyde Tombaugh who
discovered Plutah, in 1932 I think, and renamed it Pluto after
having visited Utah.

Clyde ground his own lenses, like a lot of kids did then. But,
he pushed his personal obsession into a professional career at a
time when no jobs were available.

By some luck, Pluto fell within the lenses, and could be made
out by the "blinkers" they used then, and probably do now.

Later on, scientists discovered that Pluto was a "lightweight",
i.e. Pluto had a proper mass so small that if could not possibly
explain the perturbations attributed to it!

This meant, by conventional physics, that some larger, fatter,
(presumably dumber and happier) body had to be out there!

I have always liked Clyde Tombaugh, ( for someone who
never met the fellow ) and I really like this latest apparent
discovery.

It is a Clyde Tombaugh,  not a Clyde Beatty, that adds to human
knowledge, and some partial understanding of how the world,
rather the universe itself, actually works.

No religion can do this.  No philosophy.  No politics.

Only clear-minded (myself excepted of course), rational,
scientific (in the very best sense of the word) and reasonable
examination of the facts presented can ever hope to answer our
most fundamental questions.

Touchy-feely beliefs are sort of like pissing in cotton
clothing. It only feels good for a little while.

(signed)

El Presidente de Ananaguay

AKA Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 16:29:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:21:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 01:06:01 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Mark has pointed out that,
 >>in a sense, both choices could be correct: I might be good at
 >>photo analysis and my analysis might be correct, yet I might
 >>have missed something.

 >Not so much missed something as not imagined something (to
 >imagine all of the techniques by which such photos could be
 >made is certainly possible, but it is also possible (though I would
 >say not probable) that there is some method which might meet
 >all of the requirements and yet not have been thought of except
 >by the hoaxer)).>

 >Unlike many, I do not believe that all of the information
 >required to decide the reality of a UFO case is encoded in
 >photos of the UFO. Certainly, if a photo is able to be shown
 >certainly to be a hoax (i.e. a wire is visible in the image),
 >then the reality level of the photo is certain, as it is if the
 >hoaxer confesses. But if that information is not present, then
 >all photoanalysis can do is raise the bar of difficulty and
 >expense. One can come to a conclusion at some point that a hoax
 >is unlikely because the bar is so high.>

I have said many times over the years, "a photo a ufo does not
make." I said the same thing in many more words in the message
to which Mark was responding.


 >For instance, in Gulf Breeze, there are several things which are
 >clear about a hypothetical hoaxer of the case...

 >1) He was highly skilled in model making. His models are not
 >only large and detailed, they are round (harder than

<snip>

 >2) He had a special location to do model construction, and to

<snip>

 >3) He had a special location to do the trick photography.

<snip>

 >4) He either understood typical flaws in UFO hoax photos or
 >accidentally avoided them (photos likely to be real typically

<snip>

 >5) He understood double-exposure or did enough experiments to
 >avoid telltale traces from the overprint.

 >6) He had a second camera for experiments, or he was able to
 >document/remember his experiments well enough to produce

<snip>

 >7) He kept all this hidden from investigators and friends, and
 >possibly his family, for an extended period of investigation and
 >media attention.

 >This is a pretty high bar. It is difficult to imagine a reason
 >for such intense effort on the part of a successful local
 >businessman. And, as yet, no such reason has been found.

 >Photoanalysis raises the bar still further:

 >1) The double-exposure claims have not been supported in
 >subsequent investigations. Indeed, the occultation experiments

<snip>

 >2) The correlation between the size of the object in the sealed
 >Nimslo camera photos and the consistency between that size

<snip>

 >3) The smearing characteristic of the UFO and the environment
 >in the early photos are consistent, which they would not be
 >if the photos were double-exposures.

 >4) The intensity of the blue beam in the distant object / blue
 >beam photo does not have the characteristics of a double
 >exposure line.

 >5) The closeup blue beam photo does supply indications of an
 >unusual light source.

<snip>

Mark forgot two more "bar raising" aspects of the Gulf Breeze
sightings and photos

a) if a hoax, then Ed was very fortunate to be able to have
strangers come forward and claim to have seen the same UFO..
which was certainly not a CLASSIC shape (most "flying saucers"
reports tend to fall into standard categoris as roud, disc,
triangle, etc.). Several of these witnesses were well known,
ustanding members of the society who had nothing to gain and a
lot to lose by backing a man who was unknown to them

b) the "lie detector"/psychological bar. How many witnesses do
you know, whose stories are generally accepted and

1) taken two lie detector tests and a professionally done voice
stress test

and

2) have allowed themselves to be subjected to a battery of
psychological tests by a clinical psychologist who worked with
criminal types (Dr. Dan Overlade)

In Black's Book, Travis Walton stands out because he passed lie
detector tests, but even Walton wasn't given a psychological
evaluation.

At any rate, the polygraph information is consistent with the
psychological test information: Ed is not a siociopath/con man.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 9

                   UFO Tower To Become A Reality In Valley

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose.nul>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 05:39:04
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:59:14 -0500
Subject: UFO Tower To Become A Reality In Valley

Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News, October 8,

http://insidedenver.com/news/1008ufo6.shtml

Stig

**

UFO tower to become a reality in valley

Cattle rancher intends to build an alien-theme gift shop, too

By Deborah Frazier
Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer

**

Judy Messoline used to joke about building a UFO watch tower and
alien-theme gift shop on her ranch in the San Luis Valley.

Now, she's doing it.

"We need something different down here so maybe this is it,"
said Messoline, who's never seen an unidentified flying object,
but would dearly love to. "We're even going to have a landing
pad for UFO's."

The valley, bounded by the Sangre de Christo and the La Garita
mountains north of Alamosa, has a century-old reputation for UFO
sightings. Old timers talk of hovering lights. Ranchers speak of
flying objects buzzing by.

And, yes, some say there have been cattle mutilations. Messoline
said her cattle haven't been touched -- as far as she knows.

This week, Messoline got a special use permit from the Saguache
County Commissioners for a 10-foot high observation tower on her
land near Hooper.

"This is the first UFO watch tower that anyone has ever asked to
build," said Vendi Maez, the county land use administrator.

Messoline, who moved to the valley four years ago from Golden
and raises cattle, plans let up to 20 vehicles park at the
tower. It only will be open in the summer and she won't allow
overnight stays.

Messoline is going to charge $2 for adults, $1 for kids and rent
out binoculars. The tower will open Memorial Day.

"Even if people don't see a UFO, they'll see the beautiful
stars," said Messoline, who also works at a local convenience
store.

Joshua Hillman of Crestone said couples dating in the 1940s and
50s used to drive out to the Great Sand Dunes National Monument
to watch the lights on the sand.

"These are people with no New Age affiliation," Hillman said.

"The county has quite a few UFO watchers. We have lots of
reports, but not much documented," said Undersheriff Mike
Norris. "On patrol, it's not unusual to find 30 vehicles parked
in one area with everyone out looking at the sky."

In fact, Christopher O'Brien moved to Crestone, population 27,
to chronicle the strange occurrences. O'Brien wrote "The
Mysterious Valley," and produced two episodes of the television
series "Sightings."

That's part of what gave Messoline the idea -- and years of
watching the television series "X Files."

"There's some really interesting things on that show and I'd
like to experience it," said Messoline.

**

October 8, 1999

Copyright, Denver Publishing Co.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                         New UFO Pics From Istanbul

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 21:29:19 +0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 09:53:36 -0400
Subject: New UFO Pics From Istanbul


photo of the day
http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/foto2/gft.html


Info about ALP's, Join Project ALP, The ones that support the
Project ALP, ALP reports (with password)

http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/deprem.html

The name of the participians that support ALP project will be
posted in our page. Please send your ideas briefly to
andromeda1@turk.net along with your banner or logos










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 14:54:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 09:59:43 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100

 >>>From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000

 >>>Posted for Maxwell Burns

 >>>To UFO UpDates:

 >>>This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
 >>>the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
 >>>like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
 >>>would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
 >>>have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

 >>Have you ever read such nonsense?

 >>Well, on UpDates the answer is probably yes! If anyone wanted
 >>evidence of Burn's inability to face facts, to face reality,
 >>then it's all shown below!

 >>What he entirely fails to mention is that he was found guilty -
 >>not by the Police but by a totally independent jury in one of
 >>the more liberal cities in Northern England - Sheffield is well
 >>known for its;' tolerance in many areas and this is perhaps
 >>something to do with the two major Universities located there.
 >>The judge said that Burns was "some way up the hierarchy" in
 >>terms of drug-dealing in the area and Burns had been targetted
 >>by the drugs squad for some time. Now that we know the truth we
 >>know that Burns had been involved in this evil world for some
 >>time - in other words well before his newly acquired interest in
 >>Ufology.

 >>Just because Burns chose to lie - and answered questions
 >>consistently throughout his interviews with the Police - means
 >>nothing. Just because he wore gloves to avoid finger prints on
 >>the bag of drugs that he was found with by Police - means very
 >>little.

 >>What people should not forget is that in interviews with Dave
 >>Clarke - an aware-winning local journalist (amongst other
 >>things) - Burns admitted he was guilty. He said he expected to
 >>go down for his drug-dealing.

 >>To the moron world of Ufology - where aliens are all around -
 >>Burns probably seems like an innocent man. That's a reflection
 >>upon Ufology - not the criminal justice system in the UK.

 >>Burns also engaged in a hate campaign against my wife and I.
 >>This is a fact. Initially we didn't know who it was - until the
 >>hapless Burns admitted it to another local researcher in a
 >>'private' email.

 >>I live around 15 miles North of the prison that Burns is in.
 >>Perhaps I should drop by with some friends and picket the prison
 >>demanding longer sentences for drug dealers.

 >>We can be sure of one thing. When Burns comes out, I'll be on
 >>his case......

 >>Tim Matthews.

 >Your bone to pick is with Burns.  If he's guilty or not, what if
 >he's telling the truth about his ufological issues?  Do we just
 >let it all slide through the prison bars and down the drain?  Or
 >has is all been fabricated as we all assume a 'druggy' would do?

 >Let's all condemn the man in all aspects of his existence and
 >deny him the right to share any truths that may exist that may
 >contribute to the rest of ufology's puzzle.

 >Would you disown a prostitute and her claims of having an alien
 >living in her basement, that well known researchers have
 >witnessed and spoken to in secrecy, being one of the most
 >compelling cases ever to exist, because she's a prostitute?
 >Probably.  If you found out I was a politician, would you not
 >care about my abduction or sighting experiences anymore?
 >Probably.

 >Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
 >stands.  How righteous.

 >I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone, but he was a
 >respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
 >it. At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
 >longer believable or not worthy of our attention?  When someone
 >else has a bone to pick with them?  I make up my own mind,
 >thanks. And what shall we find out about those so quick to
 >discredit? ;)

 > Sue

 > "The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never simple"
 >                                                - Oscar Wilde


Right on the money Sue ... While it is true that one's
credibility is diminished whenever something such as this
occurs, it is also quite true that:

1) It is sick for some to take such righteous pleasure over the
man's troubles and ...

2) It may (key word) not diminish his credibility in the matter
of his UFO beliefs and/or knowledge.

3) And it all may be a plot to thicken an already corn starched
pot of Oy.

Truth be known, the truth be not known.  These days, when
justice is a game all too often, one cannot even trust those
charged with the administration, determination, investigation
and mitigation of the truth.

The system has lied one too many times.  And as I once opined,
the truth shall set it's fee.  See our Juice Representative, Oy
Jay Simpleton... Sampson... whatever....

See also:

Hurricain Rubin Carter,
John Ford,
J. Jaime Gesundt.

Oy, I can't stay sober even when I try.  I am quite hopeless,
you know.

Jim







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 20:56:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:02:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 00:26:16 -0700

 >The subject of early childhood memory ability is one of great
 >debate, but it seems if an event was sufficiently emotionally
 >charged (ie fear, rejection, abuse), the memory either stands
 >out clearly or maybe forgotten only to be recalled later.  (no I
 >am not talking about recovered memories under hypnosis)

It's worth pointing out that the vast majority of "Satanic
Abuse" false-memories are not recovered by hypnosis, but by
therapy and counselling methods that involve strong one-to-one
contact between the "abuse vitim" and the therapist. A big like
abductee support groups. Although groups like the new UFOIN in
the UK are wise to keep a moratorium on the use of hypnosis, it
is not the only way of producing confabulated memories.

 >One woman I know of, recalled an event and even her thought
 >concerning an action by her mother.  Years later as an adult,
 >she mentioned this piece memory fragment and asked about the
 >rest of the event.  All she knew was it was it was some kind of
 >emergency involving danger and she wondered why her mother
 >bothered to stop and pick up the bootie that had fallen of her
 >foot as her mother raced along a sidewalk holding her.  Her mom
 >was shocked that daughter recalled that event.  She too recalled
 >it.  It was in Glasgow, Scotland, during the German bombing of
 >the British island and mom was running to a bomb shelter as the
 >nightly raid began.  Daughter was about 6 months old.

Early childhood "snapshot" memories like these are remarkable,
but not unique, and many do not have any traumatic content (I
can remember being weighed on scales at a clinic, aged about one
year). Typically, abduction and abuse false-memories usually
involve "memory" of a long series of traumatic events which do
not surface until decades later.


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:06:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 14:06:34 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 19:40:31 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:20:49 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:49:47 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:19:44 +0100
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>>>Is this a peculiarly American thing, this emphasis on whether or
 >>>>>not aliens have the "right" to do this or that? Or the similar
 >>>>>concern that an individuals "rights" are being violated by
 >>>>>aliens. I've noticed it in a few posting on this list and
 >>>>>elsewhere, and it always seems to be Americans who raise the
 >>>>>point.

 >>>>It is an American thing, this emphasis on whether or not aliens
 >>>>have the "right" to do this or that.  Especially when the "this
 >>>>or the that" is stalking, abducting and performing medical
 >>>>intrusions on our bodies. Actually, it should be a human thing,
 >>>>as Americans are not the only ones in this world with rights as
 >>>>human beings.  In the UK, there are, I presume, safeguards
 >>>>against the violations of your human rights, are there not?

 >>><snip>

 >>>Of course there are safeguards against violations of our human
 >>>rights in Britain - you may have heard, for instance of Magna
 >>>Carta, which I believe still forms one of the bases of the
 >>>American legal code, and good on you for it.

 >>That is of course correct, the Magna Carta was drawn up by King
 >>John of England in 1215 and eventually became the basis for the
 >>American constitution.

 >>So I suppose in answer to the previous/previous posting... no it
 >>is not an American thing, it's something us Brits have just
 >>forgotten about.

 >Just my opinion, but most people with such protections under
 >their laws consider this to be either a local thing, or just do
 >not consider them.  Americans consider it to be universal.  So
 >sue us.

Consider yourself sued

 >>>they can erase all
 >>>evidence of their existence.

 >>This may be getting off subject a bit but 'WHAT?' If as you say
 >>they can 'erase all evidence of their existence' then how do you
 >>explain the literally thousands of people world-wide who seem to
 >>remember being abducted??

 >>Maybe the aliens just haven't got the hang of that 'memory
 >>erase' thang.

 >>They can dance across the universe in the blink of an eye
 >>apparently but when it comes to an implant... they always seem
 >>to leave an incriminating mark, now doesn't that just strike you
 >>as a teensy weensy bit odd?

 >>Perhaps someone out there can answer those simple little
 >>questions.

 >>Answers on a postcard to:

 >>Dave.

 >>Wake up Jim, you're on.

 >There appears to no rule.
 >Why some of us remember and some of us do not remember
 >as much or perhaps at all is part of the conundrum.

 >That things "tend to be going this way or that" is a waste of
 >Dennis' boundless energy... at least in my view.  And one good
 >reason fro this is that people, many people, have experiences
 >which they never report, at least not as being either anomalous
 >or related to UFO's or abduction.

 >In addition, that there appears to be a change in the manner in
 >which most of these events occur (i.e., with or without sighting
 >a UFO, etc.) what the hell difference does this make in light of
 >the _faster_ changing level of technology, communications and
 >reporting of these events faster than spit in a vacuum.  What's
 >changed more is the technology. Therefore, it becomes difficult
 >to draw conculsions as to the methods used by "them," assuming
 >there are any "them."

Well exactly, assuming there are any "them" is the point I've
tried to make but it always seems to get side-stepped by the
quick talking used car salesmen of ufology.

If they really wanted to wipe your memory... you wouldn't
remember a thing, therefore you would not be able to write to a
mailing list and whine about being abducted right!

Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
technology'.

Unless the aliens are only interested in the people who wouldn't
have even thought to do that.

 >Kin I go back to sleep now, Dave?

Of course you can, sweet dreams.

ZZZZZZZZZZ

Dave.

I have no memory of ever being abducted.
Or perhaps I have... by the more professional aliens.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 21:31:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:12:10 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

Hi

Sue wrote......

 >Let's all condemn the man in all aspects of his existence and
 >deny him the right to share any truths that may exist that may
 >contribute to the rest of ufology's puzzle.

Has Max produced one word of evidence to back up his claims yet?
I don't think so.

However theres been a superb explanation put together hasn't
there - thats mundane and boring and doesn't have aliens in it.
- so it's ignored....

 >Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
 >stands.  How righteous.

Oh, he's been descredited over here on a continual basis for
some time, the damage he's done by making unprovable claims has
annoyed a lot of people - that case wasn't an alien crash
retreval till Max got involved.


 >I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone, but he was a
 >respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
 >it.

No he wasn't - some people swallowed what he said without
questioning or saying "show me the evidence".

A plane is hard to make just disapear - there's records, the
people who fix them etc.  A pilot has a family, birth records,
tax records, friends etc,etc,etc,etc. Can the "spooks" make all
the school records & photo's disapear as well? There has to be a
name for this missing pilot and a number for the missing plane.
Until he produces those he hasn't got a case.


 >At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
 >longer believable or not worthy of our attention?

When he makes claims and the can't back them up - how many times
must this darn well happen?

When will people learn? how many times have people come into the
field, made claims the when challenged put up a smoke screen,
made excuses, refused to allow the examination of "evidence2
etc?

Just for a start, it amazes me how many cases there are involving
"military personel" in this field. The witnessesd won't allow
their names to be given to the public, ok fair enough. But then
we get enough told about the witness to identify him to anyone
in the know - I mean how many people can be the driver of an
Alien body from wales down to London in 1974?? That's gonna
stick out........... And people swallow this. Time after time
without asking questions.


 >When someone
 >else has a bone to pick with them?  I make up my own mind,
 >thanks. And what shall we find out about those so quick to
 >discredit? ;)

That in Max's case the guys discrediting him are the ones who have to clean
up after him and the guys who
actually investigated the event's - and ripped his case to shred's.

It's People like Max that make it harder for everyone else - not
the people who disproved his claims or showed him for what he
was, but people who Make huge claims and don't back it up - they
make us all look stupid (some times by association) in others
eyes.

Now lets put him behind us until he produces his evidence..

Cheers to all of you.
Jon









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                        Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 16:58:56 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:14:35 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?


 >From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?
 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 13:18:23 PDT

 >Greetings list -

 >Found this interesting article about a new scientific report
 >suggesting that there may in fact be a "Planet X" beyond Pluto.
 >Could be a boon to Sitchin's theories if validated.

 >From: http://msnbc.com/news/320182.asp

Greetings Blair.

A planet that far from our Sun (about 30,000 times more distant
than the Earth is to the Sun) would orbit once every few million
years, much longer than the once every 3,600 years for Zecharia
Sitchin's Nibiru.  It is possible to reconcile these two
differences if the postulated new planet's orbit was assumed to
be circular.  Then Nibiru's orbit which is a very flat
elliptical one and which also brings it close to Earth would
also extend to the vicinity of the postulated new planet.  They
could thus turn out to be the same planet.

Of course the existence of Nibiru is also far from proven, but
if Sitchin is right, then our nearest E.T. neighbours are not
from a planet orbiting a distant star but from within our own
solar system.   Close enough for our E.T. neighbours to visit
Earth in their UFOs during their holidays.  ;o)

I am currently taking a course on Extrasolar Planets which is
taught by Dr. John Caldwell.  He is now at the same astronomy
conference in Italy with his colleague Dr. John Murray who will
be presenting his findings on the postulated new planet.
Another scientist, Dr. John Matese has also done a similar study
to Dr. Murray's which supports his findings.  It is due to be
published in the journal "Icarus" soon.  It is interesting that
Dr. Carl Sagan, who did not support many of Sitchin's views, was
once editor of this journal.

There are so many astronomers now doing work on extrasolar
planet detection which have yet to publish their findings that I
predict Betty Hill, Margorie Fish and Terence Dickinson will be
given special recognition in this field by these same
astronomers.

Nick Balaskas









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                      UFOR: Project Paperclip/Overcast

From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@dc.seflin.org>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 17:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:28:51 -0400
Subject: UFOR: Project Paperclip/Overcast


From: Chosa <chosa@chosa.com>

I recently had an exchange of emails with Stanton Friedman about
Project Paperclip and it's possible relationship with Roswell
via White Sands and V-2 rockets.  I have been given permission
by Stanton to post our exchanges to the internet.  The following
is a chronological and exact duplication of our exchanges.

Byron Weber

Beginning October 1, 1999, Stanton Friedman and I discussed
Project Paperclip/Overcast and any possible relationship it may
have had with the events at Roswell in 1947.  He has given
permission to post our conversation.

October 1, 1999

Hi Stan,

I was looking over the comments of Bennewitz with respect to
disimformation he may have been feed and one item struck me as
particularly interesting. He stated that the German scientists
in the US following WWII had nothing at all to do with the UFO
thing.  So I researched it.

I found a couple of references to a project in 1946 in El Paso,
TX in which a V-2 was launched, lost it tracking and landed in a
cemetery in Juarez, Mexico.  In 1947, there was reference to an
airforce project assisted by German scientists at White Sands,
NM, to launch a V-2 with primates on board.  An aeronautical
medical board was being assembled and about 230 scientists and
doctors were housed in temporary facilities at Wright Air Field.
By 1949 a high altitude record was achieved, some 250 some
nautical miles with a WAC corporal strapped onto a second stage
capsule.  The record stood for seven years.

Have you come across this information in your research of
Roswell?  If so, can you recommend any source information for
clarification as to the extent of the test flights from White
Sands?  If not, might this offer an explanation for the Roswell
events?

Looking forward to your response,

Byron Weber

October 2, 1999

Byron: I really don't understand the Question. There were indeed
hundreds of German rocket scientists working in NM.at White
Sands(usually Based at Ft. Bliss on the NM -TX border) in the
1946-1950 time period. They were certainly concerned with
Aerospace medicine and trying to use chimps for such research.
This is discussed in hundreds of papers and in books about WSMR.
Naturally it has been discussed as possibly related to Roswell.
There has NOT been any connection established. This does NOT
mean that none of the Germans such as Steinhoff and Von Braun
were called in on Roswell. There were no V-2 Launches that
Match. No monkeys were launched at the time. There is a book The
Holloman Story by George Meeter. There is a base Historian at
Holloman and one at WSMR.

STF

October 4, 1999

Stan,

The question, of course, is whether or not anyone has researched
the V-2 launches from White Sands sufficient to rule out the
possibility that the Roswell incident was actually a V-2/M-42
test.  The M-42 is known to have been considered in manned and
unmanned versions.  However, the records I found are not
detailed enough to draw conclusions and despite the fact that
Von Braun had designed a similar cruise missile mounted on a V-2
which later became the Navaho cruise missile, it seems the
Russians were the ones to develope the M-42 and M-44 Buran
trisonic ramjet missles, manned and unmanned.  There is no doubt
though that plans were designed in 1947 for primate flight by
the air force and the logical method would have been the use of
the V-2/M-2.

The best records I have been able to find lists only a dozen or
so dates for V-2 launches from 46-48.  But, the air force
library records state 64 V-2 rockets flew from White Sands with
some modified as two stage vehicles.

Common sense, if there is such a thing in this day and age, says
the first explanation for Roswell would be a closely guarded air
force project. Still, I don't seem to be able to come up with a
reasonable explanation for the air force protecting such
information except that the concept of "space planes," continues
to be stuff of black projects.

I have several queries out about V-2 launches in New Mexico.  If
anything comes of it, I will let you know.  In the meantime, I
get ahold of the book you recommended.

Thanks, Byron

October 6, 1999

Byron: Many have tried to find a connection between V-2 launches
and Roswell. To date none has been found. Don't forget the
topography... some mountain ranges between WSMR and the Brazel
ranch. It seems to me that "Common Sense" tells us nothing about
what happened.There was plenty of publicity about monkeys and
rockets.If a missile or other "secret" military system had been
launched there would have been radar tracks and search teams
sent out to look for it.  Blanchard would have been informed
etc. There was a chemical rocket fire on July 3.1947, at
WSMR.Launch cancelled. The Public Affairs office  V-2 story fact
sheet says that by June 30, 1951, 67 V-2 missiles had been
launched. The USAF also looked into Missiles as an explanation..
Didn't find anything. Stan

October 6, 1999

Stan, Rockets, Missiles, and Men in Space by Willy Ley has an
appendix with the record, by date, of V-2 firings from WSPG.
None were shown in July 1947 until the 10th.  None were shown
for the month of June..

If there is a connection, it may have been with a classified
Project MX-774. This was an Air Force project with three
objectives, a subsonic self navigating jet plane, an ICBM (5000
mile rocket) and a test missile to be used with the ICBM.
Thrust to weight ratio was a key consideration so to reduce the
weight, one of the contractors Consolidated-Vultee Aircraft Corp
(later) Convair revived an Oberth 1928 patent (also used by the
Germans) to "roll stainless steel so thin it had to be
inflated."

Throughout 1946-1947 there was a political upheaval for control
of nukes and science technology.  The National Science
Foundation was put on hiatus and several bills were introduced
to determine who would maintain control.  On one side was the
military supported to some extent by Forrestal (although they
were fighting one another in a fierce battle for funding) and on
the other side was Bush (Truman's science advisor) and his
buddy's.  Eventually Bush won out with the formation of the AEC
(Johnson-May Bill), just prior to which he publicly denounced
the feasibility of developing anything close to an accurate ICBM
or useful space plane and the Russians were not expected to
develop nuclear capabilities for many years.  There was
considerable public pressure on Truman to cut the military
budget.

After a number of sporatic successful/unsuccessful tests of the
V-2, one which could have resulted in a political crisis (the
one that landed in Juarez, Mexico) and recriminations by Bush,
on July 1, 1947 the Air Force was forced to cancel the MX-774
program due to budget cuts.  Had there been an errant flight and
crash of a rocket/space plane that week, any hope of refunding
the project would have been lost.  Also canceled was Martin's
MX-771, and North Americans MX-770 and Bells MX-776 were limited
in scope and budget.  Despite the cancellation of the project it
was continued with private funding from Convair.  The records of
the event, since the project was officially canceled, would not
have been maintained by the Air Force. The engines for the
project had already been developed in 1946 by Reaction Motors, a
four chambered engine similar to those used on the X-1.  The
rockets were ready and a space plane had already been designed,
in 1946, by Von Braun in a delta wing configuration, not unlike
a design by North American which with was later used in the
Navaho Project and later still redesigned by Lockheed as the
D-21 ramjet drone carried on the A-12.  The Air Force
cancellation of the MX-700 series was eventually rescinded, but
apparently not until 1949.

Now, on the one hand we have most of the components of an
explanation for the Roswell crash in the MX-700 series projects,
in close proximity to Roswell and with an explanation as to why
it would have been covered up.  On the other hand we have an
alien crash which would have occurred at exactly the same time
the project was canceled.  Which explanation is more reasonable?

Byron

October 6, 1999

I can't see anything here that would lead to a missile
explanation for Roswell.The 509th had high security as the only
group ever to have dropped nuclear weapons. The crash sites are
NOT close to where missiles were being launched and you haven't
suggested a launch or why it would not have been tracked by
those doing the testing. There seems to be no connection between
any such program and what happened on the Brazel ranch or out in
the Plains of San Augustin.Yes, certainly anybody would have
desired very thin very strong very flexible metal... so where is
it if it was ours.?

Obviously based on the testimony of a bunch of witnesses, the
more reasonable explanation is that 2 alien spacecraft crashed
and were recovered. If the air force could dig out Mogul, they
could certainly have dug out a test project which was hardly
near Roswell. Surely Southeastern NM would have been a unique
target for alien visitors as the only area of the world  at
which one could check on the 3 technologies clearly indicating
that Earthlings would soon (less than 100 years) he heading to
the stars.. Nuclear weapons (Trinity site), captured high flying
V-2s, and powerful radar. You might want to read my book Crash
at Corona.Evidence takes precedence over hypothesis. STF

October 6, 1999

Stan,

Points well taken.  I have my copy of Crash at Corona in my hand
and I fully intend to re-read it.

Since I have thrown in everything but the kitchen sink to make
my point, I would like to add one curious coincidence that
enlivens the imagination, figuratively the kitchen sink.  The
first real rocket research and launch site used by Robert H.
Goddard with a grant from Daniel Guggenheim and later augmented
by a grant from the Carnegie Foundation between 1930 and 1936
was located at the Mescalero Ranch near Roswell.  Whether or not
it was still in tact in 1947 I do not know, but I will try to
find out.

One other thing, least others tread this gnarled path without
road signs, I would like to make our exchanges titled Overcast
public by posting them.  Do you have any objections?

Thanks Byron

October 7, 1999

No objections. There is a Goddard Museum in Roswell and a
Goddard High School.Well recognized.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 17:23:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:31:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 02:26:01 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >At 04:41 PM 10/7/99 -0400, you wrote:
 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:50:46 GMT

 ><snip>

 >>And I am merely suggesting that those abduction reports
 >>indicating experiencer Awareness during Sleep Paralysis don't
 >>fit into the two categories outlined above. They are not
 >>completely physical events. And they are not completely illusory
 >>events.

 >I'm curious, Joe.  How do you know they are not completely
 >physical and not completely illusory events?

 >How do you know when someone is really "aware" or just dreaming
 >they are aware?

 >Would you please describe, for interested readers,
 >investigators, researchers and therapists, the techniques you
 >use to validate and evaluate these experiences?

 >Amy
 >Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"

Dear Ms. Herbert, Doctor Kannapy, et. Al.,

Please excuse me for a moment, whilst I get Dr. J. Jaime
Gesundt.  He informs me that he has the answer to your question.
One moment please, he is taste testing some new brew or other
and is somewhat.... er, in his cups, in a manner of speaking.
Oh, here he is now. . "Oooo, Oooo, Oooo ... " (his arm stabs the
air with a desire to have the teacher pick him), "I know, I
know,  Mr. Cotter!"

Darn!  You got me so excited, Sue ... I just (hic, excuse me)
forgot the answer.  (Uh, it's the brew, Amy, he thinks you are
Sue Some one or other, so sorry).

Gimme a half hour an' mebbe ah'll merember it!  Al's I needs is
a nudda one halfa ouwa an I kin do anytings more'n once... Hic!

Jaime J. Masundtle... sumpin...

Dear Ms. Herbert;

We pray this has answered your question.  Further, it is
probably the best one you'll get round these here parts.

Doctor James Morte de Fam, Assistant to the assistant to Docca
J.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                        Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:41:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:37:49 -0400
Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions


 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 23:18:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 18:58:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: The Purpose Of Abductions

 >>>Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 05:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>>Subject: The Purpose Of Abductions

<snip>

 >>Hi Henny, All>

 >>Well if your theory is correct that that could explain why there
 >>are so little British abductions. Stiff upper lip, reserve and
 >>all that dear chap. We British are not known for showing our
 >>emotions, so perhaps this might add some more weight to your>
 >>hypothesis.

 >".....stealing my emotions...."

 >In the opinion of Quentin Fogarty, who was on the airplane that
 >flew along the coast of New Zealand in December 1978, they are
 >"soul eaters". He got this impression while watching a
 >"performance" by unexplained lights off the coast of NZ. (He was
 >not an abductee.)

 >Yes, I know, Ed Walters is considered to be one of the lowest
 >forms of life by some on this list.

 >That's tough!

 >For those of you willing to listen, you ought to consider what
 >came out under hypnosis with Dr. Dan Overlade:

 >Ed was made to sit on a table and above his head was a "helmet"
 >consisting of semicircular bars that crossed perpendicular to
 >one another at the junction point at the top of this "helmet",
 >above the top of his head. This helmet was hanging from the
 >ceiling. When it was lowered onto his head it contacted at four
 >points: forehead, left right temples and back of the head.

 >(After the May 1 early morning event, and weeks before the first
 >hypnosis session, Ed reported to me that he found a red mark on
 >his forehead above his nose, red marks on his temples and a
 >small bump on the back of his head. These marks were confirmed
 >and photograped by Gulf Breeze investigators. At the time no one
 >knew the significance of these marks except that they were found
 >after a period of missing time that was precided by a sighting
 >and stereo photo).

 >A similar "helmet:" was then placed on a small alien creature
 >that was seated next to him. Suddenly he would start to relive
 >an experience. either a "real-life experience from his history
 >or an experience that the aliens had arranged for him just prior
 >to the use of the "helmet."

 >After he had relived the scene the small alien would be removed
 >from the helmet and another small alien would be placed in th
 >small helmt and Ed woul relive the same event again. Sometimes
 >this would happen with a number of aliens, as if he were a
 >videorecorder that was being repeatedly operated to shw the same
 >scene and events to many people.

 >Ed was given the impression that this was a way of "teaching"
 >the aliens about human emotions.

 >See "ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE" by Ed and Frances Walters, Avon, 1994

Dear Bruce, and others.

Unable to add anything of substance to this discussion, I hereby
rule myself out, except to say that I believe Bruce is an
honorable and honest man.

My impressions, distant and ill-trained as they are, suggest
that Ed Walters has a Florida style Credibility problem.

In short, I think or opine, in spite of Bruce's, best evidence
and opinions, that Ed Walters is a complete fake.

None of this will detract from the fine work done Maccabbee and
others.

( signed )

Presidente de Ananaguay.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                 Re: NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 17:52:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:39:09 -0400
Subject: Re: NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters?

 >From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: NASA speaks English... But Kilo-meters?
 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 17:02:41 -0400

<snip>

 >Well, the Mars Observer was sent equipped with the best cameras
 >ever, as the public interest in the "Face on Mars" was at fever
 >pitch. It was better equipped than the Mars Sojourner mission of
 >1998, which sent back the blank face pictures from Cydonia.

Actually, the current orbiter has identical cameras to the
Observer. They used the ground spares.

Terry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:57:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:43:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 00:26:16 -0700


Dear Lesley:

If you must trouble us, please at least put a few facts right up
front.

These are:

1)  Precise location; If you are as geologically deprived as
you sound, then give good distances and directions to some
places people might find.

2)  Precise time of day, exact date, and time zone.


- Larry Hatch











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 18:06:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:54:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #320


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:11:10 -0500
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #320

 >Apology to MW #320 (For October 9, 1999)

<snip>

 >No, we hang by threads. At the complete whim of the arbitrary,
 >we are song and danced by a cloying appeal to tradition and
 >ceremony. These traditions of Aristotle, and these ceremonies of
 >elitist convenience do nothing but beg the inevitable question;
 >however, a question largely unanswered but for a smirking retort
 >that maintains a status quo leading to an increasingly
 >exclusionary and suicidal dead end.

 >Somebody knows.

 >UFOs are, by definition, change, and point to worlds with much
 >more breadth and scope -- potential and expansiveness. It gets
 >no easier to maintain a faade of normalcy for the smirking
 >denial of these few, so fearlessly -- ask your own questions
 >though the answers (or the suggestions of answers) offend you,
 >shock you, or shame you. There is joy beyond the shame,
 >satisfaction beyond the shock, and fellowship beyond the
 >offense.

 >And it's real.


Dear Errol, List and Al, especially you, Al...

I am positive certain I shall be castrated... uh, castigated,
(sorry, I have been imbibing on the elixer of joy and am
presently in my cups, as Tiny Tim's daddy was that fate filled
Christmas Day, oolong ago - no - twasn't tea, twas a
Dickens).... uh, where the hell was I?  Oh, I remember now.

Lehmberg's a lot (to me anyway) like a new Dylan song, when
Docca Zimmy was maken' 'em new all the time.  At first you got
this feeling that the words had a ring of truth, but you saw
only the exterior.  You had to listen to it again and again in
order to force the truth from the words.  And what was the truth
in them?

Easy boy, this is gonna be a bitch to bite.  The truth was not
the truth ... that is, the ultimate truth, the truth was what it
meant to you.  How it's Rimbaudian inagery affected and effected
you.  That is the proof of great poetry.  The meaning, the
truth, it contains for you, personally.  But in addition, there
is also some kernel of absolute truth therein.  But Rimbaud had
nuttin on you Lemme.

I vote for Lemme as Poet Lauriate of the United States.  I
seriously doubt if the "I never inhaled" and the "I never nailed
her" president would even consider such, but he should.  It's
probably the only truth we'll see from this most pubicly
indulgent president this nation has ever seen.

Al, you are one in a million.  That makes you an ascended master
to us and dangerous to them.  If they come take our weapons, you
can come live with Rosie and me in the north woods, where we
have a good view of the surrounding area.  An easily defended
home with an arsenal of powerful and dangerous words.... yours.
They'll never even THINK of invading us with you there. Even if
they take my guns.

All I want is Lemme and just my one ten inch mortar and the 50
calibre machine gun.  Maybe the rocket launcher, you know, for
4th of July celebrations.

Thank you sir.  If anyone is soaring, it's you.  By the way, I
liked the bovine part a lot.... tee hee.

Jim Mortellaro

"I soar, I cleave.  But damned if I can land all that good."







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 22:54:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 10:48:34 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100

 >>>From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >>>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000

 >>>Posted for Maxwell Burns

 >>>To UFO UpDates:

 >>>This is the first legal opportunity I have had to speak about
 >>>the case. If the dogs have finished tearing at my flesh I would
 >>>like to enlighten you as to this travesty of British justice.  I
 >>>would also like to talk about the rules of evidence which you
 >>>have heard Matthews, Roberts and Clarke talk about so much.

 >>Have you ever read such nonsense?

 >>Well, on UpDates the answer is probably yes! If anyone wanted
 >>evidence of Burn's inability to face facts, to face reality,
 >>then it's all shown below!

 >>What he entirely fails to mention is that he was found guilty -
 >>not by the Police but by a totally independent jury in one of
 >>the more liberal cities in Northern England - Sheffield is well
 >>known for its;' tolerance in many areas and this is perhaps
 >>something to do with the two major Universities located there.
 >>The judge said that Burns was "some way up the hierarchy" in
 >>terms of drug-dealing in the area and Burns had been targetted
 >>by the drugs squad for some time. Now that we know the truth we
 >>know that Burns had been involved in this evil world for some
 >>time - in other words well before his newly acquired interest in
 >>Ufology.

 >>Just because Burns chose to lie - and answered questions
 >>consistently throughout his interviews with the Police - means
 >>nothing. Just because he wore gloves to avoid finger prints on
 >>the bag of drugs that he was found with by Police - means very
 >>little.

 >>What people should not forget is that in interviews with Dave
 >>Clarke - an aware-winning local journalist (amongst other
 >>things) - Burns admitted he was guilty. He said he expected to
 >>go down for his drug-dealing.

 >>To the moron world of Ufology - where aliens are all around -
 >>Burns probably seems like an innocent man. That's a reflection
 >>upon Ufology - not the criminal justice system in the UK.

 >>Burns also engaged in a hate campaign against my wife and I.
 >>This is a fact. Initially we didn't know who it was - until the
 >>hapless Burns admitted it to another local researcher in a
 >>'private' email.

 >>I live around 15 miles North of the prison that Burns is in.
 >>Perhaps I should drop by with some friends and picket the prison
 >>demanding longer sentences for drug dealers.

 >>We can be sure of one thing. When Burns comes out, I'll be on
 >>his case......

 >>Tim Matthews.

 >Your bone to pick is with Burns.  If he's guilty or not, what if
 >he's telling the truth about his ufological issues?  Do we just
 >let it all slide through the prison bars and down the drain?  Or
 >has is all been fabricated as we all assume a 'druggy' would do?

 >Let's all condemn the man in all aspects of his existence and
 >deny him the right to share any truths that may exist that may
 >contribute to the rest of ufology's puzzle.

He has nothing to share.

 >Would you disown a prostitute and her claims of having an alien
 >living in her basement, that well known researchers have
 >witnessed and spoken to in secrecy, being one of the most
 >compelling cases ever to exist, because she's a prostitute?

Yeah, probably!

 >Probably.  If you found out I was a politician, would you not
 >care about my abduction or sighting experiences anymore?
 >Probably.

No, I'd just be more concerned about why you had concluded
that you had been physically 'abducted'..... and whether the
episode emerged via hypnosis.

 >Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
 >stands.  How righteous.

He had no credibility from day one as far as we are concerned.

 >I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone,

Thank God for that, I was getting a little worried.

 >but he was a
 >respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
 >it.


WHHAAATT!!

The man who sent supposedly anonymous hate mails, lied to
witnesses, admitted that he'd bribed witnesses with drugs?

Which postings have you been reading here? Have you a selective
version of UpDates??

 >At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
 >longer believable or not worthy of our attention?

When they're as much of a waster, liar, criminal and bad egg
like Max, I should say.

 >When someone
 >else has a bone to pick with them?  I make up my own mind,
 >thanks. And what shall we find out about those so quick to
 >discredit? ;)

Well, good for you.

 >Sue

 >"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never simple"
 >                                              - Oscar Wilde

Oscar Wilde - another degenerate......







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 17:31:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 11:07:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Hiya Jim, list and all. My replies inserted (painlessly) below.

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 09:52:43 +0000
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>

 >>>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>><mega snip><<

 >>Dennis is getting at the heart of the "earliest recovered
 >>abduction narrative evidence" problem. So many abductees /
 >>experiencers exclaim that they have been having these encounters
 >>since childhood. I don't doubt or discount this possibility.
 >>However, in the absence of confirmatory evidence of any sort (a
 >>diary entry, a parents recall, something) it is very difficult
 >>to take these assertions as 'chapter and verse' with regard to
 >>the actual historic length of the modern bedroom visitation type
 >>encounter phenomena. The evidence in consciousness, memory and
 >>perception research surely casts much doubt on the validity of
 >>this kind of 'recall.'

 >Actually Stephen, I've already told the List in several posts
 >that my parents remember three of the more strange experiences I
 >had as a child in the mid forties.  They remember my story to
 >them the very next morning after it occured and they also
 >vividly remember hearing it for years afterward.  At age three,
 >I did not keep a diary.  So sorry. Neither did my mom or dad.
 >We have only our memories to go by.

Yes Jim, I've read the posts, at least the ones since I've been
subscribed for the last year. I do assign more value to your
experiences, even the early childhood ones, because of the many
factors you are speaking of. In my paragraph above I was
speaking of abductees in general. I'm glad, for your sake, that
you do have confirmatory evidence via your parents; this
certainly would make me personally feel a little more sane if I
had experienced what you describe.

 >There is great doubt over the validity of recall, most
 >especially at the age of two years or three.  But such must be
 >combined with and integrated into the greater history of the
 >individual, and without any such memory aid as hypnosis.  For
 >example ...

 >I very rarely recall dreams for more than a few moments after
 >I've awakened.

 >I have always been able to distinguish between a memory of an
 >event and a dream.  Certain dreams are recurring in the theme.
 >Most of us have them.  The history test is tomorrow and I've not
 >opened the book. Not only that, but I cut every class.  Ad
 >infinitum.

 >Last, the memories I recall are vivid in great detail for over a
 >half century.

I'm glad you acknowledge the doubt over validity of recall.

About the dreams, have you ever tried repeatedly to begin better
recaling your dreams? As an aside, I find it highly interesting
that every night we each spend several hours in an alternate
reality which while we are there totally convinces us of its
physical reality. And yet we awake from it and impose a form of
amnesia upon it creating missing time.

I didn't suggest that you or any abductee can't distinguish a
dream event from an abduction event. Tho there is referance to a
British woman who reported an abduction which she did dream
after she had watched the abduction episode of the television
show Dallas. I believe this case is from one of Jenny Randles
fine books.

 >Cogito, ergo, so what?   With all due respect.... one memory
 >does not a theory make, not does it substantiate one.

Wasn't trying to make a theory outta my bad memory. For theory,
see my other recent posts under this same thread.

 >My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
 >with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
 >great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
 >age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
 >hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
 >ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
 >imprinted in my memory.

 >This particular ambulance took me up into the sky.

 >You speak of hazy memories which someone may call UFO related. I
 >speak of vivid and (to my mind, my intellect and memory) - real.
 >You and I are speaking different languages.  We are on different
 >frequencies. What's your point?

I was simply stating that I've met some abductees who are so
"hazy." Again, I wasn't speaking to your specific experiences.
We aren't speaking different languages.

 >And I can point you to many individuals who share my
 >distinctively real memory in the most intricate matched detail,
 >of things which I described to my parents 50 years ago.  So they
 >didn't write it down. So what?  This makes a difference?  Well,
 >maybe to you.  But not to me my friend out there in the ether.

Yes I'm sure you can. I've met a few myself, having led a
support group for such experiencers for nearly a decade.

For those who seek "objective" evidence it matters a lot. For
someone who has experienced this phenomena it matters little.
It, the presence or lack of physical evidence, makes a
difference to those, like myself and many on this list, who
require more evidence.

We can ask for and look for this evidence and still believe and
know that you and others are indeed experiencing and interacting
with a real phenomena. I can believe you interacted with
something, even an ET intelligence. What I doubt most in all the
cases of abductions and ufo close encounters is the
infallibility of human perception. A person can interact with an
unknown entity, physically and/or psychicly, but that very
perception can be shown to be very maleable from within and
without. (see my perpetual referencing of the bibliography of
the psychoactivity of electromagetics in previous posts)

 >Dennis understands his hell bent for leather view better than you may
 >imagine.  And yet, he understands little about the experiences which
 >he decries.

 >I volunteer.  Any other takers?  Or is there going to be another
 >Challenge, as in the one Velez posed last week.

 >Come on folks. The one piece of evidence most avoided, most
 >referred to as "non evidence," is that of the experiencer's memories.
 >Doesn't matter who it is, postal worker or PhD.  IBM executive or
 >CEO of a fortune 100 corporation. Most don't accept this.  It's not
 >evidence.  To you.... not necessarily "you" personally, but the
 >collective "researcher you!"  AKA, yous.

 >John Velez asked that we all pull together with our evidence and
 >have it evaluated by independent scientists.  That goes for me
 >too when it comes to the so-called "anectotal" evidence.  The
 >testimony of people like me.  Which is as worthless to some
 >(all too many) researchers as swamp gas.  Which by the way,
 >has more validity in some circles.  Swamp gas.  Pelicans.

 >But witness testimony?

 >Nah!

 >Before I retired I was CEO of a company, my own, which did a
 >goodly volume with fortune ten companies.  Prior to that I was
 >director of marketing for  multimillion to multibillion dollar
 >firms. Does that make me a better witness to my own experiences?
 >Apparently not.

 >Ah the smell of it.  Stench is more like it.  And what stinks is
 >the truth which some people have in commone with others of their
 >clan.  Their truth.  Which is indisputable.  But not ours. Ours
 >sucks big time.

 >Sour grapes?  Of course.  We use that stuff in our best Gripple.

 >Jim Mortellaro

I'm sorry if you feel our perspectives are so far apart.
Perceptions are powerfully convincing. If we could experience
what you have we would certainly be more sympathetic and likely
to believe the exact same things you do. But I suspect there'd
still be as much debate over the details of what happened and
what it all means as there are now.

SMiles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

               Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 16:02:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 11:10:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 05:25:03
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs

 >Source: San Francisco Examiner,
 >EXAMINER TECHNOLOGY WRITER
 >>Oct. 8, 1999
 >�1999 San Francisco Examiner

 >NASA agent probes Silicon Valley meeting with UFO theorist

 >An upcoming private meeting between Silicon Valley high-tech
 >executives, NASA scientists and a high-profile UFO enthusiast
 >has sparked an investigation by a government agency.

 >Special Agent Keith Tate, an investigator with the Long Beach
 >branch of NASA's Office of Inspector General, has been calling
 >Silicon Valley sources, including The Examiner, seeking
 >information about a planned Tuesday meeting between research
 >scientists and Silicon Valley high-tech executives.

Hold on a minute.

First the San Francisco Examiner reports this upcoming meeting,
seriously as opposed to tongue-in-cheek,  now they report that a
government/NASA agent has been calling "Silicon Valley sources"
_and_ the Examiner asking questions?!!

What's wrong with this picture?

Since when do "Special Agents" go around asking questions _and_
stating their alleged position with the government and/or NASA?!
When I first read this article (and thanks to Stig for sharing
this with us!), I immediately wondered, "Well, how did the
Examiner find this out?  Did someone with Firmage's team call
the Examiner and tell them?  Why would they want this
information spread?  Could it be some kind of advertisement
campaign for this meeting?"  Sure makes this meeting sound
important.

So I re-read the article and noted that the alleged "agent" is
indicated as calling the Examiner as well as "Silicon Valley
sources" (no identification given for these alleged "sources").
Now why would someone claiming to be with the government/NASA
call a *newspaper*, _identify himself_ and ask a bunch of
questions about a meeting to discuss UFOs?  Are we to believe
the "agent" believed the Examiner would keep it's mouth shut and
not tell anyone or is this some kind of new "open" policy on the
part of NASA and our government?

I study behavior.  These behaviors are _not_ normal for
newspapers, NASA or the US government.  Red flags going up.

Could someone have gotten the facts mixed up resulting in a more
"sensationalized" story - accidently, of course?  Did the
Examiner verify that this "Special Agent" who called them was,
in fact, "an investigator with the Long Beach branch of NASA's
Office of Inspector General"?  And, still I wonder, _why_ would
any "government" agency call a newspaper and other "Silicon
Valley sources", identifying himself and his job title, and ask
a bunch of questions - as if they didn't already know the
answers?

Does not make sense. Something ain't right with this picture.

Anyone smell fish?

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

              'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Lynne Bishop &

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:45:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:45:13 -0400
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Lynne Bishop &

   ---------------------
  /// Martin Jasek
----------------------

http://www.ufobc.org/yukon/

Our first guest tonight grew up in Edmonton, Alberta where he
obtained degrees in Civil and Water Resources Engineering. His
work eventually took him to the Yukon about 6 years ago.

In 1995 he started to develop an interest in the UFO phenomenon.
He started to do local UFO investigations in 1997. In 1998 he
formed a partnership with UFO*BC and has been working as part of
their group ever since. They provide web page creation and
editing support for the Yukon UFO material as well as publish
Yukon UFO articles in their UFO*BC quarterly magazine.

A while back he got wind of an incredibles series of sightings
over the Yukon Territories and conducted an extensive
investigation


   ---------------
  /// Lynne Bishop
---------------

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3862/

Born in 1953, (the second in a set of fraternal twins), our
guest in the second hour describes herself as the typical
"Boomer with an Attitude." An Army brat through-and-through, she
grew up on Bases in the U.S. and Europe. She watched wide-eyed
as the satellite Echo silently sailed the starry skies -- and
with other members of her family, questioned the possibility of
intelligent life on other planets.

As an intellectual exercise, distantly removed from everyday
reality, she found it was fun to contemplate contact with a
non-human life-form, but was hardly prepared for the
mind-boggling discovery in 1992 that several family members and
she had already had that contact -- not once, but repeatedly
throughout their lives.

The contact continues to the present -- and the journey toward
answers is long and arduous. But her family, spouse, and friends
will continue following the road, wherever it may lead.



Join Martin Jasek, Lynne Bishop, Jonn Kares and I this evening as we
discuss these Strange Days... Indeed on:

CFRB 1010 AM - 50,000 watts 'Clear-Channel'

6070khz Shortwave

you can also listen via Media Player at:

www.cfrb.com/

You'll need to access the site using Internet Explorer since
Media Player seems to choke using any version of Netscape -
thanks Mr. Bill!


To call the program dial:

On-Air     416-872-1010
            1-800-561-CFRB
            *TALK [local mobiles]

Errol Bruce-Knapp








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 16:34:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:28:35 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >launched a bold initiative.

 >They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >in Britain.

This sounds great!

I have one question...If someone has new information they wish
to publish under copyright, will they share it with UFOIN and be
assured no authors and/or would-be writers will take the
material and publish it in their next book?

How will these ego-needs be regulated?

What happens if/when one or more of the more published authors
in the group takes information shared with UFOIN and puts it in
his/her/their next book claiming it as their "discovery" without
giving credit or asking permission from the original
researcher/investigator?

This is just one of the issues I have seen come up time and
again in UFO organizations and research groups.  This is why so
much information never reaches us, the common public, until it
is published in an article or book.

I am all for a united research effort and have been trying to
figure out a way to make these ideals work for over 4 years now.
The above issues are only a few of the "bugs" on my list.

With everyone and his grandmother trying to become a "well-known
expert", lecturer, author, how do we share openly and freely
with each other without regard to one's next book or TV
appearance?

Jenny, can you share with us the standards or "rules" designed
by UFOIN that address the issues mentioned above?

Thank you. ;>

Amy


Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 19:03:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:33:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 01:11:15 PDT

 >To Bruce Maccabbee:

 >Mr. William G. Hyzer has staked his [and his son Jame's]
 >reputation on the analysis from a first-generation copy of
 >Photograph #19. And without a doubt, Photograph #19 is a
 >double-exposure due to the fact that there is no luminance seen
 >on the road, nor is there a reflection of the UFO on the hood of
 >the truck.

As most of you kinow by now, I, Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt, _never_
butt in where I do not belong.  I _never_ stick my rather large
proboscis into areas where it would not ordinarily snit, fit....
whatever.

Anyway, I will not bore you with my very occasional silly
fossifies. I merely wish to convey a few thoughts on some of
which I have just read.  Boy, this is a long one Massa Black.
Even for you.  OK, here we go, over the teeth and thru the
gummies, look out tummies, here I come.

First I noticed right off that Hyszer's son has the same name as
mine. Ergo, he must be a mensch of the first order.

 >You, Bruce Maccabee, have contended that there was a dent in the
 >hood, or the top of the hood was muddy, or there were bricks in
 >the back of the truck causing it to be slanted in an upward
 >position near its front. I will again stress to you and those on
 >the internet that William G. Hyzer informs that even if all of
 >those things were true, there would still be a reflection of the
 >UFO on the hood of the truck. Likewise, there should still be
 >luminance reflecting from the highway.

I have a hood which I wear often on special occasions.  And it's
white.  What does this mean?  I dunno. I just you might be
interested.  Anyway, my pointy white hat goes well with the
sheet I usually wear with it. This raiment fails to reflect the
torch I usually carry.  It also fails to reflect the light from
the burning cross.  What does this prove relative to your post?

Not a thing. Which is interesting.  I least as interesting as this
story I am reading.  I undress.... uh, digress.... But wait, there's
more.

 >You state, Bruce Maccabee, that all of these aforementioned
 >points concerning the condition of the truck are fact. But you
 >were not there that evening; you only have Ed Walters word
 >[which you have used so many times in the past without any
 >thorough investigation] that the hood of the truck was muddy and
 >there were numerous building bricks in the back of the truck. I
 >even question whether you had even seen a dent in the hood of
 >the truck. Had you seen this dent, you should have [as a UFO
 >investigator] taken a picture of this dent. If you cannot
 >produce for me a picture of this dent, then obviously sir, you
 >have never seen such a dent in the hood of the truck.

My white suit got muddy once.  It was after a deduction, I mean
an abduction.  They put me back into a muddy field instead of
the place we were burnging down. Somebody's house I think it
was. Can't remember.  I was inebriating on some corn squeezins
at the time.

As for the bricks.  I never threw _one_ single brick.  It's all
a black lie, as attempt to intimidate me.  I wasn't there. I was
home.  I wasn't doin nuttin.  I was just hangin around.  I got
me a witness.  My dog "Stupid" was there with me all evening.

 >I have been aware, for years, of the testing that Bruce Maccabee
 >has done on Photograph #19, where the truck allegedly had a dent
 >on the hood. His findings were that the alleged dent in the hood
 >might cause there to be no reflection of the light from the UFO
 >on the truck. However, Hyzer has stated [during his testing of
 >Photo #19], that a dent in the truck would have no bearing on
 >the reflection that should have shown on the hood of the truck.

My truck siezed a bearing once. And it had a dent.  And it was
real muddy.

 >I stated that William G. Hyzer, with all of his sophisticated
 >equipment, has proven that there was no luminance seen on the
 >road on the famous "road-shot," Photograph #19.

I never shot nuthin from the road.  That's illegal here.  I also
never married my sister.  Even though she looked a lot like Pia
Zadora.

 >Your feeble response was: "Wrong."

I didn't find his response feeble.  Maybe you should turn up
your hearing aid.  I usually do that when my battery runs down.

 >I will let the common sense of the people on the internet
 >dictate their decision.

I am sorry to tell you this, sir, but sense is not as common as
some people around here think.

 >We have here, a young man who was at the time of this analysis,
 >State Director of Wisconsin for the Mutual UFO Network. Sainio,
 >by his own admission, had NEVER investigated a UFO case. Yet he
 >was a State Director of Wisconsin of the Mutual UFO Network. So
 >here we have a gentleman with 12-years of experience in
 >photographic analysis claiming that he can see [with the naked
 >eye] on a first generation copy [the same that Hyzer had to work
 >with] luminosity coming down the road on Photograph #19, the
 >famous "road-shot." However, William G. Hyzer with 38-years of
 >experience, and his son James B. Hyzer, with 20-years of
 >experience at that time, using their sophisticated equipment,
 >can find no luminosity coming down the road.

Did you know that referring to a man's age is bias and
punishable by the goobermint?  And the old guy, same thing.
Please attempt to be more careful if not politically correct.

 >So when you simply say "wrong" to this, Bruce Maccabee,
 >you insult our intelligence.

People tell me I'm wrong all the time.  And I am never insulted.

 >According to a letter you sent me some years ago, you stated
 >that you had received $20,000.00 for writing a chapter in a book
 >written by Ed Walters entitled: "The Gulf Breeze Sightings." You
 >stated that you had received checks from the book publisher in
 >January of 1989, and you further state that your investigation
 >was completed at that time, so in your mind, you feel you were
 >justified for writing in this book. However, the Ed Walters/Gulf
 >Breeze investigation was a continuing matter for years after you
 >had accepted this $20,000.00 for writing this chapter. While you
 >might state that your investigation was complete, a
 >re-investigation of the case was requested by Mr. Walt Andrus,
 >and Rex Salisberry had taken charge of that re-investigation
 >after you had accepted the $20,000.00 from the book publisher. I
 >still find this to be a conflict, as do others associated with
 >this case. I would also like to state that the $20,000.00 that
 >you had received for this chapter of the book came out of Ed
 >Walters' advance. The book publisher did not give you an
 >additional $20,000.00. You were paid directly out of Ed Walters'
 >pocket, not from the book publisher.

I'll do it for a grand. Think of all the money you guys'll save.

 >When I stated in my letter that each sighting or picture from
 >Gulf Breeze must be evaluated and handled on its own, you
 >replied as follows:  "I certainly agree that each case should
 >stand on its own."
 >
 >How could you make such a ludicrous statement based on your past
 >record? The whole book, "UFOs Are Real, Here's The Proof," is
 >based upon other letters sent to Ed Walters from people claiming
 >to have seen an object similar to his, or other pictures or
 >video that was taken… yet you have the audacity to tell me that
 >you believe each case should be handled on its own?

Uh, could run that by us again?

 >Even as we explore further in this letter, you stated that
 >Fenner and Shirley McConnell reported seeing Ed's Craft [as you
 >state] with windows, hovering for several minutes near the
 >shore, not far from his home. So right away, you are again
 >referring to someone else's alleged sighting to attempt a
 >vindication of Ed Walters' photographs. You can't even go one
 >page without referring to someon else's sighting to confirm Ed
 >Walters' pictures. Even further down you go to reference a Mr.
 >Polack and two others of an egg-type that appeared in May of
 >'88. You just can't seem to stay away from using other people's
 >sightings or photographs to try to validate your good friend Ed
 >Walters. So don't embarrass yourself by making such ludicrous,
 >ridiculous statements that you believe each case should handled
 >on its own merits. You obviously do not believe that for one
 >minute.

"Bellow and Bradley and they both all day lied.  And the
newspapers, they all went along for the ride.  How can the life
of such a man, be in the palm of some fool's hand.  To see him
obviously brave, kinda makes you feel ashamed to live in a land,
where justice is a game."

 >Finally, Bruce Maccabee, you state that the explanation for
 >Photograph #1 was a very special type of double exposure which
 >William G. Hyzer "discovered." There is no way, you claim, that
 >Ed Walters could not have known about it. Now we both know that
 >is a false statement. You are trying to misinform the internet
 >readers that during Hyzer's analysis, he came across some
 >special way to double-expose photographs. That is incorrect.
 >Hyzer simply said that he discovered how this photograph, with
 >very little experimentation, could be double-exposed. You had
 >taken the word "discover" and made it sound like something he
 >had never came across or knew of before. That is a total lie,
 >and you know it to be a lie. > Snip

Now, I hope you will both shake hands and come out fighting.

J. Jaime Gesundt, Gulf Wind Researcher









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 18:51:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:38:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 16:29:54 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 ><snip>

 >>2) The correlation between the size of the object in the sealed
 >>Nimslo camera photos and the consistency between that size

 ><snip>


Bruce, Mark, Jerry (Black), List:

Too bad one of you snipped the above. That said, everyone seems
to have forgotten the following. Up until the time Ed Walters
was sent the Nimslo 3-D camera, all of his pictures had been of
the original object shaped something like a tea pot or a very
squat saucer.

ALL of the Nimslo pictures (on a sealed roll of film) portrayed
a very different "object" entirely, one which Ed originally
estimated as being 200 feet in length or longer. After analysis
revealed the photographed object to be about 4 and 1/2 feet
long, it was explained that Ed didn't have his glasses on, was
looking through the viewfinder and overestimated its size,
whatever, I don't care. Then it was "explained" that Ed's wife,
who didn't have her eyes glued to the camera's viewfinder, also
though the object was only a few feet long, and thus Ed's
mis-estimate was simply glossed over and shoved under the rug.

Think of this as simply another dent in Ed's much-dented pickup
truck hood, whatever keeps the story "straight" in the face of
contravening evidence. I think it was also on the Nimslo
occasion that Ed reported his first "abduction" and all that
stinky, smelly stuff under his fingernails (that he didn't
keep), but if not, no real matter.

Curiously, Ed never photographed the Nimslo "UFO" again, to the
best of my knowledge. It appears only on the roll of 35mm film
over which Walters had no control whatsoever. Once that roll of
film was returned for development, however, Ed went back to his
trusty Polaroid (which even Maccabee admits was capable of
double exposures, unlike subsequent Polaroid models) and --
surprise! -- produced another series of pictures of his
pre-Nimslo UFO, including, if memory serves, the famous road
shot.

Odd, isn't it? Walters takes pictures of one kind of UFO with
one kind of camera, and pictures of another UFO with another
camera, one supplied by another party and sealed so that Walters
couldn't mess with it.

I'm sure there's an explanation for this -- the aliens made him
do it, whatever. Just don't expect me to believe it. The Walters
Polaroids looked hokey the first time I saw them, they looked
hokey the last time I looked at them, and they'll look hokey the
next time I look at them. In short, they'll look hokey forever.
And for good reason.

Dennis









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                        Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 20:52:26 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:41:52 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 10:06:42 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?

 >>From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: 'Planet X' Beyond Pluto?
 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 13:18:23 PDT

 >>Greetings list -

 >>Found this interesting article about a new scientific report
 >>suggesting that there may in fact be a "Planet X" beyond Pluto.

 >>From: http://msnbc.com/news/320182.asp

 >>A mystery revolves around the sun Researchers suggest that huge
 >>unseen object orbits on fringe of solar system

 ><snip>

 >There is a satisfying circularity to this, should it prove true.

 >One of my minor personal heroes is/was one Clyde Tombaugh who
 >discovered Plutah, in 1932 I think, and renamed it Pluto after
 >having visited Utah.

 >Clyde ground his own lenses, like a lot of kids did then. But,
 >he pushed his personal obsession into a professional career at a
 >time when no jobs were available.

 >By some luck, Pluto fell within the lenses, and could be made
 >out by the "blinkers" they used then, and probably do now.

<snip>

I had the good fortune to spend over an hour with Clyde Tombaugh
at his office at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces many
years ago prior to my lecture that evening at NMSU. He, of
course had had an excellent UFO sighting himself. He also had
the courage that night to attend my lecture "Flying Saucers ARE
Real"  to an overflow crowd of 1600 people. I referred one of
the questions to him. He was a true gentleman and scientist who
probably had more hours of good seeing time of the other
planets in the solar system than  any other Earthling.

His discovery of Pluto was made on February 18, 1930, while
systematically comparing photographs taken on January 23 and 29.
He was looking for a new planet as directed by Percival Lowell.
based upon calculations of the perturbations in the orbit of
Neptune.

Stan Friedman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                         Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 22:20:36 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:44:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 03:25:06 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: Errol Knapp <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Roy Hale's Site Updated

 >Hi All,

 >Just to mention that I have updated my website.

 >http://memebers.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/

 >Regards,

 >Roy..


Uhhhh... hhhmmmm... well I went there and all I got was a "page
not available" error message. ????

REgards, Mike

  Download ICQ at http://www.icq.com/
  ICQ#:7508455
  BBS: (270) 683-3026
  Fax: (270) 686-7394
  Home: (270) 683-6811
         ---







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:46:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 22:00:54 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>No, Dennis.  Not whatever I say, nor even whatever you say.
 >>It's how you say it, dude, that makes my skin crawl.  You sound
 >>to me as if you've got all the answers and even if you don't,
 >>you know what they aint.

 ><snip>

 >Whatever you say, Jim. Others have had different experiences and
 >different interpretations. Would you agree?

Yes.

 >Again, I was addressing the abduction literature as it exists.
 >Not establishing rules or insinuating anything about your own
 >experiences.

 >Sorry if you took it otherwise.

 >Dennis

No need for apology.  This is friendly counsel.  People are
allowed to debate and even get emotional.  One must never expect
someone who perceives that he or she has had abduction related
experiences, especially those who have direct memory of these
events, to ever be expected to act normally in such a debate.
One may better expect one to react.

How can you understand when you've not had the experience, when
you do not have the memory and must live with it every day of
your life, whilst some folks are telling in lieu of suggesting,
that it was that piece of undigested beef yet again?

It is one of the most frustrating things in the world for me to
sit here and read about how everyone researching this phenom,
has the facts. Just the facts.

And even when and if someone does not claim truth, just to hear
someone tell you that what you know is not at all what you know,
it's something else.

Now that I have removed myself from the closet, I want each and
every one of you to know that what I know is extremely certain
in my mind as having occured.  Further, that in spite of this
"knowledge," I still may cannot be sure what the hell did really
happen.  And to read such tripe as sometimes is written makes me
madder than hell.  So you see, the abductee or experiencer,
whatever you choose to call us, is already (if he or she is
honest) sure of what happened, but not sure of what happened,
simultaneously.  How's that for living with your own person
oxymoron, your own personal hell, your own personal conundrum?

Last but not least, it aint easy keeping a sense of humor when
this happens.  Sometimes, things just happen to make life a lot
tougher than it normally is.  And one tends to overeact.  Which
is why I've reduced the price of Gripple by 25%. It is my firm
unalterable belief that the UFO problem can be solved through a
thorough inebriation of the anterior frontal portion of the
brain.

Keep it up Dennis, and you are gonna make me go broke _and_
ticked off!

Jim








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:48:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dear Stephen, Dennis, Kevin, and other Asleep-in-the-Deep List
Members,

Stephen, your theories would be so very comforting, if they were
based in reality. I don't know how old you are, so you may not
be able to associate with this little comparative metaphor.  If
not, pick another *very* traumatic experience in your life, it
works much the same way.

Do you remember what you were doing, where you were, who you
were with the afternoon of the day JFK was shot and killed?  If
you were old enough, you'd probably remember.  Thousands of
people remember what they were doing at that moment, who they
were with,  the feelings and conversations they had with those
around them at that moment.

Just *one* "visit" is exactly like that...except that *they* try
really hard to make you forget.  Sometimes it works for several
months or years, and then the memories (not dreams) begin to
creep back in, like a cat stalking you in the pitch black night.
Not fun.  No welcoming mat out.

Now, try and remember *any* dream you've had in the last week,
and compare it to those memories you had that day when you heard
the news about JFK.  One is vivid, conscious recall, as though
it happened 5 minutes ago; the other is a clearly a dream,
slippery, misty, fades and disappears from memory, especially
when talked about.

Now, what happens if the JFK memory is purposefully manipulated
in your mind to make you think what you experienced that day was
all a dream.  Therein may lie the crux of a partial answer to
the questions, "Did it happen; can we trust our memories?  Or
were they dreams?" Big difference.

Make no mistake, the burns I received from their laser attached
to a transporter in my bedroom in 1961 was no dream.  Try
burning yourself with a laser and tell me it was a dream.  Ha!
If you don't scream your head off, you're either an alien and/or
dead.  I still have the scars, and I know exactly where I was,
how I got those burns, who was with me (a bunch of inept aliens)
and the conversation (screaming rage) that I leveled at them.

Please, please wake up people.  You say you want to help.  John
V. gave you a challenge.  I will give you another, very direct
and specific. Let's see how many of you really want to help.
You can reach me at Strick@h2net.net .  My husband and I are in
the process of moving, but I will give you specific details of
information I need to find, if you want to really help "find
proof."  I only want *true skeptics* and doubting Thomas' to
respond.  All others need not apply.

You probably wonder why I can't do it myself.  I've tried, but
cannot follow through.  I get as far as lifting the receiver or
composing the letters and then trash them, or hang up.  The fear
of ridicule is there, but more strongly is a deep-seated fear
that I'm not supposed to be talking about this with *anyone*, or
asking the kinds of questions I need to ask to get the answers I
need.  Maybe it's all hallucinations, but you'll have to prove
that this burn scar on my right calf is an hallucination. Sorry,
I don't believe in stigmata anymore than you believe in EBEs.
Should make for an interesting teaching/learning experience for
all involved.

Help me find the proof (IF it's there) of my experiences, beyond
the *stories* I and thousands of others tell. What is plainly
visible as proof to me, may not be to you.  But for anyone who
has the courage to touch those scars and let reality sink in,
it's enough impetus to begin looking...very hard. Help me find
me the answers.

Sue Strickland





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:36:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:51:50 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:56:08 +0100

 >>From: C. <xxxxx.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 18:35:18 -0000

 >Have you ever read such nonsense?

I agree with that.

 >To the moron world of Ufology - where aliens are all around -
 >Burns probably seems like an innocent man. That's a reflection
 >upon Ufology - not the criminal justice system in the UK.

Hmmmm - so if this is a 'moron world', why do you continue to
live in it? Mr Burns showed serious signs of paranoia, whereas
you seem to have a superiority complex. I really am fed up of
your diatribes, telling us all 'the truth' and how gullible we
are to believe any extraterrestrial involvement. You can't prove
anything one way or the other, and neither can anyone else.
Sorry, but dat's the truth.

Martin






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 10

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:59:28 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

Y'all,

Whilst it's heartening that Max has some supporters it's we
mustn't let knee jerk reactions cloud the issue.

Max is to continue investigating the Sheffield case from prison
and when he gets out. That's all fine and dandy. When he's paid
his debt to society he'll be free and untainted by allegations
of being a liar etc etc. No doubt some sections of ufology will
seek to make him a martyr but in view of his latest
pronunciations we shouldn't forget that, despite his other
problems, we need to look closely at his claims and not let them
be obfuscated with stories of 'set ups' etc.

As Jon said in a recent email he still hasn't come up with the
name/number of the aircraft which went missing or the
name/number of the crew. This was always the crux point of his
argument which seemd to get buried beneath his freelance
chemical courier activities.

His latest claim, that he may have access to a 'cassette' tape
of air to ground messages from Tornado jets and inter-police
messages from the night of the incident is interesting. We wait
with bated breath. Not least because to possess such a tape
Maxwell must have contacts with a radio ham or hams who had
several radios tuned to different stations, all being taped. I
doubt very much that such a tape exists. But Max has made the
opening bid in this new hand of belief poker and the other
researchers are entitled to reply.

So Max, I'll raise you

1) Where's the tape?

and

2) What does it say?

Max and supporters, should stop the weeping about 'intelligence
agents' and 'set ups', and give us some checkable facts - just
one would do! Whether Max is innocent or guilty of his criminal
charges doesn't affect his core claims nor his critics' response
to them. The conceit that he is the 'chosen one' of the secret
state may be enough to sustain him through the undoubtedly dark
prison evenings but in the long run it will not affect his
ability to produce checkable evidence.

On a more humorous note one of Max's main supporters, the
crop-circle hoaxer Matthew Williams, has claimed that not only
is Max the victim of a cover-up and a set-up, it is being run by
'luciferian freemasons', a grouping which one in twenty UK
citizens apparently belong to. Now, if that doesn't fill you
with confidence about Matthew's ability to get Max off the hook
and solve the non- mystery of the Sheffield Incident, nothing
will!

Happy Luciferian Trails

Andy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #320

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 08:11:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:23:19 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #320


Apology to MW #320 (For October 9, 1999)

I don't believe _in_ UFOs, and I'm not splitting hairs, but
*something* haunts the skies above, and shames us _well_ down
here. And not just _now_, but way back *when* 'twas flight was
just a dream. Yes, well before the pyramids that began it all,
it seems. Back before we sailed our seas we prayed to brutal
gods -- gods as thick as errant fleas to give that needed nod.
Back before, when just a few, we wandered plains in bands askew,
and we were *almost* innocent then, an uncorrupted kith and kin.
Back before we wrote in books, we scratched cave walls with
paint and soot, and we recorded saucers, flying, (scaring the
observers spying) -- pulsing inner lights in waves that we,
then, chipped in stone, OK?

Kings of fearful ancient times would see them hover there, and
scurry to their *high* priests, their witchdoctors, and sayers.
Pharos of old Egypt ran, and raised up armies that would stand
in fearful awe of flying craft that, silent (days long!) flew on
past! They could, even, smell their odors -- alien and acrid
motors! This was taken down (but hidden) by a man of some
*religion*, but the papyrus is real and good translation's solid
seal. I say this and _forget_ the Bible -- how all its stories
make it libel as a record of abduction, UFOs and piqued
destruction!

Consider Alexander as he strides his *conquered* planet, as he
crosses raging rivers to secure a grip upon it. His elephants
and horses and, yes, most of all his men were panicked by two
UFOs that _dove_ upon them, friend. They drove them from their
crossing (why?) these craft that sailed air; they flew like
massive birds of prey that owned the sky up there. Described as
silver shields spitting fire to the ground, they danced and
burned and threatened, but they did not make a sound. Squealing
like Ned Beatty, and (yes!) scared beyond his wits, Alexander
*wrote* it down, so he'd _remember_ it.

And sober (pre-Christ) Romans were observers, then, as well. Of
skies, well nigh, INFESTED are the tales they would tell.
Spectacles of "fleets of ships" would course through troubled
skies, they wrote it down as point of fact, and not as
*charming* lies. They would HEAR terrific noises, and the sky
would turn to gold. Men and women _trembled_ like they all had
gotten cold. Globes of fire fell to Earth and landed on the
ground. Taking off they'd go straight up and flash their lights
around. Described as brighter than the sun, these terrified
plain folks (who'd run) to hapless priests or scared officials
who'd write it down, and sign _initials_. Pliny wrote of burning
shields that danced across his eye, annealed. Others wrote of
missiles, then, that roared and soared their skies again.

The birth of Christ won't cure the air of errant flying craft.
Josephus wrote of phantom ships, and no one thinks he's daft.
Respected as a scholar, and revered as circumspect, he wrote of
flying chariots, and of beings WITHIN them yet! He wrote of
_armies_ of them that would course their way through clouds! He
wrote "surrounded cities" so there really is no doubt. He wrote
that all this happened in fullest light of day -- he wrote of
frightened peoples who went down on knees to pray. This wasn't
science fiction, but was well beyond his scope. He wrote it as
he saw it. All agree that he's no dope.

The Byzantine were not immune to unknown *flying* craft, they
wrote of ships called brilliant, more like burning globes -- as
fast. They hovered over cities (!), and presented beams like
swords; folks looked up and cringed in fear for judgement of
those lords! Nobles watched the pagans as the dark age was to
end, and reddish brown in color flying saucers flew again! They
hovered over churches, and they scared the people blind who ran
in "bug" confusion from the castles if outside. They had never
seen the like! They cowered in their awe. They _survived_ and
wrote it down. It sticks, yes (!), in your craw.

And what is seminal history, but Saint Gregory of Tours who
reported on one Alcuin, a biographer of stars. Charlemagne's
assaulted by a light-fast glowing globe! It flickers
inexplicably like a psychedelic strobe! It's so damned strange
it spooks his horse, which rears in the attack. Charlemagne, in
armor, is then thrown right off its back. This injures him
severely; he's dead in four more years, and kingdoms fall to
ruin as the Vikings bring their cheer.

The Japanese saw their fair share and they will not be excluded.
Yoritsumi saw the "flying lights" and here will be included.
Yoritsumi was a general with his army in the field, and he saw
them loop their circles in the sky like hurled shields. They
swung all night to morning light and then some hours still, so
he, then, asked his *wise* men who would shuck _their_ jive and
shill, "Be unconcerned, most gracious lord. Let smiles adjourn
your frown -- it's a typhoon, heaving mightily, to blow the
stars around."

This takes us from -- "way back" BC . . . to about the
thirteenth century. There's more to say another day -- eight
hundred years of saucers -- hey! Forgetting tablets Sitchin
translates, UFOs remain debated. History's a smoking gun that
people did _not_ write for *fun*. It was, then, too damned
expensive; they only wrote what common sense was. Written in the
words they _had_ in concepts they could understand, they wrote
that we are _not_ alone, and wrote that down in ink and stone!

Lehmberg@snowhill.con

No. I don't believe in UFOs. I _believe_ UFOs. The difference is
NOT that subtle. And what is there not to believe. Seriously --
it crawls _all_ over the written record, and yet collectively we
continue to laugh inappropriately up our damp sleeves.

Why? We can't let it disturb our future plans? Rofl!

And, what is it but our belief in a phony-baloney, and likely
unjust, *future* ((awarded to us if we stay our *profitable* but
world sodomizing course)) that allows the shimmering scales of a
court jester ufology to be glued to our hapless eyes in the
first place? Yeah! Phony -- baloney!

The conservative establishment smirks and continues to celebrate
a conservatism that is born out of the *satisfactions* it has
discovered in having *things* remain _just_ as they ARE. Further
-- it is an establishment that recently finds itself needing to
demonstrate some reinvention as a *compassionate* party, proof
of it's sociopathy! That future that we hope for (and that they
promise) is a red herring (for a carrot) on the end of their
long stick. And even IT evaporates (as a red herring is wont to
do) the moment they feel they HAVE to have another platinum
fixture on the downstairs bidet of their autumn home. In a
contrived and manipulated denouement that too few are availing
themselves of -- these few are very comfortable indeed. We are
embroiled in a gigantic and pyramidal ponsi-scheme for a
sociopathic minority.  This corrosive minority believes that
they will be able to insulate themselves from the very worst,
FORGETTING they are in a position to elevate the whole to truly
_cosmic_ levels. Free power, as example, has such a *problem*
NOT because there is nothing to it. Rather, a huge amount of old
(and new) money feels it has a lot *invested* in the early,
fossil, twentieth century concepts presently employed. Energy
problems in this country could be eliminated with an _incentive_
to generate power and supply it to a grid, presently, enslaving
us, but I digress.  <puff -- puff . . . deep breath> <g.>

This group (of the, ah, uh -- . . . conservatively minded) is
the same bunch that fills the trough for our news media and
mainstream science impetus. It is also the major proponent of a
campaign to keep ufology in the under-funded-court-jester status
it presently occupies. UFOs suggest change -- this is a change
that may not be compatible with the present ease of luxury and
control now enjoyed by selected persons presently disrespecting
_your_ individuality and quality of life. How much control _do_
you have?

No, we hang by threads. At the complete whim of the arbitrary,
we are song and danced by a cloying appeal to tradition and
ceremony. These traditions of Aristotle, and these ceremonies of
elitist convenience do nothing but beg the inevitable question;
however, a question largely unanswered but for a smirking retort
that maintains a status quo leading to an increasingly
exclusionary and suicidal dead end.

Somebody knows.

UFOs are, by definition, change, and point to worlds with much
more breadth and scope -- potential and expansiveness. It gets
no easier to maintain a faade of normalcy for the smirking
denial of these few, so fearlessly -- ask your own questions
though the answers (or the suggestions of answers) offend you,
shock you, or shame you. There is joy beyond the shame,
satisfaction beyond the shock, and fellowship beyond the
offense.

And it's real.

Restore John Ford!


--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 8 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Dave Baker <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:10:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:26:29 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 21:31:41 +0100


 >Oh, he's been descredited over here on a continual basis for
 >some time, the damage he's done by making unprovable claims
 >has annoyed a lot of people - that case wasn't an alien crash
 >retreval till Max got involved.

Hi Y'all,


Max's legacy - as that of a now convicted drugs dealer- is that
he has soured any relationship ufologists may form with the
police of the Sheffield/Yorkshire area.

When I first formed the Yorkshire UFO Society one of my first
tasks  was to try and forge contacts with the local police... my
idea was to leave my telephone number with the operations room
of Sheffield's main police station, so that they could pass it
on to anyone who called reporting a UFO.

The Inspector I spoke to was very polite and helpful, but I
remember him mentioning that they already had a UFO
investigator's name on their books. Did I know a Max Burns?

At the time I did not, but this was around the time that Max
must have been under investigation. He had also apparently
become a pain in the proverbials bothering the police themselves
with his antics and accusations. I've got a pretty good idea
what the police thought of ufologists in general after that.

And do you know something... I have never had a single call from
anyone who was forwarded to me by the police.

I wonder why?


Dave Baker, Yorkshire UFO Society.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                                Re: Get Real

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:46 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:30:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
 >of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
 >be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
 >hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
 >technology'.

 >Unless the aliens are only interested in the people who wouldn't
 >have even thought to do that.

Well I suppose Dave considers his remark pretty clever, but I'll
bet he's never done any real checking about whether precisely
what he suggests has been attempted.  It has, and it has failed.

Last year or so I had an email exchange with Katharina Wilson,
an abductee who has tried, with the help of local UFO
investigators, to do exactly what Dave suggests above.  On
nights she would undergo an abduction, the video camera put in
her bedroom mysteriously recorded nothing but static.  If you
don't believe me, contact her yourself. Her URL follows:

http://www.alienjigsaw.com

There is also a case, reported in one of Ray Fowler's books,
where an abductee woke long enough one night to see an alien in
his hallway examining his motion detector.  The alien mentally
suggested he return to sleep, and he did.  Apparently the
detector never went off.  Sorry I can't cite chapter and verse
on this one; I've read too many of Fowler's books by now.

Is that a sufficient answer for you Dave?  Guess those aliens
aren't too intimidated by our "advanced" technology.  After all,
any civilization like ours which has had the light bulb for all
of 100 years (wow!), isn't going to present much of a defense
against putative others may have invented it thousands if not
millions of years ago. One can only hope their ethics are as far
beyond ours as well ...

-Brian Cuthbertson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:45:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:33:56 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 09:04:31 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>>launched a bold initiative.

 >>>They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >>>Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >>>in Britain.

 >><snip>


 >Dear Jim, Jenny, and others properly disinterested:

 >I hereby announce the formation of the RCFSHES which is the
 >Redwood City Flying Saucer Highly Exclusive Society.


 >-  Larry Hatch,  President-in-exile of Ananaguay,
 >   Discoverer of Bingo Beach Uruguay,  Gods gift to
 >   cash-poor Dutch and Deutch Breweries,  the first
 >   [ex] Catholic to complain about the taste of the
 >   next parishioners spit at Hooly Communion,
 >   and other noteworthy exploits and adventures,
 >   too dripping wet to recount.

 >PS:  This information appears as a public notice only.


Congrats - I can't believe the pomposity of the announcement of
this group, so I'm gald to see someone has treated it in the way
it deserved.

Can I suggest that the best 'new start' British ufology needs is
for the 'investigators' to learn some humility.

That's not a xenophobe foreigner view, but that of a Brit who's
amazed at the certainty of some of the members of this
organisation.

It's a shame that the announcement bears all the signs of the
stereotype Brit (Englishman) - absolute certainty, elitism and
dismissal of any doubt.

Martin Phillips






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:35:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

<snip>

 >If they really wanted to wipe your memory... you wouldn't
 >remember a thing, therefore you would not be able to write to a
 >mailing list and whine about being abducted right!

Actually, Dave, in order for any beings or humans to completely
wipe out all of one's memory, he/she/it would have to erase the
victim's subconscious (or long term) memory as well as conscious
(short term) memories.  In so doing, you would have an
infant-mind on your hands who wouldn't remember anything (much
like individuals who have experienced open or closed head
trauma, stroke, etc.).  If this were done to all abductees, it
would begin to attract attention, wouldn't you think?

Erasing short term memory only effects memories acquired within
a short period of time therefore the subconscious and long term
memory is not effected.  Even short term or artificially induced
amnesia may not be permanent especially if the experience was a
traumatic one.  People tend to remember traumatic experiences
longer and more vividly than mundane experiences because of the
heightened emotions involved - that is, of course, if they do
not continually reinforce the amnesia.  Always remember - the
subconscious never forgets.

Thus, although an abductee's close encounter can be "erased"
from his or her conscious awareness, the experience always
remains vividly clear in his or her subconscious.  Subconscious
memories, especially when repressed and/or traumatic in nature
never tend to stay repressed or forgotten. Somewhere along the
way, the individual (or abductee) will remember bits and pieces
of a repressed experience or even all of the experience if he or
she is mentally ready to face the event.  The subconscious never
sleeps. These memories may begin to surface in dreams or even
while one is busy at work or watching a movie (which is, by the
way, a form of hypnosis).

Perhaps this explains why the Abductors cannot erase all of the
abductee's memories of the encounter completely.  To erase the
encounter from the abductee's subconscious the Abductors would
have to do some kind of "psychic" surgery (as in surgery on the
psyche rather than with psychic powers) and selectively sort
through all of the abductee's memories stored in his or her
subconscious, find only those memories related to the encounter
and erase only those specific memories -assuming this is
possible.  This "psychic surgery" may take more time than the
Abductors care to bother with or they may not be able to do this
any more than we can.

 >Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a
photograph >of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands
there must >be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion
detector, not >hard to do these days considering our 'changing
level of >technology'.

Well, Dave, this _is_ your lucky day!  Just so happens I have a
case I investigated for almost 3 years in which multiple
witnesses - all in a state of conscious, waking  awareness -
encountered a variety of beings over a three day period _and_
photographs were taken on the third day in which images of what
appear to be beings appeared.  By the way, although I am a
certified hypnotherapist, no hypnosis at all was used during
this investigation.  All events were recalled according to
consciously remembered experiences (events that may have
occurred when the witnesses were "knocked out" or unconscious
have never been explored).

The article and the scanned photographs have been sitting on my
web site since December, 1997 but most people tend to reject
and/or dismiss it because it does not fit the "typical"
abduction scenario.  Beings of all kinds of shapes and sizes
were observed by a woman, her family members and another witness
who arrived on the third day (the photographer).

On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
doors - or so she thought.

Upon closer inspection, a friend turned one of the photos over
on it's side and recognized the outline of what appeared to be a
being in a fetal position going through a sliding glass door or
some kind of residue left from the being going through the
glass.  Of course, this doesn't mean much to people who demand
to see a live alien in a cage on exhibit at the local zoo or on
TV but it is all we have at this point.

Two years later, the photographs were converted to slides for a
local presentation.  The night before the presentation (yeah, I
always wait 'til the last minute), I was putting the slides in
the slide tray becoming dyslexic trying to get them
right-side-up when up popped a slide with this bug-eyed critter
staring right at me.  I was so stunned that I just sat there
silently staring at this image no one even knew was in the
photograph. My kids were watching me work and it was my daughter
who pointed to the image and said, "Oh, look. An alien."  That's
when I knew it was not just my imagination.

Some people see these images, some don't.  I have tried to share
the case, the photographs and what I learned from this
investigation (not yet released - there is much more) with many
of the more well-known "researchers" and "UFO experts".  I have
mailed copies of the article and photographs to numerous authors
and so-called "researchers" only to be told it is nothing. I
have brought the case and photographs to UFO conferences and
quietly put them in hotel mailboxes of some of the well known
lecturers and alleged "researchers" with an invitation to
discuss the details of the case while I am there or at some
later date via E-mail or by phone.  Never heard a word from any
of them.

These are the "experts" we all see at UFO conferences, on TV and
book covers.  I can understand the complexities of this case but
I do not understand how someone can call himself or herself a
"researcher", "expert" or "investigator" if they do not at least
check out leads and information that come their way.  That's all
I asked - that they at least check it out. They didn't have to
believe it or accept any of it as real.  All they had to do was
look it over and perhaps ask a few questions.  They did nothing.
Ah, their loss.

I once heard my friend and associate, Dr. Turner, lament how
little time she had left to investigate and write because she
was too busy appearing on TV and lecturing.  If becoming "well
known" means becoming too busy to "walk the walk", then I am
quite happy where I am.  I investigate because I want to know
the truth not to become popular, well known or sell my next
book.

I've endured a lot of ridicule and debunking since releasing
this story and the photographs but such is the lot of anyone who
even attempts to bring any evidence, no matter how small or
large, to the public.  It has only made me stronger and more
determined.  I didn't believe the case either, at first, and
poo-pooed it myself.  It wasn't until I took the _time_ to
investigate and interview the witnesses - over and over - and
examine the photographs closely that I began to understand the
reality before me.  To see the sincerity on the witness' faces
and hear it in their voices, to spend time with the families -
in their homes, to actually go where the events took place and
review the information over and over and over for 3 years is
what it took to convince me.

I do not expect you or anyone to even admit for one moment that
this case could be real.  The bizarre nature of the events and
the beings described are just too much for most people to even
begin to accept.  But, what if it _is_ true?  What if the
photographs are genuine?  What if there is more to learn from
this information?

I won't bother you with the...details.  I no longer talk about
this case or try to share any of my work except with those who
express a sincere interest to learn more.  Those who want only
to sit in their comfy little arm-chairs and debunk can do so to
their hearts' content.  It is people like me that will be out
there learning and finding truths debunkers can only begin to
imagine.  <grin>

You asked for photographs, I give you photographs but you will
only ask for more.  And you should ask for more!  Keep searching
for the evidence _you_ need to convince _yourself_.  No one can
convince you of anything but yourself.  It is not my job to
provide you with the evidence you seek, you will have to go find
it.  Here is what you asked for, take it or leave it. (I have a
pretty good idea what you will do. ;>)

See "Alien Convention" at "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com".  You
can also check out my interview with Paul Williams for UFO Desk
at "http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk/authors.html" in which
this case is discussed.  Paul is a really, really nice guy doing
a fine job with little thanks!  Also check out UFO Desk at
"http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk"!

Oh, as for why video cameras and sensors/alarms don't work,
study the EM effect often reported when the Abductors and/or
UFOs are present. Abductees _have_ set up video cameras and
other equipment only to have them turn off with the electricity
or due to EM effects on batteries.

In the ARM (Abduction Resistance Maneuvers) studies through the
Vanguard Project, since 1997, those on the Vanguard list
continue to study ways to detect presences before the onset of
an abduction.  How many ways of collecting evidence can _you_
think of, Dave, that do not require electricity or batteries?
Hmmmm?  Since most of our appliances depend on batteries or
electricity which often shut down due to the EM effect, can you
suggest a way to make a video camera work without batteries or
electricity?  If an abductee is paralyzed, can you suggest a
sure-fire way he or she can break the paralysis, get up, grab
the camera and click off the dozens of photographs you probably
wouldn't believe anyway?  Oh, and the camera cannot operate on
batteries either.  Can you suggest a motion detector that does
not require batteries or electricity that can also detect beings
often reported as "floating" rather than walking?

You demand a lot of evidence but you don't seem to know much
about the phenomenon.  If you have any suggestions, Dave, as in
useful _practical_ suggestions, please share these with us or
with the ARM project through the Vanguard list.  And remember,
you must leave out anything that requires batteries or
electricity or canines as even animals are sometimes paralyzed
or "switched off" during abductions.

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 15:19:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:38:28 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 14:54:12 EDT
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>Your bone to pick is with Burns.  If he's guilty or not, what if
 >>he's telling the truth about his ufological issues?  Do we just
 >>let it all slide through the prison bars and down the drain?  Or
 >>has is all been fabricated as we all assume a 'druggy' would do?

 >>Let's all condemn the man in all aspects of his existence and
 >>deny him the right to share any truths that may exist that may
 >>contribute to the rest of ufology's puzzle.

 >>Would you disown a prostitute and her claims of having an alien
 >>living in her basement, that well known researchers have
 >>witnessed and spoken to in secrecy, being one of the most
 >>compelling cases ever to exist, because she's a prostitute?
 >>Probably.  If you found out I was a politician, would you not
 >>care about my abduction or sighting experiences anymore?
 >>Probably.

 >>Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
 >>stands.  How righteous.

 >>I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone, but he was a
 >>respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
 >>it. At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
 >>longer believable or not worthy of our attention?  When someone
 >>else has a bone to pick with them?  I make up my own mind,
 >>thanks. And what shall we find out about those so quick to
 >>discredit? ;)

 >Right on the money Sue ... While it is true that one's
 >credibility is diminished whenever something such as this
 >occurs, it is also quite true that:

 >1) It is sick for some to take such righteous pleasure over the
 >man's troubles and ...

 >2) It may (key word) not diminish his credibility in the matter
 >of his UFO beliefs and/or knowledge.

 >3) And it all may be a plot to thicken an already corn starched
 >pot of Oy.

 >Truth be known, the truth be not known.  These days, when
 >justice is a game all too often, one cannot even trust those
 >charged with the administration, determination, investigation
 >and mitigation of the truth.

 >The system has lied one too many times.  And as I once opined,
 >the truth shall set it's fee.  See our Juice Representative, Oy
 >Jay Simpleton... Sampson... whatever....

<snip>

Our mOrning Sunshine was innocent.  I saw who did it in a dream
the night before like a fly on the wall. I also saw the person
who did it testify on the stand, but hey, who am I?  I also had
a long time- span of seeing Mercedes sports cars wherever I went
afterwards. And I also saw the look of shock on someone's face
close to him during the verdict.  But it's my little secret.

Sooz








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:41:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

<snip>

 >If they really wanted to wipe your memory... you wouldn't
 >remember a thing, therefore you would not be able to write to a
 >mailing list and whine about being abducted right!

Actually, Dave, in order for any beings or humans to completely
wipe out all of one's memory, he/she/it would have to erase the
victim's subconscious (or long term) memory as well as conscious
(short term) memories.  In so doing, you would have an
infant-mind on your hands who wouldn't remember anything (much
like individuals who have experienced open or closed head
trauma, stroke, etc.).  If this were done to all abductees, it
would begin to attract attention, wouldn't you think?

Erasing short term memory only effects memories acquired within
a short period of time therefore the subconscious and long term
memory is not effected.  Even short term or artificially induced
amnesia may not be permanent especially if the experience was a
traumatic one.  People tend to remember traumatic experiences
longer and more vividly than mundane experiences because of the
heightened emotions involved - that is, of course, if they do
not continually reinforce the amnesia.  Always remember - the
subconscious never forgets.

Thus, although an abductee's close encounter can be "erased"
from his or her conscious awareness, the experience always
remains vividly clear in his or her subconscious.  Subconscious
memories, especially when repressed and/or traumatic in nature
never tend to stay repressed or forgotten. Somewhere along the
way, the individual (or abductee) will remember bits and pieces
of a repressed experience or even all of the experience if he or
she is mentally ready to face the event.  The subconscious never
sleeps. These memories may begin to surface in dreams or even
while one is busy at work or watching a movie (which is, by the
way, a form of hypnosis).

Perhaps this explains why the Abductors cannot erase all of the
abductee's memories of the encounter completely.  To erase the
encounter from the abductee's subconscious the Abductors would
have to do some kind of "psychic" surgery (as in surgery on the
psyche rather than with psychic powers) and selectively sort
through all of the abductee's memories stored in his or her
subconscious, find only those memories related to the encounter
and erase only those specific memories -assuming this is
possible.  This "psychic surgery" may take more time than the
Abductors care to bother with or they may not be able to do this
any more than we can.

 >Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
 >of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
 >be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
 >hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
 >technology'.

Well, Dave, this _is_ your lucky day!  Just so happens I have a
case I investigated for almost 3 years in which multiple
witnesses - all in a state of conscious, waking  awareness -
encountered a variety of beings over a three day period _and_
photographs were taken on the third day in which images of what
appear to be beings appeared.  By the way, although I am a
certified hypnotherapist, no hypnosis at all was used during
this investigation.  All events were recalled according to
consciously remembered experiences (events that may have
occurred when the witnesses were "knocked out" or unconscious
have never been explored).

The article and the scanned photographs have been sitting on my
web site since December, 1997 but most people tend to reject
and/or dismiss it because it does not fit the "typical"
abduction scenario.  Beings of all kinds of shapes and sizes
were observed by a woman, her family members and another witness
who arrived on the third day (the photographer).

On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
doors - or so she thought.

Upon closer inspection, a friend turned one of the photos over
on it's side and recognized the outline of what appeared to be a
being in a fetal position going through a sliding glass door or
some kind of residue left from the being going through the
glass.  Of course, this doesn't mean much to people who demand
to see a live alien in a cage on exhibit at the local zoo or on
TV but it is all we have at this point.

Two years later, the photographs were converted to slides for a
local presentation.  The night before the presentation (yeah, I
always wait 'til the last minute), I was putting the slides in
the slide tray becoming dyslexic trying to get them
right-side-up when up popped a slide with this bug-eyed critter
staring right at me.  I was so stunned that I just sat there
silently staring at this image no one even knew was in the
photograph. My kids were watching me work and it was my daughter
who pointed to the image and said, "Oh, look. An alien."  That's
when I knew it was not just my imagination.

Some people see these images, some don't.  I have tried to share
the case, the photographs and what I learned from this
investigation (not yet released - there is much more) with many
of the more well-known "researchers" and "UFO experts".  I have
mailed copies of the article and photographs to numerous authors
and so-called "researchers" only to be told it is nothing. I
have brought the case and photographs to UFO conferences and
quietly put them in hotel mailboxes of some of the well known
lecturers and alleged "researchers" with an invitation to
discuss the details of the case while I am there or at some
later date via E-mail or by phone.  Never heard a word from any
of them.

These are the "experts" we all see at UFO conferences, on TV and
book covers.  I can understand the complexities of this case but
I do not understand how someone can call himself or herself a
"researcher", "expert" or "investigator" if they do not at least
check out leads and information that come their way.  That's all
I asked - that they at least check it out. They didn't have to
believe it or accept any of it as real.  All they had to do was
look it over and perhaps ask a few questions.  They did nothing.
Ah, their loss.

I once heard my friend and associate, Dr. Turner, lament how
little time she had left to investigate and write because she
was too busy appearing on TV and lecturing.  If becoming "well
known" means becoming too busy to "walk the walk", then I am
quite happy where I am.  I investigate because I want to know
the truth not to become popular, well known or sell my next
book.

I've endured a lot of ridicule and debunking since releasing
this story and the photographs but such is the lot of anyone who
even attempts to bring any evidence, no matter how small or
large, to the public.  It has only made me stronger and more
determined.  I didn't believe the case either, at first, and
poo-pooed it myself.  It wasn't until I took the _time_ to
investigate and interview the witnesses - over and over - and
examine the photographs closely that I began to understand the
reality before me.  To see the sincerity on the witness' faces
and hear it in their voices, to spend time with the families -
in their homes, to actually go where the events took place and
review the information over and over and over for 3 years is
what it took to convince me.

I do not expect you or anyone to even admit for one moment that
this case could be real.  The bizarre nature of the events and
the beings described are just too much for most people to even
begin to accept.  But, what if it _is_ true?  What if the
photographs are genuine?  What if there is more to learn from
this information?

I won't bother you with the...details.  I no longer talk about
this case or try to share any of my work except with those who
express a sincere interest to learn more.  Those who want only
to sit in their comfy little arm-chairs and debunk can do so to
their hearts' content.  It is people like me that will be out
there learning and finding truths debunkers can only begin to
imagine.  <grin>

You asked for photographs, I give you photographs but you will
only ask for more.  And you should ask for more!  Keep searching
for the evidence _you_ need to convince _yourself_.  No one can
convince you of anything but yourself.  It is not my job to
provide you with the evidence you seek, you will have to go find
it.  Here is what you asked for, take it or leave it. (I have a
pretty good idea what you will do. ;>)

See "Alien Convention" at "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com".  You
can also check out my interview with Paul Williams for UFO Desk
at "http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk/authors.html" in which
this case is discussed.  Paul is a really, really nice guy doing
a fine job with little thanks!  Also check out UFO Desk at
"http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk"!

Oh, as for why video cameras and sensors/alarms don't work,
study the EM effect often reported when the Abductors and/or
UFOs are present. Abductees _have_ set up video cameras and
other equipment only to have them turn off with the electricity
or due to EM effects on batteries.

In the ARM (Abduction Resistance Maneuvers) studies through the
Vanguard Project, since 1997, those on the Vanguard list
continue to study ways to detect presences before the onset of
an abduction.  How many ways of collecting evidence can _you_
think of, Dave, that do not require electricity or batteries?
Hmmmm?  Since most of our appliances depend on batteries or
electricity which often shut down due to the EM effect, can you
suggest a way to make a video camera work without batteries or
electricity?  If an abductee is paralyzed, can you suggest a
sure-fire way he or she can break the paralysis, get up, grab
the camera and click off the dozens of photographs you probably
wouldn't believe anyway?  Oh, and the camera cannot operate on
batteries either.  Can you suggest a motion detector that does
not require batteries or electricity that can also detect beings
often reported as "floating" rather than walking?

You demand a lot of evidence but you don't seem to know much
about the phenomenon.  If you have any suggestions, Dave, as in
useful _practical_ suggestions, please share these with us or
with the ARM project through the Vanguard list.  And remember,
you must leave out anything that requires batteries or
electricity or canines as even animals are sometimes paralyzed
or "switched off" during abductions.

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 21:51:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:43:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
 >>with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
 >>great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
 >>age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
 >>hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
 >>ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
 >>imprinted in my memory.

The problem with "vivid" memories is that they develop over
time. They are not frozen in an instant like a polaroid
photograph, or recorded sequentially like a video-tape. Every
time we tell someone about our memory we help to fix it in our
mind: we create a narrative by repeating it. Doubtful parts are
edited out, other parts are reinforced by repetition and by
comparison with other accounts we hear and read. The more often
we recount our experience the closer we get to a continuous,
coherent - and vivid - narrative.

Memories are infinitely malleable. They are overlaid with things
we have heard and read and been told about. I had a serious
operation at the age of three and still bear the scar, but can
remember nothing about it. My colleague Peter Rogerson had an
operation at about the same age and has strange and vivid
memories of it. I doubt that my lack of memories denotes
"missing time" or that his involve abduction. But I'm sure if
either of us had met an abduction researcher at some time in the
past (before we started Magonia, of course), we'd be fully
fledged abductees by now.

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                                 Aeribarque!

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:31:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:44:38 -0400
Subject: Aeribarque!


An unusual item from an 1897 edition of The Cincinnati Enquirer
can be reviewed at the following location:

     http://home.fuse.net/ufo/Aeribarque.html

The report tells of an airship sighting accompanied by animal
reaction, two occupants [one being of oriental appearance that
can't understand English] and a tour of the airship called an
'Aeribarque,' with graphic descriptive features included by the
alleged witness.

This report was sought after due to a fleeting mention in a
December 31, 1985 edition of FOCUS, the monthly newsletter of
the Fair-Witness Project, Inc., where writer Jimmy Ward makes
note of a 'volatile substance' that negated the force of
gravity, as referenced in the1897 newspaper feature.

The 1897 newspaper article was retrieved several days ago, and
its text can be found at the location listed above.

Kenny Young
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:53:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:48:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 99 10:29:16 PDT

 >>From: Serge Salvaill <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 11:19:55 -0700

 >>>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>From: Kenny Young
 >>>>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >>>>Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 >>>>>From: Jerome Clark
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT


Jerome Clark,

I can only congratulate you for using state-of-the-art
disinformation technics to finally establish that Jerome Clark
is interested only in Jerome Clark.  Not the truth, not the
facts, and especially not honesty.  Only himself.

<snip>

 >>Kenny Young went on _demonstrating_ the basis of his opinion.

 >Unfortunately, no.  What he displayed was an odd, self-righteous
 >disingenuousness which accomplished precisely nothing.

Technic 1:  Accuse your opponent of your own mishaps.

<snip>

 >>This well-established fact is what makes this affair
 >>hair-raising: any member of the List should be familiar with Mr.
 >>Young's work.  Kenny Young has proven in the past that he is a
 >>reliable conscientious and very good UFO investigator.  He is
 >>not a character assassin.  Go back on the List in the past 3
 >>years.  Look for one post where Kenny Young indulges in personal
 >>attacks.  You will find none.

 >False.

Technic 2: When confronted with verifiable evidence and short
with facts to support your own position, simply refute the
irrefutable evidence with a laconic false.

Technic 2a: Don't ever think of proposing a verification of the
evidence: you'd be dead meat.

<snip>

 >>On the other hand, Jerry's road sheet does not exactly make him
 >>a Peace Nobel Prize candidate.

 >What an odd remark.  I can only scratch my mind, and I think I
 >hear a whole lot of heads having the same done to them.

Technic 3: Play dumb and pretend external support.

 >>>Kenny Young's principle of "no agreement/no respect" appears
 >>>closer in spirit to Torquemada or the Stalinist purges than a
 >>>realistic expectation of professionals or serious amateurs in a
 >>>field of study.

 >I thought this was a particularly insightful observation, as one
 >who knows something about the terrible history of Stalinism and
 >its bloody purges.

Technic 4: To assassin a character, never be afraid to whisper
horrors.  Fumigate the lone shooter with the usual
mass-murderer's stench.

Technic 4a: ALWAYS show contrition for the poor soul lost in the
mazes of its own misery.

<snip>

 >What Young and Black seek to do, sadly, is to reduce ufological
 >discourse to personal denunciation.

Technic 5: Apply pressure where it counts.  Associate the honest
with the crook, the peaceful with the warrior, the open-minded
with the bigot.

Technic 5a: Speaking of bigotry... Na, forget about this one.
Bigotry, in this kind of matter, is like water in the sea, air
in the atmosphere.  Let's not engage in too much triviality.

<snip>

 >(It's instructive -- our
 >correspondent's attempt here to hide it in the memory hole
 >notwithstanding -- to go back to the strange Black screed that
 >started it all, to which Young,  "Evans," and our present
 >correspondent have never expressed the slightest whisper of
 >criticism.  Their quarrel is only with those who take exception
 >to it.)

Technic 6: Drown the fish.  Keep playing dumb, and, don't
forget, throw your dictionary off the train.  Mix everything up.
Refute your own words and leave no trail.  Your own words are
not important from the beginning: they are there to serve you.
Forget them right away.

Technic 6b: Keep the semantic content of your argumentation to
zero.  Even better if you can lower the bar to minus one by
alzheimerizing your own history and clintonizing your own
position.

Technic 6c: Declare all contextual evidence "out of
context".

Finally:

<snip>

<re-snip>

<re-re-snip>

Technic 7. Don't be afraid to make a fool of yourself.  In all
circumstances you have your own followers who adore you and your
enemies who despise you.  Why should you care then?

Technic 7c. All objectors will be considered suspicious.
Remember, all that counts is _you_.

<snip>

 >...Young,  "Evans," and our present
 >correspondent have never expressed the slightest whisper of
 >criticism

I am 48 years old.

As a faithful reader of this List, I can't just stand here and
witness the kind of behavior you have shown in this affair.

I don't mind the hard discussions in ufology.  But your way of
dealing with adversity - espacially when it comes from dedicated
investigators - is unacceptable for a man in your position.

Black is out of order.  At least, he's got the excuse of being a
skeptic.

You are out of order too.

Your behavior is inexcusable.

Please refrain from doing this in the future.  It serves no
purpose.  Except your own ego.

It does show a lack of perspective.

<pre-snip>

 >Patient and gentle listfolk:

At least you can't bee accused of talking to yourself.

Serge Salvaille








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:30:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:51:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 99 10:29:16 PDT

 >Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >What Young and Black seek to do, sadly, is to reduce ufological
 >discourse to personal denuniciation.

Mr. Clark;

You have been given an adequate chance to clarify your comments,
yet you continue to forge ahead with inept allegations. But wait
a second... I recall already asking you to reference one
issue-related example of 'personal denunciation' or 'vile
accusation' against you, to allow yourself the opportunity to
bolster your position... so I guess it won't do any good for me
to repeat my plea again.

Perhaps that is not your intent; to support your remarks.
Rather, you seem to derive a particular glee from issuing
blanket charges and ducking fair questions.

I think my previous messages dated October 5, October 3, October
1 and September 29 sufficiently illustrate the deficiency of
your methods.

Rather than afford a fair-minded response to the concerns which
I sought to illustrate, you evaded, obfuscated and attacked. I
see no reason to provide any serious consideration to your
bombastic drivel until such time as you would care to defend
your comments in a sober-minded forum.

Thanks much,
Kenny Young
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 00:33:05 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:56:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>wrote:

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:50:46 GMT

 ><snip>

 >>And I am merely suggesting that those abduction reports indicating
 >>experiencer Awareness during Sleep Paralysis don't fit into the two
 >>categories outlined above. They are not completely physical events.
 >>And they are not completely illusory events.

 >I'm curious, Joe.  How do you know they are not completely physical and
 >not completely illusory events?

Those who theorize that AAEs are completely physical have
trouble explaining how people could be 'abducted' spiritually as
some say they are. In a few cases, it is known that the
experiencer's contact with the aliens (or whatever they were)
occurred in a non-physical state because the physical body was
under observation at the time of the experience.

This camp also has trouble explaining why abductees would
suddenly manifest psychic abilities after their experiences, or
why abductees would have a history of previous anomalous
experiences such as OBEs and NDEs. Some researchers call this
the 'paraphysical' component of abduction experiences.

The opposite theory, that AAEs are completely illusory events,
was discussed in my previous post. How can the experience by a
complete hallucination when some of the report points to
accuracy of perception?

[Note: I'm saying that some reports indicate some accuracy of
perception. I'm *not* saying that *all* reports indicate *only*
veridical perception.]

Since both camps take an extreme position and since neither camp
can prove its case, a more moderate middle path may have some
merit.

 >How do you know when someone is really "aware" or just dreaming
they >are aware?

Let's try a thought experiment to help me clarify what you see
as the difference between awareness and a dream of awareness.

You go to bed this evening and fall asleep. Sometime in the
night you get up to use the toilet. You have great difficulty
finding the bathroom. Finally, in frustration, you decide to
'go' in a cardboard box in your closet. You start to do just
that when, suddenly, you snap your body awake and scurry off to
the bathroom.

While your body was still asleep, were you really aware of
needing to relieve yourself or were you merely dreaming the
awareness of needing to relieve yourself?

If the latter, please explain why such dreams are invariably
accurate.

This was my point in reflecting on the difference between sleep
paralysis and ASP, Awareness of Sleep Paralysis, as an
explanation of a certain class of abduction experience. The
awareness of being paralyzed is an accurate perception of the
body's physiological state.

We all have sleep paralysis 4 - 6 times every night as we cycle
into REM sleep. So, having sleep paralysis doesn't distinguish
abductees from non-abductees. It has no predictive power. But,
having Awareness of Sleep Paralysis might well distinguish the
abductee from the non-abductee --- at least for that class of
cases I was referencing.

 >Would you please describe, for interested readers,
investigators, >researchers and therapists, the techniques you
use to validate and >evaluate these experiences?

I look for similarities between reports of abduction experiences
and reports of other anomalous experiences. The greater the
similarities, the less we need to postulate aliens to explain
the differences.

Joe

*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://www.trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 13:58:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:00:42 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 13:51:00 +0100

 >>Hi,

 >>Too good to be true, maybe. But its true and it will be good, so
 >>let time be the judge.

 >>AS for telling anybody what to do, that's silly. This will be
 >>the most open, democratic, individually free UFO team in Britain
 >>- possibly the world.

 >>If their priorities are selfish - like making money, getting fame and
 >>fortune and being a big fish in the little UFO pond, then they
 >>wont. UFOIN wont be rushing to try to make them see things
 >>ifferently. We are happy working simply with whoever agrees
 >>that what we are doing makes sense - whether that is 10 people
 >>or 1000. Although we already know which end of the scale its
 >>going to be!


Hi All & Jenny,

Well Jenny I applaud your efforts to start such an organization,
but you seem to be missing a point here.

Let's talk about how far certain people within this new
framework that you propose would be willing to bend their views
on selected aspects of UFO research. Now you have listed some of
the people who will sit on this new team of yours, and I have
one simple question: Having read some of the views expressed by
these researchers over the last 2 years' can I be assured that
my opinions someone who has Pro-ETH views could and would be
taken on board by such researchers?

Are you telling me that such researchers would be happy to share
views and opinions and facts , data etc. without confrontation
of any sort? I will watch your new group for about a year' and
hopefully by then you would have some results underway from
cases' and then I shall make a much fuller review of your new
group.

I wish you all well..

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:33:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:04:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
 >etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
 >has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
 >being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
 >daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
 >hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >viewed in that light, do they?

 >I would be less disturbed at the possibilities if it were
 >otherwise. Even the cattle mutilations (as nonsensical and 'far
 >out' as they may at first appear to be on the surface) bespeak
 >an -intimate- knowledge of human chemistry and physiology.

 >Food for thought and something that should not be 'blown over'
 >lightly.


Hi John, Greg and others,

I have some doubts about the relation between animal mutilations
and 'aliens'. Some time ago on the Discovery Channel a
documentary was aired that showed the areas in which most animal
mutilations are reported. To begin with, they were _all_ in the
US, while UFOs and 'abductions' are worldwide phenomena.

Furthermore, the areas correlated strongly with the direction
the wind blows coming from New Mexico. The makers of the
documentary speculated that there was a secret US government
organization behind the mutilations. Their purpose would be to
study the effects of nuclear radiation on animals, most notably
cattle. Most, if not all, nuclear tests in the US took place in
New Mexico. Such an organization, it was presumed, would also
possess the tools to make the precise incisions and the
extraction of all blood from the animals.

Personally I'm, not sure the mutilation phenomenon is confined
to the US. Some years ago Tony Dodd reported the same thing from
the UK. Still I give some weight to the hypothesis of Discovery,
because I'm not aware of any reports from other countries. Is
anyone else?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                         Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:56:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:16:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 22:20:36 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roy Hale's Site Updated

 >>Uhhhh... hhhmmmm... well I went there and all I got was a "page
 >>not available" error message. ????

 >>REgards, Mike

 >  Hi All & Mike,

Sorry wrong spelling my fault please go to:

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/

With regards,

Roy..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

               Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs

From: Chuck Sutton <chuckret@wans.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:53:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:21:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 16:02:23 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Feds Curious About High-tech Meeting On ETs
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

She said:

 >Hold on a minute.

<snip>

 >Since when do "Special Agents" go around asking questions _and_
 >stating their alleged position with the government and/or NASA?!

<snip>

 >I study behavior.  These behaviors are _not_ normal for
 >newspapers, NASA or the US government.  Red flags going up.

 >Does not make sense. Something ain't right with this picture.

 >Amy

Yes, Amy, you hit the nail right on the head and I can't hold
back any longer.

I was an undercover agent for various agencies in the new
Southern Mexico area (WSMR - Holloman A.F.B.) for about 2
decades in the 1964 to 1987 era. I never once (truthfully)
identified either myself or the agency(s) for whom I was making
enquiries.   In fact I was even provided "Quiet" plates  for my
cars -- untraceable even by the State D. M. V. -- so that nobody
could find out my real identity from the State Vehicle records.

When you one is working in this environment one tends to be very
careful about who-knows-what about "the real you."   I could go
on -- and on -- about other reasons for being a *non-agent* of
any agency but most of the statements would be obvious and
reasonable extensions.

You're right  --  *something ain't right with this picture.*

Quiet Carlos






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                              Alien Ineptitude

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:25:18 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:22:44 -0400
Subject: Alien Ineptitude


 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 >>>Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >>>upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >>>Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >>>zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >>>life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >>>You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >>>Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >>>a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >>>recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >>>fix.

 >Anal fixations aside, I think you should switch your focus from
 >excised cow rectums to missing cow's -blood!-

 >We (modern science) use cow's blood to 'extract' some of its
 >substances for use in -transfusions- for human patients.
 >(Because of its unique compatibility with human blood.) Cows and
 >humans, what's the connection? You have only to look to the
 >(ubiquitous) lack of blood in the animals and on the scene when
 >they are discovered. Time and again one of the striking features
 >of reported cattle mutilations is the lack of blood at the scene
 >or in the animal itself. Even the taking of certain organs
 >during a mutilation may be a 'side issue' to the complete
 >removal of the animals blood.

 >The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
 >etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
 >has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
 >being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
 >daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
 >hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >viewed in that light, do they?

When human scientists find a useful substance in the blood of an
animal or the sap of a tree, they synthesize it. If these aliens
don't seem to have the same skills at biochemistry that mere
human scientists have. If they are not inept, why would they
travel so far to get something they could synthesize?

Those who have responded to my first post on the assumption of
alien ineptitude within the ETH have offered different reasons
why aliens might value certain substances found on Earth. But
the question is 'Why would they come to Earth to collect a
substance they should be able to make?'.

Until you can answer that question, you're making my case for
me.

Joe


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://www.trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:28:04 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:26:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


Here is an earlier take on the TAI: Theory of Alien Ineptitude.

Joe Polanik

Begin Fwd.


The SWAMP GAS JOURNAL
Special Issue #4 ISSN 0707-7106
Spring, 1996

Alien Incompetency Theory:
A Unified Theory to Explain UFO Phenomena
by Chris Rutkowski

One of the most significant issues in ufology today is the
attempt to explain the wide variety of conflicting, confusing
and bizarre elements of the UFO phenomenon.  In every subfield
of ufological studies, there are aspects which strain the logic
of even the most seasoned researcher and cause one to doubt the
rationality of the genre.

To this end, a new theory has been developed by members of
Ufology Research of Manitoba (UFOROM) which appears to explain
most, if not all, of these baffling elements.  The theory,
labelled AINT, is the Alien INcompetency Theory, and describes
how all the confusing aspects can be explained by assuming one
simple tenet: aliens are incompetent.  To illustrate the theory,
one need only to look at examples from within the phenomenon
itself, including its outlying subfields.  First, let us look at
alien abductions.

One of the basic premises of alien abductions is the conscious
recall by abductees of their experiences aboard alien
spacecraft. Nearly all abductees report that during their
ordeal, the aliens create some sort of mental block within their
minds so that they cannot remember what has occurred.  Yet, as
evidenced by the huge number of abduction accounts published and
under investigation, these mental blocks are ineffective.

This is odd, considering the advanced technology and knowledge
reported to be held by the aliens.  Some abductees report that
their captors claim thousands of years of development beyond our
own, yet they, too, have failed to produce a lasting screen
memory that can withstand our feeble efforts to unlock it via
simple hypnosis techniques duplicable by any charlatan or stage
magician. Why would this be?

(Vladimir Simosko, a UFOROM associate and noted Fortean
researcher, has suggested some alternatives.  Aside from sheer
incompetence, he notes two other possibilities:  1) aliens have
a wacky sense of humor; and 2) they *want* us to remember,
despite the pretense of intending us to forget.)

Another curious observation is that nearly all abductees report
aliens with roughly humanoid shapes and comparable sizes, but
with different origins and purposes.  Some aliens tell their
victims they are from Venus, some from the Pleiades and others
from Zeta Reticuli.  Since space science has learned Venus
cannot support life, this is obvious misinformation.  As for the
Pleiades, these are stars much younger than our Sun and without
hope for planets with suitable living conditions at this time.

Some aliens claim their home planet has deteriorated from misuse
and pollution, and wish to warn us about our own disruption of
our planet. Others suggest they need our biological material to
breed new life (literally) into their gene pool, perhaps to
regain such things as emotions or other human characteristics.
It is interesting that these scenarios imply that the aliens
have somehow caused their own demise and that without our help
they are lost. In other words, they made some serious mistakes.
It is not too much of a stretch to suggest they were incompetent
in managing their resources!

Of course, some aliens are said to claim that they are superior
to us and have their own agendas.  This is precisely the claims
an incompetent person would say to cover his or her mistakes in
order to keep from being embarrassed.

We can look at other aspects of abductions for further evidence.
One abductee studied by John Mack described how she woke up one
morning after her abduction, wearing lavender underwear.  This
was baffling to her because she didn't own any underwear of that
color. Mack quickly interpreted this to mean that the aliens had
somehow made a mistake on board their craft during a busy
mass-abduction, and mixed-up abductees' clothing.  Other
abductees have reported returning from their abductions with
slippers on the wrong feet and other items of clothing either
missing or improperly fastened. In a case studied by Budd
Hopkins, an abductee's earrings were found to be in backwards
after her ordeal on board a craft.

This all speaks to one explanation:  the aliens were
incompetent. One would hope that superior beings who have been
watching humans for many years would have easily picked up
nuances such as the color of our clothing and the way jewelry is
fastened to our bodies.

Simosko would again note that this could be a display of an
alien sense of humor, or perhaps an "intelligence test" of some
sort. Regarding further refinements of AINT, he offers four
postulates:

1) If the aliens are intervening to "help us along," they are
incompetent because it isn't working out too well; humans remain
relatively unsophisticated and not very "tuned-in" to the
universe.

2) If the aliens are intervening by holding us back, it isn't
working all that well, either, since although an overwhelming
majority of humans are tuned-out, there are a number who are
attempting to raise the level of consciousness:  Mother Theresa,
the Pope, Sun Ra, the Dalai Lama, Sharon Stone, etc.

3) If the aliens are trying *not* to intervene, they're even
more incompetent than the other postulates would indicate.

4) If there are several different groups of aliens, some helping
and others preventing our advancement, this is proof of
incompetence because they cannot "get their act together."

Another aspect of the UFO phenomenon is crash/retrievals.
Associated with the idea that some alien ships have crashed on
Earth is the concept that terran government or military
bureaucrats have failed to keep the crashes secret, allowing
some documents to be leaked to UFO researchers. (More on this
later.)

The most famous crash story is that of the Roswell incident, in
which a flying saucer apparently crashed during an electrical
storm in New Mexico in 1947.  While researchers have spent many
years tracking down witnesses and speculating as to where the
ship might have done down, the obvious question has never been
asked:  Why did it crash in the first place?  One only needs to
consider accidents of terrestrial vehicles in order to realize
the answer: pilot or driver error.

It would be truly remarkable to consider that an alien pilot who
has navigated his (or her or its) craft through interstellar
space using highly-advanced technology and propulsion would be
unable to maintain level flight through a mere thunderstorm.
There is only one reasonable and possible explanation: the pilot
was incompetent. Considering the large number of saucer crashes
now claimed by researchers, it would seem that many aliens have
difficulty flying their vehicles.  Surely this could imply that
many are incompetent.

We can look to crop circles as further support for AINT.
Allegedly, crop circles constitute a form of "communication"
between aliens and ourselves.  It is implied they are trying to
warn us of or prepare us for some upcoming fateful situation
through the creation of "agriglyphs," consisting of complex
mathematical patterns and obscure symbols.  Why would they
attempt to communicate with us in such a fashion?  Why not just
send a radio message or write something in English or Japanese
on a sheet of cardboard?  Why 100-foot-wide Mayan lettering in
marketable durham?

Obviously, their communication skills are less than exemplary,
especially since researchers cannot come to an agreement as to
the exact messages (other than something about impending "earth
changes").  The aliens must be, of course, incompetent.

What about the infamous Men-in-Black (MIBs)?  They are described
as human in appearance, though possessing some characteristics
that give them away.  Their facial pallor is often olive or grey
in color and their eyes are wide and staring.  Their movements
are jerky and their speech stilted.  They may ask people unusual
questions or otherwise show an unfamiliarity with terran
customs. For example, in response to the query:  "Hey, buddy!
What you lookin' at?  You want a knuckle sandwich?", a MIB might
say, "Yes, please, with some mayonnaise."  Such actions easily
show they are not humans at all; if their purpose was to mimic
humans, their imperfections show that they are, again,
incompetent.

Contactees often will share their imparted knowledge from their
alien mentors.  Unfortunately, practically all contactees claim
contact with different aliens from different planets and with
different messages to humankind.  (They are similar to abductees
in this way.)  When pressed to ask their channelled entities for
more palpable proof of their claims, or perhaps a useable
prediction or two, the contactees are told by the aliens that
Earth is "not ready" for the knowledge or, instead, give a vague
diatribe about "parallel vibrational states" or "temporal matter
disruptions."

An examination of other channelled material finds many other
examples of alien doubletalk and bafflegab.  Rather than
accepting the channelled information as revelations from higher
beings, the lack of content of the messages suggests something
else: the aliens themselves don't know the answers or lack the
information as well. Again, we can ask how an incredibly
advanced civilization would not be able to give one single
example that would prove their superiority.  Could it be that
they do not know the answers, despite their reputed
intelligence?

One can also ask why aliens would choose to abduct people from
lower castes or social status rather than those in positions of
authority. Why don't they land on the White House lawn?  Perhaps
they don't know to do so.  How could they not know this?  They
are incompetent.

Even the implants found inside some abductees are curious.  Each
one is of a different size, shape and/or compost, and while
there is a trend for some to be found in abductees' noses,
others are found in feet, shoulders, wrists and knees.  Surely,
if the aliens are conducting a scientific test, their
methodology would be consistent.  In fact, the implants appear
to be little more than chunks of metal or calcified plastics
rather than microtransmitters.  Perhaps the alien doctors don't
know what they are doing.

In all of these examples, it is possible to interpret the
aliens' actions as being far from superior.  In fact, they seem
rather ridiculous.  But, if the aliens are really superior
beings from an advanced civilization on a distant planet, why
are they acting in such an illogical manner?  We can point to a
parallel situation here on our own planet.  Why, given our own
relatively-advanced technology and level of knowledge, is
bureaucratic infighting delaying the construction of the space
station?  Why is NASA nearly bankrupt?

We also can look at examples in areas other than space science.
Why would politicians lobby for tighter controls on cigarettes
because of cancer dangers, but pass bills that would subsidize
farmers to grow tobacco?  Why do bureaucrats create
subcommittees to investigate wastes of time and taxpayers'
money?  Why would politicians sponsor a covert activity to break
into a psychiatrist's office in a hotel?  (For that matter, why
would people vote for politicians, knowing their track records
for honesty and integrity?)  Why can't my subscription to a
magazine get renewed, even when I send the check in four months
before the subscription expires?  And why are 60% of all
automobiles recalled by the manufacturer during the first year
they are on the road?

The answer, of course, is incompetence.  Bureaucratic bungling,
political wrangling and general ineptitude are responsible for
most of the problems in the world today.  Politicians and
bureaucrats create such confusion that it is clear they
themselves have no idea what they are doing.

Now, imagine a highly-evolved technical civilization on a
distant planet.  Its society functions well, with the exception
of a comparatively small number of its population.  These would
no doubt be their most ineffective politicians and bureaucrats.
What better way to remove them from the general gene pool and
workforce than to send them off on interstellar voyages that,
with relativity, would return them many, many years later, if at
all?

Because they are incompetent, they would be confused as to their
mission.  They would be clumsy pilots and navigators and,
because they lack the true knowledge of their society, they
would be unable to tell anyone anything about their purpose or
scientific capability with any degree of understanding or common
sense.

As evidence that this is true, a cursory study of the
terrestrial government cover-up of UFO crashes shows
incompetence as well, but this time with regard to human
bureaucrats.  The presence of a vast number of leaked documents
shows that the government (even a "shadow" variety) cannot
function effectively because it is, after all, still a
government (which, by definition, is incompetent).

Therefore, we can observe that bizarre aspects of the UFO
phenomenon are explained best by assuming the aliens are
incompetent.  More to the point, they must be the most
incompetent examples of their race, namely the bureaucrats.  The
Alien Incompetency Theory is borne out by an examination of the
available observations and claims of witnesses, and can finally
explain what is going on.  An understanding of this situation
will certainly change the way ufologists will approach their
subject.

March, 1996

Winnipeg, Canada

End Fwd.



*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://www.trionica.com







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:07:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:25:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 18:51:22 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 16:29:54 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 ><snip>

 >>2) The correlation between the size of the object in the sealed
 >>Nimslo camera photos and the consistency between that size

 ><snip>


 >Bruce, Mark, Jerry (Black), List:

 >Too bad one of you snipped the above. That said, everyone seems
 >to have forgotten the following. Up until the time Ed Walters
 >was sent the Nimslo 3-D camera, all of his pictures had been of
 >the original object shaped something like a tea pot or a very
 >squat saucer.

Had you wanted to know what was snipped you could have dredged
up an earlier post.

 >ALL of the Nimslo pictures (on a sealed roll of film) portrayed
 >a very different "object" entirely, one which Ed originally
 >estimated as being 200 feet in length or longer. After analysis
 >revealed the photographed object to be about 4 and 1/2 feet
 >long, it was explained that Ed didn't have his glasses on, was
 >looking through the viewfinder and overestimated its size,
 >whatever, I don't care. Then it was "explained" that Ed's wife,
 >who didn't have her eyes glued to the camera's viewfinder, also
 >though the object was only a few feet long, and thus Ed's
 >mis-estimate was simply glossed over and shoved under the rug.>

Yes, the Nimslo camer itself, after calibration, showed that the
UFO was close and therefore small.  It passed on the far side of
some trees, which upon measurement, were determined to be about
40 ft away, consistent with the distance estimate calculated
from the Nimslo photos.  The UFO length was calculated from the
parallax-determined distance and the image size.   The distance
was in the range 40 -70 ft and that put the size range at 2.5-4
ft.  Unfortunately the parallax measuring capability of th
Nimslo camera (2.5 inches between outer lenses) was not very
good.

 >Think of this as simply another dent in Ed's much-dented pickup
 >truck hood, whatever keeps the story "straight" in the face of
 >contravening evidence. I think it was also on the Nimslo
 >occasion that Ed reported his first "abduction" and all that
 >stinky, smelly stuff under his fingernails (that he didn't
 >keep), but if not, no real matter.

Clearly there are some dents in your understanding of the case.
The Nimslo photo was in February, 1988.  On May 1 1988 Ed was
using a stereo "double camera" when he again photographed the
"Nimslo type" object (small UFO).

 >Curiously, Ed never photographed the Nimslo "UFO" again, to the
 >best of my knowledge.

If this is the best of your knowledge then you may as well pack
it in on this case anyway!  I have emphasized over and over
again and it is in the Gulf Breeze Sightings book, that the
Nimslo type UFO appeared in the May 1 stereo photos that.

 >It appears only

tch tch, better luck next time

 > on the roll of 35mm film
 >over which Walters had no control whatsoever. Once that roll of
 >film was returned for development, however, Ed went back to his
 >trusty Polaroid

Wrong.  He bought a model 600 Polaroid which ejects the photo
immediately after it is taken  (unlike the old one where you
could click the shutter any number of times before pulling out
the film for development)

 >(which even Maccabee admits was capable of
 >double exposures, unlike subsequent Polaroid models) and --
 >surprise! -- produced another series of pictures of his
 >pre-Nimslo UFO, including, if memory serves, the famous road
 >shot.

Memory doesn't serve, so perhaps you should butt out of this
conversation?

The Road shot was January 12, 1988,  more than two months before
the Nimslo photos on feb. 26.  After the Nimslo photos he  took
no photos until March 8.  At that time he took his first Model
600 photo of an object that apparently ascended rapidly during
the exposure.

When I learned on March 8 that he had bought a new camera I
suggested that he get one more and place the two on a board 1 ft
apart so that we could ger more stere pictures that would be
able to determine the distance to an object with much better
accuracy than the Nimslo camera.

One might expect a hoaxer at this point to choke and not do it
because a stereo camera is a poison pill for a model building
UFO faker.   A stereo camera of the SRS type would show
instantaneously if the UFO was 10 ft away or 100 or really far.
Only a genius would know how to fake the SRS photos. (OK, so I'm
a genius, but even I would have difficulty.)

But Ed said, wow, great, and built the double camera, with a 2
foot spacing between the cameras.

Within a week he had taken the first test photos which I used to
calibrate the camera.  HOwever, I discovered some problems and
it required several hours more of experiments and testing by Ed,
with me checking everything he did and everything he sent me, to
completely calibrate the camera (which I called the Slef
Referencing Stereo or SRS camera).

I estimated it could resolve distances out to several hundred
feet. (You can learn about this in the 1988 MUFON SYmp
proceedings.) On March 17 h e took the first ever stereo photos
with the SRS.   Analysis of the pictures indicated that the
object was more than 100 feet away, over water.   On March 20 he
took his second stereo photo pair with the SRS camera. Then he
took no more pictures until May 1, early in the morning. It was
after these pictures and after a period of missing time that he
found himself lying face down on the beach and had a bad
smelling stuff under his fingernails. The missing time began
immediately after Ed took a stereo photo that night.   His photo
(two pictures, one from each camera) showed two UFO.  ONe was
the typical "Ed type 1"UFO that had been the first type he had
photographed and the second type in th pucture was the Nimslo
type.   Fortunately the two photos of the stereo pair also
showed distant lights on a bridge.  These were used to provide
an excellent parallax calibration (that impressed even Robert
Nathan of JPL). Using this calibration the  "type 1" UFO  was
determined to have been about 475 ft away  and the Nimslo type
was about 132 ft.  Combining the image sizes with the parallax-
determined distances I calculated the size of the type 1 at
about 15 ft (diameter of the "power ring" and also the height
from the power ring up to the top light) and I calculated the
length of the Nimslo type at 2.5 ft.  This size is consistent
with the minimum size calculated from the Nimslo photos (see
above).

Oh, and by the way, the direction to the UFOs was out over the
Santa Rosa Sound.... in other words, Ed was on the beach and
they were over water!  And not just above te water.   The type 1
was about 150 ft up and the Nimslo type was abou t 120 ft

All this stereo camera stuff was done because Ed was willing to
put in lots of time building, calibrating, measuring, etc.  All
this work he did would have blown his faking sky high, had be
been faking.  Too bad many people don't understand this.  I have
said before and will say again, IMHO,  Ed has done more
experiments directly related to UFO sightings than all UFO
investigators combined, and he has provided more tests and
experiments than any witness in the history of the subject.

Because I know more about this than you do, Dennis, this
startled me.

I was surprised, perhaps even flabbergasted to find this Nimslo
size agreement in stereo photos that were taken with hugely
different cameras.  That meant at the very least that Ed had to
have used a 2.5 ft large Nimslo type UFO for both pictures and
that he ad to have some way of suspending it in the May 1 stereo
photos.

Talk about "raising the bar" (a la Cashman in a previous
message).


 >Odd, isn't it? Walters takes pictures of one kind of UFO with
 >one kind of camera, and pictures of another UFO with another
 >camera, one supplied by another party and sealed so that Walters
 >couldn't mess with it.

Odd, isn't it... perhaps not .. that you only know part of what
you're talking about,.

 >I'm sure there's an explanation for this -- the aliens made him
 >do it, whatever. Just don't expect me to believe it. The Walters
 >Polaroids looked hokey the first time I saw them, they looked
 >hokey the last time I looked at them, and they'll look hokey the
 >next time I look at them. In short, they'll look hokey forever.
 >And for good reason.>

 >Dennis

Yeah, and your comments are hokey.

But let's kiss and make up Dennis, because as we both know,
there are other irons in the fire.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:10:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:33:23 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 21:31:41 +0100

 >Has Max produced one word of evidence to back up his claims yet?
 >I don't think so.

 >However theres been a superb explanation put together hasn't
 >there - thats mundane and boring and doesn't have aliens in it.
 >- so it's ignored....

 >Oh, he's been descredited over here on a continual basis for
 >some time, the damage he's done by making unprovable claims has
 >annoyed a lot of people - that case wasn't an alien crash
 >retreval till Max got involved.

Where's _your_ proof.

 >No he wasn't - some people swallowed what he said without
 >questioning or saying "show me the evidence".

That's some people, others have questioned and been given
answers.

 >A plane is hard to make just disapear - there's records, the
 >people who fix them etc.  A pilot has a family, birth records,
 >tax records, friends etc,etc,etc,etc. Can the "spooks" make all
 >the school records & photo's disapear as well? There has to be a
 >name for this missing pilot and a number for the missing plane.
 >Until he produces those he hasn't got a case.

Only if someone wants it made available.  They used orphans
during the Cold War so no one would miss them.

 >When he makes claims and the can't back them up - how many times
 >must this darn well happen?
 >When will people learn? how many times have people come into the
 >field, made claims then when challenged put up a smoke screen,
 >made excuses, refused to allow the examination of "evidence",
 >etc?

Many times.  It seems to be 'company standard' in ufology.

I would like to know what you think Max is putting a screen in
front of.  Perhaps this is just convenient timing now that he is
in prison and any trace of what he _was_ trying to communicate
to us in the field has now vanished thus proving your claim,
that there is and he has nothing to prove his claims.

 >Just for a start, it amazes me how many cases there are involving
 >"military personel" in this field. The witnessesd won't allow
 >their names to be given to the public, ok fair enough. But then
 >we get enough told about the witness to identify him to anyone
 >in the know - I mean how many people can be the driver of an
 >Alien body from wales down to London in 1974?? That's gonna
 >stick out........... And people swallow this. Time after time
 >without asking questions.

Are you saying all UFO researchers just sit around with their
thumbs up their bums?  Also witness credibility in the community
is a reliable way to form an opinion even before doing the
research thus less battery of questions.  But even someone who
is thought of as less than credible, could still be telling the
truth.  It's like 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf' syndrome.  Well he
lied about this, and this, and this, and this, and when
something really does happen well there's no way he's telling
the truth this time, is there?

 >That in Max's case the guys discrediting him are the ones who
 >have to clean up after him and the guys who actually investigated
 >the event's - and ripped his case to shred's.

Perhaps the only thing in the garbage bags used to clean up, is
his evidence.  Does anyone have any credible evidence to prove
him wrong that we can all see, or is a smoke screen going to be
put up around it with excuses as to why we can't see it?  In
this field, I would vote on the latter.  You can say alot of
things too.  Am I just supposed to _swallow_ this like all these
'stupid' ufo people do on a regular basis?

I don't have a PhD, any degree of any kind, I'm no Stephen
Hawking, or rocket scientist (well after MCO even I could be one
without a degree so it would seem), but I do have a brain that
functions on logic, the senses, gut instinct, and the motives of
others.  I am perceptive and quite often see things others
wouldn't even give a second look at by reading between the
lines.

I'm not saying Max is telling the truth or lying.  I just don't
like the righteous attitude I've seen in many threads proving to
me it's not I who does not have an open mind.  If I'm being
gullible, prove it to me, otherwise how can I be gullible of
something that no one can prove to me I'm being gullible of. Not
being too intelligent, that's the only way I could word it.

 >It's People like Max that make it harder for everyone else - not
 >the people who disproved his claims or showed him for what he
 >was, but people who Make huge claims and don't back it up - they
 >make us all look stupid (some times by association) in others
 >eyes.

 >Now lets put him behind us until he produces his evidence.

And I shall do the same to you sir.

 >Cheers to all of you.
 >Jon

A toast to you also.

Sue






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:31:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:36:30 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 22:54:55 +0100

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 21:56:49 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>Would you disown a prostitute and her claims of having an alien
 >>living in her basement, that well known researchers have
 >>witnessed and spoken to in secrecy, being one of the most
 >>compelling cases ever to exist, because she's a prostitute?

 >Yeah, probably!

You didn't need to answer.  I already knew that.

 >>Probably.  If you found out I was a politician, would you not
 >>care about my abduction or sighting experiences anymore?
 >>Probably.

 >No, I'd just be more concerned about why you had concluded
 >that you had been physically 'abducted'..... and whether the
 >episode emerged via hypnosis.

Why the concern?  Would it ruin my reputation? (I'm not a
politician but I sense your response would apply to any public
figure not being fit to fill.)

 >>Funny, no one thought to discredit the man until he hit the news
 >>stands.  How righteous.

 >He had no credibility from day one as far as we are concerned.

I don't know who ' we' are.

 >>I'm not saying I believe everything from everyone,

 >Thank God for that, I was getting a little worried.

Don't worry, be happy. Do do do dododo dododododo do do do.

 >>but he was a
 >>respected person on this list until his name had mud thrown on
 >>it.

 >WHHAAATT!!

 >The man who sent supposedly anonymous hate mails, lied to
 >witnesses, admitted that he'd bribed witnesses with drugs?

Are you talking about witnesses to his ufological claims?

 >Which postings have you been reading here? Have you a selective
 >version of UpDates??

I have the same privileges to the postings as everyone else.

 >>At what level of being human do we decide someone is no
 >>longer believable or not worthy of our attention?

 >When they're as much of a waster, liar, criminal and bad egg
 >like Max, I should say.

 >>When someone else has a bone to pick with them?  I make
 >>up my own mind, thanks.  And what shall we find out about
 >>those so quick to discredit? ;)
 >>Sue

 >Well, good for you.

 >>"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never simple"
 >>                                             - Oscar Wilde

 >Oscar Wilde - another degenerate......

And based on that, I rest my case.

Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:32:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:49:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 23:00:24 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>Or maybe you stay around, staging interactions with humans,
 >>because you need something in their souls, and you need their
 >>planet, too. Not so bizarre (and it's more or less that what
 >>David Jacobs suggests in "The Threat")

 >>Greg Sandow

 >Yes, and Jacobs (with his unerring ear for who's doing this
 >hypnosis stuff right and who's not) would be more right than,
 >say, Mack, Sprinkle, or Strieber, or any other interpreter of
 >the phenomenon, including Kevin Randle?

 >You're starting to go soft on me, Greg. What you're really
 >implying is that no objections can be made, or questions asked
 >of the Jacobs scenario, because we can always ultimately refer
 >to alien intentions, desires, or whatever, when it has yet to be
 >established that these aliens that supposedly need our souls
 >and/or planet even exist as physical beings in the first place.

???????

Dennis -- relax!

I didn't say there couldn't be objections to Dave's scenario. I
didn't even say I supported it.

Joseph Polanik (one of the clearest thinkers here, in my view)
had said he found the aliens' reported behavior bizarre. All I
did was point out that there's a theory to account for it. End
of story. What we make of that theory -- and even whether the
aliens do exhibit that behavior, or whether they're here at all
-- was way beyond the scope of my very simple remark.

 >When people the least skeptical of such claims raise an
 >objection, the other side (you, in this case) responds by
 >saying, ah, but you can't judge alien psychology & logic by
 >reference to human psychology & logic -- and then proceeds to
 >promote your own interpretations of so-called alien psychology.
 >If we can't do it, then why should you and yours be allowed to?

??????

 >Are aliens that, by most accounts, don't eat, shit, pee, or
 >screw, really in need of a planet of their own? What for? Are
 >they after our purple mountain's majesty and endless seas of
 >golden grain? What for? And what about those elusive souls of
 >ours? Times are when I wish I had one to spare. Last night, for
 >example.

Ah. At last something that's related to what I said.

Maybe the aliens want to shit, pee, eat, and screw. These are
delightful activities, especially the last two. Maybe they're
breeding hybrids because -- that creaking you hear is the sound
of an ancient science-fiction hypothesis being dragged into view
once more, something I'm sure I read in dozens of stories --
their race has become too cerebral to survive.

The thing you want to remember, Dennis, is that all this is
speculation, quite harmless if not taken too seriously.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:23:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:46:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:32:30 +0000
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I think even UFO UpDates venerable Greg Sandow met PKD.]

I'm not going to touch "venerable" (makes me feel old!), but I
did know Philip K. Dick. I met him in California a year or so
before his death, after getting his phone number from another
science fiction writer, Thomas M. Disch, who'd been the
librettist for two operas I'd composed. Tom knew I loved Dick's
writing, and thought I'd enjoy meeting him.

"Enjoy," though, wasn't quite the word. My wife (now ex-wife)
went to visit Phil, and found him morose (I'm sure we weren't
the first people to find him that way). He announced that he'd
been to the doctor, and was going to die. I still don't know
whether this was an accurate report of something the doctor had
told him, a fear based on a serious diagnosis, or simple panic.

Phil then went on to tell us about the paranormal experiences --
constant contact with what he believed to be a non-human
intelligence, which put thoughts in his head, and struck him
with a purple being (I hope I'm remembering this right), at
which point he knew beyond any doubt that his young son was
desperately ill with something never diagnosed by any doctor.
And when Phil rushed the kid to the hospital, he really was
found to have the condition Phil said he had.

All this had been related in Phil's novel "Valis," but not about
him -- it all happened, in the book, to one of his characters.
it wasn't widely known, as it is now, that Phil was relating his
own reported experiences.

What struck me, first, was that he'd tell two perfect strangers
about all this. Maybe he told lots of people. And, second, I was
almost dumbfounded by something missing in the way he
interpreted what happened to him. He spend endless hours trying
to make sense of both his experience and the knowledge he felt
it conveyed to him. He read widely about western mysticism, to
find precedents and, more generally, to find a framework for all
his thoughts. But he didn't read anything in Eastern thought. I
think I asked him why not (my memory of all this is now a little
dim), and his answer was noncommittal.

Never once did he suggest that aliens of any sort were
contacting him. His theories were more along the lines of some
vast disembodied cosmic intelligence.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:13:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:58:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:18 -0600

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear Stephen, Dennis, Kevin, and other Asleep-in-the-Deep List
 >Members,

<snip>

 >Help me find the proof (IF it's there) of my experiences, beyond
 >the *stories* I and thousands of others tell. What is plainly
 >visible as proof to me, may not be to you.  But for anyone who
 >has the courage to touch those scars and let reality sink in,
 >it's enough impetus to begin looking...very hard. Help me find
 >the answers.

 >Sue Strickland

Hi Sue,

Your heart rending appeal for help is touching and illustrates a
deep need that for _many_ people continues to go un-addressed.
About all your going to get in terms of 'help' from some of the
skeptics is a hard sell on _their_ particular pet theory. Some
day, I don't know when, -someone- is going to conduct a serious
study of the 'physical' marks, scars, and bruises that many of
carry and can directly associate with a UFO experience.

You are quite correct in labeling some folks as,
"Asleep-in-the-Deep." When _thousands_ of individuals worldwide
are claiming/demonstrating a phenomenon that has never been seen
before and it goes uninvestigated or completely ignored by the
academic community, it is not the fault of those who are
courageous enough to report. It is the fault and the shame of
those who have the knowledge and expertise to find answers yet
choose not to do so.

It's funny. Both abductees _and_ the academics claim that fear
of ridicule is to blame for the lack of action on this matter!

What a world eh?

It is _only_ because of you and people like you that I stay
involved. Under any other circumstances I would have taken my
leave of the 'circus macabre' that is called modern ufology long
ago!

May you find your answers Sue. I promise I'll keep in there
swinging the bat until 'something' begins happening. Hope you
do too. We need each other.

Regards,

John Velez, abductee

________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 11:53:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:42:55 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 16:34:01 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >This sounds great!

 >I have one question...If someone has new information they wish
 >to publish under copyright, will they share it with UFOIN and be
 >assured no authors and/or would-be writers will take the
 >material and publish it in their next book?

 >How will these ego-needs be regulated?

 >What happens if/when one or more of the more published authors
 >in the group takes information shared with UFOIN and puts it in
 >his/her/their next book claiming it as their "discovery" without
 >giving credit or asking permission from the original
 >researcher/investigator?

 >With everyone and his grandmother trying to become a "well-known
 >expert", lecturer, author, how do we share openly and freely
 >with each other without regard to one's next book or TV
 >appearance?

 >Jenny, can you share with us the standards or "rules" designed
 >by UFOIN that address the issues mentioned above?


Hi,

Thanks for this salient point - although I suspect it is not so
much of a problem in the UK as you suggest it is elsewhere. The
people I regularly work with would never dream of stealing work
and claiming credit for it. Ufology, of course, does often
involve cross fertilisation of research and ideas but to me
giving credit to the people who do the work is a fundamental
principle. I think others share that view.

There are two ways UFOIN has decided to address the issue. The
first concerns the code of practice. Several of us involved in
UFOIN helped draw this up in l982. We are currently updating,
tightening it up and issues like the one you raise will form a
part of it. The code self regulates the behaviour of an
investigator towards other UFOlogists, witnesses, the
authorities and the public at large. It aims to set ethical
standards of the type that you define.

The updated code will be permanently located on the UFOIN web
site. Here everyone can read it. If any UFOIN investigator is
considered by anyone to have breached it then that person (UFOIN
team member or not) will be urged to formally complain and the
matter will be debated by a jury of the alleged offenders peers
(ie all other members of UFOIN). After both parties are allowed
to have their say a free vote will determine what action to take
and this action will not be decreed by a ruling council (as
there will not be one). It will be determined by every other
member of UFOIN in our perception of devolved open government.

The other way the issue is being addressed is in the
publications policy of UFOIN. We intend to go for full openness.
A research project or case investigation conducted by any team
member will be fully disclosed at all stages to other UFOIN
members. Indeed their assistance in the work will be solicited.
This is happening now with a study of the l967 wave (likely to
be UFOINs first published report this side of Christmas). Two
members (Andy Roberts and Dr David Clarke) have done the initial
research at the Public Records Office. Now that other aspects of
work to be done have been isolated members of the team are
chipping in and doing necessary research modules within the
overall project. The UFOIN principle is that the ones starting
the research have the right to publish it and so others chipping
in send their results to that person or persons to be collated.
I imagine it would be considered a serious breach of etiquette
and probably the C of P if anyone jumped the gun before in this
case Andy and Dave had chance to publish via UFOIN. They'd view
it that way. So would I .

The report will be published in hard copy form in the name of
the investigators/ researchers with full credit to those who
chipped in. After a period not yet agreed (but we will not be
talking years, probably just months) an electronic copy of that
report will go onto the UFOIN web site. This will be a UFOIN
report, not copyrighted as such, because UFOIN believes in
making its data publicly accessible.

I am not sure what we would do if a person requested to publish
a report through UFOIN and retain its copyright. I dont think it
will happen because UFOIN is not a publishing outlet or a medium
for other peoples work. These already exist. Its a team of
voluntary members in the UK who have agreed to our joint aims
and are working together to fulfill them. If they dont like our
plans to publish all our work openly for the benefit of all
UFOlogists then they wont stay with UFOIN. Its their choice.
Nobody is asking anyone who cares to protect their data or who
wants to steal other peoples to join UFOIN. All we are asking is
that those who do agree to our principles.

Once out in hard copy form and on the net we will not object to
anyone using our research anywhere - subject, of course, to
fully crediting the source (UFOIN) and the main researchers
involved in that project. In our view ufology is about doing
research and sharing it with everyone so that as a community we
can try to figure out what is going on. It is likely that if the
primary researchers want to write a book or journal articles on
their work they will do so, but they, like everyone, has agreed
this to be after the data goes on open access. In other words
nobody will hold it back for selfish reasons.

That means that if a UFOIN member, yourself or any other
UFOlogist wants to do so they can also write about what we do
once it is put into the public domain. Indeed we would hope that
some would follow our work and use it to aid their own studies.
UFOlogy should not be about withholding information from others
for personal motives and that wont be what UFOIN is about if
things happen as we intend.

Hope this clarifies things a little.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:03:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:45:05 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:29 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >His latest claim, that he may have access to a 'cassette' tape
 >of air to ground messages from Tornado jets and inter-police
 >messages from the night of the incident is interesting. We wait
 >with bated breath. Not least because to possess such a tape
 >Maxwell must have contacts with a radio ham or hams who had
 >several radios tuned to different stations, all being taped. I
 >doubt very much that such a tape exists. But Max has made the
 >opening bid in this new hand of belief poker and the other
 >researchers are entitled to reply.

Andy and List,

As a UK Radio Ham (though rather QRT at the moment) I thought I
might throw in my 2d's worth re the quoted comments.

The above _is_ quite easy to do with just one piece of kit.

Although not an essential piece of "shack" equipment I think if
you did a straw pole of "hams" you'd find very many had in their
list of equipment a "scanner", I know I have a rather ageing
circa 1980's one. Even this old beastie can scan "all modes" in
5 khz steps from 50 mhz to 850 mhz and though limited to 16
presets these can be any mode and any frequency within that
range. The latest models can easily scan 50-1000+mhz and have
hundreds of preset channels and scanable ranges.

Aircraft who still use AM modulation use the VHF band that used
to be just below the old VHF land mobile allocation aprox
110-135mhz the UK police had use to use a small section of band
just above this, though over the last few years they have
migrated to the UHF bands just above 400mhz as the VHF
allocation has been given over to long range pagers and similar
generators of electromagnetic "noise".

Regarding UK police comms, each "division" has a set of UHF
channels and usually operates what a commercial operator would
call a "Comm Rep" in semi-duplex mode, mobiles TX to base on one
freq, base tx's back to mobile on another, so unless you know
both freq's you usually only hear the stonger transmission of
the base station, BUT at a flick of a switch these stations can
be placed into "talkthrough" or duplex mode. Through a set of
filters on the transmitter the station can both transmit _and_
receive at the same time on the frequency split and a listening
station will hear both sides of the conversation on the base
stations frequency. The stations are actually in this mode all
the time but the "receive" audio is normally blocked and
replaced by a set of "pip" tones.

The "full duplex" mode is normally used in operations where a
number of low powered handhelds and mobiles need to talk with
each other outside the individual equipments own range, ie for
the emergency services, say in search and rescue operations
where a number of hand mobiles might be in use over a large
area.

Though encrypted TX is talked about, they still use "clear" FM.

Before my current post, I ran a few of these type of setups for
a commercial comms company, and the radio amateurs in the UK
have a large network of such "repeaters" on VHF and UHF, the US
even more so.

A "nosey" ham or short wave listener, and there are lots of
'em<g>, wouldn't have a big problem and I believe the one's that
do it on a regular basis _do_ have recorders "at the ready". Max
may or may not have a recording but don't rule it out just on
technical grounds. Years ago on said ageing scanner I monitored
the companies UHF base stations but also for light relief,
Manchester Airport's tower freq plus approach radar, Liverpool
approach and the CAA's frequency for the controlled air space
over the North West _and_ still had lots of presets to spare.

Neil.


-
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                           Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:10:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:47:58 -0400
Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World

Hot Gossip UK October'99
www.hotgossip.co.uk

Welcome to the October column, bringing you the latest news and
views about UFOs, alien abduction and other weird stuff.

Operation Thunder Child

My new book, Operation Thunder Child, is out this month. The
official publication date is 4th October, but copies should have
found their way into the shops towards the end of September.
Operation Thunder Child is a science fiction novel set in the
near future, and deals with the concept of an escalating and
hostile alien presence. What I've tried to do is to tell the
story in as realistic way as possible, drawing on my official
knowledge and experience of working at the Ministry of Defence.
Accordingly, I use knowledge about UFOs and abductions picked up
during my three years researching and investigating these
phenomena, and also utilise information picked up while working
in the Air Force Operations Room (part of the Joint Operations
Centre) during the Gulf War. I've really tried to write as
accurate an account as possible, giving people an insight into
the way in which the government and the military would really
respond to hostile alien contact. What I've tried to do is give
readers a seat at the Top Table in the MOD, and show people how
decisions are made in times of national crisis (although the
book deals with alien contact, details about crisis management
would apply equally to any normal conflict). Authenticity was a
paramount concern: I discuss Rules of Engagement, weapons
systems, operational doctrine and tactics and other real-life
details. I also explore the way in which this situation would be
reported to parliament and dealt with in the media. That said,
some details have been changed to ensure that no classified
information is included - this is the first time in publishing
history that a science fiction novel has needed to be officially
cleared by the Government! Another interesting fact concerns the
disclaimer. Most novels have to contain a statement that all the
characters and events are entirely fictitious. But my book draws
on real UFO incidents from the Government's files, and reflects
other things that have actually happened. For legal reasons,
therefore, my book had to contain a specially worded disclaimer
that points this out. Unsurprisingly, the book is already
proving to be controversial, and there is as much - if not more
- bad feeling about this book in certain quarters as there was
about either of my two non-fiction books. I should be making
various media appearances in late September/early October, so
look out for me, talking about this new book. Operation Thunder
Child is published by Simon & Schuster as a large format
paperback, and costs #39.99.

New Abduction Book

Another new book has been published about the alien abduction
mystery. The Complete Book of Aliens and Abductions is the
latest offering from Jenny Randles, and is a brave attempt to
give an overview of the whole alien abduction/alien contact
mystery. It covers a lot of ground, looking at links between
abductions and folklore and examining the possibility that
cultural factors (e.g. science fiction films and television
series) may have an influence on the phenomenon. Lots of
potential explanations are offered, and there are plenty of case
studies - some well-known and some less so. This is a welcome
addition to the number of books devoted more to abductions than
UFOs, and is a well-written and comprehensive overview of this
intriguing mystery. The book is published by Piatkus, and costs
=A317.99.

New Magazine

After the demise of Sightings, Alien Encounters, Uri Geller's
Encounters and UFO Reality, it seemed as if magazines on UFOs
and the paranormal were dropping like flies. Now a new title has
appeared. Beyond is a monthly magazine which hit the news-stands
in September, and promises to reflect all shades of opinion,
whether people be believers, sceptics or neutrals on the topics
covered. There's considerable diversity in the subjects
featured: the first issue contained plenty of news and articles
about UFOs, but other featured subjects included ghosts, crop
circles, psychic detectives, synchronicity and much more
besides.

The Unopened Files

On the subject of magazines, an established title which I
consider to be one of the most interesting and thought-provoking
publications currently available is The Unopened Files. This
magazine covers ufology, but also carries a range of fascinating
articles on secret technology, conspiracies and suppressed
information. The Autumn issue (Number 12) is now out, and should
be available from all good newsagents. One of the features is a
lengthy interview with me in which I make some candid remarks
about Operation Thunder Child, and explain why my new book is
already proving so controversial.

Psychic Development

For those with an interest in all things spiritual and psychic,
check out an interesting new book: The Psychic World of Derek
Acorah. This new publication is part autobiography, part psychic
self-development guide, and is packed with interesting accounts
of occasions where Derek's powers were demonstrated. There are
also various tests to judge your own psychic powers, and
suggestions for developing such skills. It's informative but
fun, and is well worth a look. It's published by Piatkus, and
costs =A39.99.

Alternative Therapy

Every now and then my work with abductees can throw up a bizarre
and abstract moment. One such moment occurred a few weeks ago.
There's a particular abductee who I've been working with for
about three years, and we've got to know each other socially. We
went out one evening for a drink, and found ourselves in a
karaoke bar. After some encouragement from her, I volunteered to
do a song, and found myself belting out a number to a packed
pub. The song I chose, somewhat appropriately, was the classic
David Bowie number, Life on Mars. I'm sure there'll be some
people who might think this a tad unprofessional, and I'm not
quite sure what other abduction researchers will make of this.
In reply to any criticisms, I'd simply point out that having fun
is pretty good therapy for just about anything.

Leeds Conference

The annual conference held by UFO Magazine took place in Leeds
on 17th, 18th and 19th September. Next month's column will
contain a full report on this event, with all the conference
news and gossip.
____________________________________________________

Ed's Note:

Nick Pope's three books, Open Skies, Closed Minds, The Uninvited and
Operation Thunder Child are available from all good bookshops. His UK
publishers are Simon & Schuster. In America, The Overlook Press
publish his books in hardback while Dell Publishing produce paperback
editions.
____________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                                Gary Schultz?

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:05:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:53:41 -0400
Subject: Gary Schultz?


Dear Colleagues,

I am trying on behalf of a colleague to locate Area 51
researcher Gary Schultz.

If anyone can supply mith a contact for him (address, phone, fax
or e-mail address) I would be extremely grateful.

Please reply direct to me on e-mail at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com

Many thanks for your kind cooperation with this request and
please feel free to forward this message on to others.

Yours Sincerely,

Philip Mantle.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:36:32 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:58:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:18 -0600

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear Stephen, Dennis, Kevin, and other Asleep-in-the-Deep List
 >Members,

 >Stephen, your theories would be so very comforting, if they were
 >based in reality. I don't know how old you are, so you may not

"... if they were based in reality." Judging by the date stamp
on the message of mine to which you were responding I can only
wonder what in my post you find "unreal." Just like you must be
wondering what part of your or other abductees experiences I
find "unreal." You seem to think I consider yours and others
encounters as "unreal." I said no such so if you want to
criticize the data I find convincing of being "real" just let me
know and I will try and better explain it as it is quite "real."
But then again, that's what this entire discussion is about
isn't it? What each person allows to qualify as "real evidence"
for ufos and abductions as some sort of encounter with "Others."

Onward into the smog...

 >be able to associate with this little comparative metaphor.  If
 >not, pick another *very* traumatic experience in your life, it
 >works much the same way.

 >Do you remember what you were doing, where you were, who you
 >were with the afternoon of the day JFK was shot and killed?  If
 >you were old enough, you'd probably remember.  Thousands of
 >people remember what they were doing at that moment, who they
 >were with,  the feelings and conversations they had with those
 >around them at that moment.

Firstly, I am too young to remember that particular horror story
of Amerikan history. Tho nearly everytime I am forced to
"relive" a memory I wasn't even alive at the time to experience,
I cry my heart out at this conspiracy which murdered the valient
heart of the United States. The psyche of America was never the
same - it had transmutated into the rigidified National Security
State.

So on to "equally" potent memories of traumatic events (not
necessarily against my own person in your example). Let's see,
how about the memory of my being shot at during the San Antonio
Battle de Flowers parade when I was in about 4th grade? See my
account of that experience which I wrote when I was in high
school here: http://www.elfis.net/ELFOL6/smlehe2a.htm

As much as I know this event happened and I can even speak to my
mother about it and consult the newspaper reports, my memory of
it is _not_ crystal clear. Oh sure the images I wrote in the
piece are imbedded in my mind but do I necessarily think of them
as an _exact_ representation of "actuality?" I think they are
fairly accurate but I would be hard pressed to state so
unequivocaly.

How about another example, more in line perhaps with your
original JFK analogy (tho the shooting at a parade seems similar
enuf). Here is the entry from my high school journal for
1/28/86:

"I have been putting off making this sort of "diary" you might
say for a while now for many reasons. Today though I have
changed my mind and decided to start it. Today, when I was on my
way to third period I heard a teacher telling a student
something. What caught my attention was the student asking the
teacher "was anybody hurt?" He replied, "I don't think there
were any survivors." In a hurry I rushed off to Algebra. When I
got there I went and sat down in my seat. When my friend Rhonda
entered the room she rushed over to me and said "It's so sad."
"What is," I asked her. She said the space shuttle had blown up.
My first thought was that the shuttle had either blown up on the
launch pad, had blown up in space, or that it was a sick rumor
someone had told her. Throughout the day I learned more of what
had happened.

This was to be the 25th space shuttle mission. It was the one
that was to have the first teacher in space. At 1 minute and 18
seconds after the launch, a huge explosion of flames engulfed
the space shuttle challenger. All seven people aboard were
killed. What caused the explosion is not known yet. I'm having
trouble believing this has happened. It could have been Mr.
Warren, one of the teacher's at my school. He was one of the
finalists. He had come to be a friend of the teacher who was on
the last flight of the challenger.

I'm just hoping that people won't lose support for the space
program. I think ... "

And that is where my diary ends. I didn't write in it again till
November of that year. Do I remember these events? Yes. Do I
remember them clearly? Pretty much. I cried a lot over the
shuttle disaster. But if I try to remember other details of both
the above events I can't honestly say I would trust my memories
of them. Sorry, that's just the nature of _my_ memory. Some
things are cyrstal clear and I feel I can trust - tho becuz of
what I know of perception I would never allege to be 100% sure
of _anything_ perceived by _anyone_.

 >Just *one* "visit" is exactly like that...except that *they* try
 >really hard to make you forget.  Sometimes it works for several
 >months or years, and then the memories (not dreams) begin to
 >creep back in, like a cat stalking you in the pitch black night.
 >Not fun.  No welcoming mat out.

I'm quite aware of the various descriptions of encounters with
with entities of every variety, shape, form, size, behavior from
the world over. From the Nordics, reptoids, "greys", insectoids,
amoeboids, robotic and exotic types (in Patrick Huyghe's
terminology), and my favorites... the South American hairy dwarf
type which tends towards the same Grey Alien like activities
only without all the groovy lights and bedroom visitations.

As to the amnesia which "they" impose... before we assume "they"
did it, could it not be that humans tend to black it out
themselves? Vallee and other more qualified medical doctors have
studied the effects on consciousness of the perception of
certain shocking stimuli and generally, the two effects noted
were either the blacking out of consciousness so as to hinder
the input of said stimuli (missing time?) or the confabulation
of the perception by the human mind itself to portray the
shocking perception as something more palatable to human
awareness. I believe this can be found in Richard Haines UFO
Phenomena and the Behavioral Scientist.

I assume that you believe that "they" impose the amnesia due to
feelings or perceptions of these visitors "telling" you so. Any
search of the abduction and contact literature will show many
experiencers and researchers believe we shouldn't take these
entities at their words. "They lie!" And besides not telling us
the truth (or doing so in symbolic, metaphoric, metalogical,
analogous fashions as I suspect) their very nature seems to
distort human perceptions of reality.

 >Now, try and remember *any* dream you've had in the last week,
 >and compare it to those memories you had that day when you heard
 >the news about JFK.  One is vivid, conscious recall, as though
 >it happened 5 minutes ago; the other is a clearly a dream,
 >slippery, misty, fades and disappears from memory, especially
 >when talked about.

Continuing your suggested experiment... I have always remembered
my dreams more than anyone else I know. In fact, in trying to
trace they "why" of my obsession with these subjects I am
confronted with the realization that it mostly stems from an
early age dream recall, lucid dreams, psychic experiences, and a
love of science fiction. Cosmos and Star Wars were perhaps the
most formative media complexes which influenced my interests and
beliefs.

I'm sorry but your analogy just doesn't work in my case. I still
to this day remember my dreams of the past few nights (and
years) just as murkily as I remember being shot at during the
San Antonio parade as well as during my discovery of the
challenger space shuttle disaster.

And actually, dream recall is entirely contrary to what you
state above... the more one talks about a dream, the more one
cements the images and experiences into one's "memory." At least
for me and all those whom I've read books about as well as all
the people who've shared their dreams with me over the years.

One further example of dream memory versus waking memory.
Another time back in high school I had a dream wherein I asked a
girl out on a date. I was real nervous but finally had asked her
out for a Saturday night rendezvous. I'd had a crush on her for
ages. I woke up the next day, amnesiac of the night's dream,
went to school. As I was walking through a stairwell I saw the
girl and was walking up to her about to say something like "see
ya saturday!" When I suddenly stopped myself dead in my tracks.
It hit me in a wave of memory... I had only _dreamed_ it! I had
never actually spoken to this girl in my entire life. Similarly
I have had dreams within which I had _memories_ both from
previous _real_ dreams as well as memories of dreams I _know_ I
had never actually had - tho how can anyone say for sure as we
all induce amnesia of these midnight encounters every single
day.

 >Now, what happens if the JFK memory is purposefully manipulated
 >in your mind to make you think what you experienced that day was
 >all a dream.  Therein may lie the crux of a partial answer to
 >the questions, "Did it happen; can we trust our memories?  Or
 >were they dreams?" Big difference.

Your suggestion of a purposeful twisting manipulation of certain
memories is indeed powerful. Unfortunately we know of some
incidents wherein this very thing has been done to people.
Vallee has evidence of certain prominent abduction researchers
"misrepresenting" the abductees experiences as told to him by
those disgruntled abductees. He also has evidence of "abductees"
who were in fact abused by cults utilizing hypnosis and or drugs
as well as masks and props to convince the victims of the
"alien" nature of the experiences.

We have numerous court cases of satanic ritual and child abuse
being overturned and the therapists jailed for what they have
done. We have pseudo-prominant abduction therapists whose
name(s) can't be mentioned on this list who have lost their
licenses over similar practices.

We have experiments which show how easily a memory can be
induced in the average person.

_But_ we also have a very real phenomena which probably involves
contact with intelligences and consciousnesses of a number of
equally valid "sources." Some of which are probably
extraterrestrial if not ultraterrestrial. To say otherwise is to
be as closed minded as I seem to be perceived by you.

 >Make no mistake, the burns I received from their laser attached
 >to a transporter in my bedroom in 1961 was no dream.  Try
 >burning yourself with a laser and tell me it was a dream.  Ha!
 >If you don't scream your head off, you're either an alien and/or
 >dead.  I still have the scars, and I know exactly where I was,
 >how I got those burns, who was with me (a bunch of inept aliens)
 >and the conversation (screaming rage) that I leveled at them.

Good. You have evidence and want to investigate it in order to
prove the validity / reality of your sense perceptions and
physiological after-effects (the scar).

But tell me, _how_ is the documenting of your scar going to
prove any of what you claim? I am not asking this to disavow
your experiences as real. I am simply trying to ask, what
evidence would it take to prove (to me, you, or most of the
world) that, a- your scar was caused by a laser, b- that said
laser was of an extraterrestrial origin, c- that the sense
perceptions you perceived were exact representations of what you
were actually interacting with?

I want to know what it would take to convince most people as
well as scientists and governments. Honestly, I sadly think that
there is nothing, short of open continued public contact in
daylight, that can or will prove what you believe.

However, I applaud any efforts to do so.

 >Please, please wake up people.  You say you want to help.  John
 >V. gave you a challenge.  I will give you another, very direct
 >and specific. Let's see how many of you really want to help.
 >You can reach me at Strick@h2net.net .  My husband and I are in
 >the process of moving, but I will give you specific details of
 >information I need to find, if you want to really help "find
 >proof."  I only want *true skeptics* and doubting Thomas' to
 >respond.  All others need not apply.

I guess I am a doubting Thomas, however I have no idea how I
could help you. My approach to "helping" people like yourself
when they came to the UFO Abductee/Experiencer Support group I
ran was to give them as many theories and perspectives as
possible so that they didn't rush to any conclusions about the
nature of their experiences. To my mind this is the only fair
thing to do. It bypasses the needs of the researcher who only
wants data to so as to better understand the phenomena while the
therapist is only concerned with helping the experiencer
integrate the experience and get on with life. I think my
approach does a better job than either approach on its own.

 >You probably wonder why I can't do it myself.  I've tried, but
 >cannot follow through.  I get as far as lifting the receiver or
 >composing the letters and then trash them, or hang up.  The fear
 >of ridicule is there, but more strongly is a deep-seated fear
 >that I'm not supposed to be talking about this with *anyone*, or
 >asking the kinds of questions I need to ask to get the answers I
 >need.  Maybe it's all hallucinations, but you'll have to prove
 >that this burn scar on my right calf is an hallucination. Sorry,
 >I don't believe in stigmata anymore than you believe in EBEs.
 >Should make for an interesting teaching/learning experience for
 >all involved.

Whether you believe in stigmata or not it is a fact that people
under the influence of hypnosis (and other altered states of
consciousness) can have welts and blisters raised on their skin
after someone tells them they are about to be touched with a
substance they are known to be physically allergic to. When they
are told this and then touched with a substance which is _not_
said allergen, they develop a welt. If this isn't actualized
stigmata I guess you are right and it doesn't exist.

I feel for your struggle as I have felt for all those whom I
have interacted with who are coming to grips with these phenoms.

 >Help me find the proof (IF it's there) of my experiences, beyond
 >the *stories* I and thousands of others tell. What is plainly
 >visible as proof to me, may not be to you.  But for anyone who
 >has the courage to touch those scars and let reality sink in,
 >it's enough impetus to begin looking...very hard. Help me find
 >me the answers.

 >Sue Strickland

Good luck Sue. Really, I mean that. I'm sorry to say but the
only way scientists and the public will start taking this
seriously is if instrumented science finds its way into the
bedrooms of experiencers like you and can finally get some sort
of physical data on _something_ actually occurring during one of
these encounters. There is in fact such a project underway, so
perhaps someone on this list (or I could) should put you in
contact with these researchers. I think it is one of the most
valid studies to be attempted in this arena.

However I still wonder if such an instrumented approach will
find anything other than elevated EM emissions saturating the
bedroom environment. The problem here is that, yet again, the
superior technology/magic angle can and will be induced, ie-
these beings could be in and out of our frame of reference in
the blink of an eye and so our instruments may not record a
thing. Or the phenomena, whatever it is, may simply stay away
until the devices are out of the picture.

But Sue, thanks for responding. All the non-experiencers on this
list need to be reminded of the impact this phenom has on you
and others interacting with an aspect of it directly.

Here's to continued communications between all of us humans and
hope for more direct profound communications with our Grey
brethren.

SMiles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 11

                   Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:34:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 19:01:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 20:19:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Dennis
 >
 ><snip>

 >I can only _rarely_ remember dreams. And then for only a very
 >brief period of time.  The only dreams I can recall are those
 >which are recurring and I recognize these as dreams.  Ninety
 >nine percent of my dreams I cannot recall unless I wake up in
 >the middle of them and even these, I do not retain for long.
 >And, I know a dream when it is a dream and when it is a memory
 >of an event.  Always.


Hello List Members and especially researchers and investigators,

I'm just curious of something mentioned within this message to
Dennis.  Has anyone considered and/or studied the "inability",
for lack of a better word, to remember dreams as a possible
"side effect" of abductions? And also if this "inability to
remember" was present before the abductees' abductions, or did
it start occuring after the abductions?  Does anyone maybe see a
correlation between abductions and dreaming, other than the
obvious?

Sincerely,
T. Lemire

--
"Know that there is a Creator-Sustainer, who has made Himself
knowable to Creation in direct proportion to the creatures
ability to comprehend and respond." - Taken from the Andreasson
Legacy by Raymond E. Fowler








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:42:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


*On June 10, 1990, the Pensacola News Journal ran a story
announcing that a UFO model had been found in the attic of Ed
Walters' former residence.

One week later, the newspaper announced that a Gulf Breeze
teenager, later identified as Tommy Smith, had helped Walters
hoax the UFO photos.

On June 19, Charles Flannigan, MUFON State Director for Florida,
announced MUFON was reopening the Walters' case to investigate
these new allegations. He assigned then State Section Directors,
Rex and Carol Salisberry, to assist him in this investigation.
When the Salisberrys failed to deliver a complete report on the
allegations (as outlined by MUFON's Deputy Director of
Investigations, Dan Wright), the MUFON Chief Investigator for
Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Gary Watson, was assigned to
the task. Watson completed his investigation and submitted his
report on May 23, 1991; his report was 29 pages long with 27
attachments.

The following paragraphs summarize the central facts brought out
in Watson's investigation. -Bruce Maccabee, Physicist,
photoanalyst and a MUFON state director accepted professsional
fees for his work on the photos from Ed Walters' publisher.

(from Robert Collins )

more info:
http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/ed.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 99 17:43:00 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:45:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:30:38 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 99 10:29:16 PDT


Mr. Young, with apologies to patient and gentle listfolk:

 >You have been given an adequate chance to clarify your comments,
 >yet you continue to forge ahead with inept allegations. But wait
 >a second... I recall already asking you to reference one
 >issue-related example of 'personal denunciation' or 'vile
 >accusation' against you, to allow yourself the opportunity to
 >bolster your position... so I guess it won't do any good for me
 >to repeat my plea again.

Oh, for crissake.  If you must persist, why don't you go back to
the Jerry Black screed which you entered this discussion to
second, and then explain to us (1) why you chose to defend it
and (2) why you believe, as Black does, that personal
denunciations of ufologists are an acceptable method of
discourse? While you're at it, you can tell us why the objects
of those slanders have no right to respond in righteous anger --
in other words, why you prefer to blame the victims for the
crime.

You could also try to explain the issue you're so uncleverly
trying to obfuscate here: namely, why the other listfolk who
remarked on our exchange had no difficulty understanding what I
was talking about when I objected to the personality-centered
approach you and your friends (including the amusingly unmasked
"Terry Evans") have either regaled us with or apologized for.

Allow me to remind you again of the word "disingenuous," and
then to urge you to find something more interesting to
contribute to the list.  Aren't you supposed to be a big
investigator or something?  How about postings about actual UFO
cases you've studied?

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 99 17:48:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:47:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:53:21 -0700

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 99 10:29:16 PDT

 >>>From: Serge Salvaill <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 11:19:55 -0700

 >>>>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
 >>>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>>From: Kenny Young
 >>>>>Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >>>>>Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:43:09 -0400
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 >>>>>>From: Jerome Clark
 >>>>>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>>>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT


Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >I can only congratulate you for using state-of-the-art
 >disinformation technics to finally establish that Jerome Clark
 >is interested only in Jerome Clark.  Not the truth, not the
 >facts, and especially not honesty.  Only himself.

Whatever.

Jerry Clark







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 19:07:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:50:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 14:57:00 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 00:26:16 -0700

 >Dear Lesley:

 >If you must trouble us, please at least put a few facts right up
 >front.

 >These are:

 >1)  Precise location; If you are as geologically deprived as
 >you sound, then give good distances and directions to some
 >places people might find.

Well, I think some people might  know where Scotland was as
mentioned in my last post.

And the easiest way to give anyone an exact location that will
be immediately identifiable by anyone into UFOs for more than a
week, is to say I live about 20 miles south of the Carp
sighting, filmed by the infamous Guardian.

 >2)  Precise time of day, exact date, and time zone.

Ahhh, first I think most people have some idea the dates of the
second world war, or they were too busy reading UFO books and
not paying attention in history class And in the personal
example, to give that much detail would give away my age and
since I'm a woman of 'certain years' no one can expect me to do
that.

Suffice it to say it happened in a Toronto, Ontario, Canada
hospital!

And to be sure this is UFO-related, this second event at the age
of 2 years, was only a few years before I learned in social
studies class that there were other places besides what I called
home, other countries where people lived just like we did and
from there stared up into the night sky and having read that
there were also other places called other planets, then there
was of course, people who lived there just like us too!

The rest is history.

Lesley  ;-)))







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 19:43:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:55:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:33:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

<snip>

 >Personally I'm, not sure the mutilation phenomenon is confined
 >to the US. Some years ago Tony Dodd reported the same thing from
 >the UK. Still I give some weight to the hypothesis of Discovery,
 >because I'm not aware of any reports from other countries. Is
 >anyone else?


Dear Henny,

There have been several cases of mutilations in Canada, although
not too many people know about them, with the exception of the
leading authority, Linda Moulton Howe.  I, myself, was given
three newspaper articles when I went to Alberta in 1992 to visit
a friend.  They described 12 mutilations, 6 near the town of
Drayton Valley (60 miles west of Edmonton) and the other six
near Leduc, a town a few miles southeast of Edmonton.  And don't
forget about the sheep mutilations in France and Isral.

Mutilations are definitely not confined to the US and, in my
personal opinion, are definitely related to the UFO phenomena.
Repeatedly, I've seen headlines of American newspapers that keep
saying the same thing: "Answers actively sought in bizarre
cattle mutilation.  We are going to continue to see these types
of headlines until someone realizes that something really odd is
going on.  How else can people explain the fact that no one has
ever been arrested and prosecuted for cruelty to animals?  In
every classic case, there is no physical evidence of any kind:
no footprints, no cigarette butts, no tire tracks, no helicopter
landing gear marks, nothing!

To those who keep asking the same stupid questions about
mutilations: "Keep looking, guys.  Maybe the truth will bite you
on the ass, someday!"

Cordially,

Michel M. Deschamps
MUFON Provincial Section Director for Sudbury, Ontario, Canada &
UFO Eyewitness/Researcher/Historian






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:00:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:29:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 21:51:14 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
 >>>with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
 >>>great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
 >>>age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
 >>>hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
 >>>ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
 >>>imprinted in my memory.

 >The problem with "vivid" memories is that they develop over
 >time. They are not frozen in an instant like a polaroid
 >photograph, or recorded sequentially like a video-tape. Every
 >time we tell someone about our memory we help to fix it in our
 >mind: we create a narrative by repeating it. Doubtful parts are
 >edited out, other parts are reinforced by repetition and by
 >comparison with other accounts we hear and read. The more often
 >we recount our experience the closer we get to a continuous,
 >coherent - and vivid - narrative.

 >Memories are infinitely malleable. They are overlaid with things
 >we have heard and read and been told about. I had a serious
 >operation at the age of three and still bear the scar, but can
 >remember nothing about it. My colleague Peter Rogerson had an
 >operation at about the same age and has strange and vivid
 >memories of it. I doubt that my lack of memories denotes
 >"missing time" or that his involve abduction. But I'm sure if
 >either of us had met an abduction researcher at some time in the
 >past (before we started Magonia, of course), we'd be fully
 >fledged abductees by now.

 >--
 >John Rimmer
 >Magonia Magazine
 >www.magonia.demon.co.uk


Dear John,

I guess you've never seen a UFO?  I know that abductions are not the same as
seeing a UFO, but neither is the experience of undergoing an operation.  For
one thing, they "put you under", so how could you remember the operation!?

As for UFOs or anything of that caliber, I've often said (and I speak from
experience) that an eyewtiness will remember the details of such an event
until the day he/she dies.  It is not like witnessing a 2-second car crash
and then asked to remember the licence plate number under hypnosis.  You
won't remember it, no matter how hard you try.  But when you see a UFO,
which is something totally out of the ordinary, it becomes instantly etched
in your mind because you focus in on all its details, whether it lasts
seconds or hours.  I suppose the same could be said about conciously
recalling an abduction experience; the witness will remember the parts that
got his attention the most, and vaguely remember those events which were
visually "hazy".  I'm not positively sure if I'm on the right track, but
that's what I think.

Cordially,

Michel M. Deschamps
MUFON Provincial Section Director for Sudbury, Ontario, Canada &







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                         Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:16:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:36:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:10:24 +0100
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World

<snip>

 >this is the first time in publishing history that a science
 >fiction novel has needed to be officially cleared by the
 >Government!

I won't argue with that, but a science fiction writer did draw
U.S. government attention during World War II.

His name was Cleve Cartmill, and he wrote a story about a
nuclear bomb in Astounding Science Fiction, the American science
fiction magazine that (despite its name) was the most strongly
oriented toward real science. Nuclear bombs, of course, didn't
exist back then, though, unknown to Cartmill and his editor, the
U.S. government was trying to develop one.

Cartmill, drawing on scientific information in the public
domain, apparently came very close to describing the actual
design the scientists and engineers in the Manhattan Project
were working on. When the story was published, the FBI visited
him, to find out where he'd gotten his information! What an
impossible position for them. By doing this, they revealed that
something was really going on. But if they hadn't investigated,
and there really had been a leak, there could have been serious
trouble.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:52:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:44:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:28:04 GMT


 >Here is an earlier take on the TAI: Theory of Alien Ineptitude.

 >Joe Polanik


 >The SWAMP GAS JOURNAL
 >Special Issue #4 ISSN 0707-7106
 >Spring, 1996

 >Alien Incompetency Theory:
 >A Unified Theory to Explain UFO Phenomena
 >by Chris Rutkowski


This is all very amusing and thoughtful, but sometimes I'm
staggered by the lack of imagination we tend to show, when we're
speculating about aliens.

Case in point: SETI scientists, who've sometimes wondered what
advanced races, a billion years ahead of us, might be like.
Frank Drake imagined they might be immortal. Ronald (I think
that's his first name) Bracewell, imagined they might be sexless
most of the time, and go into heat as animals do.

Meanwhile, the wonderful Argentine writer Borges wrote a story
in which he imagined a civilization with no nouns, and no
concept of nouns. He imagined their philosophy -- they wouldn't
be able to conceive the existence of objects -- and their
language. Now, obviously Borges -- one of the great literary
figures of the 20th century -- wasn't speculating about aliens.
Many of his stories might be called philosophical fantasies,
investigations of unusual lines of thought, or states of mind.
(Another one concerns someone with a photographic memory, who
lies awake nights making up names for each number, from one to
several million.)

But Borges, imagining things that aren't, shows intensely more
imagination than most of us -- scientists, science fiction
writers, ufologists, skeptics, you name it -- who do speculate
about aliens. He imagines stuff that's really out there -- in a
word, really alien. (There's a wonderful phrase in one of
Gregory Benford's science fiction novels about the galactic rim
(and Benford, for what it's worth, is a serious physicist, in
his day job): "The thing about aliens is, they're alien.")

Not, of course, that this gives us license to imagine absolutely
anything. But even our own experience here on earth gives us a
perspective wider than that shown in the document Joe so
helpfully forwarded.

 >One can also ask why aliens would choose to abduct people from
 >lower castes or social status rather than those in positions
 >of authority. Why don't they land on the White House lawn?
 >Perhaps they don't know to do so.  How could they not know
 >this?  They are incompetent.

Or maybe they think one of our problems is our belief in
hierarchy. Rather than reinforce it, they'd rather proceed in
ways we think are inefficient. There are precedents for this
kind of thinking in all sorts of new age philosophy (including
serious stuff, like the Course in Miracles).

We, of course, can't easily see beyond the hierarchies we take
for granted. So we can't imagine why aliens with an agenda here
on earth wouldn't go to our "leaders."

Or, for that matter, maybe they have an advanced social science,
and have genuinely learned that they'll accomplish their goals
more quickly and thoroughly by infiltrating us from below. Maybe
they don't even need an advanced social science to believe this.
When the Bolsheviks wanted to make a Russian revolution, they
didn't go to the Czar and try to bring him to their side. They
organized the Russian workers.

 >One of the basic premises of alien abductions is the conscious
 >recall by abductees of their experiences aboard alien
 >spacecraft. Nearly all abductees report that during their
 >ordeal, the aliens create some sort of mental block within their
 >minds so that they cannot remember what has occurred.  Yet, as
 >evidenced by the huge number of abduction accounts published and
 >under investigation, these mental blocks are ineffective.

 >This is odd, considering the advanced technology and knowledge
 >reported to be held by the aliens.  Some abductees report that
 >their captors claim thousands of years of development beyond our
 >own, yet they, too, have failed to produce a lasting screen
 >memory that can withstand our feeble efforts to unlock it via
 >simple hypnosis techniques duplicable by any charlatan or stage
 >magician. Why would this be?

 >(Vladimir Simosko, a UFOROM associate and noted Fortean
 >researcher, has suggested some alternatives.  Aside from sheer
 >incompetence, he notes two other possibilities:  1) aliens have
 >a wacky sense of humor; and 2) they *want* us to remember,
 >despite the pretense of intending us to forget.)

Suppose aliens want us to become aware of them, but slowly.
Suppose their agenda includes a lot of secret infiltration,
implantation, etc., etc., etc. Suppose they want to carry that
out in secret. But then suppose they eventually want to reveal
themselves, maybe to openly take over. ("The Threat," again.)
Suppose they'll find that last stage easier if we aren't
entirely unprepared. Wouldn't it then make sense to use a form
of blocking that wasn't 100% efficient? That would give them
time, maybe lots of time, to work underground (so to speak), but
also make it possible for us to become slowly aware of them.

A word of caution, considering some responses I've gotten in the
past. I'm not saying I necessarily believe these things. I'm
only saying that it's not hard to make up scenarios to account
for many of these supposedly inexplicable alien behaviors.

For more provocative speculation, I'd refer everyone to
"Preparing for Contact," a book by the channeler Lyssa Royal.
Think what you like about channeling, and about the ET messages
Lyssa believes she's received. But the scenario laid out in that
book is worth thinking about, and it's something I've never seen
anywhere else. Lyssa suggests that every planet goes through a
period of denial when it's about to learn it's not alone in the
universe. Other races try in various ways to break through that
denial, trying to reveal themselves in ways -- and at a speed --
specially tailored to each new situation. Some of these
procedures are faster than others, but almost all are relatively
slow.

Our planet, says Lyssa, is a somewhat difficult case. That is,
we resist more strongly than many races do. For us, then, a long
period of slow discovery -- of aliens slowly allowing their
ships to be seen, and slowly finding other ways to make us aware
of them -- would be entirely appropriate.

(And again, just to avoid unnecessary arguments -- I'm not
saying I believe Lyssa really channels aliens. I don't have a
clue. I'm only saying that her books have ideas in them that,
taken simply as speculation, make a lot of sense -- and that in
this case one of those ideas would help understand how aliens
could behave in ways that don't make sense to us.)

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:03:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:02:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 21:51:14 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
 >>>with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
 >>>great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
 >>>age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
 >>>hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
 >>>ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
 >>>imprinted in my memory.

 >The problem with "vivid" memories is that they develop over
 >time. They are not frozen in an instant like a polaroid
 >photograph, or recorded sequentially like a video-tape. Every
 >time we tell someone about our memory we help to fix it in our
 >mind: we create a narrative by repeating it. Doubtful parts are
 >edited out, other parts are reinforced by repetition and by
 >comparison with other accounts we hear and read. The more often
 >we recount our experience the closer we get to a continuous,
 >coherent - and vivid - narrative.

 >Memories are infinitely malleable. They are overlaid with things
 >we have heard and read and been told about. I had a serious
 >operation at the age of three and still bear the scar, but can
 >remember nothing about it. My colleague Peter Rogerson had an
 >operation at about the same age and has strange and vivid
 >memories of it. I doubt that my lack of memories denotes
 >"missing time" or that his involve abduction. But I'm sure if
 >either of us had met an abduction researcher at some time in the
 >past (before we started Magonia, of course), we'd be fully
 >fledged abductees by now.

I must disagree, however only on one part of your theory, which
on the surface, appears valid.  However I am no psychologist.
The reason you are mistaken, is that my memories, which are
verifiable from day one (parents, psychologist, psychiatrist and
fellow perceived abductees over a period of fifty plus years,
are "snapshot memories."

The detail has remained the same all this time.  It's not what
happened as in a dream, it is a snapshot, single frame memories
of a series of events which ocurred over a number of different
experiences.

The "picture" has never changed.  And there are many such
pictures in my memory.

What has evolved over the years, is that more detail has come to
the forefront of my memory, without speaking about it to anyone,
merely coming to me as in a flashback kind of memory.

The original snapshots are, were, and likely always will be the
same. I've shared these with very few people, wife, two
researchers and one other abductee.  The "story" never changed.

If this is not clear, please respond and I will attempt to
clarify any points which may be unclear.

Jim

Jim Mortellaro







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:53:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:05:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:25:18 GMT

 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

<snip>

 >>hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >>closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >>don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >>viewed in that light, do they?

 >When human scientists find a useful substance in the blood of an
 >animal or the sap of a tree, they synthesize it. If these aliens
 >don't seem to have the same skills at biochemistry that mere
 >human scientists have. If they are not inept, why would they
 >travel so far to get something they could synthesize?

 >Those who have responded to my first post on the assumption of
 >alien ineptitude within the ETH have offered different reasons
 >why aliens might value certain substances found on Earth. But
 >the question is 'Why would they come to Earth to collect a
 >substance they should be able to make?'.

 >Until you can answer that question, you're making my case for
 >me.

There is a limit on what can be synthesized, and in some cases,
the synthesized product is not effective in the same way as the
original product or may cause unacceptable side effects.

I recall reading in book about research done on an ancient South
American inner tree bark that was supposed to cure cancer.  The
active ingredient was identified and then synthesized and used
in a study.  The patient's on the 'real' pills suffered such
horrible side effects (not described) that the study was
immediately stopped and the old remedy was labelled toxic.  In
another book, the raw product, in its natural state, prepared
the old way, was used on some cancer patients who were in
hospital dying.  Only about nine of them I believe.  At least
five recovered and went home.  There were no negative side
effects.

Our beloved medical scientists have yet to synthesize blood.
Supposedly we have the technology and have had it for a very
long time - so why don't we have synthesized blood and still
have to collect it from real human donors along with all the
associated risks of various horrible diseases?

]Now, someone may have a better memory than I, but wasn't a cure
for some cancers or a treatment, discovered in a Yew tree that
grows on the Pacific north coast?  It was a few years ago.  Last
I heard, synthesization had not been successful, only the raw
real product would work, so while there had been great hope, it
was realized that there just isn't enough of the trees to go
around.

Synthesizing just isn't a miracle answer - yet.  So if we can't
do it here with a constant and consistent success rate, why do
we think everyone else in the universe can?  We haven't unlocked
all the mysteries of our own human biology much less that of our
environment, so why should we believe every other 'alien' race
can?

Does that maybe shed some light on an answer to your question?

Lesley Cluff







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:22:16 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:10:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:25:18 GMT

 >Those who have responded to my first post on the assumption of
 >alien ineptitude within the ETH have offered different reasons
 >why aliens might value certain substances found on Earth. But
 >the question is 'Why would they come to Earth to collect a
 >substance they should be able to make?'.

 >Until you can answer that question, you're making my case for
 >me.

And I'd counter that monitoring of "something" by destructive
animal abduction still makes sense.  It might be very quick to
get what they need by killing the animal, which apparently
doesn't bother them.   Saying they needn't kill to monitor
presupposes we can fathom what they're looking for.  Do you
claim to speak for them on that?  And the ethics of killing?
Well, anyone monitoring us probably knows by now that most of
our cattle wind up in meat packing plants anyway. Its not like
we hold some moral high ground down here.

Enjoy that non-abducted hamburger,

-Brian Cuthbertson







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                          Oz Base Nurrungar Closed

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:50:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:26:32 -0400
Subject: Oz Base Nurrungar Closed



             Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia
                    SIGHTINGS


EBK Researchers,

Oz SPY BASE NURRUNGAR CLOSED

The Joint Defence Facility spy base "Nurrungar" in South
Australia [s31:22 e137:10] designed to analyse satellite data
was closed today 12 Oct 99.

A DoD report tells us that a new modern ground relay system will
begin operating at (that alleged hot UFO location) Pine Gap. The
decision to close Nurrungar was reported to be made largely for
technological reasons. The equipment at Nurrungar was developed
in the 1960s, but more modern technology allows data analysis to
be done back in the United States.

The relocation of the Nurrungar spy base in South Australia to
Pine Gap would mean that Australian analysts would no longer be
working closely with their US counterparts. As a result, many
American analysts will be transferred home.

To make things even stranger, a senior Australian official
confirmed that the redeployment of American staff to the US gave
Australia an opportunity to maintain expertise in monitoring
ballistic missile launches [?]. Oh boy!

About 400 Australians and Americans are employed at  Nurrungar.
About 40 Australian intelligence officers were involved in
analysing some of the data.

The United States satellite station Nurrungar is a ground
station for the US Defence Support Program (DSP). It is said to
control a set of Pacific/Asia geostationary satellites that are
designed to detect and track objects.

Using infrared telescopes, visible light and ultraviolet
sensors, and a nuclear detonation detection (NUDET) sensors.

The IR detectors & UV sensors are designed to sense the
radiation emitted by missile boosters & fluorescing gases from
flight dynamics.

High Resolution cameras on the satellites transmit pictures
important ground data images to Defence Facility Nurrungar.

In an E-mail to PRA Post dated 1998/09/14 Author: Allen Thomson
<thomsona@netcom.com> said:

"Is there any indication of a Regional Sigint Operations Centre
[RSOC] being created in Australia? With the move of the
DSP/SBIRS relay station from Nurrungar to Pine Gap, the latter
is starting to look a bit like an austral version of the Denver
RSOC -- and I wouldn't be surprised if it were to be designated
an RSOC itself. Have any of the service cryptology agencies
(e.g., NSG) set up shop down there?"

We [PRA] would like also like to know! Can you help?

Regards

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
Australian & Asia UFO








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                 Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:51:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:29:28 -0400
Subject: Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof



              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia
                    SIGHTINGS

EBK Researchers,

Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof

A most interesting event will take place next month in
Australia. One of Australia's [if not the worlds] impressive
thinkers, Prof Paul Davies will be speaking at the Australian
Skeptics, National Conference to be held on the 6 and 7 November
1999.

Prof Paul Davies has listed his speaker's topic as - "Aliens on
our doorstep? Some thoughts about the UFO phenomenon."

Although, on many occasions when we have met him, he has
displayed an open mind to unusual subjects, and has in the past
produced a number of papers on the UFO subject [from a negative
point of view]. Prof Paul Davies ideas and opinions are always
welcome and we have enjoyed his questions.

His position is that of a skeptic, however, he has other
positions that are not well known and on a number of occasions
the Australian Skeptics have not been too kind to him. Yet it's
in their interest to claim him as their own. We believe them?

Prof Paul Davies currently holds the positions of Visiting
Professor at Imperial College London and Honorary Professor at
the University of Queensland.


 >From 1990 until 1996 he was Professor of Mathematical Physics,
and later Natural Philosophy, at The University of Adelaide.

In 1995 Prince Philip at Buckingham Palace awarded Davies the
Templeton Prize for progress in religion, the world's largest
prize for intellectual endeavour. 700 people attended the prize
ceremony, held at Westminster Abbey.

* Speakers and Topics -

http://203.2.134.19/skeptics/speakers.html

* Professor Paul Davies Biography -

http://203.2.134.19/skeptics/bios/bio_prof_paul_davies.html

PRA researchers will be at the conference and may present, at a
future date, a report on his lecture.

His topic "Aliens on our doorstep? Some thoughts about the UFO
phenomenon", is a most curious topic. We have pointed out on
many occasions "why" lecture on a subject that does not exist -
unless you feel something may be there? In a recent conversation
with the Australian Skeptics we asked if the topic was changed
to "Santa on our doorstep? Some thoughts about the Rudolph red
nose phenomenon." would that topic be on their agenda?

Regards

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
Australian & Asia UFO








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:43:23 +0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:31:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 ><snip>

 >>If they really wanted to wipe your memory... you wouldn't
 >>remember a thing, therefore you would not be able to write to a
 >>mailing list and whine about being abducted right!

 >Actually, Dave, in order for any beings or humans to completely
 >wipe out all of one's memory, he/she/it would have to erase the
 >victim's subconscious (or long term) memory as well as conscious
 >(short term) memories.  In so doing, you would have an
 >infant-mind on your hands who wouldn't remember anything (much
 >like individuals who have experienced open or closed head
 >trauma, stroke, etc.).  If this were done to all abductees, it
 >would begin to attract attention, wouldn't you think?

 >Erasing short term memory only effects memories acquired within
 >a short period of time therefore the subconscious and long term
 >memory is not effected.  Even short term or artificially induced
 >amnesia may not be permanent especially if the experience was a
 >traumatic one.  People tend to remember traumatic experiences
 >longer and more vividly than mundane experiences because of the
 >heightened emotions involved - that is, of course, if they do
 >not continually reinforce the amnesia.  Always remember - the
 >subconscious never forgets.

Isn't this the human way of thinking about science and
medicine?  Aren't we dealing with beings who quite possibly
have mastered the art of faster than light travel?  Beings who
according to documented experiences have extremely well
developed mental capabilities?  Capable of things we have yet
to slot into "our" definitions of physics and science.  I just mean
perhaps we shouldn't be placing human limitations on their
capabilties, just because we can't imagine it, doesn't mean it's so.

<snip>

 >>Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >>claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a
 >photograph >of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands
 >there must >be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion
 >detector, not >hard to do these days considering our 'changing
 >level of >technology'.

 >Well, Dave, this _is_ your lucky day!  Just so happens I have a
 >case I investigated for almost 3 years in which multiple
 >witnesses - all in a state of conscious, waking  awareness -

<snip>

 >On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
 >and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
 >neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
 >taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
 >sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
 >too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
 >the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
 >the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
 >photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
 >doors - or so she thought.

I have yet to view these photos and I will do shortly, but
doesn't this seem just a little tooooo convenient?


Cheers
Sharon








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 12

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:31:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:40:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:32:59 -0400

<snip>

 >The thing you want to remember, Dennis, is that all this is
 >speculation, quite harmless if not taken too seriously.

 >Greg Sandow


Whew! Now I can get back to my income taxes. Which, admittedly,
I had been trying to take as speculatively as possible until I
realized that Uncle Sam didn't permit that as an allowable
response.

And so it goes with abductions. Interesting, but not yet a
permissable deduction.

Dennis








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                   More TOP SECRET MAJESTIC UFO Documents

From: Ryan Wood <rswood@igc.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:29:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:50:06 -0400
Subject: More TOP SECRET MAJESTIC UFO Documents


Press Release - More TOP SECRET MAJESTIC UFO Documents

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MORE TOP SECRET MAJESTIC UFO DOCUMENTS ARRIVED THIS SUMMER

NEWPORT BEACH, California, October 13, 1999 -- During the summer
of 1999 Timothy S. Cooper continued to receive alleged TOP
SECRET MAJESTIC UFO documents both by mail and in person from
several sources.

Overall, the classified documents received from 1994 to present
comprise over 2,100 pages of leaked documents and photographs
with over 200 pages stamped TOP SECRET/MAJIC or an equivalent
derivative.  One mail delivery from Ft. Meade, Maryland included
a 334-page manuscript that had been submitted to Project Blue
Book for review with several chapters stamped in red "TOP
SECRET/MAJIC."  Unlike previously leaked MAJESTIC documents that
came on film or as photocopies these pages are on original
watermarked paper, produced on a typewriter identified as a 1939
Underwood Portable," said Ryan Wood.  "We think that this
exceptional find will lead to a significant validation of the
MAJESTIC program because of the handwriting on original paper,
with identifiable watermark.  Proper analysis of the paper and
ink can provide unarguable courtroom proof, which is our primary
goal. This new evidence clearly shows the use of the MAJIC
classification at least back to the 60s. For the first time, we
now have original handwriting to authenticate the involvement of
famous Air Force officials in the Majestic program" said Dr. Bob
Wood.

Of the new material received over the summer most noteworthy are
additional pictures of an apparent alien autopsy, MJ-12
personnel and a (retyped) TOP SECRET EYES ONLY intelligence
briefing for President Truman dated 30, September 1947. The
title of this six page briefing is "Unidentified Aircraft
Sightings Over The United States," prepared by Special Studies
and Evaluation State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee and the
Office of National Estimates Central Intelligence Agency.
Another nine page first generation onionskin carbon copy on
original paper with watermark, using a 1956 Courier font, was
also stamped in red TOP SECRET/MJ-12.  "Other documents will be
released on the Wood & Wood website
http://www.majesticdocuments.com in November.  In general, these
documents will be released either over the Internet or in a
related publication within a year after they have undergone
authentication tests. Premature release without quality work
only clouds the interpretation of the document and wastes
everyone's time," said Ryan Wood.

"The preponderance of evidence supporting the high level US Top
Secret Research and Development program known variously as
MJ-12, Operation Majestic Twelve, using the Top Secret code word
MAJIC is as problematic as validating the Dead Sea Scrolls and
the Aramaic Gospel by Jesus Christ." said Tim Cooper. "The
daunting authentication challenges the documents pose not only
to the civilian UFO research community but to disinterested
government officials are profound. Which begs the question: are
they real or a product of Governmental intelligence
disinformation of the Cold War?"

"There is a growing body of evidence through the tireless
efforts of Dr. Robert M. Wood, Ryan S. Wood, Stanton T.
Friedman, and a host of distinguished authors, researchers, and
former intelligence officers that the United States had a deeply
classified UFO Program since the 1947," said Tim Cooper.  A
reasonable study of the intelligence and counterintelligence
operations of the military, CIA and other defense intelligence
agencies of the U.S. Government during World War II, the Cold
War, and up to the present offers convincing evidence that the
U.S. was engaged in a high level UFO intelligence collection
effort. This is abundantly clear from FOIA declassified projects
like SIGN, GRUDGE, BLUEBOOK, SNOWBIRD (1954 flying saucer jet
aircraft) as well as a dearth of related declassified papers
from many agencies including the CIA and NSA.

"In all fairness to anti-MJ-12 arguments, some of the objections
to security classification, signatures, and dating still pose
problems. These arguments can be solved.  What is lacking is a
concerted effort to secure sworn testimony from individuals of
high rank from the Executive Branch, the CIA, and military
intelligence to either refute the MJ-12 enigma or validate the
existence of the United States Government's UFO Program," said
Tim Cooper.

Finally, it must be understood that while the data contained in
the alleged MJ-12 documents may prove to be valid in a
historical context, the assertions and claims made by the
author(s) of these documents rest not in the hands of
ufologists, skeptics and debunkers, but in what is called in
legal jurisprudence "the best evidence" rule in the halls of
justice. "Ultimately, it will boil down to what documentary
evidence and witness testimony can be presented before a Grand
Jury, the Attorney General or Congress, said Ryan Wood."

ADDING PERSPECTIVE TO THE NEW MAJESTIC DOCUMENTS

In the October 1, 1999 issue of CNI News (CNINews1@aol.com) a
secondhand report on a UK presentation made by respected
researcher and author Timothy Good about what he may have said
at the Leeds Conference has presented incorrect and misleading
information.

Mr. Cooper was disturbed and somewhat upset to learned of the
charges made by Friedman and Good; he chose not to believe that
it was their intention to discredit him nor paint him as a
common prankster.  Cooper believes that their original
conclusions were based on limited information and inadequate
resolution of conflicting data.  "I still have the highest
regards for Mr. Friedman and Mr. Good and hope that they will
soon redouble their efforts at research to explain, not only
what may be disinformation, but how it was created and why, so
we can all move on to the other pressing challenges of the UFO
enigma," said Tim Cooper.

Ryan and Robert Wood wish to respond to the points raised in the
1 October issue of CNINews as follows.

We very much doubt that Mr. Good used the phrase "blew the new
batch of MJ-12 documents out of the water."  Our first-hand
knowledge of Mr. Good is that he is a cautious, careful
researcher not given to sweeping generalities.  Assuming, for
the moment that he said what was reported, we note the
following, sequenced as in the original 1 October CNINews:

1) Concern: Mr. Tim Good was kind enough to share with Bob Wood
the original letter that Cooper wrote to Good dated October 4,
1991.  Response: Dr. Wood had this analyzed by his questioned
document examiner, James A. Black, who wrote that the fonts of
the typewriter for this letter and those of the "Interplanetary
Phenomena Unit" report and the "First Annual Report" were the
same, probably from a Royal typewriter.  He noted that this font
is common to tens of thousands of typewriters.  He verbally
discounted all aspects of similarity of the letter similarities
(raised caps, similar letter positioning, identical letter
shape) as being exactly what one would expect on two similar
machines and two  different operators.  He did, however, note
one defect in the small "L" that  occasionally showed up in both
documents. Black conceded that the same typewriter might have
produced all three documents.  However, it may also be a
characteristic of that model typewriter being operated by any
fast typist.  We provided a complimentary copy of Black's
evaluation to Tim Good as appreciation for lending us the
original, which has been returned.

2) Concern:  "The style and indentation of paragraphs is exactly
the same."  Cooper's letter to Good contains six paragraphs, all
indented four spaces.  Response:  The IPU document contains 14
paragraphs, all indented 11 spaces, and the First Annual Report
contains one paragraph indented 4 spaces, 16 paragraphs indented
5 spaces, 5 paragraphs indented 12 spaces, 16 paragraphs
indented 10 spaces, 4 paragraphs indented 9 spaces, 4 paragraphs
indented 8 spaces, 9 paragraphs indented 5 spaces, and 7
paragraphs indented 6 spaces.  Thus, only one of 76 paragraphs
has the same indentation as that of the letter from Cooper to
Good.

3) Concern:  "The classifications on the documents rule out
their being genuine."  Response:  The two pages noted may have
been from different documents. In any case, the Cutler to
Twining memo of July 14, 1954 is an example found by Stan
Friedman of Top Secret Restricted right from the National
Archives on original watermarked onionskin paper.  "Furthermore,
the phrase "Not For Public Inspection" of the table of contents
page of the First Annual Report is found in authentic documents
from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations on
microfilmed rolls from the archives," said Ryan Wood.  This is
an extremely weak argument when put in the light of numerous
examples of the Government not following its own rules
sometimes, and following them others.  Furthermore, the
top-secret markings had been redacted.  Most knowledgeable
document researchers would reject the reality of classifications
SUPER SECRET and DOUBLE TOP SECRET, but Wood & Wood have
authentic examples of the use of these classifications.

4) Concern:  "Stanton Friedman discovered that portions are
lifted..." Stan has found chirography and phrases in the book
"Wedemeyer Reports" that are similar to those in some of the
documents provided by Cooper. He noted that the book was owned
by the library in Big Bear Lake where Cooper lives, and that
this would have permitted Cooper or anyone else in Big Bear Lake
to copy it.   Response:  There are thousands of copies of the
book across the country; there is no evidence that Cooper ever
saw it.  In fact, he told Wood & Wood that he did not even know
it existed.  Furthermore, careful research is underway to
determine whether a fake has been created, when, and for what
purpose, including the possibility of psychological warfare a
long time ago.

5) Concern:  "Part of the document number on one page, 1206, is
the same as Cooper's Post Office Box address." Response:
Coincidence?  Note that 4901 Hillbrook Lane, Vannevar Bush
address in 1948 is the same four digits as the street address of
Bob Wood's grandson-in law; 5484, the branch number for Van
Bush's telephone extension, is the same as the middle four
digits of Ryan Wood's UAL frequent flyer number.  If one looks
hard enough for coincidences, one finds them.

6) Concern: "Letters from the now clearly non-existent Salina
Cantwheel, daughter of the mythical Thomas Cantwheel, were
written in exactly the same handwriting as Tim Cooper's."
Response:  Our questioned document examiner, James Black, saw no
evidence that the Salina note was "disguised writing," and found
no indication of handwriting similarities.  We cannot imagine
the basis for asserting that the Cooper and Salina handwriting
are similar.  In addition, we have a report from a source that
says that there was a Salina (Cantwheel's daughter) working for
James Jesus Angleton (Counterintelligence, CIA).  There is no
reason to think that Cantwheel is a mythical character except
wishful thinking by the skeptics.

With respect to the alleged comment that the Eisenhower Briefing
Document is a fake, questioned document examiner James Black has
definitely identified the typewriter for the Truman-Forrestal
letter as an Underwood Standard typewriter, the same as a type
specimen of May 1940.  This is no longer an issue, and the
Truman-Bush letter of October 1 was done with the same model
typewriter.  He also confirms that the paper could have been
removed from the typewriter to type part of the date, since it
is vertically misaligned.

WOOD & WOOD ENTERPRISES

Dr. Robert M and Ryan S Wood are partners dedicated to the
investigation of Majestic, MAJIC or MJ-12 documents.  Our goals
are to research, authenticate and publish our results in widely
accepted media.  We employ a variety of specialists in key
fields that contribute to our efforts. We welcome volunteers
that are willing to sign non-disclosure agreements and that have
a reputation for integrity and a dogged determination to search
for the truth.

D R  R O B E R T   &   R Y A N    S    W O O D
Majestic Documents Investigators
______________________________
PO Box 2272, Redwood City CA 94064
Orders: 1-800-845-2151







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:00:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:32:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:33:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


Hello all, Henny

 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

John may have somthing here but that isn't what I'm about to
address-Pards.


 >>The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
 >>etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
 >>has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
 >>being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
 >>daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
 >>hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >>closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >>don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >>viewed in that light, do they?

 >>I would be less disturbed at the possibilities if it were
 >>otherwise. Even the cattle mutilations (as nonsensical and 'far
 >>out' as they may at first appear to be on the surface) bespeak
 >>an -intimate- knowledge of human chemistry and physiology.

 >>Food for thought and something that should not be 'blown over'
 >>lightly.


Henny, If you knew about how things worked in the western U.S.

 >Hi John, Greg and others,

 >I have some doubts about the relation between animal mutilations
 >and 'aliens'. Some time ago on the Discovery Channel a
 >documentary was aired that showed the areas in which most animal
 >mutilations are reported. To begin with, they were _all_ in the
 >US, while UFOs and 'abductions' are worldwide phenomena.

 >Furthermore, the areas correlated strongly with the direction
 >the wind blows coming from New Mexico. The makers of the
 >documentary speculated that there was a secret US government
 >organization behind the mutilations. Their purpose would be to
 >study the effects of nuclear radiation on animals, most notably
 >cattle. Most, if not all, nuclear tests in the US took place in
 >New Mexico. Such an organization, it was presumed, would also
 >possess the tools to make the precise incisions and the
 >extraction of all blood from the animals.

Ok, if the Gummit's concern was Cows and the exposure to
radiation of said filet de' migion, you go to Auction- ya gets
yer men in black, put cowboy hats on 'em and bid (always too
low)fer old Bossy. After you anaylize her , him, or more likley
after roundup, -it- and then sell the carcass to an artist under
a grant... sorry, I digress...

 >Personally I'm, not sure the mutilation phenomenon is confined
 >to the US. Some years ago Tony Dodd reported the same thing from
 >the UK. Still I give some weight to the hypothesis of Discovery,
 >because I'm not aware of any reports from other countries. Is
 >anyone else?

Acutually  most of the Tests took place in the 50's -in Nevada-
also 'Mutes were more common in the west in the 60's and 70's
after atmosphereic testing stopped.

What I'd like to know is; some; thing or; some one is doing
mighty strange things to a poor critter that if you could buy at
the old cattle auction every  Thursday afternoon, and you could
have the local Cowpunchers load them on yer UFO, -no charge.

GT McCoy

"The big high and lonesome's a place in my mind.
like from Lakeview to Burns,
Or up on the Judith, or Promintory where the
UP track turns.

It's any where you feel tiny
when you get a good look at the sky,

And, sometimes when it's a'stormin'
you can look the Lord in the eye."

                      - Baxter Black Cowboy poet.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:41:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:44:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Alien Ineptitude
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:25:18 GMT


 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:05:38 GMT

 >>>Within the ETH, a lot of speculation about abducting aliens rest
 >>>upon an unstated assumption of alien ineptitude.

 >>>Imagine: You are the emissary of a dying race. You travel
 >>>zillions of miles across the galaxy looking for a precious,
 >>>life-preserving substance. You find it in the rectum of a cow.
 >>>You remove said rectum and return home with your discovery.

 >>>Then, instead of synthesizing the substance, instead of abducting
 >>>a herd of cows to assure yourself of a steady supply of bovine
 >>>recta, you make a special trip to Earth every time you need a
 >>>fix.

 >Anal fixations aside, I think you should switch your focus from
 >excised cow rectums to missing cow's -blood!-

 >We (modern science) use cow's blood to 'extract' some of its
 >substances for use in -transfusions- for human patients.
 >(Because of its unique compatibility with human blood.) Cows and
 >humans, what's the connection? You have only to look to the
 >(ubiquitous) lack of blood in the animals and on the scene when
 >they are discovered. Time and again one of the striking features
 >of reported cattle mutilations is the lack of blood at the scene
 >or in the animal itself. Even the taking of certain organs
 >during a mutilation may be a 'side issue' to the complete
 >removal of the animals blood.

 >The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
 >etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
 >has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
 >being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
 >daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
 >hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >viewed in that light, do they?

Joe wrote:

When human scientists find a useful substance in the blood of an
animal or the sap of a tree, they synthesize it. If these aliens
don't seem to have the same skills at biochemistry that mere
human scientists have. If they are not inept, why would they
travel so far to get something they could synthesize?

1. You are 'assuming' that they "travelled" to get here from
some distant location. No one knows who or what these 'things'
are much less 'where' they are from. They may very well have
been here for uncounted eons living in a symbiotic relationship
with humanity. Since all this is just speculation anyway one
'take' is just as valid as any other.

2. Not knowing _which substances_ 'they' may be seeking or
placing value in, there is just no way to know if it is
something that -can be- synthesized. You are wrong Joe. The
urine of (female) horses is harvested from -living animals- to
create a form of estrogen that is usable by humans.

There are 'forms' of certain hormones/enzymes that -cannot- be
synthesized in a sterile lab without using the life processes
and chemistry of a -living organism- as the 'manufacturing
plant.'

'Why would they come to Earth to collect a substance they should
be able to make?'.

I'll see your 'assumption' and raise you more speculation. It's
all just assumption based on unknowns. That is why I choose to
spend my time trying to get a serious investigation into the
reports of the abductees going rather than adding to the
cacophony of pointless speculations (noise level) that already
surrounds the subject. Some people are in very real distress
over this Joe. For them, 'reporting' is like going to an
emergency room and instead of receiving treatment the doctors
stand around debating and speculating while you slowly bleed to
death.

"Rome burns while Nero fiddles!"

Until you can answer that question, you're making my case for
me.

You haven't "made" anything that even remotely resembles
something that could be called, "a case." How then could I (or
anyone else) "make it for you!"  :)

Joe, 'they' have -you- and a majority of the inhabitants of this
rock thoroughly convinced that they don't even exist.
Governments (may be) conspiring to help them in their
clandestine activities, and all the while they continue to 'mess
with' a fairly sizable chunk of the human population with
complete impunity.

Now how "inept" is that! <LOL>

Regards,

John Velez,  Speculating my a** off just like you!  ;)
________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                               Re: Aeribarque!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:42:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:01:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Aeribarque!


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:31:22 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Aeribarque!

 >An unusual item from an 1897 edition of The Cincinnati Enquirer
 >can be reviewed at the following location:

 >     http://home.fuse.net/ufo/Aeribarque.html

 >The report tells of an airship sighting accompanied by animal
 >reaction, two occupants [one being of oriental appearance that
 >can't understand English] and a tour of the airship called an
 >'Aeribarque,' with graphic descriptive features included by the
 >alleged witness.

 >This report was sought after due to a fleeting mention in a
 >December 31, 1985 edition of FOCUS, the monthly newsletter of
 >the Fair-Witness Project, Inc., where writer Jimmy Ward makes
 >note of a 'volatile substance' that negated the force of
 >gravity, as referenced in the1897 newspaper feature.
 >>The 1897 newspaper article was retrieved several days ago, and
 >its text can be found at the location listed above.

 >Kenny Young
 >--
 >UFO Research
 >http://home.fuse.net/ufo/

Dear Kenny:

That's a real find! A most enjoyable, if not entirely credible
account, of a "Great Airship" right smack in the middle of the
G.A. wave.

I didn't have it listed here, but will put it into the database,
for reference sake at least.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Rory Lushman <Oubliette@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:49:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:03:20 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

  >From:  Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com> >Date:
  Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:45:45 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
  <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has
  Been Reborn!

 >Congrats - I can't believe the pomposity of the announcement of
 >this group, so I'm gald to see someone has treated it in the
way >it deserved.

 >Can I suggest that the best 'new start' British ufology needs
is >for the 'investigators' to learn some humility.

 >That's not a xenophobe foreigner view, but that of a Brit who's
 >amazed at the certainty of some of the members of this
 >organisation.

 >It's a shame that the announcement bears all the signs of the
 >stereotype Brit (Englishman) - absolute certainty, elitism and
 >dismissal of any doubt.

Elitism, I doubt it. It amazes me how many people do not read
properly the original message. UFOIN is not out to replace other
groups, it is willing to work with others.

What have you got to fear.....nothing.

When UFOIN falls flat on its face, then you can shout from the
wings, "we told you so" but I think you will have a long wait.
UFOIN is made of many different characters with different views
and ideas, its not a Borg collective or is that Bjork

Rory Lushman.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 13:00:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:35:24 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:31:26 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 22:54:55 +0100

<snip>

 >>The man who sent supposedly anonymous hate mails, lied to
 >>witnesses, admitted that he'd bribed witnesses with drugs?

 >Are you talking about witnesses to his ufological claims?

Certainly; a group of us (around 8 people) were witness to these
claims that related DIRECTLY to his so-called "UFO"
investigations.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 13:02:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:37:34 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:03:32 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

<snip>

 >A "nosey" ham or short wave listener, and there are lots of
 >'em<g>, wouldn't have a big problem and I believe the one's that
 >do it on a regular basis _do_ have recorders "at the ready". Max
 >may or may not have a recording but don't rule it out just on
 >technical grounds. Years ago on said ageing scanner I monitored
 >the companies UHF base stations but also for light relief,
 >Manchester Airport's tower freq plus approach radar, Liverpool
 >approach and the CAA's frequency for the controlled air space
 >over the North West _and_ still had lots of presets to spare.

I know a couple of AT controllers and plenty of radio hams and
it is true that this type of recording could be achieved -
although the listener would have had to have been lucky.

Certainly not technically impossible.....

Tim M.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 06:25:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:43:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:13:11 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:18 -0600

 >>>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:13:11 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 00:18:18 -0600

 >>>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:50:35 +0000
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Dear Stephen, Dennis, Kevin, and other Asleep-in-the-Deep List
 >>Members,

 ><snip>

 >>Help me find the proof (IF it's there) of my experiences, beyond
 >>the *stories* I and thousands of others tell. What is plainly
 >>visible as proof to me, may not be to you.  But for anyone who
 >>has the courage to touch those scars and let reality sink in,
 >>it's enough impetus to begin looking...very hard. Help me find
 >>the answers.

 >>Sue Strickland

 >Hi Sue,

 >Your heart rending appeal for help is touching and illustrates a
 >deep need that for _many_ people continues to go un-addressed.
 >About all your going to get in terms of 'help' from some of the
 >skeptics is a hard sell on _their_ particular pet theory. Some
 >day, I don't know when, -someone- is going to conduct a serious
 >study of the 'physical' marks, scars, and bruises that many of
 >carry and can directly associate with a UFO experience.

 >You are quite correct in labeling some folks as,
 >"Asleep-in-the-Deep." When _thousands_ of individuals worldwide
 >are claiming/demonstrating a phenomenon that has never been seen
 >before and it goes uninvestigated or completely ignored by the
 >academic community, it is not the fault of those who are
 >courageous enough to report. It is the fault and the shame of
 >those who have the knowledge and expertise to find answers yet
 >choose not to do so.

 >It's funny. Both abductees _and_ the academics claim that fear
 >of ridicule is to blame for the lack of action on this matter!

 >What a world eh?

 >It is _only_ because of you and people like you that I stay
 >involved. Under any other circumstances I would have taken my
 >leave of the 'circus macabre' that is called modern ufology long
 >ago!

 >May you find your answers Sue. I promise I'll keep in there
 >swinging the bat until 'something' begins happening. Hope you
 >do too. We need each other.


Dear John V., and Other List Members,

First, thank you John for your public letter of support.  Your
concern is always heart-warming, straightforward and perceptive.
It means a lot to me.  To date, I have received 6 responses
(including yours), all show various degrees of concern and
willingness to help.

I have not received any offers to help me find answers from any
of the true *debunkers* on this list.  It may be a bit premature
to make *any* assumptions on their hesitantancy to respond at
this point. After all, my note was only posted yesterday!

Stephen, you are the *only* "doubting Thomas" who has even
bothered to respond to my request for help.  You need to know
that.  So do the other list members.  Thank you very much.  But,
you did not directly say that you were willing to help.  Are
you?  Your questions are valid ones, and the very questions to
which I need help finding the answers. I only have partial
answers, and am deadlocked in discovering the "rest of the
story," as Paul Harvey used to say. I need to hear (or read) a
commitment from you, "I want to help."  If that's not possible,
I need to know that too.  Please respond personally to
Stick@h2net.net and let me know.

Sincerely,
Sue Stickland







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:45:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


Hello,

The topic of this thread and the question raised are very
interesting. It is in my opinion a very pertinent question to
ask.

When trying to understand why ET are mutilating animals, we must
be careful to avoid asumptions. In your case you asume that they
are interested in getting huge quantities of the substance
itself.

If we suppose they know how to synthetize any substance in big
quantities, the most rational explanation is that they are
simply probing and measuring. This is in my opinion the only
valid answer to explain why such advanced and distant life form
would take flesh and blood sample of animals and maybe humans.

There is a similar question with abduction. Why would they keep
abducting people in a quasi industrial scale according to Mr.
Jacobs hypothesis ? If they know how to engeneer and modify
genetical material why do they bother keeping collecting sperm
and eggs samples ? Why do they bother interacting whith humans
as appear to happen in abductions ? Wouldn't it be much simpler
to collect a few humans and start a breeding program on their
own planet or spaceship ? Why do they need to collect as much
sperm and eggs ?

Again we must be careful with asumptions.

The most common idea about abduction is that a hybridization
process is taking place. People make the assumption that  these
hybrids are crossbreeds between human and the ET life form. But
for the biologist that I am, this is an annoying idea because
this implies a lot of things. Most annoying is that this would
imply genetical and physiological compatibility between humans
and the ET life form. It is quite unprobable a priori that this
could be possible.

I suspect that hybrids, abductees are talking about, are hybrids
of humans with genetically modified humans. This makes much more
sense on the biological point of view.

ET may be interested in some human features. Accroding to
abductee's testimonies, ET might be interested in emotions,
reproduction, etc. However, in the same time humans are not
adpated to space stravel. Humans are not able, as far as we
know, for telepathic communication that looks more efficient
than vocal communication. ET may also want to be able to keep
humans under control. We all know the problems due to some
human's wickedness. And ET may be interested in many more
features we might not be aware of.

One way to reach this goal would be to select the humans with
the appropriate features or event modify the genome of some
humans to obtain the desired feature. This is what humans do
with animals and plants.

One may then clone this special man or breed a very small
population with individuals showing similar qualities. But there
are two problems with this approach.

First by selecting individuals with some specific quality we
might also inherit bad features carried by these indivuals that
might not be visible in the first place. The modified entity may
have lost it's ability to reproduce it self for instance. This
is like noise beside a signal. By amplifying the desired feature
we amplify the noise with the signal.

Second, a population has apparently a lot of useless genes and
features. However in some situation these genes and features
might be lifesaving. By selecting a subset of a population we
drop all this hidden heritage and we loose a huge potential to
adapt ourselve to a different context. The diversity of the
genetic heritage is a key component in a population stability,
viability and ability to adapt ourselve to a context change.
Breeding a new population with only a subset of this genetic
pool will yield a more vulnerable population from the evolution
point of view.

Thus when trying to breed a new variant of a population with
some amplified features, we need to keep crossbreeding this
population with the wild form to dilute the bad features (reduce
the noise) and preserve the genetical heritage of the wild form
by keeping the new population as large and genetically as
diversified as possible. This is exactly how humans process when
modifying animals or vegetals for agricultural needs. After
having selected or produced a super plant a crossbreeding with
the wild form is often need in order to obtain a plant more
resistant to deseases, etc.

 From this point of view the sperm and eggs taking process make
sense. This sounds the most plausible explanation I found so
far.

The reason for the foetus implants may be due to constrains we
might not know about. Maybe the interaction with the wild form
is not only needed for the genetical material but also for the
foetus developpement and child education. And the only reason I
see why they keep working "undercover" is that they don't want
use to bother them in their project. The less we might bother
them, the less undercover they will behave.

We still don't know if this modified human variant which might
apparently be the product of an accelerated, artificial and
directed "evolution" will take the place of the curent human
species on earth. I'm afraid it sound very plausible and is
apparently supported by some abductee testimonies. But in this
case we really don't know how painful and fast it might happen.
Mack, and Jacobs in his latest book, suggest that this might
happen fast and in a near future. I really have no idea for now
about that.

If the authopsy film produced by Santilli is not a fake one, it
would mean that some humans have at hand a key element regarding
this hypothesis. What chocked me about this film is that a
surgeon I know recognized quite easely organs in the body like
liver, heart, lungs,... and that they were very similar and at
the same place as in humans like face features. Other features
were very different like the brain and some where additional. We
might start to consider that the authospied body might be an
instance of those modifed human but in a form still very far and
quite distant from us.

I really wished it was possible to test if this hypothesis is
valid or wrong.


Best regards,

Ch. Meessen







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:46:28 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:52:53 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >4: UFOIN will be highly selective in its investigation work -
 >focusing on in depth re-appraisals of important old cases and
 >seeking new reports that offer potential to add to our
 >knowledge. To this end the professional expertise of the team
 >will be offered to science and education. UFOIN will emphasise
 >the 90% track record in case solving as professed by serious
 >ufology and will play down the use of emotive terms such as UFO
 >and alien, focusing instead on anomalies, scientific puzzles and
 >using phrases such as IFO and UAP.  It will seek to work with
 >both open minded scientists and sceptics and handle UFO data
 >from a rational perspective, steering away from the extreme
 >views and ideologies expressed by parts of the old style UFO
 >community.

Hi All,

Maybe the above should read.

4. Now that we have formed this highly professional group of
people' we can now look at those cases which have been hard to
dis-prove or rule out "Other Worldly Intelligence's" and go over
the ground once more but to arrive at the only new conclusion
that these cases were nothing more than your mis-identified
phenomena which some people forgot to mention at the time.

We will no longer describe calls we receive from Joe public' of
lights in the sky - or structured craft carrying out mind
boggling manoeuvres as UFOs, but we will call them NYEOISTONP's
<NotYetExplainedOrIdentifiedSecretTechnologiesOrNatrualPhenomena
's>

As a new group we need to steer people away from thinking that
there maybe (god forbid) other life in the universe as to which
just some of them may have found a little holiday resort called
Earth.

When the new team get bored we will have our Scientific Puzzles
to keep us going.

All those researchers who have been at it for the last ten years
should now us the New enforced terms of UFOlogy, in fact we in
this highly new group of professionals are putting forward a new
term for UFOlogy <Wehavealltheanswersology>

If you can comply with such rules and remember not to be too
passionate or get to emotive about
<NotYetExplainedOrIdentifiedSecretTechnologiesOrNatrualPhenomena
's> then we need you.

We will also have our own councilling section, for those
investigators who just happen to have seen anything strange in
our skies. We can help remove  and solve the mystery of which
you have observed.

Yours,

An old and passionate, highly emotive, quite sensible, and
rational, never wrote a book, non PhD, sick to death of
bureaucracy, quangos, look at me's, and wannabes, but happy with
his new 6 pack!

Roy..








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                                Re: Get Real

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:46:54 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 03:54:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Well, Dave, this _is_ your lucky day!  Just so happens I have a
 >case I investigated for almost 3 years in which multiple
 >witnesses - all in a state of conscious, waking  awareness -
 >encountered a variety of beings over a three day period _and_
 >photographs were taken on the third day in which images of what
 >appear to be beings appeared.

Hi Amy & All,

Are these images for display anywhere/or just private?

Thanks,

Roy..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:58:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:32:55 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:03:32 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:29 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >His latest claim, that he may have access to a 'cassette' tape
 >of air to ground messages from Tornado jets and inter-police
 >messages from the night of the incident is interesting. We wait
 >with bated breath. Not least because to possess such a tape
 >Maxwell must have contacts with a radio ham or hams who had
 >several radios tuned to different stations, all being taped. I
 >doubt very much that such a tape exists. But Max has made the
 >opening bid in this new hand of belief poker and the other
 >researchers are entitled to reply.

 >>Andy and List,
 >>As a UK Radio Ham (though rather QRT at the moment) I thought I
 >>might throw in my 2d's worth re the quoted comments.
 >>The above _is_ quite easy to do with just one piece of kit.


Hi Neil,

Thanks for that - I'll believe it's possible to do. But I still
have serious doubts as to whether Maxwell has such a tape. And
now he's made such a claim the onus is on him to prove it.

Happy Trails

Andy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:17:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:40:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:46 -0500 (CDT)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >>claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
 >>of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
 >>be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
 >>hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
 >>technology'.

 >>Unless the aliens are only interested in the people who wouldn't
 >>have even thought to do that.

 >Well I suppose Dave considers his remark pretty clever, but I'll
 >bet he's never done any real checking about whether precisely
 >what he suggests has been attempted.  It has, and it has failed.

 >Last year or so I had an email exchange with Katharina Wilson,
 >an abductee who has tried, with the help of local UFO
 >investigators, to do exactly what Dave suggests above.  On
 >nights she would undergo an abduction, the video camera put in
 >her bedroom mysteriously recorded nothing but static.

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the info.

I don't consider myself being pretty clever at all, I was
honestly asking a question.

Was the video showing time and date and did it record her
sleeping until a certain time (for argument lets say  3 AM) then
record static from there on in?

If it recorded as you say nothing but static I would have the
camera checked, no aliens involved there.

 >There is also a case, reported in one of Ray Fowler's books,
 >where an abductee woke long enough one night to see an alien in
 >his hallway examining his motion detector.  The alien mentally
 >suggested he return to sleep, and he did.  Apparently the
 >detector never went off.  Sorry I can't cite chapter and verse
 >on this one; I've read too many of Fowler's books by now.

 >Is that a sufficient answer for you Dave?

Well the second one could have been a dream. Let's face it,
we've all had some weird dreams at one time or another.

If the person in this case was hyped up enough about aliens to
install a motion detector then surely aliens were foremost in
their mind when they went to sleep.

And as you said the motion detector did not go off.

You have to understand these detectors are not tuned to react to
figments of the imagination, or dreams.

 >Guess those aliens
 >aren't too intimidated by our "advanced" technology.  After all,
 >any civilization like ours which has had the light bulb for all
 >of 100 years (wow!), isn't going to present much of a defense
 >against putative others may have invented it thousands if not
 >millions of years ago. One can only hope their ethics are as far
 >beyond ours as well ...

And yet they still can't help but leave marks on your body,
strange huh?

Dave.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:26:24 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:45:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 ><snip>

 >>If they really wanted to wipe your memory... you wouldn't
 >>remember a thing, therefore you would not be able to write to a
 >>mailing list and whine about being abducted right!

 >Actually, Dave, in order for any beings or humans to completely
 >wipe out all of one's memory, he/she/it would have to erase the
 >victim's subconscious (or long term) memory as well as conscious
 >(short term) memories.  In so doing, you would have an
 >infant-mind on your hands who wouldn't remember anything (much
 >like individuals who have experienced open or closed head
 >trauma, stroke, etc.).  If this were done to all abductees, it
 >would begin to attract attention, wouldn't you think?

I'm glad you agree with me.

If what you say is true then why even bother to try and wipe a
human memory?

'Oh hell, what's the point, they'll only remember in the end
anyway!'

 >>Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >>claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a

 >photograph >of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands
 >there must >be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion
 >detector, not >hard to do these days considering our 'changing
 >level of >technology'.

 >Well, Dave, this _is_ your lucky day!

And I don't have many of them, believe me.

 >Just so happens I have a
 >case I investigated for almost 3 years in which multiple
 >witnesses - all in a state of conscious, waking  awareness -
 >encountered a variety of beings over a three day period _and_
 >photographs were taken on the third day in which images of what
 >appear to be beings appeared.  By the way, although I am a
 >certified hypnotherapist, no hypnosis at all was used during
 >this investigation.  All events were recalled according to
 >consciously remembered experiences (events that may have
 >occurred when the witnesses were "knocked out" or unconscious
 >have never been explored).

 >The article and the scanned photographs have been sitting on my
 >web site since December, 1997 but most people tend to reject
 >and/or dismiss it because it does not fit the "typical"
 >abduction scenario.  Beings of all kinds of shapes and sizes
 >were observed by a woman, her family members and another witness
 >who arrived on the third day (the photographer).

 >On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
 >and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
 >neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
 >taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
 >sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
 >too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
 >the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
 >the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
 >photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
 >doors - or so she thought.

Well don't it just always happen.

 >Upon closer inspection, a friend turned one of the photos over
 >on it's side and recognized the outline of what appeared to be a
 >being in a fetal position going through a sliding glass door or
 >some kind of residue left from the being going through the
 >glass.  Of course, this doesn't mean much to people who demand
 >to see a live alien in a cage on exhibit at the local zoo or on
 >TV but it is all we have at this point.

 >Two years later, the photographs were converted to slides for a
 >local presentation.  The night before the presentation (yeah, I
 >always wait 'til the last minute), I was putting the slides in
 >the slide tray becoming dyslexic trying to get them
 >right-side-up when up popped a slide with this bug-eyed critter
 >staring right at me.  I was so stunned that I just sat there
 >silently staring at this image no one even knew was in the
 >photograph. My kids were watching me work and it was my daughter
 >who pointed to the image and said, "Oh, look. An alien."  That's
 >when I knew it was not just my imagination.

Why would your kid say "Oh, look. An alien"? I hope you have not
been trying to influence this poor kids mind in any way.
My kid would have said "Oh, look. A monster or a creature!"

 >Some people see these images, some don't.

I've seen that before, it's called 'faces in the fire', goes
back a long way.

 >I have tried to share
 >the case, the photographs and what I learned from this
 >investigation (not yet released - there is much more) with many
 >of the more well-known "researchers" and "UFO experts".  I have
 >mailed copies of the article and photographs to numerous authors
 >and so-called "researchers" only to be told it is nothing.

Give us a list of who you mailed this to, some of us might like
to follow this up.

 >I won't bother you with the...details.  I no longer talk about
 >this case or try to share any of my work except with those who
 >express a sincere interest to learn more.  Those who want only
 >to sit in their comfy little arm-chairs and debunk can do so to
 >their hearts' content.  It is people like me that will be out
 >there learning and finding truths debunkers can only begin to
 >imagine.  <grin>

This may come as a shock to you Amy but I am not a debunker.

I simply ask the questions that a lot of people should be
asking.

 >You asked for photographs, I give you photographs but you will
 >only ask for more.  And you should ask for more!  Keep searching
 >for the evidence _you_ need to convince _yourself_.  No one can
 >convince you of anything but yourself.  It is not my job to
 >provide you with the evidence you seek, you will have to go find
 >it.  Here is what you asked for, take it or leave it. (I have a
 >pretty good idea what you will do. ;>)

I will always check out any evidence I am presented with.

 >You demand a lot of evidence but you don't seem to know much
 >about the phenomenon.  If you have any suggestions, Dave, as in
 >useful _practical_ suggestions, please share these with us or
 >with the ARM project through the Vanguard list.  And remember,
 >you must leave out anything that requires batteries or
 >electricity or canines as even animals are sometimes paralyzed
 >or "switched off" during abductions.

Well you seem to have covered everything.

You all seem to be sure you have been abducted by space aliens.
God forbid anyone has the audacity to speak out against such a
thing.

Every effort to gain proof seems to be blocked at every turn.
How about a remote power source?

Or will the 'aliens' just cut the lines.

Look at it this way, there's a lot worse going on in the world,
victims of hurricanes, train crashes, floods, wars, famine.

I even had a personal tragedy that far outweighs the abduction
phenomenon, if only I could exchange mine for yours... but thats
in the real world and believe me I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Dave.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:22:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:53:48 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:10:01 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >>Oh, he's been descredited over here on a continual basis for
 >>some time, the damage he's done by making unprovable claims has
 >>annoyed a lot of people - that case wasn't an alien crash
 >>retreval till Max got involved.

 >Where's _your_ proof.

Actually you mean wheres my evidence? And I meant "Alien craft
shooting down an RAF Plane".

Anyway. Now those event's have been the subject of massive
investigation - and a lot of it happened very very quickly
afterwards as well. Quest sent a team over there, the BBC did an
(pretty mediocre but sceptical) episode of one of it's
paranormal type shows on the events (and didn't mention anything
about triangles), there was tons in the Uk forums and in the
magazines at the time that were still quite boyant, but I saw
not one item about the shooting down of an RAF plane.

Now, I can't produce everything written from March '97 until the
first thing by Max saying a plane was shot down in ufological
circles - but if it someone made those claims before Max and
made them publically I haven't seen them in print nor any
reporting of a lecture with those claims. If someone has it'll
be a darn sight easier to produce the one article or piece of
news than for me to produce everything written in that time on
this list! If it exists, then I'm wrong, it's that simple..

 >>No he wasn't - some people swallowed what he said without
 >>questioning or saying "show me the evidence".

 >That's some people, others have questioned and been given
 >answers.

Yes and many people have made nice speeches about freedom of
speech, evidence etc to defend Max's right to talk total
gibberish. I recall the one about "who makes these decision's
about who talks". (Parapharased).

Well. for a start BUFORA - they should have asked to see his
evidence and his talk - then made a decision based on that - ie
there was no case. Also, they should have invited the guys who
solved the case down to balance the arguament. Inviting Max to
make his claims on top of the Alien Film Farce and the upset
subscribers was the final breat of a once well respected
organisation. But I digress. Max has given answers - but from
what I've personaly seen and heard theres no checkable evidence
to prove his claims. And I take no pleasure from that....

 >>A plane is hard to make just disapear - there's records, the
 >>people who fix them etc.  A pilot has a family, birth records,
 >>tax records, friends etc,etc,etc,etc. Can the "spooks" make all
 >>the school records & photo's disapear as well? There has to be a
 >>name for this missing pilot and a number for the missing plane.
 >>Until he produces those he hasn't got a case.

 >Only if someone wants it made available.  They used orphans
 >during the Cold War so no one would miss them.

Still leaves the plane, still leaves a payroll - this wasn't
some Stealth Team but a tornado crew.

According to Max one survived - well wheres his name? Leaves
maintenace records all that sort of thing.

This was an event on the British mainland in peace time. There's
the name of the "alive navigator smelling of aviation fuel" to
come up with ...

 >>When he makes claims and the can't back them up - how many times
 >>must this darn well happen?
 >>When will people learn? how many times have people come into the
 >>field, made claims then when challenged put up a smoke screen,
 >>made excuses, refused to allow the examination of "evidence",

 >Many times.  It seems to be 'company standard' in ufology.

This is my point - People like Max are the problem. -

 >I would like to know what you think Max is putting a screen in
 >front of.  Perhaps this is just convenient timing now that he is
 >in prison and any trace of what he _was_ trying to communicate
 >to us in the field has now vanished thus proving your claim,
 >that there is and he has nothing to prove his claims.

He's had a year or so to do it -since he made the claims. For
him to make the claims he must of had the evidence - that or
he's been sold a right pup by someone or he's wildly
exagerating..

Sorry, I don't beleive he's quietly out of the way - he's now a
martyr to some and he'll be out fairly quickly.

He's out of the way in the same way as Red Ken Livingstone's
been gagged - we hear more from the pair of them now than we
ever did before.. If "they" had wanted to shut him up, I'm sure
a Drugs OD would have been arranged...

 >>Just for a start, it amazes me how many cases there are involving
 >>"military personel" in this field. The witnessesd won't allow
 >>their names to be given to the public, ok fair enough. But then
 >>we get enough told about the witness to identify him to anyone
 >>in the know - I mean how many people can be the driver of an
 >>Alien body from wales down to London in 1974?? That's gonna
 >>stick out........... And people swallow this. Time after time
 >>without asking questions.

 >Are you saying all UFO researchers just sit around with their
 >thumbs up their bums?

Nope - you show me where I say that? Some maybe do now you
mention it, ;-)) I'm saying exactly what I'm saying above- that
I've been to many talks where the identity of a witness is to be
kept secret - then information that would pretty much identify
them to anyone in the know is told - so the public don't know
but the witness superious can clearly identify the "mole" (thats
if what were told is the truth). This just seems plain old daft
to me - and I'm amazed nobody's picked up on it. How many people
can have been part of the SAS, and been the driver of a lorry
taking aliens from a crash in Wales to London or somewhere in
1974? Well, nobody would ever have a chance of identifying
someone from that would they? Thats if they are telling the
truth.

The point is that we don't know who he is, but the people who
he's supposed to be scared of now know he's blabbing all over
the shop..... Maybe it's bad form to ask questions like
these.....

 >Also witness credibility in the community
 >is a reliable way to form an opinion even before doing the
 >research thus less battery of questions.  But even someone who
 >is thought of as less than credible, could still be telling the
 >truth.  It's like 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf' syndrome.  Well he
 >lied about this, and this, and this, and this, and when
 >something really does happen well there's no way he's telling
 >the truth this time, is there?

I agree to an extent - but Max's case was already in tatters ages ago - and
thats the point
I want to make, his case isn't in pieces because he's been banged up - it's
the fact he's not delivered on
requests for how he came to his conclusions.

 >Am I just supposed to _swallow_ this like all these
 >'stupid' ufo people do on a regular basis?

No - my point is we as a group and a community should be asking
questions of the mans claims from the start.

Before he gets his publicity, before something like this is
allowed to build up. "Cases" like ACC, Alien Autopsy etc, have
got masses of exposure and the like - and caused untold damage.
Am I really the only person who wants us as a community to
expose these people without damage being caused? My sole point
is WE should ask questions before others do........

 >I don't have a PhD, any degree of any kind, I'm no Stephen
 >Hawking, or rocket scientist (well after MCO even I could be one
 >without a degree so it would seem), but I do have a brain that
 >functions on logic, the senses, gut instinct, and the motives of
 >others.  I am perceptive and quite often see things others
 >wouldn't even give a second look at by reading between the
 >lines.

I have only an mcse and other industry certifications to my name
- but this sort of thing really is common sense. If someones
making claims of a shot down plane then they must have evidence
of that event - and if they are saying a death occured then
again they must have evidence -

 >I'm not saying Max is telling the truth or lying.  I just don't
 >like the righteous attitude I've seen in many threads proving to
 >me it's not I who does not have an open mind.  If I'm being
 >gullible, prove it to me, otherwise how can I be gullible of
 >something that no one can prove to me I'm being gullible of. Not
 >being too intelligent, that's the only way I could word it.

I don't like the gloating myself - I have very very strong anti
Drug Dealer feelings for personal reasons, but I'm not gloating
- as he'll be out soon anyway and he'll be back doing the same
old stuff - only this time he'll be a martyr, so I take no
pleasure in his banging up, not in a UFOlogical sense.. But he's
been banged up, he'll do his time and thats that on a personal
level for me - I hope the tape he is talking about is real and
of some use - and I mean that.

 >>Now lets put him behind us until he produces his evidence.

 >And I shall do the same to you sir.

Well, I hope I clarified my position. I don't think people are
stupid - I just think that we can help ourselves here and learn
to ask questions and the right questions. People should not be
afraid to challenge what they are presented with  - and make up
their own minds.

Personally I think theres been a concerted attempt to link
Triangle sightings with Aliens as a cover story in the last few
years - as well as build up a British "Roswell" - Andy Roberts
"Unknown Soldier"article in Fortean Times was pretty convincing
to me as a few "name" UFOlogists I spoke to had similar
experiences - "Sas men" making claims etc.

I wonder if Max has been played for an idiot here by a few
people who have an agenda of mischeif? Theres only anecdotal
evidence for this - and some emails posted to mailing lists and
news groups but it'd explain an awful lot.......

 >A toast to you also.

 >Sue

Thanks!
Now, if you've got this far thanks to you.
Cheers Jon

Collector of video Games such as Atari 5200,Vectrex, Colecovision,
Commodore 64, Megadrive,Mega  CD,Saturn and Dreamcast
The original neoclassic list: Neo_classic-subscribe@topica.com
Trade list = http://users.powernet.co.uk/wibble/swaps.txt
Wants = http://users.powernet.co.uk/wibble/wants.txt
Web's Best & Biggest UFO Web Page =http://www.anomalies.net








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                   Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum

From: Sue Addison <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:42:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:56:25 -0400
Subject: Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum


Dr. Steven Greer of CSETI will be appearing as a conference
guest on Compuserve's UFO Forum on Wednesday 13th October 1999
at 8pm EDT (midnight BST). This interactive conference is also
available via the Internet for non-Compuserve subscribers at the
following URL: http://go.compuserve.com/UFO

Being discussed will be the controversy over the letter received
from former CIA director James Woolsey downplaying the meeting
with Dr. Greer on 13th December 1993.

- CSETI disclosure efforts.

- His recently published book 'Extraterrestrial Contact - the
   Evidence and Implications.

- Recent Mt. Shasta encounters by CSETI training teams.

If you have a question for Dr. Greer don't miss the opportunity
on the UFO Forum this Wednesday.

Sue

http://go.compuserve.com/UFO







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:25:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:01:39 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 13:58:45 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 13:51:00 +0100


 >Hi All & Jenny,

 >Well Jenny I applaud your efforts to start such an organization,
 >but you seem to be missing a point here.

 >Let's talk about how far certain people within this new
 >framework that you propose would be willing to bend their views
 >on selected aspects of UFO research. Now you have listed some of
 >the people who will sit on this new team of yours, and I have
 >one simple question: Having read some of the views expressed by
 >these researchers over the last 2 years' can I be assured that
 >my opinions someone who has Pro-ETH views could and would be
 >taken on board by such researchers?

 >Are you telling me that such researchers would be happy to share
 >views and opinions and facts , data etc. without confrontation
 >of any sort? I will watch your new group for about a year' and
 >hopefully by then you would have some results underway from
 >cases' and then I shall make a much fuller review of your new
 >group.


Hi,

Well, I obviously cannot speak for anyone else in UFOIN. Its a
one person, one vote, everybody has an equal say affair. Some of
them are on this list so egg them to answer that question
directly rather than just hear my view.

All I can say is what I will personally stand up for and
support. Anyone, regardless of their theories about UFO origin,
etc, will be welcomed by me into UFOIN on the basis that they
can do first class, objective field investigations seeking
answers, finding them where possible and if not merely
documenting the evidence so that we can theorise from that data.
I don't see UFOIN as promoting any theories or any standpoint on
UFOs. We are here to do R & I and to document good evidence in
as scientific a manner as possible. That's a remit I think is
sufficient in by itself in so far as UFOIN is concerned.
Speculation beyond that is not unimportant, but I don't see it as
UFOIN's job.

My views on UFOs are different in many ways from Andy Roberts or
Dave Clarke, for instance. Although we share quite a few ideas I
suspect they are far more sceptical than I - and whilst I do
have a suspicion that another intelligence may be involved in
some close encounters, I think they'd both offer a firm no to
that. What we all do share is - I hope - an objective approach
to UFOs and no vested interest in any theory. I assume that,
just as I am willing to be persuaded that any case can be solved
and that no UFOs as a consequence have exotic solutions, I trust
they would be persuaded by good evidence to the contrary. That's
what being objective means - you follow where the evidence trail
leads , whether it supports or denies your own ideas.

I am up for that and am happy with any UFOIN member who feels
the same way even if our personal views on the subject right now
are poles apart.

Hope that helps.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:11:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:11:34 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Dave Baker <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 18:10:09 +0100

 >>From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 21:31:41 +0100

 >>Oh, he's been discredited over here on a continual basis for
 >>some time, the damage he's done by making unprovable claims
 >>has annoyed a lot of people - that case wasn't an alien crash
 >>retreval till Max got involved.

 >Hi Y'all,

 >Max's legacy - as that of a now convicted drugs dealer- is that
 >he has soured any relationship ufologists may form with the
 >police of the Sheffield/Yorkshire area.

 >When I first formed the Yorkshire UFO Society one of my first
 >tasks  was to try and forge contacts with the local police... my
 >idea was to leave my telephone number with the operations room
 >of Sheffield's main police station, so that they could pass it
 >on to anyone who called reporting a UFO.

 >The Inspector I spoke to was very polite and helpful, but I
 >remember him mentioning that they already had a UFO
 >investigator's name on their books. Did I know a Max Burns?

 >At the time I did not, but this was around the time that Max
 >must have been under investigation. He had also apparently
 >become a pain in the proverbials bothering the police themselves
 >with his antics and accusations. I've got a pretty good idea
 >what the police thought of ufologists in general after that.

 >And do you know something... I have never had a single call from
 >anyone who was forwarded to me by the police.

 >I wonder why?


 >Dave Baker, Yorkshire UFO Society.


Hi,

Sadly I can second that. Earlier this summer we had another Peak
District 'crash' in which a strange plane and an explosion were
reported. This time I was a witness to both and they were, er, a
plane and an explosion (undoubtedly from a local quarry or
possibly an isolated thunder clap). I don't think the two events
were even connected in any sense other than that they occurred
within a few minutes of each other.

Although (as yet) no ufologist has seized on this as another
cause celebre the media did and talk of the phantom plane of the
Peaks surfaced again. Utter rot. This was a very real plane not
a W.W. II spectre.

I spoke with the police in Derbyshire (neighbouring county to
South Yorkshire) during the above - essentially as I was a
witness in their investigation. The senior officer I talked with
knew all about the l997 incident, the crashing Tornado farce and
had formed his views of ufologists through that. Had I
communicated with Buxton police as a UFO investigator I know I
would have been written off as another nutter and given short
shrift. Dealing with them as a witness convinced nothing
untoward had happened and seeking a rational answer left me on a
very different level.

We should not really need subterfuge to deal with the
authorities. Sadly ufologists are regarded as such vacant minded
loonies because of the vociferous pronouncements of a few folk
the police see via the media that we virtually have to go
undercover to do our job. Another sad legacy of making claims
about any case you cannot support with that magical missing
ingredient - evidence.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:36:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:15:49 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:45:45 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 09:04:31 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>>>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>>>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>>>launched a bold initiative.

 >>>>They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >>>>Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >>>>in Britain.

 >>><snip>

 >Congrats - I can't believe the pomposity of the announcement of
 >this group, so I'm gald to see someone has treated it in the way
 >it deserved.

 >Can I suggest that the best 'new start' British ufology needs is
 >for the 'investigators' to learn some humility.

 >That's not a xenophobe foreigner view, but that of a Brit who's
 >amazed at the certainty of some of the members of this
 >organisation.

 >It's a shame that the announcement bears all the signs of the
 >stereotype Brit (Englishman) - absolute certainty, elitism and
 >dismissal of any doubt.

Hi,

Martin. Look rather than make such a snide comment, why don't
you actually tell us what you consider elitist about a group
that is literally open to anyone to join (which rather
contradicts elitism), or that displays certainty and dismissal
of doubt (when I sure as heck don't know what UFOs are and I'm
part of UFOIN), or is lacking in humility, since none of us are
promising to change the world simply to do as good a job as we
can of R & I and publish it freely for everyone to do as they
will with our findings. What we are doing is bonding as a team
not claiming to be better than anybody else. What makes you
think that we are suggesting that?

Please point out where we have said that we have all the answers
because I don't see it in the statement and I know I certainly
don't have them. That's why we are still looking!

This is a serious request for a detailed reply. Please explain
your feelings as we are trying to do this UFOIN project right
and your opinion does matter.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:29:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:18:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 18:51:22 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >That said, everyone seems
 >to have forgotten the following. Up until the time Ed Walters
 >was sent the Nimslo 3-D camera, all of his pictures had been of
 >the original object shaped something like a tea pot or a very
 >squat saucer.

Hi, Dennis!

Unfortunately, your recollections are not correct. Prior to this
event, at least two and possibly three types of UFO had been
photographed. Please consult "The Gulf Breeze Sightings" ISBN
0-688-0987-7 for an accurate chronology with photos.

 >ALL of the Nimslo pictures (on a sealed roll of film) portrayed
 >a very different "object" entirely, one which Ed originally
 >estimated as being 200 feet in length or longer. After analysis
 >revealed the photographed object to be about 4 and 1/2 feet
 >long, it was explained that Ed didn't have his glasses on, was
 >looking through the viewfinder and overestimated its size,
 >whatever, I don't care. Then it was "explained" that Ed's wife,
 >who didn't have her eyes glued to the camera's viewfinder, also
 >though the object was only a few feet long, and thus Ed's
 >mis-estimate was simply glossed over and shoved under the rug.

This is commented on at some length in the book, so I am not
sure I understand "glossed over" in this context. Obviously, the
reason for using the Nimslo camera was to obtain an image from
which acutal size could be calculated without being subject to
the errors of distance perception. In this it would seem the
Nimslo camera was a success.

 >Curiously, Ed never photographed the Nimslo "UFO" again, to the
 >best of my knowledge.

This is not correct. Indeed, the point I was making, which you
seem to have missed, is that the "Nimslo" object not only was
photographed again, but it was photographed in the same stereo
frame with one of the original form objects (38L / 38R). Because
the photo was in stereo, the size of the Nimslo object and the
original object could be calculated and compared. In addition,
the distance of the two objects could be determined. Please see
p 300-302 in TGBS for the basic facts and calculations.

When this calculation was completed, the size of the "Nimslo"
object was comparable to its size in the original Nimslo photo,
and the original form object was comparable to its size in other
occlusion, stereo, etc. photos. In addition, because the photo
was taken pointing toward the water, and the objects were
calculated to be over one hundred feet away out over the water.

The difficulty of hoaxing this, mathematically and physically,
are very high. As such, this combination of the Nimslo photo and
the stereo photo showing the original form object and the
"Nimslo" object is strong evidence _for_ the reality of the GB
photos - and, to the best of my knowledge, has not been
addressed or explained by skeptics, including yourself, Mr.
Black, or Mr. Hyzer. Until that occurs, and the proofs offered
of falsity are compelling, I must remain uncommitted in  regard
to the validity of these photos.

 >It appears only on the roll of 35mm film
 >over which Walters had no control whatsoever. Once that roll of
 >film was returned for development, however, Ed went back to his
 >trusty Polaroid (which even Maccabee admits was capable of
 >double exposures, unlike subsequent Polaroid models) and --
 >surprise! -- produced another series of pictures of his
 >pre-Nimslo UFO, including, if memory serves, the famous road
 >shot...

This is incorrect. The road shot was taken before the Nimslo
photo.

On 2/26/88, the Nimslo photo was taken. On 3/7/88, Walters
purchased a new Sun 600 Polaroid. The stereo photos were taken
with Walters' Sun 600 and another borrowed from Duane Cook.

Dennis, these are basic facts about a case you are disputing. It
would allow more faith in your judgement if you were to actually
demonstrate you know these facts in your attempts at refutation,
since that is what a scientific approach requires.

 >I'm sure there's an explanation for this -- the aliens made him
 >do it, whatever. Just don't expect me to believe it. The Walters
 >Polaroids looked hokey the first time I saw them, they looked
 >hokey the last time I looked at them, and they'll look hokey the
 >next time I look at them. In short, they'll look hokey forever.
 >And for good reason.

This must be science by proclamation, because it isn't supported
by evidence.

And I'd like to address that point in more detail.

I don't like the GB photos. I have some real problems accepting
a long duration multiple photographic case. But science doesn't
allow me to engage my dislike - I must instead confront the
evidence. Not the weakest evidence, not the evidence I invent
because I can't remember the facts of the case, but the
strongest evidence.

I am also forced to ignore any presumptions I may have about the
aesthetics of a particular UFO. There's a simple reason for
this: I don't know what a UFO _should_ look like. I can compare
the GB photos with sketches of UFOs, and though I cannot find a
"hokiness" continuum to range them on, and I can say with some
confidence that the GB UFOs are not unusual in that context.

For all I know, the design of UFOs observed, sketched, and
photographed represents an aesthetic preference or an
engineering demand. For all I know, each UFO is uniquely
manufactured for the preferences of its occupants. In other
words, neither I nor you are privileged to know anything about
the "hokiness" of a UFO appearance as a guide to its status in
reality.

Oddly enough, many UFO photos are of rather featureless objects,
and when this is the case, the complaint is that they could be
of anything. When a UFO with structural details is shown, the
complaint is that it looks "hokey". It is difficult to see how
these viewpoints represent a criterion which can actually be
satisfied.

Science does not allow us to only confront certain data which
happens to be to our liking. We need to confront data on the
terms of science - which is to say, qualitatively,
quantitatively, in the laboratory, in the field, and we need to
reject a priori notions of what the data looks like so that we
can listen to the data itself. If something is not supported, it
can be safely rejected, but until then, we must sometimes live
in a painful state of ambiguity.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------


------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and more -
------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:45:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:38:59 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 13:58:45 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 13:51:00 +0100

 >Well Jenny I applaud your efforts to start such an organization,
 >but you seem to be missing a point here.

 >Let's talk about how far certain people within this new
 >framework that you propose would be willing to bend their views
 >on selected aspects of UFO research. Now you have listed some of
 >the people who will sit on this new team of yours, and I have
 >one simple question: Having read some of the views expressed by
 >these researchers over the last 2 years' can I be assured that
 >my opinions someone who has Pro-ETH views could and would be
 >taken on board by such researchers?

You might be surprised to find, Roy, that Jenny and several
other members of the UFOIN team have expressed pro-ETH views on
a number of occasions; Jenny certainly did so on this list very
recently. There is no prejudice against anyone with ETH views -
it is only where those beliefs are allowed to distort evidence
and interpretation of that evidence where problems arise.

I would be quite willing to "bend my view" as you, so
delightfully, put it if we found evidence in support of the ETH.
I keep looking for it. But after nearly 20 years as a field
investigator I haven't found any yet. And after investigating
hundreds of cases I've found lots of evidence of some very odd
human beings, even stranger natural phenomena and supernatural
phenomena, but no ETs.

What UFOIN is looking for are investigators who are not
belief-driven, but who are able to put personal beliefs to one
side and evaluate cases in an objective fashion, on their own
merits.

So no matter how rabidly ET anyone is, if they can submit a
balanced case report which takes other possible explanations
into account, and they adhere to the Code of Practice and
hypnosis ban, then they would be welcomed.

Despite what you may think I have no axe to grind either way - I
would love to find hard evidence for ETs.

But there are many other possible explanations for Unexplained
UFOs, some of them far more challenging than the simplistic and
naive ETH.

Unfortunately, the problem we seem to have here is that not all
of us share the same definition of what constitutes evidence;
but if we can agree to differ and still work together then we
are getting somewhere. But perhaps I'm being wildly optimistic.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:25:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:01:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300

 >*On June 10, 1990, the Pensacola News Journal ran a story
 >announcing that a UFO model had been found in the attic of Ed
 >Walters' former residence.

 >One week later, the newspaper announced that a Gulf Breeze
 >teenager, later identified as Tommy Smith, had helped Walters
 >hoax the UFO photos.

 >On June 19, Charles Flannigan, MUFON State Director for Florida,
 >announced MUFON was reopening the Walters' case to investigate
 >these new allegations. He assigned then State Section Directors,
 >Rex and Carol Salisberry, to assist him in this investigation.
 >When the Salisberrys failed to deliver a complete report on the
 >allegations (as outlined by MUFON's Deputy Director of
 >Investigations, Dan Wright), the MUFON Chief Investigator for
 >Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Gary Watson, was assigned to
 >the task. Watson completed his investigation and submitted his
 >report on May 23, 1991; his report was 29 pages long with 27
 >attachments.

 >The following paragraphs summarize the central facts brought out
 >in Watson's investigation. -Bruce Maccabee, Physicist,
 >photoanalyst and a MUFON state director accepted professsional
 >fees for his work on the photos from Ed Walters' publisher.

 >(from Robert Collins )

 >more info:
 >http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/ed.html

The discussion is horribly biased and incomplete and inaccurate.

Dr. Maccabee has discussed all these objections in great detail.
He never denied getting paid for an incredible amount of
effort.. almost none of it discussed in this harrangue.

It seems funny to me that nobody brings up the fact that Dr.
Carl Sagan received a million dollar advance for the Book
'Contact' and made huge royalties on Cosmos.

If I had to have surgery done on one of my children, I would
certainly expect that the surgeon would be paid. I would not say
his efforts are not to be trusted because he wants to be paid
for them.

Give me a break here.

How much time does Bruce have to spend pointing out the details
over and over again that refute Black's arguments?

Stan Friedman







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                Philip K. Dick [was: Re: Abductions: A Funny

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 12 Oct 1999 18:21:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:17:14 -0400
Subject: Philip K. Dick [was: Re: Abductions: A Funny


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:23:30 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:46:18 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

Hello Greg, list and all,

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:32:30 +0000
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>I think even UFO UpDates venerable Greg Sandow met PKD.]

 >I'm not going to touch "venerable" (makes me feel old!), but I
 >did know Philip K. Dick. I met him in California a year or so
 >before his death, after getting his phone number from another
 >science fiction writer, Thomas M. Disch, who'd been the
 >librettist for two operas I'd composed. Tom knew I loved Dick's
 >writing, and thought I'd enjoy meeting him.

Oops. Thanks for not being offended Greg. And thanks for
responding. I had hoped you'd notice my reference to you and
PKD. Not enuf people are familiar with his contributions to
SF or UFOs.

 >"Enjoy," though, wasn't quite the word. My wife (now ex-wife)
 >went to visit Phil, and found him morose (I'm sure we weren't
 >the first people to find him that way). He announced that he'd
 >been to the doctor, and was going to die. I still don't know
 >whether this was an accurate report of something the doctor had
 >told him, a fear based on a serious diagnosis, or simple panic.

I just recently finished reading the PKD biography by fan
Lawrence Sutin. It's towards the end of the book that he
mentions you meeting PKD. The biography title is derived from
PKD's own book Divine Invasion.

Morose wasn't the word most people would have chosen. At least
not those I've read of who met him. Quirky, weird, eccentric or
some such, maybe.

Phil was a hypochondriac and often had fears of medical problems
- he institutionalized himself several times. Towards the end of
his life he began to realize he was going to die. Whether this
was a self-fulfilling prophecy or not is for others to decide.
He had high blood pressure and the last years of his life was
questionging more and more what he had to live for.

As an aside - yer lucky he didn't hit on yer (then) wife. He had
a history of falling for certain types of women very quickly. He
was married a number of times.

 >Phil then went on to tell us about the paranormal experiences --
 >constant contact with what he believed to be a non-human
 >intelligence, which put thoughts in his head, and struck him
 >with a purple being (I hope I'm remembering this right), at
 >which point he knew beyond any doubt that his young son was
 >desperately ill with something never diagnosed by any doctor.
 >And when Phil rushed the kid to the hospital, he really was
 >found to have the condition Phil said he had.

Pink beam! Right square in the forehead, tween the eyes. You
know. Where the psychic third eye is supposed to be. And the
psychic diagnosis of his kid's impacted hernia was most amazing
- whether he obtained the information via his own psi abilities
or from VALIS.

Its hard to sum up the paranormal experiences of Phil. There was
certainly something going on there, more than schizophrenia,
IMHO. He had multiple "witnesses" to some of the phenomena.
There were no overt UFOs or Alien Entities. But like much of the
Contactee and Channel literature, he seemed to be "plugged into"
something.

 >All this had been related in Phil's novel "Valis," but not about
 >him -- it all happened, in the book, to one of his characters.
 >it wasn't widely known, as it is now, that Phil was relating his
 >own reported experiences.

I didn't find this out myself until the early 1990s. I found
Austin's own Crash Collusion magazine as well as Greg Bishop's
Excluded Middle magazine were "in the know" regarding PKD as a
contactee.

Then the idea was reinforced in me when I saw Jacques Vallee
speak at the MUFON conf in Albuqurque in 1992. He cited PKD as
an example of the plight of the experiencer who may never know
the true origin of the encounters. Vallee further drew on PKD's
perspectives for his recent (no-show) presentation at the London
Otherworld Reality conference: "Rise of the Replicants: Five
Scenarios Impacting Consciousness in the years 2012-2025"

 >What struck me, first, was that he'd tell two perfect strangers
 >about all this. Maybe he told lots of people. And, second, I was
 >almost dumbfounded by something missing in the way he
 >interpreted what happened to him. He spend endless hours trying
 >to make sense of both his experience and the knowledge he felt
 >it conveyed to him. He read widely about western mysticism, to
 >find precedents and, more generally, to find a framework for all
 >his thoughts. But he didn't read anything in Eastern thought. I
 >think I asked him why not (my memory of all this is now a little
 >dim), and his answer was noncommittal.

Phil was a paradoxical person; he was an introvert in some
respects and yet, as you say, felt at ease telling people about
his ideas and experiences upon first meeting.

Phil was also a Christian, or rather, a Gnostic. His reluctance,
if any, to read Eastern mystic perspectives probably stemmed
from that. However, I was under the impression (perhaps falsely)
that he was at least semi fluent in some Eastern philosophy.

 >Never once did he suggest that aliens of any sort were
 >contacting him. His theories were more along the lines of some
 >vast disembodied cosmic intelligence.

 >Greg Sandow

Well, yes and no. In his fiction he utilized many sci fi
conventions to get across his ideas, however, as you say, his
idea was more of a Mind At Large conception of the hierarchy of
Intelligences which he thot he might've been encountering.

He speculated (endlessly) on several other ideas, including one
akin to Trevor James Constable's space critters, ie- the
Intelligences which contacted him may have been more energetic
than corporeal. He even considered the possibility that these
etheric entities could influence human perception and thus
appear however they wished - he alluded to this in his fiction
as a sort of adapted mimicry. Along this same line he wondered
if such a race could actually be walking amongst us. Perhaps
even living in symbiosis.

Gee, that sounds an awful lot like what I was suggesting in that
other UpDates thread: the purpose of abductions. ;-)

Thanks again Mr Sandow.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net

ps-Is Mr Williams of UFODESK fame the Williams
who interviewed PKD a number of times?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:59:05 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:09:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:33:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>The use of animal substances (female horse urine for estrogen
 >>etc) in connection with treatments intended for human recipients
 >>has a history and the list of new drugs/substances that are
 >>being created or obtained via that method continues to grow
 >>daily. There may be important clues about the "alien agenda"
 >>hidden in the selection of an animal whose blood composition is
 >>closest to/most compatible with its human keepers. The "aliens"
 >>don't seem quite so "inept" when their mutilation activity is
 >>viewed in that light, do they?

 >>I would be less disturbed at the possibilities if it were
 >>otherwise. Even the cattle mutilations (as nonsensical and 'far
 >>out' as they may at first appear to be on the surface) bespeak
 >>an -intimate- knowledge of human chemistry and physiology.

 >>Food for thought and something that should not be 'blown over'
 >>lightly.

 >Hi John, Greg and others,

 >I have some doubts about the relation between animal mutilations
 >and 'aliens'. Some time ago on the Discovery Channel a
 >documentary was aired that showed the areas in which most animal
 >mutilations are reported. To begin with, they were _all_ in the
 >US, while UFOs and 'abductions' are worldwide phenomena.

 >Furthermore, the areas correlated strongly with the direction
 >the wind blows coming from New Mexico. The makers of the
 >documentary speculated that there was a secret US government
 >organization behind the mutilations. Their purpose would be to
 >study the effects of nuclear radiation on animals, most notably
 >cattle. Most, if not all, nuclear tests in the US took place in
 >New Mexico. Such an organization, it was presumed, would also
 >possess the tools to make the precise incisions and the
 >extraction of all blood from the animals.

 >Personally I'm, not sure the mutilation phenomenon is confined
 >to the US. Some years ago Tony Dodd reported the same thing from
 >the UK. Still I give some weight to the hypothesis of Discovery,
 >because I'm not aware of any reports from other countries. Is
 >anyone else?

It is simply not true that most nuclear tests were conducted in
New Mexico.

The very great majority, especially of atmospheric tests within
the continental United States, were at the Nuclear Testing
facilities in Nevada, West of Las Vegas, many hundreds of miles
West of NM.

The first nuclear test was indeed at Trinity site on White Sands
Missile Range in NM. I understand that there have been some
underground Nuclear explosions in NM as well. But the Testing
Grounds were in Nevada.

On a related matter, I keep hearing people connecting Area 51
and Roswell. Area 51 might well house artifacts from the Roswell
Incident. But it is certainly not less than 600 miles from
Roswell.

Similarly, several people have told me that the Enola Gay (which
dropped the bomb on Hiroshima) left from Roswell. The 509th was
indeed based at Roswell _after_ the end of the war, but prior to
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was based at Wendover in Utah.

Stan Friedman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                         Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:32:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:19:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:16:58 -0400

 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:10:24 +0100
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World

 ><snip>

 >>this is the first time in publishing history that a science
 >>fiction novel has needed to be officially cleared by the
 >>Government!

 >I won't argue with that, but a science fiction writer did draw
 >U.S. government attention during World War II.

 >His name was Cleve Cartmill, and he wrote a story about a
 >nuclear bomb in Astounding Science Fiction, the American science
 >fiction magazine that (despite its name) was the most strongly
 >oriented toward real science. Nuclear bombs, of course, didn't
 >exist back then, though, unknown to Cartmill and his editor, the
 >U.S. government was trying to develop one.

 >Cartmill, drawing on scientific information in the public
 >domain, apparently came very close to describing the actual
 >design the scientists and engineers in the Manhattan Project
 >were working on. When the story was published, the FBI visited
 >him, to find out where he'd gotten his information! What an
 >impossible position for them. By doing this, they revealed that
 >something was really going on. But if they hadn't investigated,
 >and there really had been a leak, there could have been serious
 >trouble.

 >Greg Sandow


Postscript:

The editor of Astounding was of course the inestimable John W.
Campbell, Jr., who, I believe, first introduced L. Ron Hubbard's
Dianetics to the world, now known as Scientology. Under the pen
name of Don(ald?) R. Stuart, if my muddled memory serves,
Campbell authored the classic "Who Goes There?" You may know it
better by its movie name, "The Thing," which starred James
Arness as the creature from the crashed flying saucer. That's
right, the same James Arness of "Gunsmoke" fame. John
Carpenter's recent remake of "The Thing," starring someone who's
not a Baldwin brother (Kurt Russell), was an excruciating joke.

So Campbell's lengthy influential career is associated not only
with the atomic bomb, but with invading aliens, crashed saucers
and Dianetics. An impressive portfolio indeed! (Did I forget the
Dean anti-gravity drive?)

Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, anyone?

Actually, look no further than the latest issue of "Saucer
Smear" for your first clue.

Dennis Stacy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:11:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:20:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:52:44 -0400

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:28:04 GMT

<snip>

 >But Borges, imagining things that aren't, shows intensely more
 >imagination than most of us -- scientists, science fiction
 >writers, ufologists, skeptics, you name it -- who do speculate
 >about aliens. He imagines stuff that's really out there -- in a
 >word, really alien. (There's a wonderful phrase in one of
 >Gregory Benford's science fiction novels about the galactic rim
 >(and Benford, for what it's worth, is a serious physicist, in
 >his day job): "The thing about aliens is, they're alien.")

<huge snip>
 >Greg Sandow


Greg,

Go back and read a Hugo award winning novella by Michael Bishop,
something by the name of "Among the Assadi," in which the aliens
truly are alien. That is, incomprehensible to the nth degree.

The aliens discussed on this thread aren't truly alien and
that's part of the problem, which should be self-obvious. All
too often their concerns mimic or replicate human concerns.

You want this argument both ways: Super-advanced technology but
with outmoded examples of same (scars left behind, implants with
no obvious functions, no need to physically milk specimens each
time an ovum or sperm is required, etc). And your answer each
time is to attribute these objections to an inscrutable alien
psychology or psyche.

By which means every criticism of perceived alien "logic" can be
summarily dismissed. All you need do to obviate any
(embarrassing or otherwise) question about alleged alien
behavior is just bump it one more step up the ladder. Raise the
cross bars, in other words.

But isn't this exactly what ufology has been criticizing
orthodox science for doing lo these many decades now?

In the end, as someone from Magonia once said, nothing can be
decided by applying this approach because there is no end to the
approach itself, which simply moves the bar another notch higher
in reponse to the prior observation or objection. This is David
Byrnes's "Stop Making Sense" in algorithms all over again.

One can't just continue extrapolating alieness as an ever ready
explanation for each and every complaint. At some point someone
has got to start making sense.

Dennis Stacy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                TMP News: The Millennium Forum Lecture Series

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:42:05 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:24:18 -0400
Subject: TMP News: The Millennium Forum Lecture Series


TMP News
News and Reports from The Millennium Project

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


The Millennium Forum Lecture Series - Chemtrails in Our Skies?


October 12, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Paul Anderson, founder and director of The Millennium Project,
will be presenting a slide show and updates on the continuing
contrail / chemtrail controversy for the New West AM group as
part of The Millennium Forum Lecture Series, with firsthand
reports (including his own personal sightings and documentation)
from Vancouver, BC and Canada, and how these reports relate to
the now many hundreds of similar reports from across the United
States and several other countries. Is biowarfare and / or
weather modification testing being conducted on a mass scale for
as yet unknown purposes? See and hear the evidence and judge for
yourself.


November 5, 1999

7:30 AM - 9:00 AM
(breakfast meeting)

The Boathouse Restaurant
(near the New Westminster Quay Public Market)
900 Quayside, New Westminster, BC

Admission: $10.00, at the door

For further information:

Len Stone
NWAM
Tel: 604.294.1195

TMP
Tel: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca


For an overview of this issue and many related reports and
links, see Mystery Contrails in Special Research Projects on the
TMP web site:

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/contrails.html

The Millennium Forum Lecture Series, part of The Millennium
Forum, is a continuing series of presentations by TMP and
various researchers on a broad range of issues, featuring the
latest news and information. Contact TMP for more information on
upcoming lectures or presentations for your group or event.

_____________________________


Links to additional news stories, reports and updates:

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/news.html

_____________________________


Important Notice:

TMP News will now be the primary e-mail news service and mailing
list of TMP; it will replace The Millennium Report (the former
monthly newsletter concept of TMP) it will still be published
periodically, covering important breaking news stories as well
as TMP-related news, including special reports and upcoming
lectures and other events for The Millennium Forum, etc.

The objective of TMP is to provide news and reports on a timely
basis; this is the wonderful ability we now have via the
internet, where we can move away from the traditional "old"
newsletter format, and provide information on a much more
flexible basis.

At this point, this change seems to be the best option for TMP,
also largely in consideration of the time constraints of your
editor (!) due to other work, projects and commitments.

Anyone who has subscribed to The Millennium Report previously,
or TMP News, will now receive the "combined" format TMP News
instead. Apologies for any confusion.

The first edition of Millennia, which will be the print format
quarterly journal of TMP, is still due out for spring of 2000,
which will feature more in-depth studies of relevant issues.

A complete listing of current news, reports and updates is also
available on the web site:

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/news.html

and is updated frequently. Thank you!

Paul Anderson

_____________________________


TMP News is the e-mail update service of The Millennium Project,
published periodically or as breaking news develops, and is
available free by subscription; to be added to or removed from
the mailing list, send your request, including "subscribe TMP
News" or "unsubscribe TMP News" and e-mail address to:

psa@direct.c

The Millennium Project is an independent research organization
which chronicles the most phenomenal, controversial and
enigmatic issues of our time, and their possible present and
future implications as we approach the beginning of the 21st
Century and the next Millennium. TMP was founded in 1999 by
future studies researcher Paul Anderson, also director of
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, as an alternative source of
information to both the mainstream and tabloid media to provide
a forum for open, serious journalistic enquiry into these
issues. Extensive resources are available to interested persons
or groups.

TMP welcomes your reports and submissions. Forward all
correspondence to:


THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


� The Millennium Project, 1999







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:55:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:04:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Jerry Black <blackhole60@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 01:11:15 PDT

It used to be said that there were only two things certain in life:
death and taxes.

Now, there is a third: Jerry Black.

Jerry is back once again with arguments recycled from year ago.
Old wine in new bottles.

OK, better get yourself a big drink of Gripple or some such.
This is going to be a long one!

 >To Bruce Maccabbee:

 >Mr. William G. Hyzer has staked his [and his son Jame's]
 >reputation on the analysis from a first-generation copy of
 >Photograph #19. And without a doubt, Photograph #19 is a
 >double-exposure due to the fact that there is no luminance seen
 >on the road, nor is there a reflection of the UFO on the hood of
 >the truck.>

Staked his reputation? I thought he had left the UFO field years
ago and was no longer commenting. I had never heard this rather
silly "reputation" claim before. In his MUFON paper (MUFON
Journal, July, 1992) he wrote: "It is this author's professional
opinion...... that photograph number 19 is a fake produced by
multiple-exposure photography." He gave his professional
opinion. Is this the same as "staking his reputation" on it?

Let's suppose the improbable or impossible (from your point of
view) is true and Ed _was_ telling the truth. Is Hyzer going to
return all his awards, resign any position he may now have and
return all the money he earned an right letters of retraction to
all the magazines where he published his work because he was
possibly wrong in earlier analyses of other photos or writings
of papers or whatever? Will he retract his argument about Ed's
photo 1?

Anyway, your "without a doubt" certainly states your position.
SO, what will you do if you are wrong?

Hyzer and others have complained that there was no reflection on
the road, apparently ignoring the bright image below the UFO
image. In my paper "Analysis of the Road Shot" (MUFON Journal.,
Oct. 1990) I pointed out that the vertical extent of the
reflection image corresponds to length of illuminated road
surface about 120 ft long. Revised calculations done since that
paper indicate that the length probably was closer to closer to
100 ft. At the same time the width of the reflection image
corresponds to a width of the illuminated/reflecting area of
about 8 ft at its widest.

(Note: I suggested that road reflection was the result of an
elliptical beam from the UFO pointed down toward the road.

However, a circular beam would also create a long narrow
elliptical area on the road, as proven by "low beam" car
headlight reflections from a road.)

Hence, although it doesn't look that way in the picture, the
fact is that the bright image below the UFO corresponds to a
long, narrow region of illumination on the road. Next time you
drive on blacktop at night look at the reflections in the road
of the oncoming headlight beams. They appear very narrow
compared to their length because the lights themselves are small
(a headlight is about 6 inches wide).

If, however, the whole front of the car were a light source
beaming forward (or imagine a dense packing of headlights side
by side), then the road reflection would appear at least as
wide, and probably a bit wider, than the width of the light
source (the spacing of the outer headlights) and, at a
sufficiently flat viewing angle, the reflection would appear
larger in the horizontal direction than in the vertical
direction, i.e., more like the reflection in the road shot.

 >You, Bruce Maccabee, have contended that there was a dent in the
 >hood, or the top of the hood was muddy, or there were bricks in
 >the back of the truck causing it to be slanted in an upward
 >position near its front. I will again stress to you and those on
 >the internet that William G. Hyzer informs that even if all of
 >those things were true, there would still be a reflection of the
 >UFO on the hood of the truck. Likewise, there should still be
 >luminance reflecting from the highway.

 >You state, Bruce Maccabee, that all of these aforementioned
 >points concerning the condition of the truck are fact. But you
 >were not there that evening; you only have Ed Walters word
 >[which you have used so many times in the past without any
 >thorough investigation] that the hood of the truck was muddy and
 >there were numerous building bricks in the back of the truck. I
 >even question whether you had even seen a dent in the hood of
 >the truck. Had you seen this dent, you should have [as a UFO
 >investigator] taken a picture of this dent. If you cannot
 >produce for me a picture of this dent, then obviously sir, you
 >have never seen such a dent in the hood of the truck.

I have a picture showing the effect of the accident after the
repair had been accomplished. The hood was bent and after repair
still did not close completely. Unfortunately there is no
picture of the bend itself. However, it's existence of the bend
is proven by the image of the sky reflection as recorded in
photo 19 itself.

 >I have been aware, for years, of the testing that Bruce Maccabee
 >has done on Photograph #19, where the truck allegedly had a dent
 >on the hood. His findings were that the alleged dent in the hood
 >might cause there to be no reflection of the light from the UFO
 >on the truck. However, Hyzer has stated [during his testing of
 >Photo #19], that a dent in the truck would have no bearing on
 >the reflection that should have shown on the hood of the truck.>

Actually Hyzer accepted the results of my experiment and
included them in his MUFON paper.

And I have pointed out to Mr. Black numerous times the sky
reflection image proves there was an abnormal bend in the hood
which could have caused the failure of reflection. What M.
Black, and Mr. Hyzer, are aware of is the results of experiments
in which flashlights about 200 ft in front of the truck were
photograped. At low altitudes the flashlights had NO REFLECTION.
Only when the upper flashlight was high enough (more than 6 ft
above ground) was there a reflection. These experiments were
done without construction blocks in the back of the truck...
zero tilt.

Mr. Hyzer incorporated these results into his paper and wrote
"Based strictly on the above reflected light experiments
conducted on Walters' truck and the range of Maccabee's
estimates of object sizes and locations, neither the light
pattern on the roadway surface nor the power ring would be
visible as hood reflections....." because they were too low.

However, Hyzer pointed out that based on these experiments the
top light would be high enough to appear as a reflection. What
Mr. Hyzer did not take into account is the effect of tilt of the
truck caused by the weight of construction blocks in the back.
Ed was carrying construction blocks and shingles in th back of
his truck at the time of the road shot. During a test series
blocks were place in a (similar) truck and were found to tilt
it. It was determined that under the conditions likely during
photo 19 the truck was tilted, rear lower, by a degree or more.
Because of the mirror effect of the hood, this raised the
minimum height for reflection in the hood. The exact amount of
tilt could not be determined because the exact weight of blocks
and shingles was unknown. However, the experiments showed that a
weight close to what Ed had in th back would tilt the truck by a
degree or so and this would rotate upward the minimum height to
an altitude above the top light of the UFO.

To summarize: the bent hood would not reflect light incident on
the hood below a certain minimum elevation angle (experimentally
this was about 2 ft at 200 ft or 0.01 radians = 0.6 degrees)
when the truck was level. When the truck was tilted (back lower)
this minimum angle was increased. Because of the mirror rotation
effect of rotating the reflected ray by twice the angle of
rotation of the mirror, the minimum angle was increased by twice
the rotation of the truck tilt angle. That is, for a 1 degree
tilt of the truck the minimum angle was increased from about 0.6
degrees to 0.6 + 2 x 1 = 2.6 degrees.

Experiments determined that the effect of the weight was such
that the load Ed was carrying could have tilted the truck by
more than a degree thereby raising the minimum elevation angle
such that even the top light of the UFO was not high enough to
reflect.

 >I stated that William G. Hyzer, with all of his sophisticated
 >equipment, has proven that there was no luminance seen on the
 >road on the famous "road-shot," Photograph #19.

He should have found luminance. Sainio with his sophisticated
equipment did,

 >Your feeble response was: "Wrong."
 >I will let the common sense of the people on the internet
 >dictate their decision.

I stated a one word response because I have given many word
responses to the same argument many times in the past 7 years
(or however long it has been).

 >We have here, a young man who was at the time of this analysis,
 >State Director of Wisconsin for the Mutual UFO Network. Sainio,
 >by his own admission, had NEVER investigated a UFO case. Yet he
 >was a State Director of Wisconsin of the Mutual UFO Network. So
 >here we have a gentleman with 12-years of experience in
 >photographic analysis claiming that he can see [with the naked
 >eye] on a first generation copy [the same that Hyzer had to work
 >with] luminosity coming down the road on Photograph #19, the
 >famous "road-shot." However, William G. Hyzer with 38-years of
 >experience, and his son James B. Hyzer, with 20-years of
 >experience at that time, using their sophisticated equipment,
 >can find no luminosity coming down the road.

This is strange. At the very least they should have found
a luminosity resulting from skylight.

At any rate, Sainio has published the result of his analysis in
the MUFON Symposium proceedings of 1992. So anyone can see for
himself what Sainio found.

 >So when you simply say "wrong" to this, Bruce Maccabee,
 >you insult our intelligence.

And you insult my memory, and probably that of the few others
who have closely followed this argument over the years.

 >According to a letter you sent me some years ago, you stated
 >that you had received $20,000.00 for writing a chapter in a book
 >written by Ed Walters entitled: "The Gulf Breeze Sightings." You
 >stated that you had received checks from the book publisher in
 >January of 1989, and you further state that your investigation
 >was completed at that time, so in your mind, you feel you were
 >justified for writing in this book. However, the Ed Walters/Gulf
 >Breeze investigation was a continuing matter for years after you
 >had accepted this $20,000.00 for writing this chapter. While you
 >might state that your investigation was complete, a
 >re-investigation of the case was requested by Mr. Walt Andrus,
 >and Rex Salisberry had taken charge of that re-investigation
 >after you had accepted the $20,000.00 from the book publisher. I
 >still find this to be a conflict, as do others associated with
 >this case.

Better not let yourself get paid for anything you do in UFO
research, Mr. Black... If you do people will say "AHA!! He just
did it for the money!"


 >you had received for this chapter of the book came out of Ed
 >Walters' advance. The book publisher did not give you an
 >additional $20,000.00. You were paid directly out of Ed Walters'
 >pocket, not from the book publisher.>

Incidently, everyone seems to have forgotten that in January or
February (I forget the exact date) a book publisher offered Ed
$300,000 for right to publish his story. Ed refused the offer.
Strange, if he was a nasty hoaxer who was only in it for $$$.

 >When I stated in my letter that each sighting or picture from
 >Gulf Breeze must be evaluated and handled on its own, you
 >replied as follows: "I certainly agree that each case should
 >stand on its own."

 >How could you make such a ludicrous statement based on your past
 >record? The whole book, "UFOs Are Real, Here's The Proof," is
 >based upon other letters sent to Ed Walters from people claiming
t>o have seen an object similar to his, or other pictures or
 >video that was taken yet you have the audacity to tell me that
 >you believe each case should be handled on its own?

The "whole book" is based on letters set to Ed? What sort of
disinformation is this? The first sections of the book discuss
more recent sightings by Ed and my analysis of those sightings.
There is another section where I have discussed some of his
older photos, including the photo 11 blue beam photo that Black
studiously avoids.

Furthermore the title is 'UFOs Are Are Real, Here'S The Proof'.
The title is not, 'Analysis Of Ed's Sightings And Photos'. That
is, it wasn't restricted to a discussion of Ed's sightings. One
could remove Ed's sightings from the book and still find
"something of interest".... sightings and photos from around the
world.

Of particular interest is the Foreword by George Filer, who did
his own independent investigation of the Gulf Breeze sightings,
including Ed's. His comments are particularly illuminating.

Incidently, anyone who has not been able to find 'UFOs Are Are
Real, Here's The Proof' in a bookstore and wants to get a copy I
can send a copy for $6.00 including shipping anywhere in the USA
(add $1.00 outside USA). Send email and address to
brumac@compuserve.com

 >Even as we explore further in this letter, you stated that
 >Fenner and Shirley McConnell reported seeing Ed's Craft [as you
 >state] with windows, hovering for several minutes near the
 >shore, not far from his home. So right away, you are again
 >referring to someone else's alleged sighting to attempt a
 >vindication of Ed Walters' photographs.

Amusing, isn't it. Here we have a sighting report by reputable
people who say they saw the same thing that Ed photographed.
Isn't it fortunate for Ed that he invented a UFO model that was
distinctly different from the classic UFO disc/triangle/sphere
shapes but which, nevertheless, matched what other people -
strangers to him - said they saw. Now it should be known to
investigators that Ed also _drew_a_picture_ of what he saw.
Suppose he had _not_ taken any photos.

Then his drawn picture could be compared with that of Shirley
and Fenner McConnell... and they would be shown to be _very_
smilar. Would we ten consider that one case strengthens the
other? Of course!. Ed's problem is that he was "guilty of
photography."

 > You can't even go one
 >page without referring to someon else's sighting to confirm Ed
 >Walters' pictures.

Sure, and you can't go one page without trying to reject the
other sightings because you know that if many other people were
reporting the same thing, then the probability was high that
there was such a thing in the area to see.... and to photograph.

 >Even further down you go to reference a Mr.
 >Polack and two others of an egg-type that appeared in May of
 >'88. You just can't seem to stay away from using other people's
 >sightings or photographs to try to validate your good friend Ed
 >Walters.

 >So don't embarrass yourself by making such ludicrous,
 >ridiculous statements that you believe each case should handled
 >on its own merits. You obviously do not believe that for one
 >minute.

Each sighting and each picture MUST stand on its own in the
following way: it must be investigated and it must be shown that
it is not a hoax. You see, Jerry, any UFO case could be a
hoax... even Walton, in spite of your lie detection tests.

In that case each witness had to be "vetted" to determine
whether or not the sighting could have taken place as stated. In
the Gulf Breeze situation, investigators interviewed the
witnesses and studied each case that was clearly of importance
such as the Pollack and MConnell cases. Each sighting in GB had
to be studied to determine whether or not it was likely to be a
hoax.

It was determined that numerous witnesses who said they saw the
same thing that Ed photographed were not likely to be hoaxers.
(A complete tabulation of sightings in this time period was
published in Gulf Breeze Without Ed in the 1991 MUFON Symposium
Proceedings. That tabulation shows that in this time period
there were 117 reports, 24 by Ed and 93 by others; there were
about 200 witnesses other than Ed and his family. )

So, you and readers ask, isn't it inconsistent to say that on
the one hand that each case must stand on its own but on the
other hand, taken together they strengthen each other? I say it
isn't inconsistent because by "stand on its own" I mean that
each case must be investigated to determine the probability of
hoax, misidentification(a mundane explanation) or delusion
(mental problem of the witness). If there is a high probability
of a hoax or mundane explanation it must be rejected even if
there are similar sighting reports. But if the probability of a
hoax or mundane explanation is low or zero then it strengthens
the other cases.

Mr. Black yells loudly that the road shot MUST be a hoax.
Therefore it cannot be used to strengthen the Ed's other photos.
I say that at worst the information in photo 19 is ambiguous
with regard to being a hoax. There is no absolute proof of a
hoax in it. Hence it must be set aside and other photos looked
at as possible absolute proof of a hoax. (Black in fact mentions
photo 1.)

Look at this another way: if there had been _no_ other sightings
in the Gulf Breeze area at the time Ed's case likely wouldn't
have even gotten off the ground. But, on the other hand, if Ed
hadn't allowed his first pictures to be published it is likely
that none of the other witnesses would have spoken up.

And now consider a counter example: a photo which I claim
contains evidence that rejects the double exposure hypothesis.

Photo 11 shows the object at a distance with a blue line coming
down. Hyzer studied this photo and says it could be a model with
a blue ribbon illuminated properly to make a "blue beam" or
perhaps a blue light beam (laser?) shining through smoke. The
double exposure hypothesis is that the first exposure was of the
model and "beam". The second was of the rather dark area behind
Ed's house, showing a very dim sky above the skyline and no
brightness at all below the skyline.. I say this hypothesis is
inconsistent with the evidence within the photo itself: the
brightness of the image of the blue beam does NOT suddenly
decrease at the skyline where the background brightness goes
from a low value above the skyline to to zero below the skyline.
However, if it were a double exposure there would be such a
decrease.

In a double exposure as proposed by Hyzer, the total image
brightness is the sum of the foreground (the brightness of the
assumed ribbon "beam" attached to the model UFO) and the
background. Above the horizon the background brightness is the
the dull glow of the sky, plainly visible at the left and right
side of the blue beam image. The sum of these two brightnesses
above the skyline is (blue ribbon brightness plus sky background
brightness) . The sum of the foreground plus background
brightness below the horizon is (blue ribbon brightness plus
zero tree brightness). Clearly the second sum is lower than the
first.

Hence, if this were a hoax, at the horizon line there would be
a drop in brightness as one moves down the beam image from the
UFO toward the end of the beam image. There is, however,
no such drop. I published the graph of brightness in UFOS ARE
REAL..... so anyone could see for himself. Hence photo 11
is NOT a double exposure hoax.

I might mention that the other blue beam photo, with Frances,
also has evidence that rejects the double exposure hoax
hypothesis (added brightness to the sleeve of her sweater
closest to the beam and added bluish brightness of some other
objects in the photo... see Sainio's MUFON 1992 Symp paper)

Now, at very least, one can say the double exposure hoax
hypothesis is rejected by these two pictures showing a beam. Of
course one can always postulate a much more complex sort of
hoax... one that would be difficult or impossible for Ed to
create, at least not without competent help (of which none has
ever been discovered). But at the same time one is confronted
with the following:

Nov. 11, 1987: Billie Zammit sees UFO with blue beam about 2:30
in the morning (same day as Ed's first photos, by the way)

March 20, 1988: Roger McCann and several other adults report
seeing several UFOs, one of which repeatedly emitted a blue beam

April 28, 1988: Truman Holcomb reported seeing an "Ed type" UFO
hovering not far his house (and not far from the location of the
"road shot" sighting). This UFO emitted a blue beam.

(There probably were other blue beam reports but these are the
ones I recall now, after more than 10 years!)

Should we now reject Ed's photo on the basis that, well, ANY
photo could be faked, given enough time, money, capability and
desire ( I would say Ed had only one of these... money... and
skeptics have loudly attributed all 4 to Ed, without proof, of
course) and then accept the other sightings as probably real
events reported by honest people? Or should we reject all such
sightings because UFOs and beams are impossible, or should we
admit that the sightings and photos actually seem to strengthen
one another:? If so, then Ed's photos may be the first
photographic evidence of what a UFO beam could look like. (They
have generated considerable speculation as to what known
physical phenomenon might make a blue beam such as shown in the
pictures.)

(Need I point out that there are lots of reports of beams,
including blue beams, from UFOs. Even Travis Walton reported a
beam.......!)

 >Finally, Bruce Maccabee, you state that the explanation for
 >Photograph #1 was a very special type of double exposure which
 >William G. Hyzer "discovered." There is no way, you claim, that
 >Ed Walters could not have known about it. Now we both know that
 >is a false statement.

We both know it is a false statement? Speak for yourself, Jerry.
I know it is a false statement. You think it is a false
statement.

I say again, there is no way Walters would have known about it.
It is not something one would find in a typical photography book
(no investigator ever found any photography books in Ed's house,
nor did I or anyone else discover any evidence that Ed was
"photographically sophisticated." Rather, he was
"photographically challenged.")

 >You are trying to misinform the internet
 >readers that during Hyzer's analysis, he came across some
 >special way to double-expose photographs. That is incorrect.
 >Hyzer simply said that he discovered

Oooooopppppsssss! What's that you say? Hyzer "simply said that
he discovered?"

He _discovered_? I presume that means that he had no previous
knowledge of it. I presume it means that when he began his
analysis of Photo 1 he did not already know of this special
double exposure method. He had never heard or read about it
before. So, he discovered it.

And so he assumes Ed, whom even you would put below Hyzer on the
scale of photographic knowledge and ability, must have
"discovered" this first. Imagine that. Ed as a photographic
scientist. My, my! Who is misinforming whom?

 >how this photograph, with
 >very little experimentation, could be double-exposed. You had
 >taken the word "discover" and made it sound like something he
 >had never came across or knew of before. That is a total lie,
 >and you know it to be a lie.

I know it to be a lie? That is a stupid statement. How can I
"know" it to be a lie. Hyzer said he "discovered" it. He didn't
say I knew about this all along.

He even did experiments to prove his theory was correct and then
took the time to write an article about it which he published in
Photomethods magazine. I conclude, therefore, that he at least
thought it was interesting enough to merit a publication because
he had "discovered" it.

Look at this another way. If it were common knowledge that
Polaroid film could be used to create "Hyzer type" double
exposures, why did he go to the trouble of proving that it would
work by making careful measurements and publishing the ranges of
exposure level over which it would work? Why didn't he just look
up in a table somewhere the necessary exposure levels? (See
below for a description of the importance of exposure levels.)

 >Hyzer has stated emphatically that Ed Waltersr anyone else,
 >would be able to produce Photograph #1 as it appears, with very
 >little experimentation.

 >And why, Bruce Maccabee, did Hyzer's analysis of Photograph #1
 >show signs and indications of double exposure? Yet you and Jeff
 >Sainio had never once implied that any photograph -much less
 >Photo #1- showed any signs whatsoever of double-exposure.

"Never once implied..."

Wait a minute. Let's get this right here. Neither Jeff nor I
ever said a photograph WAS a double exposure. On the other hand
we both examined these photos for clear evidence of double
exposure. I certainly "implied" that the photos could, in
principle. have been created by double exposure in my first Gulf
Breeze paper (A History Of The Gulf Breeze Sightings). The
_first_) But to suggest that a photo might be a double exposure
and to state positively that it was a double exposure are two
different things. The problem always is to try to RULE OUT the
hoax hypothesis. Sometimes that is not possible, but one can
still determine the level of difficulty of the photo if a hoax.


As for photo 1, when I saw the photo I immediately thought
"double exposure."

Let me be a bit more explicit. I first saw black and white
copies of photos 1-5 at the office of Dr. Robert Nathan who has
been called the "father of digital image processing" at the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory. This was in late January, 1988. Nathan
had copies because the originals had ben brought to him for
analysis in December, 1987. (This is a side story I won't get
into now.) I had heard about the Gulf Breeze sightings by that
time but had never seen any good copies of the pictures. When
Nathan handed me photo 1 I looked at it for a few seconds, saw
th UFO image "behind" the darker tree image and said to Nathan,
"This would be a tough double exposure."


Now, why on earth might I have qualified the statement with the
word "tough?" Because I knew that to make a bright model appear
to be _behind_ a darker part of the scene (tree branches) would
require a special technique known as "masked double exposure" or
else the edge of the model would have to be cut to match the
outline of the part of the scene blocking the image of the
model. In either case it would be necessary to have exact
registration between the edge of the model and the edge of the
scene. Specifically, in photo 1 the right side of the
known-to-be nearby (30 ft) tree blocks the view of the left side
of the UFO image... or it appears to do so.

So, Mr. Black... my first thought was double exposure.

Later on in the investigation I realized just how tough that was
with Ed's camera and ruled out the masked double exposure or
model-with-an-side-cut-to-match-the-tree -outline as techniques
that Ed could have used (impossible to get the correct
regisration or alignment with a and held camera).

If you read A History Of The Gulf Breeze Sightings you will find
double exposure mentioned numerous times. Furthermore, I even
proved it possible with Ed's camera by creating a double
exposure. I did it right in front of the MUFON investigator who
didn't realize what I had done when I showed him a picture of a
'UFO' in the sky in front of Ed's house. He knew there had been
no such UFO, but suddenly there it was in the picture. When I
showed my "UFO" picture to Ed he acted completely surprised and
walked around his yard looking at the sky to see if it was still
there somewhere. At this point either he was an excellent
extemporaneous actor--- able to make up a plot line in real time
and recall it later as needed - - or else he didn't know a thing
about double exposure. After numerous interactions and
experiments and tests with Ed I concluded the latter was the
explanation.


You say that, according to Hyzer, anyone with a "little
experimentation" could create such a picture. Well, following
Hyzer's prescription I tried numerous times to create a
convincing double exposure in which a dark background scene
object covered up a brighter foreground scene object. I used the
same type of camera and film. I couldn't do it. But, let's be a
little more theoretical here so the amuzed/ puzzled/bored
readers can learn just how unique the Hyzer method is.

Perhaps I shouldn't say that Hyzer "discovered" the phenomenon,
but it would be correct to say Hyzer somehow became aware of it
and was the first to apply it to intentional double exposures.

Anyway, the phenomenon Hyzer used is demonstrated as follows.

(Hang on, It's a long ride!)

Suppose a film is exposed to a very low light intensity,
  and/or the shutter time is very fast and/or the
f-stop is large (small aperture). The EXPOSURE is low.

  At this point there is a
LATENT IMAGE on the film. (A "latent" image is an area of the
film in which the chemistry of image making has begun.

A latent image must be developed by another sort of chemistry
to "fix" the image and make it visible.)

Suppose that the film is now developed.

If the exposure was low enough when the film is developed there
will be NO, I repeat NO, detectable image. In other words, it
does not require ZERO light source intensity to make no image.
It does require the exposure level (a product of the source
brightness, the shutter time and divided by the f# squared) to
be so low that the film doesn't respond in a normal way.

The latent image must be UNDEVELOPABLE.... meaning that
it can't be seen after the film is developed.

In Hyzer's terminology, the exposure of the film must be below
the Exposure Response Threshold (ERT). Hyzer gives 0.002-0.004
meter-candle-seconds (mcs, or lumens-seconds per square meter)
as the useful range of exposures, although an exposure as low as
0.001 might work..

On the other hand, the exposure level can't be TOO low. If it is
too low there won't even be an undevelopable latent image.

If the exposure level is between certain bounds there will be a
Latent (undevelopable) image on the film which IF developed at
this time, would not result in a detectable image, BUT if ADDED
TO ANOTHER IMAGE, WOULD be detectable! (Get that? There is an
image but it is "invisible" until added to another image!)

IMPORTANT POINT: if the exposure is too low this won't work. If
the exposure is too high, this won't work. You have to adjust
the model brightness or the shutter time or the fstop to get
into the useable range of exposure values. In principle you
could do this with a light meter. However, a series of exposures
at varying model brightnesses could produce a collection of
pictures, some of which would work properly when the second step
of the process was carried out. This would be the trial and
error approach.

Let's begin again.

Using the same light source and exposure conditions take another
photo, just as before, thereby making a LATENT but
"undevelopable" image.

However, this time, but BEFORE developing the film, photograph
another somewhat brighter, but not TOO bright, light source is
also filmed. Hyzer gives a range for this, too: 0.012 mcs to
0.05 mcs.

This second light source must make a large enough image on the
film to completely "cover" the (latent) image of the first light
source.

Now when the film is developed, outside the boundary of the
image of the first light source there will be the image of the
second light source. This is expected. What is not expected, but
what Hyzer realized could be used for double exposure faking. is
the following result: THERE WILL ALSO BE AN IMAGE OF THE FIRST
LIGHT SOURCE. In other words, adding two images together makes
visible a latent image which, by itself, was undevelopable. VERY
CLEVER! Get it? If not, read Hyzer's Photomethods article,
October 1991. So, you ask, before you fall asleep (you are still
awake, aren't you?) how does this apply to Ed's photo 1?

Ed would have to know beforehand about this method before he
took photo 1. He couldn't just go out and make this work the
first time without experimentation because he would have to know
how to make his first exposure (of the model) at such a low
exposure that, if he pulled the film out and developed it, there
would be NO image.

I would like to point out that this is counterintuitive for the
hoaxer. A person who does a typical double exposure will want to
have the initial exposure (of the model) good enough to ASSURE
that there is a bright image of the model...actually a LATENT
but DEVELOPABLE image .... on the film. A typical hoaxer would
likely take and develop several pictures of the model alone to
make sure he got the correct exposure of the model image. The
model image should be quite bright. Then he would take yet
another picture of the model, but not develop it. Instead he
would photograph the background scenery and THEN develop,
thereby creating the double exposure.

Why would the typical double exposure
hoaxer want a bright first image? Because he knows it must
overlay the background image and he doesn't want the normal
  "bleed through" of the background into the model mage to be
obvious. Since "bleed through" always occurs, the
best circumstance for a hoaxer is to create a photo that looks
like a bright UFO image against a dark sky. The sky image
would "bleed through", but if the UFO image were bright
enough the bleed-through would be difficult or impossible to
detect.
.........................
NOTE OF AMUSING DIVERSION: a reporter for the Pensacola TV
station, in June, 1988, wanted to create double exposure hoax
photos to prove that the double exposure method would create
photos such as Ed's, with Ed's camera.
  Ed, that nasty, clever, unrepentent hoaxer, allowed the TV
reporter to use his camera to prove it could take double
exposures. ( He also allowed me and others
to use his camera numerous times in ways that could have proven
him to be that liar Black wants Ed to be. If a hoaxer,
  Ed was either supremely stupid or supremely confident.)
  The reporter told me
about his experiment over the phone. I asked him did you make
a model with black paper "windows?" (The "Ed-type" UFO had
dark rectangular or square areas around the outer circumference which
were called "windows" although, according to Ed,. they actually
moved about on the surface and, in any case, were probably
not windows as we think of them.) The reporter said he did in fact
have a model with black "windows." They would photograph the
model against a black screen and then hold the camera up to the
sky and take the second photo with the clear blue sky as the
background. I told him that nailing the fake would be a piece of
cake... or words to that effect....because the sky would "show
through" the windows. I don't think he believed me. But a couple
of days later he called and said... "you're right!" He even put
my prediction of the sky showing through the windows into
the little documentary he made about hoaxing.
.......................
.
  Ed's situation
was poor from the hoaxer's perspective because, even though
the sky was dark (favorable) the main body of the UFO (model)
was also dark (unfavorable), so there would be the possibility
that analysts could detect the background sky "bleeding
through" as I mentioned in the paragraph above. Naturally
this possibility this was checked immediately.
There was no clear evidence that the brightness variations
of the UFO images were a result of background light.
  You can bet that if there had been clear evidence the case
wouldn't have lasted more than a few weeks after I got the
photos to work with and Hyzer
would never even have had the opportunity to devise a much
more sophisticated double exposure hypothesis.

.........................

So, where were we. Oh, yes.

Back to the Hyzer method as applied to Ed.

What Hyzer's method requires is considerable sophistication on
the part of the hoaxer to realize that his first exposure of the
model should be so dim that he couldn't see an image if he
developed the film right away. Not only that but, it should lie
within a partcular range of exposure levels.

Can't you just imagine a guy like Ed taking the first exposure,
pulling out the roll of film, letting it develop, and then
peeling the picture and seeing NO image of the model saying "Ah,
that's just right. "

I ask HOW THE HELL WOULD HE KNOW IF "THAT'S JUST RIGHT IF THERE
IS NO IMAGE? Oh, yes. He would do a series of experiments that
"any rank amateur" (to use Hyzer's phrase in his final report)
would do to establish the range of exposures needed to create
this sort of "simple" double exposure. Then Ed would use the
following steps to create photo 1..

Step 1: photograph the model against a black background There is
a problem here with the bright light at the bottom and the other
at the top of the model. The body of the model must be isolated
from these bright lights so that the body makes NO DEVELOPABLE
EXPOSURE while the bottom and top lights make very developable
exposures.

IN other words, IF the film were developed after this first
exposure only the top and bottom lights would be detectable
images (and bright ones at that).

Step 2: having the latent undevelopable image of the main body
of the UFO (and also bright, developable images of the top and
bottom lights) on the film, Ed goes outside and holds the camera
up. Now he MUST know where in the field of view the UFO image is
so that he can point the camera in the correct direction such
that the left portion of the UFO body image is "on top of" the
image of the right side of the tree. (Hey, if you don't get
this, go look at photo 1. It is posted on some web sites, I'm
sure.)

Holding the camera just right he would take the second exposure.
(A side note: this is a hand held camera,. Ed got a certain
image smear length and direction as the camera shook a little
during the first exposure. He must duplicate the smear direction
and amplitude in the second exposure by shaking the camera in
the same way so that the nearby street light image is smeared
the same way as the UFO light image. (Rotsa Ruck!) )

Step 3: pull out the film and develop. (Actually Hyzer also
recommended developing much longer than the rated 1 minute to
increase contrast of the latent image. Hyzer recommended
developing for 15 minutes. But of course, Ed could have
"stumbled" on the importance of increased development time, too,
right?)

The result is that the image of the body of the UFO, which would
not have been visible had the film been developed BEFORE the
second exposure, is now visible!

What happened? Recall that above... far above (too far above?) I
said that what Hyzer "discovered" or made use of was the fact
that the sum or superposition of a second image onto the
undevelopable first image would make the first image
developable. In this case, according to Hyzer, the brightness of
the sky image superimposed on the main body of the UFO (model)
image was sufficient to make the main body visible.

AND NOW, what you've all been waiting for, here's what makes it
appear that the UFO is beyond the tree... Hyzer's solution to
the "tough double exposure problem" I recognized in January,
1988.

PUNCHLINE:

If Hyzer were right, then the tree brightness was so low that
the exposure level from the tree was still _too_low_ to make the
ufo model image appear. That is, Hyzer assumed that the tree
image brightness did not provide sufficient added exposure to
make developable the portion of the (latent, undevelopable by
itself) model image that was overlying the tree image. Hence
where the UFO model image overlay the tree image there was no
development of the model image and the 'UFO' was effectively
"hidden behind" the tree!

(NOTE: this is the result he demonstrated in his Photomethods
paper in which he "hid" a "bright" UFO behind a black church
steeple. The UFO model was white paper and the church steeple
was black paper silhouetted against a low brightness sky
background. . The brightness of the black church steeple was
essentially zero, so where the UFO image overlay the steeple
image the sum of the two brightnesses was not great enough to
make the UFO image visible. Of course, the UFO image was visible
at the left and right of the steeple image because the
background sky brightness made the image visible.)

This is a "beautiful" method. Very elegant. And also, IMHO,
impossible for Ed to have known about!

Note that it requires the tree brightness to be so low that the
sum of the tree exposure plus model exposure is not great enough
to make the model image developable. If the tree image were too
bright... and we are discussing a small range of allowable
brightness... then the model image would become developable and
begin to "bleed through" the tree image and it would appear that
the UFO was overlapping the tree... clearly a no-no if the
hoaxer wants the UFO to appear to be more than 30 ft away (and
hence large, as opposed to within 30 ft and hence small).

There Are Three "Small" Problems With This Explanation:

1) Ed wouldn't think of this in a million billion years! (How
many of you bright, sophisticated photographers can honestly say
you realized how this was going to work out before I got to the
last paragraph above?)

2) Sainio found a "fly in the ointment." The tree image
brightness is not zero. In fact the image of the tree had a
reflectivity that indicated it was bright enough to make the
hypothetical undevelopable UFO model image developable. That is,
Hyzer's method applied to the creation of photo 1 would have
resulted in the image of the UFO overlapping the tree image.

3) I haven't discussed overall scene brightness, but experiments
I did showed that the overall scene brightness was not in the
range of brightnesses that would create the proper exposure
levels for Hyzer's method to work

I might also add that I attempted to follow Hyzer's prescription
using Polacolor film and made numerous double exposures with a
camera similar to Ed's. In no case was I able to hide a
simulated UFO behind a darker tree image. I guess I must be less
than a "rank amateur."

Hence, IMHO, Hyzer's method was _not_ used to create photo 1.

QED.

Want more details?

See Sainio's Symposium paper mentioned above.

 >Hyzer,
 >and his work with 10-photographs, explained in his preliminary
 >report how ALL of the photos showed signs of double-exposure.

Just because a photo _could_ have been created by a sufficiently
sophisticated double exposure method (e,.g. masked double
exposure), doesn't mean it was.

 >You will have to explain why Hyzer, who you admit has more
 >expertise in photographic analysis [as well as his son James],
 >would make such a statement while you or Sainio have never once
 >mentioned anything at all that would indicate the photos were
 >double-exposed.>

True. We have not once said "the photos were double exposed."
Wonder why that is? Could it be because we couldn't prove they
were double exposed? Just because a photo could have been
created by double exposure doesn't mean it was.

I presume that if Sainio or I had at any time said "the photos
were double exposed" we wouldn't be having this discussion
'right now.

It is not, of course, that we weren't aware of double exposure.
"Double Exposure" is mentioned numerous times in Sainio's paper
as well as in mine. To suggest we were so "naive" as to not know
about double exposure is to demonstrate your own ignorance of
what we have written.

 >And on the stereo photographs, Bruce Maccabee, I don't ignore
 >them. Hyzer was sent copies of the stereo photographs, but
 >because he could not determine the distance between the cameras,
 >he decided that he did not want to do any analysis without
 >having the direct information for himself, to make a credible
 >analysis. He would not take the word of myself, you or anyone
 >else concerning the distances and rely on that.

And this I find incredible. I could have supplied him with
pictures of the SRS camera. Knowing the sizes of the individual
Polaroid Model 600 cameras he could have figured out for himself
what the spacing was. I could have supplied him with all the
data he needed.

When I first learned of his work, in July 1991, I wrote him a
letter.

I sent him copies of two of my papers on the GB sightings (I
also sent him a copy of my analysis of the Japan Airlines
sighting of Nov. 1986 which was investigated by the FAA.) He
never responded. However in his final report done a year later
he did make reference to some of my work, so I know he got it.

Fortunately Robert Nathan (JPL) was not so uncommunicative.

He studied the May 1 photos himself and did not dispute my
calculations. Note: the May 1 photos had a "built in"
calibration -- lights that were at a known distance.

 >Finally, Bruce Maccabee, you have claimed for years that Jeff
 >Sainio's analysis of Photograph #19 shows that there is
 >luminosity coming down the road. In fact, as I have reported to
 >the internet readers, Jeff Sainio told me that he could even see
 >this luminosity on a first-generation copy with the naked eye.

And any interested readers should look up Sainio's MUFON symp
article and see the result of the computer enhancement which he
made.....

 >Now, for the record, I would like you to state what your
 >findings were on Photograph #19 concerning the luminosity coming
 >down the road. Obviously, when Hyzer's final report came out
 >declaring there to be no luminosity coming down the road and
 >that Photograph #19 was a double-exposure, you certainly should
 >have done your own analysis on this photo to determine for
 >yourself whether or not there was any luminosity coming down the
 >road. Certainly, even though Jeff Sainio was your good friend,
 >you would not have relied on his 12- years of experience when
 >you had more experience under your belt. It seems likely that
 >you would have done your own analysis and came up with your own
 >conclusions. Therefore, would you state to the internet reader
 >your analysis of Photograph #19 concerning the luminance on the
 >roadway?

I did not have, nor do I now have, equipment capable of doing
the very sophisticated analysis that Sainio was capable of
doing. Therefore, in spite of your assumption that I "certainly
would have done my own analysis" that fact is that I didn't.
Furthermore, I had plenty else to do with the equipment I did
have, such as the analysis of the lack of a reflection in the
hood.

..........................

All good listfolk who made it this far..... deserve the Noble
Prize for Patience and Diligence (I did not spell Noble incorrectly!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                        Trapper recounts UFO sighting

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 06:01:08 GMT
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:15:08 -0400
Subject: Trapper recounts UFO sighting


Source: Calgary Herald,

http://www.southam.com/calgaryherald/newsnow/cpfs/national/991012/n101264.html

Stig

***

Trapper recounts UFO sighting

WHITEHORSE (CP) - Don Trudeau was hiking his trap line under a
dark sky one December evening when he spotted a row of lights
among the stars in the west. It was between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m.,
and at first he thought it was a large airplane about to crash.

But he quickly realized the object was moving too slowly and
steadily for it to be any type of aircraft. And he said it
didn't make any noise.

Trudeau reached to cover his flashlight, and as he did the
unidentified flying object rushed toward him, stopping just 300
metres away.

"I had to turn my head from one side to the other to view the
whole thing," Trudeau told UFO investigator Martin Jasek. "It
must have been about a mile long. For some reason, I wasn't
frightened. I just stood there and watched it."

There were 21 others who reported similar sightings the night of
Dec. 11, 1996, according to a report released by Jasek last
week.

An engineer by trade, Jasek is a member of the non-profit group
UFO*BC. He researches UFO sightings throughout the territory.

Jasek spoke to all 22 witnesses. Trudeau was the only who was
willing to be identified.

Witnesses said the object was massive, with two rows of massive
yellowish lights.

Trudeau said it hovered silently.

Trudeau said a single beam of white light emanated from the
bottom and swept across the ground in front of him.

It then drifted to his right, as slow as nine to 16 kilometres
an hour, he said. Other beams of light shot out of the craft
horizontally and at a 45-degree angle.

After the UFO drifted behind some trees, Trudeau dashed across a
clearing to get a better view but the object suddenly vanished,
he said.

It all took about four minutes.

Jasek's report, with Trudeau's account, is available at
www.ufobc.org/yukon/22index.htm.

(Whitehorse Star)

� The Canadian Press, 1999

  Copyright � 1998 Calgary Herald New Media






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                The Prophets Conference - Dr. Edgar Mitchell

From: prophets@maui.net
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:28:26 -1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:21:47 -0400
Subject: The Prophets Conference - Dr. Edgar Mitchell

Notes From The Prophets Conference - Dr. Edgar Mitchell on
"Non-Locality"

The Prophets Conference ~ Port Townsend, which took place during
the weekend of August 27-29, 1999, brought together an
extraordinary visiting faculty, including Dr. Edgar Mitchell, a
graduate of MIT with a doctorate in aeronautics and
astronautics, and founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences.
As an astronaut, he flew on Apollo missions 10 and 16, and was
the lunar module pilot for Apollo 14.  He has spent twenty years
studying human consciousness and psychic and paranormal
phenomena in the search for a common ground between science and
spirit.

The following is an excerpt from his remarks made during the
panel entitled The UFO: Anomaly, Reality, Implications.
Joining Dr. Mitchell were panelists Joe Firmage, Dr. Robert
Anton Wilson, Dr. John Mack, Dr. Steven Greer, Marcia Schafer,
and moderator G. Cody Johnson.

Visit:  http://www.greatmystery.org/pt-tapes.html

Seattle Weekly Prophets Conference cover story --
http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/9939/features-downey.shtml
______________________________________________________________

Dr. Edgar Mitchell

I would like to begin by pointing out that the speed of light
does not seem to be a speed limit anymore.  It cannot be if we
are going to go out into the Universe.

The little curious artifact called "non-locality" that came out
of quantum mechanics, and has been kind of iffy, and not very
comfortable for 75 years, has within the last 15 years been
validated.  We've now found another non-local structure called
the quantum hologram that leads us to understanding more about
the way information is processed in nature. Nature is a learning
organism it now appears.

And, these notions of the UFO sightings - perhaps
extraterrestrials, well we're talking about energetic phenomena.
We're talking about informational phenomena.  Those who have
been abducted, or presumably have received information from
alien beings - well it is information.  Those of us who work at
that level look at this as information, and we ask: How is it
propagated?  How do they perceive it?  Where is it coming from?

There's a statement that I have not used in many, many years,
since talking 30 years ago with the late Brendan O'Regan, who
was our research director at the Institute of Noetic Sciences in
the very beginning.   Let me share that with you.  At that time
we were looking at consciousness while other people were looking
at gravitation.  And we were all right on the frontier - we
didn't know what we were talking about.  But Brendan and I
talked about the fact that consciousness and gravitation seemed
to have some of the same aspects.  One of them is that
gravitation holds the universe together, consciousness organizes
it, and they're probably both non-local. And that is exactly
what's starting to come out of this 30 years later.
Non-locality, which accounts for so much at the root of what we
call the numinous experience is just now becoming a buzzword and
will be a serious part of 21st century science.  And with that,
I'm sure that many of the predictions, much of the faith at this
conference table this morning, will start to come into a model
of reality that more and more people can endorse.  And that if
non-locality is that which causes us to realize we are One, and
when we start to think about many of these issues as One, from a
common and consensus point of view, then we will start to
achieve that which we're talking about here at this gathering.
Thank you.

______________________________________________________________

Audio tapes of The Prophets Conference ~ Port Townsend are available.  You
will find ordering information at
http://www.greatmystery.org/pt-tapes.html.  You may also call toll-free
1-888-777-5981 for information.

Thank you for forwarding this information to your friends and member lists.
Questions, unsubscribe, subscribe, inquiries, comments, issues?
Send email to Cody@greatmystery.org
explore... http://www.greatmystery.org








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:04:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:42:46 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:10:01 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

<snip>

 >Perhaps the only thing in the garbage bags used to clean up, is
 >his evidence.  Does anyone have any credible evidence to prove
 >him wrong that we can all see, or is a smoke screen going to be
 >put up around it with excuses as to why we can't see it?  In
 >this field, I would vote on the latter.  You can say alot of
 >things too.  Am I just supposed to _swallow_ this like all these
 >'stupid' UFO people do on a regular basis?

If a person is claiming that a UFO has shot down a RAF fighter
aircraft over a populated area of the North of England (we're
not exactly talking about the Nevada desert here) surely it's up
to _them_ to provide proof that it happened, rather than for
others to prove them wrong. The only person who's asking anyone
to swallow anything here is Burns (and no, I'm not talking about
"certain substances")

It seems that to a lot of people the mere assertion that a UFO
event took place is enough to guarantee its reality (Stanton
Friedman's "research by proclamation" in reverse) and anybody
who tries to challenge such an assertion must automatically be
part of the cover-up, spreading "smoke screens". David Clarke
has produced a fully documented, immensely detailed account of
what happened over Yorkshire and Derbyshire that night, and if
you asked him nicely I'm sure he'd send you a copy.

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:57:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:48:23 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Rory Lushman <Oubliette@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto"<updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:49:39 +0100

 >>From:  Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com
 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:45:45 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Congrats - I can't believe the pomposity of the announcement of
 >>this group, so I'm gald to see someone has treated it in the
 >>way it deserved.

 >>Can I suggest that the best 'new start' British ufology needs
 >>is for the 'investigators' to learn some humility.

 >>That's not a xenophobe foreigner view, but that of a Brit who's
 >>amazed at the certainty of some of the members of this
 >>organisation.

 >>It's a shame that the announcement bears all the signs of the
 >>stereotype Brit (Englishman) - absolute certainty, elitism and
 >>dismissal of any doubt.

 >Elitism, I doubt it. It amazes me how many people do not read
 >properly the original message. UFOIN is not out to replace other
 >groups, it is willing to work with others.

 >What have you got to fear..... nothing.

 >When UFOIN falls flat on its face, then you can shout from the
 >wings, "we told you so" but I think you will have a long wait.
 >UFOIN is made of many different characters with different views
 >and ideas, its not a Borg collective or is that Bjork

 >Rory Lushman.

Dear Rory and list:

Oh heck, oh dear! I didn't mean to slam UFOIN!

I was pretty full of beer, and mainly making fun of myself!

The formation of UFOIN (if I have the acronym right) merely
served as inspiration for one of my well-hopped burp-rants.

I hope all goes well with them, and that they are able to at
least partly achieve their high goals.

As for the RCHEFSS (or whatever I called the Redwood City Highly
Exclusive Flying Saucer Society)... it will have an easier time
meeting its goals, since there is only one member allowed!

RCHEFSS Ufology is not reborn, it just isn't likely to change
very much, any time soon.

Very best wishes to all concerned:

-  Larry Hatch

PS:   As for Redwood City,CA :

A very recent post to this list from Ryan Wood is offering some
more information about recent "Majestic" documents.

I cannot over stress, that I had absolutely nothing to do with
this,  in spite of the Redwood City Post Office Box address that
Wood provided.

-LH







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

               Re: Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:30:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:40:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof


 >From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:51:40 EDT
 >Subject: Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >
 >              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
 >           Phenomena Research Australia
 >                    SIGHTINGS

 >EBK Researchers,

 >Australian Ufology + Imperial College Prof

 >A most interesting event will take place next month in
 >Australia. One of Australia's [if not the worlds] impressive
 >thinkers, Prof Paul Davies will be speaking at the Australian
 >Skeptics, National Conference to be held on the 6 and 7 November
 >1999.

 >Prof Paul Davies has listed his speaker's topic as - "Aliens on
 >our doorstep? Some thoughts about the UFO phenomenon."

 >Although, on many occasions when we have met him, he has
 >displayed an open mind to unusual subjects, and has in the past
 >produced a number of papers on the UFO subject [from a negative
 >point of view]. Prof Paul Davies ideas and opinions are always
 >welcome and we have enjoyed his questions.

 >His position is that of a skeptic, however, he has other
 >positions that are not well known and on a number of occasions
 >the Australian Skeptics have not been too kind to him. Yet it's
 >in their interest to claim him as their own. We believe them?


Hi,

Good to hear this news. I should point out that I first met Paul
Davies over 20 years ago when he lived in the UK and we worked
on opposite sides on a case involving police witnesses for a TV
show. We ended up pretty well agreeing on the answer.

His interest in UFOs - although then in the background due to
the peer pressures placed on such heretical interests here - was
tangible. His approach I would characterise as objective, not
sceptical and to my mind he's one of the most important
scientists who are not specifically identified as a ufologist
but who are willing to empathise with what we are doing. Ufology
should recognise him more than we do.

One of Dr Davies' main reasons for being interested in UFOs, so
he told me all those years ago, was the possibility that ball
lightning has never been fully appreciated by physicists because
they ridicule UFOs when some UFOs are probably the very physical
data they need to resolve the BL riddle. This enlightened
attitude impressed me then and I have used it often with other
scientists to challenge their dismissal of ufology as worthless
to science. As I point out, irrespective of whether there are
any aliens involved, which is still an open question, science is
involved and if you laugh the evidence away you are the loser.
Paul Davies saw that decades ago when many less broad thinking
colleagues still have not grasped this key point.

Peter Hough and I feature as a full chapter an interview which
Dr Davies kindly granted to us before he left for Australia.
This appears in our book 'Looking for the Aliens'. This was
first published in the UK and US about 8 years ago. It became a
mass market edition in the US from Barnes & Noble and Cassell
have just last month issued a new UK mass market paperback
edition to sell to supermarkets. I think this is likely to be
available in the US via Sterling before too long.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:17:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:45:30 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:46:28 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>4: UFOIN will be highly selective in its investigation work -
 >>focusing on in depth re-appraisals of important old cases and
 >>seeking new reports that offer potential to add to our
 >>knowledge. To this end the professional expertise of the team
 >>will be offered to science and education. UFOIN will emphasise
 >>the 90% track record in case solving as professed by serious
 >>ufology and will play down the use of emotive terms such as UFO
 >>and alien, focusing instead on anomalies, scientific puzzles and
 >>using phrases such as IFO and UAP.  It will seek to work with
 >>both open minded scientists and sceptics and handle UFO data
 >>from a rational perspective, steering away from the extreme
 >>views and ideologies expressed by parts of the old style UFO
 >>community.

 >Hi All,

 >Maybe the above should read.

 >4. Now that we have formed this highly professional group of
 >people' we can now look at those cases which have been hard to
 >dis-prove or rule out "Other Worldly Intelligence's" and go over
 >the ground once more but to arrive at the only new conclusion
 >that these cases were nothing more than your mis-identified
 >phenomena which some people forgot to mention at the time.

 >We will no longer describe calls we receive from Joe public' of
 >lights in the sky - or structured craft carrying out mind
 >boggling manoeuvres as UFOs, but we will call them NYEOISTONP's
 ><NotYetExplainedOrIdentifiedSecretTechnologiesOrNatrualPhenomena's

 >As a new group we need to steer people away from thinking that
 >there maybe (god forbid) other life in the universe as to which
 >just some of them may have found a little holiday resort called
 >Earth.

 >When the new team get bored we will have our Scientific Puzzles
 >to keep us going.

 >All those researchers who have been at it for the last ten years
 >should now us the New enforced terms of UFOlogy, in fact we in
 >this highly new group of professionals are putting forward a new
 >term for ufology <Wehavealltheanswersology>

 >If you can comply with such rules and remember not to be too
 >passionate or get to emotive about
 >NotYetExplainedOrIdentifiedSecretTechnologiesOrNatrualPhenomena's
 >then we need you.

 >We will also have our own councilling section, for those
 >investigators who just happen to have seen anything strange in
 >our skies. We can help remove  and solve the mystery of which
 >you have observed.

 >Yours,

 >An old and passionate, highly emotive, quite sensible, and
 >rational, never wrote a book, non PhD, sick to death of
 >bureaucracy, quangos, look at me's, and wannabes, but happy with
 >his new 6 pack!



Hi,

Yes, all very funny, but also very tiresome. I dont think I will
bore list members yet again trying to justify in detail what
UFOIN is all about. Results matter more than words as proof. But
the above is a ludicrous parody that is not what is going on at
all. It reflects maybe the ultra sceptical attitude of some
members of the UFOIN team but by no means all.

I have stated on this list several times that my views are not
anti ETH. Several other UFOIN team members have views other than
all things are solvable. Evidently, though, Roy either chooses
not to believe this or just regards it as a joke. Fine. Thats up
to him.

But I suggest the rest of you actually read what the UFOIN
statement says. We will work to solve cases where that is
possible and not be afraid to say so. But whenever a case cannot
be solved or offers evidence for a genuine mystery we will say
that just as loudly. How this equates to the amusing joke above
I dont see.

I drafted the UFOIN statement and I know its what we will be
doing. Are you saying that you dont believe me on this? If not,
how can you argue as above when it is blatantly in contradiction
to the stated plans of the team?   The beauty of UFOIN will be
that it has sceptics, scientists, ultra rational ufologists and
ETH supporters in its number. That blend will bring dynamism to
the debate, I trust.

But if you believe UFOIN's aim is to destroy any evidence for
unexplained phenomena then I can only assume you are unfamiliar
with my own writings because thats not how I work and I could
not work alongside any group that hid unsolved cases under the
mat because they might argue in favour of some exotic answer to
the UFO mystery. Truth is truth - whether it is the news that a
promising case can be resolved or that another case appears to
be exciting evidence for a real UFO phenomenon.

You mistake objectivity for debunking. We will try not to make
the same mistake.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:24:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:48:56 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From:  Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 19:45:45 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 09:04:31 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 17:05:28 +0100

 >>>UFOIN -  A new start for British ufology

 >>>Some of the UKs most experienced investigators today
 >>>launched a bold initiative.

 >>>They have banded together under a common name - UFOIN (UFO
 >>>Investigators Network) in an attempt to professionalise ufology
 >>>in Britain.

 >><snip>

 >Congrats - I can't believe the pomposity of the announcement of
 >this group, so I'm gald to see someone has treated it in the way
 >it deserved.

 >Can I suggest that the best 'new start' British ufology needs is
 >for the 'investigators' to learn some humility.

 >That's not a xenophobe foreigner view, but that of a Brit who's
 >amazed at the certainty of some of the members of this
 >organisation.

 >It's a shame that the announcement bears all the signs of the
 >stereotype Brit (Englishman) - absolute certainty, elitism and
 >dismissal of any doubt.

 >Martin Phillips

Hi,

Martin. Look rather than make such a snidey comment, why don't
you actually tell us what you consider elitist about a group
that is literally open to anyone to join (which rather
contradicts elitism), or that displays certainty and dismissal
of doubt (when I sure as heck dont know what UFOs are and I'm
part of UFOIN), or is lacking in humility, since none of us are
promising to change the world simply to do as good a job as we
can of R & I and publish it freely for everyone to do as they
will with our findings. What we are doing is bonding as a team
not claiming to be better than anybody else. What makes you
think that we are suggesting that?

Please point out where we have said that we have all the answers
because I don't see it in the statement and I know I certainly
dont have them. Thats why we are still looking!

This is a serious request for a detailed reply. Please explain
your feelings as we are trying to do this UFOIN project right
and your opinion does matter.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:45:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:50:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:43:23 +0800

 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
 >>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
 >>and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
 >>neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
 >>taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
 >>sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
 >>too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
 >>the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
 >>the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
 >>photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
 >>doors - or so she thought.

 >I have yet to view these photos and I will do shortly, but
 >doesn't this seem just a little tooooo convenient?

Are you saying, Sharon, that the glare on the glass door was
intended?

Actually, it was an accident.  I think I too would be afraid to
open a glass door if some red-eyed being stood on the other
side, wouldn't you?

But read the story because the second image that showed up was
even better than the first image.  The second image was also
discovered by accident two years after the encounters - my kids
and I were the ones who discovered it. No one said, "Keep
looking because you might find another critter in the photos."
The witnesses involved had pretty much gone on with their lives
and forgotten the events.  No one sought recognition - that's
why all names are pseudonyms.  You'd think that if it were a
hoax, the individuals involved would want some kind of attention
brought to themselves.  Not in this case.

Sharon, I investigated this case and I am a healthy skeptic.  In
fact, there are even those who call me a debunker because I am
so hard to convince.  It wasn't just the witnesses and their
story, it wasn't just the photos that convinced me but all the
information put together.  You can't take one without the other.

You can't always manage the events that occur during a close
encounter so that the evidence stacks up the way critics and
skeptics demand to their satisfaction.  These things can happen
so fast that few people even have the sense to grab a camera.
The neighbor that joined the others on the third night knew to
take a camera because she had had experiences all her life and
knew some of the traces that can be found after such encounters.
Her story alone is incredible.  The beings probably came
searching for her but she was out of town and something
attracted them to "Cathy's" house (what was it that attracted
them? you'd be surprised <grin>).

Ya know, if people would just allow some things to be possible
without believing, and ask questions, explore, they would learn
so much more.  I have learned so much from this investigation
and just wanted to share it with others.  I didn't even tell
very many people it was posted on my web site because I hate the
way abduction stories are sensationalized. Recently I began
offering it to various magazines and others because I decided
maybe it would mean something to someone and I need to make it
more available as I have moved on to other projects.  I will not
forget those who have had enough of an open mind (and manners)
to at least express an interest.  Those who have told me it
didn't happen or the photos look fake or cannot be published
because they'd rather print stories about Bigfoot will also stay
in my memory and amuse me through all my endeavors.

Give people fuzzy photos of alleged UFOs and they gather in awe.
Give 'em photos of alleged aliens and they turn away in
disbelief.   UFOs can exist but not aliens.  Bigfoot can exist
but not aliens.  Go figure.

I've learned a lot about the status of the consensual reality
and the limits of our beliefs.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                             Links For Web-Site

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:52:16 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:53:08 -0400
Subject: Links For Web-Site


Hi All,

I am constantly updating the Links on my web site, it also seems
that my site is getting some interest, if you would like to put
your link on my site please forward me your details, and I will
post them on at the weekend.

If you wish to advertise on the site please e-mail me for details.

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:52:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:55:39 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


A&R wrote:

 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:29 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Y'all,

 >>As Jon said in a recent email he still hasn't come up with the
 >>name/number of the aircraft which went missing or the
 >>name/number of the crew. This was always the crux point of his
 >>argument which seemd to get buried beneath his freelance
 >>chemical courier activities.


Hi All,

Yes the "Crux" of the Sheffield Case has seen to be focused on
the name of the pilot. So let us clear the case once and for
all.

A little request for those researchers who don't believe that
there was some kind of Incident on the night in Question March
27th 1997' would you be able to produce all of the names of the
Nato Pilots who took part in this flight?

This way other researchers could then check to see if those Nato
Pilots named by those researchers are in fact still walking
about today?

Surely these researchers must know all of the names of the Nato
Pilots who flew on that mission on the night as they are adamant
that they all arrived back safely' for this reasoning at least
one of those researchers must have a list of the Nato Pilots
names / numbers who returned to the base intact?

If they haven't' would they care to enlighten everyone as to how
they know that no Nato Pilot was lost?

Hopefully the researchers denying that any incident had occurred
and that no pilot was lost,  can then safely assure us all by
printing the full names / numbers of all those pilots concerned,
from which everyone could check, and if proved right' then this
will be a closed case once and for all.

Regards,


Roy..                      Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                 Re: Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:19:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:57:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum


SA wrote:

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:42:14 -0400
 >>From: Sue Addison <NevadaFighter@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Steven Greer On Compuserve's UFO Forum
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Dr. Steven Greer of CSETI will be appearing as a conference
 >>guest on Compuserve's UFO Forum on Wednesday 13th October 1999
 >>at 8pm EDT (midnight BST).

Hi All & Sue,

I was flicking through my old bookmarks and tried your Research
Group Hertfordshire UFO Research web-site:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/nevadafighter/homepage.htm

I was unable to connect to the page, as it came back with unable
to connect to server?  Is your web-site still running?

Thanks,

Roy..


http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:46:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:05:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300

 >*On June 10, 1990, the Pensacola News Journal ran a story
 >announcing that a UFO model had been found in the attic of Ed
 >Walters' former residence.

 >One week later, the newspaper announced that a Gulf Breeze
 >teenager, later identified as Tommy Smith, had helped Walters
 >hoax the UFO photos.

 >On June 19, Charles Flannigan, MUFON State Director for Florida,
 >announced MUFON was reopening the Walters' case to investigate
 >these new allegations. He assigned then State Section Directors,
 >Rex and Carol Salisberry, to assist him in this investigation.
 >When the Salisberrys failed to deliver a complete report on the
 >allegations (as outlined by MUFON's Deputy Director of
 >Investigations, Dan Wright), the MUFON Chief Investigator for
 >Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Gary Watson, was assigned to
 >the task. Watson completed his investigation and submitted his
 >report on May 23, 1991; his report was 29 pages long with 27
 >attachments.

 >The following paragraphs summarize the central facts brought out
 >in Watson's investigation. -Bruce Maccabee, Physicist,
 >photoanalyst and a MUFON state director accepted professsional
 >fees for his work on the photos from Ed Walters' publisher. >

 >(from Robert Collins )

 >more info:
 >http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/ed.html

This is all old recycled stuff. The responses to these arguments
have been available for years. Old wine in a new (Turkish)
bottle.

No one ever proved that the Gulf Breeze sightings were a
"giant fraud." Mr. Black's arguments have been responded to
(and are being responded to).

1. Oechsler did "accept $5000" to cover the costs of a photo lab
and materials and labor for making numerous copies of the
original photos, said copies being both prints and slides. Each
photo was copied at two or more exposure levels for research
purposes. Each photo was cleaned carefully before being copied
and special care was taken to eliminate glare or reflections
when the originals were brightly illuminates ("light blasted" )
to show the details in the very low brightness areas. This
copying operation took several weeks and produced well over a
hundred slides and prints. It was an expensive operation.

2. I accepted a payment for writing the last chapter in the
book, Gulf Breeze Sightings.

3. William Hyzer claims the "road shot:" is a hoax. However, his
argument regarding the lack of a reflection in the hood of the
truck has been refuted. The hood was bent in an accident. The
bending changed the reflection. poperties.

4. The videotape Ed took on Dec. 28, 1987 has not yet been
explained.

5. There is no doubt that he said he wasn't abducted on the
Oprah show even though the the last chapter that he wrote in the
book has in its title the claim that he was abducted.

At the time Ed thought his story was already a subject of
ridicule and he didn't want further ridicule that would occur if
he discussed the information which indicated an abduction. (This
ultimately was published in his 1994 book, Abductions In Gulf
Breeze, Avon Pub. company)

6. The model in Ed's old house was found under circumstances
which indicate that it was placed there by someone who wanted
the model to be found. Certainly if Ed had placed it where it
was found he wouldn't want anyone else to find it. In fact, if
Ed had made it and wanted no one to fin it, why wouldn't he just
destroy it?

7. Ed arranged for a single polygraph test with Harvey
McLaughlin, who told me he had done thousands of such tests for
companies that had hired him. When Ed passed the test McLaughlin
didn't believe the result. Therefore when Ed returned for the
results of the test McLaughlin said that there were a few things
he wanted to check and he connected up the polygraph a second
time. In between the tests he had checked up on Ed's UFO
sightings and asked some different questions. Ed was not
expecting a second test, so it was a complete surprise. Ed
passed the second test as well.... no indications of deceit, so
McLaughlin wrote in his report that , in his opinion, Ed was
being truthful.

McLaughlin told me that Ed was not a sociopath or "con man" type
of person who would be likely to tel lies. Dr. Dan Overlade,
clinical psychologist who gave Ed a collection of personality
and psychological tests, told me the same thing. Neither of
these men foun evidence that Ed had lied.

8. Tommy Smith's claim of having seen Ed fake photographs was
shown to be completely at odds with th evidence. Smith said that
Ed told him how he faked some of the pictures.

Smith's descriptions of these faking techniques were temselves
fakes. Smith's description of how a model was photographed has
been found to be incorrect. The "Smith Method" of mounting a
model on a pipe and shining a flashlight up through it to light
the inside has been tested in numerous ways and found to fail.

It just would not create UFO images such as are in Ed's photos.
According to Mr. Smith, a circular area of dead grass found in
the high school athletic field behind Ed's (old) house was
created by Ed in te following way: Ed turned a trampoline upside
down and jumped up and down on it. This is, of course,
ridiculous. One would have to leave said trampoline on the grass
for days to kill it. During that time someone at the school
certainly would have noticed it. Furthermore, the grass stayed
dead for months and it took years for the grass to return to
normal.

(A test was made by a government scientist to determine
whether or not there were chemicals in the ground tat could
have killed the grass. None were found.)

9. It is true that Believer Bill and Jane have never been
"turned themselves in."

There were also a few less distinct photos. However, there were
many witnesses in the area (117 sightings, 93 not involving Ed,
between Nov. 11, 1987, and July 10, 1988.)


It is amusing to note that in this web page presentation one of
the UFO photos is #11 showing the blue beam. This photo could
not have been taken by the double exposure method claimed by
Hyzer and others. The reason why it couldn't is explained in
UFOs Are Real, Here'S The Proof (by Ed Walters and Bruce
Maccabee, Avon, 1997).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                                Re: Get Real

From: Marc BelL <MARC@wufog.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:08:11 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:11:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:17:08 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:46 -0500 (CDT)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >>>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >>>claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
 >>>of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
 >>>be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
 >>>hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
 >>>technology'.

 >>>Unless the aliens are only interested in the people who wouldn't
 >>>have even thought to do that.

 >>Well I suppose Dave considers his remark pretty clever, but I'll
 >>bet he's never done any real checking about whether precisely
 >>what he suggests has been attempted.  It has, and it has failed.

 >>Last year or so I had an email exchange with Katharina Wilson,
 >>an abductee who has tried, with the help of local UFO
 >>investigators, to do exactly what Dave suggests above.  On
 >>nights she would undergo an abduction, the video camera put in
 >>her bedroom mysteriously recorded nothing but static.

 >I don't consider myself being pretty clever at all, I was
 >honestly asking a question.

 >Was the video showing time and date and did it record her
 >sleeping until a certain time (for argument lets say  3 AM) then
 >record static from there on in?

 >If it recorded as you say nothing but static I would have the
 >camera checked, no aliens involved there.

Hi Dave,

Havn't you ever thought these 'aliens' (entities or whatever?)
are:-

Advanced enough to understand all our technology, behaviour
patterns etc

Therefore making a video look like just static shouldn't be
beyond them, should it?

Perhaps we should be asking a) why 'they' do this b) how can we
proof that would convince everyone?

 >>There is also a case, reported in one of Ray Fowler's books,
 >>where an abductee woke long enough one night to see an alien in
 >>his hallway examining his motion detector.  The alien mentally
 >>suggested he return to sleep, and he did.  Apparently the
 >>detector never went off.  Sorry I can't cite chapter and verse
 >>on this one; I've read too many of Fowler's books by now.

 >>Is that a sufficient answer for you Dave?

 >Well the second one could have been a dream. Let's face it,
 >we've all had some weird dreams at one time or another.

 >If the person in this case was hyped up enough about aliens to
 >install a motion detector then surely aliens were foremost in
 >their mind when they went to sleep.

 >And as you said the motion detector did not go off.

 >You have to understand these detectors are not tuned to react to
 >figments of the imagination, or dreams.

A couple of points here Dave....

A dream doesn't rip your bed clothes off & dump you in the
corner of the room 2 or so hours later covered in brusies etc!
Esp: with with the house alarm still on.....

Point 2, you have filmed the 'entity' in the studio here, but it
has never tripped the motion detectors in the alarm system.

 >>Guess those aliens
 >>aren't too intimidated by our "advanced" technology.  After all,
 >>any civilization like ours which has had the light bulb for all
 >>of 100 years (wow!), isn't going to present much of a defense
 >>against putative others may have invented it thousands if not
 >>millions of years ago. One can only hope their ethics are as far
 >>beyond ours as well ...

 >And yet they still can't help but leave marks on your body,
 >strange huh?

 >Dave.

Well maybe they'll pay you a visit at 3am eh Dave?

All the best,

Marc









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:34:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:17:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:29:26 -0400
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 18:51:22 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>That said, everyone seems
 >>to have forgotten the following. Up until the time Ed Walters
 >>was sent the Nimslo 3-D camera, all of his pictures had been of
 >>the original object shaped something like a tea pot or a very
 >>squat saucer.

 >Hi, Dennis!

 >Unfortunately, your recollections are not correct. Prior to this
 >event, at least two and possibly three types of UFO had been
 >photographed. Please consult "The Gulf Breeze Sightings" ISBN
 >0-688-0987-7 for an accurate chronology with photos.

 >>ALL of the Nimslo pictures (on a sealed roll of film) portrayed
 >>a very different "object" entirely, one which Ed originally
 >>estimated as being 200 feet in length or longer. After analysis
 >>revealed the photographed object to be about 4 and 1/2 feet
 >>long, it was explained that Ed didn't have his glasses on, was
 >>looking through the viewfinder and overestimated its size,
 >>whatever, I don't care. Then it was "explained" that Ed's wife,
 >>who didn't have her eyes glued to the camera's viewfinder, also
 >>though the object was only a few feet long, and thus Ed's
 >>mis-estimate was simply glossed over and shoved under the rug.

Different camera, different object. Point still applies. If it
doesn't arouse your suspicion, so be it.

 >This is commented on at some length in the book, so I am not
 >sure I understand "glossed over" in this context. Obviously, the
 >reason for using the Nimslo camera was to obtain an image from
 >which acutal size could be calculated without being subject to
 >the errors of distance perception. In this it would seem the
 >Nimslo camera was a success.

I know. I was involved with the people who prepared it and sent
it to Ed. What was glossed over was how wrong Ed was in his
original assessment of the object's size. 200 feet down to 4 1/2
is a pretty good percentage by anyone's count. You can gloss
over something at great length, or short length, or by ignoring
it altogether. There are all sorts of ways to gloss over
something, in other words.

The point here, in case you didn't get it, is that a 4 and 1/2
foot-long model is well within human ability. So is attaching
same to a boat. For that matter, how do we know it _was_ over
water, scientifically speaking, of course. By oral testimony?

 >>Curiously, Ed never photographed the Nimslo "UFO" again, to the
 >>best of my knowledge.

 >This is not correct. Indeed, the point I was making, which you
 >seem to have missed, is that the "Nimslo" object not only was
 >photographed again, but it was photographed in the same stereo
 >frame with one of the original form objects (38L / 38R). Because
 >the photo was in stereo, the size of the Nimslo object and the
 >original object could be calculated and compared. In addition,
 >the distance of the two objects could be determined. Please see
 >p 300-302 in TGBS for the basic facts and calculations.

 >When this calculation was completed, the size of the "Nimslo"
 >object was comparable to its size in the original Nimslo photo,
 >and the original form object was comparable to its size in other
 >occlusion, stereo, etc. photos. In addition, because the photo
 >was taken pointing toward the water, and the objects were
 >calculated to be over one hundred feet away out over the water.

Good God, man, ain't ye never heard of _boats_? They float on
water.

 >The difficulty of hoaxing this, mathematically and physically,
 >are very high. As such, this combination of the Nimslo photo and
 >the stereo photo showing the original form object and the
 >"Nimslo" object is strong evidence _for_ the reality of the GB
 >photos - and, to the best of my knowledge, has not been
 >addressed or explained by skeptics, including yourself, Mr.
 >Black, or Mr. Hyzer. Until that occurs, and the proofs offered
 >of falsity are compelling, I must remain uncommitted in  regard
 >to the validity of these photos.

Or for the existence of two models. No one has ever denied that
the Gulf Breeze photos are real -- it's their contents at issue.
The Cottingley Fairy pictures exist, too.

 >>It appears only on the roll of 35mm film
 >>over which Walters had no control whatsoever. Once that roll of
 >>film was returned for development, however, Ed went back to his
 >>trusty Polaroid (which even Maccabee admits was capable of
 >>double exposures, unlike subsequent Polaroid models) and --
 >>surprise! -- produced another series of pictures of his
 >>pre-Nimslo UFO, including, if memory serves, the famous road
 >>shot...

 >This is incorrect. The road shot was taken before the Nimslo
 >photo.

Good! In other words, taken with the Polaroid capable of
producing double-exposures.

 >On 2/26/88, the Nimslo photo was taken. On 3/7/88, Walters
 >purchased a new Sun 600 Polaroid. The stereo photos were taken
 >with Walters' Sun 600 and another borrowed from Duane Cook.

 >Dennis, these are basic facts about a case you are disputing. It
 >would allow more faith in your judgement if you were to actually
 >demonstrate you know these facts in your attempts at refutation,
 >since that is what a scientific approach requires.

I could go back and get my all ducks in a row, if I had the time
or inclination. By way of investigating this case
scientifically, you could also do the following. Go back and
read Irwin Weider's article in the Journal of Scientific
Exploration to see how he solved the famous Willamette Pass,
Oregon, photo case. (Pretty convincingly to my satisfaction, at
least, if not yours.) The "witness" in this case was a
biochemist and distinguished former WWII naval officer, if
memory serves.

Now, how would you take the same approach to the GB photos?
You'd duplicate the same equipment and play around a lot to see
if you couldn't produce the same results. If you could, it
wouldn't necessarily "scientifically" disprove the GB photos,
but it would sure as hell cast a pall of doubt over them.

When all is said and done, science works in many ways, not just
one.

Hyzer's science confirms what I see when I look at Ed's original
Polaroid series -- evidence of double-exposure, especially by
the washed-out color contrast of the UFO itself. Someone else
comes along and uses their science to explain the obvious
complaint. Well, we don't know how UFO's illuminate themselves,
to what blueprints they're built, and so on.

This isn't science. It's simple circular reasoning. Using alien
psychology to confirm the existence of that which hasn't yet
been confirmed _without_ reference to alien psychology, motives,
intentions and so on. Putting the cart before the proverbial
horse, in other words.

You express your own doubts about multiple photograph cases, but
Gulf Breeze goes far beyond that. It is uniquely unique among
UFO cases. Everytime Ed was handed a challenge (or a new camera
set up) he came through with supposedly shining colors. This
came to be taken as proof of the phenomenon rather than, say,
Ed's own ingenuity. ("I know Ed and he's no sociopath," to
paraphrase Maccabee, as if one had to be sociopathological to
indulge a harmless prank. But perhaps Maccabee believes that all
crop circle makers are sociopaths for all I know.)

The problem with GB was not that it had too many investigators,
but too many apologists. If Ed screwed up, the "investigators"
helped get him out of one jam after another. No reflection on
his hood of the "road shot" ufo? Dent in the hood, cinder blocks
in back. Mis-estimated the length of a four-foot-long ufo to one
200 feet long? Didn't have his glasses on. And so on.

All of which could conceivably be true, admittedly. But all of
which also resonates with an endless series of special
pleadings. Or professional UFO science, if you prefer.

 >This must be science by proclamation, because it isn't supported
 >by evidence.

 >And I'd like to address that point in more detail.

 >I don't like the GB photos. I have some real problems accepting
 >a long duration multiple photographic case. But science doesn't
 >allow me to engage my dislike - I must instead confront the
 >evidence. Not the weakest evidence, not the evidence I invent
 >because I can't remember the facts of the case, but the
 >strongest evidence.

See above. I was going to address all your paragraphs in
sequence but I got lazy.

 >I am also forced to ignore any presumptions I may have about the
 >aesthetics of a particular UFO. There's a simple reason for
 >this: I don't know what a UFO _should_ look like. I can compare
 >the GB photos with sketches of UFOs, and though I cannot find a
 >"hokiness" continuum to range them on, and I can say with some
 >confidence that the GB UFOs are not unusual in that context.

 >For all I know, the design of UFOs observed, sketched, and
 >photographed represents an aesthetic preference or an
 >engineering demand. For all I know, each UFO is uniquely
 >manufactured for the preferences of its occupants. In other
 >words, neither I nor you are privileged to know anything about
 >the "hokiness" of a UFO appearance as a guide to its status in
 >reality.

No, but something like old-fashioned common sense ought to seep
into the picture at some point, even if it does originate from a
skeptical base. Ufologists don't like to hear it, because Carl
Sagan (that damn traitor!) turned it into a personal mantra, but
extraordinary claims really do require at least more than
ordinary evidence.

 >Oddly enough, many UFO photos are of rather featureless objects,
 >and when this is the case, the complaint is that they could be
 >of anything. When a UFO with structural details is shown, the
 >complaint is that it looks "hokey". It is difficult to see how
 >these viewpoints represent a criterion which can actually be
 >satisfied.

It's not necessarily the details of the GB UFO that are in
question, but how out of place the whole looks in the pictures
in which it appears. There's a vast difference between the two.
I'm not objecting to the overall shape or window arrangement,
but to how they ultimately play out in the picture. Are you
saying that the crew ordered up a hokey-looking ufo so that if
they got photographed everyone would just say, oh, that looks
hokey? Well, that's a pretty scientific approach, isn't it?

 >Science does not allow us to only confront certain data which
 >happens to be to our liking. We need to confront data on the
 >terms of science - which is to say, qualitatively,
 >quantitatively, in the laboratory, in the field, and we need to
 >reject a priori notions of what the data looks like so that we
 >can listen to the data itself. If something is not supported, it
 >can be safely rejected, but until then, we must sometimes live
 >in a painful state of ambiguity.

 >------
 >Mark Cashman

I feel your pain.

Dennis Stacy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                         Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:28:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:26:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:32:12 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

 > John
 >Carpenter's recent remake of "The Thing," starring someone who's
 >not a Baldwin brother (Kurt Russell), was an excruciating joke.

 >Dennis Stacy

Dennis, I disagree, I think the remake was better.
--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:29:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:25:19 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:25:46 +0100

Hi Jenny

 >Hi,

I have been determined not to get embroiled over this "new" approach
to British Ufology but some things beg for me to say something.

 >Well, I obviously cannot speak for anyone else in UFOIN. Its a
 >one person, one vote, everybody has an equal say affair.

I hope it remains so for all the very best reasons.

 >Some of
 >them are on this list so egg them to answer that question
 >directly rather than just hear my view.

Some are more _outspoken_ compared to you as well Jenny.

 >All I can say is what I will personally stand up for and
 >support. Anyone, regardless of their theories about UFO origin,
 >etc, will be welcomed by me into UFOIN on the basis that they
 >can do first class, objective field investigations seeking
 >answers, finding them where possible and if not merely
 >documenting the evidence so that we can theorise from that data.

I do not see one person's name on your published list who is not
a skeptic or disbeliever in aliens Jenny so how do you plan to
prove this statement?

 >I don't see UFOIN as promoting any theories or any standpoint on
 >UFOs. We are here to do R & I and to document good evidence in
 >as scientific a manner as possible. That's a remit I think is
 >sufficient in by itself in so far as UFOIN is concerned.
 >Speculation beyond that is not unimportant, but I don't see it as
 >UFOIN's job.

OK

 >My views on UFOs are different in many ways from Andy Roberts or
 >Dave Clarke,

Jenny I have seen your opinion _change_ a few times in your
career in Ufology. Not that this is a bad thing or shows
unwillingness to learn, but it does indicate that your
_position_ is not _hardened_ into a core belief.

I would also like to mention, and please correct me if I
misquote you Andy. When I was at Tim Matthews conference in the
early part of this year Andy Roberts said to me, "I believe
_ALL_ UFO's can be explained with sufficient research" Now if
that isn't someone who has already made up his mind what is?

 >for instance. Although we share quite a few ideas I
 >suspect they are far more sceptical than I - and whilst I do
 >have a suspicion that another intelligence may be involved in
 >some close encounters, I think they'd both offer a firm no to
 >that. What we all do share is - I hope - an objective approach
 >to UFOs and no vested interest in any theory. I assume that,
 >just as I am willing to be persuaded that any case can be solved
 >and that no UFOs as a consequence have exotic solutions, I trust
 >they would be persuaded by good evidence to the contrary. That's
 >what being objective means - you follow where the evidence trail
 >leads , whether it supports or denies your own ideas.

What about if the answer does not become available? This _game_
that is ufology has yielded no answers in fifty years. With a
crew of hardened skeptics do you expect to solve the riddle?

 >I am up for that and am happy with any UFOIN member who feels
 >the same way even if our personal views on the subject right now
 >are poles apart.

As I stated when I wrote "101 Possible explanations for UFOs"
for all the explanations supplied and others, there are _still_
some cases that there are no answers for. Which would leave us
with two options, ET or the paranormal. It would seem that some
people just cannot accept these options. So with a line up of
skeptics, do you think that a Pro-ETH person is likely to
volunteer his/her time to assist in debunking?


Jenny I honestly do wish you the very best with your new
organisation but I feel that with the line up of people already
involved, the outcome of many investigations will be
directed/steered/cajoled into one debunked set of answers.

The only thing that could change this for me was if you was able
to get an equal number of Pro-ETH people and an equal number of
middle of the road people to join this new organisation, and as
I said with your current line up, do you think that will happen?

--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 01:59:22 +0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:38:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


I don't want to go into lengthly details about the arguments
presented in their article but here are a few of the significant
points they made: Bob Oechsler accepted a 5000 dollar fee from
Ed Walters for Lab expenses. Bruce Maccabee, Physicist,
photoanalyst and a MUFON state director accepted professsional
fees for his work on the photos from Ed Walters' publisher.

William Hyzer a distinguished photoanalyst and free of charge
analyzed the Walters' photos with his son Dr.James B. Hyzer:
These analysts with a combined experience of over 60 years
concluded that Walters' "road shot" (photo 19 in the batch) is a
double exposure.

The videotape: To test wheather the UFO video tape Ed Walters
had taken was a hoax Bruce Maccabee had Ed Walters and Frances
(wife) among his lab assistances. Not exactly the "scientific"
sort of thing to do. So, by using Walters in this and other
controlled experiments, he Walters, was allowed to influence the
outcome.

Ed Walters was showed to have lied about his own reported abduction
experiences: On the Oprah Winfrey show he lied to Phil Klass saying he never
had any abductions but in his book pages 256, 263 and 264 he talks in detail
about those supposed "abduction" events.

Robert Menzer who bought the Walters' house discovered a
styrofoam plate model of a UFO striking similar to the ones in
the Walters' photos: This was only found after Menzer moved
insulation out of the way: For something that some claim was
planted it certainly was well hidden. And the model was very
similiar but but not identical to the Walters' UFO photos: Now,
if one were going to "plant" a model etc wouldn't one make it
identical to the Walters' UFO photos to make the "frame-up"
stick ?

MUFON's Charles Flannigan setup a polygraph test for Walters
with Hugh Jones, a fully accredited and licensed polygrapher.
Walters failed to show for the appointment, opting instead to
arrange two sessions with a Harvey McLaughlin. McLaughin was
apparently not a member of any polygraph association which
adhere to standards of practice, principle, and ethical conduct
of polygraph examinations. Walters has denied investigators
access to his polygraph printouts.

A boy at the time Tommy Smith claimed to have helped Walters
fake some photos and had inside knowledge on how others were
hoaxed.

The famous believers "Bill" and "Jane" have never surfaced so in
essence there are no other photos or witnesses to back-up Ed
Walters' claims.....


http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/ed.html









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:35:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:32:41 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:22:15 +0100


 >>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:10:01 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >Anyway. Now those event's have been the subject of massive
 >investigation - and a lot of it happened very very quickly
 >afterwards as well. Quest sent a team over there, the BBC did an
 >(pretty mediocre but sceptical) episode of one of it's
 >paranormal type shows on the events (and didn't mention anything
 >about triangles), there was tons in the Uk forums and in the
 >magazines at the time that were still quite boyant, but I saw
 >not one item about the shooting down of an RAF plane.

That's because no one in the real world would ever have given
such an absurd claim the time of day without some pretty good
evidence to back it up.

All we have ever got - and are still getting from behind prison
bars - are promises of new and conclusive evidence which never
arives Remember the guy out walking who happened to bump into
some Tornado pilot (as you do) who said a plane had been lost
that night.

Remember the patience we were all sposed to have as Max was
going to come up with the name of this mysteriously dead but
unmissed pilot?

Well we're still waiting more than two years later but people
are still hawking this rubbish around.

I well remember one of the researchers from BBC Mysteries
cracking up in hysterical laughter when I explained Max's theory
to her. But I still asked her to give him a chance to air it
live on TV, so the whole country could share the joke..

She didn't bother in the end, which was a shame.

But in the wacky world of ufology any kind of ludicrous story
can be floated on the grapevine nowadays and there will always
be some gullible soul out there waiting to swallow it whole, and
set up some new cult or other to promote it ad infinitum.

That's how myths are created - and I would have thought enough
had been deflated by now for people to realise this. Those new
to the subject know little if anything about the history of
ufology, hence the continual credulity which prevails.

Oh hum.

 >Now, I can't produce everything written from March '97 until the
 >first thing by Max saying a plane was shot down in ufological
 >circles - but if it someone made those claims before Max and
 >made them publically I haven't seen them in print nor any
 >reporting of a lecture with those claims. If someone has it'll
 >be a darn sight easier to produce the one article or piece of
 >news than for me to produce everything written in that time on
 >this list! If it exists, then I'm wrong, it's that simple..

Well I can help you out there old chap, because I was present
from the word go with my notepad and pen ready as helicopters
whirred over my head and police dragged their tired and cold
carcasses off that God-forsaken moorland.

No one mentioned UFOs at all until Max showed up on the scene -
as the witness Sharon Aldridge later testified. Yes there was
talk of Ghost-Planes (see my article in current issue of The
Unopened Files), and this was even taken seriously by the police
themselves.

The UFO connection with the Howden Moors case is entirely the
product of Max Burns imagination and I give him all due credit
for creating a modern-day myth.

I distinctly remember discussing the case with the Maxwell Burns
Cult [as surely it now is] at the 1997 BUFORA Conference, about
five months after the incident had occured. Then the Maxwell
Burns Cult was hawking the story round that a UFO had crashed on
the moor and had been retrieved by one of those blue-beret type
retrieval things.

During the discussion (Andy Roberts was witness to this) it
became obvious that Max was not familiar with the area he was
talking about, did not recognise some of the well-known areas of
the Peak District moors we fielded to him, and was quite plainly
"making it all up as he went along."

Obviously imagination was working overtime henceforward as the
case underwent a mysterious metamorphosis from this point and lo
and behold the Tornado jet shot down by Flying Triangle appeared
- no doubt after a lengthy and vivid brainstorming session with
the assistance of whatever subtances Max was ingesting at the
time.

Anyway Jonathon, I digress, as the question you were asking
concerned when was the first appearance of the RAF jet nonsense
in the media or in public.

The answer is (and I claim first prize here) or was the Summer
1997 issue of now defunct Alien Encounters magazine, where after
a mish-mash of misreporting and selective use of facts, Max
puzzled about the sonic booms recorded near Sheffield and asked
that immortal question:

"Could this have been the UFO making a crash landing, or a
Tornado crashing after being attacked by a UFO?" So that was the
monstrous birth which started the Max Burns Cult, which has
taken a life of its own ever since.

Those of us who have watched events unfold, including Martin
Jeffrey who undertook an independent investigation and reached
the same conclusion as myself, have often mused over how and why
Max dreamed up this particularly detailed fantasy when the
"crashed UFO retrieved by blue berets" would have been far more
inviting and less easy to disprove.

I can only guess it must have been some sub-plot in an episode
of the X-Files or maybe he just made it up (the simplest
explanations are often the best).

The only conclusion I have been reach does not relate to Max
himself, but more to the credulity of those who have taken his
claims seriously for more than a millisecond.

In the days when people had to write letters to each other to
discuss the pros and cons of UFO cases, the barely literate
characters who populate the airways today would have had a hard
time promoting such a huge confidence trick, and hoodwinking so
many for so long.

But in the days of the Internet any old tripe can be dished up
to the great unwashed, and be taken seriously regardless of the
lack of one single checkable piece of evidence.

As they say, there's one born every minute!

Still it's all been vastly amusing, and I wouldn't have missed
it for the world - to actually be present at the birth of a
myth.

Thanks Max - what a privilege it's been!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                       King Island UFO Search No Hoax

From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 03:37:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:26:22 -0400
Subject: King Island UFO Search No Hoax



              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia
                    SIGHTINGS

EBK, Researchers,

THE KING ISLAND UFO SEARCH NO HOAX

On the night of the 24th July 99 and later that day there was a
set of sightings of an unusual aircraft near King Island
TASMANIA [s39:53 e143:52]. Officials brushed away the report as
nothing important.

On investigation, officials would not comment on the subject and
listed the alleged event as a "hoax balloon". Our DoD Report
states that the event was not that simple. Although it was not
resolved, a limited but unofficial search was undertaken for SAR
reasons. The light source was beyond balloon specifications and
although visual contact was made no report was concluded.

A visiting US Navy P-3C Orion [405] with the latest advance
optical and search facility joined the hunt and was reported
seen at the location by Fishing Boat Crews.

[ See Image Pra405.Jpeg 34.4K ]

The attached image (c)Steve Stefani [jpeg] is the alleged P-3C.
The aircraft 405 photo was taken at Royal Australian Air Force
[RAAF] Base Richmond in NSW [s33:35 e150:46] on the 22nd July
1999. The same craft was spotted at RAAF Base Edinburgh SA
[s34:42 e138:37] on 25th July 1999.

EBK, Researchers will remember King Island TASMANIA [s39:53
e143:52] was the location of MUFONs Walter H. Andrus Jr address
topic "The Disappearance of Frederick Valentich in Australia."
The disappearance of a pilot and his airplane in 1978.

REF: UFO UpDates:

 >Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 05:29:43
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: MUFON's International Director To Retire

 >The Frederich Valentich case was first researched by the
 >Victorian UFO Research Society, Melbourne, Victoria [VUFORS] by
 >well known researchers Mr Paul Norman and Mr John Auchettl, and
 >extensively reported by them.

[ Paul Norman - vufors@ozemail.com.au ]

A Phenomena Research Australia [PRA] team has visited King
Island on many occasions especially over SEPT/OCT 1998 after a
large number of reports of UFOs & lights hit the press. A
special I.R. Camera was taken to a location on King Island over
two weeks that year but was unable to captured any image of the
night lights.

A number of 35mm Film photographs were taken by some locals and
they were analysis by PRA.

The next attached image [jpeg] is on of the objects seen over
King Island that Oct 1998 event period.

A senior Australian official commented on the 24th July 1999
event, said; "There is no record of a search, there are no such
things as UFOs, no such event occurred"?

Australian researcher Mr Paul Jackson, tufoic@netspace.net.au of
TUFOIC in their TUFOIC Newsletter JUL-OCT 1998 - Ed 84, has a
great listing of the 1998 King Island sightings. I recommend
that you visit the site at;

http://www.netspace.net.au/~tufoic/Newsletter_84.htm

Look down the page about half way. The headings are:

   * KING ISLAND SIGHTINGS
   * KING ISLAND SIGHTINGS - FOOTNOTE


Regards

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
Australian & Asia UFO
1961-1999 - 38 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:50:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:10:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:55:02 -0400
 >From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >Let me be a bit more explicit. I first saw black and white
 >copies of photos 1-5 at the office of Dr. Robert Nathan who has
 >been called the "father of digital image processing" at the Jet
 >Propulsion Laboratory. This was in late January, 1988. Nathan
 >had copies because the originals had ben brought to him for
 >analysis in December, 1987. (This is a side story I won't get
 >into now.) I had heard about the Gulf Breeze sightings by that
 >time but had never seen any good copies of the pictures. When
 >Nathan handed me photo 1 I looked at it for a few seconds, saw
 >th UFO image "behind" the darker tree image and said to Nathan,
 >"This would be a tough double exposure."


Well, let's get into it now. What, exactly, did Robert Nathan
opine? Did he agree with your assesment of same or not? And if
not, why not? After all, we're only uninterested scientists
here, are we not? And presumably unpaid ones at that. The truth
wherever it leads us and all that.

Dennis Stacy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                             Re: Philip K. Dick

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:16:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:09:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Philip K. Dick


 >Date: 12 Oct 1999 18:21:33 -0500
 >From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
 >Subject: Philip K. Dick [was: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing...]
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>I'm not going to touch "venerable" (makes me feel old!),

 >Oops. Thanks for not being offended Greg.

I was teasing, really. I took "venerable" as a compliment. And
my hair _is_ white.

 >And thanks for
 >responding. I had hoped you'd notice my reference to you and
 >PKD. Not enuf people are familiar with his contributions to
 >SF or UFOs.

 >>"Enjoy," though, wasn't quite the word. My wife (now ex-wife)
 >>went to visit Phil, and found him morose (I'm sure we weren't
 >>the first people to find him that way). He announced that he'd
 >>been to the doctor, and was going to die. I still don't know
 >>whether this was an accurate report of something the doctor had
 >>told him, a fear based on a serious diagnosis, or simple panic.

 >I just recently finished reading the PKD biography by fan
 >Lawrence Sutin. It's towards the end of the book that he
 >mentions you meeting PKD. The biography title is derived from
 >PKD's own book Divine Invasion.

 >Morose wasn't the word most people would have chosen. At least
 >not those I've read of who met him. Quirky, weird, eccentric or
 >some such, maybe.

"Depressed" might be the best word. I didn't know Phil well, and
of course might have seen him, the few times I did, on bad days.

But it's pretty clear from his books that he may well have
suffered from depression. Think of the main characters in
"Galactic Pot-Healer" (that's gotta be one of the worst titles
ever found on any book), "The Divine Invasion," or "A Scanner
Darkly" (surely one of the most unhappy books I've ever read. All
these people are seriously depressed, as are many other
protagonists of his books. Or look at the compassionate portrait
of a depressed Abraham Lincoln robot, in "We Can Build You." One
of my first conclusions, after meeting Phil, was that he put his
own misery into these characters.

 >As an aside - yer lucky he didn't hit on yer (then) wife. He had
 >a history of falling for certain types of women very quickly. He
 >was married a number of times.

Oh, he fell in love with her. And she wasn't even the thin,
dark-haired, angry type so many of his main characters fall for.
He called me -- very weird phone call, this -- to tell me about
it, and to tell me he'd overcome his desire for her.

 >Phil was also a Christian, or rather, a Gnostic. His reluctance,
 >if any, to read Eastern mystic perspectives probably stemmed
 >from that. However, I was under the impression (perhaps falsely)
 >that he was at least semi fluent in some Eastern philosophy.

He may well have been, but didn't draw on any of it in our
lengthy discussion -- or maybe it was his monologue -- about how
to understand his paranormal experiences.

Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                      (eS) Questioning the fundamentals

From: exoScience <davew@exosci.com>
Date: 14 Oct 1999 07:07:42 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:17:52 -0400
Subject: (eS) Questioning the fundamentals


exoScience - http://www.exosci.com/

Hey everyone,

After a brief :) hiatus, I am back. I've been working on a
revamped website (you may notice some changes :).  I've got some
interesting news for you:

There have been some assertions recently that question the
'fundamentals' of physics and astrophysics:

* Firstly, a theorist has claimed that the speed of light may
be variable, rather than constant:
http://www.newsreality.com/localnews/?id=18

* I've also posted an interesting article that questions our
current notion of "time" as a framework for the universe:
http://www.newsreality.com/localnews/?id=28

Also, some interesting news from astronomy:

* There has been talk regarding the discovery of a 10th (and
perhaps 11th) planet orbiting the sun.  Check out all the news
at:

http://www.newsreality.com/showbindings/?section=science.astrono
my&id=4068

* The impressive Chandra telescope has delivered a new image for
us to look at:

http://www.newsreality.com/showbindings/?section=science.astrono
my.hubble&id=4209

* MagLev (magnetic levitation) orbital launch systems are
becoming more a reality now that NASA has built an experimental
launch track: http://www.newsreality.com/localnews/?id=23


I welcome any comments on the new site design.  The site is
still brand new, and there is *much* more to come in the near
future.

thanks,
Dave Watanabe
davew@exosci.com







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:30:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:14:04 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:11:58 +0100

 >>We should not really need subterfuge to deal with the
 >>authorities. Sadly ufologists are regarded as such vacant minded
 >>loonies because of the vociferous pronouncements of a few folk
 >>the police see via the media that we virtually have to go
 >>undercover to do our job. Another sad legacy of making claims
 >>about any case you cannot support with that magical missing
 >>ingredient - evidence.


Hi All & Jenny,

Jenny in an e-mail to this list you discussed the fact that you
and some of your colleagues views would differ on certain cases.

You happen to mention that you hold the view that some "Close
Encounters" had taken place within some of the cases you
investigated.

Does this answer mean that you believe "Extraterestials" were
the initiators of such "Close Encounters"? And if so does this
mean that you are satisfied that at least some of the sightings
from around the world are of "ET Origin?

And if you could publish the evidence you have on those "Close
Encounters" proving they were of "Extraterrestrial" origin it
would be kindly appreciated.

Regards,

Roy..                            Keep Smiling..










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:43:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:15:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
the cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
founder.

Why?

First of all, assessment of expertise requires a knowledge of
goals. In other words, you can't know if actions are appropriate
or not until you know the intended result. Leaving aside
channelers, contactees, and abductees who claim to have been
told what the intended result is (which is reasonable, since, as
anyone in intelligence knows, sources of intelligence and
_their_ sources can and do lie, for strategic, tactical, or
trivial reasons), it can be said that little or none of the
groundwork required to assess intent has yet been done. That
groundwork includes classification, statistical analysis, and
behavior analysis.

Secondly, even with categories and statistical analysis, there
is wide room for misinterpretation. For instance, is painting a
deck with clear material that doesn't cause any visible change
expert or inept? We know it is expert, because the quality of
the coating does not lie in its color, but in its water
repellency; but would we know that if our observations were made
from a satellite without prior information? Is replacing parts
which are not visibly damaged in a jet engine expert or inept?
If it is following a standard replacement schedule based on
known characteristics of wear, it is expert. Is standing in the
rain expert or inept? It might just be fun. Are the fins on old
cars aerodynamic? No, just aesthetic and symbolic. We make a
serious error if we assume that concepts such as these are not
in the data - in other words if we proceed from the (unstated)
assumption that UFOs are the product of humorless little Nazi
midgets with no art, no sense of humor, whose actions, sliced
out of context, must make sense, and who are driven by some grim
purpose.

It's just not that easy. Blanket pronouncements about the
irrationality of some specific behavior evidenced by reports of
UFOs beg all of the following questions:

1) Are the accounts in question true or false?

2) If false, are they exclusive exemplars of the behavior in
question (in which case that behavior can be discounted)?

3) How would non-humans behave in a specific context? How can we
identify the context?

4) Can non-human goals be extracted from out-of-context slices
of behavior and, if so, how is that to be done reliably?

If we are going to be scientific, we have a long way to go in
answering the above questions before we start claiming higher
level knowledge about the phenomenon.

If nothing else, UFOs raise fascinating questions of
epistemology.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:00:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:58:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:11:54 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >You want this argument both ways: Super-advanced technology but
 >with outmoded examples of same (scars left behind, implants
with
 >no obvious functions, no need to physically milk specimens each
 >time an ovum or sperm is required, etc). And your answer each
 >time is to attribute these objections to an inscrutable alien
 >psychology or psyche.

<snip>

 >One can't just continue extrapolating alieness as an ever ready
 >explanation for each and every complaint. At some point someone
 >has got to start making sense.

No, Dennis.

I did no such thing. Read my post again. I described scrutable
alien psychology, alien intentions that, to me, are
comprehensible, and make sense. Yes, I said that speculations
about aliens that I've read have been far too limited. But
that's not nearly the same thing as saying that the aliens
_can't_ be understood.

In fact (to go a little further with these thoughts), the main
limitation of many people who speculate about aliens is pretty
ironic. It's not that they don't let their aliens be alien
enough -- it's that they don't seem to know enough about how
humans have behaved. As I said in my post, it really isn't
surprising that aliens might not go straight to our so-called
leaders. There are plenty of earthly situations where mere
humans don't proceed that way.

And take your contention that

 >You want this argument both ways: Super-advanced technology but
 >with outmoded examples of same (scars left behind, implants
with >no obvious functions, no need to physically milk specimens
each >time an ovum or sperm is required, etc).

You make two assumptions here. One, as before, is that aliens
don't want us to know that they're around. As I pointed out,
it's easy to invent scenarios suggesting why they'd want us to
gradually find out. Leaving scars -- intentionally -- could be
part of that.

And the second assumption is that you know what an advanced
technology could do. Essentially -- and this is a big mistake a
lot of people make, in my opinion, when they speculate about
aliens -- you look at certain aspects of our own technology, and
imagine that they'd develop in a straight line into the future.

But already we've seen that our technology doesn't always work
like that -- and, in particular, that our ideas at any given
time of where our technology might go can be wildly incorrect..
I'll give you two examples. In the '50s, lots of people thought
that atomic power would be used everywhere -- in private cars,
for instance. The press was full of avid speculation to that
effect; atomic cars (which would never need to be refueled) were
a staple of science fiction.

Funny thing, though. Turns out that atomic power is cumbersome,
and sometimes dangerous. So it's not used nearly as widely as
all those pundits in the '50s naively -- as we now can see --
expected.

Second example: canned food, frozen food, packaged cake mixes.
When these began to appear, many people assumed they'd be as
tasty as home cooking. This was the wave of the future --
prepared food that would free us from the drudgery of making
meals ourselves.

Well, surprise. It didn't work that way. I'm not saying that the
prepared food industry didn't vastly expand; of course it did.
But we know now that fresh-cooked food tastes better. Nobody can
prepackage the work of a serious chef. Nobody can synthesize
fresh-squeezed orange juice. So it's not unreasonable to
speculate that aliens, advanced as they might be, run into
limitations of this sort. Maybe one fruit of advanced
technological wisdom is that technology has limits, and that, so
to speak, abducting aliens need to use "organic" human eggs and
sperm, harvested from real people, and not synthesized.

Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 14

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Melanie Mecca <natural.state@erols.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:11:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:03:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:25:18 GMT

 >>Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:08:50 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >When human scientists find a useful substance in the blood of an
 >animal or the sap of a tree, they synthesize it. If these aliens
 >don't seem to have the same skills at biochemistry that mere
 >human scientists have. If they are not inept, why would they
 >travel so far to get something they could synthesize?

When you are already hanging around here (made the investment of
bases, cloning space-hardened bodies, (perhaps) treaties with
earth governments (read:  The Man), and there's plenty of cattle
(and people) for the rustling, why bother to synthesize?
Besides, as you well know, synthetic substances don't always
have the same effects.  There are many examples, but let's just
take one: artificial hormones in birth control pills can cause
high blood pressure in healthy women of normal blood pressure -
some women's livers can't handle the synthetics.

 >Those who have responded to my first post on the assumption of
 >alien ineptitude within the ETH have offered different reasons
 >why aliens might value certain substances found on Earth. But
 >the question is 'Why would they come to Earth to collect a
 >substance they should be able to make?'.

See above.

Melanie Mecca









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

From: Don Allen <dona@amigo.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:51:54 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:17:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 01:38:49 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:56:19 GMT

 >>http://www.space.com/area51/colorado_ufo_wg_991012.html

 >>Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>Oct 12 1999 08:11:32 ET

 >>DENVER (Reuters) - A Colorado cattle rancher hopes that if she
 >>builds a UFO watch tower, aliens -- and tourists -- will come.

(snippage)

 >>"The county has quite a few UFO watchers.

 >>Messoline plans to charge $2 for adults and $1 for children..

 >>.. She said
 >>the watch tower would even have an alien-themed gift shop.

 >If I were a space alien, I would avoid the place like the plague.


Hooper is 35 miles due south from me. It is an ideal UFO landing
area as there is absolutely nothing there but a tiny post
office, the only gas station before Alamosa and lots of land
with scrub brush and rocks. They aren't too far from the Sand
Dunes, a real tourist draw. About the only significant air
traffic between Hooper, Moffat and Crestone/Baca has been
overflights of the National Guard, a very controversial issue
with the locals here, since the flights are just barely above
the mountain top level over Crestone, and Kit Carson peaks, two
of the highest peaks in Colorado.

A good book containing the UFO lore of the San Luis Valley ("The
Mysterious Valley") is Chris O'Brien's "Enter the Valley".
Cattle mutes, abductions, sightings,  and just plain wierdness.

Don



http://www.fwpd.net/dona/tesla/teslacoil.htm







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 11:24:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 05:20:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:46:36 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300

Hello Bruce,

Will you ever find rest?

 >7. Ed arranged for a single polygraph test with Harvey
 >McLaughlin, who told me he had done thousands of such tests for
 >companies that had hired him. When Ed passed the test McLaughlin
 >didn't believe the result. Therefore when Ed returned for the
 >results of the test McLaughlin said that there were a few things
 >he wanted to check and he connected up the polygraph a second
 >time. In between the tests he had checked up on Ed's UFO
 >sightings and asked some different questions. Ed was not
 >expecting a second test, so it was a complete surprise. Ed
 >passed the second test as well.... no indications of deceit, so
 >McLaughlin wrote in his report that , in his opinion, Ed was
 >being truthful.

 >McLaughlin told me that Ed was not a sociopath or "con man" type
 >of person who would be likely to tel lies. Dr. Dan Overlade,
 >clinical psychologist who gave Ed a collection of personality
 >and psychological tests, told me the same thing. Neither of
 >these men foun evidence that Ed had lied.

I am looking for a clarification.

I went to the mentioned site where it is said:

"MUFON's Charles Flannigan setup a polygraph test for Walters
with Hugh Jones, a fully accredited and licensed polygrapher.
Walters failed to show for the appointment, opting instead to
arrange two sessions with a Harvey McLaughlin. McLaughin was
apparently not a member of any polygraph association which
adhere to standards of practice, principle, and ethical conduct
of polygraph examinations. Walters has denied investigators
access to his polygraph printouts."

The polygraph printouts are not available to investigators?

If this is true, then why not?

If this is false, then where can one get the printouts?

Thanks for your time.

Serge Salvaille






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 05:46:22 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:52:31 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

Y'all,

As Rimmer has pointed out eleswhere the onus is on Maxwell Burns
to prove his allegations, not his critics.

 >Yes the "Crux" of the Sheffield Case has seen to be focused on
 >the name of the pilot. So let us clear the case once and for
 >all.

 >A little request for those researchers who don't believe that
 >there was some kind of Incident on the night in Question March
 >27th 1997' would you be able to produce all of the names of the
 >Nato Pilots who took part in this flight?

Well, I suppose so. We've done harder things. But, Roy, as there
is no indication other than Maxwell's deluded rantings that
there _was_ an incident that night we have no need to waste our
time naming the names. Otherwise we are doing Maxwell's research
for him into a case where only he has any belief invested that
something did happen! Tell you what - why don't I do his prison
sentence as well? Let's not have Max troubled by anything like
evidence when a simple pronunciation will do.

 >This way other researchers could then check to see if those Nato
 >Pilots named by those researchers are in fact still walking
 >about today?

No - how about doing it in the correct sequence Roy? Maxwell
gives us the name of the pilot and or co-pilot and we will then
do research as to whether those individuals ever existed etc etc
That's a promise.

 >Surely these researchers must know all of the names of the Nato
 >Pilots who flew on that mission on the night as they are adamant
 >that they all arrived back safely' for this reasoning at least
 >one of those researchers must have a list of the Nato Pilots
 >names / numbers who returned to the base intact?

You're looking down the wrong end of the telescope Roy!

 >If they haven't' would they care to enlighten everyone as to how
 >they know that no Nato Pilot was lost?

Or indeed whether or not he crashed into Santa and his sleigh,
or perhaps the guy in the helicopter on the Barrett Homes ad.
Or, well you get the picture.

Sensible UFO reserachers Roy do not just check things up because
_one_ person has imagined they happened and cannot provide
any further evidence or proof other than, ahhh, other than because
he says so. Puhleees!

 >Hopefully the researchers denying that any incident had occurred
 >and that no pilot was lost,  can then safely assure us all by
 >printing the full names / numbers of all those pilots concerned,
 >from which everyone could check, and if proved right' then this
 >will be a closed case once and for all.

See above. Put in idiot's language Roy:

1 - Maxwell Burns makes serious allegations about loss of life
     by UFO.

2 - He fails to come up with names.

3 -You then expect us to check everyone who was flying that night.

You see the flaw in this at all?

Gawd, I get home after a hard day working with criminals and
junkies, then we have to go back to UFO investigation basics
class, and all before tea!

Happy Trails

Andy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:05:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 06:45:46 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 04:52:31 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >A&R wrote:

 >>>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:29 -0400
 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Y'all,

 >>>As Jon said in a recent email he still hasn't come up with the
 >>>name/number of the aircraft which went missing or the
 >>>name/number of the crew. This was always the crux point of his
 >>>argument which seemd to get buried beneath his freelance
 >>>chemical courier activities.

 >Hi All,

 >Yes the "Crux" of the Sheffield Case has seen to be focused on
 >the name of the pilot. So let us clear the case once and for
 >all.

 >A little request for those researchers who don't believe that
 >there was some kind of Incident on the night in Question March
 >27th 1997' would you be able to produce all of the names of the
 >Nato Pilots who took part in this flight?

 >Surely these researchers must know all of the names of the Nato
 >Pilots who flew on that mission on the night as they are adamant
 >that they all arrived back safely' for this reasoning at least
 >one of those researchers must have a list of the Nato Pilots
 >names/numbers who returned to the base intact?

 >If they haven't' would they care to enlighten everyone as to how
 >they know that no Nato Pilot was lost?

 >Hopefully the researchers denying that any incident had occurred
 >and that no pilot was lost,  can then safely assure us all by
 >printing the full names / numbers of all those pilots concerned,
 >from which everyone could check, and if proved right' then this
 >will be a closed case once and for all.



Hi,

I think there is a basic misinterpretation here. Nobody to my
knowledge is saying that no incident occurred. There are things
we do know for sure about that night and some about which we are
still speculating but everyone agrees something at least on the
surface baffling did happen.

There were sounds that appear to have been a sonic boom. There
was a military exercise in force (I know I saw it). There was an
unexplained and still untraced aircraft like object. There was a
flash in the sky.

What matters is how you interpret these things - separately or
together (for we are not even sure they are one phenomenon or a
series of coincidental separate events). Dave Clarke does so
(sensibly in my view) by assessing the most likely scenario for
each. Max offers a far more imaginative interpretation. Dave's
view involving the likes of bolides, light aircraft and a
straying military jet all fit well the cumulative evidence, all
match what we have seen happen in the same area before and since
and are basically what all the professionals who were out there
that night (police, mountain rescue, etc ) believe is the most
likely answer to explain what happened.

Now Max's theory about a UFO shooting down an RAF plane in an
area that is literally straddled by two of Britain's biggest
cities (both Manchester and Sheffield are under 20 miles away in
case you had the impression this is the back of beyond) is far
harder to sustain. Of course it is not impossible. If it had any
real evidence supporting it I'd be glad to take it seriously and
fired up to do so given how near here it happened. But beyond
speculation and Nick Pope novels you need real solid on the
record data to argue for such an event and against the
interpretation of all the people out there that night who say
nothing of the sort took place. Whilst I can accept cover ups
and conspiracies can happen I don't buy that half of the public
services in South Yorkshire and Derbyshire were silenced by some
grands dictat.

All of us who live in this area rely on the police, mountain
rescue, the water authorities etc. I would be deeply concerned
if a Tornado fell into our water supply gushing gallons of
aviation fuel and I would be deeply worried if dozens of people
conspired to cover up the massive recovery operation that would
have been entailed. I would also have been more than a little
surprised to have got no inkling of any of these things
happening on my doorstep.

Ergo, without saying the whole idea is rubbish what I do ask is
to know where is there any actual evidence that it is true. This
is surely a not unreasonable request. The onus is not on anyone
to prove a highly improbable event did not happen. It is on the
person who says it did to offer reasonable grounds for anyone to
believe him.

I think unless and until anything of that sort and that can be
independently verified is published we have a responsibility to
remain properly sceptical. If these things happened someone will
be able to offer more than speculation - as in cases such as
Roswell and Rendlesham. As yet we are still waiting and all the
ifs ands and buts in the world wont change that.

Best wishes,

Jenny





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 05:54:49 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:29:47 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:25:46 +0100

Sean Jones wrote:

<snip>

 >I would also like to mention, and please correct me if I
 >misquote you Andy. When I was at Tim Matthews conference in the
 >early part of this year Andy Roberts said to me, "I believe
 >_ALL_ UFO's can be explained with sufficient research" Now if
 >that isn't someone who has already made up his mind what is?

I think you're exactly right there Sean. But what am I supposed
to say? "I believe some UFOs can never be explained?"

Presumably we _all_ think that all UFOs are explicable but may
differ as to our beliefs about the as yet unresolved ones.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, because otherwise it means you
are quite happy to have some UFOs remain unexplained. So yes, my
mind is made up, I believe that _all_ UFOs can be explained with
sufficient research.

Who thinks different and why please.

 >What about if the answer does not become available? This _game_
 >that is ufology has yielded no answers in fifty years.

Where y'been Sean? We have learned one hell of a lot in 50
years. The problem is so few ufologists stay in the field for
more than a few years that we are endlessly re-inventing the
wheel as it were.

 >With a
 >crew of hardened skeptics do you expect to solve the riddle?

Why not?

 >As I stated when I wrote "101 Possible explanations for UFOs"
 >for all the explanations supplied and others, there are _still_
 >some cases that there are no answers for.

There are.

 >Which would leave us
 >with two options, ET or the paranormal.

Not so - it merely leaves us with some unexplained cases and
people's _belief_ that the explanation for some of these may be
ET or paranormal. Big difference there Sean.

 > It would seem that some
 >people just cannot accept these options.

I'd happily accept them as options if they weren't merely beliefs.

 > So with a line up of
 >skeptics, do you think that a Pro-ETH person is likely to
 >volunteer his/her time to assist in debunking?

That's their problem. No one is press being ganged into UFOIN.
If someone who beliefs in the ETH or any of the other
belief systems kicking about in ufology that's up to them.

 >Jenny I honestly do wish you the very best with your new
 >organisation but I feel that with the line up of people already
 >involved, the outcome of many investigations will be
 >directed/steered/cajoled into one debunked set of answers.

Debunking and scepticism are poles apart Sean. None of the
people involved in UFOIN are debunkers. All are ufologists of
many years standing who have all spent thousands of hours in the
field and thousands of pounds in research. Their conclusions are
based on investigations - not an Armchair Ufologist among them
I'm afraid.

 >The only thing that could change this for me was if you was able
 >to get an equal number of Pro-ETH people and an equal number of
 >middle of the road people to join this new organisation, and as
 >I said with your current line up, do you think that will happen?

That's your opinion Sean - but it won't happen. The UFOIN
founders came together purely because of a belief that organised
ufology in this country, as exemplified by BUFORA, is rotten to
the core, riven with politics and under-hand dealings. So we do
something completely different. Hopefully we will be judged on
the quality of research and investigation we produce. If this
end product doesn't agree with your belief system that can't be
helped but I can assure you despite what you think (and you
ought to read some of the stuff Dave C and I have written, most
notably Phantoms of the Sky) you would find we are extremely
open-minded, but not gullible.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:21:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 06:49:19 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:35:00 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jonathan Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:22:15 +0100

 >>>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:10:01 -0400
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >No one mentioned UFOs at all until Max showed up on the scene -
 >as the witness Sharon Aldridge later testified. Yes there was
 >talk of Ghost-Planes (see my article in current issue of The
 >Unopened Files), and this was even taken seriously by the police
 >themselves.

 >The UFO connection with the Howden Moors case is entirely the
 >product of Max Burns imagination and I give him all due credit
 >for creating a modern-day myth.

 >I distinctly remember discussing the case with the Maxwell Burns
 >Cult [as surely it now is] at the 1997 BUFORA Conference, about
 >five months after the incident had occured. Then the Maxwell
 >Burns Cult was hawking the story round that a UFO had crashed on
 >the moor and had been retrieved by one of those blue-beret type
 >retrieval things.

Hi,

Perhaps Dave can enlighten us on another version of the story
that seems to have got covered up. I first heard this in the
green room at a TV station whilst waiting to record a program on
time travel (Channel 4). This was January l998  I believe. In
the studio were people filming another show for the series (how
Princess Diana was a descendant of Jesus and was assassinated by
a robot dog in the back of a car that has never been traced) (as
you can see real down to earth stuff).

Somewhere in the pre show discussion the Peak District crash
saga emerged and I recall being told that the alien spaceship
story was a ruse and the real truth was different. In fact it
was a futuristic RAF plane that flew through a time warp,
mistook the Tornado for an enemy fighter and blasted it out of
the sky with some sort of 21st century weapon.

Was that just someone's idea of a joke? Or has this idea really
been suggested by somebody? Or am I now revealing the awesome
truth behind March l997 that we are not supposed to know about -
hence the disinformation about that alien dog fight?

This conversation really did occur and at the time I thought it
was 'serious' (well as serious as most of the rest of the stuff
being uttered in that studio) (one chap had built a time machine
in his garage and brought it with him to try out...sadly nothing
much happened because he told us he would have to set up an
experiment in advance and had not done so... he rather lost the
plot when I suggested that he go home after the show, prepare
the experiment and then do it next week, sending someone back in
time so they would pop up in this studio in - oh - five minutes
from now right in front of the cameras thus effectively
overcoming his lack of time to prepare the experiment
...unfortunately the laws of space/time seemingly prevented this
possibility).

Anyhow, if I recall Tim Matthews and Jon King were in the green
room when the amazing truth about the Peak District crash was
revealed. Do either of them recall the RAF time machine aircraft
claim about this case - or am I slipping into fantasy ufologist
mode and merely thinking that I remember this?

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:42:51 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 06:59:09 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 21:29:47 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:25:46 +0100

 >I do not see one person's name on your published list who is not
 >a skeptic or disbeliever in aliens Jenny so how do you plan to
 >prove this statement?


Hi, well I don't know the precise views of all the names on the
list. But I think that one or two of them are at least open to
that possibility. I certainly am not a disbeliever or a skeptic.
But we did not come together as a result of our views. It is
true that in the UK many researchers are cautious and that
characteristic links the names on the list. But it was not - and
is not - a prerequisite. The final make up of UFOIN will
probably include a wider range of views than right now. I hope
so.

 >Jenny I have seen your opinion _change_ a few times in your
 >career in Ufology. Not that this is a bad thing or shows
 >unwillingness to learn, but it does indicate that your
 >_position_ is not _hardened_ into a core belief.

I don't think my basic ideas have changed that much, but you are
totally correct in saying I dont have a hardened belief. I am
willing to heed the evidence that crops up. I would hope others
in UFOIN feel the same, regardless of present ideas. But - as I
suggested - encourage them to speak up! >

 >What about if the answer does not become available? This _game_
 >that is ufology has yielded no answers in fifty years. With a
 >crew of hardened skeptics do you expect to solve the riddle?

I don't see any of us solving the mystery. Thats an egotistical
view. I think all we can ever do is gather evidence and make it
available to the community. Thats the UFOIN principle. We are
not trying to explain everything - or explain everything away -
just to gather data in a better manner. Frankly what ufOlogy
does with that data is another matter entirely. For instance, in
researching Rendlesham I have simply published in my books what
I have found (from the NSA experiments on Orford Ness, to
eyewitness testimony and so forth). I did not do this to prove a
theory because I dont know what happened. It is possible to
interpret the data for this case in many ways and I am happy
with that because anyones view is as likely to be true as mine.
Andy, for example, has his interpretation of the Llandrillo case
in l974 (and its impressed Jerry Clark as its in the next IUR).
Whilst I am 100% happy with his data I have a different view on
what happened that night. But I cannot prove it. Nor can Andy.
What matters is the case study - which Andy did extremely well.
That he is a skeptic is ultimately irrelevant because facts are
facts and if you couple that with integrity (which I believe
Andy has) you merely publish what you find and allow others to
interpret what it means (whilst no doubt having your own
opinion). Thats how UFOIN will do its job.


 >As I stated when I wrote "101 Possible explanations for UFOs"
 >for all the explanations supplied and others, there are _still_
 >some cases that there are no answers for. Which would leave us
 >with two options, ET or the paranormal. It would seem that some
 >people just cannot accept these options. So with a line up of
 >skeptics, do you think that a Pro-ETH person is likely to
 >volunteer his/her time to assist in debunking?

Well, some already have. And I actually agree with you that some
cases are indeed most likely to be either paranormal or ETH so
thats another one for you.

 >Jenny I honestly do wish you the very best with your new
 >organisation but I feel that with the line up of people already
 >involved, the outcome of many investigations will be
 >directed/steered/cajoled into one debunked set of answers.


All I can say is I will make my own mind up how I interpret the
evidence for any case. Nobody would direct me! Its up to other
UFOlogists to read the data that we produce (as we intend to
make it freely accessible) and if they think it supports a
theory other than one proposed by the investigator (certainly a
possibility!) then what is to stop them saying so? UFOIN is here
to investigate cases and not to tell the world or other
ufologists what to think.

 >The only thing that could change this for me was if you was
 >able to get an equal number of Pro-ETH people and an equal
 >number of middle of the road people to join this new
 >organisation, and as I said with your current line up, do you
 >think that will happen?

Who knows?  Probably not. But I wont lose any sleep over the
beliefs of UFOIN investigators because it really isnt an issue
for any of us. Skilful investigation is all we are looking for.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

From: Don Allen <dona@amigo.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:51:54 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:52:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 01:38:49 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:56:19 GMT

 >>http://www.space.com/area51/colorado_ufo_wg_991012.html

 >>Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>Oct 12 1999 08:11:32 ET

 >>DENVER (Reuters) - A Colorado cattle rancher hopes that if she
 >>builds a UFO watch tower, aliens -- and tourists -- will come.

(snippage)

 >>"The county has quite a few UFO watchers.

 >>Messoline plans to charge $2 for adults and $1 for children..

 >>.. She said
 >>the watch tower would even have an alien-themed gift shop.

 >If I were a space alien, I would avoid the place like the plague.


Hooper is 35 miles due south from me. It is an ideal UFO landing
area as there is absolutely nothing there but a tiny post
office, the only gas station before Alamosa and lots of land
with scrub brush and rocks. They aren't too far from the Sand
Dunes, a real tourist draw. About the only significant air
traffic between Hooper, Moffat and Crestone/Baca has been
overflights of the National Guard, a very controversial issue
with the locals here, since the flights are just barely above
the mountain top level over Crestone, and Kit Carson peaks, two
of the highest peaks in Colorado.

A good book containing the UFO lore of the San Luis Valley ("The
Mysterious Valley") is Chris O'Brien's "Enter the Valley".
Cattle mutes, abductions, sightings,  and just plain wierdness.

Don



http://www.fwpd.net/dona/tesla/teslacoil.htm





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:27:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:57:02 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 17:30:24 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:11:58 +0100

 >Hi All & Jenny,

 >Jenny in an e-mail to this list you discussed the fact that you
 >and some of your colleagues views would differ on certain cases.

 >You happen to mention that you hold the view that some "Close
 >Encounters" had taken place within some of the cases you
 >investigated.

 >Does this answer mean that you believe "Extraterestials" were
 >the initiators of such "Close Encounters"? And if so does this
 >mean that you are satisfied that at least some of the sightings
 >from around the world are of "ET Origin?
 >
 >And if you could publish the evidence you have on those "Close
 >Encounters" proving they were of "Extraterrestrial" origin it
 >would be kindly appreciated.

Hi,

I have talked on this list about the ETH a few weeks ago and it
(and many other theories for alien contact) is argued in more
detail in my current book (just published in the UK last month).

Essentially, I believe that most UFO cases are resolvable in
terms other than alien. However, in a few close encounter
situations there are good grounds for surmising that an
intelligence is conveying some kind of message to the witness.
The data match between cases is so exact this is implicit.

I have other reasons too. For example, the pattern surrounding
the Levelland, Texas cases in l957, the way these blend with the
launch of Sputnik and the simultaneous appearance of UFOs at the
site of the worlds first atomic test and the then most recent
one - thousands of miles apart and in total independence. You
can either see this as a massive coincidence or part of some
intelligently driven sign to humanity. I have yet to see a good
answer from the sceptics for this concentration of evidence.

Then there is the pattern linking genetic experiments together
from the l950's onward. This is a chain of evidence totally
unrecognised even by UFOlogists for decades as it unfolded - so
I dont buy it as some sort of witness fantasy building on
previous stories as the mythic elements just were not
established until well after the data. The cases created the
belief here - clearly not as the psycho-social theorists argue.
Yet it is so consistent across cases from many countries it is
hard to escape the idea that someone is responsible for a
pattern here.

There is also what I call in my book 'the Star Trek effect'.
Essentially this argues that if you compare the l960's and
l990's Trek series you see the way technology has advanced in
the real world. Our imagined spacecraft of 30 years ago look
like museum pieces now (no lasers, LEDs, microchips etc -
because nobody could imagine their invention far sooner than the
time period in which the series is set). No doubt todays
Enterprise and Voyager will seem just as quaint when overtaken
by real scientific progress in years to come. Thus if alien
contact stories are purely imaginative we should see
unmistakable signs of the same Star Trek effect because we have
data spanning even longer than 30 years. Witnesses should have
invented alien craft in the l950's that are pure Dan Dare in
comparison with todays UFOs. They generally dont. The remarkable
thing is that we see a consistent magical technology in cases
from 1959,1969,1979,1989 and l999. Things that even now seem
just as fantastic as they did all those years ago.

These are some of the things that persuade me. Amidst the UAP
and misperceptions that I am sure account for 99% of the
evidence there appears to be a low level of contact with another
intelligence more advanced than we.

But note that I did not say extraterrestrial intelligence. Thats
a theory and a possibility but by no means the only one. I am
actually personally quite amenable to the argument that these
entities are so human and so interested in our DNA for one very
good reason. They are us - or rather one day they will be.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                       Dr. Johannes Fiebag 1956 - 1999

From: Sue Kovioss <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:53:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 09:02:20 -0400
Subject: Dr. Johannes Fiebag 1956 - 1999


Forwarded Message:

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:55:39 +0200 (MEST)
From: Holger Isenberg <H.Isenberg@ping.de>
To: cydonia@admin.listbox.com
Subject: [M-TRAC - MSAA] Dr. Johannes


It is our sad duty to report that after a long and vicious
struggle our friend and colleague Dr. Johannes Fiebag, Editor in
Chief of the German edition Legendary Times, has passed away on
October 11, 1999. He will forever be remembered. For address of
the family and biography of Dr. Johannes Fiebag the A.A.S.
Germany created a separat web page.

Giorgio Tsoukalos & Ulrich Dopatka.
http://www.aas-ra.org

Johannes Fiebag, 43, wrote several books about UFOs, alien
abduction, the search for the holy grail and one controversial
book about the Pathfinder Mission and the ALH86001
Mars-Meteorite.

Holger Isenberg
H.Isenberg@ping.de
http://mars-news.de

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
Mars Surface Anomaly Analysis
Possible artifacts on Mars
http://www.mufor.org/ares/

The M-TRAC Project
A private, unmanned mission to Mars
http://www.mufor.org/mtrac/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:45:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 09:12:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:34:42 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Different camera, different object. Point still applies. If it
 >doesn't arouse your suspicion, so be it.

Dennis, you seem to see this as obvious and telling
evidence of a hoax, esp. due to the small size. Yet we all know
that there are reports of small UFOs. In addition, as I pointed
out, there had been apparently three different geometries
photographed prior to the Nimslo object, all of different
sizes, later apparently confirmed by occultation, angular size/
ground placement, and stereo photos analyses.

Let me outline a number of different arguments, along these
lines, all of which have potential validity:

1) The Walters photos are fakes because his UFO doesn't look
like previously reported UFOs.

2) The Walters photos are fakes because he always photographed
a UFO with pretty much the same appearance.

3) The Walters photos are fakes because the object doesn't
show the types of luminous features we expect in a UFO.

4) The Walters photos are fakes because the object has an
apparent opening in the bottom, and "real UFOs" don't.

5) The Walters photos are fakes because when given a
different camera, he photographed a different type of UFO.

6) The Walters photos are fakes because at least one of
the photos is of a smaller object within a range of size
reasonable to hoax with a model.

Now, in evaluating the above, let's assume that Walters has
not confessed to a hoax (he hasn't), that a motive for the
hoax hasn't been found (it hasn't, not at least to some basic
level of supportability (i.e. documents showing financial
trouble in his business, documents showing a propensity to
lie in public about non UFO matters (i.e. pathological
personality), etc.))

Then, let's take a look at what needs to be done to prove
the above assertions:

1) Comparative analysis of a fairly complete sample of
pre-Walters sighting reports, preferably with sketches. However,
given the typical variations in UFO appearance, and the probable
appearance of the GB UFO at a distance at night (ring or disk
with light above it), it may be difficult to confirm this
hypothesis for such cases. Perhaps the best we would be able to
do is to say "The GB UFO does not appear in DD and CE cases
prior to the Walters case", assuming that were the result of
such a study.

2) This one is espcially difficult to prove, because there is
strong evidence that UFOs seen during a local concentration are
the same types. Southwest US / fall 1957, Exeter / 1965, Hudson
Valley / 1980s, Belgium / 1990s, and more all show these
characteristics - one or a few different geometries of objects.
The reasons for this may be (for OEH supporters) same geometry
of object observed, or (for OEH critics) contamination of the
witness pool.

3) Again, this would require a comparative study with luminous
features from a variety of pre-Walters reports. As with (1), the
problem is that there are many reports which might show similar
luminous features where the physical geometry of the object may
or may not match the GB UFO. For instance, in Ray Fowler's
"UFOs: Interplanetary Visitors", which contains, AFAIK the
largest published collection of UFO sketches, allowing for some
variation in lighting and color (i.e. "portholes" can glow, ring
may be of different color, etc,), the following entries _could_
be GB UFO configurations (there are, I believe 4, counting the
Nimslo object):

Assuming the types are (my own classifications):

        Type 1: The original photographed object, largely dark
        grey, illuminated base ring exterior, full bottom opening
        illumination, short dome light...

        Type 2: The road shot object, near white below disk area
        and above disk area, dark base ring exterior, flat luminous
        ring in "power light" with additional structure (including
        possible projection) in opening, tall dome light...

        Type 3:  "Energy veil object"

        Type 4: Nimslo object

Then we have

        Type 1 & 2: 65-32, 66-26A, 67-37, 68-32, 70-8 Type 3: 64-6,
        67-33, 69-6 Type 4: 66-46, 67-31

from the Fowler reference having some commonality with the GB
object.

Obviously, there may be factors in the reports cited above which
could change this assessment, but to find this many in a mere
160 reports, spanning 20 years before the GB photos is certainly
a problem for the hypothesis.

4) A similar study to that shown above is needed.

5 & 6) Considering that 3 types of UFO were photographed prior
to the Nimslo photos, one of which (Type 3) appears to have been
small), this is not as strong an argument as it seems. But it
does have its points. One can assume that Walters spent the
"dry" period prior to the Nimslo photo constructing the new
model. One can only assume that he knows it will be seen to be
small, since size determination is the stated objective of the
Nimslo photos. But then one is left wondering why he claimed it
was so large.

Let's remember that he is smart enough to defeat the stereo
photos taken later, so he knows how stereo photography works.
But let's assume he gave the large estimate to make it seem he
hadn't faked the photo. Then he reused the model, hanging it
from a balloon above a boat, along with the other model.
Unfortunately, then, the result is that the SRS photos are
correct in the size estimate, which means the Type 1 object
model is 15-20 feet across. So there is a very large balloon
hanging it in the air to hold that one up. Or, Walters has not
only done the deal with the boat, but he has done that AND he
has defeated the stereo for a much closer and smaller Type 1
model. Indeed, if both are from the same boat, the Type 1 model
is still about ten feet across. Either that, or there are now
two boats, and at least three conspirators (Ed and one for each
boat).

BTW, at least theoretically, the Nimslo could be defeated. Four
small transparencies of a model, taken from mathematically
selected positions, held in front of the lenses, could convey
any stereo size needed (none of this is easy, though).

I am not sure the SRS can be defeated in this way - Bruce would
have to address that. But given the possibility, and the
cleverness of the hoaxer, why not do that with one of the
original models. Or why not use the already believed to be
smaller energy veil UFO? Why construct a complex switchable
lighting model of a completely different geometry?

Again, these hypotheses are not impossible, but it is fairly
difficult to sustain them.

One hypothesis which makes all this easier is to assume a
conspiracy between Ed and an effects house. The house does the
modeling and the math and Ed is the front guy.

Unfortunately, no evidence for this conspiracy has been found,
though I do not know if anyone has looked. But if this is the
case, then the model found in the old house is a fake, because
the effects people a)  would not use Walter's blueprints for
structural material and b) would not let the models out of their
control.

BTW, I have a friend who is quite intelligent and handy and who
makes railroad building models in his spare time, some of which
have very simple lighting. It is not an easy task, and it is
very time consuming.

 >I know. I was involved with the people who prepared it and sent
 >it to Ed. What was glossed over was how wrong Ed was in his
 >original assessment of the object's size. 200 feet down to 4
1/2 >is a pretty good percentage by anyone's count. You can
gloss >over something at great length, or short length, or by
ignoring >it altogether. There are all sorts of ways to gloss
over >something, in other words.

As investigators we all know witnesses can be right or wrong in
judging size. Obviously, the object lighting looked a lot like
an airliner. Is it improper to think that might affect a size
and distance estimate? Another part of the context is that
reportedly Walters spent almost the entire observation taking
pictures. This would seem to also affect accuracy of distance
estimation. And lastly, if we take the account at face value
(i.e. the witness is_not_ lying), he was under internal and
external pressure to take a picture of something great. If he
failed, his reputation might be destroyed. This could also
assist in damaging the accuracy of his distance estimate.

Roughly half of page 204, and three paragraphs on p 205 (from
Frances), and 1 paragraph on p 211 are devoted to discussing
this discrepancy. Can you outline what steps you expect more
than this to note it for the public?

 >The point here, in case you didn't get it, is that a 4 and 1/2
 >foot-long model is well within human ability. So is attaching
 >same to a boat. For that matter, how do we know it _was_ over
 >water, scientifically speaking, of course. By oral testimony?

It is known by the analysis done of the SRS photos. p 300-302

The boat issue is addressed above.

  >>The difficulty of hoaxing this, mathematically and
  physically, >>are very high. As such, this combination of the
  Nimslo photo and >>the stereo photo showing the original form
  object and the >"Nimslo" object is strong evidence _for_ the
  reality of the GB > >photos - and, to the best of my knowledge,
  has not been >>addressed or explained by skeptics, including
  yourself, Mr. >>Black, or Mr. Hyzer. Until that occurs, and the
  proofs offered >>of falsity are compelling, I must remain
  uncommitted in  regard >>to the validity of these photos.

 >Or for the existence of two models. No one has ever denied that
 >the Gulf Breeze photos are real -- it's their contents at
issue. >The Cottingley Fairy pictures exist, too.

Not two models. At least four. Three of the models available at
the start of the hoax.All with internal / external lighting of
somc complexity. All with fairly complex geometries. At least
two of which are robust enough to be suspended in the air from a
boat and pulled in quickly. At least one which can be videoed.

Possibly as many as three of one type (photo 18).

Clandestine radio contact with the boats for coordination.
Multiple conspirators.

We're not talking engravings stuck on pins and soft focused
here. (reference to the aforementioned fairy photos).

We have the following photos providing distance and size info
for the object, with the determination made by different means
for each:

        Stereo: photos 36, 37 (stereo and occultation with min 60
        foot distance), 38, Nimslo

        Occultation: 1, 7, 11 (beam location?), 14, 19

        Flashcube / light source attenuation: 13, 16, 20, 21, 22,
        23

  >Good! In other words, taken with the Polaroid capable of
  >producing double-exposures.

Capable of and proving that one has done so are two different
things, at least scientifically. So far, you have not attempted
to prove that scientifically, and Hyzer's analysis is, as
Maccabee has shown, not conclusive on Photo 19 or 1 or 7.

 >I could go back and get my all ducks in a row, if I had the
time >or inclination. By way of investigating this case
 >scientifically, you could also do the following. Go back and
 >read Irwin Weider's article in the Journal of Scientific
 >Exploration to see how he solved the famous Willamette Pass,
 >Oregon, photo case. (Pretty convincingly to my satisfaction, at
 >least, if not yours.) The "witness" in this case was a
 >biochemist and distinguished former WWII naval officer, if
 >memory serves.

I've read it long ago, and was quite convinced. I always had
some interest in it, because it was an important factor in
claims that UFOs were non-physical.

It's relevance to GB is not clear to me. Did Bruce give a
positive analysis of the photo? It's a blurry photo and the GB
photos are clear. How are they alike?

And please remember that I conclusively exposed the Beaver PA
photo hoax. I am not shy about bringing out conclusively false
material into the light of day.

 >Now, how would you take the same approach to the GB photos?
 >You'd duplicate the same equipment and play around a lot to see
 >if you couldn't produce the same results. If you could, it
 >wouldn't necessarily "scientifically" disprove the GB photos,
 >but it would sure as hell cast a pall of doubt over them.

Bruce is more compentent than I or you to comment on the
validity of these attempts. As I read his work it is clear that
he has tried to do this himself many times.

 >When all is said and done, science works in many ways, not just
 >one.

 >Hyzer's science confirms what I see when I look at Ed's
original >Polaroid series -- evidence of double-exposure,
especially by >the washed-out color contrast of the UFO itself.
Someone else >comes along and uses their science to explain the
obvious >complaint. Well, we don't know how UFO's illuminate
themselves, >to what blueprints they're built, and so on.

Actually, bluish tint is not surprising in twilight images. If
you look at the first two sets of photos, you can see that some
of this is an effect of the long exposure - the street light,
for instance has a bluish halo. In addition, the sky actually
emits bluish light and can fill shadows or reflect from whitish
areas.

Let me remind you of the ultimate proof of double-exposure -
seeing something through the object. This is not present, in
Photo 19, Photo 1, or Photo 7. That is not "my" science, it's
just science. If that feature was present, we wouldn't be having
this discussion, because every investigator would have found it.

Hyzer's special effect needed for Photo 1 and 7 is, as Bruce has
conclusively shown, a very, very, narrow and technical effect.
And Sanio has shown that it does not operate on the type of film
used by Walters, in any event. So how scientific was Hyzer, when
he did not even test on the appropriate film?

Your other comments refer to my critique of your "hokiness"
assessment. I was not using science in that statement. I was
simply pointing out that your subjective feelings about the
geometry or features of these objects were not any kind of
testable hypothesis, and that there are many ways for accounting
for your aesthetic displeasure that have nothing to do with the
truth or falsity of the photos.

No doubt there are many scientists who would think that certain
fossils look "hokey". Some trilobites, most Ordovician fish, and
certain large mammals definitely fall into that category. Yet
scientists do not write papers disputing the existence of these
creatures based on their "hokiness".

 >This isn't science. It's simple circular reasoning. Using alien
 >psychology to confirm the existence of that which hasn't yet
 >been confirmed _without_ reference to alien psychology,
motives, >intentions and so on. Putting the cart before the
proverbial >horse, in other words.

Please see the above. I am certain my reasoning was not so hard
to follow that one can actually believe the above interpretation
of my comments.

 >You express your own doubts about multiple photograph cases,
but >Gulf Breeze goes far beyond that. It is uniquely unique
among >UFO cases. Everytime Ed was handed a challenge (or a new
camera >set up) he came through with supposedly shining colors.
This >came to be taken as proof of the phenomenon rather than,
say, >Ed's own ingenuity. ("I know Ed and he's no sociopath," to
 >paraphrase Maccabee, as if one had to be sociopathological to
 >indulge a harmless prank. But perhaps Maccabee believes that
all >crop circle makers are sociopaths for all I know.)

The problem lies in using Walters' ingenuity as a given. This is
not scientific. It needs to be demonstrated. Please show me
where it has been proven that

a) Walters has model making experience at any level.

b) Walters has model making experience of the level required to
construct complex-geometry lighted models.

c) Walters has the mathematical knowledge needed to defeat a
stereo camera.

d) Walters had any location in which to make such models which
was observed by anyone.

e) Walters had someone else make and / or photograph the models
(i.e. professionals).

f) Walters had other conspirators (the boat people).

To simply _assert_ these factors is not science of any kind.

 >The problem with GB was not that it had too many investigators,
 >but too many apologists. If Ed screwed up, the "investigators"
 >helped get him out of one jam after another. No reflection on
 >his hood of the "road shot" ufo? Dent in the hood, cinder
blocks >in back. Mis-estimated the length of a four-foot-long
ufo to one >200 feet long? Didn't have his glasses on. And so
on.

 >All of which could conceivably be true, admittedly. But all of
 >which also resonates with an endless series of special
 >pleadings. Or professional UFO science, if you prefer.

Let me give you an example of how this actually works, which is
not special pleading, but just the actual job of the
investigator:

I have a DD case where the primary witnesses later observed
about 15 people in what they thought was a position to observe
what they had seen. I canvassed those people, and they had seen
nothing, though the fact that they had indeed had a party lent
some credibility to the witness account.

At this point, remaining neutral toward the witnesses and the
reality of what they observed, the crux of the matter is whether
or not a reasonable explanation for these people not seeing
anything exists. If so, no problem. If not, then big problem.

On-site measurements show that the object has to fall into
specific altitude and angular direction constraints to be seen
by these other witnesses. Trees obscure much of the elevation,
eliminating a wide range of altitudes, except in two small
places, both on the opposite side of the house from the party.

Given a reasonably estimated speed for the object (based on
observations and calculations too much to go into here), there
is a very narrow window during which the object might have been
seen by those witnesses. Even if it had been seen by them, the
window was narrow enough that they might not have noted it as
anything strange before it was out of sight.

As a consequence, it is reasonable that these potential
witnesses did not see the object.

Is this special pleading? No, it is simply posing and working to
prove or disprove a hypothesis.

 >It's not necessarily the details of the GB UFO that are in
 >question, but how out of place the whole looks in the pictures
 >in which it appears. There's a vast difference between the two.
 >I'm not objecting to the overall shape or window arrangement,
 >but to how they ultimately play out in the picture.

Can you define this in some sort of quantitative way?

Do you expect a UFO hovering over a field to look _in_ place?
Like it belongs there?

If you are not objecting to the shape or window arrangement or
anything about the geometry or the surface features then just
what are you actually objecting to? That the photos are poorly
composed? But if they weren't, Ed would thereby have shown
photographic and artistic skill, and stood convicted of that
sin. It seems impossible to win, if this is your standard.

 >Are you >saying that the crew ordered up a hokey-looking ufo so
that if >they got photographed everyone would just say, oh, that
looks >hokey? Well, that's a pretty scientific approach, isn't
it?

That's a strange interpretation of my comments, which boiled
down to:

1) Hokiness is in the eyes of the beholder.

2) Plenty of human artifacts look hokey.

3) If UFOs exist and are created by an intelligence, their
aesthetics may be different from yours, mine, and at the staff
at Lucasfilm.

4) Engineering constraints may also play a part in the
appearance of any given UFO if it is a physical and engineered
object. Many purely engineered objects look "hokey". Have Stan
Freidman show you some nuclear rocket engine pictures sometime.

5) The unique appearance of UFOs may represent the use of
manufacturing techniques (such as custom unit manufacturing by
automation, "growth" of manufactured objects, etc.) which we
would currently find impractical.

Is that clear enough to avoid misinterpretation?

I realize it is unlikely that any of the above will change your
opinion. You have clearly made up your mind (though on what
basis is unclear) that the GB photos are hoaxes. I have not made
up my mind, and I welcome the contributions of those who study
the information and draw conclusions with clear and open
reasoning, so that I can work to reach my own conclusions.

But I remain interested in scientifically or investigatively
oriented proofs, not claims which are based in wishful thinking
one way or the other.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 15

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:46:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 09:19:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Dennis Stacy
 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:34:42 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:17:02 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:29:26 -0400
 >>From: Mark Cashman
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Previously, Dennis had opined:

 ><snip>

 >>You express your own doubts about multiple photograph cases, but
 >>Gulf Breeze goes far beyond that. It is uniquely unique among
 >>UFO cases. Everytime Ed was handed a challenge (or a new camera
 >>set up) he came through with supposedly shining colors. This
 >>came to be taken as proof of the phenomenon rather than, say,
 >>Ed's own ingenuity.

<snip>

Hi Dennis.

I must agree. I understand Bruce's position that Ed could have
gotten rich off of this whole affair since someone offered him
big money for his story. The fact that Ed turned it down could
add some credibility to his story. On the other hand, maybe Ed
simply thought it was worth more and the people said "No deal".
I see it happen all the time in the entertainment business; you
get one chance.

More to the point at hand in your posting; much has been made of
the difficulty of producing double exposures using Polaroids. In
a previous posting I pointed out the error in that line of
thinking. In addition, it has been pointed out that the photo(s)
showing the UFO going behind trees would have been too
complicated for Ed to figure out how to do, especially if he
used the "newly discovered Hyzer method" requiring a latent
image to pre-sensitize a given area of the negative. I'm sorry,
but this technique is not new nor is it particularly
complicated. Photographers have known about it for years. In
fact, a variation of it called "pre-flashing" was/is used to
lower the contrast of motion picture film on a regular basis
when available light is going to be the source of illumination.
It is also used in the darkroom to lower the contrast of prints
done from slides or other positive to positive reproduction
methods.

Did Ed use the "Hyzer" method? Bruce seems to believe that he
did not because Ed isn't clever enough. I tend to agree, but not
because Ed isn't clever. On the contrary, the "Hyzer" method
would not even be necessary, ESPECIALLY if one is using
Polaroids. Why? Because a Polaroid is unique among cameras in
that it's "film gate" (the opening surrounding the actual film)
is not a fixed part of the camera. Instead, it is part of the
disposable film cartridge. Therefore, it is possible to attach
masks to the cartridge that would prevent exposure in the "tree
area". Additionally, because Polaroids can be processed
immediately and (most importantly) privately, numerous tests
could be made to be sure the masking is dead on. Even older
"wait and peel" Polaroids would allow variations on this
technique.

The recipe would be this simple:

1. Lock the camera down on a tripod pointed at the treeline
intended for use as the background. Snap off a print and
process.

2. Using a piece of acetate and a fine tip marker, technical
pen, fine tip paint brush or other marking tool, trace over the
area of the tree line that is supposed to pass infront of the
UFO. A steady hand would not be necessary. In fact, the more
random the pattern, the better.

3. Using the "film gate" as a registration device, tape the
acetate square over the opening and place in the camera during
photography of the model.

4. Without changing anything, double expose the background into
the shot.

Now, someone might suggest that the "hand drawn" treeline would
be a permanent part of the picture if the acetate is not
removed. This is correct. But so what? Unless someone compares
the actual tree line with the one photographed, no one would
notice.  It's my bet that no one ever did. The "fake" treeline
would simply merge with the darkness of the "real" treeline. The
mask would not be perfect, but it would not have to be. As long
as some parts of the tree obscure the UFO, the illusion would be
complete.

But the point is this: The camera could already have the latent
image of the UFO on its film negative, complete with "tree"
masking, at the time the background is shot. Even if someone
nearby were watching Ed, they would never see him shooting the
model (the model having already been shot). He could literally
point to the sky, yell "Look at that UFO!" and click a picture.
For those nearby that "looked too late to see it" he would
provide proof 60 seconds later after processing the Polaroid
right in front of them. I'd be willing to bet that, given such
on-the-spot astounding photographic proof, there would be those
that said they saw it, even if they didn't. No one wants to
admit the were a head turn away from witnessing something so
important!

The other point that Bruce brings up is the matching blur of the
UFO and the surrounding lights of the background. If they were
produced separately they would, indeed, be hard to match. On the
other hand, if the master Polaroid were copied on a Polaroid
copy stand, it would simply be a matter of moving the print or
the camera during exposure time. This would produce a uniform
blur on all information within the photo. By careful
manipulation of the exposure times and masking, even selected
areas could be blurred within the frame.

Did Ed use the "Evans" method to produce the GB photos? If Ed
were clever enough to know how, he'd certainly be clever enough
not to admit it. But the truth is that neither act requires a
great deal of brain-work. I do special effects for a living and
I can tell you this is all old hat technology dating back to the
earliest days of photography. If in doubt, go to the library and
check it out. Nothing new here.

Are the GB photos fake? Who knows? Obviously just because
someone can copy the Mona Lisa does not make them a Da Vinci. On
the other hand, all this discussion about how technically vexing
it would be to produce these photos on Polaroids is pointless.
It would be a breeze. Maybe even a Gulf Breeze.

Later, Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                          Electrogravitics Systems

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 02:02:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:40:27 -0400
Subject: Electrogravitics Systems


List,

Very interesting site:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/index.shtml#NEN_4_7_4

And almost at the bottom of the page you'll find:
"Electrogravitics Systems," The Definitive Report, 1956!

http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE24.html

ELECTROGRAVITICS SYSTEMS

An examination of electrostatic motion,
dynamic counterbary and barycentric control.

Prepared by:
Gravity Research Group
Aviation Studies (International) Limited
Special Weapons Study Unit
29-31 Cheval Place, Knightsbridge
London, S.W.7. England

Report GRG-013/56 February 1956.

AF Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
Technical Library
Dayton, Ohio 45433

In other words, how to make a disc fly. Happy reading.

Sue

Electrogravitics Systems.rtf





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:36:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:15:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Subject: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:43:48 -0400
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
t>he cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >founder.

<snip>

 >It's just not that easy. Blanket pronouncements about the
 >irrationality of some specific behavior evidenced by reports of
 >UFOs beg all of the following questions:

 >1) Are the accounts in question true or false?

 >2) If false, are they exclusive exemplars of the behavior in
 >question (in which case that behavior can be discounted)?

 >3) How would non-humans behave in a specific context? How can we
 >identify the context?

 >4) Can non-human goals be extracted from out-of-context slices
 >of behavior and, if so, how is that to be done reliably?
 >If we are going to be scientific, we have a long way to go in
 >answering the above questions before we start claiming higher
 >level knowledge about the phenomenon.

 >If nothing else, UFOs raise fascinating questions of
 >epistemology.

Yes, yes, yes.

Question Everything!
Believe Nothing!
Get Nowhere!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:36:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:22:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:50:23 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:55:02 -0400
 >>From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 ><snip>

 >>Let me be a bit more explicit. I first saw black and white
 >>copies of photos 1-5 at the office of Dr. Robert Nathan who has
 >>been called the "father of digital image processing" at the Jet
 >>Propulsion Laboratory. This was in late January, 1988. Nathan
 >>had copies because the originals had ben brought to him for
 >>analysis in December, 1987. (This is a side story I won't get
 >>into now.) I had heard about the Gulf Breeze sightings by that
 >>time but had never seen any good copies of the pictures. When
 >>Nathan handed me photo 1 I looked at it for a few seconds, saw
 >>th UFO image "behind" the darker tree image and said to Nathan,
 >>"This would be a tough double exposure."


 >Well, let's get into it now. What, exactly, did Robert Nathan
 >opine? Did he agree with your assesment of same or not? And if
 >not, why not? After all, we're only uninterested scientists
 >here, are we not? And presumably unpaid ones at that. The truth
 >wherever it leads us and all that.>

Well, I notice you ignored most of my response, including the
part where your failure to recall accurately resulted in false
allegations.

Be that as it may I would be delighted to tell you what Nathan
thought of Ed's photos.

First, he agreed with my assessment of photo one. HOwever, Bob
told me "I believe they are fakes."

Lest you feel a modicum of vindacation let me point out that in
all the times I visited Bob and discussed photo cases with him I
never once heard him say "This is real." Even the Heflin case
which made Bob "famous" and which he spent a LOT of time
investigating in 1965 and years following was not good enough
for a "that's real" comment from him.

ON THE OTHER HAND consider this: Bill Spaulding (for you
newbies, he was a photoanalyst 20 some years ago who founded
"Ground Saucer Watch, the organization that initiated the lwsuit
against the CIA!) claimed to have discovered "linear features"
in prints of Heflin's photos. (Recall that Heflin's photos were
Polaroids which were "lost" after several people had made copies
on 35 mm film and, at El Toro Marine base, on larger format
film.), I showed Nathan some of Spaulding's color coded
enhancements (color correlated to brightness of the black and
white picture). Some of the "edge enhanced" photos show vertical
or nearly vertical lines above the UFO images.... prima facie
evidence of a hoax... IF THE LINEAR FEATURES THEMSEL VES WERE
NOT A HOAX! (I won't get into that)

POINT: Nathan looked at these pictures, laughed and said "Where
did he get those lines?" or words to that effect. Nathan
proceeded to prove that there wre no such features on the
negatives he had (Nathan had the negatives which had been
professionally made at El Toro Marine Base in 1965). In other
words, Nathan debunked a debunking. NOw, he didn't HAVE to do
that, if he really thought the Heflin case was a fake he could
have gone along with Spaulding's analysis. But he didn't just
accept Spaulding's analysis and, in fact, rejected it.

NEXT POINT: Nathan was scientific about it. He was careful to
separate his "gut feel" from what he could prove. He did some
photo analysis work for me on the McMinnville case.

He subjected the original negatives to careful photoanalysis
looking for any evidence of a thread or string above the UFO
image. Nothing suspicious was found. Nevertheless, he said he
thought they were fakes but he _couldn't_ prove it.

Same with Heflin, perhaps he thought they were real (perhaps
deep down inside he believed Heflin, to whom he had spoken many
times, unlike the Trents or Ed walters, whom he had never met ),
but he never said so, at least not to me. But he _couldn't_
prove Heflin a fake.

Nathan looked at many photos during his JPL career, always as
"personal interest," of course. He shot down a bunch where he
found obvious flaws. He acted as a consultant to me (and others)
over the years. I would bring him photos to look at and he would
comment.

A good example are the "Peter Beard" photos that hardly anyone
here in the "colonies" would be aware of, but this was known in
the Kingdom (Britain) where the photos were taken. Nathan gave
me a clue to pursue which showed ultimately that it was
impossible to prove that the "UFO" was not a paper cutout pasted
on a window. In other words, it did nothing photographically
that a paper cutout couldn't have done.

Over the years I interacted with him on the NEw Zealand case
(color movie film) and others that I can't recall at present.

As for Ed's photos, I think Nathan was genuinely puzzled. It
would have been easy to say that he had proved they were double
exposures, but the fact is he never proved they were double
exposures and he said to me "I think they are fakes, but I can't
prove it."

Furthermore, Ed's photos became more photographically difficult
Nathan had to admit that, if a hoaxer, Ed was certainly much
cleverer than Nathan would have expected. And then came the
stereo photos. Here were pictures that Nathan analyzed himself
(NOTE:I gave him the originals to work with...in fact, he
studied a number of Ed's originals, including the first 5).
Nathan agreed with my calculations.... the objects were at a
considerable distance and a considerable height over water
(_Not_ at the water'S surface).

Nathan told me he the parallax effect (which results when a
distant object is viewed from two locations) was large enough
that he could detect it while looking at the photos with only
his eyes! He subsequently made measurements to quantify the
parallax ad thus derive the distance. He agreed with my
calculations.

Unlike Hyzer, Nathan was willing to accept the "possibility"
that (a) I might have some useful information and (b) I might be
telling the truth. Now, I should point out that my interactions
with Bob and his analyses were taking place during the spring of
1988 while all the other investigative activities and sightings
were happening and long before there was any book contract, etc.
Nathan's failure to explicitly prove any of Ed's photos to be
fakes played a roll in my opinion as stated in the MUFON
Symposium paper.

Unfortunately Nathan did not want to be publicly associated with
UFO photo analyses, presumably because of his job, so I could
only make oblique references, if at all.

You will note, however, that Nathan did allow a statement to be
published in 'UFOs Are Real', which was published in 1997 (after
he retired from JPL). He wrote: "There is nothing I can prove
that would establish that these pictures are artificial."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                          Filer's Files #41 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:54:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:25:16 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #41 -- 1999

This weeks Filer's Files sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

Filer's Files #41 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,   Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
October 14, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com.

NASA FILM SHOWS UFOs

CAPE KENNEDY � A recent visitor to the Space Center attended the
IMAX theater movie being shown to the public.  One scene shows
the US Space Shuttle near the Russian MIR space station.  The
NASA footage shows three disc shaped UFOs approaching MIR.  Two
UFOs fly slowly past and the third UFO stops and appears to
observe the space station.  The UFOs do not appear to be ice
crystals.  They appear to be space ships that either belong to a
nation of this Earth or from some where else in the universe.
Editors Note:  Can anyone else confirm seeing UFOs in this film?
NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin may be trying to let the
public know there is something else out there so the public will
help prevent Congress from cutting NASA's budget again.
Astronaut Eugene Cernan was commander of Apollo 17.  In a Los
Angeles Times article in 1973, he stated, "I've been asked
(about UFOs) and I've said publicly I thought they (UFOs) were
somebody else, some other civilization."

RHODE ISLAND

WOOSOCKET - MUFON Assistant State Director (ASD), Janet Bucci
reports that in the early evening on August 16, 1999, several
witnesses, including four law enforcement personnel, watched as
an UFO displaying lights, put on a fantastic aerial show.  As
the unidentified object roamed the sky, it flew above or near
neighboring towns.  At around the same time, a woman in a near
by town also saw a strange lighted object in the sky while she
was in her car on the way home.  She reports she also
experienced missing time.  State Section Director for Northern
RI Bill Masuck, and Assistant State Director Janet Bucci have
asked, "If you think you may have seen this same object, please
call MUFON's hotline number (401) 736-8680 and leave your full
name, home telephone number, and briefly describe what you saw.
Thanks to Janet Bucci at bucci@hotmail.com

NEW YORK

LAKE GEORGE - Linda reports that on Friday, October 1, 1999, I
saw two very bright flashing white lights in the treeline.  The
lights were heading directly north.  They gained altitude and
shot up zigzagging into the northwestern sky at 6:01 PM.  When
the white lights were very high up a second object with a red
light came from the west and lined up right behind the white
lights.  They both continued northwest.  The complete sighting
took five minutes.  Thanks to Linda,  pdshadow@hotmail.com
Glens Falls, NY 12801

MARYLAND TRIANGLE VISITS FOOTBALL GAME

BEL AIR � A nurse writes, "We had an unusual sighting on Friday
night October 8, 1999.  I do emergency medical aid at the Bel
Air High School football games.  I was standing on the sidelines
watching for injured players when I saw two lights about an inch
apart over the school building at 8:30 PM.  They were too far
apart for airplane landing lights and too high to be attached to
the building.  The UFO's lights were white and very bright
almost as bright as the stadium lights The two lights hovered
for about 5 minutes or so.  Two students came over to me and
said "Hey you see that UFO?"  I then started to look for the red
and green wing tip lights but there was none.  The craft started
to move towards us and into an east wind.  It moved very slowly
then turned to the right and flipped over on its side and flew
slowly south on its side.  I could see it was a large triangular
shaped craft.  The undercarriage had a strobe light in line with
the nose and two white lights on the tip.  It flew to the south
on its side speed estimate would be less than 20 mph and we
heard no noise.  Distance from us was about 1000 feet and its
altitude was less than 1000 feet.  It flew the length of the
school then completed the roll and flew to the east and
disappeared rather quickly behind the trees.  Conditions were
cloudy and humid, temperature was 50 F.  A number of planes flew
over providing a good comparison of size.  You could have lined
up about 5 single engine planes to equal the width of the
unknown craft.  The kids asked me "Was that a real UFO?"  I told
them it was not a plane or helicopter.  Only a few witnesses saw
the UFOs, because most people were watching the game.  I wonder
what THEY think of high school football?  Thanks to Runningpony

GEORGIA OCTAGON SHAPED UFO

FORT MOUNTAIN - MUFON State Director Tom Sheets reports that an
unusual craft was observed hovering over Fort Mountain at about
9:30 PM, on Tuesday, September 28.1999.  The craft was glowing a
bright white, and was octagon shaped, with more octagon like
shapes within it's diameter, giving the appearance of a
honeycomb.  It was estimated to be about the size of a softball
held at arm's length.  Event duration was several seconds, as
craft was observed by the approaching motorist/witness on Ft.
Mountain.  Altitude of the craft over the top of the 2800 feet
mountain was about 1/4 mile off the top.  Other well-documented
reports of UFO activity and objects have been investigated in
this vicinity, including observations by MUFONGA personnel
during the last year.

EAST ELIJAY � Assistant State Director Mark Ausmus has been
setting up an investigation into an event that occurred on
September 26, 1999, over this small mountain town 13 miles east
of Fort Mountain.  The witness was interviewed Ausmus and Olivia
Newton.  The witness awoke during the early AM and found a
bright, intense white light with a pointed bottom hovering about
40 degrees off the horizon. The size 1 1/2 times of the moon.
During the 15 minute observation it moved to about 80 degrees
and was observed to eject 15 or 20 small "sparkly prism like
objects" downward at about a 45 degree angle. Later, the friend
of the witness indicated that similar events had been witnessed
during the past 6 months in the area.  Two days later, he
witnessed an intense bright white light in the night sky, in the
distance.  This would be September 28, the same date as the Fort
Mountain sighting.   The Ausmus/Newton team is continuing to
investigate.  An unidentified thick purple substance was
discovered on the property.

COLUMBUS -- MUFONGA's Jim Steen of Columbus Georgia reports that
he has established initial contact with a male witness that
reports observing triangle shaped objects on three occasions
since May of this year.  One fly over was observed by a second
witness.  The witness has provided Jim with a written account
and excellent sketches, but interviews have not as yet been
conducted to establish witness' credibility.  Jim agreed to
re-contact the witness for a more in-depth investigation.  The
sketches indicate an isosceles triangle shape, with large
amber/white lights at each point.  There appears to be a
protrusion attached to the underside of what would be considered
the 'tail' of the craft, a sort of 'rectangle' looking
protrusion. COMMENT � Other Georgia cases are developing at this
time. We may be in for another active autumn season this year!
Semper Fi,  Tom Sheets, SD MUFONGA

KENTUCKY

BURKESVILLE -- This was really weird, as I was lying in my
pickup truck bed just studying the sky and pondering the full
moon around 8:30 PM on September 23, 1999.  Although there was
not a structured object visible, there was a strange pattern
"probing" light. It started to the NW and came to the SW...first
making an upward dart...then completing this pattern, coming
back to an imaginary midline, then it would go up again.
Surprisingly, at times even drop beneath the midline.
Altogether, making maybe 6 to 8 peaks, as it took only a minute,
perhaps, but left me breathless!  It moved in an up and down
zigzag pattern that reminded me of Chinese writing. Quickly
darting upward and back to midline in no particular sequence.
The colors of this particular line pattern were gold's, reds,
blues, greens, shimmering variously as it "drew" it the sky.
When I turned around, I saw the rising Full Moon.  Thanks to
Herbwmn2

ILLINOIS UFO IDENTIFIED AS PROBABLE BLIMP

DUNDEE - On September 29, 1999, four witnesses saw a white
saucer lit up almost like a crystal, but as big as a large
house.  They were driving westbound on Route 72 at 8:00 PM and
saw a huge lit shape in the sky moving less than 10 mph.
Further investigation indicates that the object observed was
most likely a blimp with an electronic advertising apparatus
that made it appear like a UFO from distance.  Thanks to Morgan
Clements, Director World Wide UFO Reporting Center. Editors
Note: These advertising blimps have often been mistaken for UFOs
when a person is unable to make out the writing.

OREGON

PARKDALE - On October 2, 1999, while driving home two friends
driving separate cars on Dee Highway witnessed very bright
lights with flashing colors at 11:35 PM.  They both felt it was
no ordinary aircraft.  It hovered for 35 to 40 seconds with
different colored lights flashing when it suddenly disappeared.
Thanks to WWUFORC www.ufosightings.net,  uforeports@aol.com

CALIFORNIA

EDWARDS AFB --  William Hamilton wrote,    "Yesterday, my wife
and I attended Edwards Air Force Base, 50th air show."  One of
the best ever.  We saw one of the last flights of the SR-71
Blackbird that flew high over our heads at 78,000 feet at Mach
3.2.  The double sonic boom from the leading and trailing edges
of the plane set off car alarms.  The Blackbird came in for a
low pass near the awestruck crowd.  The X-15 experimental
airplane holds the speed record when Sen. Pete Knight flew her
at Mach 6.7+ back in the sixties.  It also attained an altitude
of over 370,000 ft. Another first, the F-22 Raptor and F-16
chase plane went around for some touch and goes.  We also saw
over flights of the B-2 stealth bomber with a height of only 17
feet and a wingspan of 172 feet.  It looks like a thin black
line when it comes in.  In contrast, the B-1 engines are very
noisy, the B-2 is quiet in comparison.  The F-117 stealth
fighter also made quiet passes.  It was a fantastic air show,
but was someone watching from above?  Just as one of the
aerobatics planes was doing loops, I looked straight up beyond
his smoke trail to see what looked like a shiny cylindrical
object sitting motionless at a very high altitude.  Using the
smoke trails as a reference, it seemed to sit there and then
turned and moved off rapidly as I tried to train my video on it.
Alas, it was gone faster than the smoke!  Was it a UFO?  I could
not identify it. It just left me wondering. Thanks to Bill
Hamilton, Director Skywatch International, Inc.   Website:
home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22


CANADA CROP CIRCLES

EDMONTON � There are new crop formations near Edmonton, Alberta
as of September 28, 1999.  Another crop circle was reported near
Midale, Saskatchewan on September 28.  Farmers also report
sighting UFOs in the general area.  The complete reports, links,
analysis and commentaries are posted at:
http://caus.org/home.html. Thanks to CAUS. Peter A. Gersten
Director

NEWFOUNDLAND VAN SIZED LIGHTS

STEPHENVILLE -- On July 10, 1999, reports he obtained a siting
report of a fast moving object.  It was a bright yellow light
and made no sound.  The witness states, "I had just exited my
house at 8:15 PM when I saw a very bright light directly in
front of him about a distance of one kilometer."  He watched it
for about 20 seconds that disappeared very rapidly in the
scattered clouds. The object was about the size of a full-sized
van I then continued to meet with my friends. Thanks to Jeroen
Wierda at jeroen@wierda.com.

HAWAII SIGHTING

HONOLULU -- My name is Nicholas Cone and I would like to report
a sighting. It was on Friday, October 1, 1999. It was a round
silver ball that moved slowly across the sky and disappeared.
Thanks to Nicholas Cone, NConesk8r

IMMENSE TRIANGLE UFO OVER INDONESIA

LOVINA, BALI On September 17, 1999, Allison Williams was
vacationing in Indonesia walking on the beach with a friend at
1:00 AM.  They sighted an immense triangular shape craft with
pulsing lights hovering above.  The sky is exceptionally clear
there and the stars are very brilliant so it was difficult to
tell the altitude of the triangle.  They continued to watch from
the beach and a smaller object with lights departed from the
triangle moving south towards Australia.  The huge triangle
continued to hover in the sky for more than hour when they
decided to leave the UFO was still there.  The friend seemed
more interested in romance, but did admit seeing the UFO.
Thanks to Allison Williams.

STEALTH BLIMP

The September issue of Popular Mechanics carries an article
"Skunk Works Magic" by Jim Wilson.  The article includes an
illustration by Mark McCandlish of an alleged Stealth Blimp.  It
thought the craft may be operated by the United States Air Force
and built by Lockheed-Martin.  These craft may be responsible
for many large triangular sightings frequently reported.

POSSIBLE NEW PLANET FOUND IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM

A British astronomer appears to have discovered a new planet
orbiting the Sun, 1,000 times further away than Pluto.  The new
planet may not be an original part of our solar system and may
have been captured on the outskirts of our own solar system.
Thanks to Chris Evers HUFOS/FTL

SPACE JUNK REENTRY PREDICTIONS

John Locker provides a list of excellent decay prediction
calculations from Alan Pickup for use over the next few months.
Alan provides information on each piece of debris, including
reentry position, time, etc.  Many re-entries occur over water,
but as with the September incident, are often visible from land.

24168   94- 29 HT  STEP-2 Pegasus deb.    October 15 25507   98-
60 C   SCD-2 Pegasus deb.      October 17 25680   99- 19 E
Glblstar 19 Soyuz r1     October 18 24235   94- 29 LJ  STEP-2
Pegasus deb.     October 19 25500   98- 25 F   C 2350 aux motor
October 21 21379   75- 52 CZ  Nimbus 6 Delta 1 deb   October 23
25917   99- 48 E   Foton 12 deb.                    October 25
25921   99- 51 C   Ikonos Athena deb.         October 26 5093
70- 91 AQ  Cosmos 375 deb.             October 27 24744   97- 10
A   Zeya                                  October 30 25550   98-
69 B   SAC-A                              October 30 24349   94-
29 PA  STEP-2 Pegasus deb     October 31 24993   94- 29 ADA
STEP-2 Pegasus deb.     October 31 23563   91- 47 E   PAM-D deb
November  2 24632   94- 29 AAL STEP-2 Pegasus deb    November  2
13738   82-118 C   DMSP F6 deb                November  4 12134
81-  2 B   Molniya 3-14 r2               November  5? 24832
97- 28 E   C 2344 SOZ ullage r        November  8 24590   94- 29
YS  STEP-2 Pegasus deb      November 11 25494   98- 56 D
Eutelsat W2 Spelda       November 11 5533   71- 15 BX  Cosmos
397 deb            November 12 24972   97- 57 B   IRS-1D r
November 12 24586   94- 29 YN  STEP-2 Pegasus deb    November 13
23995   94- 29 AQ  STEP-2 Pegasus deb    November 15 4222   69-
97 B   AZUR Scout r               November 25 22016   92- 39 C
GPS 2-14 Delta r2         December  4 24291   96- 50 A
Microsat                        December  4 19377   88- 69 A
Molniya 1-73                  December ? 25551   98- 69 C
MightySat                      December ? Thanks to John locker"
<satcom@cybase.co.uk G7MIZ Satellite and Communications
Consultant at http://www.cybase.co.uk/satcom/

FALUN GONG CONTINUE TO BE ARRESTED

W. Owens writes, I read your article on the Falun Gong "take" on
ET's.  I'm certainly all for religious freedom. I think it's
terrible that these people are being harassed. But do we really
need this type of paranoia right now?  This group is Buddhist.
Buddhists are fine, nice people; like the rest of us in this
vast, mysterious universe, they don't have all the answers.
Their philosophy, while original, is a confusing + contradictory
melange of agnosticism + Eastern /philosophy/superstition.  And,
to be quite candid, it seems rather empty + pointless.  As for
this wonderful gentleman who has all the answers about space
aliens (and everything else)? -- "Yea, sure."  Editor's Note: My
point is that 100 million Chinese believe in extraterrestrials
and UFOs. The US has 275 million people, China has 1 Billion 250
million people and the worlds largest Army. "China claims to be
a military superpower and recently announced it can fire
ballistic  missiles from nuclear submarines.  The Falun Gong are
the only large organized group other than the Communists in the
country. The future of the world may be effected by the Falun
Gong who believe UFOs are visiting us.  Now they are being
arrested by the thousands.   Most UFO investigators consider
themselves a small minority, but with Falun Gong we have one
hundred 100 million believers.  That's roughly the population of
Japan.

UNDERGROUND VAULTS AT WRIGHT PATTERSON

WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE -- See URL below for images and
drawings used to support the "Underground Vault" theory at
Wright-Patterson AFB:.  This web site has interesting
engineering plans of the various buildings on base. These images
and drawings are supportive data and there are no explicative
texts http://home.sprintmail.com/~rigoletto/wrightpatterson/

THE GREAT UFO / ET AUTUMN FESTIVAL will be held at the Days Inn,
Bordentown, NJ by Pat  Marcattilio on October 30 and 31.
Speakers include Antonio Huneeus, Wendelle Stevens, myself and
many others. (609) 631-8955

BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT -- All real
estate agents are not the same?  Some real estate agents or
sales representatives are part timers and inexperienced.  Others
are experts with an excellent experience and capabilities.  When
you are selling or buying your home, you need to make sure you
have the best real estate agent working for you before you make
any important financial decisions on one your biggest
investments!  Remember, the majority of people do not know the
right questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major
problems.  Picking the right real estate agent can be a
wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a big
mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands!  Find
out, "What you need to understand before hiring any real estate
agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not want you
to ask.  Learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent for
your needs.  To get a free copy of this report, just call (609)
654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com.

U.S. GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO
Alert at Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign
Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now
available for distribution to the public.  Lunar Astronaut Dr.
Edgar Mitchell was at Edwards the night the UFO chase occurred.
The 6th person to walk on the moon said, "The night it happened
I investigated it myself and this was a real event."  Sam
Sherman's audio documentary tape called THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE
BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual
voice recordings provided by the Air Force.  During this event
12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down
low over the runways at Edwards AFB.  Tower operator Sgt. Chuck
Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command.  Sgt.
Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment
where he verifies the event as it is heard on the archival
recordings.  The UFOs are described and a decision is made to
launch F-106 fighter interceptors.  You are there for an
important part of UFO history.  Hear it for yourself, it's the
best UFO tape ever made.  Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00
for shipping -- total $16.95 --(for overseas orders- out of US -
add $6.00 shipping cost - total - $20.95) you can send either a
personal check or money order to: Independent International
Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New Jersey 08857.

MUFON JOURNAL For more detailed investigative reports subscribe
by contacting Mufon@aol.com.  Filer's Files Copyright 1999 by
George A. Filer, all rights reserved.  Readers may post items
from the Files on their Websites provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue
that the item appeared.  Send your letters to me at
Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to keep your name confidential
please so state.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                  CPR-Canada News: Formation #6 at Midale,

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:54:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:31:25 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Formation #6 at Midale,



CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


Formation #6 at Midale, Saskatchewan

October 14, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Preliminary Report - October 14

By Paul Anderson


Yet another crop circle formation has been found in the Midale
area of Saskatchewan, reported yesterday by pilot John Erickson
and Nancy Talbott of the BLT Research Team. This is the sixth
formation in that region and the eighteenth for Canada reported
now this year. First found on October 8 by the farmer (name
still kept confidential at this point) who also owns the field
with the first Midale and Midale #4 formations.

Formation is in a duram wheat field about two miles south-east
of Midale. Three circles close together in a straight line,
spaced about twenty feet apart. Largest (eastern) circle is
approximately 60 feet diametre, the second about 40 feet and the
third about 20 feet. Description of floor lay inside the
smallest circle is of a swirled lay which ends in a straight
"radial" type lay out to the edge of the circle. The other two
circles have normal swirled lay patterns.

Further details when available.

There is also a new article on the recent Saskatchewan and
Alberta formations in the October 14 edtion of The Western
Producer farming newspaper.


Paul Anderson
Director
CPR-Canada

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1999.html

A reminder for all Canadian subscribers / readers - your
assistance is welcome and needed - ANY reports of other
possible circles this year, please do let us know as soon as
possible! See Reporting and Field Research Guidelines on the
web site for more information:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/reporting.html

REPORTING HOTLINE: 604.731.8522

_____________________________


CPR-Canada News is the e-mail update service of
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada (affiliate of Circles
Phenomenon Research International), is published
periodically or as breaking news develops and is available
free by subscription; to be added to or removed from the
mailing list, send your request, including "subscribe
CPR-Canada News" or "unsubscribe CPR-Canada News" and
e-mail address to:

mailto:psa@direct.ca

CPR-Canada welcomes your reports and submissions.
Forward all correspondence to:


CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Circles Phenomenon Research International

Main Office

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4  Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


� Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 1999







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                          Electrogravitics Systems

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:41:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:41:38 -0400
Subject: Electrogravitics Systems

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 02:02:11 -0400
To: updates@globalserve.net
From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Subject: Electrogravitics Systems


List,

Very interesting site:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/index.shtml#NEN_4_7_4

And almost at the bottom of the page you'll find:
"Electrogravitics Systems," The Definitive Report, 1956!

http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE24.html

ELECTROGRAVITICS SYSTEMS

An examination of electrostatic motion,
dynamic counterbary and barycentric control.

Prepared by:
Gravity Research Group
Aviation Studies (International) Limited
Special Weapons Study Unit
29-31 Cheval Place, Knightsbridge
London, S.W.7. England

Report GRG-013/56 February 1956.

AF Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
Technical Library
Dayton, Ohio 45433

In other words, how to make a disc fly. Happy reading. (I've
attached this particular document in case someone doesn't like
to, or can't, surf.)

Sue





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                 Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 15:38:41
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:18:05 -0400
Subject: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


Source: The Western Producer

http://www.producer.com/articles/19991014/news/19991014news08.ht
ml

Stig

**

October 14, 1999

Crop circles become more frequent, complex

By Mary MacArthur Camrose bureau

*

Rusty Manuel and Thelly Whitman have always joked that the
strange lights near their grain fields on the outskirts of
Edmonton are UFOs.

Cereal circles found near Edmonton A set of seven circles was
recently discovered near Edmonton. Farmer Rusty Manuel swathed
around the circles, leaving them intact for study. The formation
was almost 58 metres across. The crop was flattened from the
centre out to the edge, rather than in the swirling patterns
found in other crop circles.  But they're not laughing after
circles were found in their barley field.

"We're not going to joke about that any more," said Whitman.

A custom sprayer operator hired to spray Roundup on a barley
field infested with thistles spotted the circles first. Without
bothering to look at the field, Manuel put the circles down to
animals or wind.

"I thought it was some animal rolling around in it. I hadn't
seen it. When I started to cut it I got pretty inquisitive."

Now, neither Manuel nor Whitman thinks animals made the circles.

"This here is a big deal, the way it's knocked down," he said.

The centre circle is 30 metres across with four smaller circles
on all four quadrants. Off two of the smaller circles are
another two circles.

What's strange is that Whitman noticed circles in the same field
a year earlier when she was swathing the crop, but attributed it
to animals. Thinking back, she can't remember if the circles
were in any sort of formation.

"I contributed it to animals bedding down in our grain. That,
and I don't like that end of the field. I get an eerie feeling
in that end of the field."

Whitman doesn't know what made the circles, but she hasn't ruled
out some other life form.

"I've always been a strong believer there's something more than
us around. There's something more than our little world."

Gordon Sopczak, Alberta co-ordinator for Circles Phenomenon
Research Canada, said he's sure whatever is creating the circles
will "delight us and astound us again."

Members of a crop circle investigative team took grain and soil
samples from within the crop circle on the farm near Edmonton to
test for abnormalities.

Manuel plans to harvest the grain separately. He wants to see if
there's anything unusual about it next spring when it's
reseeded.


More intricate


Sopczak said crop circles like the one in north Edmonton are
becoming more complex. No longer are they simple circles in a
field.

In 1999, 17 crop circles were reported across Canada. One on the
University of Alberta farm was a hoax, another was caused by
fairy rings, but several others were complex patterns, he said.

As in Britain, many of the crop circles are reappearing in areas
where they have been reported in previous years.

Sopczak doesn't know if more crop circles are being reported
because there are more circles, or if people are learning how to
report them.

According to a website run by Circles Phenomenon Research
Canada, there were 14 circles reported in Canada in 1998, two in
1997, three in 1996, two in 1995, four in 1994, nine in 1993, 21
in 1992, 12 in 1991 and 22 in 1990. Nine circles were reported
between 1969 and 1989.

The website can be found at
www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310.

*

Copyright







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 14:56:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:21:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Marc Bell <MARC@wufog.freeserve.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:08:11 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:17:08 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 12:37:46 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>>>Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 20:57:28 +0000
 >>>>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >
 >>>>Oh, and while we're on the subject, of all the thousands who
 >>>>claim to be repeatedly abducted, who has ever taken a photograph
 >>>>of an alien? the odds are that amongst the thousands there must
 >>>>be someone who set a camera up linked to a motion detector, not
 >>>>hard to do these days considering our 'changing level of
 >>>>technology'.

 >>>>Unless the aliens are only interested in the people who wouldn't
 >>>>have even thought to do that.

 >>>Well I suppose Dave considers his remark pretty clever, but I'll
 >>>bet he's never done any real checking about whether precisely
 >>>what he suggests has been attempted.  It has, and it has failed.

 >>>Last year or so I had an email exchange with Katharina Wilson,
 >>>an abductee who has tried, with the help of local UFO
 >>>investigators, to do exactly what Dave suggests above.  On
 >>>nights she would undergo an abduction, the video camera put in
 >>>her bedroom mysteriously recorded nothing but static.

 >>I don't consider myself being pretty clever at all, I was
 >>honestly asking a question.

 >>Was the video showing time and date and did it record her
 >>sleeping until a certain time (for argument lets say  3 AM) then
 >>record static from there on in?

 >>If it recorded as you say nothing but static I would have the
 >>camera checked, no aliens involved there.

 >Hi Dave,

 >Havn't you ever thought these 'aliens' (entities or whatever?)
 >are:-

 >Advanced enough to understand all our technology, behaviour
 >patterns etc

 >Therefore making a video look like just static shouldn't be
 >beyond them, should it?

It's not beyond us either.

It is however interesting to note that my earlier question: "Was
the video showing time and date and did it record her sleeping
until a certain time (for argument lets say  3 AM) then record
static from there on in?" went completely unanswered.

 >Perhaps we should be asking a) why 'they' do this b) how can we
 >proof that would convince everyone?

Well isn't that the sort of thing I am asking? Where is the
evidence??

 >>>There is also a case, reported in one of Ray Fowler's books,
 >>>where an abductee woke long enough one night to see an alien in
 >>>his hallway examining his motion detector.  The alien mentally
 >>>suggested he return to sleep, and he did.  Apparently the
 >>>detector never went off.  Sorry I can't cite chapter and verse
 >>>on this one; I've read too many of Fowler's books by now.

 >>>Is that a sufficient answer for you Dave?

 >>Well the second one could have been a dream. Let's face it,
 >>we've all had some weird dreams at one time or another.

 >>If the person in this case was hyped up enough about aliens to
 >>install a motion detector then surely aliens were foremost in
 >>their mind when they went to sleep.

 >>And as you said the motion detector did not go off.

 >>You have to understand these detectors are not tuned to react to
 >>figments of the imagination, or dreams.

 >A couple of points here Dave....

 >A dream doesn't rip your bed clothes off & dump you in the
 >corner of the room 2 or so hours later covered in brusies etc!
 >Esp: with with the house alarm still on.....

I do recall the time you were thrown across the room and left
with bruises, but this was because you were electrocuted and had
to go to hospital. The whole thing left you with a very poor
short term memory for a few weeks. There could be some confusion
here unless you have any witnesses to show the above was a
separate event.

 >Point 2, you have filmed the 'entity' in the studio here, but it
 >has never tripped the motion detectors in the alarm system.

This is very true, I along with others did see what you refer to
as the 'entity' and was lucky enough to capture it on camera.
The image is on Roy Hale's website if anyone's interested.

I sent a full report along with picture to Nick Pope who rang me
to say that although interesting as it was, it would seem to be
a little out of his field of expertise.

I agree, I do not believe it was anything to do with aliens, I
had the feeling I was watching an (as of yet unexplained)
natural phenomena.

 >Well maybe they'll pay you a visit at 3am eh Dave?

Doubtful, I have mostly happy dreams, normally involving some
Scandinavian woman with a cleavage you could ski down and a
large tub of lard.

Anyway, see you on Monday Marc

Dave.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 22:58:41 +0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:34:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:45:16 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:43:23 +0800

 >>>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 14:01:54 -0500
 >>>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>On the third day of encounters, the family, in a state of terror
 >>>and shock, called one of their neighbors to come help them.  The
 >>>neighbor, pseudonym of "Jill", arrived with a camera and began
 >>>taking photographs of a red-eyed being standing just beyond a
 >>>sliding glass door in the back yard. Unfortunately, "Jill" was
 >>>too afraid or forgot to open the glass door and the flash from
 >>>the camera reflected off the glass door obscuring any images of
 >>>the red-eyed being.  When she got the photographs back from the
 >>>photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
 >>>doors - or so she thought.

 >>I have yet to view these photos and I will do shortly, but
 >>doesn't this seem just a little tooooo convenient?

 >Are you saying, Sharon, that the glare on the glass door was
 >intended?

Not at all Amy, I'm not one for inferences without facts. All I
said was the excuse was convenient for something so important.

 >Actually, it was an accident.  I think I too would be afraid to
 >open a glass door if some red-eyed being stood on the other
 >side, wouldn't you?

Not if that was the purpose of me being there, as you pointed
out.  If I had the courage to be there intentionally in the
first place I would make sure of something as simple as the door
being open

 >But read the story because the second image that showed up was
 >even better than the first image.  The second image was also
 >discovered by accident two years after the encounters - my kids
 >and I were the ones who discovered it. No one said, "Keep
 >looking because you might find another critter in the photos."
 >The witnesses involved had pretty much gone on with their lives
 >and forgotten the events.  No one sought recognition - that's
 >why all names are pseudonyms.  You'd think that if it were a
 >hoax, the individuals involved would want some kind of attention
 >brought to themselves.  Not in this case.

I never said it was a hoax, but there always seems to be a
convenient explanation for the lack of evidence or as in this
case, 'ruined' evidence.

 >Sharon, I investigated this case and I am a healthy skeptic.  In
 >fact, there are even those who call me a debunker because I am
 >so hard to convince.  It wasn't just the witnesses and their
 >story, it wasn't just the photos that convinced me but all the
 >information put together.  You can't take one without the other.

If the photos are not clear, and contain obscured objects, they
are not a very good back up of the story.  It's been so easy for
people to run around saying I have a story, I was abducted by
aliens and here are the photos to prove it but I forgot the
flash, or it was so dark.

 >You can't always manage the events that occur during a close
 >encounter so that the evidence stacks up the way critics and
 >skeptics demand to their satisfaction.  These things can happen
 >so fast that few people even have the sense to grab a camera.
 >The neighbor that joined the others on the third night knew to
 >take a camera because she had had experiences all her life and
 >knew some of the traces that can be found after such encounters.
 >Her story alone is incredible.  The beings probably came
 >searching for her but she was out of town and something
 >attracted them to "Cathy's" house (what was it that attracted
 >them? you'd be surprised <grin>).

So the enighbour went to the house with a camera and the sole
intention of capturing the most elusive 'thing' in history, I am
extremely surprised the door wasn't open waiting for the
creatures to appear.  We're not talking about some spur of the
moment incident.  You said she herself experienced it all her
life.  She was experienced in this matter.  And everything was
set but the one thing that would put doubt over the situation, a
barrier that glared the photo and therefore the true reality of
the situation.

 >Ya know, if people would just allow some things to be possible
 >without believing, and ask questions, explore, they would learn
 >so much more.  I have learned so much from this investigation
 >and just wanted to share it with others.  I didn't even tell
 >very many people it was posted on my web site because I hate the
 >way abduction stories are sensationalized. Recently I began
 >offering it to various magazines and others because I decided
 >maybe it would mean something to someone and I need to make it
 >more available as I have moved on to other projects.  I will not
 >forget those who have had enough of an open mind (and manners)
 >to at least express an interest.  Those who have told me it
 >didn't happen or the photos look fake or cannot be published
 >because they'd rather print stories about Bigfoot will also stay
 >in my memory and amuse me through all my endeavors.

 >Give people fuzzy photos of alleged UFOs and they gather in awe.
 >Give 'em photos of alleged aliens and they turn away in
 >disbelief.   UFOs can exist but not aliens.  Bigfoot can exist
 >but not aliens.  Go figure.

I guess people running around with blurry photos and exclaming
proof doesn't really help the situation much.

 >I've learned a lot about the status of the consensual reality
 >and the limits of our beliefs.

Limits of our belief, or the lack of limits on our gullability?
Guess it depends on what you see in the glare....


Cheers
Sharon








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 11:18:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:54:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 01:38:49 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 05:56:19 GMT


 >>Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

 >>Oct 12 1999 08:11:32 ET

 >>DENVER (Reuters) - A Colorado cattle rancher hopes that if she
 >>builds a UFO watch tower, aliens -- and tourists -- will come.

<snippage>

 >>"The county has quite a few UFO watchers.

 >>Messoline plans to charge $2 for adults and $1 for children..

 >>.. She said
 >>the watch tower would even have an alien-themed gift shop.

 >If I were a space alien, I would avoid the place like the plague.

Does the term 'Cargo Cult' mean anything here?

KRandle







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                   Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Bruce Mccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:36:39 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 07:13:23 -0400
Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


Anyone who would like to read a technical discussion of the
reflection characteristics of the hood of Ed's old truck
(reference, the discussion of his photo 19) email me at
brumac@compuserve.com.  This is not a small email (41K text and
over a meg of illustrations)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 14:09:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:18:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 14:51:54 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Don Allen <dona@amigo.net>
 >Subject: Re: Colorado Woman to Build a UFO Watch Tower

<snip>

 >Hooper is 35 miles due south from me. It is an ideal UFO landing
 >area as there is absolutely nothing there but a tiny post
 >office, the only gas station before Alamosa and lots of land
 >with scrub brush and rocks. They aren't too far from the Sand
 >Dunes, a real tourist draw.   About the only significant air
 >traffic between Hooper, Moffat and Crestone/Baca has been
 >overflights of the National Guard, a very controversial issue
 >with the locals here, since the flights are just barely above
 >the mountain top level over Crestone, and Kit Carson peaks, two
 >of the highest peaks in Colorado.

 >A good book containing the UFO lore of the San Luis Valley ("The
 >Mysterious Valley") is Chris O'Brien's "Enter the Valley".
 >Cattle mutes, abductions, sightings,  and just plain wierdness.


Hello Don:

I agree that ordinarily this would be ideal UFO-turf, if past
history is any key. Relative remoteness, lack of scheduled air
traffic, previous sightings etc. all seem to fit the mold.

_But_ (and I should have made this more clear) the slightest
hint that somebody is trying to invite or lure UFOs down for a
landing, on a special "landing pad" etc., has to make one
chuckle.

I read someplace that if duck-decoys look the slightest bit
"hokey", the ducks will avoid the pond like poison (as well
they should).

I presume that anyone who can direct a UFO from "there" to
"here", will have the intelligence of a duck.

I have toyed with the idea of a place just as you describe, with
very subtle lures, and I stress the word subtle.

I recall reading about some fellow in western Canada with plans
for an "Alien Spaceport",  complete with a full-sized fake
flying saucer! I don't recall the location,  but it might be in
Sasketchewan.

Very best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS:   There is still the problem of proper toilet and dining
facilities for the aliens if they should land regardless.

As a human, I wouldn't mind visiting at all...
But, aliens?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                      Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 10-15-99

From: Rense E-News <jocelyn@dewittec.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 19:47:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:24:28 -0400
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 10-15-99


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

                         The Week Ahead
                     10-17-99 thru 10-23-99

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

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

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

                      * FROM JEFF'S DESK *

The tabs continue to feed voraciously on the ET issue.
Here are some of the latest.  There is no shame with these
publications... and they sell by the millions each week.
Occasionally, some legitimate and important material is
published but it is lost in the downpour of garbage.  With
their endless supply of 'unnamed sources'...and computer
graphics wizards... there is no end in sight.  All we can do
is laugh...

                2 Ton Alien Hairball Found In Oz

        Weekly World News <http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/

    According to Weekly World News reporter Mike Foster, "leading
    geneticist" Ian McCaulway says a two-ton spherical object
    found in the Australian outback is actually a memento of some
    enormous extraterrestrial's digestive tract.

    Foster said DNA testing performed on the sphere had produced
    inconclusive results, although the inclusion of some kangaroo
    and cow material in the sphere indicated that the object's
    creator had fed on those creatures shortly before extruding
    the sphere.

    The sphere had originally been found by UFO buff Pat Tambrush
    a few days after a large UFO was sighted over the Great Sandy
    Desert of northwestern Australia. Upon ascertaining that the
    object was not in fact a spacecraft, Tambrush rolled it back
    to display in front of his bar.

    McCaulway speculated that the object -- actually a 15-foot
    [5 meter] diameter mass of hair and digestive matter -- was
    the product of some alien pet.

    "It's possible this hairball comes from a domesticated animal
    of extraterrestrial origin," he told the News. "Human
    explorers since the days of Christopher Columbus have brought
    pets such as cats along on their journeys."

    Although Foster said the sphere was now under study at "a
    research center near Sydney," no additional details were
    forthcoming to independently confirm the story. Likewise, no
    record of McCaulway or his undoubtedly distinguished genetic
    career was immediately available.


                       Holy Water Found On Moon

           Weekly World News <http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/


    Although NASA spokesmen recently confirmed that the Lunar
    Prospector found
<http://www.space.com/news/planetarymissions/lunarprospector_991013.ht
ml> no water on the lunar surface, the Weekly World News
    stubbornly insists that the probe not only discovered water,
    but holy water at that.

    According to "a high-level NASA insider," the probe found at
    least 120 gallons of water shortly after crashing on the moon
    July 31.

    However, in a dramatic turn of events, the informant told the
    News that NASA "began to get signals back from the craft
    indicating that every system was coming back on line -- as if
    it had somehow been 'healed.'"

    Surprised technicians were then able to bring the revived
    Prospector -- along with a sample of the miraculous substance
    -- back to earth under its own power, the supermarket tabloid
    reported in its <http://www.space.com/area51/tabwrap_991013.html>
    October 19 issue.

    When analyzed, the lunar water turned out to be "natural holy
    water," in the insider's words, with a chemical composition
    more or less identical to the healing waters at the
    pilgrimage center of Lourdes, the source told the News.

    As such, it is perhaps not surprising that the substance's
    curative properties extended beyond broken space vehicles to
    human beings as well. NASA researchers were dumbfounded to
    discover that four cancer patients went into complete
    remission within hours of being exposed to the moon water,
    the News said.

    As far as
<http://www.space.com/news/planetarymissions/lunarprospector_991013.ht
ml> official sources at the space agency know, the probe
    did not actually find any water on the moon, nor did it enjoy
    a miraculous resurrection and return to earth.


           Japanese Woman And ET Near 7 Year Anniversary
         Weekly World News <http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/>

    A Japanese woman and the space alien she learned to love are
    nearing their 7-year wedding anniversary, the Weekly World
    News reported recently.

    Receptionist Miyoki Tanaka, 25, married the extraterrestrial
    known only as "X1431" on March 29, 1993, in a traditional
    Shinto ceremony, the supermarket tabloid said in its
    <http://www.space.com/area51/tabwrap_991013.html> October 19
    issue.

    The couple lives in an isolated area near Nagoya, Japan,
    where they were married after an involved two-year
    negotiation between their families. The aliens, who were
    hoping to bolster the cause of interplanetary cooperation
    and peace by arranging the nuptials, have since acted in an
    unspecified capacity to help the Tanaka family's restaurant
    business.

    "We've both had to make a lot of adjustments," Tanaka told
    the News. "He has a nasty habit of floating around the room
    at night, which is distracting when you're trying to sleep."

    While undoubtedly fascinating, any parallels between X1431
    and Japanese folkloric entities remain obscure as yet.
    However, it is noteworthy that the alien hates Tanaka's
    cooking, preferring to subsist on a diet of "shoe polish and
    brine," and is given to producing earsplitting shrieks when
    excited.

    Because X1431 has never bothered to learn Japanese or
    English, the couple communicates telepathically.  In a
    wedding photograph credited to the "Japan News Press," he is
    shown as a classic small-nosed Gray in formal kimono. Tanaka
    appears sullen but resigned.

    No children are mentioned.

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

All human beings are becoming humanoids. All over the world, not
just in America. We're just getting there faster since we're the
most advanced country.  -- from the movie "Network"

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

                          HOLLOW PLANETS
                         by Jan Lamprecht

     Do we live in a solar system composed of hollow planets?
           http://www.immunotex.com/books/agharta/

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

                         * TOP STORIES *

            Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
                     http://www.sightings.com

    * 'Someone's Watching Over Us' - Major Donald Keyhoe
    * Y2K - Extremely Useful List Of Embedded Systems And
         Equipment Failures
    * Hitler Suicide Bunker Unearthed
    * Canada Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex
    * Clinton Shuts Out Loggers/Miners From 2/3 Of Remaining
         US Wild Lands
    * China Executes Millennium Sect Founder For 'Satanic
         Activities'
    * Provable Accusations Against American Public Schools
    * Triangle Observes HS Football-Octagon Craft Over Georgia
         - Cops See UFO Show
    * New Chinese ICBM Passes Test Simulations - Can Hit Most
         Of US
    * National Physicians And Surgeons Assn Advises Stopping
         Mandatory Vaccinations
    * US Doctors Kill More People That Guns And Traffic Accidents
    * Huge Unseen Planet Proposed Circling Our Sun - Nibiru?
    * Colt Firearms Owned By Jewish Iraqi Citizen Out To
         Dismantle It?
    * The Next Bilderberg Meeting Set For November 4-5 In DC
    * Gold Battling Price Fixers & Manipulators To Break Into
         A Truly Free Market
    * Caffeine Causes Physical Changes In Brain Cells
    * EXCLUSIVE: The Bay of Pigs - What Really Went Wrong
    * NASA Quite Curious About Firmage's Private Top-Level
         Meeting
    * CIA Probing NY Virus As Possible Terrorist Bio-Terrorism
    * The Evil Empire Lives...With US Support
    * Staggering Implications: US Scientists Use Computer To
         Watch What Cat Brain Sees
    * Immortality On Ice
    * David Icke Under Severe Attack - Efforts To Silence Him
         Increase
    * Wealth Of Archived Remote Viewing Programs Available
    * Another Ancient 'City' Found On Mars?

        Read the entire text of these stories and more at
                     http://www.sightings.com

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

      Just WHY were those 14 books removed from the Bible by the
      church? Could it be the prophecies they didn't want you to
      read?      http://www.immunotex.com/books/apocrypha/

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

                     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
                        10-17 thru 10-23

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

SUN 10-17  ENCORE
   Beverly Eakman:  Losing A Generation Of Children
   Larry Patterson:  6 Year Clinton Bodyguard Talks

MON 10-18
    Bill Parrish:  Microsoft Financial Wrongdoing?
    John A. Quinn:  JFK Jr News Conspiracy Evidence

TUE 10-19
    John Thompson:  UFO Sightings In The South
    Marcia Schafer:  Intergalactic Archaeologist

WED 10-20
    Michael Lindemann  UFO/ET World Report
    Dr. Joseph Chiappalone, MD: Terminal Madness Of The End Time

THU 10-21
    Dr. Louis Turi:  Nostradamus Divine Astrology

FRI 10-22
    John Chambers: Victor Hugo's Channeled Revelations

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

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

                     Get Paid to Surf the Net.
AllAdvantage has already issued checks for over $1000. Not bad!
             http://alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=AMR609

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

                    * PROGRAM INFORMATION *

Program Show Times
         Live Coast-To-Coast
         Monday-Friday 7-10pm Pacific 10-1am Eastern
         Sundays 8-11pm Pacific 11-2am Eastern
Call in Line:
         800 TRN 4123
Program Transcripts at
         http://www.immunotex.com/rense/
Sightings Artwork/Neff Galleries/Webmastering:
         http://www.anc.net/~neff/
Program Audio Tapes
         888 456-4340
Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives
         http://www.sightings.com
Advertising-Over 3 MILLION visitors to sightings.com each month
         Cost effective exposure for YOUR product or service
         mailto:jocelyn@dewittec.net?Subject=Advertising
Sightings.com info/email center
         http://www.sightings.com/1.mail/infocenter.html
Jeff Rense Y2K RESOURCE CENTER
         http://www.sightings.com/y2kresource/y2k1r.html
Discussion Forum
         http://www3.bravenet.com/forum/show.asp?userid=hj135985
Free Greeting Cards featuring the artwork of James Neff:
         http://www.immunotex.com/rense/cards/cards.html

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

Share with your friends!
    Please feel free to forward this issue of the Jeff Rense
    Weekly E-Newsletter to any and all who are interested... but
    please forward in its entirety and do not modify it in any
    fashion without permission. Thank you!

Past issues are archived at http://www.immunotex.com/rense/

-------------------------
To subscribe:
http://www.immunotex.com/rense/rense800/subscribe-form.htm

or mailto:rense_e-groups-subscribe@egroups.com

To unsubscribe:
mailto:rense_e-news-unsubscribe@egroups.com

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

Jeff Rense Weekly E-News is independently produced by ImmunoTex
in cooperation with Jeff Rense. The material and views expressed
herein do not necessarily reflect those of Jeff Rense,
sightings.com, or the Jeff Rense - Sightings Radio Program,
except for the *From Jeff's Desk* segment.

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--
We thank eGroups for providing this tremendous service to us.
The following ad is inserted by eGroups and is not affiliated
with Jeff Rense.
_______________________________________________________________


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

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/rense_e-news
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:14:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:33:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:46:37 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 14:34:42 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:17:02 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:29:26 -0400
 >>>From: Mark Cashman
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >>Previously, Dennis had opined:

 >><snip>

 >>>You express your own doubts about multiple photograph cases, but
 >>>Gulf Breeze goes far beyond that. It is uniquely unique among
 >>>UFO cases. Everytime Ed was handed a challenge (or a new camera
 >>>set up) he came through with supposedly shining colors. This
 >>>came to be taken as proof of the phenomenon rather than, say,
 >>>Ed's own ingenuity.>

<snip>

 >Hi Dennis.


 >More to the point at hand in your posting; much has been made of
 >the difficulty of producing double exposures using Polaroids. In
 >a previous posting I pointed out the error in that line of
 >thinking.

Dear KAGE (Kinder and Gentler Evans)

Didn't require you to point it out. I demonstrated a double
exposure "UFO" hoax with Ed's camera in feb. 1988 as written in
the book 'Gulf Breeze Sightings'.

Only those with little knowledge of Polaroid photogtraphy
have ever suggested it was difficult. But of course,
it requires a "non-normal" use of the camera and so
one must be aware of that capability of the camera to use it.
You can bet your boot disc (modern version of "bet your
boots") that the local investigators watched Ed like hawks
to find out if there was any hint of photographic interest
beyond minimal, and I payed attention to his photographic
understanding, which I found negligible.


 >In addition, it has been pointed out that the photo(s)
 >showing the UFO going behind trees would have been too
 >complicated for Ed to figure out how to do, especially if he
 >used the "newly discovered Hyzer method" requiring a latent
 >image to pre-sensitize a given area of the negative. I'm sorry,
 >but this technique is not new nor is it particularly
 >complicated. Photographers have known about it for years. In
 >fact, a variation of it called "pre-flashing" was/is used to
 >lower the contrast of motion picture film on a regular basis
 >when available light is going to be the source of illumination.
 >It is also used in the darkroom to lower the contrast of prints
 >done from slides or other positive to positive reproduction
 >methods.

Sure, pros use this stuff. Astronomers sensitize film... or they
used to.... by "preflashing" (they use another term I believe).

Anyway, Hyzer applied scientific reasoning and experiments to
determine how to do it. I particular it required a restricted
range of light levels for the initial exposure.. As I have
p;ointed out, the chance of Ed having known about is vanishingly
small. But there is a more important point that rules this out
regardless of what Ed might have known. Hyzer's method requires
that the "dark covering image" (the tree in this case) be so
dark that even with the very slight exposure of the UFO image
(which, by itself is not enough to make a developable picture)
there is not enough total exposure to make a visible image (the
photo reflectivity hardly changes). Operationally this means
that the tree image in photo 1 should have been so dark that
there was no other portion of the picture that was darker. But
Sainio, using the original, did find areas of photo 1 that were
darker (less reflective) than the tree image. Hence Hyzer's
method was not used. (Had it been used, under te lighting
conditions of the photo the UFO image would not have appeared
"hidden" behind the tree... it would have appear ON TOP OF (or
in front of) the tree). Incidently, I strove mightily using Ed's
type of 108 film to create a Hyzer double exposure, even to the
point of calculating luminances, etc. I was never able to hide
even a very dim UFO image "behind" a totally dark "tree" image.

 >Did Ed use the "Hyzer" method? Bruce seems to believe that he
 >did not because Ed isn't clever enough. I tend to agree, but not
 >because Ed isn't clever. On the contrary, the "Hyzer" method
 >would not even be necessary, ESPECIALLY if one is using
 >Polaroids. Why? Because a Polaroid is unique among cameras in
 >that it's "film gate" (the opening surrounding the actual film)
 >is not a fixed part of the camera. Instead, it is part of the
 >disposable film cartridge. Therefore, it is possible to attach
 >masks to the cartridge that would prevent exposure in the "tree
 >area". Additionally, because Polaroids can be processed
 >immediately and (most importantly) privately, numerous tests
 >could be made to be sure the masking is dead on. Even older
 >"wait and peel" Polaroids would allow variations on this
 >technique.

I must admit that I hadn't thought of a "masked double exposure"
in which the mask was effectively at the film plane. Of course,
if you're going to take the film pout of the camera you have
to be in a dark room... a "darkroom".

 >The recipe would be this simple:

Simple?

 >1. Lock the camera down on a tripod pointed at the treeline
 >intended for use as the background. Snap off a print and
 >process.

No place for a tripod. But for the purpose of argument assume
that Ed could make the camea rigid on a tripod in some way.

You now have the camera placed at the location of the background
scene. Better mark that place accurately cause you will have to
replace the camera there for the second expsure of the double
exposure.

 >2. Using a piece of acetate and a fine tip marker, technical
 >pen, fine tip paint brush or other marking tool, trace over the
 >area of the tree line that is supposed to pass infront of the
 >UFO. A steady hand would not be necessary. In fact, the more
 >random the pattern, the better.

Yup, Nice.

 >3. Using the "film gate" as a registration device, tape the
 >acetate square over the opening and place in the camera during
 >photography of the model.

Probably could get close enough this way. Of course, the real
problem is the registration (pointing direction) of the camera
for the second exposure. This is the first exposure,. Light from
the complete model hits the area of the "film gate" but is
blocked by the cutout. (Note: my version of masked exposure
involved putting a mask between the model and the camera lens,
or actually cutting the model in some way.)

 >4. Without changing anything, double expose the background into
 >the shot.

Without changing anything? Whooops. The model is in a dark room
and silhouetted against a black background, but with appropriate
lighting (and being CAREFUL that the light which illuminates the
very bright bottom light of the model does not illuminate the
background cloth).

The outdoor scene is outdoors. Surely you have to change
something.

For example, you have to open the camera and remove the mask. If
you leave the mask, then you won't get the real tree in your
second exposure. Then take the camera, still on the tripod, out
to the location where you first photographed the background
scene. Now somehow manage to assure that it points in exactly
the same direction so that the latent image (undeveloped) of the
left edge of the model where it is supposed to be cut by the
tree is perfectly aligned with the edge of the real tree. I
don't know how you do this. You can't see the latent image. This
is not a reflex camera (the view point is about 3" from the
lens... really sloppy stuff). And Ed managed to take his first
three pictures in a succession that shows clouds moving at a
speed and direction consistent with the known weather. That is,
there were many minutes or many hours between photos. I suppose
he could have used any number of test photos BEFORE #1, but
after #1 he proceeded in a timely manner (presumably to hoax the
rest of them on that first fateful evening).


 >Now, someone might suggest that the "hand drawn" treeline would
 >be a permanent part of the picture if the acetate is not
 >removed. This is correct. But so what? Unless someone compares
 >the actual tree line with the one photographed, no one would
 >notice. It's my bet that no one ever did. The "fake" treeline
 >would simply merge with the darkness of the "real" treeline. The
 >mask would not be perfect, but it would not have to be. As long
 >as some parts of the tree obscure the UFO, the illusion would be
 >complete.

I wouldn't worry about the hand drawn treeline. That would be
the least of my worries with any masked method.

 >But the point is this: The camera could already have the latent
 >image of the UFO on its film negative, complete with "tree"
 >masking, at the time the background is shot.

True,. As I said aboe, my masked method was not exactly like
yours, but it would create the latent model image with the left
edge "cut" where th tree image would then be "placed" during the
second exposure.

<snip>

 >The other point that Bruce brings up is the matching blur of the
 >UFO and the surrounding lights of the background. If they were
 >produced separately they would, indeed, be hard to match. On
 >the
 >other hand, if the master Polaroid were copied on a Polaroid
 >copy stand, it would simply be a matter of moving the print or
 >the camera during exposure time. This would produce a uniform
 >blur on all information within the photo. By careful
 >manipulation of the exposure times and masking, even selected

Yes, yes yes..... all things are possible (?) given enough time,
experience/capability. equipment, money and desire. The idea
that the original pictures were NOT polaroids but large prints
which Ed photographed with his Polaroid camera was also
considered, like 11 years ago?

All this takes photographic sophistication. In order to be in
focus in the final Polaroids it would have been necessary to
have large prints so that the Polaroid camera could be far
enough from them to get a good focus. Of course, in the "full
up" hoax scenario the final Polaroids would not have been taken
with Ed's camera, but some camer with adjustable lenses so that
good focus on primary prints coul be made. The primary prints
themselves would have been blowups from 35 mm fine grained color
film. Naturally the copying process would have been done very
carefully so that there was no indication of glare or unwanted
reflections of the light(s) illuinating the prints. (Ed's photos
were checked diligently for all this stuff. Nothing was found.)

 >Did Ed use the "Evans" method to produce the GB photos? If Ed
 >were clever enough to know how, he'd certainly be clever enough
 >not to admit it. But the truth is that neither act requires a
 >great deal of brain-work. I do special effects for a living and
 >I can tell you this is all old hat technology dating back to the
 >earliest days of photography. If in doubt, go to the library and
 >check it out. Nothing new here.

Sure, Any old "hack" could do it. But not Ed. I recall a pro
photo from Florida...name escapes me now... who was very
suspicious of all this until he actually saw Ed taking some
photos (not UFO photos!) with his old camera. AFterward he said
to me something like this "I could tell by the way Ed held his
camera that he doesn't know anything about photography.)

 >Are the GB photos fake? Who knows? Obviously just because
 >someone can copy the Mona Lisa does not make them a Da Vinci. On
 >the other hand, all this discussion about how technically vexing
 >it would be to produce these photos on Polaroids is pointless.
 >It would be a breeze. Maybe even a Gulf Breeze.

As in any photo case about the best one can hope for is clear
evidence of a fake. Lacking that one has a toss up and then the
proof must fall back on other things, like circumstantial
evidence. One can ask, if the photos are fakes, then would the
photographer have been capable of creating these fakes. My
answer is no.

Also, in this case, Ed's sightings are backed up by other
witnesses who claim to have seen the same thing.

Few people are aware these days of all the argumentation that
went on endlessly from 1988 through 1992 or so and then
continued sporadically over the years. There's hardly a thing
discussed now that wasn't discussed way back when.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:16:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:43:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 11:24:24 -0700

 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:46:36 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda1@turk.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300

 >Hello Bruce,

 >Will you ever find rest?

No,

 >>7. Ed arranged for a single polygraph test with Harvey
 >>McLaughlin, who told me he had done thousands of such tests for
 >>companies that had hired him. When Ed passed the test McLaughlin
 >>didn't believe the result. Therefore when Ed returned for the
 >>results of the test McLaughlin said that there were a few things
 >>he wanted to check and he connected up the polygraph a second
 >>time. In between the tests he had checked up on Ed's UFO
 >>sightings and asked some different questions. Ed was not
 >>expecting a second test, so it was a complete surprise. Ed
 >>passed the second test as well.... no indications of deceit, so
 >>McLaughlin wrote in his report that , in his opinion, Ed was
 >>being truthful.

 >>McLaughlin told me that Ed was not a sociopath or "con man" type
 >>of person who would be likely to tel lies. Dr. Dan Overlade,
 >>clinical psychologist who gave Ed a collection of personality
 >>and psychological tests, told me the same thing. Neither of
 >>these men foun evidence that Ed had lied.>

 >I am looking for a clarification.

 >I went to the mentioned site where it is said:

 >"MUFON's Charles Flannigan setup a polygraph test for Walters
 >with Hugh Jones, a fully accredited and licensed polygrapher.
 >Walters failed to show for the appointment, opting instead to
 >arrange two sessions with a Harvey McLaughlin. McLaughin was
 >apparently not a member of any polygraph association which
 >adhere to standards of practice, principle, and ethical conduct
 >of polygraph examinations. Walters has denied investigators
 >access to his polygraph printouts.">

 >The polygraph printouts are not available to investigators?

 >If this is true, then why not?

 >If this is false, then where can one get the printouts?

Eleven years ago Ed didn't want the polygraph printouts to be
discussed among among UFO investigators and non-professionals.
At the time of the tests his integrity was in question and he
was not happy with all the rumors running around. Perhaps if
another polygraph professional had asked for them he would have
allowed them to be reviewed. Unfortunately no one thought of
that at the time, so far as I know.

I spoke to McLaughlin on Sept. 3, 1988. I was probably the last
persion to have any communication with him on this UFO case.
Haven't a clue as to whether or not he's still in the area or
whether the polygraph charts still exist.

McLaughlin's report was clear, however. He stated that Ed passed
the tests, meaning that in McLaughlin's opinion Ed really
believed in the truth of what he was saying about the UFO
sightings.

McLaughlin was quite clear that he was rather rigorous with ED.
He qusetioned Ed for several hours before each test while
watching closely to determine whether or not there were changes
in Ed's speech patterns or demeanor. M<cLaughlin told he he was
checking to see if there was evidence that Ed was on any drug
that he might have taken before entered the polygrapher's office
in order to "beat" the "lie detector." In other words, Ed's
"belief in th truth of what he was saying" might be an effect of
certain drugs.

McLaughlin said he had had lots of experience with that sort of
thing. But the effects of drugs wear out over time and the
person's speech and or demeanor changes. But he detected no such
effects on Ed, whose speech and demeanor never changed.

The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 17:28:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:55:08 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:46 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >As Rimmer has pointed out eleswhere the onus is on Maxwell Burns
 >to prove his allegations, not his critics.


Well I would go for that line, only his critics are also the
ones shouting loudly that nothing of the sort that Max is
referring to happened. Most critics would either show us
evidence to the contrary, saying  "here is a list of NATO
pilot's names for that night and they can all be checked
independently by everyone who cares to.

This would be the quickest and easiest way to close the case for
good, I would imagine even Max would go for that.

So have you got a list for all to check against?

You can prove to everyone that all pilots returned safely
because you have the list of all the pilot names & numbers
right!

Put downs are great, I love em' I deal with hits like that all
the time.

"East London' your joking this is paradise!"


Roy..                            Keep Smiling..


"We didn't inherit this land from our ForeFather's, we are
borrowing it from the children"





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 17:35:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:54:27 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:27:19 +0100


 >>These are some of the things that persuade me. Amidst the UAP
 >>and misperceptions that I am sure account for 99% of the
 >>evidence there appears to be a low level of contact with another
 >>intelligence more advanced than we.

 >>I am actually personally quite amenable to the argument that these
 >>entities are so human and so interested in our DNA for one very
 >>good reason. They are us - or rather one day they will be.


Well, if that isn't a confused answer I dont know what is.

So now they are Yesterday's People... No, sorry they are
Tommorow's People right?

Pray, enlighten us more with your theory.

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 01:31:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:57:09 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:11:58 +0100

 >Hi,

 >Sadly I can second that. Earlier this summer we had another Peak
 >District 'crash' in which a strange plane and an explosion were
 >reported. This time I was a witness to both and they were, er, a
 >plane and an explosion (undoubtedly from a local quarry or
 >possibly an isolated thunder clap). I don't think the two events
 >were even connected in any sense other than that they occurred
 >within a few minutes of each other.

 >Although (as yet) no ufologist has seized on this as another
 >cause celebre the media did and talk of the phantom plane of the
 >Peaks surfaced again. Utter rot. This was a very real plane not
 >a W.W. II spectre.

 >I spoke with the police in Derbyshire (neighbouring county to
 >South Yorkshire) during the above - essentially as I was a
 >witness in their investigation. The senior officer I talked with
 >knew all about the l997 incident, the crashing Tornado farce and
 >had formed his views of ufologists through that. Had I
 >communicated with Buxton police as a UFO investigator I know I
 >would have been written off as another nutter and given short
 >shrift. Dealing with them as a witness convinced nothing
 >untoward had happened and seeking a rational answer left me on a
 >very different level.

 >We should not really need subterfuge to deal with the
 >authorities. Sadly ufologists are regarded as such vacant minded
 >loonies because of the vociferous pronouncements of a few folk
 >the police see via the media that we virtually have to go
 >undercover to do our job. Another sad legacy of making claims
 >about any case you cannot support with that magical missing
 >ingredient - evidence.

 >Best wishes,
 >Jenny Randles

Thank you Jenny for displaying a sense of maturity, dignity and
clarity-without-knives, in your responses to this thread.  It's
much more attractive to the list than the belligerence I've been
reading and thus responding to.  Dealing with your critique on
this subject is more manageable.

Sincerely,

Sue








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 16

                Re: Phoenix Police Helicopter Accosted By UFO

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 08:19:56
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:59:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Phoenix Police Helicopter Accosted By UFO


Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

Stig

***

From: MitchLeary@webtv.net (Mitchell Leary)
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Phoenix Foo Fighter Accosts Police Helicoptors
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 14:16:34 -0700 (MST)


A report on KFYI News Radio in Phoenix Arizona.

In the late evening of October 14, 1999 a Phoenix Police
helicopter was accosted by what was described as a ball of light
playing cat and mouse with the the aircraft. The radio
transmission between the police helicoptor and another officer
was captured on tape... "It went in all directions, north,
south, east, west, up, down... I tried to fly toward it but it
flew out of my way and then just hovered there..."

Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix was contacted to confirm the
object. Their official response to the police was that the
object was invisible to radar, nothing but the police helicoptor
was visible on the radar.

KFYI News Radio can be contacted at www.kfyi.com if anyone would
like to confirm my story.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 25

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 16:30:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 10:13:02 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 25


UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 25
October 14, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

NEW RADIATION LEAK AT PLANT IN SOUTH KOREA

Less than a week after Japan's worst nuclear accident at
Tokaimura, a new nuclear mishap occurred in South Korea.

On Tuesday, October 5, 1999, workers at a nuclear power plant in
Wolsung, South Korea were repairing a cooling water pump when
the pump began gushing radioactive water.

"At least 22 people were exposed to low-level radiation after
radioactive water leaked at a South Korean power plant Tuesday,
officials said."

""The incident came five days after a major nuclear leak in
Japan, which prompted a flurry of safety checks at South Korean
plants...This was the first reported leak of radioactive
material at a power plant in South Korea."

"South Korea has 14 nuclear power plants, which provide 40
percent of the electricity in the nation of 44 million."

Wolsung is located 304 kilometers (190 miles) southeast of
Seoul.  (See USA Today for October 6, 1999, "S. Koreans exposed
to radiation at power plant," page 12A.)


TOKAIMURA LEADS TO NEW SAFETY CHECKS

"Investigators probed Japan's worst-ever nuclear accident,
focusing on a series of irregularities and missteps that led to
and exacerbated last week's release of radiation."

The accident took place when workers at the JCO Company plant in
Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, Japan accidentally poured too
much uranium oxide into a stainless steel container, setting off
a nuclear chain reaction.  Japanese police and military imposed
a 10-kilometer "off-limits zone" around the town, effectively
quarantining 330,000 people.

"The (Japanese) government also widened its scrutiny of the
country's nuclear facilities, issuing notice that the operating
procedures of all nuclear power companies will be up for
appraisal."

"Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, chairing a meeting of the
government task force on the accident, ordered emergency safety
checks at all facilities in Japan handling nuclear fuel.  The
Science and Technology Agency also plans to search the offices
of 20 nuclear facilities."  (See USA Today for October 5, 1999,
"Japan Nuclear Accident.")

UFO Roundup has learned more about the Japanese military's
efforts to respond to the nuclear accident at Tokaimura.  The
response "was the fastest in the (50-year) history of the Japan
Ground Self-Defense Forces (JGSDF)."

According to Sankei news service, the JGSDF Chemical Warfare
Response Team entered the JCO factory in a specially-
constructed "protective vehicle," a kind of modified Armored
Fighting Vehicle (AFV) like the USA's M2 Bradley

The vehicle "was effective against alpha and beta radiation" but
was unable to offer the team protection against neutrons and
high-energy gamma radiation.  As a result, the "off-limits zone"
was extended out to 10 kilometers.

The JGSDF also requested "complete protective suits" from the
USA Embassy. "They were told that a complete protective suit
does not exist."

The JGSDF has now embarked on a crash program to develop just
such a protective "moon suit" for use by its forces. (Domo
arigato to Miyuki Tamura, UFO Roundup's correspondent in Japan,
for the Sankei report.)


UFO FLAP ERUPTS IN NORTHERN ITALY

On Thursday, September 30, 1999, at 10:40 p.m., pedestrians in
the Centrocette section of Rome, Italy's capital, spotted a
strange bright object in the sky.

According to Aurelio Nicolazzo of Centro Ufologico Nazionale
d'Italia, the UFO "was represented as a comet with a short body,
very brilliant but small.  It moved in a westerly direction at a
low angle and at an unusual speed.  It first appeared as a point
high in the sky" and was in view until right after 11 p.m.

Earlier that evening, a motorist returning home to Verona from
work spotted "a strange luminous object high in the air" over
Mantova.

The UFO "was at 1,400 meters (4,620 feet) and fluttering in the
air.  The object had a triangular shape and was composed of two
colors, one a shade of silver, the other leaning a little
towards greenish-yellow.  The object remained in view for 15 to
20 seconds.  The OVNI (Italian acronym for UFO--J.T.) was at a
distance of one kilometer (0.6 miles) from the motorist."

Mantova is 150 kilometers (90 miles) southeast of Milano
(Milan).

On Sunday, October 3, 1999, "an OVNI with a red and violet
contrail" was seen over Scanno, a small town on the Adriatic Sea
near Pescara, about 210 kilometers (125 miles) east of Rome,
"drawing the curiosity of dozens of people.  Most saw it as a
point of molten luminous glow in the upper sky."  (See the
Italian newspaper Il Centro for October 4, 1999.  Grazie a
Alfredo Lissoni e Massimo Marasi di CUN-Parma per questo
rapporto.) (Editor's Comment: "Red and violet contrail," eh?
This could be Italy's first sighting of those mysterious
chemtrails.)


UFO SQUADRON SEEN EAST OF MELBOURNE

On Saturday, October 2, 1999, at 7 p.m., residents of Ferntree
Gully, Victoria state, Australia, a suburb just east of
Melbourne, "report sighting six or seven lights, slow- moving
orange fireballs," passing overhead from south to north.

"At first respondents reported sighting a group of five
illuminations about 1,500 to 2,000 feet up, slowly heading away.
The illuminations did not flicker and were very high, with a
huge glow, passing under the local hills horizon.  A second
group followed."

The weather in eastern Australia that evening, from Tasmania to
northern Queensland, consisted of heavy to light fog.  (Many
thanks to Australian ufologist Ross Dowe for this report.)


MORE UFOs SPOTTED IN DANDRIDGE, TENNESSEE

More UFOs were seen in Dandridge, Tennessee (population 1,540)
last week, but the current flap came to an abrupt end on
Saturday night, October 9, 1999.

Eyewitness Patricia G. reported, "What we have been seeing
(every night) is simply a pulsating white light with
bluish-green and red lights blinking within it.  Most times the
blinking can be seen with the naked eye.  The objects were oval
and sometimes stayed in place for a few hours.  I have seen it
at 8:30 p.m. and at 2 o'clock in the morning."

"Sometimes there are many of them scattered throughout the sky.
We have counted up to six one evening.  We have watched these
things through two telescopes, each with a tripod. We just refer
to them as 'the guys in the sky.' I am really a bit tired of
this."

On Sunday, Patricia reported that the nightly visitations had
ended the previous midnight.

Another eyewitness, Angela T., age 20, who lives in Jefferson
City, Tennessee (population 5,494), reported a strange UFO
incident that took place in July 1999.

"One evening in July, I was coming home from school," Angela
reported, "I go to school at night, get out at 10 p.m.  I live
about 25 to 30 miles from school.  I left college at 10:07 p.m.
I remember that distinctly because I looked at my watch before I
left to get into my car, thinking it will take me about a
half-hour (30 minutes) to get home."

"On my way home this Thursday night, on Dumplin Valley Road, I
saw this bright white light rise from the left side of my car
and go right over the top of me.  It moved swiftly to the right
and disappeared into the sky.  It seemed very close to me and
was very bright."

"When I came home, nearly in a panic, and told my husband, I
froze when I looked at the clock.  It said 10:15 p.m.  There's
no possible way that I came home in (only) eight minutes.  It
was very odd."  (Email Interviews)

Dandridge is 23 miles (36 kilometers) east of Knoxville,
Tennessee.  Jefferson City is on Highway 11 about 24 miles (38
kilometers) northeast of Knoxville and 9 miles (14 kilometers)
north of Dandridge.

(Editor's Comment: I've heard of "missing time" before, but this
is the first case of "accelerated time" I've ever reviewed.  Nor
are these the only strange doings in the Knoxville area.  Read
on.)


BRIGHT UFO SEEN IN EASTERN KENTUCKY

On Sunday, October 3, 1999, at 8:46 p.m., Ray Lynch was in the
town of Middlesboro, Kentucky (population 11,328) when he saw a
UFO.

"I was standing in the field across the street, looking into the
sky when I saw it," Ray reported.  "An oval-shaped object moved
across the sky.  It must have been going no more than 40 miles
per hour (64 kilometers per hour).  It had brightly colored
lights and looked to be spinning.  It looked like the shape was
changing as it moved across the sky. Then it split into three
ships.  It was heading south by southeast (towards
Knoxville--J.T.).  It looked to be about (at an altitude of) 130
feet high and moved at about 40 miles per hour."

Middlesboro is on Highway 74 just north of the Tennessee state
line and 50 miles (80 kilometers) north of Knoxville. (Email
Form Report)


UFO SEEN TWICE OVER WICHITA, KANSAS

On Thursday, September 30, 1999, at 7:15 p.m., Bob V. was
driving on Kellogg Street, a.k.a. Highway 54, in Wichita
(population 304,011), the largest city in Kansas, when he
spotted a UFO.

"I was traveling west when I spotted a huge bright object in the
western sky.  It was not any plane.  It was moving towards the
south or the southwest, and upwards."

Bob saw the same UFO again on Monday, October 4, 1999 at about
7:30 p.m. This time, he added, "the object appeared to be very
large and illuminated.  The shape was difficult to make out, but
it seemed like a large boat or ship.  The object appeared to be
heading towards the west/southwest and was in my view for 15 to
20 seconds.  This was definitely something other than a regular
aircraft."  (Email Interview)

Wichita is on Interstate Highway I-235, approximately 140 miles
(204 kilometers) southwest of Topeka, the state capital.


UFO PHOTOGRAPHED IN NORWAY DURING THE 1954 ECLIPSE

The UFOs photographed and videotaped in the UK and France during
the August 11, 1999 eclipse are not the first of their kind. A
UFO was photographed in Norway during the total eclipse of July
1, 1954.

Norwegian scientists were flying in a rented airliner at an
altitude of 13,000 feet, over the Hardangervidde National Park
240 kilometers (150 miles) west of Oslo, the national capital.

As the eclipse reached totality, "a photographer named Bjornulf
took a 35mm color film from the window of the cabin, as did two
other cameramen."

"When the pictures were processed, all the photographers were
surprised to see in the center, below the solar corona, an oval
glowing white disc standing out against the blackness of the
sky.  The disc moved rapidly across the skyline."  (See the
Norwegian newspaper Fremtiden Drammen for July 2, 1954.)


Y2K: DEFENSE CHIEF SETS UP NEW MILITARY COMMAND

On Thursday, October 7, 1999, USA Defense Secretary William
Cohen "established a new military command here (in Norfolk,
Virginia)... that will direct troops and equipment in response
to terrorist attacks on U.S. soil."

"The (USA) military must 'deal with the threats we are most
likely to face,' Cohen said, brushing aside concerns about
federal troops operating at home.  'The American people should
not be concerned about it.  They should welcome it.'"

"Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Hugh Shelton joined
Cohen at ceremonies establishing U.S. Joint Forces Command and
retiring the U.S. Atlantic Command.  The new command will make
sure U.S. troops are prepared to fight abroad or to respond if
terrorists strike with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons."

"Federal troops have been legally barred since 1878 (by the
Posse Comitatus Act--J.T.) from taking part in domestic law
enforcement. Only the National Guard of the state and
territorial governors, performs those tasks when local
authorities are overwhelmed.  But terrorist incidents in recent
years, including the release of poison gas in the Tokyo subway
and the World Trade Center bombing (in New York City--J.T.) have
prompted Congress and the Clinton administration to ease some
restrictions."

"Only the military has enough equipment to operate in a poisoned
environment or manage a massive decontamination effort.  Cohen
said federal law will not be violated because the military would
only respond if requested. 'It is subordinate to civilian
control,' he said."

"Military involvement in domestic issues has not always gone
smoothly.  Marines beefing up patrols along the border with
Mexico mistakenly shot and killed an 18-year-old gost herder in
1997.  That force has since been withdrawn.  And questions
remain regarding the presence of the military's Delta Force
during the deadly 1993 raid on the Branch Davidian compound in
(Waco) Texas."

"'We should keep scenes from movies like The Siege and Enemy of
the State in the theaters, not on the streets,' said Gregory
Nojeim, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties
Union."  (See USA Today for October 8, 1999, "Military chiefs
set up command to address U.S. terrorist threats.") (Editor's
Comment:Since the last terrorist attack was the Oklahoma City
bombing four years ago, I wonder what the new JOINTFOR is all
about.  I see two possibilities.  Either there is an imminent
terrorist threat the Clinton administration is not discussing
with the public.  Or the new command may be part of Operation
Abacus, the planned NATO military response to civil unrest
caused by the Y2K computer crisis.)


from the UFO Files...

1912: YOWIE SIGHTED IN NEW SOUTH WALES

The southeastern tip of New South Wales, near Bombala, N.S.W.
and the Victoria state line, has long been the stamping grounds
of the yowie, Australia's hair-covered hominid.

Indeed, the Bombala area is much like the Blue Mountains near
Walla Walla, Washington state, USA, with its many, many reports
of Bigfoot sightings.

One of the earliest reported yowie sightings took place on
October 12, 1912 when George Summerell, riding on horseback
along a trail, spotted a creature on all fours drinking from a
small stream.

Summerell's first thought was, What an immense kangaroo!

"But, on hearing the horse's feet on the track, it (the
creature) rose to its full height, of about seven feet, and
looked quietly at the horsemen.  Then, stooping down again, it
finished its drink, and then, picking up a stick that lay by it,
walked steadily away up the slope to the right, or eastern side
of the road, and disappeared among the rocks and timber 150
yards away."

"Summerell described the face as being like that of an ape or
man, minus forehead and chin, with a great trunk all one size
from shoulders to hips and with arms that nearly reached to its
ankles."

Summerell rode to the nearest town and brought back several
people to view the scene of the encounter.  They found "about a
score of footprints (that) attested to the truth of Summerell's
account, the handprints where the animal had stooped at the edge
of the water being especially plain.  These handprints differed
from a large human hand chiefly in having the little fingers set
much like the thumbs."

"A striking peculiarity was revealed, however, in the
handprints; these, resembling an enormously long and ugly human
foot in the heel, instep and ball, had only four toes--long
(nearly five inches), cylindrical, and showing evidence of
extreme flexibility.  Even in the prints  which had sunk deepest
into the mud, there was no trace of the 'thumb' of the
characteristic ape's 'foot.'"

"Beside perhaps a score of new prints, there were old ones
discernible, showing that the animal had crossed the creek at
least a fortnight previously."  (See the Sydney Morning Herald
for October 23, 1912.  See also Unexplained Mysteries of the
Twentieth Century by Janet and Colin Bord, Contemporary Books,
Chicago, Ill. 1989, pages 211 and 212.)

Well, that's it for this week.  Join us in seven days for more
UFO news from around the planet, brought to you by "the paper
that goes home-- UFO Roundup."  See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan Productions, all
rights reserved.  Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup
on their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of the issue
in which the news item first appeared.

MyPoints:

The MyPoints(R) Program pays you for using the Internet. You can
get Points for activities like visiting Web sites, clicking on
ad banners, making a purchase, reading an email and much more.
The Points you earn are redeemable for merchandise and services
from MyPoints(R) partners such as The Sharper Image, Marriott,
Hyatt, Barnes & Noble, Sony, Spiegel, T.J. Maxx, Marshalls,
Olive Garden and Red Lobster. What could be easier!

http://www.directleads.com/ad.html?o=149&a=cd3492

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>

UFO Roundup: http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                            Tornado Crash Puzzle

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 06:33:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 10:13:17 -0400
Subject: Tornado Crash Puzzle


For those following the debate over the imaginary "Tornado
crash" in the English Peak District during 1997, the following
may be of interest.

On the morning of Thursday, October 14, 1999 a REAL Tornado GR1
ground attack aircraft crashed into a field near Kirkheaton in
Northumberland, killing both the pilot and the co-pilot.

Witnesses told of seeing an "horrendous fireball" as the Tornado
- which had been involved in a low-flying exercise - impacted
into the ground, leaving wreckage strewn some 400 metres across
the area and a hole five to six feet deep in a field.

Please note these details: many witnesses, enormous fireball,
wreckage strewn 400 metres, six foot hole in the ground.

Furthermore, within minutes of the crash police, fire fighters,
ambulance, RAF military police and mountain rescue - not to
mention dozens of Press - were swarming around the area.

You can take a car and drive to the scene today as the wreckage
could take weeks to remove while the MOD inquiry kicks into
action.

Last night military personnel were openly guarding the crash
site, 20 miles from Newcastle-upon-Tynem awaiting an air
accident team to arrive.

Note also that within hours of the tragedy unfolding, the RAF
Press Office had released the names of the pilot and co-pilot,
Flight Lieutenant Richard Wright and navigator Flight Lieutenant
Sean Casabayo, both 30.

Within minutes of this information arriving, colleagues of mine
had obtained the addresses and phone numbers of both men's
families and had spoken to the devastated girlfriend of
Casabayo, who is three months pregnant.

The grief of the families of these two brave fliers, both of
whom had ten years experience, was very real and puts into
context those claims that the death of an airman could be
successfully concealed for more than 2 years.

This is real life;

This is how news breaks about real aircrashes - and the facts
are that it would be impossible for a 20 tonne Tornado jet to
crash into an area sandwiched between two of the largest and
heavily populated cities in northern England without the Press
hearing about it.

As John Rimmer has pointed out the Peak moors are not  the Nevada
Desert - they are criss-crossed by roads, and literally hundreds of people
from Sheffield and Manchester hike across them every weekend.

On the night in 1997 we are discussing, police and civilian mountain rescue
teams were scouring the area within minutes of the reports of a low-flying
aircraft being received.

Hundreds of mountain rescue volunteers, all of whom are highly
skilled and are familiar with every nook and cranny of those
moors, were present and found nothing to indicate a crash had
taken place. It is also clear the RAF did not take the incident
seriously, as it took them over an hour to authorise a single
search and rescue helicopter to join the civilian search effort.

All the civilians involved including PDMRO chief Mike France, a
personal friend of mine, noted the "half-hearted" attitude of
the military to the whole incident.

If there had been even a whiff of suspicion that a military jet
had been really been lost, those area would have been crawling
with RAF personnel.

Heat-seeking equipment was used to scour every inch of the moors
- equipment which can pick out a man smoking a cigarette on the
ground, that is how sensitive it is (I have seen this equipment
in operation).

No signs of any wreckage were found - no signs of any fire
either.

When I arrived at the scene early on the morning of March 25 it
was clear from all the evidence given by the police, fire
fighters and mountain rescue that there was no possibility that
a crash site could have been overlooked.

None of the 500 plus team had seen any evidence of ground
activity by military personnel, other than the single RAF Sea
King (and that had been directed by civilians from the ground!).

When a privately owned Hawker Hunter jet crashed into that same
area of Peak District hole it left an enormous crater in the
peat and smoking debris scattered over hundreds of metres
(testimony from Brian Jones, senior Peak Park Ranger, January
1998)

This, Roy Hale, is the evidence. It is not necessary to produce
the names of every single RAF/NATO pilot who was flying that
night to "prove" they all returned safely. Only a fool or the
ignorant would continue to claim such nonsense in the wake of
expert evidence.

These are the facts which lay to rest once and for all the
claims made by ignorant people who have used the imaginary
deaths of others to promote their lurid fantasies.

But at the end of the day, the Northumberland Tornado crash
contains one interesting and significant detail which may be
relevant to the Howden Moors event.

Witnesses have told Press reporters how they saw a light
aircraft flying very low in the area seconds before the Tornado
jet came over.

Horse-rider Gale Brown, 37, said: "We get jets over all the
time, but the little passenger plane was like a stranger in the
camp. It looked like a ten-seater aircraft with windows down the
side."

Another witness, Jeremy Bolam, said: "It was not a fighter
plane, it looked like a small passenger jet. It definitely had
the RAF markings on it, though.

It flew over the village of Belsay and disappeared."

The RAF have so far denied that any other aircraft were in the area at the
time.

But drawing comparisons with the events of March 24, 1997, those
who have followed the case will remember that a number of people
in Sheffield reported seeing a low-flying aircraft with
unfamiliar lighting configurations just minutes after the
low-flying exercise by Tornadoes ended.

One of them, Police Special Constable Marie France Tattersfield,
told me:

"It was the weirdest thing I have ever seen..it was big and it
was well below the legal altitude for night-flying. All its
windows were lit up which made it look even more odd as no pilot
would fly blind at that time of night over these hills."

The Northumberland incident makes me suspect more than ever that
the aircraft which triggered the 999 calls to Sheffield police
on March 24, 1997, belonged to the RAF and had been involved
somehow in the low-flying exercise over the Peak which had
finished minutes before.

Max Burns was right about one thing - there has certainly been a
cover-up over this incident.

However, the cover-up did not conceal evidence of ETs, but
simply a clumsy training mission by the military.

Full background details about the Howden Moor case can be found
at:

www.pufori.org/articles/howden_moor/index_nf.htm

and

www.iun.org/index2.htm

All best wishes,

Dave Clarke

"The Skeptick doth neither affirm, neither denie any position;
but doubteth of it."

                                          - Sir Walter Raleigh







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #321

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 06:48:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 10:13:54 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #321


Apology to MW #321 (For October 16, 1999)

I'm berated for intelligence you're advised that I'm without,
but it's not me that's laughing up my sleeve -- _you_ do
without. It's not me that figures with my metrics all mixed up
in an English that is awkward, and outdated, clumsy, -- rough.
And this is what they'd have you think if they would have their
way, that this is why the probe was lost -- was burnt up, "gone"
they say. It was teaspoons used for liters (?), or a gram was
used for pounds; English used for metric? It's astounding! It
confounds! On the face a simple problem that Joe Sixpack
understands. The *bother* of translation was an _early_ problem,
Stan. But science has a language that it prides itself upon, and
metric is that measure that they drag their carts along!

This insult to intelligence will, likely, _not_ be challenged,
and makes me wonder what _else_ hides -- so equally
unchallenged. These were figures checked and rechecked 'till
they fairly shrieked and screamed. These figures were not *pen
and ink*, and wrought by hand, you see? Computers crunched
_these_ numbers, and they'd done it fine before. Why was _this_
time different? Did a monkey mind the store? Dimensional
analysis is what they would have used... for someone
_needing_ (?) English so "a probe" is not abused. Computers
count parameters that WE can _not_ keep straight! The numbers
are exceeded and alarms should go off -- great! Apples used for
oranges in the midst of it's correction? How can we assume
that's right -- entertain the mere suggestion? It transcends the
simply ludicrous, and exceeds the merely stupid. Profoundly so
retarded, it is dumb, and just not lucid.

It is, in fact, so _dumb_,  you see, it cannot be an accident.
It must be, somehow, sabotage (?), or some *other* kind of
happenstance. Perhaps these craft are flying _well_, and tucked
down in position. They're right where we could WANT them, and
they're working in precision. What they *see* we cannot say, but
what if *weird's* the case; they're seeing ancient cities or
another solemn face! We're not privy to the info that has bled
our pockets dry (the Russians sold us "Dreamland" -- our own
lies to us is why). What is hidden from us, truly, so deep
within the bowels of a cold-as-ice bureaucracy that festers,
creeps, and fouls? What "national security", that's had _no_
oversight, has kept at bay corruption that infests the _rest_ --
alright?

What of all these satellites, these high tech probes and such.
Do you really think it likely that we screw up quite _that_
much. This is stuff we _pay_ for, and the value back to us is
the knowledge they've been hiding (?) which betrays the public
trust. Distrust is plain, there are no good guys -- Waco makes
this clear. Wherever there's no oversight the cost is just too
dear. What falls through *cracks* by some design would probably
save us grief in time, but that would *upset* all the plans of
those that live well -- understand? The multiverse is such a
creature... filled with all the tricks and features -- quite
beyond the common pale a man would think could _be_ detailed!!!
This is what our probes are seeing, change that's rampant, fluid
-- breathing.

Someone knows the secrets that would light this powder keg. Lit
off SOONER I propose that it would not have been as great! Lit
off sooner makes it useful as a righteous tool for change. Lit
off sooner keeps it interesting; we improve when things get
strange! Lit off sooner it's a profit, found out later -- missed
the boat, and all that's left to take its place still has you by
your throat. Someone knows the secrets that are fanned to some
distinction by apologists for darkness fanning murky
imprecision. Someone knows the secrets that would point to weak
foundations that are, likely, built on thinking that won't work,
or be courageous.

A nation shall not prosper if it fears its very own. A nation
not forthcoming is a tyrant on a throne. A nation that routinely
preys upon the public trust is a nation one revolts against, or
Jefferson's a bust. He said -- " . . .by its operation in [the
slowness of design] power becomes tyranny, and is corrupted so
in time." He said it's operation must be thwarted at all cost,
so folks _must_ be enlightened or, it's all we've gained that's
lost. SHOW us what our money buys! Open wide _our_ doors! Let us
see what's cooking at the center -- at the core. Let us know
*reality* so plans get made that fly, and we can soar, then, to
our fate, and know the reason why!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Somebody knows, perceives it as an upset to personal apple carts
-- and so diligently  fans the ubiquitous murk.  The worst with
a passionate intensity, and the best bereft of all conviction...
to paraphrase elitist dead poets.

A conservative estimate puts three full blown sociopaths in with
every ninety-seven people. Sociopaths take care of themselves at
the expense of other people by definition, and are, by
definition, not crazy. A sociopath can fan your murk for profit
and never bat an eye, and only a sociopath would use profit as
an excuse to keep the rest of us from inevitable and unavoidable
change. With 3% at a minimum it is likely that one is making
your decisions for you -- profiting at your expense. If it can
be unethically, but profitably  done there are those that will
find it out and take their profit from it. They're _not_
shielding your delicate sensibilities, they are not saving you
from some awful truth -- they are hiding something it would be
to your profit to know... and making a killing in the
bargain! Killing hell -- it's murder. And, all the time, they
laugh as they train YOUR kid not to be a leader in the next
century.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford!

--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation... and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 16 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Neil Freer

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 16:04:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 16:04:59 -0400
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Neil Freer

   ---------------
  /// Neil Freer
----------------

Neil Freer
Author: Breaking the Godspell
God Games: What Do You Do Forever?

Our guest for the second hour tonight is a researcher, writer,
lecturer and creator of philosophical 'models'. He holds a BA in
English and did his graduate work in Philosophy and Psychology
at the New School for Social Research. He has taught college
courses in Philosophy and History of Religion, gives private and
public seminars and lectures and has done over one hundred
thirty radio and TV interviews.

He's the author of the book 'Breaking The Godspell' which
explores the startling ramifications of the archaeological,
genetic and astronomical proofs for our being a genetically
engineered species and presents the consequences of this new
paradigm of human nature that resolves and subsumes the
Creationist-Evolutionary conflict.

Zecharia Sitchin, author of The 12th Planet, wrote:

      "It is gratifying that a mere decade after the publication
      of my work, an author with the grasp that Neil Freer
      displays in Breaking The Godspell has set out to probe what
      the recognition of the existence and Earth-visits of the
      Nefilim can mean -- not just to scientists and theologians
      -- but to each human being upon this planet Earth."


Our guest has recently finished a second book, 'God Games', in
which he explores the ways in which we will live beyond religion
when, individually and racially, we attain the unassailable
integrity afforded by the restoration of our true genetic
history. He outlines the racial maturity of a new planetary
civilization on the horizon and describes the depth,
characteristics and multi-dimensional aspirations of the new
human.


Synopsis: The current context within which The Alien Presence
Paradigm is viewed and dealt with is too narrow and limited.
The Alien Presence Paradigm should be seen as having two parts,
separate but related:

1> the recognition of the presence of an alien culture or
cultures from outside our solar system, and the ramifications of
that presence and contact. In this paper this part of the
paradigm will be called the UFO/Alien phase.

2> the recognition and restoration of our true history as a
genetically engineered species, half alien Annunaki, half
indigenous Homo Erectus, according to the thesis paradigm of the
Sumerian scholar, Zecharia Sitchin, and its ramifications for
our future. In this paper this part of the paradigm is called
the Human History phase.

=====

Neil came to our attention in the past week because of the
following:

=====

To:   Dr. David Whitehouse, On Line Science Editor
       Judy Hobson
       BBC NEWS

From: Neil Freer
Author: Breaking The Godspell
         God Games

email: freer1@concentric.net
website: http://www.concentric.net/~freer1



Re: Announcement by Dr. John Murray,  U;K.'s Open University of
possible tenth planet in our solar system through analysis of
cometary data

I wish to call to  your attention that Zecharia Sitchin,
Sumerian scholar and author of the Earth Chronicle Series of
books,  revealed the existence,  size, orbit,  and detailed
characteristics of the tenth planet in our solar system 25 years
ago through the translation of the Enuma Elish (When in the
heights....), a major document unearthed at the archaeological
digs at Nineveh by Layard, and translated by L.W. King.  It
gives a complete account of the formation of our solar system,
including the gravitational capture into the system of this
tenth planet (known to the Sumerians as Nibiru and the
Babylonians as Marduk) ,  its subsequent collision with a large
planet, Tiamat,  orbiting then between Mars and Jupiter,  the
formation of the asteroid belt, comets and meteorites from the
impact, the translation of the larger part of the impacted
native planet into our orbit to become Earth.  The Enuma Elish
says that the intruder planet settled into a huge elliptical
orbit of 3600 years around our sun in the "wrong" direction,
counter to the orbital direction of the other planets, that it
returns to the inner solar system through the asteroid belt area
periodically.   It gives the details of the path it can be
observed taking through the constellations as it approaches and
the disruptive events its close passing causes on Earth.

Tombaugh, searching for the tenth Planet X, discovered Pluto in
1930.   Christie, of the U.S. Naval Observatory, discovered
Charon, Pluto's moon, in 1978.  The characteristics of Pluto
derivable from the nature of Charon through the two Pioneer
spacecrafts' data, demonstrated that there must still be a large
planet undiscovered because Pluto could not be the cause of the
residuals, the "wobbles" in the orbital paths of Uranus and
Neptune which had to be caused by a large planet.  The IRAS
(Infrared Astronomical Satellite), during '83 -'84, produced
observations of a tenth planet so robust that one of the
astronomers on the project said that "all that remains is to
name it" -- from which point the information has become
curiously guarded.  In 1992 Harrington and Van Flandern of the
U.S. Naval Observatory, working with all the information they
had at hand, published their opinion that there was, at least,
an 85% possibility of a tenth planet, even calling it an
"intruder" planet.  Andersen of JPL later publicly expressed his
belief that it could possibly be verified any time  Harrington
invited Sitchin, having read his book and translations of the
Enuma Elish, to a meeting at his office and they correlated the
current findings with the ancient records and Harrington
acknowledged the detail of the ancient records while confidently
narrowing its current location to below the ecliptic in the
southern skies,  even acknowledging the possibility of a
retrograde orbit.

Sitchin definitively answers the question How could our earliest
civilizations know of this planet ? with the thoroughly
substantiated thesis that the transcultural "gods" known to all
the ancient civilizations were not mythological but flesh and
blood humanoids whose home planet was, is, indeed, this tenth
planet.  They came here 432,000 years ago, created our species
as a slave race for their gold mines by crossing their genes
with those of Homo Erectus,  moved us up to limited partnership
subsequently and taught us civilization and science and
astronomy, eventually phased off and left us on our own to find
our own species identity.

Regardless of whether one accepts his evidence and thesis or
not, one must face the clear and simple fact --- as Harrington
was enough of a real scientist to do --- that the information
about this tenth planet - and all the others in our system ---
is there in the ancient documents  and is continually being
verified in finer and finer detail.   The obstacle to Sitchin's
thesis is not scientific.  It is the very unscholarly,
traditional, pervasive, preclusive mindset, of  academicians and
scientists,  long fostered by the religious absolutism that put
Galileo under house arrest and burnt Bruno at the stake,  that
this history and information is to be disregarded as
mythological.

This is not to denigrate the impressive,  sophisticated and
astute work of Dr. Murray  or to detract from his findings.
Credit, however, should be given to whomever it is due in proper
measure.   The recognition of  the information that Sitchin has
published on the tenth planet  and its utilization would save
the astronomers great time and effort and is precise and robust
enough to provide all data necessary for a computer modeling of
our solar system from its beginnings. The Enuma Elish  describes
Nibiru's  visual path through the constellations as it
approaches the inner solar system to perigee in the asteroid
belt between Mars and Jupiter. A computer modeling  would
furnish a prediction of the time and path of Nibiru's  return to
the inner solar system, highly significant because the Enuma
Elish details the disruptive physical effects it creates on
Earth by its close passing.

The work of Harrington, Van Flandern,  Ritchie, the IRAS
project,  and now that of Murray and Matese continue to
reinforce and refine the details already known to humans for
thousands of years, lost and recovered,  and uncovered and
revealed again by Sitchin 25 years ago.  As to naming the
planet,   Sitchin already has written years ago to the Planetary
Society, charged with naming planets, to formally notify them of
the fact that it already has been named Nibiru for thousands of
years.  Although too modest a scholar to put himself forward in
this case, I personally think that Sitchin should receive a
Nobel prize for his research and master thesis. Let proper
credit be given in due measure where it clearly should.

=====

Joining us tonight, on the phone from his home in Santa Fe, New
Mexico, is Neil Freer


Join Neil Freer, Jonn Kares and I this evening as we
discuss these Strange Days... Indeed on:

CFRB 1010 AM - 50,000 watts 'Clear-Channel'

6070khz Shortwave

you can also listen via Media Player at:

www.cfrb.com/

You'll need to access the site using Internet Explorer since
Media Player seems to choke using any version of Netscape -
thanks Mr. Bill!


To call the program dial:

On-Air     416-872-1010
            1-800-561-CFRB
            *TALK [local mobiles]

Errol Bruce-Knapp






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:37:12 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 17:51:15 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 17:28:41 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:46 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>As Rimmer has pointed out eleswhere the onus is on Maxwell Burns
 >>to prove his allegations, not his critics.

 >Well I would go for that line, only his critics are also the
 >ones shouting loudly that nothing of the sort that Max is
 >referring to happened. Most critics would either show us
 >evidence to the contrary, saying  "here is a list of NATO
 >pilot's names for that night and they can all be checked
 >independently by everyone who cares to.

 >This would be the quickest and easiest way to close the case for
 >good, I would imagine even Max would go for that.

 >So have you got a list for all to check against?

 >You can prove to everyone that all pilots returned safely
 >because you have the list of all the pilot names & numbers
 >right!

I've just learned that one of the new Croydon trams [street
cars] on a test run from Wimbledon to New Addington was
vapourised by a UFO which zapped it as it headed away from East
Croydon Station. Obviously, the only way you can prove me wrong
is to find out the names of all the drivers who have been taking
trams out today, and checking that they all arrived safely home
tonight.

What tosh

 >"East London' your joking this is paradise!"

Best place for bagels, though!

 >Roy..                            Keep Smiling..

 >
 >"We didn't inherit this land from our ForeFather's, we are
 >borrowing it from the children"


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 04:06:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 17:52:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Subject: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:43:48 -0400
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >4) Can non-human goals be extracted from out-of-context slices
 >of behavior and, if so, how is that to be done reliably?

Interesting concepts, Mark.

Perhaps we cannot understand non-human beings, their behaviors,
their goals from a human point of view.  It would be like saying
birds, reptiles and primates all think and act alike.

However, there is one common point at which we all meet to some
extent or another - we exist in the same reality, whatever it
may be.  That we perceive them and they perceive us indicates
one common ground where we meet.  We interact in this time and
space dimension on some level or another and that is where it
all begins.

It is not necessary to classify other worldly/dimensional beings
according to what it means to be human or what we _think_ it
means to be "alien".  We can allow them to exist - anywhere in
the universe whether here or there - without making them
extensions of ourselves or us extensions of them.  We may not
understand them but we can accept their existence as a part of
this universe we all share.

Just as we accept the existence of elephants, ants and turtles,
we can accept their existence and our own.  I think we, as
humans, are coming to realize these facts about all life in the
universe no matter how many lies and illusions surround the
truth.  And this does not make us one but rather one of _many_
lifeforms that exist in the universe.

We may not know the intent of other worldly/dimensional beings
any more than they may understand us.  All that can be done is
to speculate intent based on behavioral patterns we have studied
before.  And since most behavioral studies thus far have been
based either on human, plant or animal behavior, we naturally
generalize our theories to all beings we encounter.  Considering
the difficulty of observing beings of other worldly/dimensional
origins, we have little to correlate with previous behavioral
studies and therefore speculate and theorize far beyond the
meager data obtained thus far.  With so little to go on and such
a need to understand, any data - accurate or false - is used in
attempts to know the unknown.

Although there is much room for improvement, I see these
attempts to understand other worldly/dimensional beings (you may
call them "non-human' or whatever turns your crank) as a natural
growth process that occurs when one species encounters another
hitherto unknown species.  And this applies to "them" as well no
matter how long "they" may have been here observing us.

I evaluate behaviors according to what one does stopping just
short of assigning intent.  I look for consistancies that
transcend illusion and imagination.  As my old psych professor
used to say, "We can't observe thoughts so don't tell me what
the client is thinking, tell me what they are _doing_."
Without deducing intent, describe the behaviors.

What one _does_ speaks louder than what one says or what we
think they are saying.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 13:45:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 17:54:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:36:39 -0400
 >From: Bruce Mccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Anyone who would like to read a technical discussion of the
 >reflection characteristics of the hood of Ed's old truck
 >(reference, the discussion of his photo 19) email me at
 >brumac@compuserve.com.  This is not a small email (41K text and
 >over a meg of illustrations)


Dear Bruce:

I have made up my mind.

Please do not confuse me with evidence.

Very best wishes (I mean that)

- Larry Hatch

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 19:27:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 18:01:32 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns


 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 17:35:43 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:27:19 +0100

 >>>These are some of the things that persuade me. Amidst the UAP
 >>>and misperceptions that I am sure account for 99% of the
 >>>evidence there appears to be a low level of contact with another
 >>>intelligence more advanced than we.

 >>>I am actually personally quite amenable to the argument that these
 >>>entities are so human and so interested in our DNA for one very
 >>>good reason. They are us - or rather one day they will be.

 >Well, if that isn't a confused answer I dont know what is.

 >So now they are Yesterday's People... No, sorry they are
 >Tommorow's People right?

 >Pray, enlighten us more with your theory.


Hi,

Okay. I'll try to make it simple as ABC.

A - A lot of UFOs (90% plus) are misidentifications of ordinary
things (ie IFOs)

B -  But that leaves up to 10% that are novel phenomena. Of
these I reckon most are UAP - natural, physical atmospheric
phenomena that push back the frontiers of science - but only
slightly. Most on this list wil switch off because they are not
exotic enough, but I think they are crucial to UFO research
because this is the ey to interesting real science in data we
can verify.

C - Contact with some other intelligence is apparently occurring
in a very few cases (under 1% of all sightings I believe). It is
possible this evidence will find an explanation in terms of
human consciousness and its as yet unexplored limits when we
chart how the mind works over the coming decades. However, for
reasons cited in my last e mail I suspect there are reasons to
support the liklihood that an intelligence is involved other
than the mind of the witness .

D - Despite the phenomenon itself professing an extraterrestrial
origin that is merely an option, but it has problems too that
make we suspect it not to be the answer.

E - Extraterrestrials are most likely to look, think and act
very different from us. Until we  meet one for sure we cannot
know but thats what science and logic implies. The entities in
UFO cases are too human in not just appearance but all of their
attributes. Consequently, it is at least tenable to look for
another option that involves an outside intelligence (that is
one other than the witness) - displaying technology beyond what
we have now, acting and appearing unusual but essentially doing
this in a terrestrial manner.

F - Future humans will, we trust, evolve, develop new technology
and be interested by their ancestors. If at any point (next
week, next year, next millennium, whatever) they develop
technology that can traverse time it is possible they would
visit us, study us, and happily allow the myth of alien contact
to continue. Why? Because it is part of their past and did
happen and it provides the perfect smokescreen to future
historians to study their own roots.

This is not my theory or an especially original one. But it is
an argument I find plausible for many reasons. One is deeply
personal. Whilst I have never met an alien I have to my mind
conclusively experienced time travel. As such I believe it is a
fact of the universe and I think it is almost certain it will
become possible to use technology to travel in time at some
point . If that is the case then logic tells you one thing -
time travellers should be visible in our past and our present.
We might not recognise them as time travellers (they would be
unlikely to announce themselves as such). But they would be
here.

So we have two  options - seek out possible evidence for
futuristic humans visiting our past and present in what would be
flying craft. They would probably be taking inordinate interest
in us and yet pretending to be anything other than time
travellers. If we find this evidence (and I think UFO entities
are pretty good candidates) the prospect of time travel ever
happening is vindicated. If we do not find any time travellers
then it probably means that time travel simply never will be
achieved.

Because I know that time travel is a distinct possibility I have
no problem accepting it as a mechanism for the visitors we
confront. I regard this as easy as accepting these visitors to
be from an a distant star system.

It then comes down to a choice between which of these options
best fits the appearance, actions, thought patterns etc of the
entities reported. As already indicated if you balance the
aliens versus humans equation human is in there fighting for top
spot.

So, I support this possibility and have been researching it
quite a bit in recent years. I will continue to do so. But I
dont say its the truth - just that its an idea worth deeper
study. I suggested in my book 'Time Travel' (Sterling l994) ways
to seek this evidence. I gather one US TV station has picked up
on these and an TV movie is appearing this autumn staring
Catherine Bell of JAG. In that she plays a reporter doing one of
the experiments I propose and finding proof of time travellers
amongst us. So look out for that. And in case you are wondering
- no the TV station did not pay for using this idea!

You might also note that Jim Penniston, the key witness to the
Rendlesham Forest case, says his deeper memories of the close
encounter in the forest are that the entities involved were time
travelling humans  - not aliens. What is certainly true is that
in cases such as this (as demonstrated markedly by the Oz Factor
state described by so many CE witnesses) a distortion of
time/space is central to the incident. A time travelling machine
probably would create precisely this effect in its local
environment as a natural by product. As you might expect I have
been seeking a reason for why the Oz  Factor state occurs for
many years.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:53:55 GMT
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 18:08:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >When trying to understand why ET are mutilating animals, we must
 >be careful to avoid asumptions.

How reasonable is it to theorize, from what little evidence we
have, that ETs are the ones responsible for animal mutilations?

 >In your case you assume that they are interested in getting huge
 >quantities of the substance itself.

Someone questioning the ETMT (ET as Mutilator Theory) might ask
'Why would ETs want to mutilate cattle?'.

If the reply is that the mutilators need some substance found in
the rectums of Earth cattle, we should be able to ask 'How
reasonable is it to assume that ETs having the technology to
travel to Earth would be *required* to travel to Earth again and
again to collect the precious BRS [Bovine Rectum Substance]
because they are ...

1. Unable to find the BRS anywhere closer to home;

2. Unable to synthesize the substance at home;

3. Unable to steal a bull and a few cows to establish their own
    herd;

4. Unable to genetically engineer any of their own bacteria,
    plants or animals to produce the precious BRS.

5. Etc.


In another strand of this thread Lesley Cluff answers question 2
as follows:

 >Synthesizing just isn't a miracle answer - yet.  So if we can't
 >do it here with a constant and consistent success rate, why do
 >we think everyone else in the universe can?  We haven't unlocked
 >all the mysteries of our own human biology much less that of our
 >environment, so why should we believe every other 'alien' race
 >can?

How convenient.

We explain ETs presence on Earth by assuming they have
technology far superior to our own.

We explain ETs behavior while on Earth by assuming that they
don't have technology much advanced over our own.

Trying to have it both ways is a good example of ad hoc reasoning.


 >If we suppose they know how to synthetize any substance in big
 >quantities, the most rational explanation is that they are
 >simply probing and measuring.

It _is_ far more reasonable to suppose that ETs are probing and
measuring than it is to suppose that they need the precious BRS
for their own use.

However, we should be able to question this theory (if we can
assume that this supposition is a full grown theory) by asking
'Why would they have to kill the cattle?'.

If ET was genuinely concerned about secrecy, why would they
leave all those dead cows lying around? Why not use the same
sample extraction techniques on the cattle as they do on the
humans?

When abducting and extracting body fluids from humans, ETs show
great skill and an obsessive need for secrecy yet they leave a
memory block any amateur hypnotist can penetrate. If they really
wanted abductees not to know why wouldn't they use rohypnol or
some other 'date rape' drug which actually does blot out short
term memory?

Or are we supposed to assume that their knowledge of chemistry
lags behind our own?

Conversely, if ET is genuinely concerned with secrecy, is it
reasonable to suppose they they'd use their use their advanced
surgical techniques on cattle but not on abductees where they
leave all sorts of scars, scoop marks, burns and blotches?

 >There is a similar question with abduction. ... If they know how to
 >engeneer and modify genetical material why do they bother keeping
 >collecting sperm and eggs samples ? ... Wouldn't it be much simpler to
 >collect a few humans and start a breeding program on their own planet
 >or spaceship ?

A very good question.

Of course, any ETs capable of doing this could also raise their
own cattle.

Joe


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://www.trionica.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 14:18:20 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 18:17:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 22:36:30 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Subject: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 02:43:48 -0400
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >>classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >>behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >>amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
 >t>he cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >>class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >>founder.

 ><snip>

 >>It's just not that easy. Blanket pronouncements about the
 >>irrationality of some specific behavior evidenced by reports of
 >>UFOs beg all of the following questions:

 >>1) Are the accounts in question true or false?

<snip>

 >>4) Can non-human goals be extracted from out-of-context slices
 >>of behavior and, if so, how is that to be done reliably?
 >>If we are going to be scientific, we have a long way to go in
 >>answering the above questions before we start claiming higher
 >>level knowledge about the phenomenon.

 >>If nothing else, UFOs raise fascinating questions of
 >>epistemology.

 >Yes, yes, yes.

 >Question Everything!
 >Believe Nothing!
 >Get Nowhere!

The first time I heard the word "epistemology" was during
teacher training in the late 1960s.

This and other 5-6 syllable words were used, at that time, to up
the ratio of white folks with long verbal attention spans.

A bit later in this "Ed-370" course, I learned - after an hour's
lecture, complete and replete with graphs, charts etc. - that
smart children do better than dumb kids in school.

I asked - not axed - the Ph.D. driving this hootenanny, whether
he thought it were useful to tell a bunch of post-grads [ many
as dumb as  I was ]  something as simple and obvious as this.

His answer was something like "Herpistomatically speaking, not
to mention, ahem, rhinoscropy of course, which is irrelevant,
your question could be placed upon the fergoniomic plane ....."

In other words, he was just flat f***ing full of shit.

I tried to be a secondary school teacher. I lasted exactly 18
months, during which time I could have earned more money making
honest pizzas, or playing string bass for some Italian weddings
or whatever.

I cannot, and will not stand junk any more.

I apologize publicly to the Lesley Cluff from Canada who could
not specify time, place or whatever.

I ask her indulgence as I explain how terrible, and goofy, and
somehow hilarious  this all  is.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 17

               Re: Cooper/Woods MAJESTIC Leak Grows Into Paper

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 17:02:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 18:22:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Cooper/Woods MAJESTIC Leak Grows Into Paper


 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 15:04:21
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Cooper/Woods MAJESTIC Leak Grows Into Paper Flood

 >Source: 'space.com'.

 >Stig

 >**

 >Cooper/Woods MAJESTIC Leak Grows Into Paper Flood

 >By Robert Scott Martin
 >Staff Writer

 >Oct 14 1999 10:15:36 ET

 >Tim Cooper's mailbox is still packed with documents relating to
 >the U.S. government's role in UFO activity, especially as it
 >relates to the shadowy super-secret operation code-named
 >"MAJESTIC-12," researchers Dr. Robert Wood and Ryan Wood said
 >Wednesday.

<huge justifiable snip>

 >Critics of the material have noted that Cooper did not "do well"
 >on a polygraph test in August and that the typewriter on which
 >at least two of the new documents were prepared is highly
 >similar to that Cooper has used in his personal correspondence.

<more snits>


 >Dr. Robert Wood is a member of the board of the Fund for UFO
 >Research (FUFOR).

Dr. Wood also identified the California origins of his Phuds.
I have not had time to CV these.

- Larry Hatch.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:28:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:31:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 22:58:41 +0800

 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 02:45:16 -0500
 >>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >So the neighbour went to the house with a camera and the sole
 >intention of capturing the most elusive 'thing' in history, I am
 >extremely surprised the door wasn't open waiting for the
 >creatures to appear.  We're not talking about some spur of the
 >moment incident.  You said she herself experienced it all her
 >life.  She was experienced in this matter.  And everything was
 >set but the one thing that would put doubt over the situation, a
 >barrier that glared the photo and therefore the true reality of
 >the situation.

 >>Ya know, if people would just allow some things to be possible
 >>without believing, and ask questions, explore, they would learn
 >>so much more.  I have learned so much from this investigation
 >>and just wanted to share it with others.  I didn't even tell
 >>very many people it was posted on my web site because I hate the
 >>way abduction stories are sensationalized. Recently I began
 >>offering it to various magazines and others because I decided
 >>maybe it would mean something to someone and I need to make it
 >>more available as I have moved on to other projects.  I will not
 >>forget those who have had enough of an open mind (and manners)
 >>to at least express an interest.  Those who have told me it
 >>didn't happen or the photos look fake or cannot be published
 >>because they'd rather print stories about Bigfoot will also stay
 >>in my memory and amuse me through all my endeavors.

Let me get this straight.  You don't like the way abductions are
sensationalized so you run to the magazines.  Hmmmmm.

You won't forget the ones who have had an open mind to express
an interest (the good guys) and you will also remember those who
don't agree with your beliefs (the bad guys with, obviously, a
closed mind).  Hmmmmm.  That's how I see it.  You're a
behavioural what?

 >>I've learned a lot about the status of the consensual reality
 >>and the limits of our beliefs.

And what is the limit, when someone disagrees with you?  I've
learned alot in the last few years, that there is a lot of
hypocrisy. So far all you've taught me is that either I believe
you or I believe you, either my opinion isn't valid or my
opinion isn't valid, either this is the way it is and the way
you see it or this is the way it is and the way you see it.  No
one else is allowed to make a judgement call if it doesn't
validate your beliefs and opinions.

When did this woman find out she'd been abducted all her life?
When she found out, did she have a 'religious-type' conversion
in her personality?  In other words, is she a different person
today than she was before she found out this was happening to
her?  Or has she grown up knowing all this was going on? Does
she take it with a grain of salt, or does she seem sincerely
disturbed by it all?  Do they tell her when they're coming to
visit so she and her neighbours can be ready? Does she get some
kind of signal to forewarn her?

 >Limits of our belief, or the lack of limits on our gullability?
 >Guess it depends on what you see in the glare....

 >Cheers
 >Sharon

No Sharon, I think it depends only on what Amy sees.  It
doesn't seem to matter what disagreeable people think.

And while I'm at it, did anyone ever think that maybe Mr.
Firmage's meeting was private because it was industry-related to
his current non-UFO ventures, like computers, ecommerce and all
that 90's stuff business people today get involved in?  He's
Mormon (reliable) and has always given us a hint of something in
the works, and I think he would've done so if this 'meeting'
were related to his UFO involvement. And no, I'm not a JF
groupie.  I stand behind anyone in this field, except when the
contradictions start pouring out of 'em.

I'll second that Cheer Sharon.

Sue








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:17:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:29:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >From: Bruce Maccabee
 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:14:59 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:33:02 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:46:37 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Previously, Bruce responded:

 >>You can bet your boot disc (modern version of "bet your
 >>boots") that the local investigators watched Ed like hawks
 >>to find out if there was any hint of photographic interest
 >>beyond minimal, and I payed attention to his photographic
 >>understanding, which I found negligible.

Hi, Bruce!

You know, every time I write a check at the local supermarket,
the cashier asks,"Is everything on the check correct?" What does
she really expect me to say? What would she do if I suddenly
said,"Gosh, you're too fast for me! I was gonna try and slip a
phony check by you but you caught on and had to ask!" Do you
really think Ed would fess up if his original intent was to fool
you? Come on...

Just kidding, but I think you get my point. As a photo analyst,
you are supreme. But what can you scientifically base you're
assessment of Ed's skills on? His demeanor? His apparent lack of
photographic knowledge? The way he dresses? How he parts his
hair? Any one of the above is as good as the other IF he wanted
to fool you. I truly mean no disrespect, but a "gut feeling"
that Ed was telling the truth just won't do. Now the truth may
be that Ed knows nothing about photography. But you have to
admit that you really can't be sure just by looking at him or by
what he says. If you believe that he is telling the truth about
his lack of photographic skills, then you might as well take the
plunge and believe that he really saw an extraterrestrial space
craft. If his word is good enough for one statement, then why
not the other?

Moving on, I had offered:

 >....a Polaroid is unique among cameras in
 >that it's "film gate" (the opening surrounding the actual film)
 >is not a fixed part of the camera. Instead, it is part of the
 >disposable film cartridge. Therefore, it is possible to attach
 >masks to the cartridge that would prevent exposure in the "tree
 >area". Additionally, because Polaroids can be processed
 >immediately and (most importantly) privately, numerous tests
 >could be made to be sure the masking is dead on. Even older
 >"wait and peel" Polaroids would allow variations on this
 >technique.

To which Bruce responded:

 >I must admit that I hadn't thought of a "masked double exposure"
 >in which the mask was effectively at the film plane.

Most (non digital) optical effects are achieved in just this
fashion. Fan magazines about the special effects industry are
available by the hundreds that explain just how this is
achieved. The average person would have no difficulty
comprehending the articles and emulating themIn addition, Bruce
offered:

 >Of course,
 >if you're going to take the film pout of the camera you have
 >to be in a dark room... a "darkroom".

Sorry, Bruce, but this is incorrect. If you are using a NEW pack
of SX-70 or One-Step Polaroid film, there is a light tight card
that protects the film. On older "peel and wait" versions, there
is an opaque wrapping that allows for daylight loading. In
either case, the entire registration could be achieved in bright
daylight, before loading the camera. It would make no difference
at all.

To continue, I had offered this recipe for deception:

 >1. Lock the camera down on a tripod pointed at the treeline
 >intended for use as the background. Snap off a print and
 >process.

To which Bruce responded:

 >No place for a tripod. But for the purpose of argument assume
 >that Ed could make the camea rigid on a tripod in some way.

Wrong, again. Most Polaroids had/have tripod sockets in the
bottom (particularly SX-70's). There are a variety of plastic
clip-on mounts that allow for tripod mounting of cheaper
Polaroids that don't.

Continuing this saga, I offered the next step:

 >2. Using a piece of acetate and a fine tip marker, technical
 >pen, fine tip paint brush or other marking tool, trace over the
 >area of the tree line that is supposed to pass infront of the
 >UFO. A steady hand would not be necessary. In fact, the more
 >random the pattern, the better.

 >3. Using the "film gate" as a registration device, tape the
 >acetate square over the opening and place in the camera during
 >photography of the model.

Bruce responded:

 >Probably could get close enough this way. Of course, the real
 >problem is the registration (pointing direction) of the camera
 >for the second exposure.

In actuality, I used the reference of a tripod to help simplify
the concept. Acceptable registration could easily be achieved
hand held. Why? Because all one needs to obtain correct
alignment for the second exposure are two reference points to
line up at the corners of the viewfinder, even if the viewfinder
isn't reflex (through the lens). You know from your own
experience that  the further away the subject, the less a
difference of even a foot or two would make in parallax. The
tree line, effectively existing at "infinity" (beyond 30 feet)
would appear identical, even if the camera moved several feet
between exposures, as long as the reference points in the
distance were lined up with the corners of the viewfinder. The
exposure of the model (made BEFORE the shot of the background)
would always line up with the masking since it exists at the
film plane.  For that matter, since the mask would create a
treeline of it's own, hand held registration is even more
simplified. You'd simply need to be "in the ballpark". You could
shoot a blue sky and STILL get a tree line. In fact, you really
couldn't avoid it.

 >4. Without changing anything, double expose the background into
 >the shot.

Bruce's response:

 >Without changing anything? Whooops. The model is in a dark room
 >and silhouetted against a black background, but with appropriate
 >lighting (and being CAREFUL that the light which illuminates the
 >very bright bottom light of the model does not illuminate the
 >background cloth).

As I pointed out above, the model would be shot first. Since the
mask is carried by the camera at the film plane, you could
"guess" at the positioning of the model and not mess up. The
masking will always be in the right place, and that's what
counts, right? After all, exactly WHAT part of the model is
obscured is not important as long some of it is. The treeline,
on the other hand would never be off.

On another point, the original model would not really be
necessary, nor would it be desirable for best results. A back
lit transparency or print mounted on black poster board (with a
form fitting "window" following the contours of the ship) would
give excellent results without contamination of the black
surrounding the model. Cheap and easy. In fact, a color Xerox
overhead transparency would do the trick nicely. Total cost
would be about $3.00.

<snip>

Bruce then offered:

 >This (Polaroid)
 >is not a reflex camera (the view point is about 3" from the
 >lens... really sloppy stuff).

Makes no difference. Since the only things he would have to
remember are his two alignment points that are relative to the
viewfinder he's looking through when he made his "alignment
print" (line up the top of that tree with the top corner of the
frame and the rock on the ground with the bottom corner or
such).  In fact, I am positive that you could go out on one day
and shoot a picture; then return the next day and shoot another.
Reflex viewing or not, if you line up those marks,  shots of any
subject at infinity will be identical. I guarantee it. Even hand
held. (I've documented enough construction jobs early in my
career to know that his works, even across months)

 >And Ed managed to take his first
 >three pictures in a succession that shows clouds moving at a
 >speed and direction consistent with the known weather. That is,
 >there were many minutes or many hours between photos.

Actually, since the film pack's advance is easily defeatable,
the camera could literally be loaded with latent images just
waiting for a second exposure. The masking will always line up
since it "goes along for the ride".

Further, I had offered:

 >The other point that Bruce brings up is the matching blur of the
 >UFO and the surrounding lights of the background. If they were
 >produced separately they would, indeed, be hard to match. On
 >the
 >other hand, if the master Polaroid were copied on a Polaroid
 >copy stand, it would simply be a matter of moving the print or
 >the camera during exposure time. This would produce a uniform
 >blur on all information within the photo. By careful
 >manipulation of the exposure times and masking, even selected


Bruce's response:

 >Yes, yes yes..... all things are possible (?) given enough time,
 >experience/capability. equipment, money and desire.

Yeah? Well that's the point, isn't it? Time would be minimal.
Experience would be minimal. Equipment he already had. His
investment is nothing more than the film itself and the model
(which would not have to be big). As far as desire....Well, he
made something happen, didn't he?


 >All this takes photographic sophistication.

Perhaps, if used the "Hyzer method". I maintain that a much
simpler and more predictable method was used; one that Ed or
anyone else could grasp and exploit.

 >In order to be in
 >focus in the final Polaroids it would have been necessary to
 >have large prints so that the Polaroid camera could be far
 >enough from them to get a good focus.

Again, you are perhaps misinformed about Polaroids. As I
mentioned in a previous posting, Polaroid has always offered a
copystand for their cameras. It comes complete with a close-up
lens for copying other Polaroid prints (that way they can sell
more film!). Is it your assertion that he didn't have one of
these simply because you didn't see it or simply because he said
he didn't have one? Is the information on my check really
correct? Did the man really saw the lady in half? (just
kidding).

Again, there's nothing you can do if he intended to deceive. IF
his intent was thus, then investigators would not find models,
photographic equipment or anything else laying around. Any
conclusions from such personal observations or "searches" would
be false.

Finally, Bruce wrote:

 >Few people are aware these days of all the argumentation that
 >went on endlessly from 1988 through 1992 or so and then
 >continued sporadically over the years. There's hardly a thing
 >discussed now that wasn't discussed way back when.

Really? Seemed pretty fresh to me....

Take care,
Roger Evans










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 16:27:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:34:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 22:58:41 +0800

I said:

 >>Are you saying, Sharon, that the glare on the glass door was
 >>intended?

And you replied:

 >Not at all Amy, I'm not one for inferences without facts. All I
 >said was the excuse was convenient for something so important.

Ah, Sharon, I have discussed this case with many with view
points like yours.  No matter what I say you will doubt.  No
matter how much information or evidence is put before you, you
will scoff.  That's OK because if someone else were presenting
this case to me, I would probably scoff too. ;>

However, the biggest difference between you and I is that if
someone else were sharing this info with me, I would ask more
questions and make less statements. As a researcher/investigator
I have learned there is much more going on out there than I can
fold into my paradigms.  Because I have seen things that have
shaken my belief systems to the core, I know how little I
actually know about the phenomena I study.  Even with stories
that strike me as absolutely impossible, I allow for the
possibility it may only be beyond my realities and never declare
it false.  Since I know I do not know everything nor pretend to
know all the answers, I allow everything to be possible until
proven otherwise.

I do so wish I could bring forth the evidence you and so many
require to accept the many possibilities that will open your
mind and enable you to see more.    I realize this case is
lacking in many ways which leaves ample room for you and others
to find fault with the information.  I could have kept it all to
myself but wanted to share it via the internet because it is
information and other researchers/investigators may find
correlations in the course of their work.

I think it's rather sad that you make these comments, Sharon,
when it is obvious to all that you have never even seen the
photographs in person, talked to the witnesses or spent more
than a few minutes reviewing the information.  That's like
trying to tell someone what's in a book without ever reading it.

I am sorry that you reject this opportunity to learn something.
But, that is your choice.  I really wish I could share with you
because I've found some fascinating information.  However, I
will continue to present studies as they are completed on my web
site and you may take them or leave them. I do this work to
learn not to convince people.  That's not my job and I certainly
don't get paid for it.

Nice talking with you, Sharon!

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            Santilli Film Stills?

From: Philip Mantle - QUEST <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:08:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:39:25 -0400
Subject: Santilli Film Stills?


Dear all,

I wonder could you possibly be of some assistance. I am trying
to obtain hard copy prints of some stills taken from the
Santilli film, not the autopsy section, but the debris film
instead. I did have copies but these were loaned out and never
returned.

The stills I am interested in are the 'markings' or 'lettering'
on the wreckage in the debris film.

If you can help me obtain hard copy prints (or slides) of these
stills I would be extremely grateful. Please feel free to
distribute this message to others who might be able to help if
you are unable to do so.

Many thanks,

Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive,
Batley,
West Yorkshire,
England,
WF17 7SW.
E-mail: pmquest@dial.pipex.com


[Philip, I'm sure Batley Women's Guild would be happy to
  recreate both the Alien Autopsy & the lettering in a
  muddy field close to you - just call Ewic--ebk]









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                           'Alien Autopsy' Archive

From: Philip Mantle - QUEST <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:20:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:40:55 -0400
Subject: 'Alien Autopsy' Archive


REMINDER.

This is just to remind researchers that Mark Lee Centre's 'Alien
Autopsy Archive' is now housed on our web site at:
www.beyondroswell.com

Should anyone have any information either for or against the
alien autopsy film released by Ray Santilli in l995, I would be
glad to hear of it for possible use in the archive.

Any such information can and should be e-mailed to me direct at:
pmquest@dial.pipex.com

Please feel free to forward this message onto your colleagues.


Yours Sincerely,


Philip Mantle.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            UFOIN - Announcement

From: Robert Moore <ENGIMA9@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 12:26:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:44:54 -0400
Subject: UFOIN - Announcement


Dear all,

Due to temporary technical problems,  things are not moving  as
fast - in regards to us firmly establishing an internet presence
for UFOIN - as we all initially anticipated!

Our website is still currently being built, but we do
nonetheless exist NOW as a collective of UK UFO investigators &
researchers, with a number of projects and other efforts ongoing
as I type this!

To all and any UK UFO researches interested in joining UFOIN, I
would ask them to email me at the following  e-address: -
enigma9@compuserve.com.

I will ensure any and all enquries are dealt  with swiftly  and
that we, together, can start to build a better future for
British Ufology.

Regards,

Robert Moore,
UFOIN.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                         Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Martin Phillips <martin.phillips@dtn.ntl.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 19:01:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:49:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:32:12 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:16:58 -0400

 >>>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:10:24 +0100
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World

 >><snip>

 >>>this is the first time in publishing history that a science
 >>>fiction novel has needed to be officially cleared by the
 >>>Government!

 >>I won't argue with that, but a science fiction writer did draw
 >>U.S. government attention during World War II.

 >>His name was Cleve Cartmill, and he wrote a story about a
 >>nuclear bomb in Astounding Science Fiction, the American science
 >>fiction magazine that (despite its name) was the most strongly
 >>oriented toward real science. Nuclear bombs, of course, didn't
 >>exist back then, though, unknown to Cartmill and his editor, the
 >>U.S. government was trying to develop one.

The story was called Deadline, wasn't it?

 >Postscript:

 >The editor of Astounding was of course the inestimable John W.
 >Campbell, Jr., who, I believe, first introduced L. Ron Hubbard's
 >Dianetics to the world, now known as Scientology. Under the pen
 >name of Don(ald?) R. Stuart, if my muddled memory serves,
 >Campbell authored the classic "Who Goes There?" You may know it
 >better by its movie name, "The Thing," which starred James
 >Arness as the creature from the crashed flying saucer. That's
 >right, the same James Arness of "Gunsmoke" fame. John
 >Carpenter's recent remake of "The Thing," starring someone who's
 >not a Baldwin brother (Kurt Russell), was an excruciating joke.

 >So Campbell's lengthy influential career is associated not only
 >with the atomic bomb, but with invading aliens, crashed saucers
 >and Dianetics. An impressive portfolio indeed! (Did I forget the
 >Dean anti-gravity drive?)

I think I remember reading an account of how the story came
about, and John Campbell was a big influence on the story, as
he was with a lot of Astounding stories. John Campbell also was
interested in the works of Richard Shaver, a man who believed
that the earth was hollow and inhabited by the true rulers of
the Earth. I think JC also promoted the idea that 'we are
property'.

All in all, JC was involved in publicising many elements that
are contained in conspiracy theories of all types. He was also,
like many Americans of the time, anticommunist and xenophobe, so
that might underpin his views that the world was not run by good
(ieAmerican) people.

Martin







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            ATIC Research Update

From: Wendy Connors <ProjectSign@email.msn.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 19:09:28 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:56:54 -0400
Subject: ATIC Research Update


Greetings:

Mike Hall and Wendy Connors wish to announce the acquisiton of
the official Air Technical Intelligence Histories for the year
1952 and the first half of 1953.

This completes the known official histories for ATIC from the
second half of 1951 through the first half of 1953 accomplished
by the United States Air Force.

These histories are important due to the fact that they present
the officiality of what ATIC was doing during these important
years regarding their investigation of unidentified flying
objects.

A complete report of what these histories contain will be made
at a latter date due to an up-coming research trip by Wendy and
Mike.

Thank you,

Wendy Connors and Mike Hall









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:04:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:59:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 13:45:39 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

<snip>

 >Dear Bruce:

 >I have made up my mind.

 >Please do not confuse me with evidence.

 >Very best wishes (I mean that)

 >- Larry Hatch

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

Dear Larry,

Thanks for telling me. Don't worry, I won't send you any
evidence..... unless it happens to agree with your mind (I
assume you would like to see evidence that agrees with your
mind.... on the other hand, perhaps any evidence is too much for
your mind.)

Anyway,  since you have made up your mind you can go back to
adding sightings to your beautiful data base! (get the U DATA
BASE folks... Don't fly to the Pleiades without it!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                             Please Check Links

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 15:03:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:01:12 -0400
Subject: Please Check Links


Subject: Please check links.

This is a short letter simply requesting that all of you who
sent me their Links for my web site, to go and check my World
Links page not my Link directory to see if your link is working
properly.

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/

If it isn't then please e-mail me at the above address.

Regards.

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 04:17:51 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:04:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Melanie Mecca <natural.state@erols.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:11:19 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >When you are already hanging around here (made the investment of
 >bases, cloning space-hardened bodies, (perhaps) treaties with
 >earth governments (read:  The Man), and there's plenty of cattle
 >(and people) for the rustling, why bother to synthesize?
 >Besides, as you well know, synthetic substances don't always
 >have the same effects.  There are many examples, but let's just
 >take one: artificial hormones in birth control pills can cause
 >high blood pressure in healthy women of normal blood pressure -
 >some women's livers can't handle the synthetics.

 >>Those who have responded to my first post on the assumption of
 >>alien ineptitude within the ETH have offered different reasons
 >>why aliens might value certain substances found on Earth. But
 >>the question is 'Why would they come to Earth to collect a
 >>substance they should be able to make?'.

 >See above.

 >Melanie Mecca



Hi list,

The whole debate about why aliens have to travel light years to
collect substances they can synthesize assumes that it's the
substances they are after. What if they are after something that
cannot be synthesized but that is attached to the substances?

Like emotions. Emotions are attached to the results of the sperm
and ova, namely the kids that come out of it. The typical
abductee who has been forced to donate sperm or ova sees his/her
own offspring in a later abduction. The purpose is apparently to
give some love to the kids, something the greys are unable to,
to make sure that the kids develop in an emotionally healthy
way.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:54:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:10:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:14:59 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<giant snip>

 >Sure, Any old "hack" could do it. But not Ed. I recall a pro
 >photo from Florida...name escapes me now... who was very
 >suspicious of all this until he actually saw Ed taking some
 >photos (not UFO photos!) with his old camera. AFterward he said
 >to me something like this "I could tell by the way Ed held his
 >camera that he doesn't know anything about photography.)

Bruce,

Pardon me,

But this is the same sort of specious statement and reasoning
you accuse GB skeptics of. You can say that, in your opinion, Ed
couldn't haven't pulled it off, but you can't opine or assert
absolutely that he couldn't have, because you don't know that to
be a fact, despite the anonymous Florida pro's statement, which
is itself a subjective assessment (that may or may not be true).
For all any of us knows (you included), Ed could have been
acting the fool at the time.

Ed was a highly successful construction contractor at the time
(and still is, for all I know), so he was by no means the simple
soul that his protectors and promoters sometimes make him out to
be. In person he's quite voluble and playful, and I don't take
either of those to represent character defects. Walters is
nobody's fool, in the bargain. He routinely used a camera in his
business, the results of which must have satisfied both his
professional requirements and those of his customers, and mauybe
even his insurance agent. It goes without saying that he would
have been familiar with the interpretations of blueprints as
well. Last time I looked, at least a working knowledge of
geometry and various measurements came in handy when
interpreting blueprints, or, for that matter, when ordering
cement or lumber by the cubic yard or board foot. Or maybe
there's a professional Florida architect somewhere who, if
asked, could testify: "Hey, I worked with Ed on so-and-so's
house and, believe me, that guy didn't know jack about
blueprints!"

There's a human tendency to believe that if someone is pulling
the wool over your eyes, then their motive for doing so must be
strictly a) venal, b) financial, or c) both of the above. But
this has never been the ultimate and only answer of any hoax in
history. Humans are natural-born pranksters as well as story
tellers. If money and attention sometimes come of it, well, hey,
so much the better. After all, where would we be without an
entertainment industry, which includes much current UFO
literature?

Dennis







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 03:28:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:13:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:53:55 GMT

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >In another strand of this thread Lesley Cluff answers question 2
 >as follows:

 >>Synthesizing just isn't a miracle answer - yet.  So if we can't
 >>do it here with a constant and consistent success rate, why do
 >>we think everyone else in the universe can?  We haven't unlocked
 >>all the mysteries of our own human biology much less that of our
 >>environment, so why should we believe every other 'alien' race
 >>can?

 >How convenient.

 >We explain ETs presence on Earth by assuming they have
 >technology far superior to our own.
 >We explain ETs behavior while on Earth by assuming that they
 >don't have technology much advanced over our own.
 >Trying to have it both ways is a good example of ad hoc reasoning.

You over simplify and obviously haven't taken a close look at
human behaviour and ther is no reason to expect aliens are any
less illogical than we are - we have accomplished some measure
of space travel, use an energy we still do not understand
(electricity) to create incredible feats of engineering and
technology, have developed miraculous way of healing and
prolonging life, while so many die of no medical help in many
countries and medical ineptitude even in our developed
countries, have developed the means to grow more food than
developed countries can eat, while millions are starving and
thousands die each day of malnutrition and starvation on this
tiny planet, have ways and means of destroying our planet and/or
just the people, yet can't build a simple road that won't
atrophy into pot holes In a few years.

Our level of 'advanced' technology only points out our inconsistent
development of technology.  I hardly see any reason to expect
aliens able to
travel here to have solved all their problems at home with technology if we
are so inconsistent here!

 >>If we suppose they know how to synthesise any substance in big
 >>quantities, the most rational explanation is that they are
 >>simply probing and measuring.

Now this suggestion I can accept as very likely.

 >However, we should be able to question this theory (if we can
 >assume that this supposition is a full grown theory) by asking
 >'Why would they have to kill the cattle?'.
 >If ET was genuinely concerned about secrecy, why would they
 >leave all those dead cows lying around? Why not use the same
 >sample extraction techniques on the cattle as they do on the
 >humans?

Did everyone catch the program on earlier this evening -
producer Burgess - on cattle mutilations, the search for the
killer?  The program made a very good point that it ain't the
aliens, its a backroom operation of the US monitoring the
aftereffects of its experimental explosions of atomic bombs
which coincidentally are mostly in the same area where the
testing took place and where there are a lot of known storage
sites of radioactive material and air force bases.  As you
spread out from that area, there are fewer reports.  Enough to
let us rest assured that they are monitoring even at a distance,
probably for comparison.

But, a bit but, why would aliens or anyone in the US civil
service, just dump the bodies after they have finished with
them?  The program didn't deal with that.   It was a hard
program to watch - I would be devastated if I went out one
morning and found my bull or one of our heifers mutilated like
that!   But where I live, we are very far from any testing, and
also, to the best of my knowledge, no reports of any cattle
having been mutilated recently or in the past.

Lesley








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:06:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:16:16 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<rather large snip>

 >The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.


Bruce,

Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
professionalism.

If he was just a freelance polygrapher (which must be a rather
small community), then how did he enter the picture in the first
place? Was he just in the Yellow Pages, listed under
"Polygrapher"?

Seems to me, most people skilled in this business (like any
other business) and attempting to derive income from it, either
on a full or parttime basis, would want to have some
certificates hanging on their walls and membership in a few
professional associations on their resume.

For example, I'm going to a dentist later this week. If I looked
hard enough, I might be able to find a dentist who doesn't
belong to any professional organizations, but who is nonetheless
regarded as a "capable person" in his or her field. All things
being equal, however, I think I'll look for one who is both
capable and well associated. Ditto for attorneys, stock brokers,
chemists, those people who want to reshape your eyeball with a
laser beam, and so on. But that's just me. Help with Windows
I'll take wherever I can find it.

Dennis








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:33:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:08:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 14:18:20 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

 >>>If nothing else, UFOs raise fascinating questions of
 >>>epistemology.

 >The first time I heard the word "epistemology" was during
 >teacher training in the late 1960s.

(Larry having fun with professors snipped)

For everyone's information, "epistemology" is the study of
the ways in which we gain knowledge about the world. What
makes UFOs interesting in this context is that being a transient
phenomenon, UFOs are resistant to many normal techniques
of science.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 06:08:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:20:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


Date: Mo, 18 Oct 1999 09:43:00 GMT
From: achimkoch@compuserve.com <Joachim Koch>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject:Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

<snip>

 >Gordon Sopczak, Alberta co-ordinator for Circles Phenomenon
 >Research Canada, said he's sure whatever is creating the circles
 >will "delight us and astound us again."

<snip>

 >As in Britain, many of the crop circles are reappearing in areas
 >where they have been reported in previous years.

Hello List,

Hans-Juergen Kyborg and I are researching the cop circle
phenomenon constantly since 1989 in England and Germany. We have
learned a lot about the phenomenon,human interaction -and
ourselves in all these years.

There is a genuine phenomenon at work which is beyond any doubt.

But:

-after this phenomenon reached the public interest and only
after people came back from Wltshire to their home countries the
circles started to appeare there (be honest!)

-if you have researched critically and without bias you'll have
noticed that the manmade circles became more and more complex
and deliberate, that means the skills of these land artists
increased enormously.

Today, you often cannot distinguish formations in their visual
appearance from those genuine ones of 1991 (e.g. the formation
at Devil's Den this summer).

So far, there is no lithmus test for the genuineness of
formations that would be scientifically accepted, maybe Ron
Russell has found something like this recently.

As I wrote here several times - and all who have witnessed this
phenomenon in person in England will agree - this time it is
different with a phenomenon of non-human origin. Ths time not
our detectors, apparatus and high sophisticated electronic
equipments are meant to help us to understand - it is us
ourselves who are the target this time by the intelligence which
is behind this phenomenon.

And the understanding of the crop circles phenomenon depends on
how far ones dares to go beyond his/her own limits. Those who
have been at Walker's Hill or the Wansdyke Path will know what I
am talking about - and those who haven't been there should do so
to understand before they start to argue here. Those who have
been up there have talked to the wind, have heard the sounds of
the skylarks, have glimpsed the leylines nearby - and maybe have
shed one tear for this planet.

To close with, here is a short report from this summer which
will clarify what I wrote.

Another loud and very enthusiastic American party arrived at the
Barge Inn in late July, the high time of all activities there.
There were loudly admiring the beauty of he landscape and the
wonders of the circles which usually appear more frequently at
this time.

We came in contact with this group by Busty and started to talk
to them. We made them aware of the direct link of the circles
with the energy lines, energy places and the huge stones someone
once had erected at just these locations.

We do not completely know who once had build these enigmatic
monuments with all its astronomical and energetic links all over
Western Europe. No is left to tell us, no records were found.

So we told the Americans, compared with us here in Germany or
England they are in a far better position because they still can
ask the survivings of those peoples who build similar monuments
and earth works with the same meanings and function because -
other than here in Europe - there are still many left in
America.

And learn from these Old Americans how to treat a planet.

This is in fact the true essence of all these UFO-related
phenomena: to remind us of who we are and where we are - and of
our responsibility for this planet.

If there would be a cosmic court, we would be severely accused
for one of the heaviest cosmic crimes: the rape and murder of a
living planet. For what punishment the cosmic public prosecutor
would plead for?

The New Americans calmed down.


Joachim Koch, Berlin








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 03:28:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:15:41 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 19:27:21 +0100


 >F - Future humans will, we trust, evolve, develop new technology
 >and be interested by their ancestors. If at any point (next
 >week, next year, next millennium, whatever) they develop
 >technology that can traverse time it is possible they would
 >visit us, study us, and happily allow the myth of alien contact
 >to continue. Why? Because it is part of their past and did
 >happen and it provides the perfect smokescreen to future
 >historians to study their own roots.

 >This is not my theory or an especially original one. But it is
 >an argument I find plausible for many reasons. One is deeply
 >personal. Whilst I have never met an alien I have to my mind
 >conclusively experienced time travel. As such I believe it is a
 >fact of the universe and I think it is almost certain it will
 >become possible to use technology to travel in time at some
 >point . If that is the case then logic tells you one thing -
 >time travellers should be visible in our past and our present.
 >We might not recognise them as time travellers (they would be
 >unlikely to announce themselves as such). But they would be
 >here.

<snip>

 >Because I know that time travel is a distinct possibility I have
 >no problem accepting it as a mechanism for the visitors we
 >confront. I regard this as easy as accepting these visitors to
 >be from an a distant star system.

Don't ya just hate those posts that just quote another note and
then say "yup, me too"!

Jenny, I agree with your point that there are some cases that
the idea that these are time travellers just makes sense.  And I
too believe that the nature of time is such that we just have to
figure out the how, but its there, awaiting us.  Heck, I'm old
enough that so much that was science fiction when I was born, is
not day to day knowledge and in myhome and working for me!  What
I was taught in grade 11 physics has changed! Metaphysics is now
science.  The theory of how time can be travelled is out there
in many forms, in many minds, and its only a short matter of
'time' before someone figures out how to do it using technology.
Of course, there is always the mind!

Lesley









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@mailclub.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 10:19:45 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:17:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


Hello,

I would like to answer some pertinent questions of M. Polanik.

 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:53:55 GMT

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >>When trying to understand why ET are mutilating animals, we must
 >>be careful to avoid asumptions.

 >How reasonable is it to theorize, from what little evidence we
 >have, that ETs are the ones responsible for animal mutilations?

Exactly. So we must be carefull. For now it is only an
hypothesis since we don't have any proof for that.  But this
does not mean that this hypothesis is false. I personnaly use it
as my current working hypothesis.

 >>In your case you assume that they are interested in getting huge
 >>quantities of the substance itself.

 >Someone questioning the ETMT (ET as Mutilator Theory) might ask
 >'Why would ETs want to mutilate cattle?'.

...
 >It _is_ far more reasonable to suppose that ETs are probing and
 >measuring than it is to suppose that they need the precious BRS
 >for their own use.
...

 >However, we should be able to question this theory (if we can
 >assume that this supposition is a full grown theory) by asking
 >'Why would they have to kill the cattle?'.

At first I would say that we have no idea. I guess that the
samples they need like all the blood, flesh parts and organs
like the eyes and so may not allow the animal to survive after
removal.

 >If ET was genuinely concerned about secrecy, why would they
 >leave all those dead cows lying around? Why not use the same
 >sample extraction techniques on the cattle as they do on the
 >humans?

If ET where "genuinely concerned about secrecy", leaving the
cattle carcass make no sense. So maybe we have to reconsider the
assumption that there are "genuinely concerned about secrecy".
Of course they may also be "illogical" ;-)

I'm not sure there are so concerned about secrecy. They also
show a sort of offhandedness in this secrecy process. I tend to
attribute this to a sort of self assurance of the supriority
complex. They are just as secret as needed to avoid panic, to
keep things under control and not be bothered in their projects.
This is of course only my current interpretation of the
phenomenon based on the data I had in hand so far. This may thus
be subject to revision but currently make more sense regarding
to global pattern.

 >Conversely, if ET is genuinely concerned with secrecy, is it
 >reasonable to suppose they they'd use their use their advanced
 >surgical techniques on cattle but not on abductees where they
 >leave all sorts of scars, scoop marks, burns and blotches?

I would be more cautious when reasonning in that direction. It
is true that we have some information, but we must also keep in
mind that we might bot have all the information. Currently, far
what we know, we can't outrule the possibility that humans where
also found mutilated as the cows. In France there are more than
2000 human disaperance reported to the plice per year. There is
plenty of room for this human mutilation hypothesis event if it
is only one human per year for instance. I don't say that it
happens. I just want to say that it is possible and that we
might not know about because some people prefer to keep it
confidential for some obvious reasons. Thus I dont think it is
reasonable to make an assumption that this does not happen. We
don't know.

 >>There is a similar question with abduction. ... If they know how to
 >>engeneer and modify genetical material why do they bother keeping
 >>collecting sperm and eggs samples ? ... Wouldn't it be much simpler to
 >>collect a few humans and start a breeding program on their own planet
 >>or spaceship ?

 >A very good question.

 >Of course, any ETs capable of doing this could also raise their
 >own cattle.

Good point. Sooo ... if ET exist, if ET are comming on earth to
mutilate cattles, .... it forcibly implies that they have good
reasons to do so. There are many. First. cattle may simply not
survive in their environement. Second they may need sampling of
cattles in the context they where picked from. For a pollution
study or for comparing with their own breads, etc.

Human scientists do this all the time. They are picking samples
and some just pick what they need and live the rest as scaps.
For flowers and sometime even with animals.

So theorizing on those points is in my opinion an adventurous
process. We might explore this when trying to understand what we
are talking about. But I would certainly be very carefull when
tempted to use those reasoning in a demonstration that the
phenomenon is true or false, and make sense or not. We don't
have enough data yet in my opinion.

They simply may be "illogical" from our point of view and this
could explain anything ;-) But this would also be an easy answer
that will probably not satisfy you and most sceptics ;-)


Best regards,

Ch. Meessen








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                     PRG/X-PPAC Programming Announcement

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:31:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:24:44 -0400
Subject: PRG/X-PPAC Programming Announcement


                              Paradigm Research Group
                               www.paradigmclock.com
                                            X-PPAC
                                     www.x-ppac.org

10/18/99

Stephen Bassett, consultant, lobbyist and executive
director of X-PPAC, will speak on the Politics of UFOs/Disclosure
and other topics at the following upcoming venues:

What:  Internet Chat-The Politics of UFOs: The Road to Disclosure
Date:   First Sunday of Every Month - ongoing
Time:  9 pm EST
Where: Solar Cafe's Destination Space [www.destinationspace.net]

What: News feature
Date:  Early November
Time: TBA
Where: WTTG Fox 5 News, Washington, DC

What: News feature
Date:  Early November
Time: TBA
Where: KCOP UPN Channel 13 News,  LA [www.upn13.com]

What: Fox News Channel Documentary
Date:  Early November
Time: TBA
Where:  Fox News Channel, Nationally [www.foxnews.com]

What: UFO Round Table with Larry Jamison
Date:  Saturday, November 6
Time:  7 pm PDT
Where:  KGLW 1340 AM, San Luis Obispo, CA [www.kglw.com]

What: UFO/ET Autumn Festival - Oct.  30-31
Date:  Sunday, October 31, 1999
Time:  4:30 pm EST
Where:   Days Inn -  Bordentown, NJ
More Info:  Pat Marcattilio  609- 631-8955

What: Sean David Morton's Strange Universe
Date:  Wednesday, October 27, 1999
Time: 9 am PDT
Where:  Talk America [www.talkamerica.com/seanmorton.html]

What: Rally to End Secrecy [www.endsecrecy.com]
Date: Sunday, Oct. 24. 1999
Time:  Noon EDT
Where:   Capitol front steps, Washington, DC
[Note: At Rally organizer Remy Chevalier's request,
Mr. Bassett will address a small group on the
Capitol steps & collect presented white papers.]

What: Bob Hieronimus Show
Date: Wednesday, October 20, 1999
Time: 10 - 11:30 pm EST
Where: Liberty Works Radio & Netcast [www.libertyworksradio.com]

The PRG / X-PPAC speaking schedule is located at:
http://www.paradigmclock.com/speaking&eventschedule.html









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 18

                 [bwwma] BWWMA Flash! Firmage On TV Tonight

From: Bufo Calvin <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:42:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:29:31 -0400
Subject: [bwwma] BWWMA Flash! Firmage On TV Tonight


From: BufoCalvin@aol.com

A correspondent (please let me know if you want to be credited
when you give me tips... to protect anonymity, I usually don't)
gave me a heads-up for Investigative Reports tonight at 9:00 PM
on A&E (USA).  The episode is Celebrity Close Encounters.  Among
those interviewed is Joe Firmage, the "CEO UFO", recounting his
own experience.  Others include Dennis Weaver, Robert Wise
(director of the influential and respected The Day The Earth
Stood Still), and astronaut Gordon Cooper.  The times so far
are:

Monday, October 18, 9:00 PM
Tuesday, October 19, 1:00 AM
Saturday, October 23, 3:00 PM

The same program does Bringing UFOs Down To Earth on Friday at
9:00 PM and Saturday at 1:00 AM.  Looks like Jaime Mausson is a
likely guest.

___________________________

This is Bufo saying, "If =everything= seemed normal, that
=would= be weird!"
____________________________

Please let me know if there is something in the media you think
I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, the week before.
---
You can subscribe to this list by sending an e-mail to
bwwma-subscribe@onelist.com.  You can unsubscribe by sending an
e-mail to bwwma-unsubscribe@onelist.com.
---
You may also be interested in Bufo's WEIRD NEWS LINKS (links to
weird stories in non-paranormal-dedicated media) by sending an
e-mail to bwnl-subscribe@onelist.com.
---
You may also wish to subscribe to Bufo's ANOMALIT Review (a
monthly review and listings of new books and other items on
these topics) by sending an e-mail to
anomalit-subscribe@onelist.com.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                 RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:36:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:00:03 -0400
Subject: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash


For spectacular and meritorious discoveries which have
dramatically unlocked half century old secrets associated with
the crash of an unidentified flying object near Roswell, NM in
the summer of 1947, the international Roswell Photo
Interpretation Team (RPIT) has rendered its special salute to
Neil Morris, senior photo interpretation specialist!

Morris, a veteran technical staff member of the Department of
Physics and Astronomy at the University of Manchester in
England, is an original member of the RPIT group.  His inventive
and tenacious dedication to this highly unique and unprecedented
scientific research in pursuit of finally solving the Riddle of
Roswell is deserving of the highest accolades of the World-Wide
Ufology community.

Morris' analytical research now has proved conclusively that the
United States Air Force erred in drawing conclusions in
published reports in 1994 and 1995 that the Roswell UFO Incident
of 1947 "most likely" was caused by the crash of a MOGUL train,
comprised of a series of neoprene balloons and RAWIN radar
target devices.

Morris and the RPIT group (reinforced) for more than a year have
carefully compared every part described in detailed blueprints
of the MOGUL and RAWIN devices with Roswell debris pieces
displayed and photographed in the 8th Air Force Headquarters
offices of General Roger M. Ramey, commander, on July 8, 1947.
The RPIT members have been unable to associate any of the pieces
examined through the use of modern computer enhancement
techniques with any parts expected to be found in a MOGUL/RAWIN
crash.

The most recent dramatic research release shows that what
originally was reported to be thin, paperbacked foil and solid
wooden sticks -- such as might be found in a MOGUL/RAWIN train
-- actually appears to be thick, massive sheeting attached to
carefully formed and drilled hollow beams. The beams are covered
with very unusual glyphs, which are undergoing further
examination.

The RPIT discoveries have been posted on the Internet
individually by various RPIT members. The Roswell Event findings
of Morris can be viewed by downloading:

File:  rdbg8clp.jpg (108255 bytes)
DL Time (48000 bps): < 1 minute

and at

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ .

and

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm

http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/

James Bond Johnson
RPIT Project Director









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

              NASA Report On 'Unidentified Visual Phenomena...'

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 02:23:26
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:04:02 -0400
Subject: NASA Report On 'Unidentified Visual Phenomena...'


NASA Report On 'Unidentified Visual Phenomena Associated
With Space Flight'

Source:

http://members.aol.com/moonpigeons/

Stig

***

Moon Pigeons and other unidentified visual phenomena associated
with space flight

**

The following pages are from an Apollo-era NASA report provided
by James Oberg to be made available on the internet primarily as
an instructive tool for those interested in moving objects
photographed near inflight spacecraft.

Unfortunately an original copy of the report could not be
obtained and the photographs in this copy are unusable and were
not included here. Attempts will be made to obtain usable
photographs for inclusion at a later date. Though the original
format of the report has been altered for these web pages, the
text is complete and unedited. The text was converted to ascii
format using OCR software and errors produced by it have been
corrected when found. Spelling errors and typographical errors
in the original report have not been corrected here.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:07:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >>association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.

 >Bruce,

 >Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >professionalism.

Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.

Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?

Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:25:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:09:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
 >the cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >founder.

<snip>

This wise post of Mark's raised -- much more reasonably and in
much greater depth than most of what we read here -- fascinating
questions. He gave many reasons why, scientifically speaking, we
can't think we know anything about alien intentions or
capabilities.

Mark's post came in the midst of a discussion featuring, among
others, Dennis Stacy,  Joseph Polanik, and myself. I'm happy to
concede that Mark made more sense than anything I've said on
this subject. But I'm a little surprised at the silence from
Dennis and Joe, especially since Mark raised serious objections
to points they were making.

If Dennis (whom I know and respect) and Joe (whom I don't know
and respect) are serious about what they've been arguing, they
really have to address what Mark wrote. Any comments, guys?

Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                  MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:02:09
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:11:51 -0400
Subject: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work


Source: James Easton on 'alt.alien.visitors'.

Stig

***

From: "James Easton" <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:36:09 +0100


_Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'_

Contrary to the public statements made by Nick Pope, a senior
Civil Servant with the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Ministry
have never investigated a case of 'alien abduction', crop
circles or 'animal mutilation by aliens'.

AND THAT'S OFFICIAL!

In a recent issue of 'NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD', a monthly
Internet column he writes, Pope remarked:

"Over the past few months I'd been becoming more bullish in my
response to certain people within ufology who'd been sniping at
me over the years. Nobody likes criticism, and I'd been getting
a fair bit - little of it constructive in nature. If people were
criticising my views on, say, Roswell, then fine. I wasn't
there, and so my view probably counts no more or no less than
anybody else who's followed the case with a reasonable degree of
interest. But it rankled when outsiders who'd probably never
even visited MOD Main Building started casting doubts on my
knowledge about - and access to - government and military UFO
files. I've worked for the MOD for over fourteen years now, and
three of those were spent researching and investigating UFO
sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations
and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way".

Now, in response to direct questions I asked of them, the
Ministry formally refute any suggestion they have ever been
concerned with the investigations Pope alleges.

"The Ministry of Defence has not investigated a case of alien
abduction, crop circle formations or animal mutilation", they
confirm in a letter.

It's hardly a surprise to learn this, however, it is a statement
now on record and which dispels much of the UK 'X-files'
mythology.

The Ministry also shoots down Pope's celebrated 'Fox Mulder'
image by explaining the full nature of his responsibilities and
extent of any 'UFO' involvement, revealing, "Mr Pope was
employed as an Executive Officer in Secretariat (Air Staff) 2.
His post was designated Sec(AS)2a. The main duties of the post
concern non- operational RAF activities overseas and diplomatic
clearance for military flights abroad".

It's exceptional that the Ministry have disclosed, especially to
a member of the public, exact duties which were carried out by
one of their staff.

I'm not surprised though; colleagues at the MoD are likely to be
dismayed by Pope's allegations.

In answer to my question of how much emphasis is placed on 'UFO'
related matters in the post which Pope occupied, the Ministry
confirm, "A small percentage of time is spent dealing with
reports from the public about alleged 'UFO' sightings and
associated public correspondence".

This is the true perspective of HM government's 'UFO' interest.
In context, the subject really is no more than a nuisance,
justifying only part-time clerical resources.

Pope occupied the 'UFO desk' at Secretariat (Air Staff) 2
between 1991 and 1994 and subsequently wrote 'Open Skies, Closed
Minds' and 'The Uninvited', the latter containing the accounts
of people who claim to have been experimented on by aliens.

His latest work, 'Operation Thunder Child' was released last
week and Pope declares, "Operation Thunder Child is a science
fiction novel set in the near future, and deals with the concept
of an escalating and hostile alien presence. What I've tried to
do is to tell the story in as realistic way as possible, drawing
on my official knowledge and experience of working at the
Ministry of Defence.

Accordingly, I use knowledge about UFOs and abductions picked up
during my three years researching and investigating these
phenomena, and also utilise information picked up while working
in the Air Force Operations Room (part of the Joint Operations
Centre) during the Gulf War".

It's difficult to reconcile Pope's view of his part-time tenure
at the 'UFO desk' against this unique insight provided by the
Ministry.

Sensational tales of 'alien encounters' will always sell and
perhaps we can safely say that by comparison there's not much of
a market for 'Diplomatic Clearance and Military Flights - the
Secret Files!'.

However, it's now a proven fact, at least according to his
employer, that Pope was only a part-time clerical worker,
perhaps for only a few hours each month, on the 'UFO desk'. His
main duties were completely unrelated and much more mundane.
It's a fact which isn't evident from his numerous interviews and
conferences.

Pope also never officially investigated 'alien abductions', or
crop circles or 'alien animal mutilations' - or so say the MoD -
as he continues to boldly proclaim.

It is of course ludicrous to think that the MoD have even for a
moment considered these diverse facets of 'UFO' reports might
threaten 'defence of the realm', or feared that 'abductions' had
any substance in fact.

Still, all good fun and no harm done.

What would 'ufology' be without some 'liberal' interpretations
of people's experiences!


James Easton.


NOTES

James Easton is Editor of the 'Voyager' newsletter and can be
contacted by e-mail at:

voyager@ukonline.co.uk

'Voyager On-line' is located on the World Wide Web at URL:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/


'NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD' can be found at URL:

http://www.hotgossip.co.uk/pope.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:14:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:13:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 06:08:54 -0400
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Dear Joachim,

 >So far, there is no lithmus test for the genuineness of
 >formations that would be scientifically accepted, maybe Ron
 >Russell has found something like this recently.

The lithmus test for genuine compared to hoaxed terraglyphs is
very simple: the electromagnetic properties and the direction of
growth of the corn in the field.

However, if you mean by "scientifically accepted" accepted by
organized science then I know of no lithmus test that will
suffice.

 >And learn from these Old Americans how to treat a planet.

 >This is in fact the true essence of all these UFO-related
 >phenomena: to remind us of who we are and where we are - and of
 >our responsibility for this planet.

 >If there would be a cosmic court, we would be severely accused
 >for one of the heaviest cosmic crimes: the rape and murder of a
 >living planet. For what punishment the cosmic public prosecutor
 >would plead for?

 >The New Americans calmed down.

Joachim, calm down. The earth is in far better shape than the
environmentalists would have us believe. They are a lobby group
themselves and, as any other lobby group, need funding to
continue their activities. Injecting fear among the public is a
sure way to get funding for them.


Groeten,
Henny








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:17:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >>association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.

 >Bruce,

 >Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >professionalism.

Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.

Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?

Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:25:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:21:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
 >the cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >founder.

<snip>

This wise post of Mark's raised -- much more reasonably and in
much greater depth than most of what we read here -- fascinating
questions. He gave many reasons why, scientifically speaking, we
can't think we know anything about alien intentions or
capabilities.

Mark's post came in the midst of a discussion featuring, among
others, Dennis Stacy,  Joseph Polanik, and myself. I'm happy to
concede that Mark made more sense than anything I've said on
this subject. But I'm a little surprised at the silence from
Dennis and Joe, especially since Mark raised serious objections
to points they were making.

If Dennis (whom I know and respect) and Joe (whom I don't know
and respect) are serious about what they've been arguing, they
really have to address what Mark wrote. Any comments, guys?

Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                     A&E's 'Celebrity Close Encounters'

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:23:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:34:33 -0400
Subject: A&E's 'Celebrity Close Encounters'


Would love to hear the comments of others re this program.
Personally, the 'celebrities' interviewed were well interviewed,
well spoken, well researched.  Learned a lot.

But as to the overall program - the producers failed to any
research of their own, relying instead on a chap from the
sceptic mag.  They let him get away with saying the sightings of
UFOs over Washington DC in the summer of 52 were essentially
delusions caused by too many bad Hollywood movies that year.
Project Blue Book is mentioned, but no one read the book by the
first Blue Book top investigator, Ruppelt, who in his own book,
Report on Project Blue Book, details the event and how many
different radar stations in the area picked up the sightings,
how they happened over several days with a week in between I
believe of none, and all form an official perspective! The man
lied!  And they didn't catch him on it, in fact they favoured
his words with lots and lots and lots of repeated pictures of
the saucer movies posters and scenes from the movies.  ad
infinitum.....

Opinion supported by facts and personal research were from the
celebrities, unsupported opinion from the official
representative of the sceptics (only one really) and a few whose
experiences are still opinions but which were enough to balance
the program without the idiot liar.  Overall opinion of the
producers was obvious - celebrities have no right to influence
public opinion using their status.  I noted at least twice, if
not three times that the announcer plainly referred to this
possible misuse of the public's trust and that was repeated also
by the sceptic.

I hope they have another program on the misuse by celebrities of
their public trust when they choose to take on medical disease
research and political candidates.  And I'm sure any Canadian
would be happy to play the role of the 'sceptic' on that one!

It followed well on the heels of the Sunday night program about
the cattle mutilations, targeting American secret black OP.s as
the culprits - but missed a few points like why, if its a secret
black OP.s would they leave the carcasses littered all around the
fields, often dropping them back down to the ground after
lifting them up - assuming it would be wise to maintain secrecy
if the carcasses were quietly and secretly disposed of, leaving
the cattlemen to assume the missing animals were taken by cattle
rustlers.

And of course, a point well raised by a colleague here on Update
- if they want to check out say the effects of the early atomic
bomb tests on succeeding generations of animals and people and
how the poison may have or how much it has infiltrated our food
chain, then why didn't they just don cowboy hat and buy some at
the livestock sales barns like everyone else who wants a few
good cattle!

And the sounds of the program coming up, bringing UFOs down to
earth sounds like more of the same - carefully selected facts,
ignore the obvious questions that you can't find answers to.

I am sure that if the answers were so easy to find, then there
is enough collective intelligence on this List alone to have
figured out the same conclusions as these programs suggest, plus
plugged the obvious holes in their arguments! But then, to
someone who knows nothing, even a little bit can seem to make a
lot of sense.  And since they aren't interested enough to check
out what might be missing in the meatless stew they were handed,
they will happily and lazily accept the conclusions of these
programs as God's word on the subjects!

Martha Stewart offers a lot more valid information and always
answers those little niggling questions! Where's the TV
remote?

Lesley








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:59:13 +0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:37:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 16:27:52 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 22:58:41 +0800

 >I said:

 >>>Are you saying, Sharon, that the glare on the glass door was
 >>>intended?

 >And you replied:

 >>Not at all Amy, I'm not one for inferences without facts. All I
 >>said was the excuse was convenient for something so important.
 >
 >Ah, Sharon, I have discussed this case with many with view
 >points like yours. No matter what I say you will doubt. No
 >matter how much information or evidence is put before you, you
 >will scoff. That's OK because if someone else were presenting
 >this case to me, I would probably scoff too. ;>

Thanks for admitting that Amy. But I have yet to scoff at
anything. Since when is talking about a case considered
scoffing? If people don't ask questions and simply accept the
facts blindly, we'll never get to the truth about anything.


 >However, the biggest difference between you and I is that if
 >someone else were sharing this info with me, I would ask more
 >questions and make less statements.

Well if I were making a statement it would be something like
"There are too many conveniences and obstacles in the experience
for it to be realistic" That's not what I beleive but it's a
statement. What I did say however, was the neighbour was called
in specifically to take photos of this encounter and the glass
door was left closed. Hmmm, now if i was a police person
examining this case as they do, something just wouldn't sit
right.

 >As a researcher/investigator
 >I have learned there is much more going on out there than I can
 >fold into my paradigms. Because I have seen things that have
 >shaken my belief systems to the core, I know how little I
 >actually know about the phenomena I study. Even with stories
 >that strike me as absolutely impossible, I allow for the
 >possibility it may only be beyond my realities and never declare
 >it false. Since I know I do not know everything nor pretend to
 >know all the answers, I allow everything to be possible until
 >proven otherwise.

Hey I'm a big believer in the impossible, I have seen some
really freaky stuff, like you, it has affected me beyond repair.
But it has also strengthened my resolve not to jump to
conclusions, and to be sceptical at every angle because there
are crazies out there who don't think twice about taking
advantage of our willlingness to believe.

 >I do so wish I could bring forth the evidence you and so many
 >require to accept the many possibilities that will open your
 >mind and enable you to see more.

Please, I never called for evidence. Just a plausible explanation.

 >I realize this case is
 >lacking in many ways which leaves ample room for you and others
 >to find fault with the information.

They are the hardest cases to accept, I'm afraid. I wish it was
simple enough to take the word of these folk, but knowing how
human nature works, that'll never happen. for me anyway

 >I could have kept it all to
 >myself but wanted to share it via the internet because it is
 >information and other researchers/investigators may find
 >correlations in the course of their work.

That's great, and we are appreciative to be able to learn more
about cases researched by others. However that doesn't imply we
will accept the facts based on the testimony of some strangers
and bleary photos. I'm not saying that's what you want us to do,
but that's why, being an objective outsider not attached to the
people or the case I was able to consider all the facts and
consider those that don't seem to gel.

 >I think it's rather sad that you make these comments, Sharon,
 >when it is obvious to all that you have never even seen the
 >photographs in person, talked to the witnesses or spent more
 >than a few minutes reviewing the information. That's like
 >trying to tell someone what's in a book without ever reading it.

I appreciate this, and no I have never seen the photos in real,
or talked to the witnesses myself, but I can rely on your skills
to cover those areas effectively. And I am sure, despite your
opposition, you appreciate having another's opinion on the case.
I've never said I don't believe the witnesses, or think the
photos are fakes etc, I am just curious as to why a detail like
the door was not considered by them.

 >I am sorry that you reject this opportunity to learn something.
 >But, that is your choice.

I don't reject this opp. Amy, I never immediately dismiss any
case be it one I have researched myself, or someone else's. And
the details themselves are very interesting, but I just have too
many questions. I am sure you can appreciate my scepticism.
Please don't be offended by my questions or statements
pertaining to your case it is nothing personal. Just the way I
filter to hundreds of fake cases.

 >I really wish I could share with you
 >because I've found some fascinating information. However, I
 >will continue to present studies as they are completed on my web
 >site and you may take them or leave them. I do this work to
 >learn not to convince people. That's not my job and I certainly
 >don't get paid for it.

You said it. We're all amateurs at this, just doing it for the
love of it. But sometimes I have seen some researchers get too
emotionally invloved and it becomes hard for them to accept any
doubt around the case. I'm not saying this is you, I wouldn't
dare to speculate on someone I have never met, but it's just my
experience. Please, if you get any more information from these
folk, let us know, I am still a researcher, whether it's to
prove or disprove, I haven't yet determined :)

 >Nice talking with you, Sharon!

You too

Sharon









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                         Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 21:43:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:44:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers


 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:42:58
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Geller On Nazi Saucers

Hello Stig, all:oh, by the buy, I've commented about this
before, I smellth a rat.

 >Source: The (London) Times,

 >http://www.the-times.co.uk/news/pages/tim/99/10/18/timintint01026.html?999

 >Stig

 >***

 >October 18 1999

 >INTERFACE
 >
 >Hitler's stealth

First, if Hitler had all these wonder weapons, and knew how to
use them, Why couldn't his Arado Jet Bomber Pilots hit the
Bridge ar Remagen? My late Father-in Law -was- there when:"The
Krauts thew everything but the Kitchen sink at us!!" then at the
height of the attack his buddy , Mac said: "What the hell is
that ?!!) as the Arados swooshed by -and missed the Bridge.

 >Hitler's obsession with the occult and astrology is well known -
 >but evidence that his aerospace and rocket scientists were
 >plundering alien technology to build Nazi UFOs has never gripped
 >the public imagination.

I've said this before, but I put this another way (with
apologies to Spike Jones) why aren't we goin' "Seig Heil, Seig
Heil in der Fhurer's Face!"?


 >Maurizio Verga's tantalising web pages reveal Werner von Braun
 >and the Luftwaffe design teams could have been guided by
 >extraterrestrials, perhaps looting interstellar components from
 >a crashed spaceship.

Oh, Lord, have mercy.

 >Rumours of the Third Reich's underground bases first surfaced in
 >the late Forties, coinciding with the birth of UFO sightings.
 >America's Operation Paperclip was at full throttle, with the FBI
 >smuggling Nazi war criminals into America to take advantage of
 >their scientific expertise.

Yeah, and so were the Russians, Argentinians and anyone else who
could get a Nazi Scientist to come to thier country - no
embarrising questions asked.

 >Former Nazis gave America the space race edge, and von Braun's
 >career followed a smooth flightpath from pilotless V2 rockets to

Note this following:

 >Apollo 11 and the first manned moon landing.

Yes, and he was deserving of that Honor.

 >Verga believes the Luftwaffe developed a flying disc, in the
 >classic saucer shape, which flew at Prague on February 14, 1945.
 >His photographic evidence is almost certainly faked by Fifties
 >sci-fi fans. Visit his site to enjoy the artist's impressions,
 >which are a glorious delight. It may not be a coincidence that
 >Americans began sighting flying saucers within three years of
 >the alleged Prague test-flight and von Braun's escape to
 >America.

 >Countless UFO reports of the early Eighties turned out to be
 >sightings of America's Stealth Bombers. Is it possible that the

Right, Mettalic Disks, Flying Cigars, Orbs Lights in the Sky -
clearly F-117s and B-2s by the thousand.

 >US Air Force did develop Nazi technology to build a fleet of
 >saucers 50 years ago, producng the first wave of Unidentified
 >Flying Objects?

And if the US did? why haven't we used it just like the Nazis?
Why didn't they sweep the skies of Lancasters and Fortresses?
Hmmm? Why didn't we put Stalin in jail (sharing the same cell
with say, Hesse?) after conclusivie victory over the Soviets?

 >And if those spacecraft were for real, the chilling question
 >remains: what are the menacing objects reported nightly in
 >Nineties skies?

Maybe we don't really know, but would like pat, human-based
answers? Any answer that is a comfirmation of one's _own_ideas
may be at, best silly, at worst, dangerous,

GT McCoy










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:36:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:48:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:26:24 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

I wrote:

 >>When she got the photographs back from the
 >>photo lab, all she got were pictures with a glare on the glass
 >>doors - or so she thought.

You replied:

 >Well don't it just always happen.

Was this meant to be conducive to stimulating and intellectual
conversation?

 >Why would your kid say "Oh, look. An alien"? I hope you have not
 >been trying to influence this poor kids mind in any way.
 >My kid would have said "Oh, look. A monster or a creature!"

Oh really, Dave? You mean your kids have not seen the movies,
the T-shirts, the pens, pencils, toys, the X-Files and all the
alien-related images bombarding kids these days? Most kids who
see a picture of a bug-eyed critter call them "aliens" these
days not monsters.

People who know my work know that I refer to what most people
call "aliens" as "beings of unknown origins" and those who
abduct as the "Abductors" - whether human or non-human. I do
not like calling them "aliens" because we do not know where they
are from, why they are here or who they are. The only reason I
titled the article "Alien Convention" is because people
understand these words and because the main witness, herself,
thought they might be "aliens". I didn't want to use the word
"alien" in the title but figured people just aren't ready to
understand the concept of beings of unknown origins or BUO's as
I call them. Since the printed word is used to communicate,
that is where I focus and leave "political correctness" up to
people like you.

 >>Some people see these images, some don't.

 >I've seen that before, it's called 'faces in the fire', goes
 >back a long way.

That's interesting, Dave, because you have never seen these
photos in person. Thus far, all you have seen are the scanned
images of the photographs yet you feel qualified to make snap
declarations based on so little information. I hope you don't
do this often because you are probably missing a lot.

 >Give us a list of who you mailed this to, some of us might like
 >to follow this up.

I will gladly do so via private E-mail for anyone if you (and
any other recipients) promise not to publish the information
publicly. I do not wish to point out anyone in public because it
is only my opinions based on personal experiences. I would love
for someone to ask these researchers why they never contacted me
or bothered to ask even a few questions. Thank you for
volunteering, Dave!

 >This may come as a shock to you Amy but I am not a debunker.

Never said you were.

 >I simply ask the questions that a lot of people should be
 >asking.

It is good to ask questions, Dave. We should ask questions. It's
the statements or snide comments based on so little knowledge
that do little to promote understanding and only take up time we
could use learning from each other with mutual respect.

 >Well you seem to have covered everything.

Thank you, Dave, but no - I have much more I want to learn.

 >You all seem to be sure you have been abducted by space aliens.
 >God forbid anyone has the audacity to speak out against such a
 >thing.

The main witness I inteviewed never quite believed she had been
"abducted by space aliens". In fact, the witnesses in the house,
being of Hispanic descent, first thought the beings they
encountered were demons or devils. The baby in the house woke up
shouting the Spanish word for "devil". "Cathy" called them
"aliens" because it was the closest explanation for what they
looked like.

Dave, it's one thing to ask questions, it's one thing to
question someone's experiences but it is a completely different
matter to "speak out against" something. Look back on this post
you submitted and count how many times you asked questions only
to answer them yourself. Perhaps the audacities you chase are
of your own creation.

 >Every effort to gain proof seems to be blocked at every turn.
 >How about a remote power source?

Interesting idea, Dave! It will be added to the ARM list of
proposed techniques.

 >Look at it this way, there's a lot worse going on in the world,
 >victims of hurricanes, train crashes, floods, wars, famine.

Well, Dave, we all try to contribute to the needs of this world
in our own ways. This is my way of helping. It may not meet your
standards of what is important but it meets mine.

 >I even had a personal tragedy that far outweighs the abduction
 >phenomenon, if only I could exchange mine for yours... but thats
 >in the real world and believe me I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

I'm sorry to hear of your personal tragedy, Dave. However, I
don't think any of us can say one person's experiences outweigh
the experiences of another. Each person is unique.

If I can help ease your burdens in any way, feel free to contact
me via private E-mail and I will listen.

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:38:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 17:01:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:28:02 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 > So far all you've taught me is that either I believe
 >you or I believe you, either my opinion isn't valid or my
 >opinion isn't valid, either this is the way it is and the way
 >you see it or this is the way it is and the way you see it.  No
 >one else is allowed to make a judgement call if it doesn't
 >validate your beliefs and opinions.

If this is what you have learned, Sue, perhaps you need to
re-evaluate those you allow to influence you.  You may think
whatever you wish, believe what you wish and judge all according
to your own personal standards. Never let anyone tell you you
cannot think or judge others if that's what you want to do.

 >And while I'm at it, did anyone ever think that maybe Mr.
 >Firmage's meeting was private because it was industry-related to
 >his current non-UFO ventures, like computers, ecommerce and all
 >that 90's stuff business people today get involved in?  He's
 >Mormon (reliable) and has always given us a hint of something in
 >the works, and I think he would've done so if this 'meeting'
 >were related to his UFO involvement. And no, I'm not a JF
 >groupie.  I stand behind anyone in this field, except when the
 >contradictions start pouring out of 'em.

What does Mr. Firmage have to do with this thread?  You seem
very confused, Sue.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 02:37:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 17:08:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@mailclub.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >Hello,

 >I would like to answer some pertinent questions of M. Polanik.

 >>From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:53:55 GMT

 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:11:21 +0200
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
 >>>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >>>When trying to understand why ET are mutilating animals, we must
 >>>be careful to avoid asumptions.

 >>How reasonable is it to theorize, from what little evidence we
 >>have, that ETs are the ones responsible for animal mutilations?

 >Exactly. So we must be carefull. For now it is only an
 >hypothesis since we don't have any proof for that.  But this
 >does not mean that this hypothesis is false. I personnaly use it
 >as my current working hypothesis.

 >>>In your case you assume that they are interested in getting huge
 >>>quantities of the substance itself.

 >>Someone questioning the ETMT (ET as Mutilator Theory) might ask
 >>'Why would ETs want to mutilate cattle?'.

 >...
 >>It _is_ far more reasonable to suppose that ETs are probing and
 >>measuring than it is to suppose that they need the precious BRS
 >>for their own use.
 >...

 >>However, we should be able to question this theory (if we can
 >>assume that this supposition is a full grown theory) by asking
 >>'Why would they have to kill the cattle?'.

 >At first I would say that we have no idea. I guess that the
 >samples they need like all the blood, flesh parts and organs
 >like the eyes and so may not allow the animal to survive after
 >removal.

 >>If ET was genuinely concerned about secrecy, why would they
 >>leave all those dead cows lying around? Why not use the same
 >>sample extraction techniques on the cattle as they do on the
 >>humans?

 >If ET where "genuinely concerned about secrecy", leaving the
 >cattle carcass make no sense. So maybe we have to reconsider the
 >assumption that there are "genuinely concerned about secrecy".
 >Of course they may also be "illogical" ;-)

 >I'm not sure there are so concerned about secrecy. They also
 >show a sort of offhandedness in this secrecy process. I tend to
 >attribute this to a sort of self assurance of the supriority
 >complex. They are just as secret as needed to avoid panic, to
 >keep things under control and not be bothered in their projects.
 >This is of course only my current interpretation of the
 >phenomenon based on the data I had in hand so far. This may thus
 >be subject to revision but currently make more sense regarding
 >to global pattern.

There may be another reason for the apparent cavalier attitude
in use by ET, on the assumption that it is ET performing
mutilations for whatever purpose.  Perhaps these actions and
more (i.e., abductions, crop circles, UFO appearances over
populated areas, and etc.) are being performed with the
knowledge that the goobers goobering in the goobermint are not
only aware, but have given tacit approval to these acts.

Maybe ET is getting something for giving something.... maybe.  I
only know one thing for sure, they gotta pay me for Gripple.  Of
course, it's none of your beeswax how or how much, eh?

I've often wondered why it is that so called black helicopters
are often seen around UFO's and sometimes, in the areas of
abductions, UFO appearances et al.  The helicopter is not a fast
aircraft, so it is not used to "pursue" the enemy.  It is not
nearly as well armed as fighter aircraft are.  Why helicopters?

They are slow, not heavily armed and often show up following,
not "chasing" UFO's.  Uh, duh, maybe they aren't chasing or
chasing away, maybe they are merely "escorting?"  I mean, just
in case some SOB cattle farmer decides he's had one too many
three thousand dollar bovines boned and decides to take a crack
at them thar flyin saucer machine thingies, eh?

NOTE: Please excuse the number of "eh's" eh? I am trying to get
on the good side of Doctor Kanappy.  He still owes us money.
Thank you.

 >>Conversely, if ET is genuinely concerned with secrecy, is it
 >>reasonable to suppose they they'd use their use their advanced
 >>surgical techniques on cattle but not on abductees where they
 >>leave all sorts of scars, scoop marks, burns and blotches?

 >I would be more cautious when reasonning in that direction. It
 >is true that we have some information, but we must also keep in
 >mind that we might bot have all the information. Currently, far
 >what we know, we can't outrule the possibility that humans where
 >also found mutilated as the cows. In France there are more than
 >2000 human disaperance reported to the plice per year. There is
 >plenty of room for this human mutilation hypothesis event if it
 >is only one human per year for instance. I don't say that it
 >happens. I just want to say that it is possible and that we
 >might not know about because some people prefer to keep it
 >confidential for some obvious reasons. Thus I dont think it is
 >reasonable to make an assumption that this does not happen. We
 >don't know.

Maybe some folks do and are not saying, eh?

 >>>There is a similar question with abduction. ... If they know how to
 >>>engeneer and modify genetical material why do they bother keeping
 >>>collecting sperm and eggs samples ? ... Wouldn't it be much simpler to
 >>>collect a few humans and start a breeding program on their own planet
 >>>or spaceship ?

 >>A very good question.

 >>Of course, any ETs capable of doing this could also raise their
 >>own cattle.

 >Good point. Sooo ... if ET exist, if ET are comming on earth to
 >mutilate cattles, .... it forcibly implies that they have good
 >reasons to do so. There are many. First. cattle may simply not
 >survive in their environement. Second they may need sampling of
 >cattles in the context they where picked from. For a pollution
 >study or for comparing with their own breads, etc.

 >Human scientists do this all the time. They are picking samples
 >and some just pick what they need and live the rest as scaps.
 >For flowers and sometime even with animals.
 >
 >So theorizing on those points is in my opinion an adventurous
 >process. We might explore this when trying to understand what we
 >are talking about. But I would certainly be very carefull when
 >tempted to use those reasoning in a demonstration that the
 >phenomenon is true or false, and make sense or not. We don't
 >have enough data yet in my opinion.

 >They simply may be "illogical" from our point of view and this
 >could explain anything ;-) But this would also be an easy answer
 >that will probably not satisfy you and most sceptics ;-)

Christophe, those last few sentences speak volumes. And what I
find so darned fascinating, is that those who claim to have the
truth or otherwise believe they do, are always the ones who say
it loud and clear.  But those who do have the truth, say
nothing.

On the assumption, of course, that somebody knows the truth,
which I frankly doubt.  But it would be a gas to be in a
position to have a camcorder recording the look on the face and
the sounds from the throats of those who have been shouting so
loud and so clear, just how much of the truth they know when
they hear the real truth.

Ah, but God would not allow me, a sinner, to have such happiness
in this lifetime.  I have not been good enough.  Not even to my
friends. Friend. Excuse me.

J. Jaime Gesundt








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:12:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:44:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:33:09 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 14:18:20 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

 >>>>If nothing else, UFOs raise fascinating questions of
 >>>>epistemology.

 >>The first time I heard the word "epistemology" was during
 >>teacher training in the late 1960s.

 >(Larry having fun with professors snipped)

 >For everyone's information, "epistemology" is the study of
 >the ways in which we gain knowledge about the world. What
 >makes UFOs interesting in this context is that being a transient
 >phenomenon, UFOs are resistant to many normal techniques
 >of science.


Hello Mark!

Yes, I suppose I could have looked up the word epistemology
again. What sent me off was being reminded of a certain
professor of Educ. 370 ( Educational Psychology ) who liked
using five syllable words to make the perfectly obvious
hopelessly arcane. I could say he was blowing smoke, but that
doesn't sound very educational does it?

In any case, sorry for the irrelevancy.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                             ATIC History Update

From: Wendy Connors <ProjectSign@email.msn.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 12:02:02 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:45:29 -0400
Subject: ATIC History Update


The following is taken from the official ATIC History for 1
January 1953 to 30 June 1953, pages 75-78 inclusive.

Project Blue Book (10073)

During the first six months of 1953, 249 reports of unidentified
flying objects were received by the Air Technical Intelligence
Center (ATIC). The most productive month was February, with 76
reports. This is in contrast with widespread public opinion that
since "saucers" are no longer in the newspapers, the Air Force
receives no reports. Probably more significant than this is the
fact that 55% of all reports received thus far in 1953 came from
military observers. Of the remaining 45% from civilian sources,
8% involved some type of radar detection.

On 20 May 1953 the project monitor completed a briefing tour of
all the Air Divisions in the Air Defense Command (ADC). This
briefing tour was set up in the fall of 1952 to educate ADC
personnel in the philosophy and background of Project Blue Book,
and to show how to improve their reports. Ground visual
questionaires were distributed to ADC Intelligence officers with
briefing copies to enable them to brief interested personnel in
their units. The project monitor, in his briefings, emphasized
that analysis of a sighting could be done at division or
Aircraft Control and Warning level, eliminating all but the
hard-core unknowns to be forwarded to the ATIC for further
analysis. All divisions of the Western Air Defense Force, the
Central Air Defense Force, and the Eastern Air Defense Force
were briefed. ADC produces 35% of all Flying Object Reports.

In addition to three ADC temporary duty tours, trips were made
to Darlington, Wisconsin, and to Red Lion, Ohio, during the
reporting period to investigate flying saucer incidents. In both
cases the objects in question turned out to be conventional.

In January a scientific advisory panel was called together in
Washington by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to review
the problem of unidentified flying objects. Members of the
panel, including many high-level scientists, reached the
following conclusions:

(1) National security agencies should institute policies on
intelligence training and public education, designed to prepare
the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize
most promptly and to react most effective to true indications of
hostile intent or action.

(2) The evidence presented on unidentified flying objects shows
no indication to date that these phenomena constitute a direct
threat to the national security.

(3) A continued emphasis on the reporting of these phenomena, in
these times, results in a threat to the orderly functioning of
the Government.

(4) National security agencies should take immediate steps to
strip the unidentified flying objects of the special status or
myster they have unfortunately acquired.

Generally the ATIC agrees with these conclusions and at the
present time is attempting to implement the panel's suggestions.

Seventy-three gridless Videon cameras were distributed to
Airways and Air Communications Service (AACS) tower sites and
ADC radar sites on 1 June 1953. The original plan for these
cameras was to take a diffraction grating picture of an
unidentified object which would enable a spectroscopist to
identify the spectrum bar. However, it was found that the Videon
diffraction gratings deteriorated soon after being received at
the ATIC, because of inexpert mounting. It was concluded that
the cameras would be used for obtaining photographic
intelligence on unidentified objects, without the gratings. When
a suitable grating is obtained, the cameras will be recalled and
the gratings mounted.

The International Business Machine (IBM) statistical analysis of
all sightings from 1947 through 1952 continues for Project Blue
Book. It is estimated that a final written report will be
submitte on 15 August 1953. Statistical curves of probability,
indexes of comparison on undentified objects, and a general
commentary on the results of the IBM study will be extremely
significant in the future evaluation of reports and perhaps in
the operation of Project Blue Book.

The ATIC has received two notable reports of unidentified
objects during this six month's span. A sighting at Port Austin,
Michigan, on 17 February 1953 involved both radar and visual
detection. It appeared to be a simultaneous sighting and has not
as yet been explained. On 3 March 1953, three F-84 pilots from
Luke AFB sighted an unidentified object at 25,000 feet. One of
the fighter pilots exposed 30 feet of gun camera film in
photographing the object. Following extensive analysis, this
sighting is now considered to have been a vapor trailfrom
probably two or more high flying jet aircraft.

McMillin Observatory of Ohio State University, which is
cooperating in Project Blue Book by an astronomical program, has
ascribed 25% of all sightings in April, May, and June to the
planet Venus.

End of section.

Thank you,

Wendy Connors and Mike Hall










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                Researcher Presents Findings At University Of

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 01:16:31 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 17:39:57 -0400
Subject: Researcher Presents Findings At University Of


Greetings list -

From: http://www.msnbc.com/local/KECI/37183.asp

UFO researcher presents findings at University of Montana

NBC Montana Staff

MISSOULA � A man known for his research on the subject of UFO�s
spoke at the University of Montana Monday night, and his message
was clear: the government knows a great deal more about UFO
sightings than it claims to.

Robert Hastings calls his study of UFO�s a grass roots movement.
Hastings has lectured at over 500 universities, and Monday
night, brought his findings to the University of Montana.

Hastings� interest in UFO�s began after an apparent sighting
over 20 years ago at a classified military Air Force base. Since
then, he�s worked with numerous groups to uncover government
documents dealing with UFO sightings. Thanks to the Freedom of
Information Act, over 40 thousand pages of secret government
pages relating to UFO sightings have been released. However,
Hastings says he�s not trying to turn skeptics into believers,
he just thinks people should have access to the information so
they can decide for themselves.

The information presented wasn�t based on speculation. According
to Hastings, his findings come from previously secret
information from the CIA, the FBI, the US Air Force, and the
Defense Intelligence Agency.

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                           Re: From Maxwell Burns

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 14:09:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:49:03 -0400
Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns

 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: From Maxwell Burns
 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 20:27:19 +0100


 >Essentially, I believe that most UFO cases are resolvable in
 >terms other than alien. However, in a few close encounter
 >situations there are good grounds for surmising that an
 >intelligence is conveying some kind of message to the witness.
 >The data match between cases is so exact this is implicit.

<snip>

 >There is also what I call in my book 'the Star Trek effect'.
 >Essentially this argues that if you compare the l960's and
 >l990's Trek series you see the way technology has advanced in
 >the real world. Our imagined spacecraft of 30 years ago look
 >like museum pieces now (no lasers, LEDs, microchips etc -
 >because nobody could imagine their invention far sooner than the
 >time period in which the series is set). No doubt todays
 >Enterprise and Voyager will seem just as quaint when overtaken
 >by real scientific progress in years to come. Thus if alien
 >contact stories are purely imaginative we should see
 >unmistakable signs of the same Star Trek effect because we have
 >data spanning even longer than 30 years. Witnesses should have
 >invented alien craft in the l950's that are pure Dan Dare in
 >comparison with todays UFOs. They generally dont. The remarkable
 >thing is that we see a consistent magical technology in cases
 >from 1959,1969,1979,1989 and l999. Things that even now seem
 >just as fantastic as they did all those years ago.

Thank you for making the point, Jenny. One of my constant themes
in conversations about the UFO phenomenon is our inability to
understand our own future, and therefore the difficulty of
coming to grips with what _might_ be cultures from other worlds
that are conceivably millions of years beyond our own. I will
quote again the Christian mystic, Sir Thomas Ockham, who said,
"Whatever you say about the nature of God is necessarily false."

But rather than echo your speculation about the possibility that
some UFOs may represent our own future, I hope I can stimulate
some comments about the implications of recent suggestions
regarding the string theory.

ABC News' summer science series, "Nightline in Primetime,"
featured a provocative interview with Professor Brian Greene,
whose book, "The Elegant Universe," describes his cosmological
vision if _and that's a big if_ the string theory proves to be
an accurate mathematical description of the physical universe.

Greene and some other mathematicians believe the string theory
comes close to unifying what we know about nature's fundamental
forces and particles. Ultimately, in this view, such elementary
particles as quarks could be described as a different
vibrational frequency of the same underlying "string." The
theory comes close in a mathematical sense to analogies of the
universe as a manifestation of an idea and other such fuzzy,
mystical ideas.

What struck me most in Greene's description of this cutting-edge
mathematics, however, was his statement that the string theory
would require a fifth, sixth or even seventh dimension beyond
the four dimensions that we are familiar with. ABC News'
graphics department did a good job representing the dramatic
difference that the addition of each dimension makes in the
world we are familiar with.

Greene's description of the string theory has prodded my
curiosity. What, I wonder, would these dimensions be like? Is it
possible that these additional dimensions, which ultimately
should be discoverable and subject to manipulation, unify not
just the fundamental forces of nature but possibly the physical
and spiritual, or "superluminal" travel, or time travel, or, or,
or ...?

While I am an educated generalist, my training has largely been
in mathematics for social sciences. While I have an appreciation
of certain statistical concepts _regression toward the mean, for
instance_ I have never been capable of analyzing such things as
Maxwell's Equations or now the string theory and supersymmetry.

Could one of our more mathematically minded listfolk tackle this
subject, and perhaps suggest ways that the string theory could
explain the "magical technology" that Jenny Randles observes in
the accounts of abductees? Or is this too much like trying to
describe God?

Regards,

Pat McCartney
Auburn, Calif.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 19

                NASA Unveils New, Most Accurate Antarctic Map

From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 12:00:18 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:51:45 -0400
Subject: NASA Unveils New, Most Accurate Antarctic Map


David E. Steitz
Headquarters, Washington, DC   Oct. 18, 1999
(Phone:  202/358-1730)

Allen Kenitzer
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
(Phone:  301/286-2806)

RELEASE:  99-122

NASA UNVEILS NEW, MOST ACCURATE MAP OF ANTARCTIC CONTINENT

For 18 days during the Southern Hemisphere spring of 1997, a
NASA-launched Canadian satellite called RADARSAT collected
pieces of a puzzle that will help scientists study the most
remote and inaccessible part of the Earth -- Antarctica.
Scientists now have the puzzle pieces put together, forming the
first high-resolution radar map of the mysterious frozen
continent.

With detail to the point of picking out a research bungalow on
an iceberg, the new map has both answered scientists' questions
about the icy continent, and left them scratching their heads
about what to make of strange and fascinating features never
seen before.

"This map is truly a new window on the Antarctic continent,
providing new beginnings in our Earth science studies there,"
said Dr. Ghassem Asrar, Associate Administrator for Earth
Science, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC.  The new map was
produced as part of NASA's Antarctic Mapping Project.

The most amazing features scientists now see are twisted
patterns of ice draining from the ice sheet into the ocean.  "We
were surprised to see a complex network of ice streams reaching
deep into the heart of East Antarctica," said Kenneth Jezek, a
glaciologist from the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State
University.  Ice streams are vast rivers of ice that flow up to
100 times faster than the ice they channel through, with speeds
up to 3000 feet per year.  "There are some extraordinary ice
streams in East Antarctica that extend almost 500 miles --
nearly the distance along the Mississippi River from New Orleans
to Cairo, Illinois," Jezek said.

Ice streams form the most energetic parts of the Antarctic ice
sheet, and scientists believe that they are quite susceptible to
environmental change.  Ice streams also transport most of the
snow that falls on the continent's interior and dump it into the
ocean.

"We've recently used RADARSAT and other satellite data to
estimate that one ice stream system sends over 19 cubic miles of
ice to the sea every year -- an amount equivalent to burying
Washington, DC, in 1700 feet of ice every 12 months," said
Jezek.

Antarctica looks pure, white and mostly featureless to the
low-resolution satellites that previously mapped the frozen
landscape.  With the new RADARSAT map, however, the continent
comes alive.  Blocks of broken sea ice line the coast and
sedimentary rock protrudes from the rocky walls of Antarctica's
Dry Valleys.  The vast, perplexing Antarctic Ice Sheet flows and
twists into the sea, volcanoes poke through the ice sheet and
ice streams flow like rivers into the Southern Ocean.  Even the
tracks of wayward snow tractors on their way to inland stations
are visible.  "We have a new view of the entire southern
continent.  It shows us something about an extraordinary part of
our world and how humans may be changing it -- on both local and
global scales," said Jezek.

Jezek and his colleagues have been working to complete the
enormous map since the Canadian Space Agency began the mission
with a complex in-orbit rotation of the satellite.  Researchers
chose RADARSAT because its radar collects data day and night,
through cloudy weather or clear.  Such capability enabled the
mapping to be completed in just 18 days, compared to the last
satellite map of Antarctica which required images from five
different satellites spanning a 13-year period from 1980 to
1994.  Even at that time, parts of the continent remained
obscured by cloud cover.

The map also depends on accurate ground measurements by
scientists from many of the nations that study Antarctica.  "The
entire mission was conducted in a true spirit of international
cooperation, and that is why it succeeded," said Verne Kaupp,
NASA's Alaska SAR Facility Director and Chief Scientist.

RADARSAT-1 is owned and operated by the Canadian Space Agency
(CSA).  Its data is distributed and marketed by RADARSAT
International, a Canadian company licensed by the CSA.  "We at
the Canadian Space Agency are very pleased to make this
significant contribution to the international science
community," said Dr. Rolf Mamem, Director General, CSA Space
Operations Branch.  "We are looking forward to the exploitation
of these data for the benefit of all."

The Antarctic Mapping Mission is only one part of NASA's study
of the frozen continent. NASA's study of the Antarctic is part
of the Agency's Earth Science Enterprise, a dedicated effort to
better understand how natural and human-induced changes affect
our Earth's environmental system.

RADARSAT images of Antarctica are available on the Internet at:

    http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/imagewall/antarctica.html

-end-

    * * *

NASA press releases and other information are available automatically
by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov.
In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type
the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes).  The system will
reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription.  A second
automatic message will include additional information on the service.
NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command
GO NASA.  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail
message to domo@hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only
"unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                Polygraph Standards & Principles of Practice

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 17:34:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:14:46 -0400
Subject: Polygraph Standards & Principles of Practice


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400

 >>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >>raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >>professionalism.

 >Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
 >do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
 >organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
 >Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.

 >Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
 >group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
 >Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?


Hello Greg,

How surprising some remarks may lead someone to...

http://www.wordnet.net/cape/docs/app1.htm

California Association Of Polygraph Examiners


Then to...

http://www.wordnet.net/cape/docs/casapp.htm

for the Standards and Pratices.


To finally read:


---

Article VI

In order to achieve unity of purpose; assure a clear concept
of obligations to each other and the profession; and to
provide for the continuing welfare and protection of the
general public; all members of this Association shall abide
by the following Standards and Principles of Practice:

<snip>

D. No member shall render a conclusive oral or written
opinion, decision or report based upon the results of a
polygraph examination unless said opinion, decision or
report is based upon and supported by not less than two (2)
polygraph charts, each of which conforms to a standardized
polygraph technique as taught at an accredited school. This
shall not preclude the additional use of other techniques,
provided such other techniques are generally accepted by the
polygraph community.

<snip>

H. Every polygraph opinion, decision or report, oral or
written, shall be a factual, impartial and objective account
of the relevant information developed during the polygraph
examination, based upon an analysis of the polygrams.

<snip>

---

Considering Bruce's previous remarks:

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 00:16:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 11:43:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 11:24:24 -0700

<snip>

 >7. Ed arranged for a single polygraph test with Harvey
 >McLaughlin, who told me he had done thousands of such tests for
 >companies that had hired him. When Ed passed the test McLaughlin
 >didn't believe the result. Therefore when Ed returned for the
 >results of the test McLaughlin said that there were a few things
 >he wanted to check and he connected up the polygraph a second
 >time. In between the tests he had checked up on Ed's UFO
 >sightings and asked some different questions. Ed was not
 >expecting a second test, so it was a complete surprise. Ed
 >passed the second test as well.... no indications of deceit, so
 >McLaughlin wrote in his report that , in his opinion, Ed was
 >being truthful.

 >McLaughlin told me that Ed was not a sociopath or "con man" type
 >of person who would be likely to tel lies. Dr. Dan Overlade,
 >clinical psychologist who gave Ed a collection of personality
 >and psychological tests, told me the same thing. Neither of
 >these men foun evidence that Ed had lied.

<snip>

Do still think that being a member of an association is
worth zit?

In:
http://wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us/~btcarrol/skeptic/polygrap.html

The Skeptic's Dictionary (ah! Never thought one day I'd...)

"
There are three basic approaches to the polygraph test:

The Control Question Test (CCT). This test compares the
physiological response to relevant questions about the crime
with the response to questions relating to possible prior
misdeeds. "This test is often used to determine whether
certain criminal suspects should be prosecuted or classified
as uninvolved in the crime" (APA).

The Directed Lie Test (DLT). This test tries to detect lying
by comparing physiological responses when the subject is
told to deliberately lie and to responses when they tell the
truth.

The Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT). This test compares
physiological responses to multiple-choice type questions
about the crime, one choice of which contains information
only the crime investigators and the criminal would know
about.

Psychologists do not think either the CCT or the DLT is
scientifically sound, but a majority surveyed by the
American Psychological Association think that the Guilty
Knowledge Test is based on sound scientific theory and
consider it 'a promising forensic tool.'
"

At:

http://www.klab.caltech.edu/~seckel/Polygraph.html

PINOCCHIO SCIENCE: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE POLYGRAPH
By Al Seckel (pub. 1985)

[...]

The handful of studies that used a truly random selection of
cases and scored them blind produced similar results: overall,
83% of guilty subjects were diagnosed as "deceptive", as were
43% of innocent subjects.

The accuracy rates of "failed" and "passed" depend, of course,
on the proportion of dishonest persons in the group tested.
Thus, if 800 of 1,000 persons tested are truthful, a test that
is 72% accurate overall will accuse 144 liars and 224 truthful
persons. This is not an impressive accuracy record. "

etc.

Serge Salvaille








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Tim D. Brigham <TBrigham@ksinc.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:48:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:19:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:25:44 -0400

 >This wise post of Mark's raised -- much more reasonably and in
 >much greater depth than most of what we read here -- fascinating
 >questions. He gave many reasons why, scientifically speaking, we
 >can't think we know anything about alien intentions or
 >capabilities.

 >Mark's post came in the midst of a discussion featuring, among
 >others, Dennis Stacy,  Joseph Polanik, and myself. I'm happy to
 >concede that Mark made more sense than anything I've said on
 >this subject. But I'm a little surprised at the silence from
 >Dennis and Joe, especially since Mark raised serious objections
 >to points they were making.

 >If Dennis (whom I know and respect) and Joe (whom I don't know
 >and respect) are serious about what they've been arguing, they
 >really have to address what Mark wrote. Any comments, guys?


Hey Greg, Mark, all-

Responding just to the excerpt you quoted from Mark's post

 >>Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >>classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >>behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >>amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
 >>the cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >>class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >>founder.

If I am reading Mark correctly, perhaps the point that he makes
isn/t all that far off from the same point that detractors of the
literalist ETH would make. Attempting to speculate about the true
purpose and goal of 'aliens' - as many folks who support one view
or another often do in scenarios about ecological concern or
bovine and human-nappings simply is unjustified for the reasons
cited above.

This is not to say that experiences might not have a sexual
component or an ecological component, but rather, such a
simplistic and literal view of such components can not be
justified.

I don't think that Dennis literally believes that aliens are
bumbling idiots(!?), rather I think the point is that _in order
to believe the literal scenarios and scale set forth by many
proponents_ then they would have to be. Perhaps Dennis discounts
_all_ reports where aliens take sperm samples and cow parts, I
dont know, or perhaps he is instead getting at the fact that
"maybe it aint really the sperm and cow bits that they're
after!"

Personally I think an arguement could be made that the higher
the strangeness, when we speak only within the CE3 cases, the
more likely that such reports reflect the genuine mystery
involved, but thats another rant and I have a headache.....

Tim

)+(
TBrigham@ksinc.net
http://zap.to/DevilsAdvocate  The Devil's Advocate
http://zap.to/MindPhuck  Operation MindPhuck
"Better to go hungry than to feast on lies."
)+(







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:17:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:57:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:17:03 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Previously, Bruce responded

 >>>You can bet your boot disc (modern version of "bet your
 >>>boots") that the local investigators watched Ed like hawks
 >>>to find out if there was any hint of photographic interest
 >>>beyond minimal, and I payed attention to his photographic
 >>>understanding, which I found negligible.

 >Hi, Bruce!

 >You know, every time I write a check at the local supermarket,
 >the cashier asks,"Is everything on the check correct?" What does
 >she really expect me to say? What would she do if I suddenly
 >said,"Gosh, you're too fast for me! I was gonna try and slip a
 >phony check by you but you caught on and had to ask!" Do you
 >really think Ed would fess up if his original intent was to fool
 >you? Come on...>

Come on, Roger. You go through a cashier's line once. How many
times can you get away with it going through the SAME cashier's
line over and over, day in and out, dozens of times?

A better cashier analogy would be this: you slip a bad check
through once. Then the next day you do it again. A week later
you do it again. Pretty soon the store manager finds the $$$
aren't checking, the checks bounce. Now you come back the fourth
time and there are two people at the cashiers booth. You think
"I'm smart. I can do it again." So you do and get away with it.
Next time there are two cashiers a detective and police standing
by. Do you try once again?

Ed wasn't "monitored " for one day, or one UFO sighting.
"Surveillance " of Ed and his family occurred continuously for
days, weeks, months, years. He didn' take just one, or just five
pictures. He took dozens!. Each one was a potential disaster for
his scheme to defraud the world. Not only that but as time went
on the technical difficulty increased. Also the analysis and
surveillance increased.

I don't want to belabor this point but, although we couldn't
mount an FBI level effort, neither was it as trivial as you make
it out with your "cashier analogy."

 >Just kidding, but I think you get my point.

Sure, and responded to it.

 >As a photo analyst, you are supreme.

Perhaps I did one thing right?

 >But what can you scientifically base you're
 >assessment of Ed's skills on? His demeanor? His apparent lack of
 >photographic knowledge? The way he dresses? How he parts his
 >hair? Any one of the above is as good as the other IF he wanted
 >to fool you. I truly mean no disrespect, but a "gut feeling"
 >that Ed was telling the truth just won't do.

This "gut feeling" wasn't based on an occasional fleeting
contact with Ed. And it wasn't just my feeling. It was based on
numerous contacts, many of them consisting of many minutes to
hours of contact, face to face, or over the phone. If you take
the totality of what E produced, not just the 1987-1988 stuff
which Black rants about, but everything through 1995 (and some
not ever published), one would have to imagine Ed t be a
superstar of con men.... able to lie his way out of a cage not
onces but dozens of times...a man who culd recall the smallest
details of the biggest lies so he could "pass" interviews that
occurred as long as years after the events.

In all the hundreds of hours of conversation I had with him' he
never once indicated any photographic knoweldge other than point
and shoot. Oh, yes. He knew how to defocus and focus the camera.

Then there is the opion of the "personality professional" Dr.
Danielt Ovelade, clinical psychologist. Ed was willing to take a
battery of psych tests from Overlade. Then Overlade went through
hours of hypnotic regressions with Ed. Overlade probably spent
on the order of a hundred hours with Ed (at no charge) and after
it was all over stated that (a) Ed was normal and (b) Ed
believes what he said about the sightings. This is the most any
such testing could prove: that the person is basically honest
and that he/she believes in what he/she says.

 > Now the truth may
 >be that Ed knows nothing about photography. But you have to
 >admit that you really can't be sure just by looking at him or by
 >what he says. If you believe that he is telling the truth about>
 >his lack of photographic skills, then you might as well take the
 >plunge and believe that he really saw an extraterrestrial space
 >craft. If his word is good enough for one statement, then why
 >not the other?

I would agree with your just by looking at him" statement above.
However, I didn't make my decision "just by looking at him." In
the Gulf Breeze Sightings, page 307, I listed "factors" which I
considered. This is a highly abbreviated summary:

1) lots of photos and a video, al of which culd have been hoaxed
by someone with the capabiliy and time to devote to hoaxing. I
foud no evidence of capability and Ed certainly didn't seem to
have the time, even before the investigation started. (He was
busy building houses for a living.) Once the investigation
started the investigators took up hours of his time (I know this
for a fact), and yet he continued to produce UFO photos.

Ed was not the only one in his family to report taking UFO
photos. France, his (ex)wife took two photos. She was
interviewed numerous times.

2) There were non-photographic multiple witness sightings (Ed
and Frances, Ed and Frances and the children, Ed and Frances and
"Patrick Hanks" a friend

3) The UFO sighting events as reported by Ed and Frances are
rich with details. If a hoax it is safest to keep the story as
simple as possible (e.g., a big UFO was flying over and I took a
picture of it) rather than complex (a big UFO was flying over, I
took four pictures, had to go into the house to get more film,
took another picture, then walked into the street to get yet
another picture looking straight up but suddenly everything
turned blue, I heard a humming noise and a voice and saw
pictures in my head and noticed the ground was dropping down..
etc,m, etc. and this is just Ed FIRST sighting report)

4) Ed is wealthy.... doesn't need this for money and doesn't
need it for te harassment it brings him from UFO investigators.
He is well thought of in th community. Hard to imagine that he
would decide to pull of a long-duration hoax . thereby taking
the chance of being caught and losing all standing in the
community. Frances did not like the sightings because of what
the reports might do t teir relqationships wth others in the
community...hence Ed's official anonymity for several years....
but she never blamed Ed for the sightings.

5) One would expect the hoaxer would resist efforts to uncover
the hoax. Ed, however, cooperated with the investigators. In
particular, he allowed his camera to be tested by numerous
photographers including myself, he carried out numerous tests at
my request, including potentially damaging "road shot"
experiments and so on. I recall one afternoon and evening we
spent trying to duplicate "Frances and the Blue Beam" shot so we
could find out if the flash from the camera caused the sleeve of
her sweater dress to glow or if that was an effect of the blu
beam,. (We did determine that the glow was not caused by the
flash). Ed and Frances spent hours at the Road Shot site taking
pictures to test the hood reflection theory. Ed built the stereo
cameras I asked for. Not reluctantly, as I expected, but with
some "gusto". He wanted to be sure it could accurately measure
distance. Ed allowed his house to be searched. His personal life
was totally researched by the government of Florida AT HIS
REQUEST so he could get a pardon for his crime (of car theft and
cashing another person's check) when he was19 years old. (Ed was
granted a pardon, based on his exemplary life after his 2 year
jail term was over. This Florida State justice department
investigation INCLUDED an investigation of all the events
surrounding his sightings. Had they found evidence of fraud they
would not have given him a pardon.)

6 A strange circula area of dead grass was found behind Ed's
house in the high school playing field. Had Ed made that circle
as part of a hoax, one wuld expect that he would have claimed
that it was made by a UFO which he saw hovering over the circle.
Instead, afer th circle was discovered the investigators asked
Ed if he had seen a UFO over the circle and that incredibly
stupid or incredibly brilliant hoaxer said... no. He had seen A
UFO over the field (he had reported this earlier UFO sighting
before th circle was found) but he had not seen one over the
circular area. Here was a gift to the hoaxer, ready to be
grabbed, and Ed turned it down! Like I said, if a hoaxer he was
either incredibly stupid or incredibly brilliant to deny that he
saw a UFO over the dead grass circle. Incidently, that circle
was analyzed: no traces of chemicals to kill the grass. It took
several years for te grass to return to normal.

7) passed two polygraph tests taken at the suggesion of Budd
Hopkins. The second test was a complete surprise to Ed.

8) There were numerous other witnesses in the community who
reported seeing similar or identical UFOs. There were five dates
starting with November 11, 1987 and ending with March 20, 1988
when other people in Gulf Breeze reported sightings at nearly at
the same time as Ed.

I wrote as a conclusion:

"Considering the large number of sightings by other people in
Gulf Breeze it wuold be bizarre, indeed, to reject Ed's
sighitngs as a hoax and accept any of the other well-witneses
sightings of the same sort of UFO as Ed photographed."

.........................

 >Moving on, I had offered:

 >>....a Polaroid is unique among cameras in
 >>that it's "film gate" (the opening surrounding the actual film)
 >>is not a fixed part of the camera. Instead, it is part of the
 >>disposable film cartridge. Therefore, it is possible to attach
 >>masks to the cartridge that would prevent exposure in the "tree
 >>area". Additionally, because Polaroids can be processed
 >>immediately and (most importantly) privately, numerous tests
 >>could be made to be sure the masking is dead on. Even older
 >>"wait and peel" Polaroids would allow variations on this
 >>technique.

 >To which Bruce responded:

 >>I must admit that I hadn't thought of a "masked double exposure"
 >>in which the mask was effectively at the film plane.

 >Most (non digital) optical effects are achieved in just this
 >fashion. Fan magazines about the special effects industry are
 >available by the hundreds that explain just how this is
 >achieved. The average person would have no difficulty
 >comprehending the articles and emulating themIn addition, Bruce
 >offered:

 >>Of course,
 >>if you're going to take the film pout of the camera you have
 >>to be in a dark room... a "darkroom".

 >Sorry, Bruce, but this is incorrect. If you are using a NEW pack
 >of SX-70 or One-Step Polaroid film, there is a light tight card
 >that protects the film. On older "peel and wait" versions, there
i>s an opaque wrapping that allows for daylight loading. In
 >either case, the entire registration could be achieved in bright
 >daylight, before loading the camera. It would make no difference
 >at all.

Who's sorry? The 108 type film pack is as you claim. Can be
loaded in daylight because of the cover over the film..which
must be pulled off after the film is loaded. However, photo 1
was not the first picture in the pack. It was the 5th. (The
packs had numbers stamped on each picture; pack numbers run 1 -
8, During the investigation we discovered that the pack
numbering did not always occur, as if the macine which stamped
on the numbers did not always work. But the numbers were clear
for Ed's first photos).

So there was no opaque cover over the first photo..."photo
1"....which was NOT photo 1 in the pack. Ed's first 5 photos
were pack numbers 5, 6, 7, 8 in th first pack he used, then
number 1 in a second pack. Incidently, the camera was about 10
years old.

 >>To continue, I had offered this recipe for deception:

 >>>1. Lock the camera down on a tripod pointed at the treeline
 >>>intended for use as the background. Snap off a print and
 >>>process.

 >To which Bruce responded:

 >>No place for a tripod. But for the purpose of argument assume
 >>that Ed could make the camea rigid on a tripod in some way.

 >Wrong, again. Most Polaroids had/have tripod sockets in the
 >bottom (particularly SX-70's). There are a variety of plastic
 >clip-on mounts that allow for tripod mounting of cheaper
 >Polaroids that don't.

There was no tripod mounting hole.... this was checked. Perhaps
there was a plastic clip for that camera, but no one ever
produced such a clip. I suppose if I was "wrong" it was in
ignoring the plastic clip possibility. However. I nevertheless
gave you a "pass" on the possibiltiy of holding on a tripod by
pointing out that Ed could have made the camera rigid in some
way.

 >Continuing this saga, I offered the next step:

 >>2. Using a piece of acetate and a fine tip marker, technical
 >>pen, fine tip paint brush or other marking tool, trace over the
 >>area of the tree line that is supposed to pass infront of the
 >>UFO. A steady hand would not be necessary. In fact, the more
 >>random the pattern, the better.>

 >>3. Using the "film gate" as a registration device, tape the
 >>acetate square over the opening and place in the camera during
 >>photography of the model.

 >Bruce responded:

 >>Probably could get close enough this way. Of course, the real
 >>problem is the registration (pointing direction) of the camera
 >>for the second exposure.

There is another problem alluded to above. The mask has to be
removed before taking the second exposure unless te hoaxer wants
zero brightness wherethe tree image is supposed to be. In the
actual picture the tree brightness is not zero so in this
scenario Ed must have removed the hypothetical mask ...which
means opening the camera in the dark (!) since photo 1 was not
the first picture in the pack.

 >>In actuality, I used the reference of a tripod to help simplify
 >t>he concept. Acceptable registration could easily be achieved
 >>hand held. Why? Because all one needs to obtain correct

<snip>

I agree alignment would be possible by eye with practice shots
(the first four pictures in the pack?) to get accumstomed to
what scene in the viewer corresponds to having the real tree
align with the masked area.

<snip>


 >>And Ed managed to take his first
 >>three pictures in a succession that shows clouds moving at a
 >>speed and direction consistent with the known weather. That is,
 >>there were many minutes or many hours between photos.

This _should_ have read..."That is, there were _not_ many
minutes or many hours between photos."

 >Actually, since the film pack's advance is easily defeatable,
 >the camera could literally be loaded with latent images just
 >waiting for a second exposure. The masking will always line up
 >since it "goes along for the ride".

Well, the mask would have appeared in only one... the
first... photo.

Then, your idea of preexposing a series of photos, i.e., in this
case preexposing pack numbers 5,6,7, and 8 and then #1 of a
second pack is questionable. First you would have to figure out
how to advance the negative without causing development to
occur. In this camera the "film advance" was acomplished by
pulling on th film, a procedure which forced th negative and
positive material together between rollers. To preexpose would
require taking the film pack apart and exposing the negative
material alone. That was quite complicated film, as I recall,
and I question whether it would be feasible to put it "back
together" after exposing just the negative. Unfortunately it has
been about ten years since I actually used the camerd and I have
used may different types of Polaroid camera, so I'm a little
confused as to exactly how that film worked. (It was not the
super old double-roll type) But I am sure that the only "adance"
was by pulling the film for development after clicking the
shutter once (or twice, or a dozen times).

If a double exposure hoax, I assumed it wuld have been done by
having a model set up ina darkroom, etc. and then Ed would
photograph the model (photo 1) with a mask over the left side,
run outside and photograph the sky (being careful to align the
edge of th masked model with th tree), run inside and pull out
the film for developing, then take the second photo of the
model, run outside and take the second background picture, then
ruin inside and pull the film for developing, then... etc....
running out of film, canging to a new pack, photographing the
model, running outside to photograph the background, running
inside and pulling out the film for developing... and then
collapsing in a chair, figuring 5 mondo UFO photos for the first
session ought to be enough to get him rich and famous.


 >Further, I had offered:

 >>The other point that Bruce brings up is the matching blur of the
 >>UFO and the surrounding lights of the background. If they were
 >>produced separately they would, indeed, be hard to match. On
 >>the
 >>other hand, if the master Polaroid were copied on a Polaroid
 >>copy stand, it would simply be a matter of moving the print or
 >>the camera during exposure time. This would produce a uniform
 >>blur on all information within the photo. By careful
 >>>manipulation of the exposure times and masking, even selected

 >Bruce's response:

 >>Yes, yes yes..... all things are possible (?) given enough time,
 >>experience/capability. equipment, money and desire.

 >Yeah? Well that's the point, isn't it? Time would be minimal.
 >Experience would be minimal. Equipment he already had. His
 >investment is nothing more than the film itself and the model
 >(which would not have to be big). As far as desire....Well, he
 >made something happen, didn't he?

And investment in the copy stand and investment in the correct
lens so that he could properly focus on the composite Polaroid
picture. Easy as pie for a pro.

 >>All this takes photographic sophistication.

 >Perhaps, if used the "Hyzer method". I maintain that a much
 >simpler and more predictable method was used; one that Ed or
 >anyone else could grasp and exploit.

Surprising that Hyzer didn't prefer the simpler double exposure
method. Perhaps he thought the masked double exposure was too
difficult.

 >>In order to be in
 >>focus in the final Polaroids it would have been necessary to
 >>have large prints so that the Polaroid camera could be far
 >>enough from them to get a good focus.

 >Again, you are perhaps misinformed about Polaroids. As I
 >mentioned in a previous posting, Polaroid has always offered a
 >copystand for their cameras. It comes complete with a close-up
 >lens for copying other Polaroid prints (that way they can sell
 >more film!). Is it your assertion that he didn't have one of
 >these simply because you didn't see it or simply because he said
 >he didn't have one? Is the information on my check really
 >correct? Did the man really saw the lady in half? (just
 >kidding).

No doubt there is equipment, possibly even for that poor excuse
for a camera, which would have been used. It is true that no one
ever found such equipment, no one ever came forth to say he/she
saw Ed ever having or using such equipment in the years before
or after the sightings (or during the sighting period). Could he
have hidden it? Sure. But unless you assume that he bought it
specifically for the UFO hoax and never used it before in a
casual way and never showed it to anyone (or swore his family to
secrecy) it makes little sense to say he knew enough to use a
copy stand and appropriate lenses. Actually all he needed was th
appropriate lens, since he presumably held the camera by hend to
get the appropriate jiggle.

 >Again, there's nothing you can do if he intended to deceive. IF
 >his intent was thus, then investigators would not find models,
 >photographic equipment or anything else laying around. Any
 >conclusions from such personal observations or "searches" would
 >be false.

He would have to deceive everyone for a long time. No slips when
house searches took place. Wife and kids don't know. Friends don'
know. And, all this takes TIME...but Ed was still responsible
for building houses during these sightings. The road shot event
occurred as he was traveling to a job site to photograph the
electrical work for his records.

 >Finally, Bruce wrote:

 >>Few people are aware these days of all the argumentation that
.>>went on endlessly from 1988 through 1992 or so and then
 >>continued sporadically over the years. There's hardly a thing
 >>discussed now that wasn't discussed way back when.>

 >Really? Seemed pretty fresh to me....

You got a lot of catching up to do. The only new idea was
putting the mask inside the camera and now your suggestion of a
transparency on a piece of glass with the surrounding blacked
out instead of a 3D model.

Look, the bottom line is, as I said before the 37 photos (last
three stereo pairs, and this includes 10 Nimslo photos that were
largely -- but not exactly-- redundant) could have been faked
given enough time, desire, money and photographic capability. No
one ever produced conclusive evidence that Ed had any of these
except $$$. Moreover, Ed cooperated fully with the
investigators. If a hoaxer he was the ultimate in self
confidence and chutzpah.... yet never gave any evidence of that
in his attitude toward the sightings events. But these
sightings are a lot more than photos. And there were sightings
with no photos,. If a hoax Ed could have arranged to have
photos for every sighting. I have said before and will sa again,
te photos might not prove the sightings (a photo a UFO does not
make) but they also don't disprove the sightings. If you ignore
the photos there still is a lot of information which must be
explained if this is all a hoax.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Paul C. WIlliams <paulw@escape.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:23:27 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:01:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400

 >>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>>The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >>>association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.

 >>Bruce,

 >>Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >>raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >>professionalism.

 >Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
 >do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
 >organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
 >Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.

 >Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
 >group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
 >Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?


All,

A Polygraph test is not admissible evidence in court. Of this I
am aware. I've taken a polygraph in the past for a job. Lied all
the way through, and got offered the job which I declined.

Polygraph works if the person taking the test believes in the
test. Very akin to belief in UFOs eh?

---

Greg, remember when we had that wonderful time talking with
Linda Cortile, Bud Hopkins, John Velez and Euginea Macer Story
up at WBAI a few years back. Well you can relive that wonderful
evening. I've placed the real audio file of our chat on my site.
Check out the Experiencers file. Thanks.

Paul Williams
Executive Producer UFO Desk
WBAI NY
http://www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:04:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:09:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:38:04 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>And while I'm at it, did anyone ever think that maybe Mr.
 >>Firmage's meeting was private because it was industry-related to
 >>his current non-UFO ventures, like computers, ecommerce and all
 >>that 90's stuff business people today get involved in?  He's
 >>Mormon (reliable) and has always given us a hint of something in
 >>the works, and I think he would've done so if this 'meeting'
 >>were related to his UFO involvement. And no, I'm not a JF
 >>groupie.  I stand behind anyone in this field, except when the
 >>contradictions start pouring out of 'em.

 >What does Mr. Firmage have to do with this thread?  You seem
 >very confused, Sue.

 >Amy

Many of the threads on this list have stemmed from other threads
on this list because people have the tendency to want to change
the subject when the thread they are responding to is going
nowhere or there is no more information available or it happens
unintentionally.  Take a look at Max Burns for instance.  Jenny
Randles and Roy Hale have taken it completely off the main path.
I see no problem with this, nor do other people so it does not
make me confused, unless of course we are all confused.  How
many times do you see in the Subject: [Was: XXXXXXXX]?

The reason I brought up Firmage was because you were the one who
responded to a message on this list regarding his 'meeting' and
'the secret sources' .

By the way, you didn't answer any of my questions regarding your
investigation. Why is that? (rhetorical question). Perhaps your
answers would 'confuse' me?

In your message to Dave Bowden:

 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:36:36 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:26:24 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

You said:

 >The main witness I inteviewed never quite believed she had been
 >"abducted by space aliens". In fact, the witnesses in the house,
 >being of Hispanic descent, first thought the beings they
 >encountered were demons or devils.

Perhaps I _am_ confused. I thought you said in a previous
message, "the woman had been abducted all her life".  Are you
talking about the same person here?

Would you be so kind to clarify this for me (and perhaps the
list) so I'm not 'confused'.

Regards,

Sue








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 00:41:07 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:26:47 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work


 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:02:09
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work

 >Source: James Easton on 'alt.alien.visitors'.

 >Stig

 >***

 >From: "James Easton" <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
 >Subject: Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:36:09 +0100

 >_Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'_

 >Contrary to the public statements made by Nick Pope, a senior
 >Civil Servant with the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Ministry
 >have never investigated a case of 'alien abduction', crop
 >circles or 'animal mutilation by aliens'.

 >AND THAT'S OFFICIAL!


Hi,

As I have pointed out on previous postings, there are several
key things you have to remember here.

1: The Air Staff office always has been mainly clerical. I
reported the amount of time per week spent by Nick Pope's
predecessors on UFO matters - as I learned this direct from them
at the time. It was a couple of hours a week at most. All they
did was answer letters and file report forms. No investigation
even to the Blue Book level occurred - such as follow up with
witnesses on site, very rarely even phone interviews - and I
have MoD letters l970 onwards expressing their policy. This said
that it did not involve actual research into cases - for
instance to seek possible explanations. They established there
was no defence threat (eg a radar intrusion into UK airspace)
and then dropped all interest.

2: This was presumably Nick Pope's official remit, but equally
obviously his own adoption of the job was different. He spent
more time and effort due to his personal interest and I suspect
maybe did this in extra hours beyond those involved in his MoD
role. As such it is not unreasonable to perceive him as more
than a clerical officer in this desk job - as he himself seems
to do - because he did investigate cases above and beyond the
MoD job description. As BUFORA Director of Investigations during
much of his tenure I often had dealings with him and saw him
work with my team. He offered far more support than we have ever
had before or since. There is no question he was using resources
at his disposal to do partial case investigations and help
UFOlogists in this regard. So whatever the MoD say about this
Nick was doing UFO investigation - often in concert with
UFOlogists.

3: Although the MoD will say they have never investigated crop
circles and abductions thats part of their policy statement on
UFOs and means they did not spend money or use technology to do
so. It does not mean one particularly zealous MoD officer did
not personally do this sort of thing. I know from first hand
Nick did probe crop circles and offered data on certain facts
and figures in that regard. So the MoD are right to say they did
not research this topic, but wrong if you infer from it that
Nick himself never could have done so whilst in the office.

4: You also have to remember that the MoD UFO work is more than
Air Staff 2A (see my article on this topic in International UFO
Reporter). We have cast iron documented proof that departments
such as DI 55 and DSTI have investigated UFO cases on site, via
witness interrogations and analysis work. Nick's UFO Desk was a
public interface and little more. It was not the sole hub of
whatever research the MoD may or may not be doing into UFOs.
That also occurred at science, technology and intelligence
units.

5: The MoD in the l990's released several letters to ufologists
(myself included) . These had personal details excluded (but I
had investigated two of the cases myself so could put names to
the witnesses). These were alien contact/abduction reports
submitted to the MoD. From what I have discovered these
witnesses were never contacted by the MoD - thus confirming
their stance on non research into the matter.

I also strongly suspect that Nick Pope never did follow these
up. I base this on the fact that I find it highly improbable
Nick would have risked the credibility of his work or his book
as the media would have had a field day with one of these MoD
abduction reports in particular if they had tracked it to
source.

Although not obvious from the letter from the witness, five
minutes talking to this 'abductee' would have established to any
MoD officer and certainly to any journalist that this was a
tough story to take seriously. I made no effort to 'show up'
Nick - of course - by playing the media the taped interview I
made with this 'MoD witness' in which he reports an elf on his
wardrobe, the battle against the hairy mailbox aliens, the
intelligent birds that flew him to safety after a ray-gun battle
fought at a local picnic spot, the intergalactic war in which
his alien pal was killed, and the awful truth about a local
supermarket that had been taken over by aliens.

What is pretty obvious from such things is that the MoD received
letters from abductees or people who had stories to tell them
but not even Nick investigated the data behind them. At least I
trust the MoD didn't do any follow up of such a case and simply
failed to spot the back story to the saga referred to above.
That would give even the most fervent ETH supporter reason to be
cautious and if the MoD failed to detect it after any actual
investigation it hardly augurs well for their abilities to make
discrimatory tactical analysis.

So lets hope they are true to their word and have never
investigated abduction stories. But they certainly received them
and filed them.

Anyhow, as you can see its not quite as simple as James suggests.
This is a complex issue.

Incidentally, I heard Nick on national radio the other day
describe his work as the most interesting job in the country
(one of his predecessors described it to me differently as a
chore dealing with the strange people that wrote to them each
day)

Nick also reported interest already from sources comsidering the
making of a movie out of his serious UFO novel, Operation
Thunderchild and (I think as a joke) how he not only wanted to
help produce it to restrain any Americanisation tendancies that
might arise but also perhaps to be in it.

So after Nick Pope X Files desk man, UFOlogist, investigative
reporter, and now novelist, Nick Pope the movie star may soon be
upon us. One wonders at what point the MoD will regard these
sidelines as a distraction to his day job. Hopefully never.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                Re: Colorado Professor To Present Seminar On

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 02:01:05
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:28:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Colorado Professor To Present Seminar On


Source: Lincoln Journal Star,

http://www.journalstar.com/archives/101899/lif/sto13

Stig

***

Colorado professor to present seminar on extraterrestrials

The Harvard-Radcliffe Club of Nebraska will present a seminar by
Professor Bruce Jakosky on Sunday from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. at the
Kiewit Conference Center at Mahoney State Park. Jakosky's
presentation is called "The Truth Is Out There: The Search for
Extraterrestrial Life." The event is designed for students who
may have some interest in attending Harvard University or are
particularly interested in Jakosky's presentation. There is no
charge for students to attend, but reservations are required.
Reservations may be made by calling (877) 268-9348 or by
e-mailing harvardne.hotmail.

Jakosky, who holds a doctorate, is a professor in the Department
of Geological Sciences and the Laboratory for Atmospheric and
Space Physics at the University of Colorado at Boulder. His
research interests include the geology of planetary surfaces,
the evolution of the Martian atmosphere and climate and the
potential for life on Mars and elsewhere. He has been involved
with the Viking, Solar Mesosphere Explorer, Clementine, Mars
Observer, Mars Global Surveyor and Mars Surveyor 2001 Orbiter
missions. He also heads the University of Colorado's
participation in the NASA Astrobiology Institute.

His book, "The Search for Life on Other Planets," was published
in 1998 by the Cambridge University Press.

Copyright � 1999, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved.
This content may not be archived or used for commercial purposes
without written permission from the Lincoln Journal Star.

926 P Street     Lincoln NE 68508     402 475-4200

feedback@journalstar.com









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                           'The Abduction Enigma'

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:03:32 -0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:31:22 -0400
Subject: 'The Abduction Enigma'


I don't know if it is allow in this list, but I would
like to let you know about this book by Mr. Kevin Randle. I just
received it, and I read a bit, but It's fantastic and very
controversial.

To be a good ufologist we must keep our minds open, we must see
what anybody else can see.

So have a look in this little briefing about this book, then, if
you get interested read all the book, I'm sure that you will see
how fantastic is the UFO Phenomena.

* Look, I'm getting no money from Mr. Randle, I'm just giving my
opinion.


The Abduction Enigma, by Kevin Randle.


Is alien abduction real, or are the answers to it's legacy
buried in the human psyche? Do we now have the knowledge to
understand the forces behind abdution, or are we still stubling
in the dark? Finally the evidence to answer these questions has
been uncovered.

Kevin D. Randle, Russ Estes and Dr. Willian P. Cone have been
breaking new ground in the study of the UFOs for the past
twenty-five years. Among them, they have expertise in military
aviation, a doctorate in psychology, and fisrthand alien
contact. Combining thousands of hours of taped interviews with
abductees with an overview of the aliens in world mythology and
culture, The Abduction Enigma reveals the full story behind the
chilling testemonies, examining such controversial issues as:

- scars, implants, and the theft of unborn children - hypnosis
and recovered memories - parallels between pop culture and
abdution phenomena - startling sexual motivation behind many of
today's abductions.

The pieces of the alien puzzle are finally falling into place.
ANd the full picture is much more complex and incredible than
anyone suspected.



THIAGO LUIZ TICCHETTI

Diretor Do Departamento de Publicao e Traduo Especializadas
( DEPTE - EBE-ET / Brasilia-Brasil) Director of the Publication
Department and Specialized Translation ICQ - 35119615
http://www.ebe-et.com.br

*************************  MAKE THE CHANGE
***************************








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                          Re: Santilli Film Stills?

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 03:32:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:55:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Santilli Film Stills?


Regarding:

 >Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:08:55 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle - QUEST <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Santilli Film Stills?

Philip wrote:

 >Dear all,

 >I wonder could you possibly be of some assistance. I am trying to
 >obtain hard copy prints of some stills taken from the Santilli
 >film, not the autopsy section, but the debris film instead. I did
 >have copies but these were loaned out and never returned.

 >The stills I am interested in are the 'markings' or 'lettering'
 >on the wreckage in the debris film.



Philip,

I have one of the 'debris' stills showing these erm...  'Marcel
hieroglyphics'... and have uploaded it to:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/debris.jpg


Those of us who can remember the 'alien autopsy' story and how
the most impressive and tangible 'ET' evidence ever seen asked
such searching questions, might recall that obvious candidates
for hoaxing said footage were John Lundberg and Rod Dickinson.

Renowned, they are, as artistic impressionists in fields of
corn.

John especially had experience in model making and for other
reasons, which I won't go into, achieved top of the 'suspects'
list.

Innocent or otherwise, I'm sure he would be suitably amused.


A query I haven't had time to raise before now; can it possibly
be confirmed we merely have a notable coincidence if I point out
that a 'John Lundberg' was responsible for the 'mechanical
effects' in subsequent films 'Alien Resurrection' and 'Men In
Black' - see respectively:


http://www.alien-resurrection.com/digizine/makingof/b_credits.html

and

http://www.microserve.net/~dinov/cast.htm

This 'John Lundberg' is employed by 'Cinovation Studios' in the
US.

I don't know if he's ever trampled a field of corn and duly
become an alien visitor.


James.
E-mail: voyager@ukonline.co.uk













   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                               McDill AFB 1967

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:25:47 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:57:44 -0400
Subject: McDill AFB 1967


Folks,

Just recieved the following post below from the CSETI group.
Is anyone outside of CSETI familar with the McDill incident
noted therein?

Just curious,
   -Brian C.

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

  Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:08:28 -0700
  From: "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org>
  Subject: Global Warming

Have just put up a new video on the CSETI Website which includes
an interview with Base Newspaper Editor Jack Pickett who, with
his friend, saw four flying saucers parked at McDill AFB in
1967, and the briefing the base Adjutant General gave him about
the space flying capabilities of the craft.

There is more and more solid evidence such as this that
anti-gravity craft using free (zero-point) energy have been
operated by terrestrial powers since the 1950s and 1960s -
leading one to wonder why we are still forced to use polluting
fossil fuels in the non-covert world.

This, of course, is why CSETI is pressing so hard for Congress
to hold open hearings on the issue.

A reminder.....1998 was the hottest year on record due to global
warming, and a two-mile ice core extracted from 1992-98 by a
U.S.-Russian-French team at Russia's Vostok research station in
the Antarctic, the coldest spot on Earth, show that
heat-trapping greenhouse gases are at their highest levels in
the last 420,000 years.

Have YOU written to your Congressional representative to request
open hearings on the UFO issue?

No-one will upset the status quo without public
pressure..........and the
nuclear power industry is sitting in the wings waiting.

Regards

Tony Craddock
Web Administrator
CSETI
<http://www.cseti.org>http://www.cseti.org









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                     Missile Intercept Mistaken as UFO?

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:33:56 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 16:58:56 -0400
Subject: Missile Intercept Mistaken as UFO?


Greetings list -

From: http://www.abqjournal.com/news/1UFO10-19-99.htm

Missile Intercept Apparently Mistaken as UFO
The Associated Press

GALLUP, N.M. -- An unidentified flying object sighted from the
Gallup area may now be identified.

Jennifer Canaff of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
has told the Gallup Independent that a missile launched from
Vandenberg Air Force Base on the California coast coincided with
the time a UFO sighting was reported by Navajo tribal officials
and others, at 8 p.m. Oct. 2.

It was a historic launch from Vandenberg -- the first successful
intercept of a ballistic missile warhead, Canaff said.

A Minuteman-2 missile was the target. And before its warhead
re-entered Earth's atmosphere, an interceptor rocket destroyed
the Minuteman over the Pacific Ocean.

Vandenberg officials say they're told the launch was seen by
people as far away as Iowa.

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 22:28:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:00:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400

 >>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>>The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >>>association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.

 >>Bruce,

 >>Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >>raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >>professionalism.

 >Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
 >do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
 >organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
 >Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.


Which may beg the question: Which organizations _are_ you a
member of, and why?

 >Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
 >group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
 >Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?


Greg,

My simple point was: most people professing expertise in a
particular area tend to inflate (in the best sense) their resume
in order to attract business. A writer has his previous clips,
etc.

What you dodged was the issue of how this particular polygrapher
got found (if that's the word) in the first place.

Let's say I've got some land and would like to know whether or
not there's oil underneath same. A logical approach might be to
do a web search for a US Seismological Association in hopes that
they could point me to a local _accredited_ seismologist or
geologist. Surely nothing wrong with that.

Or, presumably, I could take my chances with any old
seismologist, be he or she a "capable person" or not -- and how,
incidentally, would a layman _know_, if not by professional
association and accreditation?

So whether you belong to the Music Critic's Association or not
doesn't mean spit. Just as it probably doesn't mean spit whether
or not you belong to a union in New York City and would like to
play a cello in an orchestra for a living. Right? Right.

My point stands: most serious professionals in any field join
those societies and organizations that in turn support the
individual practictioner and keep he or she informed of the
latest developments and advances in their respective area of
alleged expertise.

I'm not saying that because the polygrapher Walters chose didn't
belong to any such association that he is by definition an
incompetent. Just that I would have felt better if he had been
accredited (in which case he might have submitted an article to
his society's journal for publication and/or peer review, etc).
And I still wonder how he got found to begin with.

Anything wrong with that?

Dennis









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

               Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash

From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 23:40:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:03:23 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash


 >From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 17:36:43 EDT
 >Subject: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash Discoveries
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >For spectacular and meritorious discoveries which have
 >dramatically unlocked half century old secrets associated with
 >the crash of an unidentified flying object near Roswell, NM in
 >the summer of 1947, the international Roswell Photo
 >Interpretation Team (RPIT) has rendered its special salute to
 >Neil Morris, senior photo interpretation specialist!

<snip>

 >The RPIT discoveries have been posted on the Internet
 >individually by various RPIT members. The Roswell Event findings
 >of Morris can be viewed by downloading:

 >File:  rdbg8clp.jpg (108255 bytes)
 >DL Time (48000 bps): < 1 minute

 >and at

 >Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ .

 >and

 >http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm

 >http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/


'Very interesting picture although it's provenance seems a
little sketchy at present. This is what I managed to glean from
the accompanying text.

I would like to know if you can ascertain from the higher
quality (October) copy if the good General is poking the debris
with a stick or something. Is he touching it with his bare hand?
It is not apparent in the full-scene picture that is posted at
the site I visited. Are there any plans to post the full-sized
picture in the clearer format or is the small clip all we can
expect for now?

I feel this detail (hand or stick?) though circumstantial, is
worth pondering.

Cheers,

Richard Goldsmith







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work

From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 17:15:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:06:54 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work


 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:02:09
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: MoD Lessens Scope Of Pope's X-Files Work

 >>Source: James Easton on 'alt.alien.visitors'.

 >>Stig

 >***

 >>From: "James Easton" <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >>Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
 >>Subject: Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 14:36:09 +0100

 >>_Ministry Do Not Investigate 'X-Files'_

 >>Contrary to the public statements made by Nick Pope, a senior
 >>Civil Servant with the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Ministry
 >>have never investigated a case of 'alien abduction', crop
 >>circles or 'animal mutilation by aliens'.

 >>AND THAT'S OFFICIAL!


Hi all,

What amazes me and a few others I know, that is certain people
are willing to accept anything the government say about not
investigating UFOs/Alien abductions  etc., when half the time
no-one believes anything the government throws out, National
Health Service [UK] statistics & unemployment figures included
or is this the only subject that the government always come
clean with?

Roy..               Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 01:22:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:08:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:59:13 +0800

 >Thanks for admitting that Amy. But I have yet to scoff at
 >anything. Since when is talking about a case considered
 >scoffing? If people don't ask questions and simply accept the
 >facts blindly, we'll never get to the truth about anything.

Yes, asking questions is important.  What I have noted is that
no one has asked the questions that a skilled researcher would
ask.  There are many pieces of information - in this case and
the photographs as presented on my web site - that no one has
even mentioned.  Those who know what they are looking at would
be asking the necessary questions by now.

A good researcher would take note of these aspects not to debunk
or ridicule but simply to inquire and file in their data base
for comparisons with other cases.  There is no way to prove a
case real or false simply by reading the details on a web site
and viewing scanned versions of photographs.

 >What I did say however, was the neighbour was called >in
specifically to take photos of this encounter and the glass
 >door was left closed.

Whoa.  That is not what happened.  The neighbor was not called
in to specifically take photos.  The neighbor was called to come
help - if she could - since by that time the family thought
maybe the beings resembled "aliens" more than "demons" and the
only person they knew who studied phenomena was their neighbor.
The neighbor, "Jill", brought her camera as an after thought in
case she might catch something on film - as she had been trying
to do in her own encounters.

The door was _not_ "left closed" deliberately, "Jill" arrived
and nervously started snapping pictures as soon as she arrived
because "Cathy" was pointing to the back yard and "Jill" just
started snapping pictures.  A few minutes later, "Jill" and
"Cathy's" sister gained enough courage to go into the back yard
together to see if they could see anything in the dark. "Jill"
also snapped pictures while in the back yard and odd images did
show up such as two bright red lights about a foot above the
ground as well as other images that have yet to be analyzed and
studied.  Though neither "Jill" nor "Cathy's" sister saw
anything while in the yard, "Cathy" - who remained in the house
- could see a being standing by the swing set that would move
away every time "Jill" and the sister approached it.

Now, allowing the circumstances described above and the
information in the article to be possible - for just a moment -
think of the implications contained in the information.  There
are several bits of information that may have come together to
create a unique situation in which these images became visible
in the photographs.  As I said before, there are more details to
this case yet to be presented.  But since no one seems
interested enough to ask pertinent questions or is too busy
criticizing the state of the sliding glass door, I will share
the rest at a later date through another median.

There is a wealth of information in this case if one stops to
analyze the data rather than spending more time debating why the
witnesses did or did not open the sliding glass door.  These
were real people experiencing real fear in the face of unknowns
they could not explain.  I met and talked with the witnesses -
in person - so I remember the terror in their voices and the
shock they experienced and continue to experience.

Until I investigated this case, I wasn't sure if abductions were
really happening and I certainly _did not_ believe the stories
about "reptilian" beings.  In fact, I don't think I will ever
totally accept the idea of "reptilian" beings abducting people
until I see one in conscious, waking awareness up close and in
person (not something I really care to do).  For now, it's just
too hard for me to stretch my paradigms that far.  But I know
something happened to those witnesses on the nights in question
and whatever it was, it really happened.

Over the years since learning of this case, I have spent many
hours debating in my own mind whether it was real or not.  There
were events that occurred while I was investigating the case
that are extremely hard for me to accept even though I
experienced them myself.  I don't know how to explain what it
feels like to be empirically oriented and come face-to-face with
phenomena that defies explanation.  I am basically the type who
believes if you can't put something under a microscope and
measure it, then it does not exist.  Yet I cannot deny the
phenomena I and others have personally witnessed.

I know how hard it is for people to accept the phenomena that
surrounds us especially if you don't see it or experience it in
person.  How do you explain a reality we have been programmed to
deny since the early '50's? How do you remain a "healthy
skeptic" yet open minded enough to consider all possibilities?
It's a difficult balance.

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                   Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:09:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:57:01 -0400
Subject: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?


On July 4, 1998 when Pathfinder landed on Mars, Japan launched
their PLANET-B Nozomi (means hope) to Mars. It was supposed to
arrive in Mars orbit earlier this month, and send back pictures.
Here is the original Reuters story:

Japan Probe Heads For Mars With All Systems Go
http://www.ufoseek.org/News/Japmars2.htm

Japan's official Planet B website (still online, but seems to
have been abandoned)
http://www.planet-b.isas.ac.jp/index-e.html

There have been no updates there since Dec. 25, 1998!!

I don't recall hearing any subsequent announcements about the
mission, good or bad. Maybe I missed something. What happened to
it?  It seems a bit strange nothing has been said about this
mission for well over a year. I have sent an e-mail inquiry from
their website ( yyoshida@stp.isas.ac.jp )  Anyone who has
information about this please contact Ufoseek@aol.com

Naz

http://www.ufoseek.org







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                           RPIT More New Findings

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:35:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:20:36 -0400
Subject: RPIT More New Findings

[Images are not posted to the UpDates Archive - subscription has its
  advantages -- ebk]

All on UpDates,

If Errol will indulge me yet again<g>, I'd like to share with
you a recent finding which might just be classed as "a smoking
gun" in the Roswell case.

I realise some on this list have concluded that the RPIT project
is nothing more than a wild goose chase reading symbols into
"smuge" marks etc, but I hope the attached image will even make
these people stop and think.

The image is taken from a recently aquired reproduction of one
of the "lost" negative what we refer to as the RameyDubose(Grim)
shot. The UTA library only holds the sister shot to this image,
it's the one that has the Ramey Message in view. The newly
aquired print is not in as great a detail as the UTA prints and
has had some cropping which is a pity as some of the cropped
image area holds further "interesting" debris!.

Refering to the attachment, I'd firstly like to draw your
attention to items A and B these appear to show the edge of a
large _and_ _thick_ piece of metalic debris partially covered by
foil sheet C. This debris is far thicker than anything else we
have seen and at a guess (looking at the carpet pattern) it
could be up to 1/2 an inch thick. For another comparison look at
the foil type debris at points D and D'(top right). I cannot
resolve this large piece of debris in any way with the standard
explanations, I have also tried to "find" it in the other better
resolution UTA print and at the moment have to conclude that
most of it in these images is covered by foil sheets except for
a piece of "odd" debris spotted early on which was dubbed "the
moulding", images of this from the MarcelRight shot can be found
for comparison at:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/earlywrk.htm

Looking at this image some may think this is nothing more than
"camera shake/movement" generating the "edge". Playing devil's
advocate when I first spotted this feature I too tried to run
with this, _but_ camera shake would "smudge" the whole negative,
as it has done with the UTA MarcelLeft shot, look again at the
attachment image, items D and D' are perfectly clean "thin"
edges and yet A and B show the "thick" edge, this is _not_
camera shake. Ok did the metal move?, fine details on the debris
in question show no blur, so it didn't, I'm left with the
conclusion that this _is_ a large piece of aprox 1/2 inch thick
material which is totally at odds with anything contained in the
"usual" explanations for the debris. I'm not saying it's ET at
this point, but as sure as hell it's _not_ MOGUL.

A final thought, I find it interesting that this debris is in
clear view in one of the two photographs were the original
negatives have been "lost", I only hope a copy might have been
made of the other and it might yet turn up, I wonder if it too
might have had "interesting" debris in full view.

Best Regards
Neil.

--
*    *     *     *     *     *     *     *
Neil Morris.    /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.  1                         1
Univ of Manchester 0                         0
Schuster Labs.   1 Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES 1
Brunswick St.   0                         0
Manchester.    1                         1
UK.        \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


        E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page  ->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*    *     *     *     *     *     *     *









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

             Correction: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:41:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:22:48 -0400
Subject: Correction: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?


Pathfinder landed on Mars on July 4, "1997", not 1998. Please
remove reference to Pathfinder in any re-postings. No connection
with the launch of the Planet B probe on July 4, 1998.

Ufoseek

Corrected Copy:

On July 4, 1998 Japan launched their PLANET-B Nozomi (means
hope) to Mars. It was supposed to arrive in Mars orbit earlier
this month, and send back pictures. Here is the original Reuters
story:

Japan Probe Heads For Mars With All Systems Go
http://www.ufoseek.org/News/Japmars2.htm

Japan's official Planet B website (still online, but seems to
have been abandoned)

http://www.planet-b.isas.ac.jp/index-e.html

There have been no updates there since Dec. 25, 1998!!

I don't recall hearing any subsequent announcements about the
mission, good or bad. Maybe I missed something. What happened to
it?  It seems a bit strange nothing has been said about this
mission for well over a year. I have sent an e-mail inquiry from
their website ( yyoshida@stp.isas.ac.jp )  Anyone who has
information about this please contact Ufoseek@aol.com

Naz

http://www.ufoseek.org







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                         Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers

From: Maurizio Verga <mverga@wolf.it>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:50:33 +0200 (CEST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:24:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 21:43:28 -0700


Hi Folks!

The Times article does NOT reflect my thinking about the
so-called "Nazi UFOs" legends at all. Anybody can visit my site
at http://www.ufo.it/german and realize that.

Besides the sensational claims needed by columnists, the
historical truth is something really different.

Maurizio Verga








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 20

                       The Legend Of The Piri Reis Map

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:56:00 +0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:26:54 -0400
Subject: The Legend Of The Piri Reis Map


"Strangely accurate maps were circulating around Europe at the
time of Columbus"

Let us take a trip into some periods of the past. The first stop
on this trip will be Turkey thirty years ago. The first quarter
of the present century shows Turkey at the end of the War of
Independence, and the Republic established by Kemal Ataturk
(1923). The Turkish Republic, now thirty years old, was founded
on the remains of another Turkish state, the Ottoman Empire
(1299-1923).

For the second stop let us take the year 1929. Let us go into
the Palace of Topkapi of the Ottoman Sultans, situated on one of
the most beautiful spots of Istanbul called Sarayburnu. The
palace, which consists of various buildings, each surrounded by
vast gardens, testifies to the different characteristics of the
Ottoman period. The Turkish Republican Government decided to
turn this palace into a museum.


Discovery of the map of America

In the process of classifying the numerous articles in the
buildings, Mr. Halil Edhem, Director of the National Museums,
discovered a map* (9 Nov.1929) till then unknown in the world of
science. Upon hearing of this discovery of the oldest map of
America Ataturk showed great interest in the matter. He asked
for the map to be brought to Ankara, studied it and ordered it
to be published as it stood and to be submitted to scholarly
research.

To study this map for the first time with Ataturk was an immense
thrill. It had been drawn hundreds of years ago on a roe-skin,
with various coloured illustrations and writings on it. As I
held it in my hands, I felt as if I were living in the long
forgotten past. My emotions are twcnty-four years old now, but
let us, with the same national and scholarly pride, take a
glimpse into the period when this map was drawn and into the
history of the man who had drawn it.

This is one of the oldest and yet most perfect maps of America,
drawn by a Turkish admiral. Now, if you do not mind being
centuries old for a few minutes, come with mc to the XVI th
century. In this third stop our journey suddenly covers a vast
ground.

The Legend of the Piri Reis Map

http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/pri.html









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Jim Mortellarko <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:18:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:05:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:19:22 -0400

 >>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:07:32 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >>>The fact that McLaughlin wasn't a member of a polygrapher's
 >>>association doesn't mean he wasn't a capable person.

 >>Bruce,

 >>Alternatively, it doesn't mean he was, either. In fact, it
 >>raises several doubts about both his seriousness and his
 >>professionalism.

 >Dennis won't believe I say this with perfect neutrality, but I
 >do. Are most polygraphers (polygraphists?) members of this
 >organization? For instance, I'm not a member of the Music
 >Critic's Association. Doesn't mean spit.

 >Maybe a dentist who doesn't belong to the proper professional
 >group is, well, not very professional. But polygraph operators?
 >Let's have a reality check. Does anyone know about this?

 >Greg Sandow


I do.  I received one of my numerous PhD's in Polygamy and I can
say for a certainty, that most polygamists are polygraphers.  Of
course this means that polygraphers cannot be trusted as mates.
However, since they are all (or mostly all) polygamists, they
oughta be quite professional at being married to lotsa women.

Cogito, ergo, anyone who can hang out with lotsa women and survive
the experience, cannot be believed.  As a result, they are not only
not organized, but they have no organization.

Finally, anyone who decides to test a UFO experiencer of any kind,
is a nutcase anyway.  Which means that most all of us except Dennis
are nuts.

The floor is yours, Dennis.  Are you on it?

J. Jaime Gesundt, Bigapoligamist and dying of thirst






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                           ATIC History Update #3

From: Wendy Connors <ProjectSign@email.msn.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:14:57 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:10:40 -0400
Subject: ATIC History Update #3


The following is from page 42 of the official ATIC history for
the first half of 1953:

Stereo Cameras.

One hundred stereo cameras with spectroscopic gratings were
procured for use in conjunction with Project Blue Book and have
been under test for the past six months. Much difficulty was
encountered in establishing a reliable shelf-life of the
gratings. All seemed to deteriorate rapidly after they had been
mounted to the camera. This project was turned over to Battelle
memorial Institute for further study and evaluation.
Seventy-three of these cameras were transferred to the Technical
Analysis Division from where they were shipped to areas where
sightings of aerial phenomena have been reported most
frequently.

End of Section.

The following is from the official ATIC History for 1 January
1952 to 30 June 1952, pages 73-74, inclusive:

EVALUATION OF REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS - Project
Blue Book (Project No. 10073)

(Init, 15 Aug 51; ECD, Cont.; Auth, CO, ATIC; Req by: D/I, USAF;
PM, Capt E. J. Ruppelt)

This project, in progress for approximately four years, involves
the investigation and evaluation of reports of unidentified
aerial objects. To date, approximately 900 reports have been
received by the Air Force. Recent articles  in LIFE, LOOK, and
TIME magazines have caused an increase in letters to the public.
Ablut [sic] 250 letters were received during May and June 1952.

These reports have been filed and cross-indexed so that the
maximum amount of data can be utilized. This cross-indexing
breaks down the sightings according to color, shape, location,
date, etc. It is estimated that about 20 percent of the reports
cannot be explained by any proven theory, or by identifying the
objects as balloons, aircraft, meteors, or known natural
phenomena; however, the remaining 80 percent of the reports can
be explained in various degrees of probability.

The problem of unidentified aerial objects has been presented to
various Air Force agencies in briefings. In most cases the
briefing was given to familiarize the groups with the project
and to enlist their aid or advice. ADC has put all available
radar scope cameras on a 24-hour operational basis. A special
electronics questionaire has been sent out to all
comera-equipped stations. This questionaire will be completed
and forwarded to ATIC with the scope photos. Certain portions of
the project have been declassified so that the press may have
access to more facts, a step designed to reduce some of the
"mysteriousness" heretofore associated with the project.

End of Section.

Thank You,
Wendy Connors and Mike Hall








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                                Re: Get Real

From: Marc Bell <MARC@wufog.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 20:31:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:21:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 14:56:16 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

Hi Dave,

Sorry for the delay, my pc has been down for repairs.

 >>From: Marc Bell <MARC@wufog.freeserve.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:08:11 +0100

 >>Havn't you ever thought these 'aliens' (entities or whatever?)
 >>are:-

 >>Advanced enough to understand all our technology, behaviour
 >>patterns etc

 >>Therefore making a video look like just static shouldn't be
 >>beyond them, should it?

 >It's not beyond us either.

 >It is however interesting to note that my earlier question: "Was
 >the video showing time and date and did it record her sleeping
 >until a certain time (for argument lets say  3 AM) then record
 >static from there on in?" went completely unanswered.

<snip>

 >>A couple of points here Dave....

 >>A dream doesn't rip your bed clothes off & dump you in the
 >>corner of the room 2 or so hours later covered in brusies etc!
 >>Esp: with with the house alarm still on.....

Hi Dave

It obviously wasn't a dream... & I'm personally very skeptical
about MILAB etc...

 >I do recall the time you were thrown across the room and left
 >with bruises, but this was because you were electrocuted and had
 >to go to hospital. The whole thing left you with a very poor
 >short term memory for a few weeks. There could be some confusion
 >here unless you have any witnesses to show the above was a
 >separate event.

Yes these were too separate events:

a) firstly being thrown across the room... this was the nite
that me & 2 friends experienced similar things in the early
hours of the morning (I think you have the text file?). The
significance being we had met earlier that nite to talk about
'aliens & abductions', we were on our own, each of us about a
mile apart, our partners being away at the time in all 3 cases.
All I personally remember was i) what I percieved to be
footsteps (the house alarm was set), ii) the bed clothes being
violently pulled off of me iii) 'fixed' by large dark eyes iv)
ending up in a heap the other side of the bedroom, with
significant painful brusies, feeling dehydrated & being sick
down the toilet, then feeling in a daze for the following day

b) the second event was nothing more than being electrocuted. My
wife had tampered with the studio alarm system, (could heve been
an accident on her part?) This was some weeks later. I was
thrown across the studio & rendered un-conscious for at least an
hour (and found by a friend). This has seriously affected my
short term memory. This to my knowledge has zero ET involvement.

 >>Point 2, you have filmed the 'entity' in the studio here, but it
 >>has never tripped the motion detectors in the alarm system.

 >This is very true, I along with others did see what you refer to
 >as the 'entity' and was lucky enough to capture it on camera.
 >The image is on Roy Hale's website if anyone's interested.

 >I sent a full report along with picture to Nick Pope who rang me
 >to say that although interesting as it was, it would seem to be
 >a little out of his field of expertise.

 >I agree, I do not believe it was anything to do with aliens, I
 >had the feeling I was watching an (as of yet unexplained)
 >natural phenomena.

I would however keep an open mind about this. I have no evidence
to point to this entity (that was caught on camera), was ET or
just paranormal? But I (& you) cannot deny it exists, as
numerous people have witnessed it. My 'feeling' is it is ET and
I just ask people to respect this view, I'm not asking anyone to
believe in the existence of ET life without 'substancial' proof,
its just I can't personally come to any other conclusion based
on my own personal experiences

 >>Well maybe they'll pay you a visit at 3am eh Dave?

 >Doubtful, I have mostly happy dreams, normally involving some
 >Scandinavian woman with a cleavage you could ski down and a
 >large tub of lard.

Never really had any dreams like that actually.... but I don't
have problems if you're, Asian, over 40, sing in Hindi & have
also been abducted though.....









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                              eS) Moon Mystery

From: exoScience <davew@exosci.com>
Date: 20 Oct 1999 21:03:33 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:25:09 -0400
Subject: eS) Moon Mystery

exoScience - http://www.exosci.com/

Hey everyone,

   http://www.newsreality.com/redir/?id=5773

"Reports of curious flashes and fleeting clouds on the Moon may
not be figments of wild imaginations, astronomers say. A new
look at observations by the American satellite Clementine show
that a small area on the Moon's surface darkened and reddened in
April 1994. Why this happened remains a mystery.

For hundreds of years, people have reported seeing flashes,
short-lived clouds and other brief changes on the Moon's
surface. But astronomers have never been able to confirm the
sightings. "The events were observed on many occasions, but most
astronomers don't believe in them," says Bonnie Buratti of
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. "

   http://www.newsreality.com/redir/?id=5773

Also, on http://www.exosci.com/

  * Speculation that Russia is secretly aiding China's space
    efforts
  * New Hubble image of the "Rotten Egg" nebula
  * and much more!

   http://www.exosci.com/

Dave Watanabe
davew@exosci.com







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:23:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 09:24:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:14:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

 >The lithmus test for genuine compared to hoaxed terraglyphs
 >is very simple: the electromagnetic properties and the
 >direction of growth of the corn in the field.

<snip>

 >The earth is in far better shape than the
 >environmentalists would have us believe

Dear Henny,

So please tell us something about the electromagnetic properties
and the direction of growth of the corn in the field. How do
which properties change? How can yo measure the growth of corn
that was flattened just five hours before?

Which are the instruments you use?

Regarding our planet: the atmosphere becomes warmer, the
glaciers become smaller, CO2 increases, Ozone increases, each
day many animals/insects are wiped out, the woods are burning,
in Staten Island, N.Y., is the biggest monument ever build by
humans - consisting of garbage and we have now 6,000,000,000
humans here - will someone continue this enumeration?

Joachim Koch, Berlin







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                         PRG/X-PPAC Program Addendum

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 17:48:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 09:26:30 -0400
Subject: PRG/X-PPAC Program Addendum


Paradigm Research Group
www.paradigmclock.com

X-PPAC
www.x-ppac.org

10/20/99 - Addendum

Stephen Bassett, consultant, lobbyist and executive director of
X-PPAC, will speak on the Politics of UFOs/Disclosure and other
topics at the following upcoming venue:

What:   SciZone with Bill Boshears
Date:   Saturday - October 23
Time:   9 - 12 pm EST
Where:  Netcast nationally at:  www.scizone.com
         Broadcast at WLW 700 Cincinnati
         www.700wlw.com

The PRG / X-PPAC speaking schedule is located at:

http://www.paradigmclock.com/speaking&eventschedule.html







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

               WBAI's 'UFO Desk' [was: Ed Walters' Photos...]

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:37:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 09:58:26 -0400
Subject: WBAI's 'UFO Desk' [was: Ed Walters' Photos...]


 >From: Paul C. WIlliams <paulw@escape.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:23:27 -0300

 >Greg, remember when we had that wonderful time talking with
 >Linda Cortile, Bud Hopkins, John Velez and Euginea Macer Story
 >up at WBAI a few years back. Well you can relive that wonderful
 >evening. I've placed the real audio file of our chat on my site.
 >Check out the Experiencers file. Thanks.

Hi, Paul,

I won't forget that long, long night, because not only was it
fun, it was LONG! From midnight, as I remember, till after 3 AM.

In my view, the best part came at the end, when we took phone
calls. People called to talk about UFO sightings they said
they'd had, and two things struck me. First, how reluctant the
callers said they were to tell anyone in their regular lives,
and, second, how generous and compassionate Linda and John were
in talking to the callers. I'm glad this is available for
everyone to hear.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                 Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:53:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:01:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case


 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 22:28:32 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case

 >What you dodged was the issue of how this particular polygrapher
 >got found (if that's the word) in the first place.

Dodged? Dennis, I don't have anything at stake in this
discussion, honest. I have no position on Gulf Breeze, and I
wasn't trying to support this disputed polygrapher. Why (I'm
asking this as someone who likes you) do you treat a simple
request for information as if it were a confrontational debate?

I completely agree that professionals with solid affiliations in
their field seem, well, more professional than those with no
affiliations. (Except in music criticism, my own field. But
then, you don't need any qualifications to become a music
critic. Ka-BOOM!)

What I wondered is how many polygraphers belong to this
organization. Nearly all of them? Half of them? A small,
dedicated, perhaps more competent or responsbile minority? I
don't know that, and, I gather from your response, neither do
you. I like to evaluate things in their proper context, and if I
knew what percentage of polygraphers belonged to this group, I
could much better assess what to make of someone who doesn't.

Greg Sandow

(Comparative situation. In classical music, an American
professional orchestra that doesn't belong to the American
Symphony Orchestra League would be automatically suspect. I'd
immediately assume that its professional claims were bogus. But
if the musicians in a professional orchestra belonged to some
other union than the American Federation of Musicians, that
wouldn't be a blot on their reputation. It would almost
automatically make them interesting, refreshing, very much worth
paying attention to.

And, as I've said, a music critic who doesn't belong to the
Music Critic's Association wouldn't be remarkable at all.)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:31:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:03:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >From: Tim D. Brigham <TBrigham@ksinc.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:48:33 -0500

 >I don't think that Dennis literally believes that aliens are
 >bumbling idiots(!?), rather I think the point is that _in order
 >to believe the literal scenarios and scale set forth by many
 >proponents_ then they would have to be. Perhaps Dennis discounts
 >_all_ reports where aliens take sperm samples and cow parts, I
 >dont know, or perhaps he is instead getting at the fact that
 >"maybe it aint really the sperm and cow bits that they're
 >after!"

Hi, Tim.

Did you read all of Mark's post. I didn't quote it, to save
bandwidth, but I was referring to all of it.

Mark thought arguments like Dennis's are too literal (my word,
not his). Since we have no context for alleged alien behavior --
we don't know anything about the aliens -- we can't assess
whether or not it's plausible. Mark also thought that aliens
might be have elements of play or art or humor in some of what
they do, and that anyone who expects them always to be logically
consistent hasn't allowed for those things.

But he said much more, and said it better than I can. Everyone,
I hope, will read all of what he said.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                        RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:51:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:51:23 -0400
Subject: RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On





From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto



Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 03:45:11
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Subject: Robert AM Stephens Has Died (unconfirmed)

Source: Shadie Pines

http://209.145.38.129/shadiepines/ramsdead.htm

Stig

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

Robert AM Stephens Has Died

I just received the following fax attached to an email from an
anonymous source. This material has not been confirmed:

Robert A.M. Stephens, who showed up on the UFOlogy scene about
one year ago, made quite a stir in many UFOlogy camps, including
late night talk show host Art Bell.

Stephens made a very brief appearance on the Bell show in late
December of 1998. Mr. Stephens was to debate a regular guest of
Mr. Bells', Richard C Hoagland. For some unknown reason, Mr.
Stephens was cut off from the show by Mr. Bell.

Apparently intensely angered by this, Mr. Stephens then created
a website called "Behold" and "Shady Pines", depicting many of
the mainstream "UFOlogists" including Art Bell as "guests" of a
fictitious insane asylum.

Following a nearly fatal illness and legal action against him by
Art Bell, Mr. Stephens has disappeared from the ufology scene.

Rest in peace, Robert Stephens....

Shadie Pines Webmaster

**

*Stephens Obituary

� 1999 4th Dimension Computer Services. All rights reserved. Designed and
maintained by Foster VS

Contact the *webmaster for any questions, comments or submissions


Fax Transcript
""""""""""""""

10/18/99 10:56 AM 1/1

Missoulian Article

[No Attribution, date, page #, etc. --ebk]


Controversial local resident Robert Stephens died yesterday,
reportedly from a brain anurism. "Heaven need a dissenter,"
said a man known only as EJ, "he was some kind of man."

Stephens, a former Navy SEAL, had been working on sensitive
projects with NASA for the past ten years.

He had also been involved with computer imaging and painting.
Recently he had become embroiled in a lawsuit with latenight
talkshow spook jock Art Bell.

He is survived by estranged wife Jennifer, his parents, two
sisters and niece Mia. No sevices have been scheduled

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



Robert A.M. Stephens 'Obituary'?

Fax Transcript
""""""""""""""

10/18/99 10:56 AM 1/1

Purportedly a 'Missoulian' article

[No Attribution, date, page #, etc. --ebk]


Controversial local resident Robert Stephens died yesterday,
reportedly from a brain anurism. "Heaven need a dissenter,"
said a man known only as EJ, "he was some kind of man."

Stephens, a former Navy SEAL, had been working on sensitive
projects with NASA for the past ten years.

He had also been involved with computer imaging and painting.
Recently he had become embroiled in a lawsuit with latenight
talkshow spook jock Art Bell.

He is survived by estranged wife Jennifer, his parents, two
sisters and niece Mia. No sevices have been scheduled

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

A simple web search yielded the Missoulian newsroom number:

1-800-366-7186

I talked with 'Roberta' there this afternoon. There has
been no obituary for Stephens nor does his name appear
in their database of recent stories.

Errol Bruce-Knapp






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                     The Missing Nozomi (Planet B) Probe

From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 20:02:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 17:49:38 -0400
Subject: The Missing Nozomi (Planet B) Probe


Another Mars Probe thruster malfunction.

Check out this link.

http://www.tui.edu/STO/Japan/Japan/Planets.html

Gavin McLeod






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 21:50:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 17:55:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >From: Bruce Maccabee
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:17:49 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:57:24 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:17:03 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Previously, I had offered:

 >>You know, every time I write a check at the local supermarket,
 >>the cashier asks,"Is everything on the check correct?" What does
 >>she really expect me to say? What would she do if I suddenly
 >>said,"Gosh, you're too fast for me! I was gonna try and slip a
 >>phony check by you but you caught on and had to ask!" Do you
 >>really think Ed would fess up if his original intent was to fool
 >>you? Come on...

To which Bruce replied:

 >>Come on, Roger. You go through a cashier's line once. How many
 >>times can you get away with it going through the SAME cashier's
 >>line over and over, day in and out, dozens of times?

Actually, Bruce, you just made my point. I can (and do) go
through the line over and over, day in and day out, dozens of
times......as long as they find no evidence of fraud. And, until
they do, every time they ask me if everything on the check is
correct, my answer will always be,"You bet!" Why would I fess up
voluntarily if everything was going so smoothly? Likewise, IF Ed
wanted to deceive you, he certainly would not fess up on his
own, now would he? As long as you found no evidence of fraud, he
could keep going through that check out line over and over, day
in and out, dozens of times....

As you pointed out, the only way he could _not_ continue is if
he were found out. Has he been found out?

 >Moving on, I had opined:

 >>>The other point that Bruce brings up is the matching blur of the
 >>>UFO and the surrounding lights of the background. If they were
 >>>produced separately they would, indeed, be hard to match. On the
 >>>other hand, if the master Polaroid were copied on a Polaroid
 >>>copy stand, it would simply be a matter of moving the print or
 >>>the camera during exposure time. This would produce a uniform
 >>>blur on all information within the photo.

Bruce replied:

 >>And investment in the copy stand and investment in the correct
 >>lens so that he could properly focus on the composite Polaroid
 >>picture.

I'm not sure why I can't seem to get this point across: Polaroid
made a cheap copystand with a built in close up lens. This copy
stand was designed for average, non-sophisticated consumers to
make copies of other Polaroid photos. It was very, very, very,
very easy to use. Is it so unreasonable that Ed could possibly
own one of these copy stands? You can still pick then up at
garage sales for less than five bucks. Every shot that Ed
produced on Polaroids could have been created using one of these
stands. The only basis for the belief that he didn't is that no
one saw it. Pretty weak evidence, if you ask me.

Continuing, Bruce commented:

 >>Easy as pie for a pro.

 >>>All this takes photographic sophistication.

Gosh, Bruce. I'm not quite sure how I'd feel if I were Ed. I
mean is the guy as much of a dumb ass as you make him out to be?
I'm surprised he can tie his own shoes.

Finally, Bruce offered:

 >Surprising that Hyzer didn't prefer the simpler double exposure
 >method. Perhaps he thought the masked double exposure was too
 >difficult.


I think we've gone about as far as we can on this subject.

My position is not necessarily that the GB photos are, indeed,
fake.

On the other hand, I see nothing in them that could not be
created by the average person using consumer based equipment.
The fact that Hyzer didn't think of the simpler masked double
exposure method is indicative of what I find amiss in the whole
GB investigation.

Pro or con, it has been assumed that either the photos are
genuine or only a very complicated photographic effect could
have possibly created the end results on Ed's shots. And since
Ed seems to be dumb as a brick, then there's no way he could
have pulled them off, right?

How can I argue with that?

Take care,
Roger







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                         Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 21:12:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 18:14:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:50:33 +0200 (CEST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Maurizio Verga <mverga@wolf.it>
 >Subject: Re: Geller On Nazi Saucers

 >The Times article does NOT reflect my thinking about the
 >so-called "Nazi UFOs" legends at all. Anybody can visit my site
 >at http://www.ufo.it/german and realize that.


Hello, all

Sorry Maurizio , didn't mean to imply you as a Pro-Nazi
saucerist at all , I assumed it was another attempt by certain
ah, forces in the UFO community to ascribe Alien/Nazi
cooperation or that the Nazis used Alien tech to achive , well,
circular flight giving way to circular thought in this segment
of the UFO community.

 >Besides the sensational claims needed by columnists, the
 >historical truth is something really different.

I absolutely agree, sorry if I offended you, I just want what is
historical truth to be brought to the front , and I have a pet
peeve with some people who spout the "Nazi superiority" line.

thank you,

GT McCoy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 02:23:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 18:50:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:04:53 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >The reason I brought up Firmage was because you were the one who
 >responded to a message on this list regarding his 'meeting' and
 >'the secret sources' .

Well, why didn't you respond to it in that thread?  Why bring it
to this thread?

 >By the way, you didn't answer any of my questions regarding your
 >investigation. Why is that? (rhetorical question). Perhaps your
 >answers would 'confuse' me?

Precisely.  The tone of your inquiries thus far have reflected
much less than a genuine interest in the case.  I felt your
questions were only meant to provide more "fuel" for your
diatribe than to answer anything you sincerely wanted to know.
And since you say you are "tired" of this topic and wish to
change the thread to your liking, I won't bore you with any more
details.

 >You said:

 >>The main witness I inteviewed never quite believed she had been
 >>"abducted by space aliens". In fact, the witnesses in the house,
 >>being of Hispanic descent, first thought the beings they
 >>encountered were demons or devils.

 >Perhaps I _am_ confused. I thought you said in a previous
 >message, "the woman had been abducted all her life".  Are you
 >talking about the same person here?

 >Would you be so kind to clarify this for me (and perhaps the
 >list) so I'm not 'confused'.

Obviously, Sue, you have not read the article in question (see
"Alien Convention" on my home page) or you would know the
answers to this.  Try reading the article first so you will be
able to comprehend the discussions in this thread and perhaps
not be so bored.

Ah, but you have decided to change the topic of this thread to
discussions of Mr. Firmage.  So....neverminds. ;>

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 01:04:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 18:48:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

 >From: Tim D. Brigham <TBrigham@ksinc.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:48:33 -0500


 >>>Given that only a tiny amount of research has been done
 >>>classifying and analysing even _raw reported_ UFO and occupant
 >>>behavior, and that the resulting database contains an unknown
 >>>amount of noise, very likely increasing almost asymptotically in
 >>>the cases whose strangeness exceed CE2 and CE3, attempts to
 >>>class reported behavior as inept or expert are doomed to
 >>>founder.

 >If I am reading Mark correctly, perhaps the point that he makes
 >isn/t all that far off from the same point that detractors of the
 >literalist ETH would make. Attempting to speculate about the true
 >purpose and goal of 'aliens' - as many folks who support one view
 >or another often do in scenarios about ecological concern or
 >bovine and human-nappings simply is unjustified for the reasons
 >cited above.

This is a fair reading of my comments.

 >This is not to say that experiences might not have a sexual
 >component or an ecological component, but rather, such a
 >simplistic and literal view of such components can not be
 >justified.

But this part isn't - quite. My point is that the "simplistic"
or "literal" views may very well be _justifiable_, but that
those who put them forward haven't done the work needed to
justify them, core among which is being able to use a very clean
standard database and making both methodology and database
available.

Or even using a not-so clean database but making the methodology
clear, so that disputes can be performed on a case by case
basis.

I did something like this in

http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/analysis/toomanylandings/index.htm

where I used 6 classifications for the UFO events in the Magonia
catalog to try to show whether the record justified contentions
that there are too many landings for UFOs to be physical
objects.

 >Personally I think an arguement could be made that the higher
 >the strangeness, when we speak only within the CE3 cases, the
 >more likely that such reports reflect the genuine mystery
 >involved, but thats another rant and I have a headache.....

The problem with this is that as the strangeness increases, the
probability seems to decrease. In other words, as can be seen at

http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/analysis/demographics/ufoexperience/index.htm

the demographics of witnesses approach the normal demographics
of the population as strangeness increases. However this means
more kids, more housewives, and far fewer trained observers.

AFAIK, there have been few if any studies of these demographic
and probability issues done for CE and above classifications.

There is an additional problem in that (except for repeater
abductions) the number of cases available decreases with
increasing strangeness, making it very hard to do good
statistics on higher strangeness cases.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                        Some Questions For Nick Pope

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:28:01 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 20:44:21 -0400
Subject: Some Questions For Nick Pope


Dear All,

As Editor of BEYOND magazine, the new and exciting bi-monthly
British newsstand magazine, I received a gratis copy of Nick
Pope's new "technothriller" 'Operation Thunder Child' this
morning.

The book doesn't read particularly well although I'm sure Nick
had a problem moving into the realms of fiction writing.
Importantly, there are some serious and misleading comments in
the Press Release accompanying the book that warrant our
attention. I'll deal with them as they emerge;


1 - "Nick Pope, the Government's official UFO expert". This is
not true, he hasn't worked for Air Staff 2a since 1994. When he
did his three year tour we know, through our investigations,
that he was not a UFO expert of any kind, working on the subject
on the most limited basis.

2 - "a novel that has made some at the MOD nervous". Yes,
probably because people (taxpayers, that's us), want to know why
Nick/his publishers are able to put out these quarter-truths
without any comeback. The MOD is probably wondering what people
think its staff get up to;  9am, arrive at the office, 10am,
meeting with agent, 11am, meeting to discuss newspaper article,
12am, two hour break for dinner with TV executive.....

3 - "this novel has been written by someone with inside
knowledge". You wouldn't think so! Although full of weapons
details, anyone could have got this from Jane's Defence Weekly.
Nick did not have that much knowledge of the UFO subject because
he only spent around 30 day looking into it during his tenure.
That's a fact!

4 - "From 1991-4 Nick Pope was responsible for investigating
UFOs and alien abductions for the MOD". Not true. See above. In
a recent letter ro researcher James Easton, the MOD made it
_clear_ that it had _not_ investigated _one_ case of so called
"abduction". The cases in Nick's "The Uninvited" are worse than
ridiculous.....

5 - "Nick Pope has dipped into the 'real X Files' and packed the
book with references to "formerly classified" UFO events
investigated by the MOD". Really? These must be those same
events featured in the Public Records Office files which both
myself, Dave Clarke and Andy Roberts have examined in detail
recently. There were no shadowy 'secret groups' of
investigators, no UFO 'incidents' of merit and no policy on how
to deal with cases which were routinely fobbed off onto
horrified, low-ranking civil servants - like Nick!

The only interesting document is the 24th June 1965 one which
states that "it is our policy to play down the subject of UFOs".
It is clear why, the MOD was inundated with letters/reports from
cranks!

6 - The "Rendlesham Forest Incident......reflects what Nick Pope
was told by USAF officers". It'll be interesting to know what
they told him as it's clear that there was no 'incident' as
such, just a misidentification of some lights in the woods.
There is no evidence of merit to suggest an alien landing, an ET
event, the existence of a 'craft'. Larry Warren may disagree,
but then who takes him seriously?

7 - "The alleged downing of an RAF Lightning BY A UFO in 1970".
Alleged by whom.....I think we know and again, there is _no_
evidence to suggest that a UFO downed a Lightning. It's a good a
story, that's all. It'll probably fool the gullible reader for a
while.....

8 - Get this; "The descriptions of the shape and capabilities of
the UFOs, and the physical description and behaviour of the
aliens are based on actual UFO reports and alien abduction
claims investigated by Nick Pope "as part of his official MoD
duties." Which, according to his employers, the MOD, is not the
case!!! The official word is that he spent a tiny proportion of
his official time investigating UFOs and did not investigate
abductions. What he did in his spare time is certainly different
- but was, by definition, _not_ official....

9 - "Nick Pope has worked for the MoD for fourteen years. As
well as a tour of duty spent researching and investigating
UFOs".....this can _only_ realistically be described as a lie.
Maybe it's not Nick's lie; maybe it's the spin doctors (that
Nick mentions in the book) at Simon and Schuster.

10 - "They [MoD] had the book for three months - before giving
final clearance to publish". The suggestion, of course, is that
they were desperate to stifle the publication - or something
along these lines. Nick suggested that similar blocking tactics
were adopted for 'Open Skies, Closed Minds' but there was
_nothing_ vaguely interesting in it, let alone material of a
classified nature.

So what is going on?

I think it's clear. The facts are routinely obscured as part of
a mass marketing campaign. I'm not of the belief that Nick is
part of some conspiracy to mislead us all although I'm sure if
he'd concluded that some UFOS were man-made things would be
different. What I think is happening is a ruthless pursuit of
money and book sales at all costs. We shouldn't be surprised.

What I think is wrong is where claims that we _know_ are wild
exaggerations of untruths are allowed to be presented to both
press and public as truth.

Simon and Schuster are said to be a reputable company and yet
they insist upon putting out misleading statements. What is the
world coming to?

Tim Matthews.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 21

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 12:23:32 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 20:47:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 23:36:36 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:26:24 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Why would your kid say "Oh, look. An alien"? I hope you have not
 >>been trying to influence this poor kids mind in any way.
 >>My kid would have said "Oh, look. A monster or a creature!"

 >Oh really, Dave? You mean your kids have not seen the movies,
 >the T-shirts, the pens, pencils, toys, the X-Files and all the
 >alien-related images bombarding kids these days? Most kids who
 >see a picture of a bug-eyed critter call them "aliens" these
 >days not monsters.

My children are aged 2 6 and 7 (all girls). They are interested
in Barbie, the Disney channel and Zelda (N64) and are not
interested in space aliens. Their description of these creatures
as 'monsters' is as good as any since none of us know what they
are, assuming that they exist at all.

 >>>Some people see these images, some don't.

 >>I've seen that before, it's called 'faces in the fire', goes
 >>back a long way.

 >That's interesting, Dave, because you have never seen these
 >photos in person. Thus far, all you have seen are the scanned
 >images of the photographs yet you feel qualified to make snap
 >declarations based on so little information. I hope you don't
 >do this often because you are probably missing a lot.

So the creature doesn't show up in scanned images and I have to
be looking at the original photo in order to see anything, is
this what you're saying?

My faces in the fire comment was only in response to you saying
that some people can see something in your images and some
people can't.

 >>Give us a list of who you mailed this to, some of us might like
 >>to follow this up.

 >I will gladly do so via private E-mail for anyone if you (and
 >any other recipients) promise not to publish the information
 >publicly. I do not wish to point out anyone in public because it
 >is only my opinions based on personal experiences. I would love
 >for someone to ask these researchers why they never contacted me
 >or bothered to ask even a few questions. Thank you for
 >volunteering, Dave!

My pleasure, you know my address. I promise not to publish the
information.

 >I'm sorry to hear of your personal tragedy, Dave. However, I
 >don't think any of us can say one person's experiences outweigh
 >the experiences of another. Each person is unique.

 >If I can help ease your burdens in any way, feel free to contact
 >me via private E-mail and I will listen.

Thank you for the kind offer Amy but it's the kind of thing that
my family and I have managed to get over on our own.

Dave.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                               'The Grey Dude'

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 10:34:23 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 06:58:46 -0400
Subject: 'The Grey Dude'


Folks,

Just to point you at an interesting tale, however you choose to
interpret it ...

    http://www.largeruniverse.com/docs/greydude.html

Onward,

   -Brian Cuthbertson






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:15:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 07:01:59 -0400
Subject: Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004


http://www.tui.edu/STO/Japan/Japan/Planets.html

Japan is Third to Probe the Planets

Japan, the fourth nation ever to send a satellite to Earth
orbit, became the third nation ever to send a spacecraft to Mars
when its Planet-B probe blasted off from Japan's Kagoshima Space
Center on the southern island of Kyushu on July 4, 1998.

While on its way to Mars, Planet-B was renamed Nozomi which
means Hope.

Unfortunately, an out-of-control thruster necessitated an heroic
rescue effort which will lead Nozomi around the Sun on its way
to the Red Planet. Arrival at Mars will be four years later than
planned.

The flight plan. After launch in 1998, the robot science
explorer went into a looping orbit around Earth which took it
out and around the Moon. Nozomi then made two swings by the Moon
to establish its final trajectory to Mars. The swing-by
technique would gather speed for the trip to Mars where Nozomi
was to have arrived at the end of 1999.

Once the spacecraft reached Mars, it would have been placed in a
highly elliptical or "egg-shaped" orbit stretching from a low of
93-186 miles out to about 17,000 miles above the planet's
surface.

What went wrong? Nozomi made a first gravity-assist flyby of
Earth on Sept. 24, 1998. Following the second Earth flyby on
Dec. 18, 1998, a thruster on the spacecraft stuck open and much
fuel was wasted. Nozomi did not receive sufficient acceleration
boost to make into orbit around Mars.

Controllers at Japan's Institute of Space and Astronautical
Sciences (ISAS) ordered the thrusters to burn in a correctional
manuever on Dec. 21, 1998. However, that did not leave enough
fuel for Nozomi to be able to slow itself down later as it
entered Mars orbit. That called for an extraordinary effort to
save Nozomi.

The controllers radioed orders to the spacecraft, assigning it a
new flight plan. Now it would make three trips around the Sun
and two more Earth flybys. These gravity assists from the Sun
and Earth would give Nozomi just the right speed for entering
Mars orbit by January 2004.

Nozomi's orbital path around Mars will be elliptical, ranging
from a low of 93 miles out to a high of 31,620 miles.

ISAS researchers say they believe the spacecraft's science
instruments will work properly after the four year delay. A
benefit of the longer flight will be extra time to collect and
send back data on the solar wind in interplanetary space.

Martian atmosphere. Nozomi is designed to perform long-term
studies of the upper Martian atmosphere and ionosphere, and its
interaction with the solar wind.

The low-altitude portion of the orbit will be used for remote
sensing of the lower atmosphere and surface, and for direct
measurements of upper atmosphere and ionosphere.

The more distant parts of the orbit will allow instruments to
probe the ions and neutral gas escaping from Mars, which
interact with the charged-particle "wind" blowing outward from
the Sun. Ionization of the upper atmospheric gas by solar
radiation produces the charged-particle atmosphere (ionosphere)
that acts as an obstacle to the solar wind.

This radiation produces species of gas not seen in Mars' lower
atmosphere, such as nitric oxide, or dissociates the atmosphere
into single atomic species, such as atomic oxygen. If these
neutral or ionized species possess enough energy, they can
escape the gravitational pull of Mars, resulting in a net
atmospheric loss. Measurements of lighter species such as atomic
hydrogen and deuterium also can provide clues about the
evolution of the Martian atmosphere.

More like Venus. Mars has little or no intrinsic magnetic field
to interact with this process, making it more like Venus in this
respect than Earth.

The upper atmosphere of Venus and its solar wind environment
were studied for almost fourteen years by the U. S. Pioneer
Venus Orbiter spacecraft from a similar, highly elliptical
orbit. Nozomi carries an insturment, known as NMS, which is a
state-of-the-art enhancement of the Pioneer Venus mass
spectrometer. It weighs only six pounds. To conserve space and
weight, electronic items such as transistors and integrated
circuits were removed from their outer casings and placed in
larger packages called hybrid circuits.

Dust storms. Data from previous Mars exploration spacecraft such
as Mariner 9 indicate that dust storms near the surface can heat
the lower atmosphere and increase the gas density in the upper
atmosphere where Nozomi will make its measurements. The U.S.
Mars Climate Orbiter carries an instrument called the Pressure
Modulated Infrared Radiometer, which will provide complementary
information on the lower atmosphere and its response to dust
storms.

NMS. Nozomi carries 14 instruments from Japan, Canada, Sweden,
Germany and the United States. NMS is a U.S. instrument provided
by NASA to measure the gas composition of the upper atmosphere
of Mars. NMS is short for Neutral Mass Spectrometer and Ultra
Stable Oscillator. There also is NASA hardware aboard for a
radio science experiment.

The Neutral Mass Spectrometer will enable researchers to measure
the chemical composition of the upper atmosphere of Mars on a
global scale, which has never been done before.

Previous upper atmospheric composition measurements were done in
only two locations as NASA's Viking landers entered the Martian
atmosphere on July 20 and Sept. 3, 1976, respectively.

Precise clock. The radio science hardware was built by the Johns
Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel,
Maryland, under contract to NASA. The ultra-precise signals
generated by the oscillator serve as a very accurate clock to
enable analysis of the Martian atmosphere and to help guide the
spacecraft as it orbits the red planet.

Other science packages aboard Nozomi were contributed by
Canada's Calgary University, Germany's Munich Technical
University, the French space agency CNES, and Sweden.

M5 rocket. The spacecraft was built by the Nippon Electric
Corporation and was launched on one of Japan's M-5 rockets. That
rocket was designed to expand Japan's launch capability for the
inner planets and beyond.

The Nozomi project is managed by ISAS and the Japanese Ministry
of Education. ISAS personnel operate the spacecraft and its
instruments.

Information on NMS and the NASA portion of the Nozomi mission is
at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Laboratory for Atmospheres
in Greenbelt, Maryland.

Nozomi's objectives. The main objective is to investigate the
motion and structure of the upper atmosphere of the planet Mars.
To do this, 14 instruments are on board the spacecraft. The
observations by Nozomi will include:

Magnetic field of Mars

Scientists are not sure if Mars has a magnetic field or not.
Nozomi will measure precisely the Martian magnetic field.

Atmosphere of Mars

Nozomi will investigate the composition and structure of the
atmosphere with ultraviolet remote-sensing detectors. A small
mass-analyzer will be used to study the composition of the the
ionosphere.

Plasma in the Ionosphere of Mars

Nozomi will study the components, structure, temperature and
plasma waves within the ionosphere with detectors.

Pictures of Mars and its Moons

A small camera will snap pictures of Martian weather and its two
moons -- Phobos and Deimos. Those images should help scientists
understand how sandstorms and clouds are generated on Mars and
the planet's polar icecaps grow and decay.

Dust Rings around Mars

Scientists suggest there may be a dust-ring along the orbit of
Phobos. By using the dust counter aboard Nozomi, they will
discover if it exists.

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                 Re: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?

From: Perry Mick <bridgingworlds@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 05:47:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 07:03:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:41:02 EDT
 >Subject: Correction: Where is Japan's "Planet-B" Mars Probe?
 >To: Updates@globalserve.net

 >Pathfinder landed on Mars on July 4, "1997", not 1998. Please
 >remove reference to Pathfinder in any re-postings. No connection
 >with the launch of the Planet B probe on July 4, 1998.

Looking at this picture:

http://www.planet-b.isas.ac.jp/neworb.jpg

Appears that it doesn't arrive until 2003.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                       Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris...

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 16:33:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 07:08:48 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris...


 >From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT Salutes Neil Morris For Roswell Crash Discoveries
 >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 23:40:57 -0400


 >'Very interesting picture although it's provenance seems a
 >little sketchy at present. This is what I managed to glean from
 >the accompanying text.

 >I would like to know if you can ascertain from the higher
 >quality (October) copy if the good General is poking the debris
 >with a stick or something. Is he touching it with his bare hand?
 >It is not apparent in the full-scene picture that is posted at
 >the site I visited. Are there any plans to post the full-sized
 >picture in the clearer format or is the small clip all we can
 >expect for now?

 >I feel this detail (hand or stick?) though circumstantial, is
 >worth pondering.

 >Cheers,

 >Richard Goldsmith


Richard and List,
I attach a further image with more details from the RameyDubose(grim)
image and to answer Richards question Gen Ramey _is_ holding some of
the dark "balloon envelope" material and apparently inspecting it
closely.

The bottom half of the attachment shows the main debris area and the
circled areas are the locations of the two detail insets. The larger
of these which takes upt the top half of the image is of a section
of "white edgetape" attested to by Charles Moore as being a type of
Scotchtape with printed flowers, as you can see at B in the inset
far from being tape this seems to be a structure like a flattened
tube similar again to a structure I have noted some while back which
appeared to have an internal wire frame:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/new-1/edgetape.gif

For comparison at A you have the edge of some "normal" foil close by.

The smaller inset is the other area from the lower image circled
and shows a beam with some very nice regular "smudge marks" at
C.

Best Regards
Neil.

PS As for posting the full scale image of RameyDubose(grim),
it's _big_, an 11 megabyte scan and the archive that now claims
copyright on the duplicate negative might not appreciate it. So
far I hope, as this is non profit making research, I have not
trodden on any toes in this respect.



-------------------------------------------------------
                      Neil Morris@Home.

Email:             Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Web Sites:        Roswell and Alien Autopsy
                   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
         The Fort Worth Photographs of James Bond Johnson
                http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/
-------------------------------------------------------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 26

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 17:27:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 07:43:36 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 26


UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 26
October 21, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

UFOs ARE BACK IN DANDRIDGE, TENNESSEE

Following a five-day hiatus, UFOs returned to the small town of
Dandridge, Tennessee (population 1,540), offering two nighttime
viewing experiences.

According to eyewitness Patricia G., the UFOs returned at 2 a.m.
on Wednesday, October 20, 1999.  She reported, "The UFO was in
the northwest sky.  He was a little lower than usual and, as I
noticed the pulsating and flashing of the brilliant colors, he
sank lower, and the trees blocked my view.  This was no
airplane.  It was the same light in the sky we have been
watching all year."

Several UFOs turned up in Dandridge again at 8:30 p.m. on
Saturday, October 16, 1999, Patricia added, "Tonight from 8:30
to 9 p.m., there were five UFOs that I could see. They were in
their usual position in the northwest sky.  Four of them were
scattered, and the one to the north-northeast was very, very
bright.  There was one in the southwest sky of the same
intensity.  I can't understand for the life of me why others are
not reporting these things."

Dandridge is located 23 miles (36 kilometers) east of Knoxville,
Tennessee.  (Email Interview)


SMALL SWIFT UFO PUZZLES RANCHERS IN UTAH

A small, fast-moving silver UFO "several feet long and a few
inches in diameter" has been seen by ranchers in rural Rich
County, near Woodruff, Utah (population 50) during the past
month.

According to eyewitness Mark L., the speedy UFO was last seen on
Friday, October 15, 1999 at 5:15 p.m.  The object flew from west
to east, just above the ankle-high sagebrush on the arid
prairie.

"Over the month, my wife, sister and brother-in-law have
independently seen some sort of thing in our rural area," Mark
reported. "A silver tube several feet in length and a few inches
in diameter zips across the road in front of them and
disappears.  They all insist that the object is hardly glimpsed
before it is gone.  My sister described small 'fins' or
something on the side."

Woodruff is on Utah Highway 39 about 130 miles (208 kilometers)
northeast of Salt Lake City.  (Email Form Report)


MASS DEATH OF BIRDS REPORTED IN ILLINOIS

About 2,000 dead birds fell from the sky in Mascoutah, Illinois
last Friday, October 15, 1999.

Dead birds included starlings, grackles and red-winged
blackbirds.  The cause of the deaths is not known, and the case
is being investigated by the Illinois Department of Natural
Resources (DNR).

This was the third mass death of small birds in the USA this
year.  The first such puzzling occurrence took place in Bastrop,
Louisiana back in January 1999.

According to USA Today, "State officials suspect a chemical, not
strong winds, might have killed thousands of birds in a southern
Illinois farm field."

"State Department of Natural Resources biologists are running
tests on some of the birds and should have the results today,
said DNR spokesman Joe Khayyat."

Mascoutah (population 5,511) is on Illinois Highway 177 about 25
miles (40 kilometers) east of St. Louis, Missouri.  (See USA
Today for October 19, 1999, "Illinois," page A7."


UFO AIMS SPOTLIGHT AT LIVERPOOL

A bright UFO appeared over Liverpool Tuesday night, October 12,
1999, and was also seen in Liscard and across the bay in
Wallesay.

According to eyewitness Lorraine W., the UFO "first looked like
a faint star" when it appeared over the large UK city. "At first
it looked like a star, but it was quite fast.  A beam of light
came out of the bottom right-hand-side of the object."

The beam "looked like a cone--narrow at the top but getting
wider as it got longer. The light was a smoky white or grey in
colour. The light lasted for a second or two and went out.  The
object itself hung around for a few minutes and vanished."
(Email Form Report)


MORE UFOs SEEN IN MELBOURNE SUBURBS

The UFO flap in Australia's Victoria state entered its second
week with multiple sightings in three suburbs just west of
Melbourne.

On Saturday, October 16, 1999, at 9:15 p.m., "six bright orange
illuminations" were seen by 20 to 30 witnesses over Melton, Deer
Park and Rockbank, three suburbs on the western edge of
Melbourne, Victoria's largest city.

The UFOs were "heading east" and "were seen by 20 to 30 people
for 20 minutes on the Western Highway between Melton and Deer
Park, Vic., western outer suburbs of Melbourne."

"The illuminations at times were in an S formation up to periods
of some two minutes before flying or running off easterly.  They
all remained at one height (altitude) and size.  In fact, twice
the size of the background stars." (Many thanks to Australian
ufologist Ross Dowe for this report.)


NEW SET OF CROP CIRCLES APPEARS IN MIDALE

On Friday, October 8, 1999, researchers found a new formation of
crop circles two miles south of Midale, Saskatchewan, Canada.

This was the sixth formation of crop circles found in Midale
this year.  Midale was also the site of heavy crop circle
activity in 1998.

The formation was found in a durum wheat field two miles south
of Midale by pilot John Erickson and researcher Nancy Talbott.

The formation consisted of three circles close together in a
straight line about 20 feet (6 meters) apart.  The largest
circle (on the east side of the cluster--J.T.) is approximately
60 feet (18 meters) in diametre, the second about 40 feet (12
meters) and the third about 20 feet (6 meters)."

"Description of the floor lay inside the smallest circle is of a
swirled lay which ends in a straight 'radial' type lay out to
the edge of the circle.  The other circles have the usual
swirled lay pattern."

  Midale (population 497) is on Provincial Highway 39 about 98
  miles (157 kilometers) southeast of Regina, Sask.  (Many thanks
  to Paul Anderson of Circles Phenomenon Research- Canada for
  this report.)


TOKAIMURA PLANT IS STILL RADIOACTIVE

On Friday, October 15, 1999, the Japanese government raised the
number of people exposed to radiation during the nuclear mishap
at Tokaimura two weeks ago from 49 to 69. Three of the victims
remain hospitalized at Tokyo University Hospital.

The nuclear accident occurred on September 30, 1999 when workers
at the JCO Company plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, Japan
mistakenly poured too much uranium oxide into a stainless steel
container, thereby setting off a nuclear chain reaction.

"A report on the accident submitted Friday by the (Japanese)
Nuclear Safety Commission said the new exposures were revealed
when investigators belatedly checked badges the workers to
monitor radiation levels."

"Previously, the government had given the number of those
exposed to radiation as 49, including seven people working near
the site and three firefighters who rescued the three most
seriously injured workers."

"Other workers were exposed to radiation levels 50 to 100 times
(about 500 to 1,000 REM, meaning Radiation Equivalent Man--J.T.)
higher than what is considered safe to receive over the course
of a year, Friday's report found."

"Also on Friday, JCO Co., which runs the plant, said that a
small amount of radiation still was leaking, but that it doesn't
pose a health risk to nearby residents."

(Editor's Comment:  According to Japan's Sankei news service,
there are 330,000 people living within a radius of 10 kilometers
(6 miles) of the nuclear plant.)

"Last week, JCO said a ventilator was still spewing radioactive
iodine 131 at about twice the safety limit."

"The company sealed the opening and turned off an exhaust fan,
but the leak was continuing Friday, said Science and Technology
Agency spokesman Ken Maruoka.  Workers are to install a filter
today to stop the leak, he said."  (See the Minneapolis, Minn.
Star-Tribune for October 16, 1999, "Those exposed to radiation
leak in Japan increased to 69," page A5.)

(Editor's Comment:  Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi is going to have
to bite the bullet and bury that factory under a mountain of
concrete--just like in Chernobyl.)


Y2K: FBI SAYS BORN-AGAIN CHRISTIANS A "THREAT"

"With some extremists attaching apocalyptic significance to the
new millenium, the FBI is quietly warning local police about
possible threats posed by anti-government militias and hate
organizations."

"The campaign includes the national distribution of a report
titled Project Megiddo in which federal authorities assess
threats posed by hate groups and explain the significance of
biblical references the groups use to discuss Y2K."

"The project, which is named for an ancient battleground in
Israel associated with Armageddon, will be the centerpiece of an
FBI seminar this month before the International Association of
Chiefs of Police in Charlotte, N.C." (North Carolina--J.T.)

"Unlike the rest of the meeting, the seminar will be closed to
the public, a sign of how sensitive the subject of militias has
become."

"One workshop is titled 'Millenium, militias and mayhem: what to
expect in the coming year.'"

"A senior government official said the 10-page report was meant
to heighten awareness among local police departments to the
possibility that militias might use the new millenium as an
opportunity to initiate acts of violence or general disruption."

"The FBI has urged police to be alert to changes in behavior of
known militias and cult groups and to the possible stockpiling
of weapons."

"According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the militia
movement reached its peak in 1996, when there were 858 such
organizations across the country.  By last year, there were
435."

"What concerns officials now, however, is the possibility that
extreme members might undertake missions of their own."

"They cite as an example Buford Furrow, who belonged to a white
supremacist group (Aryan Nations of northern Idaho--J.T.) and is
accused of killing a mail carrier and shooting six people at a
Jewish community center in Los Angeles this summer."  (See USA
Today for October 20, 1999, "FBI: Militias a threat at
milleniumm" page A1.) (Editor's Comment::  Yes, there are a lot
of militia or "patriot" groups in the USA.  Some are Aryan
Nations, some neo-Nazi, some constitutionalist and others
Bible-believing Christians.  Just what does the FBI consider a
cult?  Stockpiling food? All 10 million of the USA's Latter-Day
Saints do that.  Musings about the seals of the Bible? There's
the Seventh-Day Adventists.  Literal belief in the Book of
Revelation?  That's all of our country's evangelical Christians,
which the last time I checked, consisted of about 20 percent of
the entire USA population

If the Bureau has admissible evidence that certain extremists
are planning millenial mayhem, then why don't they take it to
the grand jury? Instead of stirring up the nation's police
departments against people who might believe that Y2K could be
linked to events prophesied in the Book of Revelation.

If the prospect of Y2K civil unrest and Operation Abacus were
not serious enough, we now have this to worry about.  Like our
country's second president, John Adams, I can only assess the
future by looking at the past.  Back in February and March of
1942, the FBI rounded up the Japanese-Americans under
circumstances far less threatening than Y2K.)


from the UFO Files...

1954: UFO SQUADRON SEEN IN ALGERIA

Of all the continents, Africa has the fewest reported UFO
sightings, and most of these have taken place south of the
Zambezi River.  But North Africa has had a few celebrated UFO
incidents of their own.

On October 26, 1954, amateur astronomer Yves Vernet set up his
prismatic telescope in his vineyard near Bou Hanifia in Algeria.

"With my prismatic telescope set at 20 magnification, I watched
the sky at high altitude.  I was stupefied to see a brilliant
object fly high above the cloud layer at great speed.  Five
minutes later, I saw another object pass."

"Since October 26, when the first sighting occurred, every day
between 1 and 2 p.m., I have not ceased to see flying saucers
passing by every five to ten minutes. More are visible at midday
than at morning or evening.  Their frequency in a (viewing)
field so reduced is of great importance.  Their performance is
far above that of our best terrestrial aircraft, and their
number seems greater than the greatest aerial concentration we
could effect."

Bou Hanifia is on the river el-Hamma (Arabic for the bath),
about 88 kilometers (55 miles) southeast of Oran.  The valley is
one of the oldest archaeological sites in North Africa, with
signs of human habitation dating back to 6,000 B.C.  (See Flying
Saucers Uncensored by Harold T. Wilkins, The Citadel Press, New
York, N.Y. 1955, page 247.)


That's it for this week.  Join us next time for more UFO news
from around the planet, brought to you by "the paper that goes
home-- UFO Roundup."  See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan Productions, all
rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup on
their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue in
which the item first appeared.

*****************************************************
This weeks advertiser:

Anyday.com

Click here for your FREE online DayPlanner!

http://www.directleads.com/ad.html?o=354&a=cd3492

Take control of your time! Schedule meetings easily.
Get reminders - automatically! Manage all your
contacts in your private address book. Find out
about your favorite sports events, TV shows, and more
- in advance.
Organize your life with AnyDay.com!
*****************************************************

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>

UFO Roundup: http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Bob Kathman <BKathman@microprose.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:44:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:13:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:23:18 -0400
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:14:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >The lithmus test for genuine compared to hoaxed terraglyphs
 >is very simple: the electromagnetic properties and the
 >direction of growth of the corn in the field.

<snip>

 >The earth is in far better shape than the
 >environmentalists would have us believe


 >Regarding our planet: the atmosphere becomes warmer, the
 >glaciers become smaller, CO2 increases, Ozone increases, each
 >day many animals/insects are wiped out, the woods are burning,
 >in Staten Island, N.Y., is the biggest monument ever build by
 >humans - consisting of garbage and we have now 6,000,000,000
 >humans here - will someone continue this enumeration?

 >Joachim Koch, Berlin

You meant Ozone DEcreases, right?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:31:15 -0400

 >>From: Tim D. Brigham <TBrigham@ksinc.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:48:33 -0500

 >Mark thought arguments like Dennis's are too literal (my word,
 >not his). Since we have no context for alleged alien behavior --
 >we don't know anything about the aliens -- we can't assess
 >whether or not it's plausible. Mark also thought that aliens
 >might be have elements of play or art or humor in some of what
 >they do, and that anyone who expects them always to be logically
 >consistent hasn't allowed for those things.

 >But he said much more, and said it better than I can. Everyone,
 >I hope, will read all of what he said.

 >Greg Sandow

In the case of mutilations I'd wonder if they aren't a form of
terrorism... attention without logic. Ironically, there is a cow
cut into slices on exhibit in the current and notorious Brooklyn
NY Museum show, Sensations. Maybe it is art after all!

Bob Kathman







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 13:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:15:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 18:23:18 -0400
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 03:14:34 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

 >>The lithmus test for genuine compared to hoaxed terraglyphs
 >>is very simple: the electromagnetic properties and the
 >>direction of growth of the corn in the field.

 >>The earth is in far better shape than the
 >>environmentalists would have us believe

 >Dear Henny,

 >So please tell us something about the electromagnetic properties
 >and the direction of growth of the corn in the field. How do
 >which properties change? How can yo measure the growth of corn
 >that was flattened just five hours before?

 >Which are the instruments you use?

 >Regarding our planet: the atmosphere becomes warmer, the
 >glaciers become smaller, CO2 increases, Ozone increases, each
 >day many animals/insects are wiped out, the woods are burning,
 >in Staten Island, N.Y., is the biggest monument ever build by
 >humans - consisting of garbage and we have now 6,000,000,000
 >humans here - will someone continue this enumeration?

 >Joachim Koch, Berlin

Hello Joachim,

You'd better watch your language -- you're beginning to sound
like one of those contactees or abductees! :-)  (Although if
it's in the upper stratosphere that the O3 content is
increasing, that's good, not bad.) Here in the U.S., in our
Congress, we rarely ever hear the word "planet" used. To think
of our planet the way you suggest would detract from
nationalism.

Jim Deardorff







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:19:45 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Sean Jones wrote:

Good Afternoon Andy

 ><snip>

 >>I would also like to mention, and please correct me if I
 >>misquote you Andy. When I was at Tim Matthews conference in the
 >>early part of this year Andy Roberts said to me, "I believe
 >>_ALL_ UFO's can be explained with sufficient research" Now if
 >>that isn't someone who has already made up his mind what is?

 >I think you're exactly right there Sean. But what am I supposed
 >to say? "I believe some UFOs can never be explained?"

Well, yes. I believe that no amount of research can conclusively
answer every single UFO case.

 >Presumably we _all_ think that all UFOs are explicable but may
 >differ as to our beliefs about the as yet unresolved ones.
 >Please correct me if I'm wrong, because otherwise it means you
 >are quite happy to have some UFOs remain unexplained. So yes, my
 >mind is made up, I believe that _all_ UFOs can be explained with
 >sufficient research.

 >Who thinks different and why please.

I think different for the previously stated reason.

 >>What about if the answer does not become available? This _game_
 >>that is ufology has yielded no answers in fifty years.

 >Where y'been Sean? We have learned one hell of a lot in 50
 >years. The problem is so few ufologists stay in the field for
 >more than a few years that we are endlessly re-inventing the
 >wheel as it were.

Andy, yes _we_ have learned a heck of a lot _BUT_ have _we_ got an
answer that satisfies all? No! Why's that? Because some UFO's have
not, or can not be explained to anyone. But when I was speaking about
solving the riddle that is ufology, I was talking generally Andy, not
individual cases.

 >
 >>With a
 >>crew of hardened skeptics do you expect to solve the riddle?
 >
 >Why not?
OK, please elaborate on what you think gives you the _edge_.

 >
 >>As I stated when I wrote "101 Possible explanations for UFOs"
 >>for all the explanations supplied and others, there are _still_
 >>some cases that there are no answers for.

 >There are.

But hold on, didn't you just say

 >So yes, my
 >mind is made up, I believe that _all_ UFOs can be explained with
 >sufficient research.

??

 >>Which would leave us
 >>with two options, ET or the paranormal.

 >Not so - it merely leaves us with some unexplained cases and
 >people's _belief_ that the explanation for some of these may be
 >ET or paranormal. Big difference there Sean.

To paraphrase a quote from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: "When you have
eliminated all the possible explanations, the impossible must be
possible". And as I said in 101 Possible, even if you go to the
extremes and use the explanation that the witness is lying, you still
have some sightings that can not be explained. So what other
explanations are you going to offer us that I haven't already offered
in 101? As opposed to ET or paranormal, and thinking about it, I even
used the paranormal as one of the possible explanations!

 >>It would seem that some
 >>people just cannot accept these options.

 >I'd happily accept them as options if they weren't merely beliefs.

Being that I am a man of Christian faith, belief is a fundamental
thing to me so for me at least it is easier to believe in ET than
some of the half baked _explanations_ offered by some
debunkers/skeptics.

 >>So with a line up of
 >>skeptics, do you think that a Pro-ETH person is likely to
 >>volunteer his/her time to assist in debunking?

 >That's their problem. No one is press being ganged into UFOIN.
 >If someone who beliefs in the ETH or any of the other
 >belief systems kicking about in ufology that's up to them.

I said volunteered, not press ganged! So answer the question.

 >>Jenny I honestly do wish you the very best with your new
 >>organisation but I feel that with the line up of people already
 >>involved, the outcome of many investigations will be
 >>directed/steered/cajoled into one debunked set of answers.
 >
 >Debunking and scepticism are poles apart Sean. None of the
 >people involved in UFOIN are debunkers. All are ufologists of
 >many years standing who have all spent thousands of hours in the
 >field and thousands of pounds in research. Their conclusions are
 >based on investigations - not an Armchair Ufologist among them
 >I'm afraid.

Scepticism is poles apart from debunking, sKepticism however, is
not.

 >>The only thing that could change this for me was if you was able
 >>to get an equal number of Pro-ETH people and an equal number of
 >>middle of the road people to join this new organisation, and as
 >>I said with your current line up, do you think that will happen?

 >That's your opinion Sean - but it won't happen. The UFOIN
 >founders came together purely because of a belief that organised
 >ufology in this country, as exemplified by BUFORA, is rotten to
 >the core, riven with politics and under-hand dealings.

Are you saying _all_ UFO groups in the UK are rotten to the core?

 >So we do
 >something completely different.

Different from what?

 >Hopefully we will be judged on
 >the quality of research and investigation we produce. If this
 >end product doesn't agree with your belief system that can't be
 >helped but I can assure you despite what you think (and you
 >ought to read some of the stuff Dave C and I have written, most
 >notably Phantoms of the Sky) you would find we are extremely
 >open-minded, but not gullible.

Andy, please correct me if I am wrong but how can you say that
you are open minded when you said this?

 >>Now if
 >>that isn't someone who has already made up his mind what is?

 >I think you're exactly right there Sean. But what am I supposed
 >to say? "I believe some UFOs can never be explained?"

Andy, I do not mean this as a personal thing, I really do wish
UFOIN the very best, I am only expressing my doubts as to the
results of the work, not the quality.

--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      Re: RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 17:03:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:39:33 -0400
Subject: Re: RAMS - The Beat Still Goes On


 >From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 03:45:11
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Robert AM Stephens Has Died (unconfirmed)

 >Source: Shadie Pines

 >http://209.145.38.129/shadiepines/ramsdead.htm

 >Stig

<snip>

 >I talked with 'Roberta' there this afternoon. There has
 >been no obituary for Stephens nor does his name appear
 >in their database of recent stories.

 >Errol Bruce-Knapp


Well -- if RAMS was a SEAL, then I am the WALRUS!!!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 16 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:44:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:21:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 21:50:06 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Bruce Maccabee
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 18:17:49 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:57:24 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>>Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 20:17:03 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans
 >>>Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Previously, I had offered:

 >>>You know, every time I write a check at the local supermarket,
 >>>the cashier asks,"Is everything on the check correct?" What does
 >>>she really expect me to say? What would she do if I suddenly
 >>>said,"Gosh, you're too fast for me! I was gonna try and slip a

 >>>really think Ed would fess up if his original intent was to fool
 >>>you? Come on...

 >To which Bruce replied:

 >>>Come on, Roger. You go through a cashier's line once. How many
 >>>times can you get away with it going through the SAME cashier's
 >>>line over and over, day in and out, dozens of times?>

 >Actually, Bruce, you just made my point. I can (and do) go
 >through the line over and over, day in and day out, dozens of
 >times......as long as they find no evidence of fraud. And, until
 >they do, every time they ask me if everything on the check is
 >correct, my answer will always be,"You bet!" Why would I fess up
 >voluntarily if everything was going so smoothly? Likewise, IF Ed
 >wanted to deceive you, he certainly would not fess up on his
 >could keep going through that check out line over and over, day
 >in and out, dozens of times....

 >As you pointed out, the only way he could _not_ continue is if
 >he were found out. Has he been found out?

If you went through dozens of times... no fraud was committed.
What would be the nature of rhe fraud, anyway? Writing checks
that bounced? The store would realize soon enough that someone
was passing faulty checks and would track carefully. Perhaps
your fraud would be using counterfeit money. Or perhaps you were
switching prices on items so you paid less? I must confess I
don't know what sourt of fraud you could commit that the store
would care about (the store doesn't care about you using a false
name if the checks or money or credit cards, etc. are honored).
In other words, the fraud must hav some substance or it would be
ignored as opposed to detected but the crime not solved (that
you did it).

I think you are trivializing this.

 >Moving on, I had opined:

REGARDING blur:

 >I'm not sure why I can't seem to get this point across: Polaroid
 >made a cheap copystand with a built in close up lens. This copy
 >stand was designed for average, non-sophisticated consumers to
 >make copies of other Polaroid photos. It was very, very, very,
 >very easy to use. Is it so unreasonable that Ed could possibly
 >own one of these copy stands? You can still pick then up at
 >garage sales for less than five bucks. Every shot that Ed
 >produced on Polaroids could have been created using one of these
 >stands. The only basis for the belief that he didn't is that no
 >one saw it. Pretty weak evidence, if you ask me.

Presumably Ed would not need a copy stand if he were to take
pictures with no smear. You have him using a tripod to take
unsmeared pictures and then saying, :"oh these will be more
convincing if I create a smear which will be th same on both the
UFO and the streetlight. SoO I'll go out and buy a cheap copy
stand, one so cheap that when I click the shutter the camera
will move slighting thereby creating the same smear on the UFO
and on the streetlight."

No matter how you cut it, Roger you are escalating the
photographic "sophistication" whether you think of it as
sophisticated or not.

 >Continuing, Bruce commented:

 >>>Easy as pie for a pro.

 >>>>All this takes photographic sophistication.

 >Gosh, Bruce. I'm not quite sure how I'd feel if I were Ed. I
 >mean is the guy as much of a dumb ass as you make him out to be?
 >I'm surprised he can tie his own shoes.

He can ties his shoes. That doesn't mean he can do any
sophisticated photography.

 >Finally, Bruce offered:

 >>Surprising that Hyzer didn't prefer the simpler double exposure
 >>method. Perhaps he thought the masked double exposure was too
 >>difficult.


 >I think we've gone about as far as we can on this subject.>

 >My position is not necessarily that the GB photos are, indeed,
 >fake.

 >On the other hand, I see nothing in them that could not be
 >created by the average person using consumer based equipment.
 >The fact that Hyzer didn't think of the simpler masked double
 >exposure method is indicative of what I find amiss in the whole
 >GB investigation.

You should contemplate photo 11, the photo of the UFO supposedly
in the distance over a field, with a blue line coming down.
Hyzer claims it was a double exposure. By this he means what I
call a simple double exposure as opposed to a masked double
exposure. The upper part of the "beam" is silhouetted against
the dim morning sky. The bottom of the beam is silhouetted
against the total dark trees, buildings and ground. So, what do
you think? A simple double exposure?

 >Pro or con, it has been assumed that either the photos are
 >genuine or only a very complicated photographic effect could
 >have possibly created the end results on Ed's shots. And since
 >Ed seems to be dumb as a brick, then there's no way he could
 >have pulled them off, right?

 >How can I argue with that?

You can't unless you can provide evidence that Ed was
considerably smarter than a brick photographically speaking.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                    Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:20:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:23:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude


 >Subject: Re: Theories of Intent and Ineptitude
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 01:04:04 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >The problem with this is that as the strangeness increases, the
 >probability seems to decrease.

<snip>

 >There is an additional problem in that (except for repeater
 >abductions) the number of cases available decreases with
 >increasing strangeness, making it very hard to do good
 >statistics on higher strangeness cases.

The higher the strangeness, does not mean a case is less likely
to be real. But it may be accurate to assume the higher the
strangeness, the less cases available due to causation reviewed
below....

Since much of my research tends to center around high
strangeness cases and information, I have been studying the
various paradigms that influence not only the reporting of such
data but also how they are perceived.

Witnesses seem less likely to report observations and/or
experiences that do not fit conventional/stereotypical
descriptions perhaps because they do not think anyone will
believe them and because they, themselves, may have difficulty
defining their experiences/observations.  High strangeness cases
tend to include entities and/or realms and/or objects that are
frequently neglected or ignored by mainstream media; books,
articles, E-lists, conferences, TV, movies, etc.  Thus high
strangeness witnesses do not always know what to call their
sightings/experiences or who to contact for information or help.
Much like the plight of those who claim to have been abducted,
high strangeness witnesses are afraid to speak of their
encounters for fear of ridicule even among those in the
UFO/abductee community.

Another factor that obscures high strangeness cases from our
awareness is the reluctance of investigators, organizations and
research groups to include such reports in their data bases.  I
have found many cases reported to UFO and other organizations
that are deleted or ignored on a regular basis simply because
they do not fit the stereotypical, preconceived notions of the
investigator or individual who records the information. Many
individuals who run reporting centers and keep large data bases
have specific criteria as to what is more likely to be real and
what is not and regularly screen reports accordingly.
Unfortunately, this is how high strangeness cases become deleted
from data bases and thus never available for study.

If phenomena we study do not fit our preconceived notions of
what can or cannot be real, we ignore or debunk the information
and reports.  If we do not record such cases - no matter how
strange or bizarre, they will never be available to study should
more cases come along.  So, we have nothing to compare new cases
to because there are no data bases in which these cases are
recorded.

There have been many phenomena ignored in the past only to
become relevant at a later date.  We, as investigators,
researchers, and interested parties, must not assume what may or
may not be real based on realities evolving faster than our
paradigms.  We need only observe and record what correlates as
the information unfolds, suspending judgement, bias and
ridicule.

(PS- The book I am currently writing deals directly with high
strangeness UFO sightings that do not fit the typical
descriptions of UFOs so I have a pretty good idea how much we
are missing every day due to reporting and recording bias.  I
was quite shocked when I discovered just how much we filter from
our data bases, our studies and our perceptions.  We tend to
"cover-up" and deny more information - usually right under our
noses - than any governments or entities could possibly be
blamed for.  We are our own worse enemies when it comes to
phenomena.)

;>

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 02:01:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:33:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 02:23:41 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:04:53 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>The reason I brought up Firmage was because you were the one who
 >>responded to a message on this list regarding his 'meeting' and
 >>'the secret sources' .

 >Well, why didn't you respond to it in that thread?  Why bring it
 >to this thread?

 >>By the way, you didn't answer any of my questions regarding your
 >>investigation. Why is that? (rhetorical question). Perhaps your
 >>answers would 'confuse' me?

 >Precisely.  The tone of your inquiries thus far have reflected
 >much less than a genuine interest in the case.  I felt your
 >questions were only meant to provide more "fuel" for your
 >diatribe than to answer anything you sincerely wanted to know.
 >And since you say you are "tired" of this topic and wish to
 >change the thread to your liking, I won't bore you with any more
 >details.

Typical. Just what I was expecting, more evasion to someone
questioning you. Does that mean anyone with a negative tone
doesn't deserve any answers to legitimate questions?

 >>You said:

 >>>The main witness I inteviewed never quite believed she had been
 >>>"abducted by space aliens". In fact, the witnesses in the house,
 >>>being of Hispanic descent, first thought the beings they
 >>>encountered were demons or devils.

 >>Perhaps I _am_ confused. I thought you said in a previous
 >>message, "the woman had been abducted all her life".  Are you
 >>talking about the same person here?

 >>Would you be so kind to clarify this for me (and perhaps the
 >>list) so I'm not 'confused'.

 >Obviously, Sue, you have not read the article in question (see
 >"Alien Convention" on my home page) or you would know the
 >answers to this.  Try reading the article first so you will be
 >able to comprehend the discussions in this thread and perhaps
 >not be so bored.

I'm not referring to the article, I'm referring to what you said
in two different messages.  I am just trying to get
clarification as to who you were referring to in these messages,
but I guess that doesn't deserve an answer either.

 >Ah, but you have decided to change the topic of this thread to
 >discussions of Mr. Firmage.  So....neverminds. ;>
 >Amy

I wasn't trying to change the thread.  You just thought I was.


"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never
simple"    - Oscar Wilde






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                         Re: RPIT More New Findings

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 00:17:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:28:41 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:35:33 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: RPIT More New Findings


 >I realise some on this list have concluded that the RPIT project
 >is nothing more than a wild goose chase reading symbols into
 >"smuge" marks etc, but I hope the attached image will even make
 >these people stop and think.>

 >The image is taken from a recently aquired reproduction of one
 >of the "lost" negative what we refer to as the RameyDubose(Grim)
 >shot. The UTA library only holds the sister shot to this image,
 >it's the one that has the Ramey Message in view. The newly
 >aquired print is not in as great a detail as the UTA prints and
 >has had some cropping which is a pity as some of the cropped
 >image area holds further "interesting" debris!.>

 >Refering to the attachment, I'd firstly like to draw your
 >attention to items A and B these appear to show the edge of a
 >large _and_ _thick_ piece of metalic debris partially covered by
 >foil sheet C. This debris is far thicker than anything else we
 >have seen and at a guess (looking at the carpet pattern) it
 >could be up to 1/2 an inch thick. For another comparison look at
 >the foil type debris at points D and D'(top right). I cannot
 >resolve this large piece of debris in any way with the standard
 >explanations, I have also tried to "find" it in the other better
 >resolution UTA print and at the moment have to conclude that
 >most of it in these images is covered by foil sheets except for
 >a piece of "odd" debris spotted early on which was dubbed "the
 >moulding", images of this from the MarcelRight shot can be found
 >for comparison at:

Upon seeing this image it took me only a few microseconds to
realize the Neil is right on this one.... whatever it was, it
was thick. Looks like a saw cut through thick aluminum. Does not
look like material bent or pulled (stretched) to breaking.
Looks like a saw cut!  But strangely irregular.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

              Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..."

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:38:33
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:36:35 -0400
Subject: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..."


Source: The Detroit News,

http://detnews.com/1999/religion/9910/21/10220003.htm

Stig

***

Searching for life beyond Earth: Neil Armstrong says it's out
there somewhere

By Todd Halvorson and Robyn Suriano/Florida Today


CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- The first human to set foot on a place
beyond Earth found an airless, waterless, lifeless world.

Nevertheless, Neil Armstrong is convinced life thrives elsewhere
in the cosmos.

"We have no proof," said Armstrong, who stepped onto the moon 30
years ago. "But if we extrapolate, based on the best information
we have available to us, we have to come to the conclusion that
... other life probably exists out there and perhaps in many
places."

Two million years after intelligent life emerged on Earth,
humans finally have arrived at the moment when science and
technology are making possible a systematic search for other
life in the universe.

During the next 100 years, researchers armed with powerful
telescopes, computers and robots could find proof of past or
present microbial life in our solar system.

And during the next 1,000 years, scientists say, it's no longer
pure fantasy to think that the human race could discover and
perhaps contact intelligent civilizations on distant worlds.

"This is really an incredible time to be living because we've
gone from the idea that we're alone on this nice little planet
to the idea that anything is possible," said Lou Allamandola, a
chemist at NASA's Ames Research Center in Mountain View, Calif.

After all, there are 400 billion stars in the Milky Way galaxy
and an estimated half-trillion galaxies in the universe.

"We know there are planets going around other stars, and we know
it's likely that some of those planets have the right conditions
for life," said Dan Werthimer, a research physicist at the
University of California at Berkeley. "So it would be really
bizarre if we were the only ones. It's much more likely that the
universe is teeming with life."

If that's the case, the discovery would revolutionize our
perception of who we are, where we came from and what our place
is in the cosmos. On the other hand, the implications will be
just as great if scientists conclude the rest of the cosmos is
populated by nothing other than gases and carbon compounds.

"We'll either find extraterrestrial life and have a great
insight into it, or we'll not find it, and basically conclude
that we're it. Either answer is important," said Louis Friedman,
executive director of the Planetary Society, a space-exploration
advocacy group based in Pasadena, Calif.

Only in recent years have scientists discovered other planets
and solar systems in our Milky Way galaxy, a star-studded
pinwheel 600 quadrillion miles across.

Those findings raise serious scientific challenges to the idea
that our own solar system is a cosmic quirk of nature, and that
Earth is the only locale capable of producing and sustaining
life.

"I think the most moving question is whether or not our own
Earth with its lukewarm temperatures, allowing for water in
liquid form is a unique type of planet, or whether there are
thousands, perhaps millions, of Earthlike planets in our Milky
Way," said Geoffrey Marcy, an astronomer at San Francisco State
University.

An immense number of Earthlike planets would heighten the
possibility that ET: The Extraterrestrial, in fact has a home to
phone. And radio astronomers at the SETI Institute in California
are hoping to eavesdrop on the call.

Working with the world's most powerful radio telescopes, the
researchers study sunlike stars to see whether alien
civilizations are broadcasting signals.

Inside mountaintop observatories and cloistered university labs,
work is being done by astronomers, biologists, geneticists,
geologists, ecologists, paleontologists, physicists, chemists
and zoologists.

Even though researchers still are unsure exactly how living
creatures took root on Earth, they know solving that mystery is
crucial to the search for life beyond it.

"It's an essential question," said Harley Thronson, an
astronomer at NASA headquarters in Washington, D.C. "If we could
figure it out for Earth, we could use that for a template as how
it might occur on any one of the other worlds that are orbiting
other stars."

The abundance of life in Earth's deep seas and other hostile
environments leads scientists to think it might flourish in
equally extreme locales in our solar system.

The planet Mars is a top contender.

In recent years, scientists have uncovered impressive evidence
that Mars once was warmer, wetter and more hospitable to life.
The latest theory is that water once raged across its surface,
creating planetary nooks and crannies in which life may have
emerged.

The evidence? A 4.5-billion-year-old Mars meteorite found on a
wind-blown glacier in western Antarctica. NASA scientists
contend the potato-shaped rock contains evidence of the
fossilized remains of primitive, bacterialike organisms that are
signs of past life on Mars.

Beyond Mars lies another seductive site for life: Europa, one of
the four moons of Jupiter discovered by Galileo in 1610.
Close-up photos from NASA's Galileo spacecraft show possible
evidence of a subsurface ocean, volcanic activity and comet
strikes.

"You've got liquid water. You've got a strong energy source
that's long lasting, and organic chemistry. You put those
ingredients together with enough time, and on Earth, those same
ingredients in less than a billion years gave rise to life,"
Richard Terrile, a planetary scientist at JPL, said.

All the theories about Europa and Mars are sound, but the
missions may turn out to be scientific busts.

"Maybe we'll strike out at all these places," said SETI
Institute scientist Seth Shostak. "But all we have to do is find
life on one other world in our solar system whether it's fossils
on Mars or tuna on Europa and that tells you right away that
life can spring up in all sorts of places in the galaxy."

Added Firouz Naderi, who is heading a NASA project aimed at
finding life beyond Earth: "If, in fact, we are able to find
life or to answer the question 'Are we alone?' then that
certainly is grand enough and noble enough to be the enduring
legacy of our civilization."


Copyright 1999, The Detroit News








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                     Laura Lee E-News - October 23, 1999

From: webmaster@lauralee.com
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:38:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:38:15 -0400
Subject: Laura Lee E-News - October 23, 1999


::
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Laura Lee E-News - October 23, 1999
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 00:09:12 -0700
:
:


LAURA LEE E-NEWS For Saturday, October 23, 1999
By Laura Lee
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SUBSCRIPTION ONLY is how we send Laura Lee E-News.
If you receive this message without subscribing, it means that someone
else has entered you for subscription. If you wish discontinue receiving these
updates, simply return this message with "unsubscribe" as the subject to:
webmaster@lauralee.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SATURDAY UPCOMING TOPIC/GUEST LINE-UP
LIVE SHOW HOURS: 7pm-2am PST/10pm-5am EST
SHOW DATE: Saturday October 23, 1999

John Horgan: the Limits of Science
Has science gone about as far as it can? John Horgan thinks so,
in just about every field but that closest to home - the human
mind. That's the area he believes has the most potential for
really revolutionary advancements, but so far, we're just spinning
our wheels. Why? The brain and mind are fantastically complex.
We need new approaches to solving consciousness, free will,
personality, the self. And in some of our advancements, we're
fooling ourselves -- one example: evidence that most of the effect
of Prozac is the placebo effect. John Horgan is the author of
"The End of Science" and "The Undiscovered Mind: How the
Human Brain Defies Replication, Medication, and Explanation"

Bob Bigelow: Will UFO Question Ever Be Solved by Science?
Does science provide all the tools to solve the UFO question?
The National Institute for Discovery Science has a full time staff
applying scientific analysis to UFO cases. Hear about some of
the more promising case files.

Dr. Henry Lai: Cell Phones Safety Alert
A research professor of bioengineering at the University of
Washington, Dr. Lai has researched the effects of radiation since
1980, finding effects from DNA to learning behaviors. Exposure
to the radiofrequency radiation common to cell phones, radar,
TV, AM/FM radios, remote controls of all types (for toy cars
and airplanes as well as for the television) for 45 consecutive
minutes can cause disruption of the neurotransmitters responsible
for memory. Another problem is damage to the DNA. Cells
repair their DNA, but the danger is in putting it back together.
Putting it together wrong can cause mutations, some of which
may turn a cell cancerous. Is the effect of radiofrequency
radiation cumulative over time?  Hear the studies that answer
that question.

Wade Clark Roof: Spirituality and Religion in America Today
If you enjoy this radio show, you're likely pondered the meaning
of life, and have explored spirituality and religion in your search
for answers. Clark Roof offers insights/surveys/statistics into
our nation's collective search in all its diversity. He'll tell us about
new emerging subcultures, and why so many of us nowadays
value personal spirituality over traditional forms of religion, the
impact this trend has, and the shape of religion in the future.
Roof is the author of "Spiritual Marketplace: Baby Boomers
and the Remaking of American Religion" and "A Generation
of Seekers" and a professor of Religion and Society at UCSB.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS FOLLOW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE LAURA LEE SHOW WEBSITE:
http://www.lauralee.com

WRITE TO US AT: lauralee@lauralee.com

REAL AUDIO ARCHIVES:
Now formatted in Windows Media Player.
http://www.lauralee.com/archives.htm

AUDIO CASSETTES:
Should you need an audio tape of same to send to a friend, or to
listen to when you are not at your computer, call 1-800-243-1438.
Tapes are edited of commercial and news breaks, are often on
90-minute cassettes, and only $7 each. More info at:
http://www.lauralee.com/cassette.htm

LIVE WEBCAST:
During live show hours, we webcast audio only at
http://www.lauralee.com/aud_live.htm and visit our chatroom and
find a friendly and informed community of
fellow adventurers at http://www.lauralee.com/chat.htm.

CHATROOM
We have a new chatroom and webcasting at provided by The Cyber-
Station,which uses Windows Media Player. This software is free at:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/mediaplayer/download/default.asp

Meet a lively, fun, and chatty crowd in our chatroom during live show
hours. Reserve your user name, or log in as a guest. Membership is
FREE and does have its privileges. You'll find all the links you need
http://www.lauralee.com/chat.htm

BULLETIN BOARD: "And the Conversation Continues"
Here's where you can post your reaction, research additions, and
comments to segments that inspire or rile you.
We've arranged it by date/guest. Offer your own, and read the
  musings of others. http://www.lauralee.com/bulletin.htm

LIVE WEEKEND RADIO SHOW HOURS:
Saturday  7 PM to Sunday 2 AM Pacific
Saturday  8 PM to Sunday 3 AM Mountain
Saturday  9 PM to Sunday 4 AM Central
Saturday 10 PM to Sunday 5 AM Eastern

WEEKLY BOOK GIVEAWAY:
Books, videos and audio tapes are given away from a random drawing of entries.
To enter, go to:  http://www.lauralee.com/contest.htm

SEE SOME INTERESTING PHOTOS
We've got "must-see" photos of China's pyramids, and Japan's
underwater stone mysteries. View photos at: http://www.lauralee.com/mystery.htm

LAST MINUTE CHANGES OFTEN OCCUR:
The list above of posted guests/topics represent what is scheduled when
this is sent. Last minute and often unavoidable changes can occur. When
a scheduled guest  is unable to join us, we'll include a rescheduled
time/date in the next email message to you. We apologize for any inconvenience.

TO SUBSCRIBE:
If you wish receive these weekly updates, and you are not already on our list
(perhaps someone kindly forwarded this message to you) simply
return this message with "subscribe" as the subject, and we
will add you to our email list.  Or go direct to
http://www.lauralee.com/enews.htm

TO UNSUBSCRIBE:
If you receive this message without subscribing, it means that someone
else has entered you for subscription. If you wish discontinue receiving these
updates, simply return this message with "unsubscribe" as the subject to:
webmaster@lauralee.com

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT
We appreciate it! Please tell your friends and colleagues around the world
about our website, the radio show, and our audio archives to which they can
listen at any time. JUST FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO THOSE
WHO WILL FIND IT OF INTEREST! Many thanks ;-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TELL A FRIEND: Simply forward this message on to your online
friends around the world, and let them know about this show.
Anyone online can listen in on our live webcasts and audio archives.
Thanks!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                           Ice-Age Nanotechnology?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:53:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:53:31 -0400
Subject: Ice-Age Nanotechnology?

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 11:25:15
To: updates@globalserve.net
From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Subject: Ice-Age Nanotechnology?


Source:

http://home.fireplug.net/%7Ershand/streams/science/russcrew2.html

Stig

***

Translation by George Sassoon

Lochbuie, Isle of Mull, PA62 6AA, Scotland

and

2 Campbell Place, Sutton Veny, Wilts BA12 7SA

tels. 01680-814261 and 01985-840205

From: Ancient Skies, German Edition 2/19/98, pp. 5-7
CH-3803 Beatenburg, Switzerland

*

[Figure 1 - Example of micro-artefact found in the Urals
Click on picture for larger image.]

ICE-AGE NANOTECHNOLOGY

By Hartwig Hausdorf
Frank-Caro-Str. 94a, D - 84518, Garching-a.d.Alz, Germany

*

Mr. Hausdorf has a travel company which enables him to travel
extensively, often to places not normally accessible to
foreigners. Recently he was in a remote part of China where
there are a large number of pyramids. His book THE CHINESE
ROSWELL is to be published by New Paradigm Books, Boca Raton, FL
. (Contact John Chambers, jdc@flinet.com)

Abstract

*

The discovery, about a year ago, of possibly-extraterrestrial
nano-artefacts from the upper Pleistocene in the Ural mountains,
led to violent arguments. Are these really remnants of some
unearthly technology, or merely industrial waste from our own
times? The present report, by the Central Scientific Research
Institute for Geology and Prospecting for Precious and
Non-Ferrous Metals (ZNIGRI) in Moscow, which has now been
translated into German, emphasises the possibility of an
extraterrestrial origin.

In my book WENN GOETTER GOTT SPIELEN (When Gods play God) [1] as
also in Ancient Skies [2], I reported an unbelievable find of
numerous metallic artefacts in Russia. I was told from several
quarters that such objects simply couldn't exist, and that I had
been carried away by my imagination. But now, new visual
material, and a translation of a laboratory report from Moscow
by a sworn translator, support my conclusion that we are here
dealing with possible technical artefacts of extraterrestrial
origin.

Let's recapitulate: since 1991, more and more mostly
spiral-shaped objects have been found, on the banks of the
rivers Narada, Kozim, and Balbanyu in the eastern Ural
mountains. They are composed principally of tungsten,
molybdenum, and copper [1, 2]. It was extremely fortunate that
these discoveries were made in the course of official
exploration. The expeditions were mounted with a view to
exploiting precious and non-ferrous metals in this regions, and
geological and mineralogical analyses were carried out. The work
was under the auspices of the Central Scientific Research
Institute for Geology and Prospecting for Precious and
Non-Ferrous Metals (ZNIGRI) in Moscow, which comes under the
Committee of the Russian Federation for Geology and Exploitation
of Mineral Resources.

As I was told by Dr. Valerii Ouvarov (St. Petersburg), further
analyses of the mysterious spiralswere carried out by the
out-stations of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St.
Petersburg and in Syktyvar (former capital of the Komi ASSR),
and also at an independent institute in Helsinki.

I have before me the Expertise No. 18/485 of 29th November 1996,
by the aforementioned Institute (ZNIGRI) [3], the original
Russian text of which I reproduced in my book WENN GOETTER GOTT
SPIELEN. Due to the short time before the book went to press, a
correct and complete translation was not possible. This was only
possible after a sworn translator had been brought in [4].

The author of the Expertise is Scientific Assistant Mme. Dr. E.
W. Matveyeva, of the Section for Geology, Prospecting
Techniques, and Economics of Precious Metal Alluvial Deposits.
She reports first on the development of the discovery site, then
the testing procedures used for the analysis of the
thread-shaped tungsten spirals in the alluvial deposits of the
Balbanyu river. The exact location of the site is given by
ZNIGRI as follows: it is a development in the alluvial deposits
of the third flood-terrace on the (looking downstream) left bank
of the river Balbanyu, oriented along borehole line no. 106.
Loose sediments are found in this development, which are
represented as follows, working upwards from the oldest to the
youngest deposits:


1 A structured weathering-crust (alternating chalk and
carbon-containing slate with grey-blue and brown-yellow banding:
visible thickness 0.5 - 1.0 metres.)

2. Included lenticles (Einschlusslinsen) of 0 to 0.2 metres of
weakly-sorted sand, gravel, clay, and fine detrital material,
which can be designated as erosion products of stratum 1.
described above.

3. Deposits of grey gravel and detrital material of various
grain sizes with well washed-out sands and a visible thickness
of 1 to 1.7 metres, which could be investigated for possible
gold content.

4 Gravel-containing sand and clay deposits, grey-coloured, with
a visible thickness of 2.0 metres. In the upper region of this
sediment can be seen evidence of disturbance by grading work.


As regards the age of the strata which contain the tungsten and
molybdenum artefacts, Dr Matveyeva states as follows: The layer
which contains the spiral-shaped objects is characterised as
gravel and detritus deposits of No. 3 stratum, which in our
view, show inner-sedimentary erosion of polygenetic accumulative
layers (i.e. layers composed of material of various origins).
 From their orientation these layers can be dated to 100,000
years and correspond to the lying parts (i.e. the lower regions)
of the Mikulinsk horizon of the upper Pleistocene.[3]

In the geological time-scale, the Pleistocene is that part of
the Quaternary, the latest geological epoch, which began about 2
million years ago and ended around 10,000 years ago. After that
followed the Holocene, in which we are at the moment.

The report continues by describing the tests carried out, which
include the use of an electrom microscope type JSM T-330 made by
the Japanese firm Jeol. This also yielded data of various
spectroscopic analyses [5].

[Figure 2 - Micro-artefact found in the Urals Click on picture
for larger image.]

Particular attention should be paid to the final conclusion
reached by the Moscow institute. Report No. 18/485 states that
the age of the deposits and the results of the tests give a very
low probability to the assumption that the origin of these
unusual, thread-shaped tungsten crystals is of a technogenic
cosmic nature, due to the rocket take-off route from the
Plesetsk space-station over the polar part of the Ural region.

In plain language: these objects cannot have originated from
earlier test rockets or similar fired from Plesetsk. The key
word of the report comes finally to the point: The data obtained
allow the possibility of an extra-terrestrial technogenic
origin.[3]

In view of these conclusions, critics will find it very
difficult to accuse me of pseudo-documentationor embarrassing
behaviour. On the contrary: I will try to obtain further
investigation reports from the independent Finnish research
institute, on which greater value might be placed.

My hypothesis is that these artefacts are so-called
nano-technology, which I can sustain with reference to a recent
publication [6]. Researchers all over the world are working on
miniature pistons, gear wheels, switches, and other control
elements, to be used in nano-robots. These workers will soon be
in a position to achieve results which hitherto have been the
province of science fiction.

Surely the last word has not yet been said about the sensational
finds in the Ural mountains!

*

Literature and remarks

1. Hausdorf H. Wenn Goetter Gott spielen Muenchen 1997
2. Hausdorf H. Sensationeller Fund in Russland Ancient Skies, 2/1997
3. Matveyeva, E.W. Conclusions on the finds of threrad-shaped tungsten
spirals in the alluvial deposits of the Balbanyu river. ZNIGRI Analysis
18/485 of 29 Nov. 1996
4. In this connection I must thank the Aldea Translation Bureau in Cologne
for good co-operation and much help in the translation from the Russian.
5. I would be glad to send interested readers a copy of the complete ZNIGRI
report for the cost and postage, also representative micro-photographs.
6. Nanotechnologie Faktor X, 5/1997







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:16:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:55:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 12:23:32 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Get Real

 >My children are aged 2 6 and 7 (all girls). They are interested
 >in Barbie, the Disney channel and Zelda (N64) and are not
 >interested in space aliens. Their description of these creatures
 >as 'monsters' is as good as any since none of us know what they
 >are, assuming that they exist at all.

My daughters were 9 and 10 when they saw the images in question
and called them "aliens".  They, too, were into Barbie and
Disney.  They are still into Disney although the Barbie's are
now stored in the attic because they are teenagers.  They watch
the Disney channel almost every day after school and we listen
to the Disney radio station on the way to school, after school
and any time we are listening to the radio.  By the way, it is
the Disney channel that has the program "So Weird" and many
movies with alien-related themes.  And on the Disney radio
channel the other day I heard them doing a little contest where
kids call in to an alleged telephone located near Area 51 and if
an alien answers, they win (complete with the X-Files theme
song).  If you don't want your daughters exposed to alien themes
and images, better watch out for Disney too.

If you are interested to see what your kids are being exposed to
these days, you can do this little experiment - they do it in
the schools.  Talk a little about what your kids think about the
possibility of life on other planets then ask them to draw a
picture of what they think someone from another planet would
look like.  Bet ya 9 outta 10 at least one will draw a critter
with a big head and large, almond-shaped eyes.  Don't worry,
doesn't mean they've been abducted - only living in the real
world with all the commercialism that surrounds us.

 >So the creature doesn't show up in scanned images and I have to
 >be looking at the original photo in order to see anything, is
 >this what you're saying?

That's what I would do before drawing conclusions.

 >>I will gladly do so via private E-mail for anyone if you (and
 >>any other recipients) promise not to publish the information
 >>publicly. I do not wish to point out anyone in public because it
 >>is only my opinions based on personal experiences. I would love
 >>for someone to ask these researchers why they never contacted me
 >>or bothered to ask even a few questions. Thank you for
 >>volunteering, Dave!

 >My pleasure, you know my address. I promise not to publish the
 >information.

Can you indicate what you plan to say to these
"researchers"/"investigators" about the article in question?
Will you simply ask them why they didn't review the material or
will you be adding your assessment as well?

 >Thank you for the kind offer Amy but it's the kind of thing that
 >my family and I have managed to get over on our own.

Glad to hear it no longer bothers you.  I was just a little
worried since it still seemed to be on your mind as expressed in
your post. ;>

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                          Filer's Files #42 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 14:52:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 16:44:12 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #42 -- 1999

Filer's Files #42 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
October 22, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.

This weeks files are sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com.

Congratulations to the National Reporting Center and Director
Peter Davenport on their 25th Anniversary.  This organization
and especially Peter has done a great job in recording and
reporting sightings.  There were 317 UFO sightings recorded
during September.  Thank you Peter for your excellent work and
long hard hours operating the phones. Their Web site is at:
http://www.ufocenter.com.


IMAX THEATERS SHOWING NASA FILM WITH UFOs

CAPE KENNEDY, WASHINGTON DC � The huge IMAX movie theaters are
showing a film called "Mission to Mir." One scene shows the US
Space Shuttle near the Russian Mir space station with three disc
shaped UFOs approaching Mir.  Calls to NASA by MUFON's
distinguished Ernest Jahn have failed to confirm the UFOs. The
NASA footage shows two unknown objects fly slowly past the Mir
and the third UFO stops and appears to observe the space
station.  The movie features Astronaut Sharon Lucid aboard the
Mir. Those who have seen the film insist these are not ice
crystals but some unknown space ships. Susan Creden the Founder
and Director of the Florida UFO Research & Study Group at Vero
Beach, FL is sending me a copy of the film for review.  This
film was obtained by a free lance researcher and may also be the
same one show at the Leeds UFO Conference in England.  Barry
Taylor from Australia also wrote to tell me this is a wonderful
film and it's not ice crystals but UFOs.


SOUTH CAROLINA DISK

GOOSE CREEK � On October 7, 1999, a school teacher was taking
her dog for a walk and noticed a row of blue-white lights up in
the sky.  She thought it might be a plane until she realized it
was not moving.  It stayed in one spot in the sky for about ten
minutes.  The sun was just coming up at 6:45 AM.  The UFO was
shaped like a hamburger with a row of circle lights across the
middle.  There were sirens and lights flashing, so I thought the
police knew about it and were looking at the same thing.  I got
my daughter so she could see it too and she called the family
next door.  We all watched it ascend straight up without any
noise and change to a diamond shape. The next morning I looked
up in the same spot and there it was again, but higher.  It
started coming straight down and wobbling side to side.  I
called the police to report it and when the officer arrived it
had moved back up higher into the sky. He said, it looked like a
star to him.  It is very frustrating to not have people believe
you.  I'm just glad the neighbors saw it too.  Thanks to NUFORC
and Peter Davenport


UFOs ARE BACK IN TENNESSEE

DANDRIDGE -- Following a five-day hiatus, UFOs returned to the
small town of 1,540, offering two nighttime viewing experiences.
According to eyewitness Patricia G., the UFOs returned at 2:00
AM on Wednesday, October 20, 1999.  She reported, "The UFO was
in the northwest sky.  He was a little lower than usual and, as
I noticed the pulsating and flashing of the brilliant colors, he
sank lower, and the trees blocked my view.  This was no
airplane.  It was the same light in the sky we have been
watching all year."  Several UFOs turned up in Dandridge again
on October 16, 1999. Patricia added, "Tonight from 8:30 to 9:00
PM, there were five UFOs that I could see. They were in their
usual position in the northwest sky.  Four of them were
scattered, and the one to the northeast was very, very bright.
There was one in the southwest sky of the same intensity.  I
can't understand for the life of me why others are not reporting
these things."  Dandridge is located 23 miles east of Knoxville,
Tennessee.  (E-mail Interview) Thanks to UFO Roundup Volume 4,
#26, 10/21/99 Editor: Joseph Trainor.


FLORIDA FLYING TRIANGLES

TAMPA � I phoned MUFON State Section Director Lorraine Gerber to
determine the status investigation of the September 7, 1999, UFO
sighting.  Fox Channel 13 showed a video of a UFO on the 10:00
Nightly News.  The two anchors gave a fair and honest appraisal
of the UFO.  Lorraine had some military personnel examine the
film and they felt it showed a triangular shaped craft banking
in a turn.  The film can be viewed at www.filersfiles.com

CASEY KEY -- On October 10, 1999, A large triangular shaped
craft flew from horizon to horizon as observed from the stern
deck of a motor vessel at 10:30 PM.  The witness is a Vietnam
vet, pilot and captain of motor vessel.  When sitting on the
stern deck of my motor vessel I observed a black triangle craft
pass over and through my field of vision.  Five bright white
lights were visible on each arm aspect on the craft the size and
shape of the craft was evident as it continued to cover clouds
and star fields.  No noise was heard.  The sighting lasted 30-60
seconds.  Thanks to NUFORC and Peter Davenport.


NEW JERSEY ABDUCTEE

CLIFTON � Henri a possible abductee sent this message concerning
his missing time on October 20, 1999. Henri states, "Something
happened last night." I left with sensations on my back and neck
as if something was lifting me. I went out the back way of my
apartment in the middle of last night, different from the
direction I was taken from last time. That is all I remember."
Sometimes I see a great deal more including craft.  At other
times hardly anything.


OHIO FLYING TRIANGLE

ELYRIA � On October 1, 1999, a triangle shaped object with 12
lights was observed moving very slowly at low altitude at 4:40
AM.  The object had three lights right at the very tip, shaped
like a "V." There were three more lights on each side of the
"V." None of the lights blinked.  The two wing's tip lights
would change color. The witness stated, "The blueish-gray object
was moving very slowly, with a low rumbling sound and stopped
over our house." It was the size of a football field but it
blended with the sky.  The stars were so bright tonight, when it
passed over you couldn't see the stars.  It paused over our
house, and then kept moving very slowly southwest.  Thanks to
Peter Davenport NUFORC.


ARKANSAS UFO INVESTIGATION REVEALS A PRANK

After further investigation the September 3, 1999, encounter by
Mike and Henry appears to be false.  Henry claims he saw the
head of a grayish white entity 4 to 5 feet tall outside.  They
went outside and both saw four flashing colored lights in the
sky on a hovering triangle shaped craft.  Investigator JoAnne
Scarpellini has learned from Billy Dee of UFOSSI that Mike's
father who was very reluctant to talk and didn't say much more
than Mike is a pathological liar.  Among the things I found were
Mike had told UFOSSI that he is 34 years old and veteran of
military service.  He is in fact 16 years old, confirmed by the
man with whom he lives.  Henry the other witness is 17 years old
and is very easily influenced and led.  He will instantly agree
with anyone about anything.  It appears this case is most likely
a prank by the two teen agers.  Thanks to JoAnne Scarpellini and
Billy Dee UFOSSI@ufossi.org alucard90@webtv.net. Editor's Note:
The initial reports carried in these files are followed up by
in-depth investigations whenever possible.  Occasionally we turn
up hoaxes.  In most cases these pranks are perpetuated by teen
agers.  I usually avoid carrying teenage reports for that
reason.  There is an alarming tendency for our teenagers to lie.


COLORADO

LOVELAND -- Morgan Clements Director, of the World Wide UFO
Reporting Center writes, "We are working on a unique possible
abduction case with an experiencer who has been branded with a
special undeniable mark on her thigh."  On September 21, 1999,
the witness reported very strange dreams that were a little too
real to be dreams.  The witness states, "Almost every night I
get a very strange feeling that I am going to be abducted, but
have not ever been before to my knowledge."  In my dream I am in
a very dark place that looks like the field about one half a
mile from my house.  I see a landed alien ship.  I blink my eyes
and the next thing I know I am in a silver ship.  An extremely
bright light was pouring from it as if it were liquid-light.
Inside there was a bunch of TV monitors that display images of
what seemed to be various sections of the interior of the ship.
The creepiest thing I saw was an alien with large oval shaped
black eyes wearing a shiny blue suit.  He seemed to paralyze me.
He was lying on the floor and he didn't have eyelids so I
couldn't tell if he was knocked out or just resting.  I
continued exploring the ship and saw a TV monitor that showed
the alien on the floor had disappeared.  I saw some movement
through the wall of the ship and realized that it was that same
being! After that everything is a freaked out blur. In the
morning and I felt terrible and found two new scratches on my
lip. Thanks to M. Clements  uforeports@aol.com

Ron Hannivig writes, 'The above cited dateline of Loveland,
immediately rang a bell.' I passed through this region back in
August.  Loveland appears to be located within Larimer County,
Colorado -- the specific region of a very recent, rather bizarre
missing person case that got a lot of national attention.  The
case did not make much sense to begin with.  A three-year-old
boy somehow got lost in the Larimer County wilderness, and from
the last report I heard, the body was never recovered.  One
report actually claimed this lost three year old had asked
hikers, if there were any bears or other wild animals about?
This is indeed odd, since there are not too many boys,
especially of that age, wandering alone in the woods.
Additionally, the report's provided timeline (Sept. 21, 1999) is
extremely interesting, relative to this boy's disappearance.
There were more than enough searchers hot on the trail of this
missing boy to have quickly found him, his body ... or some
parts of his remains -- given the short distance any
three-year-old could wander in that sort of rough terrain.
Again, from what I currently understand: This remains a missing
person case, and we seem to be dealing well within a reasonable
window in time (of 10 days, perhaps). Thanks to Ron Hannivig
Simpson, PA.  Editor's Note: I noticed that when there is a
flurry of UFO reports there are often missing persons as well.


NEW MEXICO POLICE CHASE UFOs

GALLUP � Reporter Jim Maniaci reports, | Not one, but two Navajo
police officers chased an unidentified flying object seen in the
night sky over northern McKinley County last week.  According to
Capt. Daniel K. Thomas, acting chief of police of the Navajo
Department of Law Enforcement, Sgt. Tommy Rogers tried to reach
the unusual light. But each time either he or Officer El Reno
Henio approached it, the mysterious object would take off and
run away from them.  Thomas, who is commander of the NDLE's
Crownpoint Police District, said his men described the UFO as a
circular disc that projected a cone of light to the ground, with
the light being exceptionally bright at the bottom of the cone,
where it met the ground.  He said reports describing the
sighting were received from residents of Bicenti Chapter, Dalton
Pass and Standing Rock, which are north and west of Crownpoint
and east and north of Gallup.  The first report Monday, October
4, from the NDLE came from Henio, who was headed toward Tohatchi
when he first spotted the light around 8:00 PM.  On Tuesday,
Navajo police officers added to the original report, noting that
Rogers had also seen the light.  Numerous other calls were
received by dispatchers at Crownpoint, and the lights also were
seen in the Window Rock area.   After two hours, the UFO moved
off and disappeared. http://www.navajos.com/

"Missile Intercept Apparently Mistaken as UFO" Jennifer Canaff
of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization has told the
"Gallup Independent" that a missile launched from Vandenberg Air
Force Base on the California coast coincided with the time a UFO
sighting was reported by Navajo tribal officials and others, at
8:00 PM October 2. It was a historic launch from Vandenberg --
the first successful intercept of a ballistic missile warhead,
Canaff said. A Minuteman-2 missile was the target.  And before
its warhead reentered Earth's atmosphere, an interceptor rocket
destroyed the Minuteman over the Pacific Ocean.


CURIOUS MOON FLASHES AND CLOUDS

Distinguished researcher Joseph Stefula who is now healing well
from surgery sends this report: A new look at observations by
the American satellite Clementine show that a small area on the
Moon's surface darkened and reddened in April 1994. Why this
happened remains a mystery.  For hundreds of years, people have
reported seeing flashes, short-lived clouds and other brief
changes on the Moon's surface. But astronomers have never been
able to confirm the sightings. "The events were observed on many
occasions, but most astronomers don't believe in them," says
Bonnie Buratti of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena,
California.  On 23 April 1994, around a hundred amateur
astronomers reported seeing a darkening of the Moon, lasting 40
minutes, near the edge of the bright lunar crater Aristarchus.
At the same time, the US Department of Defense's Clementine
satellite was mapping the lunar surface.  Intrigued by the
amateur reports, Buratti's team has taken a close look at the
Clementine data to see if the satellite also recorded the event.
Sure enough, they found that the crater looked redder after the
amateur reports. Thanks to Joe Stefula, by Charles Seife From
New Scientist, 10/23/99


DAN SMITH GIVES HIS VIEWS ON THE UFO PHENOMENON

Celebrated researcher Dan Smith writes, 'I am hearing a bunch of
hardware people talking to each other.'  This phenomenon is not
about hardware.  It is about the intercourse between cosmic and
human intelligence.  The appropriate segments of the
intelligence community *are* very concerned with ufologists, not
for their observations of 'hardware,' but as canaries breathing
the cosmic methane.  When the ufologists fall off their
obsession with hardware, it is time to clear the decks.  The
Powers-that-Know do what they can to perpetuate your adolescent
infatuations with the 'mechanical' end of this phenomenon.  At
the same time they are willing to play footsie with those of us
working the 'business' end of it, that is to say the
psychological cutting edge of this phenomenon.  So be paranoid.
Your grip on the perch is gradually being loosened.  When you
fall off, it will not be gradual. : "No one has gotten a handle
on the phenomenon, and until someone does, the policy people see
very little to be gained by stirring the pot.  The ball remains
in the court of the ET's.  It is still their show.  What we know
mainly is that any unilateral action on our part, particularly
of a military sort, has been shown to be counterproductive."
Thanks to Dan Smith
http://www.clark.net/pub/dansmith/contents.html


GEORGIA UFO IN FORMER USSR

TBILISI -- On October 7, 1999, a UFO was sighted over the
capitol of Georgia. The UFO was videotaped and photographed.
The UFOs were first sighed by police on patrol who notified the
local newspaper.  The local newspaper staff went out to
investigate and at first found nothing, Then they noticed
deep-leaden-fire coloring the northern sky. To the east in the
blue sky a strange object with a huge human face was observed
with eyes and nose, that were like a fire color.  All this was
being videorecorded and suddenly the camcorder stopped working.
The UFO was a bent disc shaped form.  When the camera zoom was
used a disc and small blue objects were visible.  On a second
photo the objects-modules" are flying out on another course.
Thanks to: (Kutovoy, Anatoly) Zaza Edilashvili <lion@mmc.net.ge
GUFOA NEWS s uvazenuem Zaza Edilashvili.


CANADA MANY NEW  CROP CIRCLES APPEAR

EDMONTON, ALBERTA -- In a phone call with eminent scientist
Nancy Talbot I learned of a new series of spectacular crop
circles found in barley fields near Edmonton. One had seven
large circles and the lay of the radial extends out from the
center of the circle towards the edges.  Along the outer edge
the lay of the barley is counter clockwise on the ground with
the other barley laid on top. Seventy to eighty percent of the
ranchers Nancy talks to voluntarily provide sighting information
on strange lights in the sky.  In addition, their tractor
batteries fail, and their cattle behave abnormally during the
time when the crop circles are being formed.

MIDALE � On October 8, 1999, pilot John Erickson found a new
formation of crop circles two miles south of Midale,
Saskatchewan. Three separate farms had formations that looked
like Indian medicine wheels.  This is the sixth formation of
crop circles found in Midale this year. A Geiger counter placed
in the field stopped working during the investigation, due to
the drainage of the battery.  A strong magnetic field will drain
batteries. The formation was found in a wheat field and
consisted of three circles close together in a straight line
about 20 feet apart.  The largest circle is approximately 60
feet in diameter, the second about 40 feet, and the third about
20 feet."

"The smallest circle is a swirled lay that ends in a straight
'radial' type lay out to the edge of the circle."  The other
circles have the usual swirled lay pattern." In another field in
Texas, videocameras have failed when aimed toward the crop
circle.  While the camera is operating and turned away from the
crop circle the video picture will clear and the camera will
work normally.  This phenomena has also occurred when aircraft
fly over the crop circles. In one case, developed photographic
film appears to show something that appears like a craft with
port holes, but nothing is visible to the eye at the time the
photos were taken. Thanks to Nancy Talbot BLT Research.


US WANTS RUSSIAN HELP IN TRACKING UFOs AND MISSILES

The United States has proposed helping Russia complete their
huge missile tracking radar site in Irkutsk, Siberia.  The US
government claims that it is worried that Iran or North Korea
may attempt to launch missiles against Russia or the US.
Cooperation could be beneficial to both countries.  The Russian
radar is oriented eastward and covers the area from the North
Pole, the Pacific and south to Korea.  The Clinton
Administration is trying to keep Russia as an ally in
preparations for shooting down missiles that could be launched
from the middle east or North Korea.  This technology would also
be useful in tracking and shooting at UFOs.  The US government
has also proposed that the Russians and the US share satellite
tracking data on the trajectory of missile launches.  The
government announced that both Russia and the US have a common
interest in guarding against attacks from rogue states.  The
Russians and the US have shared some data in the past.  The US
is now preparing to build a defensive system with 100 missile
interceptors based in Alaska and another 100 in the US.  Changes
are needed in the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to allow this
system.  The government claims it is willing to go quite far in
providing the Russian's with advanced technical data in exchange
for changes in the treaty.  The Soviets were working on an
advanced plasma based antimissile system that seemed very
promising prior to their forming a new government.  The key
question is this alliance based on the threat of nations of
Earth or from other powers?

When President Reagan first proposed his SDI program he stated
in an address to students at Fallston High School on December 4,
1985. In his private discussions with Soviet leader Mikhail
Gorbachev at last months Geneva summit, he noted that 'We're all
God's children.' "I couldn't help but say to him just think how
easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held
if suddenly if there was a threat to this world from some other
species from another planet outside in the universe, Reagan said
the president went on to say that such an event would force
himself and Gorbachev to forget all the little local differences
that we have between our countries and they would find out that
we really are all human beings here on this earth together.
Well, I don't suppose we can wait for some alien race to come
down and threaten us, Reagan added.  But I think that between us
we can bring about that realization.

Since 1975, the USA and USSR have a Bilateral Agreement to
Reduce the Risk of Nuclear War between the two nations.  Article
3 states, "The parties undertake to notify each other
immediately in the event of detection missile warning systems of
unidentified objects or in the event of signs of interference
with these systems or with related communications facilities.
if such occurrences could create a risk of outbreak of nuclear
war between the two countries."

UNDERGROUND VAULTS AT WRIGHT PATTERSON-Update -- See URL below
for reports and drawings used to support the "Underground Vault"
theory at Wright-Patterson AFB: This web site has interesting
engineering plans of the various buildings on base. There are
reports and drawings that are supportive data that have recently
been added.  Please see,
http://home.sprintmail.com/~rigoletto/Sanctuary_Of_The_Birds.htm

THE GREAT UFO/ET AUTUMN FESTIVAL will be held at the Days Inn,
Bordentown, NJ by Pat Marcattilio on October 30 and 31.
Speakers include Antonio Huneeus, Steven Basset, Peter Robins,
Wendelle Stevens, myself and many others.  Call (609) 631-8955
for reservations.

RECOGNIZING ABDUCTION EXPERIENCES PROGRAM October 30th in
Sedona, Arizona featuring Derrel Sims with Robert Dean and Dr.
Ruth Mckinley-Hover Conference begins at 10 AM and ends at 10 PM
Lunch is included. Learn the signs and symptoms of having been
abducted. Explore both human and alien motives behind the
experience. Develop healing and Spiritual techniques for coping
and expanding the human potential. By Derrel Sims, see Dr. Chet
Snow's website at: http://people.delphi.com/sedonaconf


BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT --

All real estate agents are not the same?  Some real estate
agents or sales representatives are part timers and
inexperienced.  Others are experts with an excellent experience
and capabilities.  When you are selling or buying your home, you
need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working
for you before you make any important financial decisions on one
your biggest investments!  Remember, the majority of people do
not know the right questions to ask, and what pit falls can
cause major problems.  Picking the right real estate agent can
be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong one can be a
big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands!
Find out, "What you need to understand before hiring any real
estate agent!" These are the questions that many agents do not
want you to ask.  Learn how you can obtain the best real estate
agent for your needs.  To get a free copy of this report, just
call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com.


US GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO
Alert at Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign
Technology Division at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now
available for distribution to the public.  Lunar Astronaut Dr.
Edgar Mitchell was at Edwards the night the UFO chase occurred.
The 6th person to walk on the moon said, "The night it happened
I investigated it myself and this was a real event."  Sam
Sherman's audio documentary tape called THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE
BASE ENCOUNTER on the night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual
voice recordings provided by the Air Force.  During this event
12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air space and came down
low over the runways at Edwards AFB.  Tower operator Sgt. Chuck
Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command.  Sgt.
Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment
where he verifies the event as it is heard on the archival
recordings.  The UFOs are described and a decision is made to
launch F-106 fighter interceptors.  You are there for an
important part of UFO history.  Hear it for yourself, it's the
best UFO tape ever made.  Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00
for shipping -- total $16.95 --(for overseas orders-out of US -
add $6.00 shipping cost -- total -- $20.95) you can send either
a personal check or money order to: Independent International
Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New Jersey 08857.

MUFON JOURNAL For more detailed investigative reports subscribe
by contacting Mufon@aol.com.  Filer's Files Copyright 1999 by
George A. Filer, all rights reserved.  Readers may post items
from the Files on their Websites provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue
that the item appeared.  Send your letters to me at
Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to keep your name confidential
please so state.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                      JJG Passes - More Than Swamp Gas

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 13:44:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:59:49 -0400
Subject: JJG Passes - More Than Swamp Gas


The world has lost a major mojo, a man who will be hissed a man
who was once described as, "That jerk!"   In fact, he was often
referred to that way.

J. Jaime Gesundt passed away (rumor has it) just moments ago,
from an anurism of the liver.  He went quickly.  As life faded
from his jaded but spade ... uh, eyes, he uttered, "I didn't
wanaa tell no body, but I have the truth.  I shall take it wit
me, cause I don't want no body callin me a jerk, eh?"

His last words were, "Tell them, tell them, (gasp), tell them
Sal Mineo was a Jew. And tell them, tell them, tell them that
UFO's are real, and tell them that, that, (gasp) abductions are
real, and they are here.  Tell them "they" are among us.

And tell them I lied about all them Ph.D.'s.  I only got five.

"Last, but not least, tell all them mothers what said they had
the truth to go (deleted) themselves into oblivion and die of
thirst, like that Judas Priest guy."  (It was Frankie Lee).

J. Jaime will be burried in a "T-shaped" coffin later this
afternoon.  He wanted it that way.  Along side J. Jaime, will be
a folded and freshly powdered Julio doll.  It was his last wish.

According to his last will and testament, everything he owns
would have gone to Lehmburg's Ford fund, but after what the poet
lauriate said about J's secret friend, Mr. Ramalamading Dong,
this will not happen.  You see, they were more than friends.

Requiacet in pacem, dude.  Dr. J. Morty Mortellaro will deliver
the eulogy later, after he stops laughing.

Jim Mortellaro






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 22

                  An Invitation To Messrs Black & Maccabee

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:21:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:21:23 -0400
Subject: An Invitation To Messrs Black & Maccabee





From: 'Strange Days Indeed' <updates@globalserve.net>


It has been suggested that perhaps Bruce Maccabee & Jerry Black
might care to debate their differing takes on 'The Gulf Breeze
Photos' via the radio program that Jonn Kares and I host -
'Strange Days... Indeed'.

On All-Hallows Eve, Sunday October 31st, we shall be celebrating
the programs 1st Anniversary and would like to invite both Bruce
and Jerry to join us, via the phone, that evening.

We look forward to receiving responses from both Bruce and Jerry.


Errol Bruce-Knapp







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:08:33 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Sean Jones wrote:

 >Good Afternoon Andy

 >><snip>

 >Andy, yes _we_ have learned a heck of a lot _BUT_ have _we_ got an
 >answer that satisfies all? No! Why's that? Because some UFO's have
 >not, or can not be explained to anyone. But when I was speaking about
 >solving the riddle that is ufology, I was talking generally Andy, not
 >individual cases.


Hi,

I think the point is that all UFO cases are potentially
explicable. There is an answer to everything in the universe. We
just have not found   all these answers yet. That answer might
be a simple thing or an exotic solution but all UFOs will in the
end be IFOs by the process of identifying them.

Its also highly unlikely that any UFO solution will please
everyone for two key reasons.

1: UFOs are not a single phenomenon. There are multiple and
different UFO phenomena with a range of explanations.

2: Most people accept this but believe 'some' UFOs are -
substitute whatever your own pet theory is. There are many pet
theories and most (ETH, Time Travellers, All UFOs are IFOs) are
quite unprovable. It can only ever be a value judgement and
these can never please everyone.

What Andy is saying - and I agree with him - is that all UFOs
have the potential to be mundane IFOs - with none any exotic
phenomenon at all. You cannot, as you quote from  Sherlock
Holmes, eliminate all the possibles and thus leave an impossible
(i.e. aliens or whatever). The reason is that new types of IFO are
always feasible and may simply never have been thought of before
now. When they are thought of they can suddenly solve a
potentially baffling case. This is the nature of the
investigation process in ufology.

Our book 'The UFOs that Never were' makes this apparent. But its
easy to see by, for instance, the Williamette Pass case. Here
you can eliminate all the obvious possibilities. Its not a
plane, balloon, meteor, etc. So does that mean by your argument
it must be some exotic form of UFO? Many ufologists argued so
for years. I felt it did. But clearly it does not. The case
remained a UFO for 30 years until Irwin Weider solved it. He
solved it as an IFO nobody in the world had dreamed of as a way
to explain a UFO case (a road sign).

This conclusively shows that the Sherlock Holmes quote does not
work in UFO terms and that potentially any UFO case can become
an IFO.

You may feel some cases never will have mundane causes. I
actually agree with you. But its an opinion that we cannot prove
and the position Andy adopts (that ultimately all cases will
fall in down to earth terms) is perfectly defensible and at
least as plausible as the ETH, Time Travellers or any exotic
theory. This is not, as you seem to suggest, scepticism or
debunking. In fact its just another theory of UFO origin vying
like all the others for evidence to back it up.

Best wishes,


Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

               Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:18:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:11:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex


 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 13:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex

 >Hello Joachim,

 >You'd better watch your language -- you're beginning to sound
 >like one of those contactees or abductees! :-)  (Although if
 >it's in the upper stratosphere that the O3 content is
 >increasing, that's good, not bad.) Here in the U.S., in our
 >Congress, we rarely ever hear the word "planet" used. To think
 >of our planet the way you suggest would detract from
 >nationalism.

 >Jim Deardorff

 >From: Bob Kathman <BKathman@microprose.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Crop Circles Become More Frequent, Complex
 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:44:47 -0400

[snip]

 >In the case of mutilations I'd wonder if they aren't a
 >form of terrorism...

Dear Jim, Dear Bob,

I put these two things together and hope that Errol will
tolerate this. :-)

Thank you for your patience with my English/American, some of
the mistakes are due to typing errors.

My intention was  to sound like someone who deeply is
concerned about the state of our planet.

This is very old German tradition...  :-)

I know that the people who lived in your home country before
the Europeans conquered did the same.

 >From my point of historical view - here in Germany, I always
thought, when I heard about these mutilations:

despite from criminals and sects and so on, what would
impress a normal American farmer and with this the whole
American pubplic more then violating something they identify
themselves with - the cattle?

So to raise negative attitudes against aliens - wouldn't
it be the best to take the most sensitive part of a nation -
its historic links and to violate them?

I am a surgeon myself since 22 years and I am working since
many years with electric knifes, I know how quick and perfect
(clean) they go. Train a team, and within some time, they
will produce mutilated, bloodless cattle or whatever you want.

I am open to every mundane explanation to the cattle
mutilation's secenario because  I think this is their
(= those we cannot control though we think we live in
a democracy)worst card they were forced to play because they
have lost the game:

- to prevent us from getting knowledge that we are not alone
here - since a long time.

And that is exactly what this non-human Intelligence in England
had shown us with their (at that time) genuine circles:

Look (up) and (start to)Think!

Best whishes

Joachim Koch

Berlin, Germany









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                          UFOcity.com Report 10/99

From: Peter Robbins <ufolist@mail.teamcpm.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:17:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:21:08 -0400
Subject: UFOcity.com Report 10/99


The UFO city.com Report
"The Truth Matters"
October 1999

  "We seek a free flow of information... we are not afraid to
  entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign
  ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values.  For a
  nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and
  falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its
  people."

        John F. Kennedy


UFO's and Intolerance, Part II

Last month's editorial on televangelist Pat Robertson's alleged
statement that people who believe in the existence of aliens
from space and UFOs should be put to death by stoning, drew
numerous comments and responses, but none from Mr. Robertson,
who was forwarded a copy of the editorial.  We have since sent
for a full transcript of the July 8, 1997 broadcast of "The 700
Show" during which the alleged remark was made and will
carefully review the text upon its receipt here.  In any case it
will be the subject of a follow-up letter to Mr. Robertson which
will be reproduced in this newsletter.

In the meantime, I have been making an effort to better
understand the beliefs which might generate such a shocking
statement.  They go something like this: New Age leaders are the
willing or unwilling henchmen of Satan. They understand that
belief in the Anti-Christ will be easier to foist on the public
if the public has been conditioned to believe in the existence
of aliens - who are actually demons, the minions of Satan,
appearing as predicted in the Bible at the present, or
"Endtime."

After these 'extraterrestrials' and their UFOs are accepted as a
genuine, all religions (excluding Biblical, or Fundamental
Christianity) will accept a new system of worship - a spiritual
paradigm which includes aliens from other planets.  The Vatican
will then accept these 'space brothers' as fellow creatures of
God and establish a new religion - the religion of the Beast.

The alien impostures will then convince most Christians that
they have no need for a personal savior, which is about as
un-Christian as any behavior can be.  The ultimate 'logic' here
is that even if the aliens (even if there are real ones) are not
'employed by Satan himself, they are laboring in his service and
must therefore be his agents, the fallen angels.

I for one do not believe in the above scenario, but it does
sober me to remember that millions of people do.  Food for
thought; more next month..

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

NASA Says Mars Orbiter Loss the Result of Metric Mix-Up; Others
Say, Yeah, Right

If we are to take NASA at their word, an elementary math mix-up
by world-class scientists who should have known better was the
cause of the September 30 loss of the $125 million Mars Climate
Orbiter.  The alleged error caused the craft to fly too close to
the planet's surface (only 35 miles up!) resulting in it's
disintegration in the Martian atmosphere

How could such a rudimentary error have occurred?   Well, the
Orbiter team at Pasadena's Jet Propulsion Laboratory was using
metric units and the production team at Colorado's Lockheed
Martin facility (where the Orbiter was built) were using English
measuring units - and NOBODY noticed the discrepancy.

"People sometimes make errors.  The problem here was not the
error, it was the failure of ... the checks and balances in our
processes to detect the error. That's why we lost the
spacecraft." said Edward Weiler, NASA's associate administrator
for space science.

I am a layman is such matters, but I have a real problem with
this explanation.  The Mars Climate Orbiter was able to get to
Mars without a hitch, suggesting that it was successfully able
to execute numerous orders during its perilous voyage.  How
could this sophisticated piece of technology have made it all
the way to the red planet free of command and execution
problems, then be destroyed by a single command at the end of
its multi-million mile journey?   With apologies to NASA, JPL
and Lockeed Martin, the official explanation is extremely
problematic.

American and Soviet Mars missions began in the early 1960's.
Since then, there have been a combined total of 32, 18 of which
have met with failure*. Most of these failed missions have never
been well explained and some have never been explained at all!
Certainly, space missions are risky enterprises, but Mars shots
in particular have an outstandingly negative success record.
Are Martians to blame?  Possibly, but I doubt it.  I do however
feel there are things on Mars which our government does not want
us to see.  As such, it may well turn out that it is we who are
selectively sabotaging our own missions to Mars, despite the
havoc and negative PR is brings down on NASA and the billions of
dollars of taxpayers money it wastes.

I know many may see this view as extreme, but for me the 'metric
explanation' washes about as well as UFO's being swamp gas and
the Roswell crash being a weather balloon.  In any case, NASA
has announced that the fate of the Mars Climate Orbiter is now
being investigated by three separate review boards.  We expect
they will all come to the conclusion that the problem was caused
by the aforementioned metric error.

*See "Mars Missions Successes and Failures"
http://www.ufocity.com/guest/ga-111.cfm

Also visit the website of the Mars Surface Anomaly Analysis
Group which posts photographs of possible artifacts on Mars
http://www.mufor.org/ares/

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

Space Sciences Organization Takes Off In Silicon Valley

On October 12, a number of Silicon Valley's top corporate
executives met with Joe Firmage and members of his International
Space Sciences Organization to discuss, among other things,
possible links between UFOs and cutting-edge (terrestrial)
technology.  The details of the gathering (including its
location) have been kept private, but we understand that
attendees also included research scientists, as well as
representatives from NASA's Ames Research Center in Mountain
View California.

No matter how the meeting may be characterized in the press,
NASA is obviously taking it seriously.  "We're trying to
determine if any proprietary information will be talked about at
that meeting," a NASA investigator was quoted as saying in the
San Francisco Examiner.

The International Space Sciences Organization had no comment on
the NASA inquiry.

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

Tobacco Ad Sparks UFO Controversy

Successful advertising has always taken advantage of popular
trends, styles and beliefs, but the line between trendy and
stupid can be a thin one.  Are individuals who have been
abducted by UFO's "the dumbest people on earth?" That's what the
text of a current print ad for Winston cigarettes would have us
believe.

UFO's and aliens have been a staple in all types of advertising
for years now, but more often than not it's been with some good
humor or cleverness. Not so of the Winston ad.  Accompanied by a
nice grainy photo of an alleged UFO, the copy reads, "If aliens
are smart enough to travel through space, why do they keep
abducting the dumbest people on earth?"  Funny?  Hip?
Meaningful?  No on all counts.  Meanspirited and meaningless is
more like it.  The fact is that the ad makes no sense and the
copy is genuinely demeaning to a very real group of individuals.

Mocking people who have suffered through traumatic events is
simply not funny.  Even if one does not take such accounts
seriously, most people who maintain that they have been the
subjects of alien abduction seem to be suffering the effects of
something, and at the very least should be accorded a little
respect and sensitivity.

Personally, I don't think the folks at  R. J. Reynolds'
advertising agency though this one through very well.  What
about those abductees who are - uh oh - Winston smokers?  Are
they also among "the dumbest people on earth?" Or are abductees
who smoke Winstons given some special R. J. Renyolds
dispensation?  Or, is the message here that smokers - especially
Winston smokers - are among the smartest people in the world?
Sure they are..

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

What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers

"U.S. Air Force and civilian radar experts know enough about
temperature inversion to be sure that it doesn't explain the
strange objects they've seen on their scopes in Washington, and
in other places. And the official Air Force gun-camera photos
reproduced here for the first time back them up..."

So begins a refreshingly nuts-and-bolts article from the golden
age of flying saucers.  "What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers"
was written by one of the true pioneers of ufology, Marine Maj.
Donald E. Keyhoe (ret.). The original article appeared in the
December 1952 issue of The men's magazine, True.  "What Radar
Tells.." is one of a series of vintage UFO articles currently
posted on the Internet and is still very much worth reading.
You can find it at http://users.ev1.net/~seektress/key1.htm

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

Laser Signal to Travel Across Universe Forever

A September 23 Associated Press news story states that beginning
next year, a Roswell, New Mexico-based company will begin to
attempt communication with extraterrestrial life forms via a
powerful laser broadcast array named "Starlite."  According to
representatives for Light Messenger Inc., the signal will travel
across the universe forever.

"Think of it as the greeting card for the new millennium,"
Starlite creator Frank Costantini said.

The first messages sent into space by Starlite will feature the
words of children with the Starlight Children's Foundation, a
nonprofit organization that helps the families of seriously ill
youngsters.  For a one-time fee of $19.95 however, anyone can
have their own message sent into the cosmos. For information.
visit http://www.starlite.com, or call Starlite International's
toll-free number 1(888)905-STAR.

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

Video Pick of the Month

The Truth About Crop Circles: Colin Andrews Live at Madison
Square Garden, Multimedia presentation, running time
approximately 2 hours

For my money, Colin Andrews has proved himself to be the most
accomplished researcher investigating the crop circle mystery.
He is co-author (along with Pat Delgado) of  Circular Evidence,
a genuine international best-seller with more than 250,000
copies now in circulation.  An electrical engineer and former
civil servant, Colin left Her Majesty's service more than a
decade ago to pursue crop circle research full time. His
organization, Circles Phenomenon Research International,
maintains the largest archive of crop circle images in the
world, and thanks in part to a study grant from Laurance
Rockefeller, CPRI's research will likely continue to remain in
the vanguard of this most fascinating area of study.

Having had the pleasure of attending a number of Colin's
lectures over the years, I can say without hesitation that his
presentations are always compelling and thought-provoking, and
no one else in the field can hold a candle to his remarkable
archive of aerial photographs.

This video covers some of Andrews' best research, and more than
establishes the authenticity of this global phenomenon.  The
powerful beauty of the formations challenge the viewer to delve
more deeply into what is easily one of the major paradoxes of
our time.  The Truth About Crop Circles captures a remarkable
evening with a remarkable researcher.  Highly recommended.  This
tape and many other outstanding titles can be found at
http://www.UFOcity.com/ufocity.cfm

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

UFOcity.com Announces Its First Label Release!

UFOcity.com takes real pleasure in announcing the upcoming
release of Ultimate UFO!, the most ambitious UFO DVD-ROM set
ever produced.  The double DVD package will include the most
comprehensive collection of UFO footage ever with clips spanning
almost 50 years.  The footage totals more than five and a half
hours of viewing  and was shot in 26 countries - and outer
space, courtesy of NASA.  You will be able to watch it
accompanied by a music soundtrack, or with running commentary by
myself and noted UFO historian and researcher J. Antonio
Huneeus, co-author of UFO Briefing Document - The Best Available
Evidence, and International Coordinator for the Mutual UFO
Network.

To compliment this remarkable collection, Ultimate UFO! will
feature more than 250 pages of the best authentic declassified
government UFO documents available, many of which were formerly
classified SECRET and TOP SECRET. These reports, orders, letters
and position papers make for hours of fascinating reading and
show how seriously the offices and agencies of the United States
government have taken the subject of UFO's since they first
appeared on the scene in 1947.  To characterize these documents
as historic is an understatement: America's Post War history is
indelibly stamped with 3 letters - U-F-O!

In summary, Ultimate UFO! will include:

� An in-depth audio commentary by well-known ufologists Peter
   Robbins and J. Antonio Huneeus
� Links to six outstanding UFO websites
� Interactive menus
� Chapter Stops
� The UFO Experience video series trailer
� DVD-ROM containing
   Over 250 pages of government documents
   More than 50 pages from the now legendary MJ-12 papers -- the
   most controversial documents in the history of UFO studies.

Minimum System requirements:
Pentium PC with a DVD-ROM Drive and Windows 95 or higher

A SPECIAL OFFER ON ADVANCE DVD ORDERS:

If you place your order for Ultimate UFO! between now and
December 31, we will send you one of three outstanding UFO
CD-ROMs (retail value $29.95 each) absolutely free, no strings
attached!  For credit card orders, simply go to
http://www.ufocity.com/shop/dvd.cfm and place your order.  Money
orders should be sent directly to:  UFO DVD OFFER c/o BMW, 250
West 57th St., Suite 317, NYC, NY 10107.  Ultimate UFO! is
$39.99 plus $3.95 shipping. $2.00 shipping for each additional
DVD.  Sorry, no personal checks.  New York State residents
please add 8.25% sales tax. The free CD-ROM's available are
Beyond Roswell, Left at East Gate and Psychic Discoveries Behind
the Iron Curtain.  Please let us know your first choice, but we
reserve the right to substitute as supplies are extremely
limited. Allow 8 to 10 weeks for delivery.

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

UFOcity.com Welcomes Shadowbox Collectibles Online!

Taking UFO's seriously shouldn't preclude having some fun with
the subject as well.  That is why UFOcity.com is delighted to
bring to your attention a series of UFO-related collectibles
which should pass muster with even the most scholarly researcher
- not to mention with their kids!  Shadowbox Collectibles' alien
figures and I (for "identified") FO's are based entirely upon
first-hand reports of actual encounters.  The figures are
extremely well cast, beautifully detailed and carefully hand
painted.  Most come in a carded blister pack complete with a
collectible trading card. They also have glow-in-the-dark
figures and keychains.

Most of the collectibles in the Shadowbox line are very
reasonably priced at between $3.00 and $6.00 and are available
for view by just clicking on the item at
http://www.UFOcity.com/sbox/sbox.cfm  The company also has a
line of terrific mythological figures (sasquatch, yeti, Loch
Ness monster, dragons, etc) to choose from.  Shadowbox
Collectibles make great gifts and are fine additions to your own
UFO-related collection.  Check out their online catalogue at
UFOcity.com!

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

 From Arcturus Books Online October Catalogue

Arcturus Books' new catalogue is out and as always, there are
numerous new and ongoing UFO and paranormal titles to choose
from.  Here are our picks for the month:

(Documents) PROJECT BLUE BOOK SPECIAL REPORT NO. 14.  1999,
256pp, large spiral bound.  This reproduction of No. 14 differs
from the Leon Davidson "Analysis Of" book in the sense that A)
this is the complete collection of statistical tables which
comprise the report, and B) there is no "analysis" of these
statistics.  Raw data, waiting for your analysis!  $20.00

(Documents) PROJECT GRUDGE.  FUFOR, 1999, lg. softbound, about
300pp.  All the documentation pertaining to Project Grudge.  As
such, a must for libraries emphasizing the historical aspects of
Ufology.  Rob Swiatek contributes the foreword.  $25.00

Gruber, Elmar R.  PSYCHIC WARS: PARAPSYCHOLOGY IN ESPIONAGE-AND
BEYOND. 1999, qual. soft, 288pp, notes, glossary, index.
Originally a 1997 German work, this now gets its first
English-language exposure.  It is full of evidence which reveals
something of the true nature of the actual powers possessed
within human consciousness, and very reminiscent of the work now
being done with various subjects by Dr. Berthold Schwarz.  Are
we in a degenerative state today, with respect to such powers,
or are we only now beginning to awaken these powers in
ourselves, after tens of thousands of years of existence as
"homo sapiens"?  I suspect the latter possibility is correct-and
here is an excellent place to start examining the evidence for
it.  $17.95

Halliday, Ron.  UFO SCOTLAND.  1998, qual. soft, 337pp., photos,
bibliog, index.  Case studies of Scottish UFO encounters, seems
to be all-1990s material,  good solid reporting from an area not
previously well known in UFO circles.  $15.95 (Stock due in
about 2 weeks)

Newman, Paul.  LOST GODS OF ALBION.  THE CHALK HILL-FIGURES OF
BRITAIN.  R. Hale, 1997.  HC, 216pp, photo-illus, bibliog,
index.  Reprint of 1987 original.  The Uffington Horse, the
Cerne Abbot Giant, the Long Man of Wilmington and other hill
figures are described here, and some are assigned a date much
earlier than previously given.  If your interests include
Megalithic Britain, this book is sure to please.  Priced too
low, at $19.95

INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER.  Summer, 1999, Vol 24:2.  Jerome
Clark says "It ain't over (for ufology) yet (without mentioning
anything about the fat lady who still has to sing).  Also,
Argentinian UFO crash-landing; 1997 South Pacific sighting
(article by Richard Haines);  Part One of "The Mystery of Howden
Moors" in the UK;  UFOs in Canada, 1998, by Mark Rodeghier, and
Michael Swords unveils "Classic Cases from the APRO Files."
Always the best, $6.00

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

In Closing: No Aliens, No UFOs, No Elvis - National Enquirer
Revamps It's Image

"No Aliens, No UFOs, No Elvis" will be the slogan of the "new"
National Enquirer.  The Wall Street Journal reports that the
venerable supermarket tabloid will be sprucing up it's image and
avoiding UFO and Elvis sightings coverage in the future.  The
strategy is part of an effort to gain new readers,
respectability, and a greater share of the gossip market now
dominated by "People" and "Us" Magazines.

We cannot say whether or not the absence of UFO coverage from
the Enquirer will be of any assistance in making the subject
more mainstream or respectable, but despite years of griping,
some of us will begrudgingly miss the tabloid's more overtly
goofy coverage of UFO's.  But if you are a member of this group,
fear not.  We are confident that "Midnight," "The Tattler," and
the other tabloid sleaze sheets will more than take up the slack
and keep us supplied with as much "I Had Elvis's Love Child
Aboard a Flying Saucer" as we can handle.

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

If you have a friend who you think might enjoy receiving the
UFOcity.com Report, please tell them about it or forward them a
copy.  To subscribe, email us at <ufolist@teamcpm.com> and
include the word "subscribe" in the subject.  To unsubscribe,
email us at the same address and include the word "unsubscribe"
in the subject.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                 Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 18:27:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:26:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:38:33
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..."

 >Source: The Detroit News,

 >http://detnews.com/1999/religion/9910/21/10220003.htm

 >Stig

 >***

 >Searching for life beyond Earth: Neil Armstrong says it's out
 >there somewhere

 >By Todd Halvorson and Robyn Suriano/Florida Today

<snip>

... And if the 'smart money' rests on "they're out there
somewhere," wouldn't it be rational good sense to function (down
here) in a manner like they were "out there somewhere" --
_close_?

I mean, if we're _wrong_ we just treat each other with respect,
deference, and consideration... but if we're _right_, we treat
each other with respect, deference, consideration -- _plus_ we
provide an assuring example to our judge, jury, and (perhaps)
executioner.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 16 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                         Re: RPIT More New Findings

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 01:39:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:29:30 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings


Regarding:

 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:35:33 +0100
 >Subject: RPIT More New Findings

Neil wrote:

 >I realise some on this list have concluded that the RPIT project
 >is nothing more than a wild goose chase reading symbols into
 >"smuge" marks etc, but I hope the attached image will even make
 >these people stop and think.

[...]

 >I'm left with the conclusion that this _is_ a large piece of
 >aprox 1/2 inch thick material which is totally at odds with
 >anything contained in the "usual" explanations for the debris.
 >I'm not saying it's ET at this point, but as sure as hell it's
 >_not_ MOGUL.


Neil,

How do you know that for sure?


 >A final thought, I find it interesting that this debris is in
 >clear view in one of the two photographs were the original
 >negatives have been "lost", I only hope a copy might have been
 >made of the other and it might yet turn up, I wonder if it too
 >might have had "interesting" debris in full view.

It's clearly the same 'debris' in all photographs taken.


[From your website]

 >After starting out on this little project thinking the debris
on the floor WAS a weather balloon, the more I look at these
pictures in detail the more I think it's NOT, and the proof of
the Roswell Event might have been right there looking out at us
for the past 50 years in these 4 photographs.>

A difficulty with greatly magnified images is losing sight of
the simple picture.

See, for example:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/jbj_1.jpg

Does that even conceivably show debris from an alien spacecraft?


James.
E-mail: voyager@ukonline.co.uk









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                      Alien Abduction: What's Going On?

From: Tara Wood <TSWood65@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 19:47:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:33:30 -0400
Subject: Alien Abduction: What's Going On?


I just wanted to share my page on the whole Alien Abduction
thing.  It's at:

www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Gazebo/2758/myabductionpage.html

It's still in construction mode, but most of it is already up.
I've tried to make it with as little mumbo-jumbo as possible.
Just writing down what I know and when it happened.

Tara







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

                 Jupiter, Saturn and Venus (and the Northern

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 21:24:57 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:41:55 -0400
Subject: Jupiter, Saturn and Venus (and the Northern


Hi everyone.

Although Jupiter never gets quite as bright as Venus (which is
now visible in the eastern morning sky and rises several hours
before the Sun), it is now about as big and bright as it gets.
Jupiter rises in the east after sunset.  In binoculars or a small
telescope Jupiter and its four largest moons make an impressive
sight.  Don't forget to also have a look to at Saturn which is
also very bright but fainter than Jupiter (Saturn is located a
little further east in the sky than Jupiter).

If the sky is clear tonight, people living in the mid-northern
latitudes of North America and Europe may get a bonus.  There is
an alert of a big aurora storm now in progress which may produce
an impressive light show in the sky.

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

               UFO Conference Oct. 30 & 31, 1999 - New Jersey

From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 23:04:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:45:04 -0400
Subject: UFO Conference Oct. 30 & 31, 1999 - New Jersey

UFO Conference Oct. 30 & 31, 1999-Bordentown New Jersey
:
:

The 10th Great UFO/ET Alien & Abduction Congress will take place at the
Days Inn, Rt.#206 & NJTP Exit #7 on October 30 & 31, 1999. Speakers
are::

Saturday

Mohammad A. Ramadan - Effects on Society of Public Disclosure of ETs.

Wedelle Stevens - Area 51 & S4  Level 2- Security Guard Report

Patrick Huyghe -  The Alien Horde: A Field Guide to the Unknown
Author of several books on ETs,  Bigfoot, Ghosts
Editor of Anomalist journal  (www.anomalist.com)

Harry Trumbore - Ilustrator for Pat Huyghe's books.

Antonio Huneeus - Ancient History of UFOs, South American update
MUFON International Coordinator, FATE magazine columnist

Wendelle Stevens - UFO Contact From The Pleiades, Reticulum, Etc,

Sunday

Peter Robbins -  Bentwaters, Great Britain case and continuing
activity,  (co-author book- Left at East Gate) ( Editor -
www.ufocity.com)
=======================================
Group Discussion - on WACO, Y2K, MARS probes, etc.
=======================================
Larry E. Arnold - Alien Fire: The Burning Evidence for UFOs  author -
Ablaze: The Mysterious Fires of Spontaneous Human  Combustion.

Wendelle Stevens - Nazi German & Man Made Flying Discs

Steve Bassett - Politics of the UFO- Leading to Disclosure

George Filer - Major UFO Reports From Around the World (Eastern Regional
Director, MUFON) Compiler Filer's Files

Registration 2 days $85 (before October 23),  after 23rd, $90, 1 day
$50,  individual lecture $20,  individual workshop $20

Make out checks to Pat Marcattillo, 221 Joan Terrace, Hamilton, N.J.
08629 For more information call Pat at 609- 631-8955 between 11 am-3pm
or Sat /Sun after 4pm. Or Tom Benson at 609-883-6921 evenings after 8
pm..

Conference Hotel  Site (Days Inn) reservations 609-298-6100.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 23

              Re: Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 23:16:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 09:51:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:15:51 EDT
 >Subject: Japan's Mars Probe In Mars Orbit January 2004
 >To: Updates@globalserve.net

 >http://www.tui.edu/STO/Japan/Japan/Planets.html

 >Japan is Third to Probe the Planets


A translation from the Japanese English to formal English
by Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt.

Having worked for the Japanese for more than a decade, I can
tell you that the language of language is often lost in the
translation of language into the language used to relay the
message in, but often has a meaning other than that expressed on
the surface of the words used.  Or soemthing like that, anyway.

Here, let me give an example.  I was always told "Hi!" by my
boss when ever I had a suggestion to make.  I'd say, Wasabi-
San, what to you have to say regarding my suggestion?"  And he
would always answer, "Hi!"  Meaning "YES!"  But he meant "Yes I
understand!"  Not "Yes I agree!"  See?  So please, and with all
due respect, allow me to translate the following....

 >Japan, the fourth nation ever to send a satellite to Earth
 >orbit, became the third nation ever to send a spacecraft to
 >Mars when its Planet-B probe blasted off from Japan's Kagoshima
 >Space Center on the southern island of Kyushu on July 4, 1998.

Spacehip not fall fown and go boom!

 >While on its way to Mars, Planet-B was renamed Nozomi which
 >means Hope.

Japanese engineers know immediately sucker was never get across
Baja!

 >Unfortunately, an out-of-control thruster necessitated an heroic
 >rescue effort which will lead Nozomi around the Sun on its way
 >to the Red Planet. Arrival at Mars will be four years later than
 >planned.

Tell 'em it's gonna take four more years, by then, we'll all
know that Mars was a set for a Japanese Monster Movie...  and
they will have forgotten big mistakes.

 >The flight plan. After launch in 1998, the robot science
 >explorer went into a looping orbit around Earth which took it
 >out and around the Moon. Nozomi then made two swings by the Moon
 >to establish its final trajectory to Mars. The swing-by
 >technique would gather speed for the trip to Mars where Nozomi
 >was to have arrived at the end of 1999.

We miss!

 >Once the spacecraft reached Mars, it would have been placed in a
 >highly elliptical or "egg-shaped" orbit stretching from a low of
 >93-186 miles out to about 17,000 miles above the planet's
 >surface.

We miss BIG TIME!

 >What went wrong? Nozomi made a first gravity-assist flyby of
 >Earth on Sept. 24, 1998. Following the second Earth flyby on
 >Dec. 18, 1998, a thruster on the spacecraft stuck open and much
 >fuel was wasted. Nozomi did not receive sufficient acceleration
 >boost to make into orbit around Mars.

Stupid engineer forgot to remember. Is now with honored
ancestors.

 >Controllers at Japan's Institute of Space and Astronautical
 >Sciences (ISAS) ordered the thrusters to burn in a correctional
 >manuever on Dec. 21, 1998. However, that did not leave enough
 >fuel for Nozomi to be able to slow itself down later as it
 >entered Mars orbit. That called for an extraordinary effort to
 >save Nozomi.

We should have sent stupid engineer on this trip instead of his
design.

 >The controllers radioed orders to the spacecraft, assigning it
 >a new flight plan. Now it would make three trips around the Sun
 >and two more Earth flybys. These gravity assists from the Sun
 >and Earth would give Nozomi just the right speed for entering
 >Mars orbit by January 2004.

Another stupid engineer used Kanji instead of Metric system.

 >Nozomi's orbital path around Mars will be elliptical, ranging
 >from a low of 93 miles out to a high of 31,620 miles.

Kanji was to base ten.  Metric was to base eleven.  Hah!  Too
much sacki.... saki... sorry.

 >ISAS researchers say they believe the spacecraft's science
 >instruments will work properly after the four year delay. A
 >benefit of the longer flight will be extra time to collect and
 >send back data on the solar wind in interplanetary space.

See part above where you are supposed to forget about it.

 >Martian atmosphere. Nozomi is designed to perform long-term
 >studies of the upper Martian atmosphere and ionosphere, and its
 >interaction with the solar wind.

Right.

 >The low-altitude portion of the orbit will be used for remote
 >sensing of the lower atmosphere and surface, and for direct
 >measurements of upper atmosphere and ionosphere.

Right.

 >The more distant parts of the orbit will allow instruments to
 >probe the ions and neutral gas escaping from Mars, which
 >interact with the charged-particle "wind" blowing outward from
 >the Sun. Ionization of the upper atmospheric gas by solar
 >radiation produces the charged-particle atmosphere (ionosphere)
 >that acts as an obstacle to the solar wind.

Right.

 >This radiation produces species of gas not seen in Mars' lower
 >atmosphere, such as nitric oxide, or dissociates the atmosphere
 >into single atomic species, such as atomic oxygen. If these
 >neutral or ionized species possess enough energy, they can
 >escape the gravitational pull of Mars, resulting in a net
 >atmospheric loss. Measurements of lighter species such as atomic
 >hydrogen and deuterium also can provide clues about the
 >evolution of the Martian atmosphere.

Blah, blah, blah.... etc., just fill in to make us sound like
we know what we are talking about.

 >More like Venus. Mars has little or no intrinsic magnetic field
 >to interact with this process, making it more like Venus in
 >this respect than Earth.

No one respect earth which is why we trying to leave.

 >The upper atmosphere of Venus and its solar wind environment
 >were studied for almost fourteen years by the U. S. Pioneer
 >Venus Orbiter spacecraft from a similar, highly elliptical
 >orbit. Nozomi carries an insturment, known as NMS, which is a
 >state-of-the-art enhancement of the Pioneer Venus mass
 >spectrometer. It weighs only six pounds. To conserve space and
 >weight, electronic items such as transistors and integrated
 >circuits were removed from their outer casings and placed in
 >larger packages called hybrid circuits.

 >Dust storms. Data from previous Mars exploration spacecraft such
 >as Mariner 9 indicate that dust storms near the surface can heat
 >the lower atmosphere and increase the gas density in the upper
 >atmosphere where Nozomi will make its measurements. The U.S.
 >Mars Climate Orbiter carries an instrument called the Pressure
 >Modulated Infrared Radiometer, which will provide complementary
 >information on the lower atmosphere and its response to dust
 >storms.

 >NMS. Nozomi carries 14 instruments from Japan, Canada, Sweden,
 >Germany and the United States. NMS is a U.S. instrument provided
 >by NASA to measure the gas composition of the upper atmosphere
 >of Mars. NMS is short for Neutral Mass Spectrometer and Ultra
 >Stable Oscillator. There also is NASA hardware aboard for a
 >radio science experiment.

Parts from NASA will work well because they use wrong system of
measuring, but system just right for us.  Talk amongst youselves,
I'm a little ferklempt!

 >The Neutral Mass Spectrometer will enable researchers to measure
 >the chemical composition of the upper atmosphere of Mars on a
 >global scale, which has never been done before.

 >Previous upper atmospheric composition measurements were done in
 >only two locations as NASA's Viking landers entered the Martian
 >atmosphere on July 20 and Sept. 3, 1976, respectively.

 >Precise clock. The radio science hardware was built by the Johns
 >Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel,
 >Maryland, under contract to NASA. The ultra-precise signals
 >generated by the oscillator serve as a very accurate clock to
 >enable analysis of the Martian atmosphere and to help guide the
 >spacecraft as it orbits the red planet.

<snipped - but very respectfully>

 >Scientists suggest there may be a dust-ring along the orbit of
 >Phobos. By using the dust counter aboard Nozomi, they will
 >discover if it exists.

Konishi wa, or depending on your location, Konban wa.  Or Ohio
goizimus... or, need more wasabe for sushi.  Also, Domo Arrigato
and Hajimae mashte, dozo, uroshuku.  Uh, means prease pass
Gripple.

J. Jaime Gesundt, creator of internatioanl incidents as well as
good fresh wine.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

                Virginia Tech Prof Makes 'Out Of This World'

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 05:18:21
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 02:40:54 -0400
Subject: Virginia Tech Prof Makes 'Out Of This World'


Source: U-WIRE.

Stig

***

Virginia Tech prof makes an 'out of this world' discovery

Updated 12:00 PM ET October 19, 1999

By Karen Hix
The Collegiate Times
Virginia Tech

**

(U-WIRE) BLACKSBURG, Va. -- Water, the basis of life, was
thought to only exist on Earth until a Virginia Tech professor
proved otherwise.

Robert Bodnar, professor of geochemistry, made the discovery in
a Martian meteorite after beginning analysis in December.

"As far as we know, it was the first water that had been found
in an extraterrestrial sample," Bodnar said.

This discovery indicates liquid water was present when the solar
system formed about 4.5 billion years ago, he said.

"Life -- at least the way we think of life -- requires water to
develop, evolve and survive," he said. "The earth wasn't unique
in terms of a place where life could develop."

The meteorite fell in Mohans, Tex. March 22, 1998 in view of
seven boys who were playing basketball, he said.

"The whole meteorite was about the size of a big potato," Bodnar
said.

NASA transported the meteorite to a clean room at the Johnson
Space Center in Houston less than 48 hours after the fall.

NASA scientist Mike Zolensky began studying the meteorite. He
noticed that it contained purple halite, or salt, crystals with
fluid bubbles inside them, which he thought might contain water.

Because the meteorite fell in an arid area and was recovered
immediately, there was almost no chance of water getting inside
it after it reached Earth, Bodnar said.

"Locating the halite in the Mohans meteorite was serendipitous
in a way," Bodnar said. "It was very unique and fortunate."

Bodnar, who attended graduate school with Zolensky at
Pennsylvania State University, traveled to Houston and returned
to Tech's Fluids Research Lab with a sample of the halite.

To determine whether the bubbles contained water, Bodnar first
cooled and heated them under a microscope. The contents of the
bubbles froze and melted at the temperatures expected for salt
water.

Next, he used a Raman Microprobe to compare the light spectrum
produced by a laser passing through the sample to the spectrum
produced by saltwater. They produced similar graphs.

The presence of water in other parts of the solar system could
someday be important in space exploration because we may use the
moon or asteroids as staging points for missions farther into
space, Bodnar said.

The water they contain could be used to make fuel for the
missions or as drinking water.

"In one or two or three hundred years, these things will occur,"
Bodnar said. "There will be exploration of other parts of the
solar system other than the Earth and moon."

Now that NASA knows what types of meteorites are good candidates
for studies of fluid inclusions, they have identified a second
meteorite that fell in Morocco last year. Bodnar is currently
analyzing it.

"Our goal is to find a meteorite that is large enough, that
contains enough of this purple halite so that we can start doing
some very detailed chemical analyses of the water," Bodnar said.

Bodnar is enjoying the widespread attention his research is
receiving.

"You can go your whole research career doing work that is just
important in your field," he said. "It's kind of fun, actually,
when you're doing research and it starts generating interest in
the general public."

**

(C) 1999 The Collegiate Times via U-WIRE







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

                  SETI@home Project Reaches Major Milestone

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 05:48:00
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 09:17:03 -0400
Subject: SETI@home Project Reaches Major Milestone


Source: Sun Microsystems, Inc. via PRNewswire.

Stig

***

Friday October 22, 8:00 am Eastern Time

Company Press Release

SOURCE: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

University of California Berkeley Reaches Major Milestone in
Supercomputing History

Sun Microsystems Servers Power the World's Largest Supercomputer

**

BERKELEY, Calif., Oct. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- The University of
California Berkeley's Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence
project, SETI@home, today reported a major milestone in
supercomputing history. The project has received more than
100,000 years of computing time from over 1.3 million volunteers
in 223 countries, creating the world's largest supercomputing
project.

The SETI@home Project pioneers the use of the Internet as a
massive parallel computer for a data-driven task. The combined
computing power of SETI@home's participants is far greater than
the world's largest single supercomputer, with a combined power
of more than 7 Teraflops. Data that would have taken a single
desktop computer 100,000 years to analyze was analyzed in nearly
five months, thanks to the volunteers.


Sun Powers The World's Largest Supercomputing Project


The SETI@home Project is run entirely on Sun systems and
technologies donated by Sun. Through its Academic Equipment
Grant (AEG) Program, Sun has previously given SETI@home 3
Ultra(TM) 10 workstations and a Sun Enterprise(TM) 450 server,
each with significant memory and storage capabilities and the
Solaris(TM) Operating Environment, to power the world's largest
supercomputer. Sun's latest donation of 2 Sun Enterprise 450
servers and an additional 1 GB of memory brings the total value
of Sun's equipment donations to SETI@home to $250,000.

"This project is a significant step forward in the way that high
performance computing projects are undertaken," said Kim Jones,
vice president, Global Research and Education, Sun Microsystems.
"The donated Sun systems and technologies are helping the
Berkeley team communicate with and collect results from a
variety of computing platforms worldwide easily and
efficiently."

Sun has also been a significant contributor of computing cycles
to the project, along with SGI, Intel, Compaq, and other
companies and schools. Sponsors of SETI@home, in addition to
Sun, include The Planetary Society, the University of
California, and Fuji Film Computer Products.


SETI In Your Home


Computer users who are interested in participating in the
project simply download software that acts as a screensaver from
the project's Website. The software is actually a sophisticated
signal-processing program that runs whenever the computer is
idle to analyze data collected by the Berkeley computer from the
giant radiotelescope at Arecibo, Puerto Rico, seen in Jodie
Foster's movie, "Contact."

"By harnessing the power of computers worldwide, SETI@home lets
us do a much better job of listening for extraterrestrial
signals than ever before", said Dr. David Anderson, director of
the project. "It's a new way of doing supercomputing that may be
useful for other projects besides SETI. And it has the added
bonus of teaching people about science and getting them
personally involved in it."

The goal of the SETI@home project, which is the first
distributed, high performance computing project to offer the
general public the opportunity to participate in important
research, is to help the institution collect and analyze large
amounts of critical radio data from space. The SETI@Home
software analyzes data in search of strong spikes or repetitive
patterns in radio signals in space. As the computer works on the
data, the screen displays a three-dimensional graph charting the
signal analysis. After the computer finishes with the analysis,
it automatically sends the results back to the Berkeley computer
via the Internet and grabs another piece of data for analysis.

For additional information about SETI@Home, or to download
project software go to http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/

NOTE: Sun, the Sun logo, Sun Microsystems, Solaris, Java, Sun
Enterprise, Ultra and The Network Is The Computer are trademarks
or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the United
States and other countries.

SOURCE: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

**

Copyright � 1999 PRNewswire. All rights reserved. Republication
or redistribution of PRNewswire content is expressly prohibited
without the prior written consent of PRNewswire. PRNewswire
shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or
for any actions taken in reliance thereon.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

              UFO Research - Focus On Nuclear Weapons Incidents

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 05:59:57
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:40:24 -0400
Subject: UFO Research - Focus On Nuclear Weapons Incidents

Source: U_WIRE

Stig

***

UFO guru warns U. Montana of alien life

Updated 12:00 PM ET October 19, 1999

By Khris Carlson
Montana Kaimin
U. Montana

**

(U-WIRE) MISSOULA, Mont. -- The U.S. government possesses a
massive amount of information confirming that UFOs do exist and
the time is now for people to begin educating themselves, a UFO
researcher and former janitor said Monday night.

Speaking to a crowd of two hundred in Urey Lecture Hall at the
University of Montana, UFO guru Robert Hastings, a former
custodian at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Great Falls, presented
a lecture and slide show highlighting recently unclassified
documents regarding UFO sightings and the government's attempts
to hide the truth from the lay-people of America.

Citing records from various government agencies, Hastings
described sensitive documents confirming UFO sightings over
Montana in 1975 and told of his own experience here in 1967 when
a similar UFO sighting occurred. According to the documents
presented by Hastings, the Defense Department reported a number
of UFO sightings at highly sensitive nuclear missile silos and
atomic bomb storage units near Malmstrom.

"Over the period of my research, dozens of ex-Air Force officers
have told me that UFOs have the ability to shut down nuclear
launches - their presence over silos creates missile system
failures," he said.

In other words, if Osama bin-Laden strikes a deal with aliens,
we could be in for it. Hastings, who makes $1,850 per lecture,
says that it is no coincidence that reported UFO sightings have
risen with the increased development of nuclear weapons and
energy sites since the mid-20th century.

"It is clear that the focal point for UFO investigations is with
regard to nuclear weapons," he said.

Hastings spent 30 minutes of his two-hour lecture with a slide
presentation documenting the history of alien spacecraft
sightings in America.

"The fact that it has occurred is highly documented," he said.

Hastings has gathered hundreds of pages of documents released
under the Freedom of Information Act, enabling him to travel
across the country to spread the news.

"It is a question of time before all the answers come out," he
said. "Educate yourselves with information on UFO's."

**

(C) 1999 Montana Kaimin via U-WIRE





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 23:21:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:43:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >From: Bruce Maccabee
 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:44:23 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:21:42 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Previously, I had opined:

 >>As you pointed out, the only way he could _not_ continue is if
 >>he were found out. Has he been found out?

Bruce responded:

 >If you went through dozens of times... no fraud was committed.

<respected snip>

 >I think you are trivializing this.

On the contrary, Bruce. I truly believe it is you that are
trivializing the importance of this particular aspect of the GB
investigation. The analogy of the check out line is clear: I
could continue through the line as many times as I wanted UNTIL
they found out I had committed fraud. In the meantime, I'll
never admit it voluntarily. Likewise, if Ed wanted to deceive,
he could continue to produce fakes as long as you were willing
to believe he knew nothing about photography; thereby adding
credence to the authenticity of his photos. He certainly won't
voluntarily admit fraud, especially if he is getting away with
it.

Is it your assumption that all fraud is detectable and, if not
detected, then it doesn't exist?

In the meantime, you maintain that no evidence exists that Ed
faked the photos because of an unnecessarily complex view of
just what it would take to fake them. By doing so, you, perhaps
unknowingly, artificially enhance the credibility of what
appears to me as basic photographic techniques applied by
someone with basic, not advanced, photographic skills.

This is illustrated by your response to the following.

I previously wrote:

 >I'm not sure why I can't seem to get this point across: Polaroid
 >made a cheap copystand with a built in close up lens. This copy
 >stand was designed for average, non-sophisticated consumers to
 >make copies of other Polaroid photos. It was very, very, very,
 >very easy to use.  Every shot that Ed
 >produced on Polaroids could have been created using one of these
  >stands.

Your response was:

 >Presumably Ed would not need a copy stand if he were to take
 >pictures with no smear. You have him using a tripod to take
 >unsmeared pictures and then saying, :"oh these will be more
 >convincing if I create a smear which will be th same on both the
 >UFO and the streetlight. So I'll go out and buy a cheap copy
 >stand, one so cheap that when I click the shutter the camera
 >will move slighting thereby creating the same smear on the UFO
 >and on the streetlight."

This is nonsense, Bruce. The obvious point is that ALL of the GB
photos could be produced on the copy stand, whether he wanted
them blurred or not. The stand could be rigid as steel; the blur
would be created by moving the print during exposure.
Butt-simple. Or is this yet ANOTHER basic photographic technique
that you didn't think of while investigating every possible
explanation about the GB photos? Let's explore that territory a
bit...

Beyond admitting that you never thought of the masked double
exposure technique, you stated that the photos to be copied
would have to be "quite large"; large enough to maintain focus.

This is false: Using the Polaroid copy stand, no large prints
would be needed. He could double expose, cut and paste and alter
original Polaroids at will and copy them onto more Polaroid
film.

You also stated that he would need to be an expert to find the
right closeup lens. Again, this is not true. The Polaroid copy
stand had the lens built in.

You also stated that alignment for doing any effects would be
hindered by the Polaroid's lack of though the lens viewing. This
is false, since the Polaroid copy stand is prealigned to copy
the exact picture area whether you even bother to look though
the lens at all!

And, yes, the addition of blur WOULD make the final effect more
believable. It fooled you, didn't it? Or, rather, you believe
that the inclusion of blur makes the photo less likely to be a
fake? Why? Because you couldn't think of a way to fake it? Well,
now you know how! Does that make the photo more or less likely
to be a fake?

Moving on, Bruce suggested:

 >You should contemplate photo 11, the photo of the UFO supposedly
 >in the distance over a field, with a blue line coming down.
 >Hyzer claims it was a double exposure. By this he means what I
 >call a simple double exposure as opposed to a masked double
 >exposure. The upper part of the "beam" is silhouetted against
 >the dim morning sky. The bottom of the beam is silhouetted
 >against the total dark trees, buildings and ground. So, what do
 >you think? A simple double exposure?

A distinction without a difference. It, too, could be created on
the Polaroid copy stand.

In fact, this is my whole point, Bruce. It doesn't have to be
complicated to look good. And the less complicated it is,
the more likely Ed (or anyone else) could do it.

However, you maintain the false reasoning that the pictures he
produced could ONLY be fake if a sophisticated optical technique
was used by someone with an advanced degree of knowledge about
photography. You are a photo analyst; presumably with said
advanced degree of knowledge about photography. Yet the notion
of using a cheap copy stand or a masked film cartridge never
occurred to you. Does that make me some kind of photographic
genius? (Bob Shell would say "No.")

Forgive the inclusion, but I believe Hyzer made the same
mistake. Instead of looking at what tools were available for the
average person to achieve the GB photos through fraud, you and
Hyzer both assumed that it MUST be something more exotic and
sophisticated; something that would elevate the challenge of
discovery and detection to a level worth of your expertise
(hence the "Hyzer method")

Why?

Why must it be so darned complicated?

In fact, this has nothing to do with Ed's intent, or whether
he's telling the truth or blowing smoke up your skirt. It has
nothing to do with what other witness saw or didn't see. It has
nothing to do with whether Ed is a simple man or a sophisticated
man. Henry Ford couldn't even write his own name. So what? And
believe it or not, it has nothing to do with whether the GB
photos are real or fake.

All it boils down to is this:

Can't you just admit that the photos could be faked on a cheap
Polaroid copy stand? If not, then why? Because Ed said he didn't
have one? Because Ed claims to know nothing about basic
photography?

Gee, there goes Ed through the check out line again....

At what point does Maccabee's Grocery Store start becoming
suspicious?


- Sorry, Bruce. I must have stumbled into a smart ass zone ;)

Take care,

Roger







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

              'Cigarette-Smoking Man' A CSICOP Member - Speaks

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 06:24:29
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:47:43 -0400
Subject: 'Cigarette-Smoking Man' A CSICOP Member - Speaks


Source: 'space.com'.

http://www.space.com/spaceimagined/xfiles_davis_991022.html

Stig

***

The Cigarette-Smoking Skeptic Speaks

By Brian Doherty
Special to space.com

Oct 22 1999 12:36:11 ET

**

The X-Files

**

The Cigarette-Smoking Man feels a little guilty about what he's
done. Not about his role in a hideous conspiracy to sell out the
human race to malevolent aliens, but his role as an actor.

William B. Davis, the Canadian actor and acting teacher who
plays the human linchpin of the grand conspiracy in Fox TV's
cult smash show The X-Files, is a hidebound rationalist and a
dues-paying member of the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP).

He regards evolution popularizer and professional materialist
Richard Dawkins as an intellectual hero. Because of this, as
Davis told an audience Thursday night at the University of
Southern California, when he saw Dawkins attacking The X-Files,
he thought for a moment that perhaps he should quit the show.

In a CSICOP fundraising letter, Dawkins accused the show of
inculcating belief in the paranormal in its audience, spreading
irrationalism far and wide.

However, Davis saved his job and his self-respect. Like a good
skeptic, he asked himself, "Does Dawkins have any evidence for
his claim that The X-Files zaps rationality from its fans?"

Davis, who meets fans all the time, doesn't think so. Most
viewers take the show for fascinating entertainment, not a guide
to reality. If he truly believed Dawkins' accusations, he says,
he'd have to leave the show.


Cutting wit and arguments, but no frills


Davis' young audience, composed more of TV fans than skeptics,
started at around 100 and thinned out appreciably as they
realized they would be lectured to about things other than a TV
show.

Indeed, the speech could be grim going for the true X-phile. The
first blow struck before Davis even took the podium, when it was
announced that during the question and answer period, questions
about X-Files plots or shooting details were forbidden.

"No questions about the color of Scully's underwear," said the
representative of the Center for Inquiry West, the skeptical
group sponsoring the talk.

"I'm afraid I don't know the answer anyway," Davis offered from
his seat.

Davis began by deflating his own status, asking rhetorically why
the audience should assume an actor is any kind of expert in
issues related to his role.

His abashed, almost shy manner was a far cry from his X-Files
character's sinister, hard-bitten edge, and the talk rambled
conversationally over topics ranging from a book he's reading on
"memes" -- ideas said to replicate themselves like genes -- to
the development of perspective in post-medieval painting, to
Marshall McLuhan's theories on how the media affect how we see
the world.

As he noticed more and more crowd members slipping away, Davis
quickly jumped back from his speculations about the medieval
mindset, joking that he should "get back to the paranormal
before they all slip away."


Abduction therapist "insults" actors


He wrapped up with tales of his debates with Harvard's alien
abduction maven John Mack.

Since many of Mack's patients are abducted over and over, Davis
asked him why the therapist didn't put tracer devices on them to
figure out where they are going and what's happening to them
there.

Mack replied that it wouldn't do any good because these
abduction adventures "don't happen on the physical plane
anyway."

Furthermore, Davis found Mack's insistence that alien abductions
must be real because people report them with such complete
sincerity and true emotion insulting to actors.

"But that's what actors do," Davis points out, "live truthfully
within imagined circumstances." Or, in other words, just because
the "abductees" believe it with such conviction doesn't mean
it's true.

As for The X-Files, Davis thinks the show lost some of its charm
when it became obsessed with explaining all its mysteries.

"I think the fans don't want answers," he says. "I think the
mystery was the real appeal." Three years ago, he noted, the USC
lecture hall would have been completely packed with fans; mania
for the show has faded.

Did the shadowy conspirator bring the light of reason and
skepticism to his fans at USC? Perhaps. But I noticed early
exiters leaving their free copies of the Center for Inquiry West
newsletter behind.

In connection with this article, Brian Doherty also interviewed
William Davis about skepticism, The X-Files and the possibility
of alien life.

**

more stories:

*William B. Davis - An Interview

*Book Review: 'Real Science Behind The X-Files' Entertains,
Informs

*Whitley Strieber Rallies UFO Faithful, Rails Against 'Denial'

*New Book Debunks Abduction Evidence

*The man behind the Smoking Man

*CSICOP


*images

*related links


Copyright �1999 space.com, inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 24

             'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Stan Friedman &

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 19:20:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 19:20:46 -0400
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Stan Friedman &

   ----------------
  /// Gilles Milot
-----------------

Our first guest tonight is Gilles Milot. Gilles is the chairman
and founder of the Association Qubecoise d'Ufologie - The
Association of Quebec Ufologists. He's been involved in the
field for almost 30 years.

His work for a major Canadian engineering firm has taken him
around the world and he's met with many UFO researchers who
share the same passionate interest in UFOs.

Six weeks ago we reported here the story of a 'Madame. H.' who
spotted two small beings that seemed to be working in her
sisters garden, next door.

Joining us from his home in Quebec, to give us some more details
on this 'High-Strangeness' case is Gilles Millot.....


   -----------------------
  /// Stanton T. Friedman
------------------------

Our second guest tonight received Bachelor of Science and Master
of Science degrees in physics from the University of Chicago.

He spent 14 years as a nuclear physicist working on the
development of a variety of advanced, highly classified nuclear
and space systems for companies such as General Electric,
General Motors, Westinghouse and TRW.

He has spoken at the United Nations and presented testimony to a
Congressional Committee. He speaks at universities, before
august professional bodies and associations throughout the world
and has given careful and studied opinion on numerous television
and radio programs.

He's the author of a CD ROM and several books, the most recent,
Top Secret Majic reads like a detective story. He's the
consummate UFO researcher and a member of the Board of the
Mutual UFO Network.

Stanton T. Friedman is a rarity; a dynamic, outspoken scientist
who communicates in terms that we can all understand.

We'll discuss the 'New' MJ-12 documents.


Join Gilles, Stan, Jonn Kares and I this evening as we
discuss these Strange Days... Indeed on:

CFRB 1010 AM - 50,000 watts 'Clear-Channel'

6070khz Shortwave

you can also listen via Media Player at:

www.cfrb.com/

You'll need to access the site using Internet Explorer since
Media Player seems to choke using any version of Netscape -
thanks Mr. Bill!


To call the program dial:

On-Air     416-872-1010
            1-800-561-CFRB
            *TALK [local mobiles]

Errol Bruce-Knapp





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 01:00:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:24:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 02:01:25 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >Typical. Just what I was expecting, more evasion to someone
 >questioning you. Does that mean anyone with a negative tone
 >doesn't deserve any answers to legitimate questions?

Actually, Sue, I have no problem answering your questions.  It's
the way you keep badgering me that makes it more fun to keep you
in stitches waiting for the answers. <grin> If you had
indicated a little more respect and hadn't been so demanding,
you would have had your answers by now.  And as you continue to
change the subject every time I ask you a question, it makes one
wonder who is really being "evasive" here.

 >I'm not referring to the article, I'm referring to what you said
 >in two different messages.  I am just trying to get
 >clarification as to who you were referring to in these messages,
 >but I guess that doesn't deserve an answer either.

Again you demand answers to questions that you can easily gain
by simply reading the article.  If you are confused, read the
article over and over or read it aloud to yourself or read it
into a tape recorder and play it over and over until you are
able to comprehend. If you do not wish to read the article,
that's your choice.  I am not going to go over the information
with you word-for-word.  The answers you seek are stated clearly
in the article, read it.

 >>Ah, but you have decided to change the topic of this thread to
 >>discussions of Mr. Firmage.  So....neverminds. ;>
 >>Amy

 >I wasn't trying to change the thread.  You just thought I was.

First, Sue, you didn't like my comments about a clip from the
movie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" which is where this
thread started.  Then you found fault with a case I was
discussing with Dave, also part of this thread.  Then you
decided you didn't like something I said, in a completely
separate thread, about a newspaper article about Joe Firmage's
group. Wonder why I am getting all this "special" attention from
you?  Perhaps your "questions" and comments are more personal in
nature (left over from "discussions" on another list).  Since I
have not been on any lists for over 6 months, you must have
waited a long time to confront me, but this is not the place for
that.

Let us take this to private E-mail and not bother the fine folks
on this list any longer.  I promise to answer all your questions
if you treat me with mutual respect and I will extend the same
courtesies to you.  ;>

My E-mail address is: "yelorose@swbell.net"

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #322

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:19:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:25:37 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #322


Take someone like this Firmage, an ordinary Joe, but plainly
individual, and drives a Chevy, don't you know. He owns a home
and won't have three, apparent that he's off _his_ knees.
Looking up to see a star, he's asking where the space folk are!
He's not fooled by strained ambivalence -- twitchy phactual�
insignificance; he's a spirit of true science -- _balanced_
systems, more reliance. He's aware what's watched is changed! He
seems calm and non-deranged. His interest is not based on
profit, (perhaps a little like a prophet?) he seems oddly
genuine for what it's worth -- a man of men! It's hard to hate
his message, clear, that I _myself_ have written here. UFO's are
all mixed up with attitudes, and greener thoughts. Present mores
are complacent, Earth destroying, cloying -- nascent. We are,
PLEASE (!), the Earth's disease, and still we scrape our
callused knees!

This is what he talks about -- that there is _more_ within,
without . . . than dreamt of in a current system locked in
dogma's stopped up cistern. Perhaps perceived as planet killers,
raising rashes, burns, and blisters everywhere we settle down --
we're pus and mucous spread around. We've small respect for one
another, crossing borders, lines, and brothers. We have no
respect for life surviving us through strike and blight! We are
what we make at last, and that's the air you suck and gasp --
begging for that second chance that you let go for cash advance.
Slash and burn in ignorance. Practice your belligerence. Blow up
nukes like fire crackers; act like selfish, stupid slackers.

Firmage wants to touch the stars, and somehow, nobly, make them
ours. He would tell us what he's seen, and make it seem like
MORE than dreams. Our destiny is in our face? We'll live with
others out in space? We'll take our place, and earn our spot,
we'll work so they won't have to drop some bolus from an angry
sky to wipe us out -- insure we die. Yes -- tell me how we're
NOT disease to bring our planet to its knees with poisons that
we throw around for *greener lawns* that aren't so sound.
Firmage has a bigger gun, he's got the juice -- he thinks it's
fun! He has (in fact), straight up, admitted that his joy is not
attrited in his struggle for the truth -- though *heavens* fall,
and *hell* breaks loose! GIVING IN TO RIGHTEOUS CHANGE IS
STEPPING UP OUR SCOPE AND RANGE! It puts us in the asteroid
belt, secures a future Firmage felt. Hell is vanquished soon
enough if YOU get off your flaccid duff, and make the *search*
important business, investigate this *stuff* -- sans glibness.

Something crazy's going down -- written records are profound.
History is _pregnant_ with it. Crowds of people SEE them --
Jesus! Firmage wants the honest look, SCIENCE used, and by the
book -- but using an imagination, taught by ALL the data's
lessons. Look for better plans, designs -- newer models,
paradigms. Asking ALL the tougher questions, tolerant of new
suggestions (empty prisons building schools before we fail, and
play the fool?). In-depth study shows the curse that disrespect
has made _much_ worse. Firmage has the guts to question CUSTOM
and its infestation. Tradition is a suspect tool; abusing, and
it's learned in school. Morality from corporations (?), ethics
from religious *blessing* (?), dancing to convenient tunes where
few MAY win -- but most will lose is NOT what we can really do.
We ARE much more than THAT. It's true!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Aren't we? My reach exceeds my grasp, and that's what heaven's
FOR! I'd be damned, but for that kingdom that IS at hand! A
god's speed, Mr. Firmage.

Restore John Ford.


--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 23 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 10:25:42 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:38:23 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Hi, Jenny,

 >It's also highly unlikely that any UFO solution will please
 >everyone for two key reasons.

 >1: UFOs are not a single phenomenon. There are multiple and
 >different UFO phenomena with a range of explanations.

I have sometimes thought along the same lines myself
(specifically in the area of high-strangeness cases), but I
certainly would not state it, as you have here, as if this were
an established fact, because it isn't.  I am assuming here that
you do not assume that all UFOs are potentially reduceable to
IFOs -- a debunking cliche to which history has not been kind --
and that your premise here is that what we call UFOs and what we
call IFOs are different in kind.

 >What Andy is saying - and I agree with him - is that all UFOs
 >have the potential to be mundane IFOs - with none any exotic
 >phenomenon at all. You cannot, as you quote from  Sherlock
 >Holmes, eliminate all the possibles and thus leave an impossible
 >(i.e. aliens or whatever). The reason is that new types of IFO are
 >always feasible and may simply never have been thought of before
 >now. When they are thought of they can suddenly solve a
 >potentially baffling case. This is the nature of the
 >investigation process in ufology.

Why is the idea of alien visitors "impossible"?  I suspect that
you do not mean what you say quite the way it sounds.

 >Our book 'The UFOs that Never were' makes this apparent. But its
 >easy to see by, for instance, the Williamette Pass case. Here
 >you can eliminate all the obvious possibilities. Its not a
 >plane, balloon, meteor, etc. So does that mean by your argument
 >it must be some exotic form of UFO? Many ufologists argued so
 >for years. I felt it did. But clearly it does not. The case
 >remained a UFO for 30 years until Irwin Weider solved it. He
 >solved it as an IFO nobody in the world had dreamed of as a way
 >to explain a UFO case (a road sign).

I think you are making far, far too much of this isolated
instance.  Historically, the best cases have overwhelmingly
stayed unexplained over time, under repeated investigation.
Where the best photographic  cases are concerned, McMinnville is
a more appropriate example than the Willamette photo.
Incidentally, note the spelling -- it's not "Williamette."  I
hope you have it rendered correctly in your book.

Cordially,

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:43:38 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Andy, I do not mean this as a personal thing, I really do wish
 >UFOIN the very best, I am only expressing my doubts as to the
 >results of the work, not the quality.

What an intriguing and revealing statement Sean.

If we are likely to produce quality research, ergo we are doing
a good job.

Therefore, if the results and conclusions reflect that quality,
then what is the problem?

I get the idea you are trying to imply that somehow any
conclusions we reach will be twisted towards debunking or
skepticism for its own sake.

Where is your evidence to back up this claim?

I can only speak for myself, but I certainly do not approach
cases expecting to solve them just to upset all the believers.

I use my training as a journalist and academic to follow where
the evidence leads. If that leads to a rational explanation,
then so be it.

If there is an explanation to be found, or which is thought to
be likely, then surely we owe it to everyone to say so.

If we fall back on ifs and buts and 'maybes' then we are harking
back to the age of superstition - belief in nebulous powers 'out
there' which ultimately lead us to abdicate responsibility for
our own actions in the real world (see for example the
witchcraft mania of the Middle Ages).

The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
fairies and little folk.

What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
Age culture.

Everyone is exposed to this stuff, we can't escape it,. But if
we expect to be taken seriously by the real world then we need
at least to show we can be dispassionate when looking at the
evidence upon which we base those beliefs.

Speculation can only be based upon good evidence, and if cases
are investigated shabbily and by people who are driven by
beliefs to such an extent that the facts become distorted before
they reach us - then how can we make any definitive conclusions
about them?

UFOIN welcomes those who can investigate fairly and objectively
without allowing beliefs and prejudices to cloud conclusions.
Open minds are what we want - but not so open that the contents
dribble out!

All best wishes,

Dave Clarke

"The Skeptick doth neither affirm, neither denie any position;
but doubteth of it." -Sir Walter Raleigh.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                         Re: RPIT More New Findings

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 19:40:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:10:33 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 00:17:21 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:35:33 +0100
 >>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: RPIT More New Findings

 >>I realise some on this list have concluded that the RPIT project
 >>is nothing more than a wild goose chase reading symbols into
 >>"smuge" marks etc, but I hope the attached image will even make
 >>these people stop and think.>

<snip>

 >Upon seeing this image it took me only a few microseconds to
 >realize the Neil is right on this one.... whatever it was, it
 >was thick. Looks like a saw cut through thick aluminum. Does not
 >look like material bent or pulled (stretched) to breaking.
 >Looks like a saw cut!  But strangely irregular.


Bruce and list, I have seen this type of fracture in metal
before. I live in the North West of Britain in the area that
gave rise to the "Industial Revolution", the builders of the
18/19th century  "Dark Satanic Mill's" were great users of "cast
iron" and it's grainy, crystaline structure, when subjected to
high impact(a demolition hammer<g>) gives just this brittle type
of fractured edge. I'm not for one second saying this is cast
iron<g>, I'm just suggesting whatever it is might have similar
properties of structure, ie tough, crystaline almost ceramic
like, but when pushed beyond it's limits brittle, like smashed
pottery. Some of these type of fractures can also be observed on
the broken ends of some of the "sticks".

I also wonder if this thick material is all solid, if you check
the thickness around some of the edges you can see that it
varies, thinning out in areas which seem to have sustained
additional damage. Shadows cast onto the edges also seem to hint
that the surfaces of the edges are not all flat, but sometimes
slightly "hollowed out" as though an inner "softer" core
material might have been eroded by whatever process generated
the initial fracture damage.

Best Regards
Neil.

-------------------------------------------------------
                      Neil Morris@Home.

Email:             Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Web Sites:        Roswell and Alien Autopsy
                   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
         The Fort Worth Photographs of James Bond Johnson
                http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/
-------------------------------------------------------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                        Re: UFOcity.com Report 10/99

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 16:33:01 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:30:18 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOcity.com Report 10/99


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:17:25 -0500
 >Subject: UFOcity.com Report 10/99
 >From: Peter Robbins <ufolist@mail.teamcpm.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >UFO's and Intolerance, Part II

 >Last month's editorial on televangelist Pat Robertson's alleged
 >statement that people who believe in the existence of aliens
 >from space and UFOs should be put to death by stoning, drew
 >numerous comments and responses, but none from Mr. Robertson,
 >who was forwarded a copy of the editorial.  We have since sent
 >for a full transcript of the July 8, 1997 broadcast of "The 700
 >Show" during which the alleged remark was made and will
 >carefully review the text upon its receipt here.  In any case it
 >will be the subject of a follow-up letter to Mr. Robertson which
 >will be reproduced in this newsletter.

 >In the meantime, I have been making an effort to better
 >understand the beliefs which might generate such a shocking
 >statement.  They go something like this: New Age leaders are the
 >willing or unwilling henchmen of Satan. They understand that
 >belief in the Anti-Christ will be easier to foist on the public
 >if the public has been conditioned to believe in the existence
 >of aliens - who are actually demons, the minions of Satan,
 >appearing as predicted in the Bible at the present, or
 >"Endtime."

 >After these 'extraterrestrials' and their UFOs are accepted as a
 >genuine, all religions (excluding Biblical, or Fundamental
 >Christianity) will accept a new system of worship - a spiritual
 >paradigm which includes aliens from other planets.  The Vatican
 >will then accept these 'space brothers' as fellow creatures of
 >God and establish a new religion - the religion of the Beast.

 >The alien impostures will then convince most Christians that
 >they have no need for a personal savior, which is about as
 >un-Christian as any behavior can be.  The ultimate 'logic' here
 >is that even if the aliens (even if there are real ones) are not
 >'employed by Satan himself, they are laboring in his service and
 >must therefore be his agents, the fallen angels.

 >I for one do not believe in the above scenario, but it does
 >sober me to remember that millions of people do.  Food for
 >thought; more next month..

<snip>

I admire your correct and fair approach and I too look forward
to reading the full transcript of Pat Robertson's remarks.

Who are these millions of people who believe in your scenario,
Peter?  There are people who are searching for truth and will
embrace anything that sounds good but certainly you do not mean
Christians, including Roman Catholics?

 >From the very first verse in the Bible we are told that "In the
beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."  Since God
created everything and the Bible describes man's special
relationship with our creator, no new knowledge, including
'space brothers' can change this special relationship and
establish a new religion where humans honor aliens, which are
just a part of creation, rather than our Creator.

Many of our top astronomers and scientists who are searching for
E.T. life, including those working at the new large Vatican
Observatory, are Christians and their faith actually demands
that aliens exist.  The discovery of E.T.I. won't change their
faith.

Answers to all our specific questions about the universe and
E.T. life are not found in the Bible, but a lot are.  Although
it is popularly accepted that the Bible does not talk about
aliens, in fact there over 300 such references - even more
verses than about angels.

As for me, I am well satisfied with the Reader's Digest
condensed version of the Encyclopedia Galactica (i.e. the Bible)
when I am reminded the following in the last verse of the
Gospels "Jesus did many other things as well.  If every one of
them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world
would not have room for the books that would be written."  I
have enough trouble reading everything that comes in on UFO
UpDates.  ;o)

Nick Balaskas









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:01:54 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:36:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


 >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:41:26 -0400
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >I ... choose to
 >spend my time trying to get a serious investigation into the
 >reports of the abductees going ...

 >Some people are in very real distress
 >over this Joe. For them, 'reporting' is like going to an
 >emergency room and instead of receiving treatment the doctors
 >stand around debating and speculating while you slowly bleed to
 >death.

A better analogy (IMHO, at least) is this one: Doctors and
medical researchers are standing around the emergency room
debating about the causes of and cures for bleeding. You arrive
bleeding. The doctors and researchers race each other to get to
you first. If a doctor wins the race, you get some curative
treatment. If a researcher wins you get sucked into a research
study into causes of bleeding.

You're right, John. Some people are in extreme distress. They
_need_ something curative. Such as emotional support and
counseling. Too often, what they _get_ is a researcher who wants
to get the data before a therapist 'contaminates' it.

That poses problems for those of us who are research oriented.
We need to realize that therapists and researchers have
different aims. And, consequently, successful therapy doesn't
always produce much evidence for the researcher, and may even
produce red herrings.

 >Joe, 'they' have -you- and a majority of the inhabitants of this
 >rock thoroughly convinced that they don't even exist.
 >Governments (may be) conspiring to help them in their
 >clandestine activities, and all the while they continue to 'mess
 >with' a fairly sizable chunk of the human population with
 >complete impunity.

 >Now how "inept" is that! <LOL>

 >Regards,

 >John Velez,  Speculating my a** off just like you!  ;)

Not everyone who doesn't share your views has been the victim of
a government/alien conspiracy. [;-)

FWIW, I do believe that 'they' exist and that something real is
happening to those who call themselves abductees. I just don't
know what.

Actually, I'd also like to point out that 2 or 3
changes-of-subject upstream from this post I posed the following
question:

   Is there any evidence that would selectively discriminate
   between these theories:

   1. That the same off-world beings that pilot the craft are
   also perpetrating the abductions.

   2. That abductions are Out-of-Body Experiences, Lucid Dreams
   or cases of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that are
   unrecognized or incompletely recalled.

   I know that there are advocates of each point of view. But if
   we were to sit down to soberly sift the evidence available
   now, do we find any that is simultaneously consistent with one
   theory but inconsistent with the other?

The results were meagre.

Kevin Randle responded and we went back and forth for a while. I
think it's fair to say that we agree that evidence relating to
what he calls 'sleep paralysis' and what I call 'Awareness of
Sleep Paralysis' does not support theory 1. However, we disagree
(somewhat) over what theory such evidence does support.

If you'd like to get a serious investigation going, why not
start by taking inventory of the evidence at hand?

What evidence do you think discriminates between the two
theories (or types of theories) outlined above?

Just looking for evidence.

Joe


*****************************************************
Joseph Polanik, jpolanik@mindspring.com
Trionic Research Institute, http://www.trionica.com









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:02:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:46:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In


Stig wrote:

 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 03:01:32
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In Wales?

<snip>

 >A TOP-SECRET Government research base was used to store alien
 >bodies after their UFO crashed in a remote Welsh valley, it was
 >claimed yesterday.

 >The mysterious craft came down in the Berwyn Mountains, Clwyd,
 >according to a new book by top UFO investigator Nick Redfern.


Hi All,

I thought Andy Roberts had cleared this case up for everyone?

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

             Australian UFO Sighting Reports OZ Files 24.10.1999

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:47:00 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:51:52 -0400
Subject: Australian UFO Sighting Reports OZ Files 24.10.1999


UFO Sighting Reports OZ Files 24.10.1999

Thankyou to everyone for these reports

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(1)

VUFORS Tony cook FOLLOWUP

Date: 18.9.99 19:50
Location: Oakleigh, Victoria
Source: Margaret

Margaret reported that she was leaving the drive through of a
fast food outlet in Dandenong Road Oakleigh and noticed a large
light towards the North. At first, she thought it to be a
landing light of an aircraft, however it became apparent that is
was not due to the high speed at which the light passed from the
North to the South with the light visible at all times.

Margaret thought the colour to be aqua but believes
this colouring may be due to the window tinting of
her car.

Further information has been requested.

Regards,
Tony Cook
VUFORS Secretary
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~vufors

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(2)

 >From VUOFRS Tony Cook


Date: Tuesday 31.8.99 22:30
Location: Reservoir, Victoria
Source: Phillip Murphy

Mr. Murphy was on Cuthbert Rd in Reservoir looking
away from the Melbourne CBD.
Sky was clear at the time.

Witness could a brief glimpse (a few seconds) of what
he described as a "green cigar - lit from within"
before the object disappeared behind trees.
By the time the wittness had moved to view the
object again, it could not be found in the sky.

The object was thought to be travelling from
the direction of Broadmeadows/Cambellfield towards
Greensborough.

More information has been requested.

Regards,
Tony Cook
VUFORS Secretary

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(3)

 >From Peter Johnson AUFORN South Australia


Mr. & Mrs. Camp and their sighting
report is as follows :


Place - Elizabeth East - Adelaide
Time first noticed - 4:45am
Time last seen     -  5:45 - 6:00
Direction of object when first seen - N.W.
Angle above the horizon - 40 degrees
Size at arms length - head of a 4" nail (4-5 millimetres)
Colour - Pale yellow .
Description - Ball of light with a shaft of light going straight down

Mr and Mrs Camp were leaving the Gaming room at Elizabeth East
when they noticed a bright light in the N.W. sky which moved
overhead slowly, and was still there when they got home 20
minutes later. They looked at it with binoculars and said it
appeared to have a shaft of light coming straight down from it.
It was still there about 1 hour later. They said they were not
drunk.

Conclusion:
I suggested that it may have been Venus as it has been rising at
about that time in the morning, I have seen it , as I was doing
security watch at the local field days with the State Emergency
Service last week and was still awake at 5:00am (sort of)

Mrs Camp was adamant that it wasn't there this morning. I asked
her to look for the morning star in the same position at the
same time and just see if it looks the same as what she saw, I
gave her my number and she said she would ring me and tell me if
that is what she saw.

I had to ask my self, why do they go to a gaming room so often
during the week and stay so late ? That may not have anything to
do with what they said they saw.

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(4)

 >From Peter Johnson AUFORN South Australia

Rang Robert who wishes to remain anonymous at this
stage, about his sighting on 1.10.99 Thursday.

Time sighted - 02:00 am
Location        - Gray St Adelaide city centre.
Direction       - Looking East
Angle             - 45 degrees
Duration        - 6 seconds
Witness - one
Size at arms length - index fingers fingernail

Statement :
My friend Jeff and I were walking down Gray St in the city after
leaving a night club. When I noticed a shooting star at about 45
degrees to the horizon travelling down to about 30 degrees above
the horizon and it just stopped (sounds familiar)PJ. then it
travelled in a triangular pattern very fast and stopped again, a
white light shot up to the first object which I could see was
disc shaped and then the disc did a series of loops very fast
and shot of at incredible speed.

Robert said that when he first saw the disc it was travelling at
the speed of a meteor and when it took of it was going at
approximately 4 times that speed.

I asked him if he thought that it could have been man made and
he said " Well I know that technology is fairly good these days
but I don't think that anyone would survive the G forces
involved in the manoeuvres that this object made".

Peter Johnson AUFORN SA

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(5)

Sighting Report Gold Coast Queensland
Still under investigation Robert Frola AUFORN
Sent Via  VUFORS Tony Cook

Over the last two and a half months, i have experienced two
sightings on the gold coast and would like to communicate with
others either here or elsewhere who may have seen the same
thing. the first sighting occured about two and a half months at
about 10.15pm on a sunday night. i was on my front patio
grabbing some fresh air, which faces an easterley direction,
when a bright orange light caught my attention, coming out of
the south. it appeared to be travelling at about 200-250 km's an
hr., at an elevation of approx 3000-4000 ft.

At  first i thought it was an aircraft on fire, but as it
gotcloser it appeared to be a round shape, with no discernible
fueslage, no cabin lights, no nav lights, no rotors of any kind,
and the colour was an incredibly bright orange, so bright in
fact, that it reflected off the cloud bank directly behind it.
also i must stress that there was no sound whatsover from the
'craft' and also that it was a very quiet night with no wind.
the area i live in is a very quiet residential suburb. it
continued in a northerly direction until it became obvious that
it was slowing down and in fact, it came to a complete stop.
there was no hovering or sideways motion at this point as a
helicopter might do, it stopped at a precise point and stayed
there for about four or five minutes before it slowly took off
again in a northerly direction and eventually disappeared.

The second sighting occurred about three weeks ago. iwas sitting
in my lounge room watching t.v. when i happened to look out my
window, which faces a northerley direction, and coming out of
the northern sky was an incredibly bright light, travellin at a
speed a lot faster than the original object and a lot brighter.

I called out to my wife, 'it's back again', and we both ran out
onto the front porch as the object came closer. as we both
watched, the object slowed down and came to a complete stop in
the sky, at a point very close to where the first object had
stopped. the object seemed to be a lot closer than the first
sighting, and again , the light was incredibly bright, this time
however, it actually appeared to be a type of flame and actually
appeared to be moving around the craft as a flame might move
around in a light wind.

Unfortunately it came to a stop in such a position that a tree
in my front yard stopped me getting a photograph of it. again,
it stopped for about four minutes, and waiting for it to move
again, camera at the ready, we both observed it start to move
very slowly, but unfortunately in a northerly direction. by the
time i ran downstairs and out into the street, the object had
dimmed greatly and even though i took a photo i doubt it would
reveal anything.

As we both watched it move off into the northern sky, we were
both amazed to see something fall off the craft, or possibly
thrown out,  which fell to earth at terminal speed and
definitely appeared to be on fire. there were definitely flames
and apparent burning debris coming from the falling object, and
kept burning until it got closer to the surface, when it
appeared to be extinguished. it definitely would have been over
open ocean by this stage, somewhere north of surfer's and
possibly near north stradbroke or moreton island. hope to hear
from you ,

All the best,  lee

~~~~~~~~/////////////////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More to come

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Director Skywatch

Keeping you informed :>)

_____________________________________________

THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK
(A Non-Profit Organization)

E-Mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.a
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new

ADMINISTRATION:

PO Box 805
Springwood  Qld  4127
Australia
_____________________________________________

Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number
            1800 77 22 88 Freecall
_____________________________________________

Disclaimer: The Keith Basterfield List Owners are not
responsible for the content or misuse of this. However,
personal insults, flaming will not be tolerated.
_____________________________________________









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

               CPR-Canada News: WAIF Radio Interview - October

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 19:57:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 02:10:47 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: WAIF Radio Interview - October


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


WAIF Radio Interview - October 26, 1999

October 23, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Interview with CPR-Canada director Paul Anderson on the Chris
and Rob late night talk show on WAIF FM public radio in
Cincinnati, Ohio. Tuesday, October 26, 10:00 pm EST.

Reports and updates on all the Canadian crop circles of 1999
(the busiest season in years!). See below for web site links
to online reports.

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1999.html

A reminder for all Canadian subscribers / readers - your
assistance is welcome and needed - ANY reports of other
possible circles this year, please do let us know as soon as
possible! See Reporting and Field Research Guidelines on the
web site for more information:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/reporting.html

REPORTING HOTLINE: 604.731.8522

_____________________________


CPR-Canada News is the e-mail update service of
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada (affiliate of Circles
Phenomenon Research International), is published
periodically or as breaking news develops and is available
free by subscription; to be added to or removed from the
mailing list, send your request, including "subscribe
CPR-Canada News" or "unsubscribe CPR-Canada News" and
e-mail address to:

mailto:psa@direct.ca

CPR-Canada welcomes your reports and submissions.
Forward all correspondence to:


CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Circles Phenomenon Research International

Main Office

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4  Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


� Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 1999









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                       When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:23:46 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 02:21:33 -0400
Subject: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


Hello EBK, list and all,

I've been worried about Dr. Greer and others push for "an end to
ufo secrecy" for the reasons obvious if you've read any of
Vallee's 1979 _Messengers of Deception_ as well as his
subsequent books; the probability that such disclosure would be
manipulated as a continuance of the manipulations that have gone
before. Greer seems to have wisened up to this same scenario's
probability.

I find this one of the most important statements to have been
written in recent ufological history. I hope it will find its
way onto the UpDates list and beyond. It deserves to and needs
to be circulated widely.

Read on...

SMiles

  -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

WHEN DISCLOSURE SERVES SECRECY

Copyright 1999
Steven M. Greer M.D.


Ending the secrecy surrounding the UFO/ET subject is a laudable
goal. It is long overdue. It would transform the world in ways
both simple and profound.

And yet it is fraught with danger.

The covert projects which have been running UFO related programs
for nearly 60 years are not interested in a disclosure which
upsets their apple cart. They want such a disclosure to
transform their apple cart into a freight train. And they
potentially have the power and connections to do it.

There are multiple scenarios attending the disclosure of the UFO
subject-and not all of them have the best interests of humanity
at heart. Elsewhere, in the new book 'Extraterrestrial Contact:
The Evidence and Implications' (www.DrGreer.com) I write about
the kind of disclosure the world needs. An honest one. An open
one. One which replaces secrecy with democracy. A disclosure
which is peaceful, scientific and hopeful.

But then there is the disclosure the powers that be would like
to see: Manipulated. Calculated to consolidate power and
engender fear. Configured in such a way that chaos and a
deepening need for Big Brother is carefully inculcated into the
masses.

We have seen the plans and it is not a pretty picture.

I write this as a warning. A warning that the wolves in sheep
clothes are very cunning indeed. And have almost limitless
resources. Most who work with them do not even know they are
wolves. Indeed, it is likely that many of the wolves have been
convinced that they are sheep.

The UFO matter is not so much a mystery as a matter deliberately
obfuscated and mystified. Confusion and a lack of clarity serves
the larger covert goal of keeping it off the long- range radar
of society while power and plans are consolidated quietly. And
the one thing more dangerous to society than all this secrecy is
a planned, contrived disclosure run by the keepers of the
secrets.

For years such plans have been made - to be unfurled at just the
right time. During a time of great expectation. Of social
confusion. Perhaps of millennial madness?

I have personally met with a number of people who are very
involved with such plans. I do not speculate here. Be aware: The
disclosure of UFO reality is being planned very carefully. It
will assiduously follow a scheme to spin the subject in just the
right way - the only way which will further redound to the glory
and power of the secret-keepers. It will be a false disclosure -
one born out of the age-old bane of human existence: selfishness
and greed. Greed for power. Greed for control. Greed for
domination.

We must be mature and informed on such matters. Only a vigilant
and informed public can see through such deceit - and correct it
should such a plan be unfurled. Every citizen needs to know that
great good can come from the truth being known. But the mature
citizen must also recognize that the 'truth' can be spun and
spun again -until the goals of those who crave secret and overt
power are met.

Consider: One scenario for disclosure is that the UFO and
Extraterrestrial subject is acknowledged in a way which is
scientific and hopeful. Excessive secrecy which lacks executive
branch and congressional oversight is ended. Humanity begins to
entertain open contact with other civilizations, with peaceful
engagement as the goal. Technologies which are currently
suppressed are allowed to be disseminated: Pollution ends. An
economy of abundance and social justice is firmly established.
Global environmental destruction and mind-numbing world poverty
become a faint memory. Zero-point based energy devices transform
the world. Electro-gravitic devices permit above ground travel
without paving over the world's precious fertile farm land. As
an ET once told Colonel Philip Corso, " Its a new world, if you
can take it...". This is the disclosure which we are working
for.

But the disclosure envisioned above could have happened in 1950.
It did not - Why? For such a disclosure would lead to the total
transformation of the status quo. Centralized energy systems
would be obsolete. Oil would be useful only for lubricants and
synthetics. The geo-political order of today would be a thing
forgotten: Every country and people on earth would have such a
high degree of progress and advancement that all nations would
have a seat at the global table. Power would need to be shared.
Peaceful acknowledgment of life from elsewhere would make the
earth seem like the very small, organic homeland which it is.
The vast trillion dollar global military - industrial sector
would be reigned in. And a universal spirituality might dawn...

But remember, there are hugely powerful interests who dread this
scenario. For them, it is the end of the world as they know it.
The end of centralized, elite power. The end of a controlled
geo-political order which today leaves nearly 90% of the people
of earth barely one step out of the stone age. And they do not
wish to share the power they wield.

Now, let me describe the 'disclosure' which would make these
covert control programs happy. This is the false or contrived
'disclosure' which has only one clear goal: The further
consolidation of their power and their paradigm. It has to do
with fear, not love. With war, not peace. With division and
conflict, not unity. It is the dominant paradigm - but it is
slipping away slowly. And a carefully orchestrated disclosure of
the 'facts' of the UFO and ET subject could secure their power.
This is the disclosure which is to be dreaded. This is the
disclosure to watch out for. This is the disclosure which is
already occurring.

My meetings over the past 9 years with covert operatives who
have worked on UFO related programs have introduced me to some
characters right out of a spy novel - and then some. Whether in
private high tech industry, at the Pentagon or at a midnight
meeting in a private mansion, a theme has emerged. It is one of
immense, though currently hidden, power. It transcends
government as we know it (at this point the government of 'We
the people...' has been made irrelevant on this issue). And the
theme has two main strands - the eventual covert militarization
of the ET subject and a weird covert religious strain which can
only be viewed as bizarre.

Here, we find some very strange bed-fellows indeed. War mongers
and militarists in cahoots with industrialists who share a
certain bizarre eschatological bent: A dark view of the future,
featuring an extraterrestrial Armageddon - or at least the
threat of it. Such a theme supports retrograde and fanatical
religious causes as well as deeply covert military-industrial
plans to expand the arms race into space.

In fact, the big players in the so-called 'civilian UFO
community' are tied into such beliefs and agendas. It strains
credulity, I admit, but here is what we have found by
penetrating these operations.

 >From a military-industrial perspective, the disclosure of
choice is one which frames the UFO/ET issue in a threatening
manner. If a threat from space can be established (as President
Reagan liked to say) then the entire world can be united around
the need to fight such a threat. This would ensure trillion
dollar plus military - industrial spending well into the next
century, and beyond. If you think the cold war was costly, wait
until you see the price tag for this ' protection' from the
'threats' in space: The trillions spent on the cold war will
look like a blue light special.

Retrograde and fanatical religious groups, similarly, have great
vested interests in fulfilling the promise of Armageddon. An
eschatological paradigm, well enshrined in the belief systems of
those running covert UFO projects, is supported by the portrayal
of a cosmic conflict in the heavens. Voila! We have the
necessity of spinning the UFO/ET issue in the evil invading
aliens (translates in religious terms as demons) direction.
Indeed, this has already been accomplished , courtesy of the
'civilian UFO community' and the tabloid media (which at this
point is virtually all media...).

Additionally, there is a subtext which can only be viewed as
thinly veiled racism. You will note that part of the 'new myth'
regarding UFOs involves the 'good ET s' , which invariably are
described as 'Pleidians' who are 'handsome' white, blue-eyed
Aryan appearing types. Naturally, those 'evil, bad ET s' are
darker, shorter, look funny and smell funny. Please. Such
clap-trap would have us trade age-old human racism for an
extraterrestrial variety. This nonsense and propaganda could
only make Hitler proud.

In one lengthy meeting with a multi-billionaire, I was told that
he gave great support to UFO activities which propel the
so-called 'alien abduction' subject into public awareness
because he wanted humanity to unite around fighting this 'alien
threat'. Later, this very influential figure informed me that he
believed these demonic ET s were the cause of every set back in
human history since Adam and Eve. Sound familiar?

Military interests, which are heavily involved in covert
projects which hoax ET events, such as human military- related
abductions, have a shared goal of demonizing the UFO/ET
phenomenon. Doing so lays the foundations for the fear and dread
necessary for an organized opposition to all things ET. And this
subserves the long - term need to provide a rationale for an
expanding global military even should world peace emerge. In
fact, under this scenario, 'world peace', or strictly speaking
peace on earth, could be secured by the world uniting,
eventually, against the 'threat from space' referred to by
President Reagan. (By the way, personally I believe Reagan was
the victim of disinformation specialists who surrounded him and
who manipulated him into the statements he made on this
subject.)

Under this scenario, currently being gamed and 'disclosed'
courtesy of the trial - balloon UFO 'community', we would get
peace on earth - in exchange for inter-planetary conflict. One
step forward, ten steps back. Wonderful.

Such a false and contrived 'disclosure of the truth' regarding
UFOs and ET s would, then, subserve agendas held by powerful
covert interests in both the military - industrial sector and
those of a strange collection of religious fanatics, who pine
for Armageddon - and the sooner the better.

Lest the reader think such a strange amalgam of militarists and
cult-like religious interests are unlikely, remember the weird
views of the Third Reich. Or more recently, the views of one US
Department of the Interior cabinet secretary during the Reagan
years named James Watts. It was he who, not knowing a microphone
was still on and recording his comments, stated in the 1980s
that we did not need to worry about all these environmental
problems since Armageddon was coming soon and the world would be
destroyed anyway...This bizarre view, held by a man who shaped
and applied policy for the Interior Department of the US
Government, was later reported in the general media. At the time
a comical footnote perhaps. But what does it say about the
degree to which such beliefs may be shaping covert UFO policy -
and specifically disclosure plans? We have found that such views
- bizarre as they may seem to most - are heavily represented in
covert policy development on the UFO subject.

And most disconcerting of all: This strange mixture of military
cosmic saber - rattling and bizarre religious beliefs are the
dominant forces shaping both the 'civilian UFO community' and
the planned eventual 'spin' on UFO disclosure. Let the buyer
beware.

To the rational and intellectual, such views seem ridiculous.
Why, you might ask, would anyone want a cosmic war in space, an
Armageddon and the destruction of the earth? To comprehend this,
you have to get inside the head of people who hold such beliefs
- people like James Watts. In his case, why worry about a little
bit of deforestation, air pollution and areas of dead oceans if
the entire world is going to be destroyed in a couple of years
anyway?

But the thinking goes further than this. Because such fanatical
thinking has within it the concept that as a result of the
Armageddon we will see the return of Christ- and with it the
good people's salvation. Now, people are free to believe what
they want. But what we have found is a deliberate influencing of
covert policy on UFOs by such beliefs. Some of these people want
Armageddon - and they want it ASAP.

Strictly speaking, the militarists and war-mongers, itching to
'kick some alien butt' as it was said in the movie Independence
Day, may actually only want a pretext to justify their existence
and get the world to eventually spend huge sums of money on a
perceived (if contrived) threat from space.

But in some cases - high up on the food chain of the covert
entity running UFO secrecy - the two views meet. A place where
militarism and eschatology merge. Where Star Wars and Armageddon
join.

In tracing the history of both the UFO civilian community and
the covert policy-making group concerned with UFOs, we have
found a growing penetration of the latter into the former. So
much so that at this point there are projects which ostensibly
are innocent civilian initiatives but which in reality are
totally controlled and financed by 'cut-outs' from ultra-secret
projects.

Moreover, our careful penetration of such projects yielded the
disturbing finding that deep-cover black project operatives are
working closely with alleged civilian researchers, journalists
and UFO glitterati. CIA and military intelligence operatives are
working with civilian 'think tank' heads, alongside very wealthy
business people who are eschatologists, and being advised by
'civilian' technologists and scientists - who are themselves
proponents of bizarre religious belief systems involving the end
of the world and ET s....

Thus, the new 'chosen ones' have been assembled. They are
planning your disclosure on the UFO/ET subject. They are owned
by the money whores and power brokers doing the bidding of the
secret entity which runs UFO projects to begin with. And it all
looks like a civilian initiative. So innocent. So well-intended.
So 'scientific'. And by the way, the sky is falling courtesy of
ET and we need your money and your souls to defend against it.

Do not be deceived. You need to be awake to the darker scenarios
which some would like to thrust upon the world. And you need to
know that there are alternatives. If a 'disclosure' is unleashed
on the world which is xenophobic, militaristic and terrifying,
know that it comes from the spinmeisters of secrecy - regardless
of how respectable the person or group may appear to be.

And remember: Part of this disclosure plan involves the use of
UFO look-alike devices made by humans in an attack on earth or
military assets of earth. This would be a well-orchestrated use
of advanced human technologies to hoax an ET attack - all for
the purpose of disclosing the truth with the desired
military-oriented spin. In such a scenario, most of humanity
will be deceived into believing the threat from space has
arrived - and that we must fight it at all costs. This is
nothing more than long-term social security for the
military-industrial complex. There must be people who can expose
this fraud.

But why should we wait for these darker scenarios to be
unleashed on an unsuspecting world?

Here is another idea: Why don't 'we the people' unite and launch
a disclosure which resembles the first one described above. An
honest one. One which leads to peace, not war. To a sustainable
and beautiful world, free of pollution and brimming with
abundance, of all types. One which reaches out into the unknown,
instead of firing particle beam weapons into the darkness of
space.

Additionally, we welcome those who can come forward with first
hand knowledge of the machinations referred to in this paper and
who wish to expose such madness to contact us at
http://www.cseti.org. The one thing the darkness of secrecy
cannot tolerate is a spotlight shining right on it. And the more
of us holding the light, the better.

Evil steps in when good people do nothing. This is a lesson
taught through thousands of years of human history. We stand at
the beginning of a new time, and a new world awaits us. But we
must embrace it, and help create it. For if we are passive,
others will have their way - at least in the short run.

Steven M. Greer M.D.
CSETI Director
Albemarle County, Virginia
21 October 1999







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                               More Web Links

From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 16:56:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:42:22 -0400
Subject: More Web Links


Hi All,

Just to mention that I have updated my website again. Updated Links
listed.

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/index.htm

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/Stanad1.htm

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/Coollinks.htm

http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/royjhale/MusicLinks.htm


Regards,


Roy..                     Keep Smiling..



AOL Instant Messenger: jackalroy1@netscape.net







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                  Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 17:31:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:47:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 03:14:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Hiya Jim, list and all. My replies inserted (painlessly) below.

 >>Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 09:52:43 +0000
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 17:30:38 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...

 >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 17:38:02 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Abductions: A Funny Thing Happened...
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>><mega snip><<

 >>Dennis is getting at the heart of the "earliest recovered
 >>abduction narrative evidence" problem. So many abductees /
 >>experiencers exclaim that they have been having these encounters
 >>since childhood. I don't doubt or discount this possibility.
 >>However, in the absence of confirmatory evidence of any sort (a
 >>diary entry, a parents recall, something) it is very difficult
 >>to take these assertions as 'chapter and verse' with regard to
 >>the actual historic length of the modern bedroom visitation type
 >>encounter phenomena. The evidence in consciousness, memory and
 >>perception research surely casts much doubt on the validity of
 >>this kind of 'recall.'

 >Actually Stephen, I've already told the List in several posts
 >that my parents remember three of the more strange experiences I
 >had as a child in the mid forties.  They remember my story to
 >them the very next morning after it occured and they also
 >vividly remember hearing it for years afterward.  At age three,
 >I did not keep a diary.  So sorry. Neither did my mom or dad.
 >We have only our memories to go by.

Yes Jim, I've read the posts, at least the ones since I've been
subscribed for the last year. I do assign more value to your
experiences, even the early childhood ones, because of the many
factors you are speaking of. In my paragraph above I was
speaking of abductees in general. I'm glad, for your sake, that
you do have confirmatory evidence via your parents; this
certainly would make me personally feel a little more sane if I
had experienced what you describe.

 >There is great doubt over the validity of recall, most
 >especially at the age of two years or three.  But such must be
 >combined with and integrated into the greater history of the
 >individual, and without any such memory aid as hypnosis.  For
 >example ...

 >I very rarely recall dreams for more than a few moments after
 >I've awakened.

 >I have always been able to distinguish between a memory of an
 >event and a dream.  Certain dreams are recurring in the theme.
 >Most of us have them.  The history test is tomorrow and I've not
 >opened the book. Not only that, but I cut every class.  Ad
 >infinitum.

 >Last, the memories I recall are vivid in great detail for over a
 >half century.

I'm glad you acknowledge the doubt over validity of recall.

About the dreams, have you ever tried repeatedly to begin better
recaling your dreams? As an aside, I find it highly interesting
that every night we each spend several hours in an alternate
reality which while we are there totally convinces us of its
physical reality. And yet we awake from it and impose a form of
amnesia upon it creating missing time.

I didn't suggest that you or any abductee can't distinguish a
dream event from an abduction event. Tho there is referance to a
British woman who reported an abduction which she did dream
after she had watched the abduction episode of the television
show Dallas. I believe this case is from one of Jenny Randles
fine books.

 >Cogito, ergo, so what?   With all due respect.... one memory
 >does not a theory make, not does it substantiate one.

Wasn't trying to make a theory outta my bad memory. For theory,
see my other recent posts under this same thread.

 >My memories are not pretty hazy.  Some are memories of a room
 >with a haze, as if cloudy but the memory is vividly real and in
 >great detail.  I am able to describe the detail of what I saw at
 >age three or four, laying on a table in what I imagined was a
 >hospital room. I'd never been to one.  I was taken there by
 >ambulance.  I'd never seen one, yet the picture is indelibly
 >imprinted in my memory.

 >This particular ambulance took me up into the sky.

 >You speak of hazy memories which someone may call UFO related. I
 >speak of vivid and (to my mind, my intellect and memory) - real.
 >You and I are speaking different languages.  We are on different
 >frequencies. What's your point?

I was simply stating that I've met some abductees who are so
"hazy." Again, I wasn't speaking to your specific experiences.
We aren't speaking different languages.

 >And I can point you to many individuals who share my
 >distinctively real memory in the most intricate matched detail,
 >of things which I described to my parents 50 years ago.  So they
 >didn't write it down. So what?  This makes a difference?  Well,
 >maybe to you.  But not to me my friend out there in the ether.

Yes I'm sure you can. I've met a few myself, having led a
support group for such experiencers for nearly a decade.

For those who seek "objective" evidence it matters a lot. For
someone who has experienced this phenomena it matters little.
It, the presence or lack of physical evidence, makes a
difference to those, like myself and many on this list, who
require more evidence.

We can ask for and look for this evidence and still believe and
know that you and others are indeed experiencing and interacting
with a real phenomena. I can believe you interacted with
something, even an ET intelligence. What I doubt most in all the
cases of abductions and ufo close encounters is the
infallibility of human perception. A person can interact with an
unknown entity, physically and/or psychicly, but that very
perception can be shown to be very maleable from within and
without. (see my perpetual referencing of the bibliography of
the psychoactivity of electromagetics in previous posts)

 >Dennis understands his hell bent for leather view better than you may
 >imagine.  And yet, he understands little about the experiences which
 >he decries.

 >I volunteer.  Any other takers?  Or is there going to be another
 >Challenge, as in the one Velez posed last week.

 >Come on folks. The one piece of evidence most avoided, most
 >referred to as "non evidence," is that of the experiencer's memories.
 >Doesn't matter who it is, postal worker or PhD.  IBM executive or
 >CEO of a fortune 100 corporation. Most don't accept this.  It's not
 >evidence.  To you.... not necessarily "you" personally, but the
 >collective "researcher you!"  AKA, yous.

 >John Velez asked that we all pull together with our evidence and
 >have it evaluated by independent scientists.  That goes for me
 >too when it comes to the so-called "anectotal" evidence.  The
 >testimony of people like me.  Which is as worthless to some
 >(all too many) researchers as swamp gas.  Which by the way,
 >has more validity in some circles.  Swamp gas.  Pelicans.

 >But witness testimony?

 >Nah!

 >Before I retired I was CEO of a company, my own, which did a
 >goodly volume with fortune ten companies.  Prior to that I was
 >director of marketing for  multimillion to multibillion dollar
 >firms. Does that make me a better witness to my own experiences?
 >Apparently not.

 >Ah the smell of it.  Stench is more like it.  And what stinks is
 >the truth which some people have in commone with others of their
 >clan.  Their truth.  Which is indisputable.  But not ours. Ours
 >sucks big time.

 >Sour grapes?  Of course.  We use that stuff in our best Gripple.

 >Jim Mortellaro

I'm sorry if you feel our perspectives are so far apart.
Perceptions are powerfully convincing. If we could experience
what you have we would certainly be more sympathetic and likely
to believe the exact same things you do. But I suspect there'd
still be as much debate over the details of what happened and
what it all means as there are now.

SMiles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 08:21:35
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:49:51 -0400
Subject: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


Many of you know Gleason's story, but fewer Larry Warren's
confirmation.

Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

'UFO Folklore' is at

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

and receives all of my newsitems. You can find a lot of them at

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/news.html

Stig

***

From: jesus475073@webtv.net (J C)
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Interesting Story
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 02:21:48 -0400 (EDT)


Well folk, I am just tickled pink to present this one!

This article deals with the ole folklore of Jackie Gleason and
President Nixon, who were not only supposedly good buddies but
UFO believers as well. This one gets me because I remember not
only the Honeymooners as a kid but also the Jackie Gleason Show
in later years. Maybe UFOs had always played a part in the Great
One's life ? If you recall, Ralph Kramden was always threatening
to send Alice : "To the Moon Alice !"

"One more time and it's to the moon ! "

With all repsect to a great entertainer I now bring you "Jackie
Gleason & The Little "Men From Mars"

This was sent to me via email: I don't know where it came from,
so if anyone knows the originting source please let me know so I
may post proper credit !

Jackie Gleason & The Little "Men From Mars" by Timothy Green
Beckley

Way back in the mid-1960s, I got a letter in the mail from
Jackie Gleason Productions, Hollywood, Florida, ordering a copy
of a mimeographed booklet I had put together relating to UFOs.
This, to me, was confirmation of what I had heard rumors about
for a long time ... that "the Great One" was personally involved
in researching UFOs.

Supposedly - and I've since found out that this is true -
Gleason had one of the greatest UFO book collections in the
world. This is where the tale gets a bit wilder. A story
circulated by Gleason's ex-wife, Beverly, has Jackie actually
viewing the bodies of several aliens who died when their craft
crashed in the Southwest.

The story was carried originally in the National Enquirer, and
though Beverly Gleason later confirmed it to members of the
press who were able to track her down, independent confirmation
of Gleason's supposed experience could - for the longest time -
not be certified.

Now with the striking revelations of a young man who knew
Gleason personally, it can safely be said that such an event did
take place...Larry Warren was an Airman First Class stationed at
Bentwaters Air Force Base in England (a NATO installation
staffed mainly by US. servicemen) when an incredible series of
events took place over Christmas week of 1980. A UFO was picked
up on radar and subsequently came down just outside the
perimeter of the base in a dense forest.

On the first of several nights of confrontation with the
Unknown, three security police ventured into the area across an
eerie-looking object hovering just above the ground. One of the
MPs was mesmerized by the UFO and was unable to move for nearly
an hour. While in this mental state, he received some sort of
telepathic message that the craft would return.

For the next few nights, up to 80 US. servicemen, British
bobbies, as well as civilians from some nearby farms, witnessed
an historic event. According to Larry Warren who stood within
feet of this craft from another world-three occupants came out
of the ship and actually communicated with a high ranking member
of the U.S. Air Force. This close encounter at Bentwaters has
become the subject of several books (see "From Out Of The Blue",
Jenny Randles, Inner Light Publications) and has been given wide
publicity on CNN, Home Box Office and more recently "Unsolved
Mysteries." Warren has, in a sense, become somewhat of a
celebrity himself as he remains in the public eye, willing to
talk about what he observed.

"Jackie Gleason was interested in hearing my story first hand,"
Warren offers as a means of explaining how he met the famous
comic in May, 1986. "At the time I was living in Connecticut and
both CNN and HBO had run pieces on the Bentwaters case. Through
mutual friends who knew members of his family, I was told that
Gleason would like to talk with me privately in his home in
Westchester County, and so the meeting was set for a Saturday
when we would both have some time to relax'".

After being formally introduced, the two men ventured into
Gleason's recreation room complete with pool table and full-size
bar. "There were hundreds of UFO books all over the place,"
Warren explains, "but Jackie was quick to tell me that this was
only a tiny portion of his entire collection, which was housed
in his home in Florida."

For the rest of the day, UFO researcher and UFO witness
exchanged information. "Gleason seemed to be very well informed
on the subject," Larry says, "as he knew the smallest detail
about most cases and showed me copies of the book "Clear Intent"
that had just been published, as well as a copy of "Sky Crash",
a British book about Bentwaters that was published, actually,
before all the details of this case were made public. I remember
Gleason telling me about his own sightings of several discs in
Florida and how he thought there were undersea UFOs bases out in
the Bermuda Triangle."

But it wasn't till after Warren had downed a few beers and
Gleason had had a number of drinks-"his favorite, Rob Roys"-that
conversation really got down to brass tacks. "At some point,
Gleason turned to me and said, 'I want to tell you something
very amazing that will probably come out some day anyway. We've
got em!' 'Got what', I wanted to know? 'Aliens!'

Gleason sputtered, catching his breath." According to Warren,
Jackie proceeded to tell him the intriguing set of circumstances
that led him to the stunning conclusion that extraterrestrials
have arrived on our cosmic shores.

"It was back when Nixon was in office that something truly
amazing happened to me," Gleason explained. "We were close
golfing buddies and had been out on the golf course all day when
somewhere around the 15th hole, the subject of UFOs came up. Not
many people know this," Gleason told Warren, "but the President
shares my interest in this matter and has a large collection of
books in his home on UFOs just like I do. For some reason,
however, he never really took me into his confidence about what
he personally knew to be true... one of the reasons being that
he was usually sur rounded by so many aids and advisers."

Later that night, matters changed radically, when Richard Nixon
showed up at Gleason's house around midnight. "He was all alone
for a change. There were no secret service agents with him or
anyone else. I said, 'Mr. President, what are you doing here?'
and he said he wanted to take me someplace and show me
something."

Gleason got into the President's private car and they sped off
into the darkness - their destination being Homestead Air Force
Base. "I remember we got to the gate and this young MP came up
to the car to look to see inside and his jaw seemed to drop a
foot when he saw who was behind the wheel. He just sort of
pointed and we headed off."

Warren says that later Gleason found out that the Secret Service
was going absolutely crazy trying to find out where Nixon was.
"We drove to the very far end of the base in a segregated area,"
Gleason went on, "finally stopping near a well-guarded building.
The security police saw us coming and just sort of moved back as
we passed them and entered the structure. There were a number of
labs we passed through first before we entered a section where
Nixon pointed out what he said was the wreckage from a flying
saucer, enclosed in several large cases."

Gleason noted his initial reaction was that this was all a joke
brought on by their earlier conversation on the golf course. But
it wasn't, as Gleason soon learned. "Next, we went into an inner
chamber and there were six or eight of what looked like
glass-topped Coke freezers. Inside them were the mangled remains
of what I took to be children. Then - upon closer examination -
I saw that some of the other figures looked quite old. Most of
them were terribly mangled as if they had been in an accident."

According to Larry Warren's testimony (regarding Gleason's
lengthy conversation about UFOs and space visitors), "I forget
whether he said they had three or four fingers on each hand, but
they definitely were not human...of this he was most certain!"
For three weeks following his trip with Nixon to Homestead Air
Force Base, the world famous entertainer couldn't sleep and
couldn't eat. "Jackie told me that he was very traumatized by
all of this. He just couldn't understand why our government
wouldn't tell the public all they knew about UFOs and space
visitors. He said he even drank more heavily than usual until he
could regain some of his composure and come back down to
everyday reality."

Larry Warren is convinced that Gleason wasn't lying to him. "You
could tell that he was very sincere - he took the whole affair
very seriously, and I could tell that he wanted to get the
matter off his chest, and this was why he was telling me all of
this." And as far as Larry Warren was concerned, the Great One's
personal testimony only added extra credibility to his own first
hand experience with aliens while he was in the service.

"Jackie felt just like I do that the government needs to 'come
clean,' and tell us all it knows about space visitors. It time
they stopped lying to the public and release all the evidence
they have. When they do, then we'll all be able to see the same
things the late Jackie Gleason did!"

Hopefully this day may arrive soon.

Dan;

OK here again is tieing things together: Gleason's description
matches fairly closely what my source described in 1982 at WP:
Both the containers and physical description.

For similar descriptions to Jackie Gleasons experience, read the
Valuts at WPAFB section here at UFO Folklore !

Email Comments to UFO Folklore !










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                         Re: RPIT More New Findings

From: neil morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 11:21:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:53:16 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings
 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 01:39:03 +0100

 >Regarding:

 >>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:35:33 +0100
 >>Subject: RPIT More New Findings

 >Neil wrote:

 >>I realise some on this list have concluded that the RPIT project
 >>is nothing more than a wild goose chase reading symbols into
 >>"smuge" marks etc, but I hope the attached image will even make
 >>these people stop and think.

 >[...]

 >>I'm left with the conclusion that this _is_ a large piece of
 >>aprox 1/2 inch thick material which is totally at odds with
 >>anything contained in the "usual" explanations for the debris.
 >>I'm not saying it's ET at this point, but as sure as hell it's
 >>_not_ MOGUL.

 >Neil,

 >How do you know that for sure?


James,

As I said in a protracted private exchange with Phil Klass a
couple of months back now on this topic, I _cannot_ be 110% cast
iron sure.

Nobody can _either_ way, just from the images.

_But_

When numerous details within these images fail to match the
official blueprints of the ML307a->c radar reflector nominated
by the USAF as being identified as the cause of the wreckage
within these images, I start to smell a rat. I have footage of
the MOGUL launches showing the train configuration, I have
details of the equipment packages and instruments they carried,
I see none of this in the images, I therefore conclude, in my
opinion, this is _not_ MOGUL debris.

You are free to continue to believe it as such, _but_ please go
through the anomalous items located within the FW images one by
one and attempt to identify each within the MOGUL specification.

I suggest you may have _extreme_ difficulty resolving the latest
"thick" metalic debris findings with this specification as there
seems to have been no such material used in the construction.

 >>A final thought, I find it interesting that this debris is in
 >>clear view in one of the two photographs were the original
 >>negatives have been "lost", I only hope a copy might have been
 >>made of the other and it might yet turn up, I wonder if it too
 >>might have had "interesting" debris in full view.

 >It's clearly the same 'debris' in all photographs taken.

Not so, though _some_ of the debris is seen in _most_ of the
images, the "mix" gets moved round from shot to shot it gets
covered and uncovered and as with the later Newton shot some
dissapears altogether.

 >[From your website]

 >>After starting out on this little project thinking the debris
 >>on the floor WAS a weather balloon, the more I look at these
 >>pictures in detail the more I think it's NOT, and the proof of
 >>the Roswell Event might have been right there looking out at us
 >>for the past 50 years in these 4 photographs.

 >A difficulty with greatly magnified images is losing sight of
 >the simple picture.

 >See, for example:

 >http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/jbj_1.jpg


Even in the UTA's 552x694 lossy .jpg (the URL above) you can
clearly make out the "tram lines" of the "glyph panel" in the
lower left, (not part of any MOGUL spec) and just about make out
the light coloured sedan parked outside Ramey's window. Of
course you'd have no idea exactly what these blobs of pixels
were if you hadn't bothered to look any closer, and, when things
didn't start to make sense with the "accepted convention" to
keep on looking that little bit closer.

You are correct in the observation that I look _very_ closely at
the images, but this is not done in isolation, I do have the
original 11x14's and general overviews of the prints used for
"targeting". For example, regarding the above image, my data set
comprises of the lower half of this image, using my own 11x14
first generation prints I produced 14 overlapping grid scans
covering the area showing the debris, each of these 14 images is
6000x6000 pixels scanned at 2400 dpi. Together with general
overviews this comes to aprox 580 megabytes of image data, a
similar amount of image data has been generated for the other
two usable UTA images, the MarcelLeft image is of no great value
for close work as the camera was moved as the flash went off
causing image blur.


 >Does that even conceivably show debris from an alien spacecraft?


I prefer to consider it "unknown" at this time as I have yet to
come accross the makers "chassis plate".

Best Regards
Neil.

-------------------------------------------------------
                      Neil Morris@Home.

Email:             Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Web Sites:        Roswell and Alien Autopsy
                   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
         The Fort Worth Photographs of James Bond Johnson
                http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/
-------------------------------------------------------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 08:43:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:56:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In

 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 03:01:32
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Alien Bodies Recovered After UFO Crash In Wales?

 >Source: The Daily Mirror, London
 >http://www.ic24.net/mgn/THE_MIRROR/NEWS/P23S12.html
 >Redfern's book was published months ago.
 >Stig

The recent Berwyn 'UFO Crash' piece in the Daily Mirror cannot
be allowed to pass without comment.

So.......


 >HOW ALIEN'S MY VALLEY?

 >Farmer claims he saw UFO

 >A TOP-SECRET Government research base was used to store alien
 >bodies after their UFO crashed in a remote Welsh valley, it was
 >claimed yesterday.

 >The mysterious craft came down in the Berwyn Mountains, Clwyd,
 >according to a new book by top UFO investigator Nick Redfern.

 >In a chilling echo of the infamous Roswell Incident in New
 >Mexico, scores of troops were dispatched on a secret mission to
 >recover the wreckage.

 >One soldier, quoted in the book under the pseudonym James
 >Prescott, was ordered to Llandderfel with four others and loaded
 >two oblong boxes into their armoured truck.

The source of this 'information' has always been anonymous. Tony
Dodd _claims_ to know who was involved but, as usual, won't
share his secrets. No-one actually saw a _craft_ of any kind!

 >They then ferried the bodies back to the Chemical and Biological
 >Defence Establishment at Porton Down near Salisbury, Wilts,
 >under strict orders not to stop for anything.

Again this is information derived from an anonymous and almost
certainly non-existant source.

 >Retired Mr Prescott, who is too afraid of reprisals to be named,
 >said: "Once inside, the boxes were opened by staff at the
 >faculty in our presence. We were shocked to see two creatures
 >.which had been placed inside decontamination suits.

Consider: Would the 'delivery boys' be allowed to stay around to
see the Greatest Secret In The Universe being unveiled? And with
no protective garb being worn? Why were the 'bodies' transported
by truck and not helicopter?

 >"It was obvious the creatures were not of this world and, when
 >examined, were found to be dead.
 >"The bodies were about five to six feet tall, humanoid in shape,
 >but so thin they looked almost skeletal with a covering skin.
 >"Although I did not see a craft at the scene of the recovery, I
 >was informed that a large craft had crashed and was recovered by
 >other military units."

Research in the villages of Llandrillo, Llanderfel, Bala and Corwen
indicates that there were very few military personel around
for this 'incident'. Police (who had initially thought a plane had
crashed) and a three man team from RAF Valley were involved.
There is no evidence, other than the anecdotal, to the contrary.

 >Farmer Huw Lloyd, 39, was a boy of 14 watching TV at home in
 >nearby Llandrillo on the night of the crash in January 1974. He
 >said there was a huge bang followed by a tremor and a blinding
 >blue light.
 >Huw recalled: "I was amazed at how quickly the police responded
 >and how many people came here."

In an interview I conducted with Lloyd in 1998 he stated that
there were no more than two car loads of police, which is not an
unreasonable amount if they suspected a plane crash. They
arrived at his father's farm about 30-40 minutes after the earth
tremor. Not a particularly fast response time.

 >The incident has remained classified and the Ministry of Defence
 >refuses to comment.

Utter nonsense! The MOD are quite happy to answer letters about
the 'event' but will say they have no knowledge other than the
fact that RAF Valley was called out. The squadron log for RAF
Valley for the relevant date is entirely freely available and
was not classified.

 >Details were uncovered by expert Mr Redfern after years of
 >research and are published in his book Cosmic Crashes.

Even Nick now says that the Berwyn Case isn't as clear cut as he
once thought, although we agree to differ in our conclusions.

I hope to be able to post a full analysis of the 'James
Prescott' scenario in a week or so. Kevin McClure has done some
excellent work on this aspect and I have asked him if he will
write a summary.

It seems that there are certain UK ufologists who are desparate
to turn a mundane incident into our very own Roswell. Fun ahead!

Happy Trails

Andy






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 15:12:10 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:59:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:16:43 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 12:23:32 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Get Real

 >>My children are aged 2 6 and 7 (all girls). They are interested
 >>in Barbie, the Disney channel and Zelda (N64) and are not
 >>interested in space aliens. Their description of these creatures
 >>as 'monsters' is as good as any since none of us know what they
 >>are, assuming that they exist at all.

 >By the way, it is
 >the Disney channel that has the program "So Weird" and many
 >movies with alien-related themes.  And on the Disney radio
 >channel the other day I heard them doing a little contest where
 >kids call in to an alleged telephone located near Area 51 and if
 >an alien answers, they win (complete with the X-Files theme
 >song).  If you don't want your daughters exposed to alien themes
 >and images, better watch out for Disney too.

It's not a case of not wanting my daughters exposed to alien
themes, as I said before, my kids are just not interested.
They can make their own minds up and space aliens just do not
grab their attention.

 >If you are interested to see what your kids are being exposed to
 >these days, you can do this little experiment - they do it in
 >the schools.  Talk a little about what your kids think about the
 >possibility of life on other planets then ask them to draw a
 >picture of what they think someone from another planet would
 >look like.  Bet ya 9 outta 10 at least one will draw a critter
 >with a big head and large, almond-shaped eyes.  Don't worry,
 >doesn't mean they've been abducted - only living in the real
 >world with all the commercialism that surrounds us.

Living in the real world? living in a world of television
imagery more like, I don't see how this is supposed to prove
anything.

If that experiment was done in say the 1950's I don't think the
same results would be found do you?

Let's jump forward a decade or so, using _your_ logic (real
world commercialism) how do you explain the total lack of
'greys' in any of the sci-fi films and tv shows made in those
days?

Is there a record anywhere pre-1970's that describes the grey
alien as we presently know it??

Your point about commercialism is a good one though, it
certainly proves how easily some people (child and adult) can be
influenced by what they see on the television.

 >>So the creature doesn't show up in scanned images and I have to
 >>be looking at the original photo in order to see anything, is
 >>this what you're saying?

 >That's what I would do before drawing conclusions.

I am a computer graphic artist by trade, 2D/3D.

I asked the question because it has been my experience that
scanning a photo actually enhances the picture, I quite often
pick out features within a scan I hadn't noticed in the
original.

I would like to know why nothing can be seen in your scan, do
you have a poor scanner or something?

A cheap flatbed can normally handle at least 600 dpi optical and
generally comes with all the enhancement software needed.

 >>>I will gladly do so via private E-mail for anyone if you (and
 >>>any other recipients) promise not to publish the information
 >>>publicly. I do not wish to point out anyone in public because it
 >>>is only my opinions based on personal experiences. I would love
 >>>for someone to ask these researchers why they never contacted me
 >>>or bothered to ask even a few questions. Thank you for
 >>>volunteering, Dave!

 >>My pleasure, you know my address. I promise not to publish the
 >>information.

 >Can you indicate what you plan to say to these
 >"researchers"/"investigators" about the article in question?
 >Will you simply ask them why they didn't review the material or
 >will you be adding your assessment as well?

I just want to ask why they didn't review the material, I don't
plan to add anything.

 >>Thank you for the kind offer Amy but it's the kind of thing that
 >>my family and I have managed to get over on our own.

 >Glad to hear it no longer bothers you.  I was just a little
 >worried since it still seemed to be on your mind as expressed in
 >your post. ;>

Actually it will always be on our minds but life is for the
living and we've learned to get on with it, thanks again.

Dave.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Chris Kelly <MIBAREA51@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 13:08:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:01:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


I am wondering with all of the talk about the Gulf Breeze
photo's...

Did Tommy Smith ever say anything else about his part in faking
pictures and or Ed Walters? What about the short video Walters
took of the "UFO" coming into view and casting the shadow on the
trees. What is the opinion on that? I have not seen anything
about it posted.

Chris Kelly







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 18:44:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:07:00 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

Good Afternoon Jenny

 >>Andy, yes _we_ have learned a heck of a lot _BUT_ have _we_ got an
 >>answer that satisfies all? No! Why's that? Because some UFO's have
 >>not, or can not be explained to anyone. But when I was speaking about
 >>solving the riddle that is ufology, I was talking generally Andy, not
 >>individual cases.

 >I think the point is that all UFO cases are potentially
 >explicable. There is an answer to everything in the universe. We
 >just have not found   all these answers yet. That answer might
 >be a simple thing or an exotic solution but all UFOs will in the
 >end be IFOs by the process of identifying them.

 >Its also highly unlikely that any UFO solution will please
 >everyone for two key reasons.

 >1: UFOs are not a single phenomenon. There are multiple and
 >different UFO phenomena with a range of explanations.

 >2: Most people accept this but believe 'some' UFOs are -
 >substitute whatever your own pet theory is. There are many pet
 >theories and most (ETH, Time Travellers, All UFOs are IFOs) are
 >quite unprovable. It can only ever be a value judgement and
 >these can never please everyone.

 >What Andy is saying - and I agree with him - is that all UFOs
 >have the potential to be mundane IFOs - with none any exotic
 >phenomenon at all. You cannot, as you quote from  Sherlock
 >Holmes, eliminate all the possibles and thus leave an impossible
 >(i.e. aliens or whatever). The reason is that new types of IFO are
 >always feasible and may simply never have been thought of before
 >now. When they are thought of they can suddenly solve a
 >potentially baffling case. This is the nature of the
 >investigation process in ufology.

 >Our book 'The UFOs that Never were' makes this apparent. But its
 >easy to see by, for instance, the Williamette Pass case. Here
 >you can eliminate all the obvious possibilities. Its not a
 >plane, balloon, meteor, etc. So does that mean by your argument
 >it must be some exotic form of UFO? Many ufologists argued so
 >for years. I felt it did. But clearly it does not. The case
 >remained a UFO for 30 years until Irwin Weider solved it. He
 >solved it as an IFO nobody in the world had dreamed of as a way
 >to explain a UFO case (a road sign).

 >This conclusively shows that the Sherlock Holmes quote does not
 >work in UFO terms and that potentially any UFO case can become
 >an IFO.

 >You may feel some cases never will have mundane causes. I
 >actually agree with you. But its an opinion that we cannot prove
 >and the position Andy adopts (that ultimately all cases will
 >fall in down to earth terms) is perfectly defensible and at
 >least as plausible as the ETH, Time Travellers or any exotic
 >theory. This is not, as you seem to suggest, scepticism or
 >debunking. In fact its just another theory of UFO origin vying
 >like all the others for evidence to back it up.

 >Best wishes,

 >Jenny Randles

Jenny I think that you might be missing the same point that Andy
is missing.

I am assuming that we are talking about _only genuine_ sighting
reports and etc and not hoax's etc.

When _you_ have _positively_ identified 99.99 percent of UFO's
using every explanation that you have, including outrageous
statements such as "piezo electric lights dancing in the swamp
gas which was reflected off Venus's glow"  Then you _must_ be
left with

 >'some' UFOs are -
 >substitute whatever your own pet theory is.

Are you not?

And as to

 >The case
 >remained a UFO for 30 years until Irwin Weider solved it.

There is still cases that cannot be explained even after fifty
years of research, I.E. Kenneth Arnold's sighting, Hogwash to
all the pelican theories.

Whether alien spacecraft is prove-able or not is too some degree
a moot point at this moment in time. Until the proverbial
landing on Buckingham Palace lawn (White house lawn for you
"yanks" <g>) the ET answer is not going to be "Proved".

So until the proverbial landing on whatever public lawn, ET will
remain unproved to the general public will it not? So until
then, ET is a matter of _belief_ or logical deduction depending
on your point of view. So please stop sitting on the fence and
make your mind up, does ET exist, yes or no? Simple as that
really if you ask me.

--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 25

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:14:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:26:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 23:21:54 -0500
 >From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>From: Bruce Maccabee
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:44:23 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:21:42 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>I think you are trivializing this.

 >On the contrary, Bruce. I truly believe it is you that are
 >trivializing the importance of this particular aspect of the GB
 >investigation. The analogy of the check out line is clear: I
 >could continue through the line as many times as I wanted UNTIL
 >they found out I had committed fraud. In the meantime, I'll
 >never admit it voluntarily. Likewise, if Ed wanted to deceive,
 >he could continue to produce fakes as long as you were willing
 >to believe he knew nothing about photography; thereby adding
 >credence to the authenticity of his photos. He certainly won't
 >voluntarily admit fraud, especially if he is getting away with
 >it.

 >Is it your assumption that all fraud is detectable and, if not
 >detected, then it doesn't exist?

Of course not.

But my assumption is that if ed had been creating a fraud it
would have been detectable. Not only that, but, if Ed had been
commiting photographic fraud, then he was continually getting
"better" at it since the conditions were continually getting
tougher.

You argue that creation of all the pictures was "easy"... I say
that it wasn't all that easy.

 >In the meantime, you maintain that no evidence exists that Ed
 >faked the photos because of an unnecessarily complex view of
 >just what it would take to fake them.

Unnecessarily complex? Complex for Ed, IMHO. You wish to argue
that they were not too complex for Ed. Apparently I can't
convince you that they were beyond Ed's
knowledge/skill/capability and you can't convince me that they
were withing his knowledge/skill/capability/ I guess we'll have
to agree to disagree.

 >By doing so, you, perhaps >unknowingly, artificially enhance
the credibility of what >appears to me as basic photographic
techniques applied by >someone with basic, not advanced,
photographic skills.

Yes, "appears to you as basic photographic techniques" But just
because it appears to you to be basic doesn't mean it appears to
everyone as "basic" or simple. I would classify Ed as in the
group of people for whom these techniques are not "basic" but
actually rather advanced.

<snip>

 >>Presumably Ed would not need a copy stand if he were to take
 >>pictures with no smear. You have him using a tripod to take
 >>unsmeared pictures and then saying, :"oh these will be more
 >>convincing if I create a smear which will be th same on both the
 >>UFO and the streetlight. So I'll go out and buy a cheap copy
 >>stand, one so cheap that when I click the shutter the camera
 >>will move slighting thereby creating the same smear on the UFO
 >>and on the streetlight."

 >This is nonsense, Bruce. The obvious point is that ALL of the GB
 >photos could be produced on the copy stand, whether he wanted
 >them blurred or not. The stand could be rigid as steel; the blur
 >would be created by moving the print during exposure.
 >Butt-simple. Or is this yet ANOTHER basic photographic technique
 >that you didn't think of while investigating every possible
 >explanation about the GB photos? Let's explore that territory a
 >bit...>

Butt-simple... yes. If you think of doing it. If the copy stand
were as rigid as steel and the camera fastened and the film
lying there with no "wind" around... the natural thing would be
to take a picture with no motion of the camera or film being
copied. This would produce an unsmeared picture. One would have
to _think_ of actually moving the picture while the shutter was
open. That requires an escalation of "expertise" over simply
making a copy with the copy stand. (And, also requires care in
moving the picture in such a way that a reflection glare does
not occur during the movement.)

 >Beyond admitting that you never thought of the masked double
 >exposure technique,

Whoops. Never said that. I described the masked double exposure
in my MUFON Symposium presentation.

What I didn't think of was putting the mask inside the camera on
the film container. This is "easy" to introduce for the first
picture of the pack and, of course, can be left in a single
position for all the pictures in the pack. But if the position
of the mask has to be changed after the first picture the change
has to be made in a dark room. Ed's first photo was #5 of the
pack.

 >you stated that the photos to be copied
 >would have to be "quite large"; large enough to maintain focus.
 >This is false: Using the Polaroid copy stand, no large prints
 >would be needed. He could double expose, cut and paste and alter
 >original Polaroids at will and copy them onto more Polaroid
 >film.

The idea of cut and paste was tested. The edges of the images
where a cutout is laid over another picture will generally have
a jagged edge or not a smooth variation of brightness from the
image on the cutout to the image on the underlying film. Of
course the boundary between the cut edge and the lower
_background_ film can be "smoothed" by defocus or motion blur...

So analyses of photos using a computer were done to determine
whether or not defocus was used to hide the "cut and paste". No
evidence of that technique was found. SNIP

 >And, yes, the addition of blur WOULD make the final effect more
 >believable. It fooled you, didn't it? Or, rather, you believe
 >that the inclusion of blur makes the photo less likely to be a
 >fake? Why? Because you couldn't think of a way to fake it? Well,
 >now you know how! Does that make the photo more or less likely
t>o be a fake?

It's not that I didn't think of a way to fake it, I just didn't
think of doing it exactly the way you have suggested. You are
claiming that with the copy stand it is "so easy." Yes, as I
pointed out above, easy if you think of doing it.


 >Moving on, Bruce suggested:

 >>You should contemplate photo 11, the photo of the UFO supposedly
 >>in the distance over a field, with a blue line coming down.
 >>Hyzer claims it was a double exposure. By this he means what I
 >>call a simple double exposure as opposed to a masked double
 >>exposure. The upper part of the "beam" is silhouetted against
 >>the dim morning sky. The bottom of the beam is silhouetted
 >>against the total dark trees, buildings and ground. So, what do
 >>you think? A simple double exposure?

 >A distinction without a difference. It, too, could be created on
 >the Polaroid copy stand.

Yes, this would have to be a cut and paste situation in which
the UFO model and blue "beam" are cutouts laid on top of a
Polaroid photo of the background and then the combination
photographed... essentially a masked single exposure in which a
paper cutout (of a photographed model of a UFO) is blocking
light from the background photo at the location of the model
(and beam).

 >In fact, this is my whole point, Bruce. It doesn't have to be
 >complicated to look good. And the less complicated it is,
 >the more likely Ed (or anyone else) could do it.

 >However, you maintain the false reasoning that the pictures he
 >produced could ONLY be fake if a sophisticated optical technique
 >was used by someone with an advanced degree of knowledge about
 >photography. You are a photo analyst; presumably with said
 >advanced degree of knowledge about photography. Yet the notion
 >of using a cheap copy stand or a masked film cartridge never
 >occurred to you. Does that make me some kind of photographic
 >genius? (Bob Shell would say "No.")>

I suppose we would have to define "sophisticated". I still say
that Ed was not sufficiently sophisticated to do these things.
The idea of a "cheap copy stand" and rephotogrqphy was
considered and investigated years ago... although I doubt that
anyone contemplated the expense of the stand... Ed could have
afforded the best photographic equipment available... It is true
that the masked film cartridge didn't occur to me. But so what?
I contemplated another masked method which, to my way of
thinking, would have been more likely what someone would try.

 >Forgive the inclusion, but I believe Hyzer made the same
 >mistake. Instead of looking at what tools were available for the
 >average person to achieve the GB photos through fraud, you and
 >Hyzer both assumed that it MUST be something more exotic and
 >sophisticated; something that would elevate the challenge of
 >discovery and detection to a level worth of your expertise
 >(hence the "Hyzer method")

Look, there were two things you came up with: a mask inside the
camera and a "cheap copy stand" with rephotography of a paste on
"model."

(Don't need the mask inside the camera if you use rephotography)
How do you know that Hyzer didn't think of these things himself,
or variants, and check for them on photo 1 and then rule them
out?

 >Why?

 >Why must it be so darned complicated?

 >In fact, this has nothing to do with Ed's intent, or whether
 >he's telling the truth or blowing smoke up your skirt. It has
 >nothing to do with what other witness saw or didn't see. It has
 >nothing to do with whether Ed is a simple man or a sophisticated
 >man. Henry Ford couldn't even write his own name. So what? And
 >believe it or not, it has nothing to do with whether the GB
 >photos are real or fake.

 >All it boils down to is this:

 >Can't you just admit that the photos could be faked on a cheap
 >Polaroid copy stand? If not, then why? Because Ed said he didn't
 >have one? Because Ed claims to know nothing about basic
 >photography?

Well, as I have said above, rephotography or whatever you want
to call it (paste or lay a "model" on top of the photograph of
the background and then photograph the combination) can be done
well or can leave "tracks." These tracks... unwanted variations
in brightness or even shadows at the edges of the model..can be
looked for in the final photo. They were looked for... and not
found. Perhaps Ed figured out a way to cover the tracks without
using defocus to blur the edges. But if so he was "very good."

So I "admit" that the photos could, _in_principle_ be faked
using a copy stand and rephotography. HOwever, I cannot "admit"
that Ed's photos were done this way because I found no evidence
of it.... and not just me. Sainio and other pros looked at the
photos. Possibly Hyzer also searched for "rephotography tracks."

Of course, Ed's denial of knowing about photo tricks and his
apparent zero level knowledge of photography in general means
nothing. He could be a fabulous genius with "no tracks." Right?

 >Gee, there goes Ed through the check out line again....

 >At what point does Maccabee's Grocery Store start becoming
 >suspicious?

Oh, about 11 1/2 years ago.

I should point out, as have numerous times before, that I would
_give_ you the argument that the photos could have been faked. I
say, the capability is beyond Ed.

Your rejoinder is, hey, all these things are so simple... cheap
copy stands, lenses come with it, just slap the photo of the
background into the stand, lay a cutout model on top and
photograph away... even slide the picture a little if you want
convincing smear... all so simple.

Well, in the absence of any evidence at all that Ed could have
known about any of those things I would have to say simplicity
is not "proof"... not even evidence.

If you are trying to argue that Ed's photos are fake because it
was "so easy" to create them, I would say you are wrong.

If you say you don't know whether the photos are fake or real,
but at the least they could be done "easily" by someone with the
equipment, time and knowledge, I would say you are right
(probably... although there are certain technical details for
the various photos that make some of them "iffy" to fake in a
"simple" way).

If you argue that Ed had the equipment, time and knowledge then
I would say... OK... prove it, but don't use circular
reasoning. That is, don't use the fact that the pictures could
have been faked as proof that Ed had the equipment, time and
knowledge. that Ed faked the pictures. Find some other
evidence such as "sightings" of a copy stand, darkroom,
photographic magazines, books, numerous cameras of different
types, etc... something to indicate that Ed was not a photo
dolt.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                   Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:26:20
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 02:40:14 -0400
Subject: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy


Source: Florida Today,

http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/special/contact/panic.htm

Stig

***

Alien contact would ignite media frenzy

[Image: Aliens blast the White House in this scene from
"Independence Day."]

Scientists' plan for trying to manage the event: Confirm,
verify, tell the world

By Todd Halvorson FLORIDA TODAY

ARECIBO, Puerto Rico - The Hollywood scenarios always are the
same.

Soon after we make contact with aliens, hysteria seizes a
panicked public, or paranoid G-men in black suits and dark
sunglasses put a lid on the news.

But in the real world, scientists expect neither mass
pandemonium nor a government cover-up if or when intelligent
life is found elsewhere in the universe.

A media free-for-all in today's wired world - coupled with a
carnival-like sideshow - is more likely.

"What happens next will be something that we cannot in fact
control or orchestrate at all," said Jill Tarter, chief
scientist with the SETI Institute of Mountain View, Calif.,
which is searching for extraterrestrial intelligence. "It will
be a huge circus."

Imagine the O.J. Simpson trial with a cosmic twist.

The initial news flash will be followed by special TV reports
with such catchy titles as "Alien Encounter at Arecibo."

News crews will scurry to the mountaintop observatory here, and
a new genre of "expert" TV analysts - astronomers with a knack
for snappy sound bites - will form a lucrative cottage industry.

A human wave made of the UFO crowd, strange cults, religious
zealots and enterprising T-shirt vendors will crash onto Puerto
Rican shores, swamping the media event to beat all media events.

"That's one scenario that just might play out," Tarter said.
"What is unsettling is the fact that the situation will get away
from us, and it will be very difficult to do our work."

A plan, however, already is in hand to try to manage the event.

Called the "Declaration of Principals Concerning Activities
Following the Detection of Extraterrestrial Intelligence," it's
a three-page set of instructions adopted in 1989 by the
International Academy of Astronautics.

Made up of 1,000 researchers from 65 countries, the academy
presumes the detection will come in the form of an intercepted
radio signal rather than an alien spaceship visiting the White
House.

The protocol includes the following:

�Step One: Confirm, over and over again. The discoverer will not
make any announcement until proving - beyond a doubt - that the
radio beacon isn't a stray TV signal from The Sci-Fi Channel.
�Step Two: Verify, repeatedly and independently. Don't claim an
alien contact before scientists at other radio telescopes can
unequivocally determine that ET indeed is calling. �Step Three:
Tell Everybody. Alert the appropriate "national authorities."
Advise astronomers through the Central Bureau of Astronomical
Telegrams. Notify the secretary general of the United Nations.
Ring up the media. But do not return ET's call.

Any response to an alien message, the protocol says, is a matter
for "international consultations" - in other words, a worldwide
debate over who should say what for humankind.

Tarter, who played a major role in putting together the
protocol, is one of the many scientists who know full well the
announcement won't go by the book.

But at the same time, scientists say:

Street rioting is unlikely.

Without a doubt, a 1938 radio dramatization of "The War of The
Worlds" triggered frenzy when thousands of listeners thought
invading Martians were spreading death and destruction in New
Jersey and New York.

The Sunday night broadcast disrupted households, interrupted
church services, spawned traffic jams and clogged telephone
lines. Some actually left their homes as wide-eyed mobs took to
the streets.

But scientists say the chances that aliens actually will show up
in spaceships, threatening to lay waste to our cities and abduct
our women, are slim and none.

Even an advanced alien civilization, they say, would find
interstellar travel technically difficult, extraordinarily
expensive and prohibitively time-consuming.

It would, for example, take 100,000 years for an alien spaceship
traveling at the speed of light - 186,282 miles a second - to
fly from one side of the Milky Way to our little spot in the
boondocks.

Aliens on board likely would be dead on arrival unless they had
discovered a cure for old age. Scientists, as a result, say it's
more likely contact will come in the form of a remote radio
signal.

"The point here is that there would be no immediate danger,"
said SETI Institute scientist Seth Shostak. "Just because you
picked up a radio signal doesn't mean the aliens are hopping in
their saucers and coming our way."

The announcement won't shock the world.

Public opinion polls the past few years show most people already
believe life exists elsewhere in the universe - primarily aliens
piloting UFOs - so the news won't come as a big surprise.

Pseudoscientific literature, supermarket tabloids and talk shows
have persuaded many to believe also in ancient astronauts and
alien crop circles.

"If the headline tomorrow says, `Scientists Prove Existence of
Extraterrestrial Intelligence,' Joe Six Pack will say, `Look
Marge, they've finally come clean. I knew the aliens were out
there. Could you hand me the sports section?' "

There will be no government cover-up.

Much to the chagrin of the conspiracy crowd, the international
protocol clearly states that a confirmed alien detection "should
be disseminated promptly, openly and widely through scientific
channels and public media."

Beyond that, the drill for authenticating a signal from ET
effectively spreads the news very fast.

Astronomers in countries around the world would be called to
work in a harried bid to verify the alien beacon, making leaks
to the media unstoppable and a cover-up impossible.

In addition, those who think the government successfully could
quash the scientific discovery of the millennium "greatly
underestimate the urge to share heart-stopping news - and the
perceptive powers of the press," Shostak said.

Case in point:

In June 1997, SETI Institute scientists working at an
observatory in West Virginia intercepted a signal that appeared
to be the real thing.

In the midst of a daylong effort to authenticate it, a New York
Times reporter called the observatory control room to ask about
"that interesting signal" the scientists tuned in to.

"Here was a signal that had us going for 24 hours, and I can
tell you there were no government types crashing into the
control room. No guys in narrow ties. No guys with black
fedoras," Shostak said.

But a newspaper reporter hundreds of miles away already had been
tipped to what eventually turned out to be a false alarm.

"The point is that in the case of a detection, the people who
are going to know first are the media, and then it's too late"
for a cover-up, Shostak said.

"The feds could come in and shut us down, but the signal is in
the sky and in The New York Times. Anybody with a big radio
antenna could confirm the signal for themselves."

The ensuing media blitz would be overwhelming, like the blanket
coverage during the Persian Gulf War or the more recent crisis
in Kosovo.

Just how long it would last depends on the nature of the beacon.
Scientists say there are two types of signals that could be
detected:

Stray radio signals that radiate into space like waves created
by a pebble dropped into a pond.

Early television shows such as "I Love Lucy" have been rippling
outward for a half century, long enough to have traveled past
hundreds of stars as far as 50 light years away.

A light year is 5.88 trillion miles, or the distance television
and radio signals travel in one year at 186,282 miles a second.
Who knows? Any day now, an alien version of "My Favorite
Martian" might reach Earth.

An intentional beacon, one intended to be heard by intelligent
civilizations. It might be a simple welcome to the Galactic Club
or a signal with an embedded message.

Neither a stray signal nor an interstellar hello would tell us
much except to provide proof of life elsewhere and scant
information about the home of our celestial neighbors.

Astronomers, for instance, could use telescopes to focus on the
source of the signal and study a farflung planetary home. But
that would reveal little about an alien civilization's way of
life.

"We'd be able to tell a number of things about their planet -
its size, its location, the length of their day and the length
of their year," said SETI Institute scientist Peter Backus.

"But it may be a long time before we find out anything about
their civilization."

On the other hand, an intentional beacon with an embedded
message may shed light on the aliens themselves and the lives
they lead.

Perhaps ET is broadcasting an Encyclopedia Galactica or advice
on how to solve global environmental and geopolitical problems.

"The first question Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch are going to ask
is, `What are they saying?' " Shostak said.

"The second question will be, 'What do they look like?' "And the
information we get might not answer either question. The message
might be screaming difficult to decipher, like hieroglyphics. Or
it might be something that we can never decipher."

Media coverage and public interest, consequently, are likely to
wax and wane with the speed at which cryptographers can decode
the message.

In the meantime, SETI Institute scientists will discover
long-term job security.

"I don't think we'll have trouble getting telescope time
anymore," Tarter said.

**

Order your personal copy of "Contact" by using this secure order
form.

Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of
Service updated June 1999.

Comments or questions? Inquire about advertising *here.

This World Wide Web site is copyright � 1999 FLORIDA TODAY.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                            Re: Alien Ineptitude

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 04:36:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 02:52:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude


Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 01:36:46 -0400
To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@mindspring.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude
 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:01:54 GMT


 >>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 03:41:26 -0400
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Ineptitude

 >>I ... choose to
 >>spend my time trying to get a serious investigation into the
 >>reports of the abductees going ...

 >>Some people are in very real distress
 >>over this Joe. For them, 'reporting' is like going to an
 >>emergency room and instead of receiving treatment the doctors
 >>stand around debating and speculating while you slowly bleed to
 >>death.

Joe responds:

A better analogy (IMHO, at least) is this one: Doctors and
medical researchers are standing around the emergency room
debating about the causes of and cures for bleeding. You arrive
bleeding. The doctors and researchers race each other to get to
you first. If a doctor wins the race, you get some curative
treatment. If a researcher wins you get sucked into a research
study into causes of bleeding.

My point was that the 'experiencers' get lost in the shuffle. I
agree Joe. It's a tough call to know 'who' to call in and for
which case and under which conditions. There are times when a
serious research person is called for, and others where a
psychologist is clearly indicated. My sense of it is that a
combination of both would be best under the circumstances. That
is, if we lived in a 'perfect world.'  :)

You're right, John. Some people are in extreme distress. They
_need_ something curative. Such as emotional support and
counseling. Too often, what they _get_ is a researcher who wants
to get the data before a therapist 'contaminates' it.

It's a P.I.T.A. job and I don't know who would actually 'do it'
but -each case/report- needs to be evaluated individually. I'd
be happy to see -any kind- of concerted effort made to examine
these cases. A big part of the problem is that we can't get any
two people to agree with each other even as to what the
'protocols' of such an investigation should be! In the meantime
I continue to receive letters from perfectly ordinary family/
working folks from all over the planet who have had their
'world' turned upside down by the possibility that they, or
their families, are somehow involved in this mess.

Tough call. "Treat" or "investigate?" One case at a time is the
only way. BUT- 'treat or investigate' we must because it is our
neighbors and coworkers and sometimes even family members that
are reporting! It is in -everyone's- best interest that we do
so.

That poses problems for those of us who are research oriented.
We need to realize that therapists and researchers have
different aims. And, consequently, successful therapy doesn't
always produce much evidence for the researcher, and may even
produce red herrings.

Why it needs to be taken on a case by case basis. I went to a
psychologist for an evaluation before I went to Budd Hopkins. I
didn't know (or trust) Budd and I -needed to know- that I hadn't
simply 'snapped a bridge cable.' Maybe 'multi-disciplinary' is
the right way to go. Strict research people working in tandem
with mental health care pro's. If it should ever prove out that
there is a real and physical phenomenon happening, it'll be good
to know that those who were traumatized by those experiences
received help, support, and counselling when they needed it.

Not everyone who doesn't share your views has been the victim of
a government/alien conspiracy. [;-)

I don't know if there is or isn't any "alien/government" conspiracy.
What I said was, that governments (may be) involved in keeping
the lid on an alien presence. I didn't mean to give the impression
that I 'believed' that it was true. or that anyone who "doesn't
share my views" has been a "victim" of it. You place meaning
in my words that was not there or intended.

FWIW, I do believe that 'they' exist and that something real is
happening to those who call themselves abductees. I just don't
know what.

Wish you had been standing at my side a few times along the way.
"Tweety" would be whistling a different tune!  :)

Actually, yours is an intellectually honest response Joe. I
respect it.

Actually, I'd also like to point out that 2 or 3
changes-of-subject upstream from this post I posed the following
question:

 >Is there any evidence that would selectively discriminate
 >between these theories:

 >1. That the same off-world beings that pilot the craft are
 >also perpetrating the abductions.

 >2. That abductions are Out-of-Body Experiences, Lucid Dreams
 >or cases of Awareness during Sleep Paralysis that are
 >unrecognized or incompletely recalled.

<snip>

The results were meagre.

Bloody shame man. I'd like to think that 'good minds' are coming
together to study the question. But then 'apathy' is what has
allowed the whole world to sink into its current condition.

Just looking for evidence.

We're both looking for the same thing Joe. In the final analysis
we're all on the 'same side.' Would be nice to know the truth.

Whether for or against.

Regards,

John Velez

________________________________________________
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 06:04:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 03:01:39 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:23:46 +0000
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I've been worried about Dr. Greer and others push for "an end to
 >ufo secrecy" for the reasons obvious if you've read any of
 >Vallee's 1979 _Messengers of Deception_ as well as his
 >subsequent books; the probability that such disclosure would be
 >manipulated as a continuance of the manipulations that have gone
 >before. Greer seems to have wisened up to this same scenario's
 >probability.

Stephen

What Greer hasn't wised up to is the fact that he has been
saying for years that he's on the verge of a paradigm shifting
UFO disclosure, yet two and half years after their Washington
meeting they are no nearer disclosing anything.

If you ever get to question them over this you'll receive
standard replies which side step the issue and leave the
disclosure just out of grasp. You'll hear that the witnesses
will only testify under oath infront of congress, yet the
meeting in Washington two years ago wasn't done under oath.
You'll then hear that they fear for their lives, yet have names
and photographs on their website of those that spoke in
Washington. lastly you'll that they need funding for a
disclosure documentary, which is apparently under way, but they
seem to forget that their witnesses will only speak under oath
at a congressional hearing.

The action is simple, organise a world wide press conference and
get the witnesses to speak enmass and stop pussy footing around
demanding funds.

 >Military interests, which are heavily involved in covert
 >projects which hoax ET events, such as human military- related
 >abductions, have a shared goal of demonizing the UFO/ET
 >phenomenon.

Greer allegedly has witnesses who will testify that alien
abductions are psychotronic military abductions and/or
government cloned et's. He has been sitting on this information,
holding it for ransom, rather than put a stop to these
experiences. Of course we have to take his word that this
information is genuine. If it is true Greer is guilty by
association with these covert forces.

 >And remember: Part of this disclosure plan involves the use of
 >UFO look-alike devices made by humans in an attack on earth or
 >military assets of earth. This would be a well-orchestrated use
 >of advanced human technologies to hoax an ET attack - all for
 >the purpose of disclosing the truth with the desired
 >military-oriented spin. In such a scenario, most of humanity
 >will be deceived into believing the threat from space has
 >arrived - and that we must fight it at all costs. This is
 >nothing more than long-term social security for the
 >military-industrial complex. There must be people who can expose
 >this fraud.

Funny how Greer shirks responsibility, he claims to have a
witness who holds this information. At the Washington briefings
the witness allegedly pulled out at the last minute because the
big bad military had changed their minds. Seems now they've
changed their minds again, or is this scare mongering for funds?
The witness Greer had is so top secret you can find his photo on
their website!

 >But why should we wait for these darker scenarios to be
 >unleashed on an unsuspecting world?

This is the question that everyone should be asking Greer, why
are you sitting on this information?

 >Here is another idea: Why don't 'we the people' unite and launch
 >a disclosure which resembles the first one described above. An
 >honest one. One which leads to peace, not war. To a sustainable
 >and beautiful world, free of pollution and brimming with
 >abundance, of all types. One which reaches out into the unknown,
 >instead of firing particle beam weapons into the darkness of
 >space.

The ransom note arrives.

CSETI claim to have the truth, so why don't they simply hire a
conference suite, invite the worlds media, and let these
witnesses talk? Answer, that's not how holding information for
ransom works!

Tony







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 12:38:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 03:10:12 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 10:25:42 PDT

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >>>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Hi, Jenny,

<snip>

 >>1: UFOs are not a single phenomenon. There are multiple and
 >>different UFO phenomena with a range of explanations.

 >I have sometimes thought along the same lines myself
 >(specifically in the area of high-strangeness cases), but I
 >certainly would not state it, as you have here, as if this were
 >an established fact, because it isn't.

Well we can hopefully disagree in amicable terms on that. I
believe it is established to my satisfaction. Thats not the same
thing as a fact, of course, but I am not forcing the conclusion
onto anyone - merely telling you what I, personally, have found
from my many hundreds of case investigations.


Isn't it odd that when I dont offer conclusions I get told that
I 'sit on the fence' and when I do I am told I am issuing as a
fact a statement that cannot be said to be fact.  If all we ever
did was discuss proven facts about UFOs I think Updates could
close now through lack of use. We can only offer reasoned
premises based upon the evidence and thats what I do here - not
claim that I know 'the truth' any more than anybody does
regarding UFOs.

 >From my experience as an investigator I have encountered cases
that I am overwhelmingly convinced to be a form of UAP (eg an
extreme form of ball lightning is one example). (A first hand
instance of this would be the Nelson car stop case from March
l977)  I do not think all unexplained cases are super BL. This
option does not, for instance, explain alien contact encounters.
Therefore this means we must have at least two types of UFO to
explain different sorts of case. I think the evidence in support
of that contention is strong enough to convince me - especially
given, for instance, basic differences such as the witness per
case ratio for each type. But if it doesnt convince you thats
okay by me too.

 >I am assuming here that
 >you do not assume that all UFOs are potentially reduceable to
 >IFOs -- a debunking cliche to which history has not been kind --
 >and that your premise here is that what we call UFOs and what we
 >call IFOs are different in kind.

If you read my original reply I think I do actually answer your
question there.

I quote from it ...

(You may feel some cases never will have mundane causes. I
actually agree with you. But its an opinion that we cannot prove
and the position Andy adopts (that ultimately all cases will
fall in down to earth terms) is perfectly defensible...

 >>new types of IFO are
 >>always feasible and may simply never have been thought of before
 >>now. When they are thought of they can suddenly solve a
 >>potentially baffling case. This is the nature of the
 >>investigation process in ufology.

 >Why is the idea of alien visitors "impossible"?  I suspect that
 >you do not mean what you say quite the way it sounds.

I did not come up with this possible/impossible analogy if you
follow the original posting to which I replied. I was responding
to a note that argued by citing Sherlock Holmes, from which this
famous quote appears. The point being made by the use of this
quote was - as I understood it - that exotic solutions like
aliens or time travellers forced themselves upon you when you
had ruled out the more mundane ones for any case. As such I did
not choose to substitute 'possible' and 'impossible' into this
scenario - that was done in the quote to which I was clearly
responding !

As you know (because I have said it many times in recent months
on Updates) I do not regard alien contact as an impossible
theory or even an improbable one.

 >I think you are making far, far too much of this isolated
 >instance.

Its not just one instance. 'The UFOs that never were' features
about 25 cases which have progressed from UFO towards sometimes
surprising IFO conclusions as you will see. More than one
involved an answer that required guesswork, skill, good luck or
good judgement to find. Without that often lengthy research they
would have stayed UFOs. In many cases UFOlogists still regard
them as such. Our book aims to make that point from various
examples  - illustrating how UFOs do sometimes become IFOs years
down the track and involve quite unsuspected explanations. I
think it proves that to occur much more than in just one
isolated example - although, of course, most IFOs are not
unusual or surprising. We are simply saying that some are and
these suggest that presently unsolved cases may one day prove to
be IFOs that we have yet to recognise.

This should not be a threat to ufologists or ufology. Is not our
job to solve cases as and when thats possible? Surely doing so
strengthens the scientific value of the evidence we cannot
solve? Thats how I see it anyhow.

 >Historically, the best cases have overwhelmingly
 >stayed unexplained over time, under repeated investigation.

And I have never suggested otherwise. As we have pointed out
many times 'The UFOs that Never Were' is not a book that even
tries to argue that all UFO cases are solved. It is not a book
that claims there are no UFOs (not even exotic UFOs such as
aliens). Indeed as I have also noted the three authors disagree
on that question appreciably. It is not a book that is in any
way about the unsolved cases. But I dont think you can fairly
argue I have not written a good deal about such unexplained
events in the past. So it is silly to judge too much from one
book - its not as if I dont write others!

This is an unusual kind of UFO book in that it concentrates on
cases that started as UFOs and became IFOs (exactly as the title
suggests) and arguing the lessons we can learn from them. The
truly impressive data like McMinnville isnt in there. Theres one
fairly obvious reason for that. Its an unsolved case, not a UFO
that never was.

 >Where the best photographic  cases are concerned, McMinnville is
 >a more appropriate example than the Willamette photo.

Whos arguing otherwise? This book is not a book about the best
photographic cases, or the best UFO cases. Its a book about
SOLVED UFO cases (or in a few instances cases that appear to be
heading for resolution but remain contentious). It at no point
suggests (indeed it says pretty clearly otherwise) that because
some photo cases have been solved every other case on the UFO
records also must be an IFO. I emphatically do not believe that
- but as I said in my last reply I support Andy Robert's right
to defend such a theory, because its a premise you can justify
by way of solved cases. You no doubt reject it in its entirity
for sound reasons. So do I.

I am well aware of the fundamental difference between UFO and
IFO cases and have written about it at length (eg in Science and
the UFOs). But I repeat you are arguing at cross purposes here
attacking a book for not doing things it has never set out to
do.

Its interesting that I can write 30 pro UFO books over 20 odd
years and now that I am involved in one book that is not about
real UFOs but discusses pseudo UFOs instead - suddenly this is
perceived as being far more important than it is ever thought to
be by us. You have to see it in context - as one book out of
many, on a specialised area and making specific points by the
medium of a clearly defined exploration of a set of cases. Dont
read an entire philosophy of UFOs into it - especially as its
authored by three people who have similar ideas but also
markedly different ones at times.

We agreed up front to allow each of us to say our own piece on
cases that we wrote about even if the others disagreed about
them. As such individual chapters are credited. Andy thus
presents his views on the l974 Llandrillo incident based on a
good direct investigation (good enough that you have decided to
publish it in the IUR even though it appears to explain away a
noted case). I accept many of Andy's findings here and he has
clearly illuminated the path towards truth with a first rate
follow up - but I dont fully support all of his interpretation
of the evidence. However it was his chapter so what he writes is
what is in the book. It does not, of course, mean that in this
case (or probably any other)  controversy will be ended. But
again that was not why the book was written.  Although I think
its true that this is one of the few instances in the book where
there is a fundamental dispute over the nature  of a case - and
even here we are all agreed on more than we do not agree on (eg
none of think that an alien spaceship spewing dead bodies
crashed at Llandrillo  - which is what most others who have
written on the case seem to report).

If anything this book is a guide to investigators through
practical examples as to how to stick with cases beyond the
first few days. Thats how I view it. Not as a diatribe against
UFOs, a debunking assault or a claim that all UFOs are
explicable. But I can of course only give my opinion.

 >Incidentally, note the spelling -- it's not "Williamette."  I
 >hope you have it rendered correctly in your book.

Not sure, as I did not write that page (and its only a one page
box). But I'll try to make sure it is corrected if not. I must
admit I thought it was Williamette myself. I must have misread
it and added the 'i' and then for years falsely read the tiny
print on maps that include it.  With an 'i' and two 'll's next
to each other the eye is fooled easily into seeing another 'i'
after the second 'l' because its what your mind tells you is
most likely to be there.

In fact, thats a pretty good example of selective memory, and
how perception can be altered by expectation. This no doubt
occurs with many UFO witnesses who see a light, expect a UFO and
so perceive things in that light that are not really there (just
as I assumed it was William, not Willam, and my mind thereafter
saw the missing 'i' whenever I looked at a map).

Interesting. Thanks for pointing out this useful example of an
optical illision.


Best wishes,

Jenny Randles







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 03:12:23 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dave,

 >The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >fairies and little folk.

 >What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >Age culture.

These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
ufological discourse soon.  It is, as we have already seen
demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
of astrobiology.

Jerry Clark







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 05:04:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 04:26:19 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Sean wrote:

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 18:44:30 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 ><snip>

 >>So please stop sitting on the fence and make your mind up,
 >does ET exist, yes or no? Simple as that really if you ask me.

Hi All & Sean,

If those people around the World  writing books and giving
Lectures , appearing in magazines and on TV regarding  the UFO
subject , would  answer "YES" to your question, would this then
prove the need to write, Lecture and appear on TV anymore
talking about UFOs?

Surely not if they knew they existed, what would be the point,
then alternative careers might be in hand.

Regards,

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 11:38:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 04:45:34 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 18:44:30 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hello all patient list folk,

Might I inquire as to whether everyone is as sick of this "same
ole same old" back and forth pointless diatribe as I am?

I for one respect Jenny's scientific fence straddling. I applaud
her and her cohort's attempts at correcting the course of ufology
(if it's not already too late) thru the new _non-organization_ of
British UFO investigators.

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >Good Afternoon Jenny

<Mighty Sniparoo>

 >>Jenny Randles

 >Jenny I think that you might be missing the same point that Andy
 >is missing.

Not to sound confrontational but it seems like _you_ are the one
missing the point. Jenny has responded over and over and over to
the likes of this kind of stupid "either / or" mentality. This
is why most UFOlks need a healthy dose of The Excluded Middle.

 >I am assuming that we are talking about _only genuine_ sighting
 >reports and etc and not hoax's etc.

Define genuine. Do you mean "all sightings of 'UFO' which can be
positively identified as ET craft?" Or, more in line with
Jenny's perspective (or rather my interpretation / explanation
of her POV), that some UFO / Alien Encounters, which may be
related to UAP or ASP, may in fact contain an "alien / ET"
signal within the "noise" of the encounter narrative. Read her
books _Beyond Explanation?_, _Mind Monsters_, and _Alien
Abduction-Mystery Solved_.

 >When _you_ have _positively_ identified 99.99 percent of UFO's
 >using every explanation that you have, including outrageous
 >statements such as "piezo electric lights dancing in the swamp
 >gas which was reflected off Venus's glow"  Then you _must_ be
 >left with

 >>'some' UFOs are -
 >>substitute whatever your own pet theory is.

 >Are you not?

Yes she is as she herself has stated on this list. Tho she does
it with more rationality than most.

<snippity doo da day>

 >So please stop sitting on the fence and
 >make your mind up, does ET exist, yes or no? Simple as that
 >really if you ask me.

Why the heck should she when she has already adequately
expressed her POV. Are you a Republican or a Democrat Sean? Are
UFOs _real_ or not? Do answers to these questions always hafta
be a yes or no / either or scenario for you Sean? Are all issues
black and white? Are there no gray areas in your own
perspective?

I sincerely hope Jenny will not answer your post as she already
has. She has explained her balanced non-commital POV already and
for her to do so again would be a waste of her time and yours as
you will only see what she has already stated which... is enuf
for someone not as polarized as one who must keep asking this
question. _Yes_ some UFOs may represent the communication or
manifestation of an alien or ET intelligence / consciousness.
But is there enuf evidence to prove such? No, not until, as you
said earlier, the proverbial landing on public lawns takes
place.

Aaarrrgh! "Can't we all just agree to disagree"?

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net

 >--
 >    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
 >Sean Jones
 >http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 13:58:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 05:02:47 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Andy, I do not mean this as a personal thing, I really do wish
 >>UFOIN the very best, I am only expressing my doubts as to the
 >>results of the work, not the quality.

 >I get the idea you are trying to imply that somehow any
 >conclusions we reach will be twisted towards debunking or
 >skepticism for its own sake.

<snip>

 >If we fall back on ifs and buts and 'maybes' then we are harking
 >back to the age of superstition - belief in nebulous powers 'out
 >there' which ultimately lead us to abdicate responsibility for
 >our own actions in the real world (see for example the
 >witchcraft mania of the Middle Ages).

 >The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >fairies and little folk.

 >What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >Age culture.


Thanks, Andy, for articulating the attitude that prompted Sean
to express reservations about the results of your new group's
research.

As anyone with a passing familiarity of the debate between
conventional biology and "creation science" knows, one's basic
assumptions of what is possible often determines the outcome of
one's conclusions about ambiguous data.

I would submit that the premise which Andy boldly outlines, that
the ET hypothesis is "just one tiny, remote possibility,"
practically guarantees his dismissal of evidence that points
toward an ET explanation in favor of more conventional
explanations.

But I would go further, and suggest to Andy that ET visitation
is more than a "tiny, remote possibility." All one has to do to
realize that is simply extraplolate the human experience of the
past century by a thousand years or more. If interstellar travel
is possible, humans will achieve it within that time span. And
that's discounting a possible exchange of technology with other,
more advanced species.

Rather than being fuzzy minded adherents of a nebulous power
akin to witchcraft, I would submit that backers of the ET
hypothesis have a far better grasp of what the universe _in all
likelihood_ will prove to be than researchers who view ET
visitation a "tiny, remote possibility."

Regards,

Pat McCartney
Auburn, Calif.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:35:56 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 05:05:40 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 18:44:30 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >Jenny I think that you might be missing the same point that Andy
 >is missing.


With respect. I dont think either of us are.

There are lots of UFO sightings. Most are sooner or later
explained as IFOs. Some IFOs are odd ones and take a long time
to be resolved. Potentially any case still termed a UFO (because
we have not found an answer) might become an IFO one day when
further information comes about. But we will always have at any
point in time a few cases that are unresolved and seemingly
unresolvable. The argument is whether these are truly new or
exotic phenomena (eg alien craft) or simply things we have yet
to understand but more mundane in origin. I suspect they are
probably both. Andy, I think, argues all these residual UFO
cases will probably fall as IFOs one day. I say all potentially
could do but in my view there will remain insoluble cases. I say
this because there are fundamental differences between IFOs and
UFOs in the statistical data base.

In my view you cannot just assume IFOs, hoaxes and solved cases
are not part of the argument. You have to take them into account
and see what lessons they offer for the remaining unsolved
cases.  The reason is that IFOs represent the only UFO data
where we have pretty firm conclusions. We can often prove an IFO
to reasonable degrees of certainty. A UFO is simply an
unresolved case and may eventually become an IFO or stay a UFO.
This means ufologists should pay more heed to IFO cases because
they teach us useful lessons.

 >There is still cases that cannot be explained even after fifty
 >years of research, I.E. Kenneth Arnold's sighting, Hogwash to
 >all the pelican theories.


I dont think Arnold saw pelicans but I also dont think this is
an insoluble case. Its one of those where I suspect eventually
the truth will out and it will turn out to be that it was not a
fleet of spaceships. However, nobody is arguing that there are
unsolved cases after 50 years or 100 years. There are plenty of
them. I am not even arguing there are no real UFOs - ie ones
that require new science to explain them. In fact I am not sure
what you think I am arguing with you about here.

 >So until the proverbial landing on whatever public lawn, ET will
 >remain unproved to the general public will it not? So until
 >then, ET is a matter of _belief_ or logical deduction depending
 >on your point of view.

Yes, thats reasonable. But what you dont seem able to accept is
that people can view this same evidence objectively and reach
entirely opposite conclusions - ie that ET is not coming to
earth. I dont know which option is true. Nor do you. We are both
making estimates from the evidence. But both are possible
solutions. Thats really all I said.


 >So please stop sitting on the fence and
 >make your mind up, does ET exist, yes or no? Simple as that
 >really if you ask me.


I claim a new entry in the Guiness Book of Records. My answer
has succeeded in being attacked by you for 'sitting on the
fence' and by Jerry Clark for making a too definitive statement
that could not be proven. That takes some doing!

I have given my views on the ETH several times on this list. And
it is not as 'simple as that' as you put it. The evidence is
confusing and contradictory. Some of it supports an alien
visitation. Some clearly does not. If you wish then you can
ignore the half that fits one view and base your conclusions on
the rest. That will allow you or anyone to issue a definitive
yes/no statement on the matter. But it wont make it true (or not
true).

I dont see why anyone has to jump in both feet first here and
proclaim they believe or do not believe simply because you
regard not doing that as sitting on the fence. My summation of
the evidence is that the ETH cannot be proven even to reasonable
assurance but that it has sufficient suggestive evidence that it
would be foolish to dismiss it as a possibility as many sceptics
do. Sure, jumping to a conclusion one way or the other would be
easy and no doubt please a lot of people (and infuriate others).
It would also make me a lot more money because publishers far
prefer books that proclaim ET has landed than ones afflicted
with terminal honesty saying we just dont know.

I honestly believe this is an argument that is too close to call
and therefore do not feel it is unreasonable to require better
evidence than we have so far to cause me to be firm in support
of one option or the other. This is not an election where you
have to stand up for a cause or else be branded the enemy. Its a
quest for answers. Right now we dont know those answers and the
evidence is well balanced and could support either possibility.
Sorry but in my opinion it just is. I cannot say other than that
just to please you.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 11:16:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 04:35:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 15:12:10 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >Living in the real world? living in a world of television
 >imagery more like, I don't see how this is supposed to prove
 >anything.

Dave, I wasn't trying to prove anything.  I was just indicating
what I have seen in children these days because I work as a
part-time teacher as well as doing research (gotta eat).  I
suggested the experiment so that parents who may wonder what
their children are being exposed to these days can see for
themselves by performing this simple experiment.  This train of
thought stemmed from your comment about my children calling an
image they saw in the photographs an "alien" and your
insinuation that they see "aliens" because that's what I have
taught them to see.

 >If that experiment was done in say the 1950's I don't think the
 >same results would be found do you?

I guess not.  Perhaps you may wish to do more study on this
topic and get back with us.

 >Let's jump forward a decade or so, using _your_ logic (real
 >world commercialism) how do you explain the total lack of
 >'greys' in any of the sci-fi films and tv shows made in those
 >days?

I don't.

If you wish to talk about the lack of 'greys' in sci-fi films
and tv shows in the '50's, why not start another thread titled
"Lack of Greys In The '50's".  I am not interested in the topic.
I started this thread, "Get Real", in reference to something I
observed while watching "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind",
then you asked why there weren't any photographs of beings and I
offered the photographs from the case I investigated, then you
began asking questions about the photographs. Remember?

Maybe you want to change the topic of this thread to "Lack of
Greys In The '50's".

 >Is there a record anywhere pre-1970's that describes the grey
 >alien as we presently know it??

I don't know.  Good luck in your research.

 >Your point about commercialism is a good one though, it
 >certainly proves how easily some people (child and adult) can be
 >influenced by what they see on the television.

Yep, couldn't agree with you more.

 >>I am a computer graphic artist by trade, 2D/3D.

 >I asked the question because it has been my experience that
 >scanning a photo actually enhances the picture, I quite often
 >pick out features within a scan I hadn't noticed in the
 >original.

 >I would like to know why nothing can be seen in your scan, do
 >you have a poor scanner or something?

Actually, yes, I bought a scanner to scan these photos and
didn't know anything about scanners so I didn't get a very good
one.  It was on sale and seemed to work so I bought it.  It has
left scratches on some of my photographs and now eats anything
put into it (my 13 year old has been using it and seems to have
killed it).  It's the kind you feed the photographs or paper
into.  I want to buy a better scanner as soon as I have enough
money.  Since I don't get paid for the research and
investigations I do, I make do with the little money I have.

I didn't say "nothing" can be seen on the scanned images.  In
fact, I've had many people write to me saying how amazing the
photographs are so they must see something of what I'm talking
about.  As indicated in the article and in this thread, the
photographs are clearer than the scanned images and the slides
are even more clear and bring out more details.

I had to learn web site construction and HTML, buy a scanner,
and learn how to use it just to present this case to the public.
Silly me, I thought people might be interested and wanted to
share it with them.  I didn't want to send it to some magazine
or those that sensationalize the information. I just wanted to
get it out to share it for free and let each person make up his
or her own mind.  This is why I chose to use the internet.  I
did the work and it took many months to complete the article,
the web page and present it.  Now I have moved on to other
investigations and research and do not care if anyone believes
it or not. Now I am quite sure the case will not be
sensationalized because so few care or have enough of an open
mind to review the information.  I figure I am lucky because I
have learned much more than shared in the article and the
information has led to further research.  When ya snooze, ya
lose. ;>

Those who like to debunk everything they hear and see will do so
no matter how much evidence or information is put before them.
I've learned to accept this in my work yet continue doing
research and investigations. Those who are curious and want to
learn, ask serious questions rather than scoffing all the time.
_These_ are the people I share with.  _These_ people treat
others with respect and receive the same.  Once you have
encountered both kinds of people, you know how to tell the
difference between someone with a genuine interest in reviewing
the data and those interested only in seeing their name in
print.

 >>Can you indicate what you plan to say to these
 >>"researchers"/"investigators" about the article in question?
 >>Will you simply ask them why they didn't review the material or
 >>will you be adding your assessment as well?

 >I just want to ask why they didn't review the material, I don't
 >plan to add anything.

Very well, the list of those with whom I have tried to share
this case will be sent to your E-mail box tonight.  I trust your
inquiries will be done with taste and professionalism.  However,
how will we know you actually contacted them?

As usual, enjoyed conversing with you, Dave. ;>

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

               PRG/X-PPAC 'Beyond Little Green Men And SETIi's

From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 14:41:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 18:58:17 -0400
Subject: PRG/X-PPAC 'Beyond Little Green Men And SETIi's


                              X-PPAC
                          www.x-ppac.org
                      Paradigm Research Group
                       www.paradigmclock.com


10/26/99

A copy of the newspaper column below and its web location is
being sent out to the PRG/X-PPAC contact list as well as the
national media list of several thousand.  It is a masterpiece.

It is written by Billy Cox, a great media friend of the
UFO/Dislcoure movement for "Florida Today," which serves
Central Florida - home of the Kennedy Space Center.

All receiving this are requested to do everything possible
to spread the content of this column and its web location.
Post on your website, send to your email list, send to
your local media, and send to your political representatives.

The UFO/ET cover-up is ending.  The media will drive the
process, open Congressional hearings will define the process,
and disclosure will culminate the process.

It is time for American journalists to step forward and take on
the biggest news story in history.  Colleagues like Billy Cox are
showing them the way.

Stephen Bassett
Paradigm Research Group
----------------------------------------
Spread the word about X-PPAC
      http://www.x-ppac.org
   and the politics of disclosure
----------------------------------------

Source: Florida Today
http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1999b/102399a.htm
FLORIDA TODAY
Space Online
Oct. 23, 1999

Looking Beyond Little Green Men And SETIi's Cult

By Billy Cox
A FLORIDA TODAY column

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - As cults go, members of the Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence community are a benign crowd.
What's  not to love? They're cool. They want to contact ET -
using radiotelescopes.

They are dreamers with doctorates. They command the vocabularies
of science with eloquence and self-effacing humor. They are the
underdogs; they fight bland congressional tightwads for funding
and lose. They bounce back, resilient. They reside, with the
greatest of ease, simultaneously, in opposing worlds of
rationalism and faith. And it is that faith - pursued without
evidence to support the sanctified medium of radio, dogmatic and
selective in its beliefs, closed to alternative possibilities -
which makes their science look so insecure.

A full house turned out Tuesday night in Cocoa to catch the SETI
show at Brevard Community College's Fine Arts Auditorium.
Leading the sermon was Dr. Seth Shostak, a brilliant wit at the
privately funded SETI Institute of Mountain View, Calif. Given
a) the billions of stars orbiting billions of galaxies, b) the
ongoing discovery of new planets, and c) amino acids-laden
cosmic debris seeding the universe like sperm cells, painting
space as a yawning pond wriggling with life forms was easy
enough. Audience members were told how they, too, could assist
the radio hunt by downloading and crunching signals with the
so-called SETI@Home program.

The doors slammed when several listeners advanced the UFO
heresies, wondering if maybe those alien life forms hadn't
already arrived.  One woman rattled off a list of related Web
sites, prompting Shostak to charge, "None of those sources
you've mentioned are credible."

Too bad. Because one of the sites Shostak dismissed -
www.blackvault.com - as nothing to do with alien implants,
ancient astronauts, or any other subjective aspect of the
phenomenon. It's jammed solely with scanned-in photocopies of
government documents - 7,000 or so, from acronyms such as the
CIA, DIA, FBI and USAF - acquired through the Freedom of
Information Act. The patterns of high-level interest are clear;
what they're onto is not. We get glimpses of what we already
know - military and commercial pilot reports of wild UFO evasive
maneuvers, associated power failures, radar signatures, etc. -
but the best stuff presumably has been blacked out by censors.

Pressed further by another listener who asked why UFO
researchers and SETI guys couldn't reason through this thing,
Shostak replied, "Scientists don't object to a dialogue; it just
doesn't go anywhere."

Speaking for all scientists, naturally. But not a nine-member
Stanford University panel led by physicist Peter Sturrock who,
after examining the available evidence in 1998, advocated a
rigorous public investigation. Good luck.

The data Sturrock's colleagues studied was assembled by
billionaire philanthropist Laurance Rockefeller, who circulated
a lengthy briefing paper on UFOs to top government officials,
reportedly including President Clinton. But the lid remains
sealed. In his memoirs, Friends In High Places, now-disgraced
former associate attorney general Webb Hubbell states one of his
greatest regrets was being unable to get to the bottom of the
UFO mystery, which Clinton ordered him to do.

Our chief executives often lack the proper security clearances
to know what's going on. Witness Ronald Reagan's Iran-contra
debacle. Or consider the Venona intercepts of the 1940s. That's
when Signals Intelligence monitored the chatter of Soviet
espionage rings in the United States and knew everything about
the real - but extremely limited - activities of domestic
agents. Disclosure could've preempted Joe McCarthy's
persecutions of the innocent, since the names of the guilty were
known, but protecting the information was evidently more
important than protecting American citizens. We didn't learn
until Senate hearings in 1996 that then-Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chairman Omar Bradley withheld access to the truth from
President Truman.

Among the ironies of Shostak's remarks was that the not-credible
Black Vault - constructed by 18-year-old John Greenewald Jr., of
Mission Hills, Calif. - also offers instructions on how to
participate in SETI@Home. Thus, by appropriating "scientists"
for the SETI elite and shooing everyone else into the barnyard
of cheap laughs over "little green men," Shostak and colleagues
create artificial schizoid divides that fail to further the
public interest.

The Cold War is over, but the pathology of secrecy oozes
forward. Consequently, SETI glows in the dark.

**

Billy Cox can be reached at (407) 242-3774, or
FLORIDA TODAY, P.O. Box 419000, Melbourne, FL 32941-9000.

Please e-mail comments or questions about this page to
Space Online Editor Mark DeCotis.

� 1999 FLORIDA TODAY.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                  Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:24:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:05:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum


 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 06:36:51
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

<snip>

Stig or Anyone -- Is there any report of what the UFO question
was and what Al "Dumb as a Post" Bore answered?

BTW, note that Bore was born about a month after the alleged
Roswell crash.  Note his "alien" demeanor.  Hmmmmm...  Is a vote
for Al a vote for Them?...

-- Cheers, KARL







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

              Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Scott Hale <scott_hale@american.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 20:11:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:11:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 08:21:35
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >Now with the striking revelations of a young man who knew
 >Gleason personally, it can safely be said that such an event did
 >take place...Larry Warren was an Airman First Class stationed at
 >Bentwaters Air Force Base in England (a NATO installation
 >staffed mainly by US. servicemen) when an incredible series of
 >events took place over Christmas week of 1980. A UFO was picked
 >up on radar and subsequently came down just outside the
 >perimeter of the base in a dense forest.


Stig Posted

I'm simply amazed how much Larry Warren's story continues to
grow and expand.

I wonder what part of UFO history he'll next be associated with.
Does anybody else find this just a little hard to swallow?


Suspiciously,
Scott Hale









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                         Re: RPIT More New Findings

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 23:34:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:14:12 -0400
Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings


 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 19:40:48 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: RPIT More New Findings

 >>Upon seeing this image it took me only a few microseconds to
 >>realize the Neil is right on this one.... whatever it was, it
 >>was thick. Looks like a saw cut through thick aluminum. Does not
 >>look like material bent or pulled (stretched) to breaking.
 >>Looks like a saw cut!  But strangely irregular.


 >Bruce and list, I have seen this type of fracture in metal
 >before. I live in the North West of Britain in the area that
 >gave rise to the "Industial Revolution", the builders of the
 >18/19th century  "Dark Satanic Mill's" were great users of "cast
 >iron" and it's grainy, crystaline structure, when subjected to
 >high impact(a demolition hammer<g>) gives just this brittle type
 >of fractured edge. I'm not for one second saying this is cast
 >iron<g>, I'm just suggesting whatever it is might have similar
 >properties of structure, ie tough, crystaline almost ceramic
 >like, but when pushed beyond it's limits brittle, like smashed
 >pottery. Some of these type of fractures can also be observed on
 >the broken ends of some of the "sticks".

Yes, I agree. I was not thinking of brittle material when I made
my comments. I was thinking of ductile metal.

Clearly brittle material... not just metal... could break like
that, depending upon the internal structure of the material.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:41:31 +0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:19:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 01:22:50 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <>

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 09:59:13 +0800

 >>Thanks for admitting that Amy. But I have yet to scoff at
 >>anything. Since when is talking about a case considered
 >>scoffing? If people don't ask questions and simply accept the
 >>facts blindly, we'll never get to the truth about anything.

 >Yes, asking questions is important.  What I have noted is that
 >no one has asked the questions that a skilled researcher would
 >ask.  There are many pieces of information - in this case and
 >the photographs as presented on my web site - that no one has
 >even mentioned.  Those who know what they are looking at would
 >be asking the necessary questions by now.

If there is something specific we should know that is so
pertinent to the case, why not just tell us?

 >A good researcher would take note of these aspects not to debunk
 >or ridicule but simply to inquire and file in their data base
 >for comparisons with other cases.  There is no way to prove a
 >case real or false simply by reading the details on a web site
 >and viewing scanned versions of photographs.

You seem very defensive Amy, acussing at least three people so
far of ridiculing or debunking.  There is no way to prove the
case real or false, period.  It's subjective, each person's own
beliefs influence their acceptance/rejection of cases.  If
something doesn't sit right with me about this case I am sure
you can apprectiate it as my opinion.

Debunker or ridiculer I am not, or I wouldn't have wasted most
of my life so far researching UFO phenomena, and being laughed
at by friends and family.

 >>What I did say however, was the neighbour was called >in
 >specifically to take photos of this encounter and the glass
 >>door was left closed.

 >Whoa.  That is not what happened.  The neighbor was not called
 >in to specifically take photos.  The neighbor was called to come
 >help - if she could - since by that time the family thought
 >maybe the beings resembled "aliens" more than "demons" and the
 >only person they knew who studied phenomena was their neighbor.
 >The neighbor, "Jill", brought her camera as an after thought in
 >case she might catch something on film - as she had been trying
 >to do in her own encounters.

My apologies if I misunderstood you previous post. The neighbour
was collected enough to remember the camera as an after thought,
but not the door.  She had experienced it all her life, and was
trying to photograph her own experience, so she was most likely
aware of things to do to get a good shot.

 >The door was _not_ "left closed" deliberately,

<snip>

In your opinion it was not left closed on purpose.  That is the
key here.  You have their word and their frightened looks to go
on, I have your word.  As a 'fellow' researcher I accept your
skills and analysis of the case, but surely you understand why I
might be somewhat sceptical when there are many cases of blurred
alien and ufo photos.

 >"Jill" arrived
 >and nervously started snapping pictures as soon as she arrived
 >because "Cathy" was pointing to the back yard and "Jill" just
 >started snapping pictures.  A few minutes later, "Jill" and
 >"Cathy's" sister gained enough courage to go into the back yard
 >together to see if they could see anything in the dark. "Jill"
 >also snapped pictures while in the back yard and odd images did
 >show up such as two bright red lights about a foot above the
 >ground as well as other images that have yet to be analyzed and
 >studied.  Though neither "Jill" nor "Cathy's" sister saw
 >anything while in the yard, "Cathy" - who remained in the house
 >- could see a being standing by the swing set that would move
 >away every time "Jill" and the sister approached it.

What are the two red lights?  Are they supposed to be from
the craft?  or did the beings emit the light?

How did the person standing in the house see the being in the
dark, and not the two who were closer to it?  Could she perhaps
have just been seeing what she wanted to believe was there?
afterall, it's a pretty traumatic experience.

 >Now, allowing the circumstances described above and the
 >information in the article to be possible - for just a moment -
 >think of the implications contained in the information.  There
 >are several bits of information that may have come together to
 >create a unique situation in which these images became visible
 >in the photographs.  As I said before, there are more details to
 >this case yet to be presented.  But since no one seems
 >interested enough to ask pertinent questions or is too busy
 >criticizing the state of the sliding glass door, I will share
 >the rest at a later date through another median.

Well, see this is where we differ.  Perhaps to you the physical
evidence is not important, but I have read case after case of
witness testimony, and am just about filled up with people's
experiences.  I know what they go through (not personally, but
the situation they experience) because they have told me over
and over again.  But at the end of the day it's just
unverifiable, unsubstantiated words.  I have the tendancy to
believe most people tell me the truth, after all why would they
want to lie to me?  But when they throw in a few blurry photos,
it just makes the whole testimony seem that little less
credible, like they're trying to hard.  If the witnesses had
kept the photos secret and just shared their experience
verbally, I probably would have been more likely to accept their
story, especially as the experience was corroborated by an
independant witness (being the neighbour).

 >There is a wealth of information in this case if one stops to
 >analyze the data rather than spending more time debating why the
 >witnesses did or did not open the sliding glass door.

  Sorry, but it is a very important fact in the case which can't
  be easliy dismissed.

 >These
 >were real people experiencing real fear in the face of unknowns
 >they could not explain.  I met and talked with the witnesses -
 >in person - so I remember the terror in their voices and the
 >shock they experienced and continue to experience.

Like the time my mum thought she saw someone standing in the
backyard looking back at her at night, and upon investigation i
found it was just a strategically located, very human shaped
shrub.  She was absolutley petrified, but also mistaken.  It
happens.

But if these experiences are not one offs, then I anticipate the
photos they will capture next time, with the door open. Surely
they would be prepared for it next time?

 >Until I investigated this case, I wasn't sure if abductions were
 >really happening and I certainly _did not_ believe the stories
 >about "reptilian" beings.  In fact, I don't think I will ever
 >totally accept the idea of "reptilian" beings abducting people
 >until I see one in conscious, waking awareness up close and in
 >person (not something I really care to do).  For now, it's just
 >too hard for me to stretch my paradigms that far.  But I know
 >something happened to those witnesses on the nights in question
 >and whatever it was, it really happened.

See, now you just backed up my point.  You don't know what
happened that night.  Just that something happened. If leaving
the glass door closed was an accident, fair enough.  But the
experience may just have been a bunch of fire flies (sorry, I'm
from australia so I don't know much about them, it's just an
example), swarming around some alien shaped bushes :)

 >Over the years since learning of this case,

So the case is not a recent one, have they had any other
experiences after this?  Are they prepared for anymore?

 >I have spent many
 >hours debating in my own mind whether it was real or not.  There
 >were events that occurred while I was investigating the case
 >that are extremely hard for me to accept even though I
 >experienced them myself.  I don't know how to explain what it
 >feels like to be empirically oriented and come face-to-face with
 >phenomena that defies explanation.  I am basically the type who
 >believes if you can't put something under a microscope and
 >measure it, then it does not exist.  Yet I cannot deny the
 >phenomena I and others have personally witnessed.

I'm not denying the phenomena, I strongly believe in it as a
matter of fact.  And I am not an experiencer.  I just feel it
happens way too much, to unrelated people, all around the world
for it to be a coincidence.  But that doesn't mean I will
blindly accept glared photos as physical evidence of the
experience.

 >I know how hard it is for people to accept the phenomena that
 >surrounds us especially if you don't see it or experience it in
 >person.  How do you explain a reality we have been programmed to
 >deny since the early '50's? How do you remain a "healthy
 >skeptic" yet open minded enough to consider all possibilities?
 >It's a difficult balance.

Here here, I'll agree with you on that.

 >Amy

Cheers

Sharon







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

               Top UFO News Stories of 1999 Poll Starts Today

From: Ignatius Graffeo <Ufoseek@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:00:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:22:43 -0400
Subject: Top UFO News Stories of 1999 Poll Starts Today


Last year's list generated a lot of interest, and was read on
Art Bell's New Year's Eve show. This year we will let _you_
decide what is _The_ Most Important UFO News Story (so far!). A
list of 15 news stories with "radio" buttons and links to the
actual source article are provided. The poll is conducted by
Pollit.com, a profession polling service.

We are open to suggestions and comments to include something we
might have missed. Please do so by Nov.15.

Ignatius Graffeo, Editor

http://www.UFOSEEK.org

Mirror site:
http://members.aol.com/ufoseek/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                   [canufo] UFS 10-24-99 Whitehorse, Yukon

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:12:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:12:47 -0400
Subject: [canufo] UFS 10-24-99 Whitehorse, Yukon




From: UFO UpDates

Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:14:13 -0600
From: Martin Jasek <mjjasek@yknet.yk.ca>
To: canufo <canufo@egroups.com>
Subject: [canufo] UFS 10-24-99 Whitehorse, Yukon


UFS October 24th, 1999 1:15AM- Whitehorse, Yukon Territories

Hello Group

Received the following e-mail yesterday. Have spoken to witness
on the phone. Interesting!

UFS = Unidentified Flying Sound

Martin

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am __________ __________ of __ Dawson Rd in Wolf Creek, a YTG
employee. My wife and I have lived here for 9+years. Phone
_________ or work at ________. __ Dawson is on the creek side of
the road.

I am a smoker who only smokes outside; we have a dog, _______,
who before I go to bed is always taken on a leashed walk around
our circular driveway, while I have a last smoke or two. This
morning (the 24th) at 1:15AM while on the walk and on the south
side of the driveway I heard a sound coming from the north which
continued in intensity as it approached us.

The sound was a cross between a "bruup" and a squeak in
composition and was regular in oscillation of noise and silence.
The sound went directly over us and between looking at the dog's
reaction and at the sky I observed nothing of a physical or
material nature. As trees blocked the view  the sound continued
in a southerly direction. Probably 5 seconds duration.  The
dog's reaction was one of puzzlement and so was mine.


[Investigator's Note: The sound was loud enough to obscure the
  sound of conversation.]


I continued to the house (150') and up on the deck to finish my
cigarette and to hear if the sound would return. The deck has
views to the south and east. After a minute or so one could here
it faintly in the distance traversing a south to north
trajectory over Mary Lake or Cowley Creek. The dog did not
react.

While on my second cigarette and perhaps a few minutes after the
last "hearing" the noise returned from a southerly to northerly
direction but over where we had initially heard it. This time
the dog went to the edge of the deck as if following the sound.
The sound was not as pronounced in volume as I had originally
heard it so may have been traversing a path farther away from us
but in the opposite direction to when initially heard. Again
nothing of a physical or material nature was observed. The
duration seemed to be less than the initial incident.

As the Grey Mountain navigation tower is at the AH end of Dawson
Road I see and hear a variety of planes coming from the south
following the beacon. This sound was certainly not one I would
identify with a plane, jet or otherwise.

The noise most closely resembled the laser powered experimental
(conical) space craft as shown on PBS last night (and which I
have seen a number of times). In all of this - I have no idea
what an owl flying at night sounds like - one assumes they fly
silently. But the noise seemed more mechanical than feathers
pocketing the air.


While on the topic of Unidentifieds. Last February or March
sometime before midnight while on my deck I observed 3 lights in
a triangular formation coming from the south at light plane -
slow - speed. The lights were always on and didn't seem to
deviate as one would expect if 3 separate planes were flying in
formation from one's right to left over Mary Lake. No engine
noises were heard which was unusual as the distance seemed to be
close enough that one would hear them. The approach seemed to be
a normal approach to the airport. The lights disappeared behind
trees. No engine noises were heard as would be expected in the
down run to the airport to the north of the house. Thus my
curiosity as to what they were.

In all the 9 years of observing the sky from this location these
2 incidents are the only strange ones I have come across.

This info is for your records only. No publication of name,
address whatsoever, please.


[Investigator's Note: A check with Whitehorse Control tower
  showed no flight plans in the area for that time. The tower
  closes at 9:00pm so a direct tower observation/data could
  not be correlated. Other residences in the area are being
  contacted to  check if they had heard anything.]







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                 Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:45:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:05:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy


 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:26:20
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy

<snip>

 >The initial news flash will be followed by special TV reports
 >with such catchy titles as "Alien Encounter at Arecibo."

 >News crews will scurry to the mountaintop observatory here, and
 >a new genre of "expert" TV analysts - astronomers with a knack
 >for snappy sound bites - will form a lucrative cottage industry.


Interestingly I suspect that all the so called astronomers who
have belittled UFOs, would suddenly "come around" and be
claiming that they knew all the time UFOs were real; how it was
somebody else in the astronomical community who was saying they
were not etc etc.

In that said initial media frenzy, the media would be
interviewing so called PHd experts from various universitys as
well.  I suspect that the main stream UFOlogists who have
actually been studying UFOs for years would be regulated to a 5
second sound bite while the astronomical and PHd experts would
have their faces all over the cameras.

After that nobody and I mean nobody (well perhaps Phil Klass)
would claim to have ever been skeptical about the existance of
UFOs/life elsewhere, although we would hear all the storys about
how these same skeptics sincerely believed but until now, the
evidence wasn't available blah blah.

Cheers,
Robert






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:25:28 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 06:04:15 -0400
 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >The ransom note arrives.

 >CSETI claim to have the truth, so why don't they simply hire a
 >conference suite, invite the worlds media, and let these
 >witnesses talk? Answer, that's not how holding information for
 >ransom works!

Bravo Tony! Very well said! If Greer wanted his alleged truth
out, then all he'd have to do is call a press conference.

Rebecca






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 11:07:48 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:29:59 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 12:38:02 +0100

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 99 10:25:42 PDT

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >>>>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 21:55:06 +0100
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:48:38 -0400
 >>>>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Jenny,

 >>>1: UFOs are not a single phenomenon. There are multiple and
 >>>different UFO phenomena with a range of explanations.

 >>I have sometimes thought along the same lines myself
 >>(specifically in the area of high-strangeness cases), but I
 >>certainly would not state it, as you have here, as if this were
 >>an established fact, because it isn't.


 >>From my experience as an investigator I have encountered cases
 >that I am overwhelmingly convinced to be a form of UAP (eg an
 >extreme form of ball lightning is one example). (A first hand
 >instance of this would be the Nelson car stop case from March
 >l977)  I do not think all unexplained cases are super BL. This
 >option does not, for instance, explain alien contact encounters.
 >Therefore this means we must have at least two types of UFO to
 >explain different sorts of case. I think the evidence in support
 >of that contention is strong enough to convince me - especially
 >given, for instance, basic differences such as the witness per
 >case ratio for each type. But if it doesnt convince you thats
 >okay by me too.

What you're discussing here is a form of ball lightning, a
generally recognized, accepted meteorological phenomenon.  Why
are you lumping BL in with UFOs? I think that no serious
ufologist would disagree that on occasion BL, like lots of other
things in nature, gets mistaken for a UFO.  That, however,
doesn't make BL (or any other unusual but known natural
phenomenon) a UFO.

 >>Why is the idea of alien visitors "impossible"?  I suspect that
 >>you do not mean what you say quite the way it sounds.

 >I did not come up with this possible/impossible analogy if you
 >follow the original posting to which I replied. I was responding
 >to a note that argued by citing Sherlock Holmes, from which this
 >famous quote appears. The point being made by the use of this
 >quote was - as I understood it - that exotic solutions like
 >aliens or time travellers forced themselves upon you when you
 >had ruled out the more mundane ones for any case. As such I did
 >not choose to substitute 'possible' and 'impossible' into this
 >scenario - that was done in the quote to which I was clearly
 >responding !

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 >As you know (because I have said it many times in recent months
 >on Updates) I do not regard alien contact as an impossible
 >theory or even an improbable one.

 >>I think you are making far, far too much of this isolated
 >>instance.

 >Its not just one instance. 'The UFOs that never were' features
 >about 25 cases which have progressed from UFO towards sometimes
 >surprising IFO conclusions as you will see. More than one
 >involved an answer that required guesswork, skill, good luck or
 >good judgement to find. Without that often lengthy research they
 >would have stayed UFOs. In many cases UFOlogists still regard
 >them as such. Our book aims to make that point from various
 >examples  - illustrating how UFOs do sometimes become IFOs years
 >down the track and involve quite unsuspected explanations. I
 >think it proves that to occur much more than in just one
 >isolated example - although, of course, most IFOs are not
 >unusual or surprising. We are simply saying that some are and
 >these suggest that presently unsolved cases may one day prove to
 >be IFOs that we have yet to recognise.

I look forward to reading your book, which I have no doubt will
be an excellent one.  As you know, I have the greatest respect
for you and your work.  I think, however, that my point remains.
We've seen some dreary instances in recent months on this very
list where some strutting, self- styled "skeptic" has announced
his explanation for a classic UFO case, only to have it
disintegrate virtually upon impact. I am not, I hasten to add,
putting you into this category.

Cordially,

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                         AA Film In Popular Culture

From: Philip Mantle - QUEST <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:17:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:32:32 -0400
Subject: AA Film In Popular Culture


Dear colleagues,

I wonder if once again I can ask for your kind assistance. I am
looking for any information on Ray Santilli's 'Alien Autopsy
Film' that has appeared in popular culture.

For example I know that 'The X-Files' TV show ran their own
version of an alien autopsy film and made reference to the
Santilli film. I know that you can also obtain a children's game
called 'Alien Autopsy'.

I am therefore confident that there must be other examples like
this. I dare say the  the Alien Autopsy Film has been used in
cartoons, advertising, TV shows, books and magazine articles,
etc, etc, etc.

If you know of any such places where the Alien Autopsy Film has
appeared in some type of popular culture I would greatly
appreciate it if you could contact me direct at:

Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive,
Batley,
West Yorkshire,
England,
WF17 7SW.

Tele: 01924 444049.

E-mail: pmquest@dial.pipex.com

Many thanks for your kind cooperation.

Yours Sincerely,


Philip Mantle.
26 October, l999.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:40:26 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Seeings as various people have been menting my name and my
colleagues' I thought I'd better reply before my tea.

I fail to understand why saying that _all_ UFOs have the
potential to be IFOs causes such a problem. Many, many
_good_ cases in the UK, which as Jenny points out have been
held as ET and/or unexplained have fallen to the IFO
explanation. Surely this is a _good_ thing? Surely
a mound of cases which we can't explain must infuriate
ufologists?

The bald facts are that as a  great many cases have been
downgraded from UFO to IFO, and that no UFOs have been (yet)
proven to be ET in origin.

That fact alone makes it reasonable to suggest that _all_ UFOs
are thus resolvable.

But.....

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT

In response to Dave Clarke's

 >The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >fairies and little folk.

 >What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >Age culture.

Jerry wrote

 >>These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
 >>confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
 >>you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
 >>UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

Innit great how Jerry uses 'my friend' when he's attempting
sarcasm? Dave's (a Doctor of Folklore I hasten to add) statement
tells us about his experience after 20 years in the field and
his research Jerry. It tells us what _he_ has come to believe
about the UFO phenomenon, based on more research than most
ufologists will ever be able to shake a stick at. And Dave has
changed his views dramatically in the fifteen or so years I have
known him from being postive that some UFO cases were ETH in
nature to a far more sceptical position. All based on research
and investigation. Surely not a bad way of reaching conclusions?

 >>One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
 >>from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
 >>ufological discourse soon.  It is, as we have already seen
 >>demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
 >>things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
 >>of astrobiology.

'Smart enough to know better' - sheer brilliance Jerry! It's not
empty posturing - see above. 'Astrobiology'? Yor avin' a laarf
incha? Don't we have to actually have some hard biological
evidence before we can talk about such a thing?

The fact is, as Dave has been making, UFO belief is culture and
age-specific. Thirty years from now and it will be as completely
different as it was thirty years ago. Three hundred years from
now and who knows what people will be experiencing. I'd like to
see your evidence to the contrary please.

and

 >From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 13:58:33 EDT
 >Subject: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >I would submit that the premise which Andy boldly outlines, that
 >the ET hypothesis is "just one tiny, remote possibility,"
 >practically guarantees his dismissal of evidence that points
 >toward an ET explanation in favor of more conventional
 >explanations.

No it doesn't!

What is actually means is that 'the ET hypothesis is "just one
tiny, remote possibility,"' In that there is no evidence or
proof  that ET either exists or has steered his starcars
in our direction.

 >But I would go further, and suggest to Andy that ET visitation
 >is more than a "tiny, remote possibility." All one has to do to
 >realize that is simply extraplolate the human experience of the
 >past century by a thousand years or more. If interstellar travel
 >is possible, humans will achieve it within that time span. And
 >that's discounting a possible exchange of technology with other,
 >more advanced species.

Isn't this just a version of 'there's so many stars etc out
there that some of them -must- support life bearing planets'?
Again an interesting speculation but as we have no proof of ET
it remains just that. You are confusing your _belief_ with
reality. I can't discount ET - no-one can, but in lieu of hard
evidence it must remain a temporarily held belief and a 'tiny
and remote possibility'/ Got any evidence to the contrary Pat?

The point I am trying to make is that because so many _good_ (in
the UK at the very least) cases have been proved to be IFOs then
it is reasonable to suggest _based on that reality_ that all UFO
cases may be reduced to an IFO _eventually_. The fact there are
cases which are as yet 'unsolved' does not (as Sean Jones
appears to be saying) make them _unsolvable_ or ET or paranormal
in origin. It may just mean we don't have the relevant
information, which if we had would enable us to turn them into
IFOs.

 >Rather than being fuzzy minded adherents of a nebulous power
 >akin to witchcraft, I would submit that backers of the ET
 >hypothesis have a far better grasp of what the universe _in all
 >likelihood_ will prove to be than researchers who view ET
 >visitation a "tiny, remote possibility."

You can submit what you like Pat but the ETH still looks shaky
from my pink half of the drainpipe.

Happy Trails

Andy






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 26

                           [lunascan] Re: Warning

From: Ted Phillips <theo2042@gte.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 14:52:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:56:21 -0400
Subject: [lunascan] Re: Warning


 >From: Francis Ridge <slk@evansville.net>
 >To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
 >Date: Tuesday, October 26, 1999 12:30 PM
 >Subject: [lunascan] warning

 >Anyone,

 >If for any reason the email does not get answered or the web
 >pages go down, don't be surprised. We just got caught up in an
 >MCI scam and our phone bill is now $556.74. I'm paying
 >Ameritech $40 a week and trying to get credit on $300 worth of
 >card calls from MCI. We got hit and hit hard. We've been told
 >by some to just not pay it, but Ameritech expects to be paid or
 >they will shut off both lines; my home and the computer line if
 >I don't resolve this. Has anyone had any experience with these
 >things?

 >Fran

 >Please support The Lunascan Project web site by sending donations to:
 >Lunascan, 618 Davis Drive, Mt. Vernon, IN  47620
 >http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lshomepage.html
 >Note: The Rukl lunar atlas charts are no longer on The Lunascan Project
 >directories. Please refer to your personal atlas.


Fran,

MCI talked my wife into a switching and then we received a
$500+ internet bill which we have not and will not pay--they are
not ones to give up easily and persist.

Ted Phillips

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

THE LUNASCAN PROJECT (TLP): An Earth-Based Telescopic Imaging (EBTI)
program using live and recorded CCD technology to document and record
Lunar Transient Phenomena (TLPs).

The Lunascan Project HomePage
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lshomepage.html

The Project's Mission Statement :
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/miss.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:35:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


The following appeared in the London Daily Mail, 26 October,
1999:

Riddle of UFO at Heathrow

A passenger jet's close encounter with a mysterious,
fast-moving craft seconds after taking off from Heathrow had
experts baffled yesterday.

The crew of an MD-81 reported an object 'like a bright light'
passing within 20ft of them at 3,500 ft. "Air accident
investigators were unable to shed any light on the mystery as
radar records show there were no other planes in the area at the
time.

A dossier on last month's incident is thought to have been
passed to the MOD to see if the UFO could have been a
radar-invisible spy plane or a stray British test craft.

---

Am I correct in thinking this claimed sighting has been
mentioned somewhere on UpDates before?

Does anyone recognise this case - or is it something completely
new?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:37:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:37:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO





From: UFO UpDates - Toronto



 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >Am I correct in thinking this claimed sighting has been
 >mentioned somewhere on UpDates before?

 >Does anyone recognise this case - or is it something completely
 >new?


David,

From:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m22-020.shtml

 >From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:47:04 +0000
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 21:57:15 -0500
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 4, Number 8

 >     UFO ROUNDUP
 >Volume 4, Number 8
 >February 22, 1999
 >Editor: Joseph Trainor


<snip>

 >>GIANT CYLINDRICAL UFO SEEN
 >>OVER GLOUCESTERSHIRE

 >>     On Monday, February 8, 1999, businessman
 >>Miles J. was relaxing in his seat aboard a British
 >>Midlands A310 Airbus jetliner when he spotted
 >>something odd outside his window.  He was
 >>flying home from Belfast, Northern Ireland, and
 >>the plane "had just begun its descent into
 >>London's Heathrow Airport.  I was seated on the
 >>right side of the Airbus, and I first saw it as a
 >>kind of after-image."

<snip>

 >ebk







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:41:03 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >>The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >>which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >>would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >>fairies and little folk.

 >>What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >>origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >>remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >>Age culture.

Jerry wrote:

 >These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
 >confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
 >you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
 >UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

I beg to differ.

My statements are based upon 20 years of field work, research
and hundreds of case investigations which turned me from an
out-and-out believer in the ETH to a skeptic, or agnostic at
best. {Note agnostic - I do not dismiss the possibility that
*some* UFOs could be ET craft, only that in my opinion it is a
remote possibility, that's all}.

Add to that a sound knowledge of folklore and cultural belief
which led to a me being awarded a PhD - described by a panel of
academics as "a valuable contribution to knowledge" - and I feel
I am well qualified to comment, and certainly as qualified as
Jerome Clark.

So, friend, you might not trust my judgement, but there are
plenty of other 'smart' people who do share my views and whose
conclusions are equally valid within their own disciplines.

Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
open-minded academics.

So your disaproval doesn't make me feel too lonely.

As for "UFO phenomenon or the ETH", it's just a theory and
despite your 'special pleading' it has not more evidence to back
it up than any other. I think I will stick with the idea that
the fairy folk are the flying saucer pilots, after all two can
play at wearing cultural blinkers if that's the game we're
playing.

But please Jerry, if you have some evidence which proves the ETH
is not a cultural artefact of the late 20th century, then I'm
sure we'd all love to hear about it.

 >One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
 >from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
 >ufological discourse soon.

So my opinions are not welcome on this list?

Presumably the "empty posturing" of the ETH believers is OK
then... I don't see Jerry objecting as they all happily slap
each other on the back, cracking jokes about  pelicanists and
debunkers along the way. Sounds to me like a spot of intolerance
is creeping in. Opinions are fine, as long as they are ones
Jerry agrees with.

 >It is, as we have already seen
 >demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
 >things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
 >of astrobiology.

Astrobiology?

Let's get this one right  - the study of alien lifeforms?
Pleease. Yes I'm happy to plead ignorance there, along with the
rest of the human race.

But perhaps you've got one hidden in the freezer, and you know
better. And before you retort that I've just taken you too
seriously and you were only jesting after a few beers, well so
was I.

Dave Clarke.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:49:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:43:52 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi Dave

 >>Andy, I do not mean this as a personal thing, I really do wish
 >>UFOIN the very best, I am only expressing my doubts as to the
 >>results of the work, not the quality.

 >What an intriguing and revealing statement Sean.

Thank you.

 >If we are likely to produce quality research, ergo we are doing
 >a good job.

Agreed.

 >Therefore, if the results and conclusions reflect that quality,
 >then what is the problem?

None, _providing_ _all_ possible answers are given a fair and
reasonable hearing.

 >I get the idea you are trying to imply that somehow any
 >conclusions we reach will be twisted towards debunking or
 >skepticism for its own sake.

 >Where is your evidence to back up this claim?
I have none, yet. Only time and your results will tell. I am only
voicing my concerns.

 >I can only speak for myself, but I certainly do not approach
 >cases expecting to solve them just to upset all the believers.

 >I use my training as a journalist and academic to follow where
 >the evidence leads. If that leads to a rational explanation,
 >then so be it.

And when it leads to a non-rational explanation, what then?

 >If there is an explanation to be found, or which is thought to
 >be likely, then surely we owe it to everyone to say so.

Does that include ET?

 >If we fall back on ifs and buts and 'maybes' then we are harking
 >back to the age of superstition - belief in nebulous powers 'out
 >there' which ultimately lead us to abdicate responsibility for
 >our own actions in the real world (see for example the
 >witchcraft mania of the Middle Ages).

 >The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >fairies and little folk.

Your statement here dictates your train of thought before you
investigate any case. You have already pre-determined that ET
and his cousin ALF do not exist. If you would like I can provide
you with copious amounts of historical sighting reports and
these go back further than a mere 500 years.

And speaking of fairies and little folk, some researchers believe
these are historical accounts of ET anyway.

 >What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >Age culture.

In your opinion. And as for one tiny remote possibility, there
was one tiny remote possibility that life existed on Mars. Now
there's proof.

 >Everyone is exposed to this stuff, we can't escape it,. But if
 >we expect to be taken seriously by the real world then we need
 >at least to show we can be dispassionate when looking at the
 >evidence upon which we base those beliefs.

By dispassionate, do you mean: UFOIN will automatically look for
a mundane explanation because the public does not like the ETH?

 >Speculation can only be based upon good evidence, and if cases
 >are investigated shabbily and by people who are driven by
 >beliefs to such an extent that the facts become distorted before
 >they reach us - then how can we make any definitive conclusions
 >about them?

And you are being different because you are expecting to find a
mundane answer to all UFO cases?

 >UFOIN welcomes those who can investigate fairly and objectively
 >without allowing beliefs and prejudices to cloud conclusions.
 >Open minds are what we want - but not so open that the contents
 >dribble out!

You have practically stated that your opinion is  a closed mind
to the ETH, so does this not prejudice your investigation?

 >All best wishes,

And the same to you.


--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:04:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:45:42 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 05:04:45 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Roy

 >If those people around the World  writing books and giving
 >Lectures , appearing in magazines and on TV regarding  the UFO
 >subject , would  answer "YES" to your question, would this then
 >prove the need to write, Lecture and appear on TV anymore
 >talking about UFOs?

Well yes. Because there is still the matter of abductions to be
explained, there is still the matter of crop circles to be
explained, there is still the matter of cattle mutilations to be
explained. There are many facets of the UFO enigma, and ET are
only one part of it Roy.

 >Surely not if they knew they existed, what would be the point,
 >then alternative careers might be in hand.

 >Regards,

 >Roy..

--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:28:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:47:34 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: 25 Oct 1999 11:38:35 -0500
 >From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi Stephen

 >Might I inquire as to whether everyone is as sick of this "same
 >ole same old" back and forth pointless diatribe as I am?

Do you have a delete key?

 >I for one respect Jenny's scientific fence straddling. I applaud
 >her and her cohort's attempts at correcting the course of ufology
 >(if it's not already too late) thru the new _non-organization_ of
 >British UFO investigators.

Hmm, I don't see how sitting on the fence is scientific, could
you explain how it is so?

 >>Jenny I think that you might be missing the same point that Andy
 >>is missing.

 >Not to sound confrontational

OK I wont be either then <G>

 >but it seems like _you_ are the one
 >missing the point.

Stephen, unless you are being deliberately evasive we must be
talking about different points?

 >Jenny has responded over and over and over to
 >the likes of this kind of stupid "either / or" mentality. This
 >is why most UFOlks need a healthy dose of The Excluded Middle.

Which is? Jenny has her view, I have mine, you have yours. I
would like to consider mine very middle of the road, balanced
and thought- out. I do not jump to conclusions, I do not
automatically jump to ET as being _the_ answer. And I
investigate when possible. I also respect the work of others.
But to clarify what the point that it appears you are missing:
UFOIN has a disproportionate number of out- and-out s(K)ceptics,
and some members who have stated that every UFO will have a
mundane answer, and I am merely pointing out that if an ET
answer was the most likely, because it did not fit into the
remit of these people would it get a fair airing? Can I be any
clearer for you?

 >>I am assuming that we are talking about _only genuine_ sighting
 >>reports and etc and not hoax's etc.

 >Define genuine. Do you mean "all sightings of 'UFO' which can be
 >positively identified as ET craft?" Or, more in line with
 >Jenny's perspective (or rather my interpretation / explanation
 >of her POV), that some UFO / Alien Encounters, which may be
 >related to UAP or ASP, may in fact contain an "alien / ET"
 >signal within the "noise" of the encounter narrative. Read her
 >books _Beyond Explanation?_, _Mind Monsters_, and _Alien
 >Abduction-Mystery Solved_.

Genuine: _Not_ a deliberately falsified picture, _not_ an
account in which the "witness" lied, _not_ hoaxed or faked
"evidence", need I go on? A genuine UFO report is a person
seeing something that can not be readily identified. As simple
as that.

 >>When _you_ have _positively_ identified 99.99 percent of UFO's
 >>using every explanation that you have, including outrageous
 >>statements such as "piezo electric lights dancing in the swamp
 >>gas which was reflected off Venus's glow"  Then you _must_ be
 >>left with

 >>>'some' UFOs are -
 >>>substitute whatever your own pet theory is.

 >>Are you not?

 >Yes she is as she herself has stated on this list. Tho she does
 >it with more rationality than most.

Thanks for agreeing with me.

 >>So please stop sitting on the fence and
 >>make your mind up, does ET exist, yes or no? Simple as that
 >>really if you ask me.

 >Why the heck should she when she has already adequately
 >expressed her POV. Are you a Republican or a Democrat Sean? Are
 >UFOs _real_ or not? Do answers to these questions always hafta
 >be a yes or no / either or scenario for you Sean? Are all issues
 >black and white? Are there no gray areas in your own
 >perspective?

In answer to your questions.

I am neither republican or democratic, I am British. UFOs are
real. Yes. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Yes there are grey areas
that need further research.

 >I sincerely hope Jenny will not answer your post as she already
 >has. She has explained her balanced non-commital POV already and
 >for her to do so again would be a waste of her time and yours as
 >you will only see what she has already stated which... is enuf
 >for someone not as polarized as one who must keep asking this
 >question.

I am a little confused with your statement. I ask the questions
of Jenny because her views have changed on a number of
occasions, to which she freely admits. So all I am trying to do
in this instance to is to clarify her current position on these
matters.

 >_Yes_ some UFOs may represent the communication or
 >manifestation of an alien or ET intelligence / consciousness.
 >But is there enuf evidence to prove such? No, not until, as you
 >said earlier, the proverbial landing on public lawns takes
 >place.

I'm glad that you agree <G>.

 >Aaarrrgh! "Can't we all just agree to disagree"?

Any time you want to <G>.


--
    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                 Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 14:57:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:50:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out


In a message dated 10/23/1999 10:50:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
updates@globalserve.net writes:

 >Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 18:27:03 -0500
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..."

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:38:33
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Armstrong: "...life probably exists out there..."

 >>Source: The Detroit News,

 >>http://detnews.com/1999/religion/9910/21/10220003.htm

 >>Stig

 >>***

 >>Searching for life beyond Earth: Neil Armstrong says it's out
 >>there somewhere

 >>By Todd Halvorson and Robyn Suriano/Florida Today

 ><snip>

 >... And if the 'smart money' rests on "they're out there
 >somewhere," wouldn't it be rational good sense to function (down
 >here) in a manner like they were "out there somewhere" --
 >_close_?

 >I mean, if we're _wrong_ we just treat each other with respect,
 >deference, and consideration... but if we're _right_, we treat
 >each other with respect, deference, consideration -- _plus_ we
 >provide an assuring example to our judge, jury, and (perhaps)
 >executioner.


One aks's for rational good sense from whom?  Us?  Perhaps our
goobers in gooberland.  Perhaps the world goobermint.

Note, my good friend, that in the word goobermint, the last four
letters are related to half of what drives this engine called
"La Toillet de Terre,"  money!

Aks me what the other half is.  Please.

Thank you.

The other half consists of lies, disinformation and other
assorted puke which is regurgitated at just the right ripeness
with which to appear almost palpable.

Al, what is needed is a really good purgative.  Somehow I think,
I feel, deep down, that it's going to have to happen soon.

So, I am developing Gripple Lax, a combination of Gripple and
Saratoga purgative mineral waters.  The good stuff stays and the
bad stuff goes.

We'll all be better off for it.  Available now from your local
Good Humour Gripple Truk.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                  Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:00:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:02:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >From: Chris Kelly <MIBAREA51@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 13:08:11 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >I am wondering with all of the talk about the Gulf Breeze
 >photo's...

 >Did Tommy Smith ever say anything else about his part in faking
 >pictures and or Ed Walters? What about the short video Walters
 >took of the "UFO" coming into view and casting the shadow on the
 >trees. What is the opinion on that? I have not seen anything
 >about it posted.

Chris Kelly,

Tommy Smith has not been heard from since his heyday in the late
spring of 1990.  His claims about how the photos were taken (he
said Ed told him how he (Ed) had taken the pictures) were
determined to be at least in error and in some cases impossible.
Tommy had his own UFO pictures, by the way, which he claimed Ed
faked by double exposure.  However (a) the pictures were not
double exposures and (b) Tommy had told a friend about his
(Tommy's) sighting and pictures taken during the sighting a year
and a half before he claimed that Ed  took the pictures.

Regarding the moving shadow video, which is described completely
in the paper ACCELERATION, posted at:

www.accessnv.com/nids/articles/maccabee.html

It has never been discussed by the skeptics(!).

In that case the shadow appears to be on trees about 7000 ft
from the camera.  To see my own analysis and discussion of th
hoax possibilities read ACCELERATION.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                  Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 19:12:08 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:07:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:24:04 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 06:36:51
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

 >Stig or Anyone -- Is there any report of what the UFO question
 >was and what Al "Dumb as a Post" Bore answered?

 >BTW, note that Bore was born about a month after the alleged
 >Roswell crash.  Note his "alien" demeanor.  Hmmmmm...  Is a vote
 >for Al a vote for Them?...

Karl,

Nah, any more than a vote for Shrub is a vote for (relatively)
intelligent plant life.

Jerry Clark







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 20:36:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:11:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 20:11:18 -0700
 >From: Scott Hale <scott_hale@american.edu>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

 >I'm simply amazed how much Larry Warren's story continues to
 >grow and expand.

 >I wonder what part of UFO history he'll next be associated with.
 >Does anybody else find this just a little hard to swallow?

The whole story is suspicious. Does anybody think that Nixon
drove Gleason anywhere on his own, let alone to an Air Force
base to look at alien bodies? American presidents are always
surrounded by Secret Service people, and a miscellaneous, large
entourage; they don't go anywhere on their own. Where would
Nixon even find a private car?

This story, quite apart from Larry Warren, has been around for a
long time. It could be checked. The first question to ask might
be whether Gleason really told it. If he told two people (Warren
and the other source), he might have told others. Can anybody
find some friend of his who'll swear he or she heard it from
Gleason independently?

For that matter, if Nixon showed the alien bodies to Jackie
Gleason, he might have showed other people, or at least told
them the bodies existed. There are plenty of people around who
were close to Nixon. Can we find any other testimony? Is there
anything on the famous Nixon tapes? God knows, Nixon shot his
mouth off about all sorts of subjects. Did he ever mention the
alien bodies?

Did Nixon and Jackie Gleason play golf together? That might be
the first thing to check.

If the Secret Service really was dismayed that Nixon got away
from them (as Warren says), that can be verified. Are there
active or retired Secret Service people who were working then,
and can confirm that Nixon disappeared? Is there anything in
Nixon's logs to confirm a disappearance?

Here's a story from the memoirs of Charles Colson, one of
Nixon's aides, later convicted of some Watergate crime. One
night, Colson was on duty at the White House. If World War III
broke out, or some other emergency happened, Colson would be the
one to tell Nixon; if Nixon needed something, Colson would have
to deal with it.

Around 9 PM, Nixon, who was restless, told Colson he wanted to
go to a show. Was there anything at the Kennedy Center? Colson
called the box office, but it was closed. He then called every
Kennedy Center number he could find, and -- this is one of those
true stories that show not everything in the government or the
military follows standard procedures -- finally connected with a
waitress at a Kennedy Center restaurant. "This is the White
House," Colson told the astonished woman. "What's playing at the
Kennedy Center tonight?"

Turned out there was a concert by one of the military bands.
Nixon insisted on going to it, creating gigantic havoc when he
(and his staff and Secret Service squad) arrived all but
unannounced in the middle of the performance, forcing the band
to stop in the middle of a piece and play "Hail to the Chief."

The next morning, Colson reported all of this to Handleman,
Nixon's chief of staff. (Is that what he was? I've forgotten my
Watergate rogue's gallery.) Handleman said, "If he asks to do
something like that again, don't say yes. He rattles his cage,
but we can't let him out."

Could Nixon really slip away with Jackie Gleason?

Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:03:45 -0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:14:32 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


I agree with Jerry Clark.

I don't beleive that still have people that believe that the
UFOs are imagination, and the ETs are a product of our Space Age
Culture. Don't you think that the fairies and little folk could
be aliens, but the people from that age didn't know how express
theirs sightings? I mean, when they saw a UFO in the sky, they
associated it with something that they know, like a ship ( see
the sketch of an airship over Oakland, California, apperead in
the San Francisco Call, in November 1896)

You have your opinon, of course, but you have to get arguments
to support your claims.

See'ya.

THIAGO LUIZ TICCHETTI
Diretor Do Departamento de Publicao e Traduo Especializadas ( DEPTE -
EBE-ET / Brasilia-Brasil)
Director of the Publication Department and Specialized Translation
ICQ - 35119615
http://www.ebe-et.com.br







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

              Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:18:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:16:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >From: Scott Hale <scott_hale@american.edu>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 20:11:18 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:11:05 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

 >I'm simply amazed how much Larry Warren's story continues to
 >grow and expand.

 >I wonder what part of UFO history he'll next be associated with.
 >Does anybody else find this just a little hard to swallow?

Scott, everyone:

Another Clifford Stone, Boy Wonder.

Bob Young








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 27

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:33:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:40:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:41:31 +0800

 >>Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 01:22:50 -0500
 >>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <>

<snip>

 >You seem very defensive Amy, accusing at least three people so
 >far of ridiculing or debunking.  There is no way to prove the
 >case real or false, period.  It's subjective, each person's own
 >beliefs influence their acceptance/rejection of cases.  If
 >something doesn't sit right with me about this case I am sure
 >you can appreciate it as my opinion.

Well that is three of us, the only three who took this seriously
enough to bother asking questions.  It's quite apparent to me,
'judging' by the way we three have been treated by this
researcher, that this is all a big waste of time and no matter
what questions you ask, you will never be given a
straight-forward answer without defense.

I say it's time to end this tattered thread and move on to some
more productive and interesting items, unless of course Sharon
and Dave have more stamina to pursue this never-ending lack of
co-operation and continual criticism.  Even in private mail, I
have received nothing but abuse for asking questions and having
an opinion, and am accused of being 'nasty'.

I reviewed the web site and the pictures, and see things quite
differently, but I'm sure I'm wrong since I've never seen the
originals.  I'm sure someone more deserving will get some
answers somewhere and would have the courtesy to share them with
us, perhaps one of these researchers that Amy has shared this
with (as she stated).  Or perhaps Amy would like to share with
the rest of us who has been afforded the privilege of reviewing
the information.  Like Amy says, we are all in this together,
right? But is there room for this attitude towards anyone who
asks questions?

Sharon, I respect the questions you are asking because these
'are' questions an interested researcher would ask.
Unfortunately, they are not being recognized as such, nor were
mine.  It's very hard to respond any other way when nothing is
being given to respond to except defensiveness.

I am curious what kind of dog (that is mentioned on the web
site) these people had.  Is that a legitimate question?

Hey Amy, you won't see my 'name in lights' on this topic anymore
unless you are willing to share with everyone on this list what
you are so willing to share in private.  Unfortunately I can no
longer take this thread seriously, nor tolerate being called
confused and uneducated by someone who can't keep their stories
straight and tries to manipulate everything I say. This is a
difficult field to balance, but getting defensive answers makes
it even more difficult.

I'm not giving in, I've just had enough.  There is a difference,
Amy. Instead of winning, you've lost someone who was interested.
And I have observed how you have responded similarly to the
other interested parties, but it is their choice if they want to
pursue this.

You claim I'm picking on you and am constantly trying to change
the thread, but looking back it was you changing it. It's no
longer about 'Close Encounters' anymore is it?  And if it's okay
with Amy, I refer to Dave's message in this regard, since it is
in the same thread.

Sorry for butting in, Sharon, but I didn't want to be accused of
'changing the thread' and I felt your remarks needed validation.

Sharon and Dave, good luck in your research.  Keep asking all
the right questions.  Perhaps one of you is more deserving and
will get further than I.  My shovel broke, so I can't dig
anymore. And good luck to you too Amy, sincerely. Thank you for
your valuable contributions and enlightenment.  You deserve
respect for putting time and money into this case, regardless.

Sue

"Truth is a shining goddess, always veiled, always distant,
never wholly approachable, but worthy of all the devotion of
which the human spirit is capable." -Bertrand Russell






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 22:52:54 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:45:08 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT


Hey, Andy guy,

 >In response to Dave Clarke's

 >>The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >>which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >>would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >>fairies and little folk.

 >>What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >>origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >>remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >>Age culture.

 >>>These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
 >>>confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
 >>>you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
 >>>UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

 >Innit great how Jerry uses 'my friend' when he's attempting
 >sarcasm? Dave's (a Doctor of Folklore I hasten to add) statement
 >tells us about his experience after 20 years in the field and
 >his research Jerry. It tells us what _he_ has come to believe
 >about the UFO phenomenon, based on more research than most
 >ufologists will ever be able to shake a stick at.

Interesting that you think a genuine expression of regard and
good feeling for Dave Clarke is "attempting sarcasm." (Believe
me, Andy, I don't have to "attempt" sarcasm.  It ain't that hard
to do.  You of all people should know that.) I have nothing but
respect for Clarke (even if he persists with the unnecessary "e"
at the end of his name), who among other accomplishments has a
splendid two-part article running in IUR. (And somebody named
Andy Roberts -- presumably no relation to our present
correspondent -- has a fine article in the upcoming issue.)
Can't you grasp the elemental fact, Andy, that people can
disagree and still respect each other without "attempting
sarcasm"?  Whatever "attempting sarcasm" is.  Perhaps you could
explain.

 >And Dave has
 >changed his views dramatically in the fifteen or so years I have
 >known him from being postive that some UFO cases were ETH in
 >nature to a far more sceptical position. All based on research
 >and investigation. Surely not a bad way of reaching conclusions?

And all sorts of people can make the identical claim from the
opposite direction, most dramatically and visibly the astronomer
who for 20 years was the U.S. Air Force's chief scientific
consultant on UFOs. Interesting, of course, that this man was a
physical scientist, whereas Dave Clarke is a folklorist.  There
is room for both hard science and softer social science (and
folklore, a field in which I have deep interest and for which I
have high regard [I once seriously considered pursuing a Ph.D.
in it], has been derided as not even a "soft" science but a
branch of literary study; most academic folklorists in the US
are in the English department) in this field, but I think that
on the larger scientific questions about the nature of the UFO
phenomenon and its possible relationship to ETI, most of us
would go with the hard scientists.

 >>>One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
 >>>from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
 >>>ufological discourse soon.  It is, as we have already seen
 >>>demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
 >>>things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
 >>>of astrobiology.

 >'Smart enough to know better' - sheer brilliance Jerry! It's not
 >empty posturing - see above. 'Astrobiology'? Yor avin' a laarf
 >incha? Don't we have to actually have some hard biological
 >evidence before we can talk about such a thing?

Tell that to the SETI crowd, and then get all those university
presses to stop publishing books on extraterrestrial life, such
as the one I just read which Oxford University Press will
publish in February.  I'm sure they'll appreciate your insights,
Andy. (See, I did it; no mere "attempt" there.)

Congratulations on the Northbritspeak and a brave attempt to
change the subject.  But as I say, if you reduce astrobiology's
concerns to a folklore of elves and fairies, my friend (no sarcasm
here, and I assume you'll get the song allusion to follow), you
ain't goin' nowhere.

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 06:45:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:53:18 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Hello Andy and list,

At 21:40 26-10-99 -0400, you wrote:
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Seeings as various people have been menting my name and my
 >colleagues' I thought I'd better reply before my tea.

 >I fail to understand why saying that _all_ UFOs have the
 >potential to be IFOs causes such a problem. Many, many
 >_good_ cases in the UK, which as Jenny points out have been
 >held as ET and/or unexplained have fallen to the IFO
 >explanation. Surely this is a _good_ thing?

Sure, Andy.

 >The bald facts are that as a  great many cases have been
 >downgraded from UFO to IFO, and that no UFOs have been (yet)
 >proven to be ET in origin.

That's true, because to begin with, nobody knows how to prove a
UFO to be of ET origin. After all, we have no access to ET's
home planet and can't verify whether a craft or artefact comes
from there.

 >That fact alone makes it reasonable to suggest that _all_ UFOs
 >are thus resolvable.

Well, that depends. In the first place, it is quite firmly
established that some UFO cases stand the test of time, ie they
are still unresolved even after decades.

If we were talking here about vague light in the sky, glows and
obscure photographs and all that, your statement would be true
that all UFOs are potentially resolvable.

As anyone who professes to be a serious UFO investigator should
know however, there are also cases in which solid flying objects
fly at several times the speed of sound, suddenly turn on a dime
and evade pursuing fighter aircraft. All in such a manner that
we can see a technology at display that is clearly not human in
origin. Cases such as these are recorded on radar and witnessed
by reliable investigators or hundreds of members from the
public.

The question whether we would call these craft ET seems to me
rather academic and is in fact a sidepoint. The real point is
that there is an intelligence operating in our skies from time
to time that is clearly not ours. And those UFOs are only solved
when we label them as such.

I have such a suspicion, however, that you are not inclined to
put a label on them that suggest "non human intelligently
operated craft". Therefore I am afraid that ironically to you,
my friend, these tried and true unsolved cases will remain
unsolved.


Groeten,
Henny








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 06:45:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:51:42 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hello Andy and list,

At 21:40 26-10-99 -0400, you wrote:
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >
 >
 >Seeings as various people have been menting my name and my
 >colleagues' I thought I'd better reply before my tea.
 >
 >I fail to understand why saying that _all_ UFOs have the
 >potential to be IFOs causes such a problem. Many, many
 >_good_ cases in the UK, which as Jenny points out have been
 >held as ET and/or unexplained have fallen to the IFO
 >explanation. Surely this is a _good_ thing?

Sure, Andy.

 >
 >The bald facts are that as a  great many cases have been
 >downgraded from UFO to IFO, and that no UFOs have been (yet)
 >proven to be ET in origin.

That's true, because to begin with, nobody knows how to prove
a UFO to be of ET origin. After all, we have no access to ET's
home planet and can't verify whether a craft or artefact comes
from there.


 >
 >That fact alone makes it reasonable to suggest that _all_ UFOs
 >are thus resolvable.
 >

Well, that depends. In the first place, it is quite firmly established
that some UFO cases stand the test of time, ie they are
still unresolved even after decades.

If we were talking here about vague light in the sky, glows and
obscure photographs and all that, your statement would be true
that all UFOs are potentially resolvable.

As anyone who professes to be a serious UFO investigator should
know however, there are also cases in which solid flying objects
fly at several times the speed of sound, suddenly turn on a dime and
evade pursuing fighter aircraft. All in such a manner that we can
see a technology at display that is clearly not human in origin.
Cases such as these are recorded on radar and witnessed by reliable
investigators or hundreds of members from the public.

The question whether we would call these craft ET seems to
me rather academic and is in fact a sidepoint. The real point is
that there is an intelligence operating in our skies from time to time
that is clearly not ours. And those UFOs are only solved when we
label them as such.

I have such a suspicion, however, that you are not inclined to
put a label on them that suggest "non human intelligently operated
craft". Therefore I am afraid that ironically to you, my friend,
these tried and true unsolved cases will remain unsolved.


Groeten,
Henny







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 02:10:39 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

 >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:23:46 +0000
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: WHEN DISCLOSURE SERVES SECRECY
 >From: "Stephen MILES Lewis" <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>


 >WHEN DISCLOSURE SERVES SECRECY

 >Copyright 1999
 >Steven M. Greer M.D.

<snip>

 >But then there is the disclosure the powers that be would like
 >to see: Manipulated. Calculated to consolidate power and
 >engender fear. Configured in such a way that chaos and a
 >deepening need for Big Brother is carefully inculcated into the
 >masses.

 >We have seen the plans and it is not a pretty picture.

Please be more specific.  Have you viewed classified government
documents, or been told storys from alleged government
informants?  If these storys come from alleged government
leakers/informants we must be very careful. Remember the so
called government leakers unloading tales of mass landings in
the desert SW april 24 of 1997 (never happened)  Hoaglands
various informants who were telling him tales and storys about
the Mars lander several years ago and a landing to happen on Dec
10th 1998 on some peak in AZ...which turned out to be bogus?

 >I write this as a warning. A warning that the wolves in sheep
 >clothes are very cunning indeed. And have almost limitless
 >resources. Most who work with them do not even know they are
 >wolves. Indeed, it is likely that many of the wolves have been
 >convinced that they are sheep.

I suspect that anybody that doesn't agree 100 percent will
probably be labled a wolf, or a sheep that is in fact a wolf or
working for the wolves.

Darn, going to have to change my Halloween costume.  :)

 >The UFO matter is not so much a mystery as a matter deliberately
 >obfuscated and mystified. Confusion and a lack of clarity serves

Confusion and lack of clarity is how government typically works.
I think of this everytime I fill out a new form for the
government that has a paper work reduction act notice on the
front of a 20 page form.

 >the larger covert goal of keeping it off the long- range radar
 >of society while power and plans are consolidated quietly. And
 >the one thing more dangerous to society than all this secrecy is
 >a planned, contrived disclosure run by the keepers of the
 >secrets.

 >For years such plans have been made - to be unfurled at just the
 >right time. During a time of great expectation. Of social
 >confusion. Perhaps of millennial madness?

Years ago the storys went, Richard Nixon was going to disclose,
then Gerald Ford, then everybody just knew Jimmy Carter was going
to blow the lid off of secrecy because he had seen a UFO himself,
then Reagan was going to do it because he had seen a UFO while
governor of Calif, then we heard Bush was going to do it, then Clinton
in 1992, then again both the Republican and Democrats were going
to make it a campaign issue in 1996.  It never happened then, and
likely it won't happen anytime soon, because Americans a more interested
in beer, monday night football, baseball playoffs, paychecks and govt
retirement checks.

 >I have personally met with a number of people who are very
 >involved with such plans. I do not speculate here. Be aware: The

So instead of keeping this information secret which is what
Greer critiques the government over, why doesn't Greer disclose
it?

If Greer starts making excuses and telling storys as to why he
can't disclose it, he sounds an awful lot like the goverment he
is criticizing.

 >disclosure of UFO reality is being planned very carefully. It
 >will assiduously follow a scheme to spin the subject in just the
 >right way - the only way which will further redound to the glory
 >and power of the secret-keepers. It will be a false disclosure -
 >one born out of the age-old bane of human existence: selfishness
 >and greed. Greed for power. Greed for control. Greed for
 >domination.

So even if they disclose ET reality, it will be a false
disclosure? Give me a break.  The guy paints himself into a
position of no matter what happens it will be wrong.

Lets look at other govt disclosures of late:

CIA and Bay of Pigs report.  Did not paint a pretty picture of
govt.

CIA and Guatamala. Did not paint a pretty picture of govt.

Disclosure based upon declassified documents that US stored
nuclear weapons at various locations abroad.  Did not paint a
pretty picture of govt.

Everybody pretty well gets the point.  The so called disclosures
from the government recently have not painted pretty pictures of
the officials in power at the time.    Same thing will be true
of ET/UFO reality if it ever happens.  It will be blamed on
previous Presidential administrations, and govt officials who
are likely dead by now.  UNLESS somehow, someway, society has
secretly benefitted from the technology, THEN you will have
hoardes of people who worked on the program over the years
coming forward to be part of the disclosure.

<snip>

 >Consider: One scenario for disclosure is that the UFO and
 >Extraterrestrial subject is acknowledged in a way which is
 >scientific and hopeful. Excessive secrecy which lacks executive
 >branch and congressional oversight is ended. Humanity begins to
 >entertain open contact with other civilizations, with peaceful
 >engagement as the goal. Technologies which are currently
 >suppressed are allowed to be disseminated: Pollution ends. An
 >economy of abundance and social justice is firmly established.
 >Global environmental destruction and mind-numbing world poverty
 >become a faint memory. Zero-point based energy devices transform
 >the world. Electro-gravitic devices permit above ground travel
 >without paving over the world's precious fertile farm land. As
 >an ET once told Colonel Philip Corso, " Its a new world, if you
 >can take it...". This is the disclosure which we are working
 >for.

This is a modern copy of the old theory that ET's are going to
save us and our planet from certain ruin...whether that be
global cooling, warming, pollution or whatever the current
crisis of the moment is.

Back in the 70s, the so called scientific community feared that
we were going to have a "global ice age"  or global nuclear war
which was the popular fears at the time.  Naturally some in
UFOlogy were claiming that when we made contact, the ET's were
going to show us a way to warm the planet, or save humanity from
certain nuclear destruction etc etc.

<snip>

 >But remember, there are hugely powerful interests who dread this
 >scenario. For them, it is the end of the world as they know it.
 >The end of centralized, elite power. The end of a controlled
 >geo-political order which today leaves nearly 90% of the people
 >of earth barely one step out of the stone age. And they do not
 >wish to share the power they wield.

_If_ an ET reality announcement was made, it would be hot news
for about a week, then it would fade from the news with the next
airplane crash of a famous person or disaster that strikes the
US better yet, the next White House/Congressional
arguement/scandel. Bottom line for many if the choice is to hear
about alien visitation, or find out if they get an increase in
their government checks, they will take the checks each and
every time.

Then the people will be howling about 'well you spent all this
money studying aliens from space, when it could have been spent
on this planet..'

<snip>

 >My meetings over the past 9 years with covert operatives who
 >have worked on UFO related programs have introduced me to some
 >characters right out of a spy novel - and then some. Whether in
 >private high tech industry, at the Pentagon or at a midnight
 >meeting in a private mansion, a theme has emerged. It is one of

One suspects the so called "midnight meeting in a private
mansion" was the hotly debated dinner meeting with the former
CIA director, which the CIA director had a totally different
take on what was in fact discussed.

I would assume that Greer is going to keep all the information
the other people allegedly said secret, i.e can't be checked out
or verified by anybody else.


<snip>

 >Here, we find some very strange bed-fellows indeed. War mongers
 >and militarists in cahoots with industrialists who share a
 >certain bizarre eschatological bent: A dark view of the future,
 >featuring an extraterrestrial Armageddon - or at least the
 >threat of it. Such a theme supports retrograde and fanatical
 >religious causes as well as deeply covert military-industrial
 >plans to expand the arms race into space.

 >In fact, the big players in the so-called 'civilian UFO
 >community' are tied into such beliefs and agendas. It strains
 >credulity, I admit, but here is what we have found by
 >penetrating these operations.

You mean people will always be broken up into two camps? You
know, the glass is either half full, or half empty; it all
depends on your perspective and back ground.

There will be those that believe that ET's are the saviors of
Earth and whose only purpose is to bring humanity to a new level
and those that believe that the ET's may have some other motive
other then peace and goodwill.  You would think that if all the
so called abduction accounts are true, that is not the calling
card of a race interesting in lifting humanity to a new level of
peace and understanding.

 > From a military-industrial perspective, the disclosure of
 >choice is one which frames the UFO/ET issue in a threatening
 >manner. If a threat from space can be established (as President
 >Reagan liked to say) then the entire world can be united around
 >the need to fight such a threat. This would ensure trillion
 >dollar plus military - industrial spending well into the next
 >century, and beyond. If you think the cold war was costly, wait
 >until you see the price tag for this ' protection' from the
 >'threats' in space: The trillions spent on the cold war will
 >look like a blue light special.

If a ET/UFO reality announcement came it would likely validate
many of the abduction storys that are out.  People reading some
of those may want the government to spend 1 trillion dollars
protecting them from beings that can kidnap them right out of
their bed in the middle of the night and do medical experiments
on them without permission.  These are the same people who want
to ban guns because that will protect them from the criminal
elements.

Alas I suspect the current "crisis of the moment" is not
ET's/UFO but weapons of mass destruction such as CBW and so on.
The threat from weapons of mass destruction especially if rogue
nations like Iraq, Iran, and or North Korea get them is very
viable and likely. In fact the possibility of millions being
killed by a fruit cake and his CBW/nuke is probably a greater
threat in peoples minds.

Needless to say, they are the darlings of funding at the moment.


 >Retrograde and fanatical religious groups, similarly, have great
 >vested interests in fulfilling the promise of Armageddon. An
 >eschatological paradigm, well enshrined in the belief systems of
 >those running covert UFO projects, is supported by the portrayal
 >of a cosmic conflict in the heavens. Voila! We have the
 >necessity of spinning the UFO/ET issue in the evil invading
 >aliens (translates in religious terms as demons) direction.
 >Indeed, this has already been accomplished , courtesy of the
 >'civilian UFO community' and the tabloid media (which at this
 >point is virtually all media...).

This is somewhat of a stretch because you have some religions
who believe everybody is going to be taken up before all the so
called Armageddon/bad stuff hits the earth.  You have others who
have believed the end was going to happen every year since the
50s, and yet others who think its pretty far off.    During/just
after the nuclear tests in the Pacific in the high altitude (in
which the EMP turned the lights off in Hawaii) the Rev Billy
Graham said Armageddon would happen no later then within 12
months or so. It didn't happen.

Remember the  Nostradamus theorists/predictors who were
unloading the story about the alleged great terror from the sky
that was going to happen in 1999 in the 7th month.  Well it
didn't happen.

Point being is people have been speculating about Armageddon/the
end for years and while some groups may try and create their own
version of Armageddon (Koresch) society will continue on as a
whole.

 >Additionally, there is a subtext which can only be viewed as
 >thinly veiled racism. You will note that part of the 'new myth'
 >regarding UFOs involves the 'good ET s' , which invariably are
 >described as 'Pleidians' who are 'handsome' white, blue-eyed
 >Aryan appearing types. Naturally, those 'evil, bad ET s' are
 >darker, shorter, look funny and smell funny. Please. Such
 >clap-trap would have us trade age-old human racism for an
 >extraterrestrial variety. This nonsense and propaganda could
 >only make Hitler proud.

The glass is either half full, or half empty depending on
perspective. ET's are either good, or evil...again depending on
perspective.

Several years ago somebody at the Montuak project sent out an
email claiming that he had seen a gray alien and that the gray
aliens liked to guzzle DRAINO as the drink of choice.

I would suspect that continous drinking of Draino may turn a
gray Alien a different color.  :)

 >In one lengthy meeting with a multi-billionaire, I was told that
 >he gave great support to UFO activities which propel the
 >so-called 'alien abduction' subject into public awareness
 >because he wanted humanity to unite around fighting this 'alien
 >threat'. Later, this very influential figure informed me that he
 >believed these demonic ET s were the cause of every set back in
 >human history since Adam and Eve. Sound familiar?

Sounds like Rockefeller.  What he spends his money on, and what
his opinion is on various subjects, including who is going to
win the world series is just that an opinion and what he is
spending his bucks on.  In my community we have a local
millionaire who spent a ton of bucks on a issue that tickled his
hot button. That doesn't mean that he represents everybody in
the area. Needless to say his influence wained when he quit
spending money on the issue.

 >Military interests, which are heavily involved in covert
 >projects which hoax ET events, such as human military- related
 >abductions, have a shared goal of demonizing the UFO/ET
 >phenomenon. Doing so lays the foundations for the fear and dread
 >necessary for an organized opposition to all things ET. And this
 >subserves the long - term need to provide a rationale for an
 >expanding global military even should world peace emerge. In
 >fact, under this scenario, 'world peace', or strictly speaking
 >peace on earth, could be secured by the world uniting,
 >eventually, against the 'threat from space' referred to by
 >President Reagan. (By the way, personally I believe Reagan was
 >the victim of disinformation specialists who surrounded him and
 >who manipulated him into the statements he made on this
 >subject.)

Another old theory.  Reagan was a great guy (until he made a
statement which a person disagrees with) then everybody knows he
was manipulated by either the intelligence community, his
cabinet, the Vice President,  the evil military industrial
complex, or which enity and whomever we want to point the finger
at as being the evil villain.

During Iran/contra Reagan supporters were saying similar things.
'Well he is a good president, but he was manipulated by his evil
national security advisor Admiral Pointdexter, or his evil
secretary of Defense Weinberger etc etc.

Bottom line is they are trying to alabi off statements they
don't like to hear.

 >Under this scenario, currently being gamed and 'disclosed'
 >courtesy of the trial - balloon UFO 'community', we would get
 >peace on earth - in exchange for inter-planetary conflict. One
 >step forward, ten steps back. Wonderful.

Sounds like Greer suggesting that the UFO community is the
current location for disclosure for govt trial balloons?

To those floating government trial balloons, I am still waiting
for a good one...please don't disappoint me as you have so often
in the past.  :)

<snip>

 >In tracing the history of both the UFO civilian community and
 >the covert policy-making group concerned with UFOs, we have
 >found a growing penetration of the latter into the former. So
 >much so that at this point there are projects which ostensibly
 >are innocent civilian initiatives but which in reality are
 >totally controlled and financed by 'cut-outs' from ultra-secret
 >projects.

Why does Greer want to keep the information secret?  Why can't
he step forward and name the so called innocent civilin
initiatives that he claims are "in reality are totally
controlled and financed  by 'cut-outs' from the ultra-secret
projects? It is possible that the people telling him storys may
have covert manipulation agendas of their own.

 >Moreover, our careful penetration of such projects yielded the
 >disturbing finding that deep-cover black project operatives are
 >working closely with alleged civilian researchers, journalists
 >and UFO glitterati. CIA and military intelligence operatives are
 >working with civilian 'think tank' heads, alongside very wealthy
 >business people who are eschatologists, and being advised by
 >'civilian' technologists and scientists - who are themselves
 >proponents of bizarre religious belief systems involving the end
 >of the world and ET s....

Why don't you start naming names/projects/people?   We are left
to suspect the only thing this information is based on is tales
and storys told to him by alleged government informants.

 >Thus, the new 'chosen ones' have been assembled. They are
 >planning your disclosure on the UFO/ET subject. They are owned
 >by the money whores and power brokers doing the bidding of the
 >secret entity which runs UFO projects to begin with. And it all
 >looks like a civilian initiative. So innocent. So well-intended.
 >So 'scientific'. And by the way, the sky is falling courtesy of
 >ET and we need your money and your souls to defend against it.

If I were creating a list of 'chosen ones' I would put Greer at
the top of it merely because of his high level
contact/government leakers that come to him to dribble allegedl
top drawer/top level UFO information out.

<snip>

 >Here is another idea: Why don't 'we the people' unite and launch
 >a disclosure which resembles the first one described above. An
 >honest one. One which leads to peace, not war. To a sustainable
 >and beautiful world, free of pollution and brimming with
 >abundance, of all types. One which reaches out into the unknown,
 >instead of firing particle beam weapons into the darkness of
 >space.

Instead of writing lengthy emails, why doesn't Greer start
disclosing information allegedly told to him by all the so
called top level/top drawer government informants...or is OK for
Greer to keep secrets but not the government?

If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
public and end the secrecy himself.  He doesn't have to wait for
Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
position that sounds more credible everyday.

Cheers,
Robert








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 03:06:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:15:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:41:31 +0800

 >If there is something specific we should know that is so
 >pertinent to the case, why not just tell us?

Well, ya know, Sharon, I'm not sure what you would consider
"pertinent" and what you consider irrelavent so I just don't
know what to tell ya.  As you state below, it all depends on
each person's beliefs.  I wouldn't want to influence your belief
systems so you pick and scratch whatever you need out of the
information and throw the rest back. ;>

 >You seem very defensive Amy, acussing at least three people so
 >far of ridiculing or debunking.

Naaa, I don't accuse, I state facts. <grin>

 >There is no way to prove the
 >case real or false, period.  It's subjective, each person's own
 >beliefs influence their acceptance/rejection of cases.  If
 >something doesn't sit right with me about this case I am sure
 >you can apprectiate it as my opinion.

In the words of Curly, "Why, cewtainly!"

 >Debunker or ridiculer I am not, or I wouldn't have wasted most
 >of my life so far researching UFO phenomena, and being laughed
 >at by friends and family.

That is such a sad thing to hear!  Sometimes the going gets
tough and I get frustrated but I never feel searching for the
truth is a waste of my time. I mean, it is my choice therefore
nothing is wasted.  Even the time I spend talking with you, Sue,
Errol and Dave is worth my time because that is how we learn -
by sharing and comparing information.  My friends and family
laugh too but there are also many people who thank me for
sharing with them so it pretty much evens out. <winking to my
friends and supporters>

 >My apologies if I misunderstood you previous post. The neighbour
 >was collected enough to remember the camera as an after thought,
 >but not the door.  She had experienced it all her life, and was
 >trying to photograph her own experience, so she was most likely
 >aware of things to do to get a good shot.

Isn't it amazing, Sharon, how we react in different situations?!
I mean, I've heard so many people describe how they had 2 or 3
cameras hanging around their necks, saw a UFO hovering right
over them and not once thought to take a picture.  Then there
are  people who keep a camera in their car for years - just in
case they ever see a UFO - yet when the big event finally
happens, they totally forget the camera sitting just a few feet
away in the car.  I know that if I had been in the neighbor's
("Jill's") shoes that night, I'm not sure I would have been able
to retain the contents of my bladder let alone remember to open
the door for a clearer shot.

 >>>The door was _not_ "left closed" deliberately,
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 >In your opinion it was not left closed on purpose.

Yes, Sharon, that's what I said. This is my informed opinion as
the one who investigated the case for almost 3 years and as the
one who interviewed the witnesses in person and recorded their
statements on video and tape.

I'm curious.  If I had only read this case on the internet,
viewed the scanned photographs on a web site and never met nor
interviewed any of the witnesses in person, who would be more
likely to know the details of the case - the one who conducted
the investigation or the one who only read about it on the
internet?

 >What are the two red lights?  Are they supposed to be from
 >the craft?  or did the beings emit the light?

Good question, Sharon.  I don't know what those red lights were.
As I said there are still photos that have yet to be analyzed.

 >How did the person standing in the house see the being in the
 >dark, and not the two who were closer to it?  Could she perhaps
 >have just been seeing what she wanted to believe was there?
 >afterall, it's a pretty traumatic experience.

Another good question, Sharon!  How do you do it?!!  One right
after another! ;>

I don't not know how this happened and until I have more
information, I would not want to appear so assuming as to
conjure my own answers without further study.  That's why I do
research and investigations - to search for answers hopefully so
I will not make a fool of myself by speculating too much.

 >Well, see this is where we differ.  Perhaps to you the physical
 >evidence is not important, but I have read case after case of
 >witness testimony, and am just about filled up with people's
 >experiences.

Now, Sharon, where did I say "physical evidence is not
important"?  Maybe you are just seeing what you want to believe
I said.  I would never say physical evidence is not important
nor would I imply such a thing.  In fact, I consider physical
evidence _extremely_ important - if and when we can get our
hands on some.  This is where my current research is focused -
in attempts to gather as much physical evidence as possible.
After investigating this case, I realized it _was_ possible to
gather physical evidence during and/or after an abduction and
set about studying ways to achieve these objectives.  I have
come up with several double and triple-blind experiments that I
will be submitting to various abduction researchers soon.  Main
problem here is discerning genuine abductees from assumed
abductees.  (I pretty much get it from all sides as I do not
believe everyone who claims to be an abductee has actually been
abducted and not all abductions are non-physical.)

 >If the witnesses had
 >kept the photos secret and just shared their experience
 >verbally, I probably would have been more likely to accept their
 >story, especially as the experience was corroborated by an
 >independant witness (being the neighbour).

You probably never would have heard of this case, Sharon, if I
hadn't taken the time to transcribe the interviews, written the
article, learned web site construction and posted it on a web
site.  You never would have been able to read the witnesses'
story or view the photos if they and I had kept it all secret.
So, you prefer it to be by word of mouth only yet demand
evidence.  Gees, kinda hard to have it both ways - secret yet
shared, verbal yet physical.

 >>There is a wealth of information in this case if one stops to
 >>analyze the data rather than spending more time debating why the
 >>witnesses did or did not open the sliding glass door.

 > Sorry, but it is a very important fact in the case which can't
 > be easliy dismissed.

I'm not dismissing it.  I'm just not basing the entire case on
one aspect as you are.

I don't get it, Sharon.  How can you assume to know more about
this case than anyone else when you never even met these people
in person or talked with them?  I don't care if you believe it
or not, that is your choice. What I cannot fathom is how you and
others can point to the glass door, say it was a hoax or
imagination when you can't even point to the actual, physical
glass door and present your arguments in person?  You say you
need physical evidence yet claim this door - you can only
imagine - was left closed on purpose.  You cannot touch or
examine this glass door, have not interviewed the witnesses
yourself yet you are so sure the door was left closed for
reasons other than accident or poor judgement.  I wonder how
this would stack up in a courtroom?

Hey, that's an interesting concept!  You would be the
prosecution and I would be the defense.  I'd present the actual,
physical glass door, the actual, physical photographs, the
actual physical negatives, the live, physical witnesses (and the
actual, physical fingerprints, sorry, forgot to mention that),
and you could present your theories as to why the glass door
(that you could only imagine) was left closed (of course, I'd
object and indicate it was only not opened rather than "left
closed" <hehe>).  Before a jury of our peers - probably not
anyone directly or indirectly connected with the administration
of or stock holders in this list due to conflict of interest -
we would present our views as to the validity or lack thereof as
pertaining to this case, the witnesses, the sliding glass door
and the photographs -assuming, of course, the court allowed for
the remote possibility that abductions could be real.  You would
present your theories calling for physical evidence and I'd
present the actual witnesses, the physical as opposed to
imagined sliding glass door, the fingerprints, the photos, the
negatives and let the jury decide.  Wonder what their verdict
would be.... ;>

 >Like the time my mum thought she saw someone standing in the
 >backyard looking back at her at night, and upon investigation i
 >found it was just a strategically located, very human shaped
 >shrub.  She was absolutley petrified, but also mistaken.  It
 >happens.

You investigated?  Why didn't you just stay in the house and
tell your "mum" what you believed it was rather than actually
checking it out?  The shrub was probably planted there on
purpose - strategically located and human shaped - just to panic
your "mum".  I wonder who did this?  Did you open the door?  Why
or why not?  Did you remember to take photographs?  Why or why
not?  Sounds a little too convenient to me!  I don't have to be
there, examine the "evidence" or interview your "mum" to know
what actually happened.  I have it all figured out.  Not. <GBG>

 >But if these experiences are not one offs, then I anticipate the
 >photos they will capture next time, with the door open. Surely
 >they would be prepared for it next time?

Ya think so?  I do so admire your vision and insight.

 >>Until I investigated this case, I wasn't sure if abductions were
 >>really happening and I certainly _did not_ believe the stories
 >>about "reptilian" beings.  In fact, I don't think I will ever
 >>totally accept the idea of "reptilian" beings abducting people
 >>until I see one in conscious, waking awareness up close and in
 >>person (not something I really care to do).  For now, it's just
 >>too hard for me to stretch my paradigms that far.  But I know
 >>something happened to those witnesses on the nights in question
 >>and whatever it was, it really happened.

 >See, now you just backed up my point.  You don't know what
 >happened that night.

Neither do you.

 >If leaving
 >the glass door closed was an accident, fair enough.  But the
 >experience may just have been a bunch of fire flies (sorry, I'm
 >from australia so I don't know much about them, it's just an
 >example), swarming around some alien shaped bushes :)

"Alien shaped bushes"?  Are these related to the "human shaped
bushes" your "mum" imagines in the yard?  And "fire flies"?!!
(Amy whispers to Sharon: I had no idea fire could fly!)  You are
getting just a little too weird for me, Sharon.  How do you come
up with these things?! ;>

 >So the case is not a recent one, have they had any other
 >experiences after this?  Are they prepared for anymore?

Actually, Sharon, they have all moved on with their lives.  Next
time I talk with them, I'll ask them how they are doing.  Thank
you for your concern.

 >I'm not denying the phenomena, I strongly believe in it as a
 >matter of fact.  And I am not an experiencer.  I just feel it
 >happens way too much, to unrelated people, all around the world
 >for it to be a coincidence.  But that doesn't mean I will
 >blindly accept glared photos as physical evidence of the
 >experience.

That is your choice, Sharon.  But you can't expect everyone to
share your views.

G'Day. ;>

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:26:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:22:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 11:16:10 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 15:12:10 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Using _your_ logic (real
 >>world commercialism) how do you explain the total lack of
 >>'greys' in any of the sci-fi films and tv shows made in those
 >>days?

 >If you wish to talk about the lack of 'greys' in sci-fi films
 >and tv shows in the '50's, why not start another thread titled
 >"Lack of Greys In The '50's".  I am not interested in the topic.

And why is that? It is after all relevant, is it not? I thought
you were a researcher. Researching something like this involves
more than just interviewing people. Check out the history, see
how far back it goes, question the reason why there were no
lightbulb-headed creatures in the 50's or 60's. Don't just brush
aside any information that goes against your own personal
beliefs.

 >I started this thread, "Get Real", in reference to something I
 >observed while watching "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind",
 >then you asked why there weren't any photographs of beings and I
 >offered the photographs from the case I investigated, then you
 >began asking questions about the photographs. Remember?

I am not the one with the 'missing time' of course I remember, I
also remember seeing your pictures.

The only face I can make out appears to have a black wet nose.
Do you by any chance happen to have a dog?

 >Those who like to debunk everything they hear and see will do so
 >no matter how much evidence or information is put before them.

Debunk? Oh dear oh dear, there's always someone out there
roasting that old chestnut.

What do you consider to be 'how much evidence'?

Pictures of a camera flash reflected in glass showing nothing
more than possibly someone's dog.

Verbal accounts but nothing else to back it up.

And of course you are not interested in researching past
accounts (pre-1970's).

 >you know how to tell the
 >difference between someone with a genuine interest in reviewing
 >the data and those interested only in seeing their name in
 >print.

And when your book or books are published, I take it you will
have your name in print?

Going by what you have just stated above (and if you are to earn
the respect of others) you will go by a pseudonym or is there
any reason why what you state to others does not apply to you?

 >>>Can you indicate what you plan to say to these
 >>>"researchers"/"investigators" about the article in question?
 >>>Will you simply ask them why they didn't review the material or
 >>>will you be adding your assessment as well?

 >>I just want to ask why they didn't review the material, I don't
 >>plan to add anything.

 >Very well, the list of those with whom I have tried to share
 >this case will be sent to your E-mail box tonight.  I trust your
 >inquiries will be done with taste and professionalism.  However,
 >how will we know you actually contacted them?

This is a very good question, since your private mail to me
indicated that you do not want me to spread around the list
(which I obviously will not do).

Therefore how can I let anyone know that I actually contacted
anyone without everyone else knowing who I contacted?

 >As usual, enjoyed conversing with you, Dave. ;>

Funnily enough enjoyed conversing with you too. ;)

Dave.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                      Ways To Make Sight-Observations?

From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:08:10 +0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:26:42 -0400
Subject: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?


Here are the results of my latest adventure, the deep dive in to
some encyclopedias of neurology and psychiatry. I belive this is
stuff you all know already. To me this has been a new way to
study UFOs: As glancing through different encyclopedias and
searching for alternative explenations for different happenings
I�ll learn a lot lot lot more about the phenomenons called
"human and how it functions", a "space and how it may function",
and "the nature and how it maybe functioning", and after these
travels I always feel a huge need to share the findings with
others, even I know I might be the last in line, who
comprehenses them.

1) Hallucination is  for instance interpreted in some finnish
encyclopedias "a observation about a object with has no
physically counterpart or which does non exist physically". As
speaking about a hallucination generally the first association
is some mental problem. In schizophrenia and other psychosis
different degrees of a hallucinations are part of symptoms in
the same way delusions, which can also be consequence of the
hallucinations.

1a) So called optical illusions has typically sundry humane or
quite divergent forms from human, even for example only head of
devil's or extraterrestrial creature, and also some observers
tell they have seen also animals.  About human or almost-human-
look figures I think the best examples are the ones seen during
sleep-paralysis.

1b) Auditory hallucinations. They vary. The most common versios
seems to vary from a critical voice to different degrees of
other voices. The one that is sometimes commected to
sound-hallucinations is called "Tinnitus" in finnish. (= The
beeb or a constante annoying sound in a ear.)

1c) In a sensory person experiences that at her/his side is some
invisible being or that someone touches to him/her.

1d) In taste- and olfactory hallucinations are common senses
about suddenly scent, or a rare sudden taste. For all these is
common that there is no perceptions of their physically
originator.

2) Neurological optical illusion are typically at least among
brain tumour and migraine. The best known optical illusions are
supposely - waggleing serrateds appearanced in a purview
alarming about the beginning of a migraine attacks. ( even other
optical illusions are quite rare in migraine)

To these optical illusion belongs also

2a) so called "stars": bright, dazzling points at the purview,
2b) the various sizes of light-balls, which doesn`t have clear outlines,
2c) a additional nimbus nascent around a (e.g. airplane`s) light,
2d) so called double-pictures, in other words beside tha main percepted persons
and objects appearances another object or outlines. I think the best example of
the double-pictures is when above the horizon appears another horizon, or beside
 the block of flats appearances another block of flats, looking like made of lig
ht.

3) About optical delusions one good example supposely is so
called "autokinesia" (: in creek: " move by itself"). There are
physical mechanisms which makes to seem, that object located in
its position is seen moving. The long staring of star in the sky
seems to start moving or rotating even if it in fact were still
in its position. This is said to happen when the eyes "gets
tired".

4) Another optical delusion are so called "floaters" (= in
finnish used term). In the back of the eye is located colloid
material, vitreous humour can be floating chop particles, dead
cells, which in suitable circumstances creates a shadowto a
retina, and are seen bacillary or roundish objects. A "Floater"
[musca volitante] can be observed transparently, but in some of
them there are also seen darker tones.

5) Photogene that is easiest to cause by staring one bright
-coloured or -lighted point a long time (= about 30 seconds
normally), and it after that to move the stair e.g. to a white
wall or preferably to a page of a book. Then the same starting
picture appearances  to a white base. If the test about
producing photogenes  is carried out is possible, that even if
every testperson stares the same figure during the test is
possible, that evryone can see the colours of the photogene for
example in different order. This is - as we all know- a normal
test seen in psyhcological teaching- books.

Another way to see photogenes is either to stare the lamp`s
bright light before slaking it, and when room it is getting dark
stays the dazzling, blinding brilliance to the eyes for a small
moment.

6) Long-sighted deterioration in other words nearsightedness is
one thing, tha makes percepted object to look like what it
isn`t. Nearsightedness makes distant points grow dim and impress
foggy and blur. Inadvertently out-of-dated eyeglasses don't
reply the currently need and distortvperceptible figures. How a
nearsightednesses person sees the lights of a oncoming airplane
or a train (= in Finland it has triangle-lights in front)
lights? The lights miscible as a single (= not 3!) multifilament
lightball,  where is resolving outlines not seen.

7) People who claims they can see the aura around people answers
often to a question "How it shows/looks like?" so, that things
they have seen are either light- and/or colourcoat around
persons, objects, animals or plants, some describe they have
seen so called frames, some sighted e.g. frames around lecturer,
and inside the frames beside the head a light-ball which seems
to attemt desperately to cope with the person`s move around the
estrade, and sometimes it seems the ball has problems to stay
close the head.

I asked from a neurology specialized physician about the visual
perceptions. He had a answer to many optical visions, but he
seem not to dare to explain the frames as a neurologist optical
illusion. He seemed he couldn`t offer another explanation
either. I have heard  lighting as a one attempt to explain the
frames, because phenomenom seems to be seen only in a dim light,
and after putting lights on the frames disappears. I�ve heard
the same-looked frames appears around the flame of a candle
after stared it for a while. Sounds like a photogenes to me.
Would it be at least partly a question of some redolent to a
photogenes in these kind of perceptions- even without a physical
irritant? And what could be this non- physical irritant? Some
psychological irritant?

Many of these "visions" could be originators of the extrasensory
and even paranormal perceptions. How many persons as agazing the
sky sees "floaters", but interpretate them as cigar or
ball-shaped, non- physical ships, because he/she doesn`t know
that the object is i the person`s own eye? Almost as equally
often the star seems to starting to move,  and therefore it is
interpreted as a ufo, when it isn�t flying across the  whole
sky, which points to a satellite or to a airplain.

One explanation to so called faulse preceptions could be some
chemical mal-function in brains: for some unknown reason the
sight-association part of brains seems to produce the image, and
the non-awared person gots mostly surprised. It seems these
mis-perceptions aren�t harmful as long as person him/herself is
able to live with them and is no other way un-balanced. Even
these events (= especially hallucinations) are often connetced
to a psychosis my opinion is, that the person who listens to
such experiences from someone shouldn`t make any fast
conclusions about should the experiencer need some "treatment"
or not, but instead it it could be better to make distant
observings during some time before making mind what is the best
way to think. I have heard such wild stories from many persons,
and only minor part of them did indeed sink to psychosis. Evev
they are non-physically seen by others I thik both
hallucinations and neurological optical illusions are the same;
some mal-function in brains, which might jus vanish. It grows
100 times bigger when it`s denied, questioned (= "are you sure
you saw it?") or even attacked. I think that these are temporary
phenomenons, and only humans attidute makes them permanent- the
people around the experiencer or him/herself. Somehow I�ve
noticed in my life, that a thought becomes a problem only, when
it�s catched. A thought coming and going isn�t a problem- we
have tens of thoughts every day, and we catch only few of them.
Our own choice is wich ones. I think tha main problem is to see
does the hallucinating or neurological illusions observed perdon
need more ears to listen his/hers confusing experiences,
explains to them, or is he/she totally unbalanced. Sometimes
only once listening is more therapy, than an year in a mental
institute. Or what do you think?

Wonders Minna Laajala











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                      Top Events And Publications Ltd.

From: Philip Mantle - QUEST <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:19:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:35:11 -0400
Subject: Top Events And Publications Ltd.


TOP EVENTS AND PUBLICATIONS LTD. COMPANY VOLUNTARY ARRANGEMENT.


To Whom It May Concern.

In the matter of the insolvency act 1986 and in the matter of
Top Events and Publications Limited. In the High Court, Chancery
Division, Manchester District Registry.

Top Events and Publications Limited, owned by Roy Bird, has
issued via Hacker Young and Partners (chartered accountants), a
proposed Company Voluntary Arrangement.

I don't pretend to fully understand the legal jargon but Top
Events owes its creditors (myself included) �349,000. I am
listed as being owed �550. This is totally incorrect.

Among the many things included in the legal documents sent to me
by Hacker Young and Partners details the transfer (by payment)
of some of Top Events magazine titles to another company called
Chesterwell Management Limited. This company is owned (surprise,
surprise) by one Roy Bird.

What Roy Bird is doing is strictly legal but in my humble
opinion is totally immoral.

To be honest, as far as I am concerned I have told Roy Bird not
to bother me ever again and to shove his money where the sun
don't shine.

My advice to anyone who is currently writing for any of his
titles, including QUEST and BEYOND, is to stay well clear. This
does not reflect on the magazines editors (Tim Matthews and John
Downes).

If anyone wishes to check the facts of this then they can
contact Hacker Young and Partners at:

St James Building,
79 Oxford Street,
Manchester, M1 6HT.
Tele: 0161 236 6936.
Fax: 0161 228 0117.
E-mail: manchester@hackeryoung.co.uk

Advice I have just received via the Trading Standards Office in
Chester is for anyone who is owed money by Roy Bird and/or any
of his companies, is to contact the high court and to take him
to the small claims court for money owed under �5000. They have
also suggested contacting your local Citizens Advice Bureau, and
even the police. The latter of which I doubt will be of any use.

If there are any investigative journalists out there reading
this message, may I respectfully suggest that you look into Roy
Bird and his companies as I'm sure their is a colourful story to
be told  here.

It is  imperative that others like myself do not fall foul and
write things for Roy Birds magazines and then end up not getting
paid. Please do whatever you can legally to prevent such
happening to others.

Please forward this message onto everyone on your mailing list.
post on bulletin boards, web sites, and anywhere else you can
think of.

Yours Sincerely,

Philip Mantle.
27.10.99.

PS.

If you have had any unpleasant dealings with Roy Bird and any of
his companies, then why not share it with us. Why not issue a
public statement for distribution on the internet.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:33:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:38:34 -0400
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 11:07:48 PDT

 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >What you're discussing here is a form of ball lightning, a
 >generally recognized, accepted meteorological phenomenon.  Why
 >are you lumping BL in with UFOs? I think that no serious
 >ufologist would disagree that on occasion BL, like lots of other
 >things in nature, gets mistaken for a UFO.  That, however,
 >doesn't make BL (or any other unusual but known natural
 >phenomenon) a UFO.

Of course, it does. Although as you know I prefer the term UAP
for such cases to try to form a distinction. If a witness
reports something odd in the sky that they do not recognise they
do so as an unidentified flying object. My argument is that all
too often they do so to a UFO group or the media not to a
physicist. As such ufology attracts many BL cases.

Further than that I also suspect - from cases I have worked upon
and discussions I have had with BL experts - that there is a
rare form of 'Super BL' that nearly always gets reported way out
of context of a met phenomenon especially when it occurs outside
of recognised weather conditions (eg a storm). As such I am
pretty certain we have valuable UAP data that would benefit BL
researchers but they rarely get to see it because they run a
mile from the public image ufology generates. Indeed from people
like Dr Paul Davies, who has researched BL, and Ralph Noyes from
the MoD, I know this is their view as well.

But the basic point is that all sightings reported as UFOs
remain so until identified. Even ones that are finally proven to
be BL, or Super BL, or related forms of atmospheric phenomena.
Otherwise who makes the arbitrary decision that a UFO really
isnt a UFO because it was a natural phenomenon? And on what
criteria? How can we single out cases that are not UFOs because
they are just some sort of energy phenomenon and ones that are
because that therory doesnt seem to work. Surely the only
acceptable definition is that the phenomenon is unidentified by
the witness? It then becomes our task to try to identify what it
was. If it turns out to be BL it still started off as a UFO
report. These investigations provide key lessons for the rest of
the UFO evidence that are all too easy to miss if we junk such
cases as 'not really UFOs'.

 >I look forward to reading your book, which I have no doubt will
 >be an excellent one.  As you know, I have the greatest respect
 >for you and your work.  I think, however, that my point remains.
 >We've seen some dreary instances in recent months on this very
 >list where some strutting, self- styled "skeptic" has announced
 >his explanation for a classic UFO case, only to have it
 >disintegrate virtually upon impact. I am not, I hasten to add,
 >putting you into this category.


Appreciated. But I dont think you should read too much into this
book. It is an exercise in using the experience of three long
term field investigators to try to make ufologists think more
about the cases that can be solved and what we should do with
that knowledge. Its not a treatise on how to do ufology, or a
revolutionary idea about how to interpret the evidence or a book
that aims to debunk ufology out of existence. Its aims really
are very modest ones.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:33:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:43:05 -0400
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 11:07:48 PDT

 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 20:54:23 +0100

 >What you're discussing here is a form of ball lightning, a
 >generally recognized, accepted meteorological phenomenon.  Why
 >are you lumping BL in with UFOs? I think that no serious
 >ufologist would disagree that on occasion BL, like lots of other
 >things in nature, gets mistaken for a UFO.  That, however,
 >doesn't make BL (or any other unusual but known natural
 >phenomenon) a UFO.

Of course, it does. Although as you know I prefer the term UAP
for such cases to try to form a distinction. If a witness
reports something odd in the sky that they do not recognise they
do so as an unidentified flying object. My argument is that all
too often they do so to a UFO group or the media not to a
physicist. As such ufology attracts many BL cases.

Further than that I also suspect - from cases I have worked upon
and discussions I have had with BL experts - that there is a
rare form of 'Super BL' that nearly always gets reported way out
of context of a met phenomenon especially when it occurs outside
of recognised weather conditions (eg a storm). As such I am
pretty certain we have valuable UAP data that would benefit BL
researchers but they rarely get to see it because they run a
mile from the public image ufology generates. Indeed from people
like Dr Paul Davies, who has researched BL, and Ralph Noyes from
the MoD, I know this is their view as well.

But the basic point is that all sightings reported as UFOs
remain so until identified. Even ones that are finally proven to
be BL, or Super BL, or related forms of atmospheric phenomena.
Otherwise who makes the arbitrary decision that a UFO really
isnt a UFO because it was a natural phenomenon? And on what
criteria? How can we single out cases that are not UFOs because
they are just some sort of energy phenomenon and ones that are
because that therory doesnt seem to work. Surely the only
acceptable definition is that the phenomenon is unidentified by
the witness? It then becomes our task to try to identify what it
was. If it turns out to be BL it still started off as a UFO
report. These investigations provide key lessons for the rest of
the UFO evidence that are all too easy to miss if we junk such
cases as 'not really UFOs'.

 >I look forward to reading your book, which I have no doubt will
 >be an excellent one.  As you know, I have the greatest respect
 >for you and your work.  I think, however, that my point remains.
 >We've seen some dreary instances in recent months on this very
 >list where some strutting, self- styled "skeptic" has announced
 >his explanation for a classic UFO case, only to have it
 >disintegrate virtually upon impact. I am not, I hasten to add,
 >putting you into this category.


Appreciated. But I dont think you should read too much into this
book. It is an exercise in using the experience of three long
term field investigators to try to make ufologists think more
about the cases that can be solved and what we should do with
that knowledge. Its not a treatise on how to do ufology, or a
revolutionary idea about how to interpret the evidence or a book
that aims to debunk ufology out of existence. Its aims really
are very modest ones.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:01:51 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:08:59 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 11:07:48 PDT

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 12:38:02 +0100

 >>From my experience as an investigator I have encountered cases
 >>that I am overwhelmingly convinced to be a form of UAP (eg an
 >>extreme form of ball lightning is one example). (A first hand
 >>instance of this would be the Nelson car stop case from March
 >>l977)  I do not think all unexplained cases are super BL. This
 >>option does not, for instance, explain alien contact encounters.
 >>Therefore this means we must have at least two types of UFO to
 >>explain different sorts of case. I think the evidence in support
 >>of that contention is strong enough to convince me - especially
 >>given, for instance, basic differences such as the witness per
 >>case ratio for each type. But if it doesnt convince you thats
 >>okay by me too.

 >What you're discussing here is a form of ball lightning, a
 >generally recognized, accepted meteorological phenomenon.  Why
 >are you lumping BL in with UFOs?

For the same reason that people lump extraterrestrial spacecraft
in with UFOs - as a possible explanation for a puzzling event.

 >I think that no serious
 >ufologist would disagree that on occasion BL, like lots of other
 >things in nature, gets mistaken for a UFO.  That, however,
 >doesn't make BL (or any other unusual but known natural
 >phenomenon) a UFO.

What do you mean by this? Ball lightning can be mistaken for a
UFO. Agreed. But that does not make ball lightning a UFO? Of
course it does. If a report of ball lightning is so described
that it is inexplicable to the person making the report then or
someone subsequently investigating it, it is, by definition, a
UFO. Or are you saying, as you appear to be, that there is an
actual object called a "UFO" which exists in its own right and
has no other existence?

If ball lighting may be mistaken for a UFO, what else might be
"mistaken" for a UFO? Time-travellers? Secret aircraft?
Fourth-dimensional psychic projections? Extraterrestrial
spacecraft?

But presumably, Jerry, you just *know* what a UFO is. It's just,
well, a UFO. It doesn't have an explanation, even though
sometimes it might be mistaken for something else it's still a
"UFO". So that's alright then.

Foe someone as pedantically obsessed with the meaning of words
as you sometimes appear to be, this is very sloppy thinking,
Jerry.

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                       New UFO Crash In Brazil Forest?

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:55:48 -0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:11:37 -0400
Subject: New UFO Crash In Brazil Forest?


New UFO Crash In Brazil Forest? - Explosion, Devastation... But
No Wreckage

A huge UFO was seen by hundreds of witnesses - some of them
Kaiapoh Indians - when it crossed over the skies of Sao Felix do
Xinguh on October 9th up in Parah State. This UFO fell down in
the middle of the forest about 40 kms away from town.

It took some time for this information to reach the press
because that region is slihgtly out of the day-to-day Brazilian
media observation range. But on last Monday, October 25th , the
Brazilian Network "Bandeirantes" presented a special report on
this occurence.

"Destruction, fire, fear" - these were the words used by
Bandeirante's correspondent for Parah State, Ronaldo Vilhena, to
describe the fall of such a strange object that flew low over
Sao Felix city, where the population works mostly with cattle
and wood extraction.

Although the Bandeirante special report has not dealt
specifically with the possibility of this occurrence to be of
extra terrestrial nature, the implications were quite clear.

It was Saturday, October 9th, around 4 pm. It was a normal,
beautiful day when the population of Sao Felix city heard a
enormous thundering and right after that, they spotted a bright
object flying over the city, leaving this smoke trail behind it
- it looked pretty much like a rocket smoke trail.

This smoke track clearly indicated the direction followed by
this weird flying object, after passing over the city,
disappearing among the mountains about 30 kms away.

Some seconds later on, the population of Sao Felix [and Kaiapoh
indians from 4 different tribes] heard a gigantic explosion - as
described by one of the witnesses Gildemar de Souza: "It was
more like a big explosion, like a bomb, that trembled the
ground". The impact and the explosion of this object became the
main subject of talk in town.

Bandeirantes Network going beyond its competitors, sent a
exploration team to that area to find out what really happened
near Xingu river. The hypotheses of a big meteorite was a real
possibility among this team - once again, nobody mentioned an
alien vehicle. There had been some speculation [inside
Bandeirantes] also about the possibility of a spy airplane from
somewhere that had suffered an accident, since no red alert was
started, in search of any Brazilian aircraft.

Two geologists participated in this expedition. No ufologist or
airplane crash specialist were informed about the event at that
time.

Flying in this small mono-engine airplane, this team left Sao
Felix, heading towards Maria Preta indian tribe, about 50 kms
away. Then, as they approached the impact zone, they used a
small boat to go up Xingu river, getting close the border
between Parah state and Mato Grosso state.

There, they found another Kaiapoh tribe, who was nearer the
impact place. "That thing was very...very big,...the ground
shook up" said this Kaiapoh indian named Kruakruque. With the
help of two other Kaiapoh indians, this exploration team finally
got to the crash site, where the some parts of woods were still
on fire - "16 days after the incident". What they found out
there was impressive: hundreds of trees torn off the ground
completely destroyed and still burning/smoking but, no evidence
or residue of any aircraft, meteorite - plus no marks on the
soil. Something had obviously impacted the ground and left no
clues, of what it could have been. Simply "nothing". Very
strange!!

"It's very frustrating, coming all this way up here to see all
this devastation and no evidence of what could have caused this
disorder" - said one of the geologists: Romulo Angelica. His
colleague, geologist Nelio Rezende also said: "we found this
very strange because, we should see at least a crater here; but
there is no crater around here. We honestly don't know what has
happened".

No radioactivity was detected at the supposed crash site. The
only things that really caught the team's attention besides the
destruction of the trees and the fire, was this very "weird and
unrecognizable smell in the air". "It was not burned wood smell,
not gunpowder smell, not even burned fuel smell" - confirmed the
Bandeirante's reporter.

No other information is available at the present time. We'll
keep an eye on this story and any developments will be certainly
reported.

THIAGO LUIZ TICCHETTI
Diretor Do Departamento de Publicao e Traduo Especializadas
( DEPTE - EBE-ET / Brasilia-Brasil) Publication Department and
Specialized Translation Director.

ICQ - 35119615
http://www.ebe-et.com.br







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 03:26:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:16:23 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


From: royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk
Subject:Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Andy wrote:

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Many, many _good_ cases in the UK, which as Jenny points out have
 >been
 >>held as ET and/or unexplained have fallen to the IFO
 >>explanation.

Hi All,

I keep hearing that there are "_good_ cases in the UK" which
have now fallen into the IFO category.

Would Jenny or Andy like to list all of these cases on Updates?

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:37:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:18:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>


 >The following appeared in the London Daily Mail, 26 October,
 >1999:

 >Riddle of UFO at Heathrow

 >A passenger jet's close encounter with a mysterious,
 >fast-moving craft seconds after taking off from Heathrow had
 >experts baffled yesterday.

 >The crew of an MD-81 reported an object 'like a bright light'
 >passing within 20ft of them at 3,500 ft. "Air accident
 >investigators were unable to shed any light on the mystery as
 >radar records show there were no other planes in the area at the
 >time.

 >A dossier on last month's incident is thought to have been
 >passed to the MOD to see if the UFO could have been a
 >radar-invisible spy plane or a stray British test craft.

 >---

 >Am I correct in thinking this claimed sighting has been
 >mentioned somewhere on UpDates before?

 >Does anyone recognise this case - or is it something completely
 >new?


All,

It might reminding readers of this report from 1996.

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

            The Times, London, Friday 2 February 1996.

           UFO 'buzzed' airliner at Manchester Airport

               by Harvey Elliott Air Correpondent

A British Airways passenger jet had a close encounter with an
unidentified flying object while landing at Manchester Airport,
an official report disclosed last night.

The Boeing 737, with 60 people on board, was overtaken at high
speed by a wedge-shaped craft as the plane descended through 4,000ft
on the final stages of a journey from Milan. Captain Roger Wills
reported that the UFO, which was emblazoned with small while lights
and possibly a black stripe down one side, flashed silently down the
side of the jet so close that his co-pilot, First Officer Mark Stuart,
involuntarily ducked as it went by.

There was no sound and no wake but both pilots were so concerned that
they filed a formal "airmiss" report. The Civil Aviation Authority
launched an invetigation, the fourth such incident since 1987, and
after a year-long inquiry concluded yesterday that they could find no
likely explanation. The three previous sightings also baffled the CAA
expert.

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

The near-miss took place Jan 95 the official CAA report concluded:

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

Having debated the various hypotheses at length the Group concluded
that, in the absence of any firm evidence which could identify or
explain this object, it was not possible to assess either the cause
or the risk to any of the normal criteria applicable to airmiss reports.
The incident therefore remains unresolved.


ie it's an official UFO.


Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:35:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:23:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >To: 02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers
 >Date: 27 October 1999 15:32
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 ><snip>

 >>Am I correct in thinking this claimed sighting has been
 >>mentioned somewhere on UpDates before?

 >>Does anyone recognise this case - or is it something completely
 >>new?


 >David,

 >From:

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m22-020.shtml

 >>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:47:04 +0000
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 21:57:15 -0500
 >>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 4, Number 8

 >>    UFO ROUNDUP
 >>Volume 4, Number 8
 >>February 22, 1999
 >>Editor: Joseph Trainor


 ><snip>

 >>>GIANT CYLINDRICAL UFO SEEN
 >>>OVER GLOUCESTERSHIRE

 >>>    On Monday, February 8, 1999, businessman
 >>>Miles J. was relaxing in his seat aboard a British
 >>>Midlands A310 Airbus jetliner when he spotted
 >>>something odd outside his window.  He was
 >>>flying home from Belfast, Northern Ireland, and
 >>>the plane "had just begun its descent into
 >>>London's Heathrow Airport.  I was seated on the
 >>>right side of the Airbus, and I first saw it as a
 >>>kind of after-image."

 ><snip>

 >>ebk

Hi,

I think this is a different case from the l998 incident that was
refered to by the Mail. This incident occurred in l998 and was
first published in mid September l999 after the CAA report.

Incidentally, its presumably just a curious coincidence I trust
but Businessman Miles J cited above surely isn't Miles Jonhston
the ufologist and David's nemesis over the Peak District crash
affair is it? He does come from Belfast and now lives in London.

Nah. Couldnt be.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                  Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:23:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:31:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:24:04 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 06:36:51
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Gore Is Asked About UFOs At N.H Forum

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84

STIG et al. --

 >BTW, note that Bore was born about a month after the alleged
 >Roswell crash.  Note his "alien" demeanor.  Hmmmmm...  Is a vote
 >for Al a vote for Them?...

In my haste to make a joke, I made a "slight" goof--which make the slight
joke even less funny.  Bore was born about nine months after Roswell.

Still, I'm serious about my query:  Does anyone know what the question was
that was put to Gore and what Bore's answer was? -- Cheers, KARL







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:42:10 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Dave,

 >>>The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >>>which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >>>would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >>>fairies and little folk.

 >>>What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >>>origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >>>remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >>>Age culture.

 >>These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
 >>confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
 >>you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
 >>UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

 >My statements are based upon 20 years of field work, research
 >and hundreds of case investigations which turned me from an
 >out-and-out believer in the ETH to a skeptic, or agnostic at
 >best. {Note agnostic - I do not dismiss the possibility that
 >*some* UFOs could be ET craft, only that in my opinion it is a
 >remote possibility, that's all}.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.  I think you're
wrong, and yours is not a conclusion other smart, hard-
working investigators, including those trained in the physical
sciences (McDonald, Hynek, Maccabee, Sturrock, et al.,
come to mind), have come to.  Perhaps your training as a
folklorist has given you too narrow a focus.


 >Add to that a sound knowledge of folklore and cultural belief
 >which led to a me being awarded a PhD - described by a panel of
 >academics as "a valuable contribution to knowledge" - and I feel
 >I am well qualified to comment, and certainly as qualified as
 >Jerome Clark.

But not as well qualified as the physical scientists who have
worked on specific cases.  You can have all the folklore
knowledge in the world, and none of it is going to help you
explain the McMinnville photo, the RB-47 case, Socorro, or any
of the other classic UFO incidents on which the case for the
reality of UFOs as extraordinary unknowns rests.  I have no
doubt that your Ph.D. amounts to "a valuable contribution to
knowledge" -- you're a bright, interesting guy.  All I am saying
is that it doesn't help you explain the most puzzling UFO cases.

 >So, friend, you might not trust my judgement, but there are
 >plenty of other 'smart' people who do share my views and whose
 >conclusions are equally valid within their own disciplines.

 >Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >open-minded academics.

I note no physical scientists among them.  And those
sociologists, folklorists, psychologists, and historians -- do
they know anything about UFOs except that they don't exist?  And
what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
an answer: say, just about nothing?


 >As for "UFO phenomenon or the ETH", it's just a theory and
 >despite your 'special pleading' it has not more evidence to back
 >it up than any other. I think I will stick with the idea that
 >the fairy folk are the flying saucer pilots, after all two can
 >play at wearing cultural blinkers if that's the game we're
 >playing.

Interesting argument for a proclamation without supporting
evidence.  For a insightful discussion of the limitations of
folklore as an approach to UFO study, I urge listfolk to read
"Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3 (new
series, 1991): 1-57.  The author, interestingly, is Thomas E.
Bullard, who also holds a Ph.D. in folklore from Indiana
University, which houses one of the world's best esteemed
folklore departments.

 >But please Jerry, if you have some evidence which proves the ETH
 >is not a cultural artefact of the late 20th century, then I'm
 >sure we'd all love to hear about it.

If _any_ theory about UFOs were "proved," they wouldn't be UFOs,
would they?  And the notion that some UFOs are ET spacecraft
wouldn't be a "hypothesis," would it?

 >So my opinions are not welcome on this list?

Of course they are.  I get the impression, though, that dissent
from them isn't.

 >Presumably the "empty posturing" of the ETH believers is OK
 >then... I don't see Jerry objecting as they all happily slap
 >each other on the back, cracking jokes about  pelicanists and
 >debunkers along the way. Sounds to me like a spot of intolerance
 >is creeping in. Opinions are fine, as long as they are ones
 >Jerry agrees with.

Huh? Should I apologize for presuming to disagree with you? Are
we to believe your words are carved on stone and carried down
from the mountaintop?

Seriously: I did not mean to imply -- as surely you should have
known based on our past interaction -- that I deem nothing you
say of worth or interest in UFO discussion.  To the contrary,
you have much to contribute, and I've praised, both privately
and publicly, at least one of your investigations, which was a
model of thoroughness and sound analysis, to all available
appearances.  It was just a particularly broad, indefensible
statement that I am taking issue with.  As far as I can tell,
you yourself are backing away from it a little. And that does
you credit.

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:48:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:47:45 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:49:30 +0100

 >>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 13:10:22 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>I use my training as a journalist and academic to follow where
 >>the evidence leads. If that leads to a rational explanation,
 >>then so be it.

 >And when it leads to a non-rational explanation, what then?

Then I admit that the case remains unknown.
And if you then want to suggest the ETH as one possible
explanation, then fair enough.

 >>If there is an explanation to be found, or which is thought to
 >>be likely, then surely we owe it to everyone to say so.

 >Does that include ET?

Yes, I've no problem with that, but in my opinion there would have
to be some pretty convincing evidence before I would say 'this
case proves ET' (plenty have fallen for that old chestnut).


 >>The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >>which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >>would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >>fairies and little folk.

 >Your statement here dictates your train of thought before you
 >investigate any case. You have already pre-determined that ET
 >and his cousin ALF do not exist.

No I have not, I have said here repeatedly time after time that I
do not dismiss the ETH, but feel it is just a remote possibility.
If you cannot understand my point - that the ETH is a product of
our culture - then I'm wasting my time.

If you want to make it out that I'm prejudiced against the ETH
simply because I follow the rest of the world in accepting the
argument that one's background and exposure to popular culture
affects the interpretation of phenomena, then please go ahead.

You are the one who will look silly, not me.

 >>If you would like I can provide
 >>you with copious amounts of historical sighting reports and
 >>these go back further than a mere 500 years.

 >And speaking of fairies and little folk, some researchers believe
 >these are historical accounts of ET anyway.

Researchers can think what they want, the same sort of people
used to take Erich von Daniken's yarns literally too.

Really - some people have a lot of catching up to do.

I spent ten years in the field recording the stories of people
who claim to seen among other things, fairies, demons, giant
slugs, aliens, Valkyries, etc etc. They were all equally
convinced these things were real, and all of them were
influenced by their cultural background.

As for fairies, could it not work the other way round and aliens
are really fairies in disguise?

That's my opinion, and how dare you dismiss it when there is
plenty of evidence to support it going back hundreds of years
too.

 >>What I'm trying to say is that opinions about the ultimate
 >>origin of unknown UFOs are legion and ETs are just one tiny,
 >>remote possibility, and are themselves a product of our Space
 >>Age culture.

 >In your opinion. And as for one tiny remote possibility, there
 >was one tiny remote possibility that life existed on Mars. Now
 >there's proof.

Granted. But I'm entitled to my opinion as much as you are.

And as for Mars - that proof you refer to has been hotly debated
and is not as clear cut as you would like to believe.

 >>Everyone is exposed to this stuff, we can't escape it,. But if
 >>we expect to be taken seriously by the real world then we need
 >>at least to show we can be dispassionate when looking at the
 >>evidence upon which we base those beliefs.

 >By dispassionate, do you mean: UFOIN will automatically look for
 >a mundane explanation because the public does not like the ETH?

By disapassionate I mean UFOIN will look for rational
explanations for reports, rather than jump the gun and run to
the press saying "There's no doubt this was an extraterrestrial
spaceship" before we have even tried to check with  the local
airport.

The public have got nothing to do with it - there's enough UFO
buffs out there to keep them entertained without more of us
jumping on the bandwagon.

 >>Speculation can only be based upon good evidence, and if cases
 >>are investigated shabbily and by people who are driven by
 >>beliefs to such an extent that the facts become distorted before
 >>they reach us - then how can we make any definitive conclusions
 >>about them?

 >And you are being different because you are expecting to find a
 >mundane answer to all UFO cases?

We're not expecting to find a mundane explanation for all UFO
cases. We're simply going to investigate cases as they should be
investigated - quickly, efficiently and calling upon the best
technical and scientific advice. You got a problem with that?

 >>UFOIN welcomes those who can investigate fairly and objectively
 >>without allowing beliefs and prejudices to cloud conclusions.
 >>Open minds are what we want - but not so open that the contents
 >>dribble out!

 >You have practically stated that your opinion is  a closed mind
 >to the ETH, so does this not prejudice your investigation?


Does believing in the ETH make people hard of hearing? One last
time, I do not discount the ETH, so your proposition is a
non-starter.

All best wishes,

Dave Clarke







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:07:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:36:02 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT

 >Jerry wrote

 >>>These are not the sorts of statements designed to encourage
 >>>confidence in your judgment, my friend. They tell us more about
 >>>you (and maybe about UFOIN as well), I'm afraid, than about the
 >>>UFO phenomenon or the ETH.

 >Innit great how Jerry uses 'my friend' when he's attempting
 >sarcasm? Dave's (a Doctor of Folklore I hasten to add) statement
 >tells us about his experience after 20 years in the field and
 >his research Jerry. It tells us what _he_ has come to believe
 >about the UFO phenomenon, based on more research than most
 >ufologists will ever be able to shake a stick at. And Dave has
 >changed his views dramatically in the fifteen or so years I have
 >known him from being postive that some UFO cases were ETH in
 >nature to a far more sceptical position. All based on research
 >and investigation. Surely not a bad way of reaching conclusions?

You forget Andy. Researchers don't come to sceptical positions
because they've studied cases and witnesses for many years
without finding any evidence for extraterrestrial intervention.
It's because, as Jerry explained a while ago, they're frightened
of being ridiculed by those nasty scientists.

 >>>One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
 >>>from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
 >>>ufological discourse soon.  It is, as we have already seen
 >>>demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
 >>>things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
 >>>of astrobiology.

 >'Smart enough to know better' - sheer brilliance Jerry! It's not
 >empty posturing - see above. 'Astrobiology'? Yor avin' a laarf
 >incha? Don't we have to actually have some hard biological
 >evidence before we can talk about such a thing?

By "the literature of astrobiology" Jerry means presumably the
writings of his friend Michael Swords, someone who has his own
agenda of denying Darwinian evolution. Astrobiology (is this
what used to be called "exobiology") has the rare distinction of
being a science completely without data.


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

              Federal Notice on Groom Lake/AREA 51 status, Oct.

From: Norio Hayakawa <GroomWatch@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:15:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:41:42 -0400
Subject: Federal Notice on Groom Lake/AREA 51 status, Oct.



Source:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1999_register&docid=99
-27866-filed

======================================================
[Federal Register: October 26, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 206)]
[Notices]
[Page 57633-57634]
 >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26oc99-51]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Presidential Determination on Classified Information Concerning
the Air Force's Operating Location Near Groom Lake, Nevada

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the President has exempted
the United States Air Force's operating location near Groom
Lake, Nevada, from any Federal, State, interstate, or local
provision respecting control and abatement of solid waste or
hazardous waste disposal that would require the disclosure of
classified information to any unauthorized persons.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. W. Kipling At Lee, Jr.,
Deputy General Counsel (Military Affairs), Office of the
Secretary of the Air Force, Washington DC 20330; telephone (703)
695-5663.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 42 U.S.C. Section 6961 makes each
department, agency, and instrumentality of the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government (1)
having jurisdiction over any solid waste management facility or
disposal site, or (2) engaged in any activity resulting, or
which may result, in the disposal or management of solid waste
or hazardous waste subject to all Federal, State, interstate,
and local requirements, both substantive and procedural
(including any requirement for permits or reporting or any
provisions for injunctive relief and such sanctions as may be
imposed by a court to enforce such relief), respecting control
and abatement of solid waste or hazardous waste disposal and
management in the same manner, and to the same extent, as any
person is subject to such requirements, including the payment of
reasonable service charges. 42 U.S.C. Section 6961 also states
that the President may exempt any solid waste management
facility of any department, agency, or instrumentality in the
executive branch from compliance with such a

[[Page 57634]]

requirement if he determines it to be in the paramount interest
of the United States to do so and that any exemption shall be
for a period not in excess of one year.

On September 20, 1999, the President exempted the Air Force's
operating location near Groom Lake, Nevada, from any Federal,
State, interstate, or local provision respecting control and
abatement of solid waste or hazardous waste disposal that would
require the disclosure of classified information concerning that
operating location to any unauthorized person.

Therefore, the text of the Memorandum from the President to the
Secretary of the Air Force is set forth below.

Janet A. Long,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

Presidential Determination No. 99-37
September 20, 1999
Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency [and] the Secretary of the Air Force
Subject: Presidential Determination on Classified Information
Concerning the Air Force's Operating Location Near Groom Lake,
Nevada

I find that it is in the paramount interest of the United States
to exempt the United States Air Force's operating location near
Groom Lake, Nevada, (the subject of litigation in Kasza V.
Browner (D. Nev. CV-S-94-795-PMP) and Frost v. Perry (D. Nev.
CV-S-94-714- PMP)), from any applicable requirement for the
disclosure to unauthorized persons of classified information
concerning that operating location. Therefore, pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 6961(a), I hereby exempt the Air Force's operating
location near Groom Lake, Nevada, from any Federal, State,
interstate, or local provision respecting control and abatement
of solid waste or hazardous waste disposal that would require
the disclosure of classified information concerning that
operating location to any unauthorized person. This exemption
shall be effective for the full one-year statutory period.

Nothing herein is intended to: (a) imply that in the absence of
such a Presidential exemption, the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) or any other provision of law permits or
requires disclosure of classified information to unauthorized
persons; or (b) limit the applicability or enforcement of any
requirement of law applicable to the Air Force's operating
location near Groom Lake, Nevada, except those provisions, if
any, that would require the disclosure of classified
information.

The Secretary of the Air Force is authorized and directed to
publish this determination in the Federal Register.
William J. Clinton

Editorial Note: The Office of the Federal Register did not
receive the original of Presidential Determination No. 99-37.

[FR Doc. 99-27866 Filed 10-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-05-P

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

Boy, oh, boy.....here we go again!
-from Norio Hayakawa






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

              Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:44:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:51:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 20:36:50 -0400

<snip>

 >Could Nixon really slip away with Jackie Gleason?

 >Greg Sandow


Yes. In Larry Warren's mind.

Dennis Stacy
http://www.anomalist.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 28

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 03:33:21 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:54:55 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Hello Andy and list,

 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Seeings as various people have been menting my name and my
 >colleagues' I thought I'd better reply before my tea.

 >I fail to understand why saying that _all_ UFOs have the
 >potential to be IFOs causes such a problem. Many, many
 >_good_ cases in the UK, which as Jenny points out have been
 >held as ET and/or unexplained have fallen to the IFO
 >explanation. Surely this is a _good_ thing?

Sure, Andy.

 >The bald facts are that as a  great many cases have been
 >downgraded from UFO to IFO, and that no UFOs have been (yet)
 >proven to be ET in origin.

That's true, because to begin with, nobody knows how to prove
a UFO to be of ET origin. After all, we have no access to ET's
home planet and can't verify whether a craft or artefact comes
from there.

 >That fact alone makes it reasonable to suggest that _all_ UFOs
 >are thus resolvable.

Well, that depends. In the first place, it is quite firmly
established that some UFO cases stand the test of time, ie they
are still unresolved even after decades.

If we were talking here about vague light in the sky, glows and
obscure photographs and all that, your statement would be true
that all UFOs are potentially resolvable.

As anyone who professes to be a serious UFO investigator should
know however, there are also cases in which solid flying objects
fly at several times the speed of sound, suddenly turn on a dime
and evade pursuing fighter aircraft. All in such a manner that
we can see a technology at display that is clearly not human in
origin. Cases such as these are recorded on radar and witnessed
by reliable investigators or hundreds of members from the
public.

The question whether we would call these craft ET seems to me
rather academic and is in fact a sidepoint. The real point is
that there is an intelligence operating in our skies from time
to time that is clearly not ours. And those UFOs are only solved
when we label them as such.

I have such a suspicion, however, that you are not inclined to
put a label on them that suggest "non human intelligently
operated craft". Therefore I am afraid that ironically to you,
my friend, these tried and true unsolved cases will remain
unsolved.

Groeten,
Henny






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 99 08:05:34 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:11:06 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:01:51 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 11:07:48 PDT

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 12:38:02 +0100


John,

 >>What you're discussing here is a form of ball lightning, a
 >>generally recognized, accepted meteorological phenomenon.  Why
 >>are you lumping BL in with UFOs?

 >For the same reason that people lump extraterrestrial spacecraft
 >in with UFOs - as a possible explanation for a puzzling event.

Wrong, old boy.  Ball lightning is a known, generally
noncontroversial phenomenon.  It is not an "unidentified."
Extraterrestrial spacecraft are not known, only theorized, to
exist.  A UFO is by definition a mystery -- in other words,
something without identification as either a known or a
hypothesized unknown.  If UFOs were BL or ET ships, we'd call
them one or the other.  If we can prove with certainty that
someone saw BL, we can state with equal certainty that he did
not see a UFO.

Of course it's always possible that what you really mean is that
UFOs don't exist and that therefore the category is therefore
illegitimate.  In which case you and I don't have much to talk
about.

 >But presumably, Jerry, you just *know* what a UFO is. It's just,
 >well, a UFO. It doesn't have an explanation, even though
 >sometimes it might be mistaken for something else it's still a
 >"UFO". So that's alright then.

 From reading the literary journal you edit, I think you have
always made a greater claim to "knowing" what UFOs are than I
ever have.

 >Foe someone as pedantically obsessed with the meaning of words
 >as you sometimes appear to be, this is very sloppy thinking,
 >Jerry.

You continue to amaze me, my friend.

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                Re: Get Real

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:28:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:08:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:26:19 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >And why is that? It is after all relevant, is it not? I thought
 >you were a researcher. Researching something like this involves
 >more than just interviewing people. Check out the history, see
 >how far back it goes, question the reason why there were no
 >lightbulb-headed creatures in the 50's or 60's. Don't just brush
 >aside any information that goes against your own personal
 >beliefs.

Hey, if you are interested in it, go for it.  Just because I do
research doesn't mean I have to study everything you tell me to
study.  I am also a mom.  But that doesn't mean I want to go
around raising everybody's kids. I'm good but not _that_ good.
I have enough to research right now so if you want to study this
area, do it, don't expect me to do all your work for you.

 >The only face I can make out appears to have a black wet nose.
 >Do you by any chance happen to have a dog?

So, you claim to see a "black wet nose" in a scanned image and
ask if I have a dog.  Mmmm, I wonder where this is leading?.
Good research there, Dave.  I have three cats.  Now tell me you
see three cat butts in the picture too.  Oh, and don't forget
the goldfish.  See any fish heads in the picture?  Really
scraping the bottom of the barrel on this one, Dave.  By the
way, do you wear glasses?  Do you suffer from periodic delusion
or hallucinations?  Do you perhaps use a computer screen that
may have dirt on it in the shape of a "black wet nose"?   Hey,
this is a fun game!  Let's play some more!

 >Pictures of a camera flash reflected in glass showing nothing
 >more than possibly someone's dog.

You see all that in a poorly scanned image of a photograph?
Wow.  You are incredible, Dave.

 >Verbal accounts but nothing else to back it up.

And what do _you_ have to back up your claims?

 >And of course you are not interested in researching past
 >accounts (pre-1970's).

So glad a brick doesn't have to drop on your head to finally get
that point across. ;>

 >And when your book or books are published, I take it you will
 >have your name in print?

 >Going by what you have just stated above (and if you are to earn
 >the respect of others) you will go by a pseudonym or is there
 >any reason why what you state to others does not apply to you?

You think I'm in it to "earn the respect of others"?  As long as
I have self-respect, it doesn't matter what name I use.

 >Therefore how can I let anyone know that I actually contacted
 >anyone without everyone else knowing who I contacted?

Perhaps we can think of a way to solve this.

;>

Amy

Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 11:04:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:20:05 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >public and end the secrecy himself.  He doesn't have to wait for
 >Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >position that sounds more credible everyday.

I think loss of control of his organization might play a part in
Dr. Greer's refusal to take this public.

Recently, Dr. Jack Sarfatti, a well-known "fringe" physicist
offered to help Steven expose the coverup.  Particularly, Jack
was intrigued by Steven's claims that the "black government" was
withholding antigravity technology reverse engineered from ET.

Dr. Greer refused to work with Dr. Sarfatti even though he was
urged by many, including myself, to do so.  Steven told me that
one reason that he would not deal with Jack was because Jack
believed that aliens could be "evil".  Of course, CSETI believes
that all ET are good.

IMO, I suspect that Dr. Greer does not wish to share the
limelight with anyone and enjoys being the ET guru.  After all,
his email address on Compuserve is Dr_ET.

Terry

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:32:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:28:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>The following appeared in the London Daily Mail, 26 October,
 >>1999:

 >>Riddle of UFO at Heathrow

 >>A passenger jet's close encounter with a mysterious,
 >>fast-moving craft seconds after taking off from Heathrow had
 >>experts baffled yesterday.

 >>A dossier on last month's incident is thought to have been
 >>passed to the MOD to see if the UFO could have been a
 >>radar-invisible spy plane or a stray British test craft.


Hi All,

How many "stray British test craft" are flying over our cities?

What Base would these "stray British test craft" fly from, and
who would write a test program to fly over Heathrow?

If it was a "stray British test craft" then surely the M.O.D.
would knew who flew it and from whence it came, and I would
imagine the Base receiving a bit of a rollocking?

Or is this another incident much like the Manchester City
Airport incident some years back.

And who is sending "radar-invisible spy planes"?  Can someone
please put a list of such craft on UpDates - relating to the
size of the above object?

Or could this be a UFO much like the ones that have been seen
regulur over East London and the City filmed for anyone to see?

Roy..                    Keep Smiling..









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 27

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:04:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:34:56 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 27


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 27
October 28, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

BRITISH VET CLAIMS
UFO CRASHED IN WALES

      A new book by researcher Nick Redfern
makes the claim that a UFO crashed in a
remote valley in the Clwyd district of Wales
back in January 1974.
      The bodies of two dead aliens were
reportedly recovered from the wreck.
      "Farmer Huw Lloyd, 39, was a boy of 14
watching TV at home in nearby Llandrillo
on the night of the crash in January 1974.
He said he saw a large object followed by
a train (luminous contrail--J.T.) and a
blinking blue light.  Huw recalled, 'I was
amazed at how quickly the police responded
and and how many people came here."
      Among the arrivals, according to Redfern,
were British Army units, one of which took
custody of the two alien bodies.
      "The mysterious craft came down in the
Berwyn Mountains, Clwyd...In a chilling echo
of the infamous Roswell incident in New Mexico
(in July 1947 (or Kecksburg, Pennsylvania in
1965--J.T.), scores of troops were dispatched on
a secret mission to retrieve the wreckage."
      "One soldier, quoted in the book under the
pseudonym 'James Prescott,' was ordered to
Llanderfel with four others and loaded two
oblong boxes into their armoured truck."
      "The truck ferried the boxes back to the
Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment
at Porton Down, near Salisbury, Wiltshire under
strict orders not to stop for anything."
      "Retired Mr. Prescott, who is too afraid of
reprisals to be named" said that once they
arrived, "'the boxes were opened by staff at the
facility in our presence.  We were startled to see
two creatures which had been placed inside
decontamination suits.'"
      "'It was obvious that the creatures were not
of this earth, and, when examined, were found
to have died.'"
      "'The bodies were about five to six feet tall,
humanoid in shape, but so that they looked
almost skeletal with a covering skin.'"
      "'Although I did not see a craft at the scene
of the recovery, I was informed that a large craft
had crashed and was retrieved by other (British)
military units.'"
      "The incident has remained classified, and
the (UK) Ministry of Defence has refused to
comment."  (See the Daily Mirror of London for
October 22, 1999, "How Alien's My Valley?"
(Editor's Comment: Shouldn't that be How Green
Was My Alien?  Interestingly, Porton Down is not
far from the recently-identified secret base at
Corsham, Wilts.  It looks like Llandrillo, Wales
has joined Roswell, Kecksburg, Boyle, Ireland
and Varginha, Brazil on the roster of UFO crash
sites.)

GLOWING FIREBALLS SEEN
BY MANY IN SOUTH AFRICA

      "That spectacular UFO which streaked through
the night sky yesterday (Saturday, October 23,
1999--J.T.) was a meteorite shower."
      "Dreikus Weideman, a marketer for a steel
company, thought he was seeing things while
driving home from Johannesburg to
Suikerbusrand along the (Highway) R59 at
1:55 a.m. yesterday."
      "'At first I thought it was an aircraft with
incredibly strong landing lights,' he said, 'I pulled
the car over to the side of the road, switched off
the engine and climbed out to watch it.  There
was a very white light streaming backwards and
within it were a string of five smaller lights.  I
thought maybe it was a military aircraft and
smaller craft flying in formation.'"
      "Weideman said the object was travelling
diagonally, heading northeast and 'moving
incredibly fast in a straight line.'"
      "He said a call to Johannesburg International
Airport revealed that two aircraft had also
spotted the light."
      "'One plane, which ws headed towards
Bloemfontein, was travelling at 31,000 feet
(10,300 meters) and it seemd that the light
was even higher up.  They also had a
call from Heidelberg.'"
      "But an air traffic controller at Johannesburg
International Airport poured water on this tale
and also commented yesterday, 'It was just a
meteorite shower.'"
      "In Schweizer-Reineke, in North West (about
464 kilometers or 290 miles southwest of
Johannesburg--J.T.), Pastor Andre Pieterse and
his wife were loading bread into a van when they
saw an 'object' coming in low."
      "'At first we thought it was a landing aircraft,
but, as it came closer, we saw it was a fireball,
with a piece as big as a house in front and
several smaller pieces the size of cars following
it in its orange tail,' he said, 'It was travelling
very fast and in the direction of Warmbaths.
It was very beautiful.'"  (See the Sunday Times
of Johannesburg for October 24, 1999, "Flying-
saucer scare just meteorites in a teacup."
Many thanks to Stig Agermose for forwarding
this newspaper article.)

BRIGHT UFO HOVERS OVER
HEEMSKERK, NETHERLANDS

      On Tuesday, October 19, 1999, at 3:30 p.m.,
Win M. was at his home in Heemskerk in the
Netherlands, a city located 42 kilometers
(25 miles) northwest of Amsterdam, the
national capital, when he spotted a UFO.
      "I looked out my window, and I could see a
bright object overhead," Win reported.  "It was
flying from southeast to northwest in a straight
line.  Estimated speed was about the same as
a jet airliner.  Estimated altitude was 10 kilometers
(6 miles or 31,680 feet--J.T.)  No vapor trail could
be seen.  I watched the UFO with 10x50
binoculars.  It took at least three seconds to
disappear out of sight" over the North Sea.
(Email Interview)

MORE UFO SIGHTINGS
REPORTED IN AUSTRALIA

      More UFO sightings were reported in
Australia during October.
      On Thursday, October 1, 1999, at 2 a.m.,
two men saw a UFO from the downtown area
of Adelaide, S.A. (South Australia), the state
capital.
      R.R. reported, "My friend Jeff and I were
walking down Gray Street in the city after leaving
a night club, when I noticed a startling thing
about 45 degrees to the horizon travelling down
to about 30 degrees above the horizon, and it
just stopped.  Then it travelled in a triangular
pattern very fast and stopped again.  A white
light shot up to the first object, that I could see
was disc-shaped, and then it also did a series
of loops very fast and shot off at incredible
speed."
      "Well, I know that technology is fairly good
these days,' he added, 'but I doubt that anyone
would survive the G forces involved in the
manoeuvres the object made."
      The case is being investigated by Peter
Johnson of the Australian UFO Research
Network (AUFORN).
      On Saturday, October 9, 1999, a woman
named Margaret "was leaving the drive-through
of a fast food outlet on Dandenong Road" in
Oakleigh, Vic. (Victoria), Australia when she
"noticed a large light towards the north.  At
first, she thought it was the landing light of an
aircraft."
      Margaret then became startled by "the
high speed with which it passed from north
to south" over Oakleigh.  She said she believed
the UFO "to have been aqua in colour" but is not
certain.  It might have been bright white but
appeared aqua because of her tinted windshield.
      The case is being investigated by Tony Cook
of the Victoria UFO Research Society (VUFORS).
(Many thanks to Diane Harrison of AUFORN
for these reports.)

GIRL SEES THREE UFOs IN
ASHLAND, WISCONSIN

      On Monday, October 25, 1999, at 6 p.m.,
the eyewitness, Jessica, was walking along
Sunset Beach on the shore of Chequamegon
Bay on Lake Superior, when she noticed
something odd in the sky.
      Sunset Beach is in Ashland, Wisconsin
(population 8,695), located on U.S. Route 2
approximately 377 miles (607 kilometers)
northwest of Milwaukee.
      "I was walking my dog, and I saw three
white orbs hovering over the Lake (Superior)
for about three minutes," she reported.
      The UFOs then zipped away to the
east, "over the hills across the bay," towards
Odanah, Wis. (population 400)  (Many thanks
to Morgan Clements, director of World Wide
UFO Reporting Center, for this report.)
(Editor's Note: Odanah is the site of the
Bad River Indian Reservation, owned by
the Anishinabe people.)

TRIANGULAR UFOs SEEN
IN MASSACHUSETTS

      On Friday, October 22, 1999, at 7:30 p.m.,
a 30-year-old man was hiking in the woods
of Brookfield (population 1,037), a small town
in central Massachusetts, and stopped to
"take a breather" on a hilltop.
      "I have seen three triangular aircraft,"
he reported, "They appeared to be sneaking
through a smalll valley at night, near where
I live.  They are probably 75 feet long, and,
as a rule, totally silent with no lighting on
the outside.  I have seen them pretty up
close and can tell that there's lighting inside
them."
      "I was scared, reaching to get a cigarette.
All of a sudden, three large roaring planes
went screaming by, as if they were chasing
them.  This is the second time I have seen
these craft."
      Brookfield is on Routes 9 and 48,
approximately 25 miles (40 kilometers) west
of Worcester, second largest city in
Massachusetts.  (Many thanks to Morgan
Clements, director of World Wide UFO
Reporting Center for this report.)
(Editor's Note:  Brookfield was the site of
a UFO sighting during the "airship era."
The incident took place on October 24, 1908.
You can read about it in the Berkshire Daily
Eagle for October 25, 1908, page 2.)

ROUNDUP MYSTERY VAN
SEEN IN LOUISIANA

      Three months after its initial appearance,
the mysterious white surveillance van bearing
UFO Roundup's website address surfaced
again, this time in southwestern Louisiana.
      The van was first seen last July in
Warsaw, Indiana (population 10,968).  See
UFO Roundup, Volume 4, Number 16,
"Mysterious Van Sighted in Warsaw,
Indiana."
      During the evening of Thursday,
October 14, 1999, Gary and Linda K. and
a few of Gary's friends stopped at the
isle of Capri Casino just off Interstate
Highway I-10 in Lake Charles, Louisiana
(population 70,580), about 126 miles
(211 kilometers) west of Baton Rouge, the
state capital.
      Returning that evening, Gary and Linda
sent an email to this newsletter, saying,
"Hi, we saw your van."  Editor Joseph Trainor
informed the couple that UFO Roundup is not
the owner of the mysterious white van and
asked them for an interview, to which they
graciously consented.
      "We saw the van in Lake Charles, La.,
in the (parking) lot of the Isle of Capri Casino,"
Linda reported.  "In the lot closest to the door.
It was evening.  The rear of the van had UFO
FIELD INTERCEPT TEAM and your website
(URL) on the back door."
      "It was government-owned.  It had (the
license plate read) US000000 and a single
number at the end.  It had two satellite dishes
on the roof, a computer on the dash
(dashboard--J.T.) and tinted windows."
      "Me and my husband Gary saw it and also
an old friend from Ennis and two of his fellow
workers.  My husband got a really good look
at the UFO van. He spent the time to look it
over well.  We saw no humans on board."
      Apparently, the mysterious white van has
undergone some changes since its last
appearance in Warsaw, Indiana.  The word
FIELD was added to the back-door logo.  And
the van ditched its previous Georgia license
plates for a pair of phony U.S. Government
plates.
      Real government license plates have a
GS prefix.  Examples: GS12 5498 or
GS10 7642.  They don't start with the
prefix U.S.
      The owners and operators of the
mysterious white van remain unknown.
As does the purpose of its strange odyssey
across the USA.  (Email Interview)

COSMIC CONFERENCE
TO BE HELD IN KENOSHA

      The Cosmic Awareness Conference
will be held on Saturday and Sunday,
November 13 and 14, 1999 at the Parkway
Chateau/Brat Stop at the intersection of
Interstate Highway I-94 and Route 50 in
Kenosha, Wisconsin.
      Kenosha (population 80,352) is about
55 miles (88 kilometers) north of Chicago.
      Saturday's conference hours will be
8:30 a.m. to 9 p.m.  Sunday's conference
hours will be 8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.  Admission
is $20 for each day.
      Keynote conference speakers include
abduction researcher John Carpenter,
paranormal author Dr. Heather Harder,
Joyce Murphy of Beyond Boundaries,
author Dr. Joe Lewels, Native American
contactee Steven Red Hawk, Iowa state
MUFON director Beverly Trout, martial
artist Tom Cameron and past-life researcher
Harry Garrett.

Y2K: MARINES TRAIN IN
CENTRAL ARIZONA

      On Monday, October 18, 1999, at 7:30
p.m., 49 camoflauged Marines of the 15th
Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) of Camp
Pendleton, California, slid down nylon
ropes from two helicopters and landed
on the runway at Williams Gateway airport
in Mesa, Arizona (population 288,091),
a large city on Highway 87 about 10 miles
(16 kilometers) southeast of Phoenix.
      "One by one, the Marines jumped out
of the craft and landed on a target 25 feet
below on a Williams Gateway airport runway."
      "It was a scene that will be repeated
several times this week in different Valley
locations as part of the training to prepare
them for the rigors of working in urban areas,
rathern than open stretches of beach or
dense strands of deserted forests often
associated with Marine operations."
      "'We've come to recognize that more and
more of our missions will be in urban areas,'
said Col. Richard C. Zilmer, commanding officer
of the 15th MEU, based at Camp Pendleton,
Calif."
      "(Col.) Zilmer and Marine unit spokesman
1st Lt. David T. Romley coordinated Monday's
training exercise with local and federal officials--
agencies ranging from the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to local fire departments."
      "Just after 7:30 p.m., 49 Marines practiced
'insert techniques' in which two helicopters
hovered over a target while Marines descended
on ropes, a technique called 'fast roping.'"
(See the Arizona Republic for October 19, 1999,
"Valley is urban training ground for Marines.")
      In all, about 300 Marines of the 15th MEU
participated in MOUT (Military Operations in
Urban Terrain--J.T.) exercises in the Phoenix
suburbs, most notably in Goodyear, Ariz.
(population 6,258), 12 miles (18 kilometers)
southwest of Phoenix, and in Litchfield Park,
Ariz. (population 3,303) 14 miles (19 kilometers)
west of Phoenix.
      In Litchfield Park, a local reporter interviewed
members of the City Council, who reportedly
told her that the FBI was "overseeing" the
training operation.  (See the West Valley View
for October 19, 1999.)
      However, Capt. Arnoux Abraham, USMC,
a spokesman for the 15th MEU, "vehemently
denied a locally-published report stating that the
FBI was 'overseeing' the exercises."
      "'That is, emphatically, incorrect,' he said."
      Capt. Abraham "said that while the FBI was
indeed on the scene, these officials were merely
acting as a liaison between 'the Marine Corps and
local law enforcement officials.'"
      "The FBI's role, said (Capt.) Abraham, is to
coordinate with local police to cordon off training
areas and make them safe, and to ensure
civilians did not stray into live-fire zones.  The
Justice Department normally sends an FBI
agent to a planned training site 'a couple of weeks'
before the training actually begins 'to start the
coordination process.'"
      "Regarding the concern local residents have
about seeing armed Marines in town, (Capt.)
Abraham said there is no reason to worry."
      "'The training that we practice is strictly in
preparation for our operations abroad,' he said,
'Our purpose...is not to use it on our own citizens.
We're all Americans, too, and we took an oath to
protect the people we serve.'"
      "'This is an effort to ensure the U.S. Marine
Corps is properly trained to execute its
mission abroad,' he added."  (See WorldNet Daily
for October 20, 1999, "The Marines land in
Arizona: Units engaged in urban assault training
exercises," by Jon E. Dougherty.)
(Editor's Comment:  Here we have another instance
of intensive military training to deal with some
threat that the U.S. government in unwilling to
discuss publicly.  But...don't worry about it.
Go watch Dharma and Greg on TV.  Jenna
Elfman is cute and funny.  And remember, only
"kooks" believe in UFOs or Operation Abacus.)

from the UFO Files...

1994: REHOBOTH'S HAUNTED
           CEMETERY

      Fans of The Blair Witch Project looking for a
place to visit Halloween night should visit the
Rehoboth Village Cemetery in Rehoboth,
Massachusetts (population 7,600), a small
town on Route 44 about 40 miles (64 kilometers)
southwest of Boston.
      The cemetery dates back to the Seventeenth
Century and was a boyhood haunt (no pun
intended--J.T.) of Howard Phillips Lovecraft
(1890-1937), who lived most of his life in nearby
Providence, Rhode Island.
      "Old Ephraim" is the leading attraction at
the Rehoboth Village Cemetery.  Since 1994,
there have been repeated manifestations of
this particular entity.
      Ephraim was sighted on January 17,
1994 by Daniel and Barbara Miles who "were
standing in the center of the cemetery, visiting
a relative's grave, when suddenly in a spot
at the southwest rear of the graveyard,
where there had been no one present just a
moment earlier, en elderly man" dressed in
Eitheenth Century clothes "who had a
prominent hooked nose and a sneering
facial expression, was curiously kneeling on
the ground next to a gravestone.  He seemed
to be praying and alternately sobbing and
laughing."
      "After less than a minute, the bizarre
figure suddenly dematerialized, and Barbara
and Daniel hurried out of the cemetery in a
state of alarm."
      What they saw, Daniel reported, "will
upset both of us for the rest of our lives."
      On August 21, 1995, two sisters, Lisa
and Karen Mackey of Rehoboth, Mass.
"visited the cemetery to pay respects to their
dead mother."
      "Suddenly, as they prepared to depart,
the two women were startled by a strange
sound deriving from the southwest corner
of the graveyard"--the loudest wolf whistle
they had ever heard.
      "When Lisa and Karen looked in that
direction, they were startled to see a
strange-looking elderly man" wearing the
same Eighteenth Century garb the Miles
couple had seen.  Old Ephraim was
"staring at them intently and making an
obscene gesture with his hands."
      Lisa reported that the apparition
"was clearly not natural.  Not only did he
move in a strange sort of floating slow
motion, but the old man's eyes seemed
entirely black and hollow...without the
spark of life, somehow soul-less."
      The Mackey sisters beat a hasty
retreat and have not been back to the
cemetery since.
      The most recent Ephraim sighting was
on April 7, 1996 when he was seen by
teacher Sarah Dickerman, 36, of nearby
Taunton, Mass.
      "What I encountered that day has
affected every aspect of my life," Sarah
reported.
      "While taking a walk through the
cemetery for relaxation, she reportedly
observed an elderly man at that
southwestern rear part of the graveyard,
kneeling on the ground and sobbing."
      "When she came to within a few
yards of the strange character, he
suddenly sprang to his feet (in retrospect,
says Sarah, with a type of 'liquid' movement
that wasn;t natural), and then he burst out in
a strange laughter..  A second later, he
called Sarah a '(expletive)' to her face."
      "Profoundly startled, Sarah quickly turned
away and began to walk briskly in the direction
of her parked car, and behind her she could
hear him alternately laughing and yelling,
'Catherine, Catherine, you (expletive)!'"
      "At that point, in a state of pronounced
panic, Sarah broke in a terrified run toward
her car, which was parked on the road
(Pond Street--J.T.) to the side of the cemetery.
Upon reaching her vehicle, she was astonished
to observe, in the distance, that the old man
had re-materialized back in his original spot
in the southwestern part of the cemetery."
      "As she nervously began to drive away,
the astonished woman noticed from her car
window that the bizarre old man was now
leaning over and beating with his fist a young
woman lying prostrate before him on the
ground.  A moment later, both figures
entirely vanished."
      Charles Turek Robinson, the author who
interviewed the witnesses, believes that the
haunting involves "some terrible human drama
conflict that is re-enacting itself over and over
again in the cemetery."
      However, the Village Cemetery, located
about 100 meters (330 feet) south of Route 44
on Pond Street, isn't the only haunted spot in
the town of Rehoboth.
      Ghosts have also been reported on
Lake Street, Perryville Dam Road, Danforth
Street and the Palmer River Riding Club.
      Indeed, there are more ghosts in Rehoboth
than there are witches in Salem.  Or UFOs
in Fitchburg!  (See the book True New England
Mysteries, Ghosts, Crimes and Oddities by
Charles Turek Robinson, Covered Bridge Press,
North Attleboro, Mass. 1997, pages 38 to 43.)

      We'll be back next week with more UFO
news from around the planet, brought to you
by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
It'll be interesting to see what kind of UFO and
paranormal activity takes place on Halloween
1999.  Have a safe Trick or Treat.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan
Productions, all rights reserved.  Readers may
post news items from UFO Roundup on their
websites 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.
*****************************************************
This weeks advertiser:

eTour

http://www.directleads.com/ad.html?o=283&a=cd3492

Make eTour.com your start page, and you'll see a
different Web site, matched to your interests, every
time you log onto the Web. You'll also earn TourPoints
while you're at it, redeemable for free gifts from
JCrew, eToys, CDNow, and many more.
*****************************************************

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>

UFO Roundup: http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin
and AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences
also available.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                      Heathrow 06-09-98 UFO Full Report

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:27:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:38:15 -0400
Subject: Heathrow 06-09-98 UFO Full Report


Here follows the text of the Civil Aviation Authority air miss
report on the Heathrow incident.

I hope this helps to clear up some of the queries on this list.


Airprox Report No. 63/98
Date/Time: 09 June 1998, 1245
Position: N5129 WOO32 (2.5 NM WNW Heathrow)
Airspace: CTZ
Reporting a/c type: MD81
Reported a/c: Unknown
Operator: CAT
Alt/FL: 3000 ft (QNH 1005mb)
Weather: IMC INT CLOUD

Summary of Information reported to UKAB:

The MD 81 pilot reports that he was passing 3000 - 3500 ft (QNH
1005) at 170 kt having just departed from RW 27L at Heathrow on
a BPK SID. He was in IMC flying in and out of cloud. When about
2 NM W of Heathrow, both pilots saw an object pass in the
opposite direction down their port side slightly above their
a/c. The incident was very quick, the object passing in about a
tenth of a second. The PIC describes it as metallic grey and the
size of a small a/c with lights on; the FO, who saw it a
fraction of a second later as it passed the LH clear view
window, describes it as a bright light very close. They
estimated that it passed 30-50 metres away. No estimate of risk
given.

Note: Despite extensive enquiries by AIS (Mil), no explanation
for this object can be found. A thorough ground search of the
area was carried out by Slough, Metropolitan and Maidenhead
police officers and the possibility of models, light a/c,
fireworks and flares was investigated. All proved negative.

LATCC investigations reports that the MD81 departed from
Heathrow for Oslo at 1242 on a BPK 6G SID. Having established
contact with the TC NE controller passing 4,000 ft, the pilot
reported a "flare or something passed twenty feet from our
aircraft". The controller asked at what point this had happened
and the pilot replied that it occurred just as the a/c was
turning on the BUR NDB QDM 302 degrees. Subsequently the pilot
said he was not sure what had passed, it might have been an a/c
but the crew were not sure. The controller advised him that he
thought it was unlikely that it was another a/c and requested
the DME range from Heathrow that  the incident had occurred. The
pilot reported that it was about 2 DME as the a/c would file an
Airprox, commenting that the object "looked like a fighter or
something, about 20-50 metres away and moving very fast." The
controller was busy and arranged for the Airprox to be filed on
the FIS frequency 124.6.

Following the Airprox, the Watch Manager carried out an
immediate radar replay to determine whether the intruder could
have been an a/c; nothing was seen. Additionally, the Heathrow
10cm radar was later replayed as it offered the best resolution
for any small object that might have been in the vicinity, and
nothing was observed either ahead of the departing MD81 or at
the reported position of the encounter. The incident was
reported to Slough police and a thorough search of the area
revealed no evidence ofm model a/c or fireworks having been
ignited.Inquiries with the public in the area have also proved
fruitless.

Part B. Summary of the Board Discussions.

Information available to the Board included a report from the
pilot of the reporting a/c, a tape recording of the relevant RT
frequency, radar photographs/video recordings, reports from the
air traffic controllers involved and reports from the
appropriate ATC and operating authorities.

It was clear that the MD 81 crew's brief glimpse of the object
afforded them little opportunity to describe what they had seen.
The pilot's radio transmissions and his written report variously
depict it as "metallic" "bright light", a "flare" or "a fighter
or something". ATCO members were certain that even a very small
craft in such close proximity to Heathrow would have been
detected, particularly on the Heathrow 10cm radar. Despite the
extensive efforts of the police, AIS (Mil) and the general
public, there were no clues as to the nature of the reported
object. The Board concluded that owing to the lack of
information available to them the incident was unassesable with
regard to both cause and risk.

Part C: Assessment of risk and cause.
Degree of risk: D
Cause: Unassesable.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 15:31:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:51:19 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 22:52:54 PDT

 >  Whatever "attempting sarcasm" is.  Perhaps you could
 >explain.

Sarcasm is as sarcasm does as my grandmother never used to say
Jerry!

This general interchange of views on what ufologists believe is
all very interesting but ultimately we're not going to get very
far because we can never reach an agreement. Which is fine but I
prefer to discuss the _facts- within ufology rather than the
speculation and belief, hence the contents of my previous posts
which have only had belief and not fact to counter them. Boring,
I know, but relevant.

 >Tell that to the SETI crowd, and then get all those university
 >presses to stop publishing books on extraterrestrial life, such
 >as the one I just read which Oxford University Press will
 >publish in February.  I'm sure they'll appreciate your insights,
 >Andy. (See, I did it; no mere "attempt" there.)

Well, that's all arguable too Jerry. Astrobiology is a purely
theoretical 'science' for a start and the interest shown in it
is arguably an attempt to make the admirable, but boring,
exploration of space somewhat more 'sexy'. Sales of books -
academic or otherwise - and popularity of a subject does not
imbue that subject with any reality Jerry. You'll be telling su
there really _was_ a Blair Witch next!

 >Congratulations on the Northbritspeak
 > and a brave attempt to
 >change the subject.  But as I say, if you reduce astrobiology's
 >concerns to a folklore of elves and fairies, my friend (no sarcasm
 >here, and I assume you'll get the song allusion to follow), you
 >ain't goin' nowhere.

I didn't reduce astrobiology to a folklore of elves and fairies
Jerry. But I would disgregard astrobiology as being of little
relevance to what is actually reported in ufology and of no
relevance to the physical evidence available. Elves, fairies etc
are as interesting as Greys or any other apparent denizens of
our culture and consciousness - and I have yet to see evidence
which offers much to the contrary (and yes, I'm familiar with
Eddie Bullard's work).

As for the song allusion, thanks - it's made me dig Sweethert of
the Rodeo out for a well deserved listen!

Happy Trails

Andy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:04:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:53:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?


 >From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:08:10 +0300

Hi, Minna!

At best these might explain some small angular size
observations, observations by people suffering from delusions,
and some very non-UFO observations. But they fail to explain any
multiple witness case, any effect case, and any case with
photos, instruments, or radar involved.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, music and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 99 17:38:29 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:54:36 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:07:59 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT


John,

 >>>>One hopes that this sort of empty posturing -- especially coming
 >>>>from someone smart enough to know better -- disappears from
 >>>>ufological discourse soon.  It is, as we have already seen
 >>>>demonstrated repeatedly, much less than helpful, and among other
 >>>>things, it betrays a fairly shocking ignorance of the literature
 >>>>of astrobiology.

 >>'Smart enough to know better' - sheer brilliance Jerry! It's not
 >>empty posturing - see above. 'Astrobiology'? Yor avin' a laarf
 >>incha? Don't we have to actually have some hard biological
 >>evidence before we can talk about such a thing?

 >By "the literature of astrobiology" Jerry means presumably the
 >writings of his friend Michael Swords, someone who has his own
 >agenda of denying Darwinian evolution. Astrobiology (is this
 >what used to be called "exobiology") has the rare distinction of
 >being a science completely without data.

You're getting a little wacky in your middle age, John. Mike
Swords does not "deny Darwinian evolution."  You just made that
up, didn't you?  You also prove a point I'd intended to make:
that self-styled psychosociologists can't be bothered to read
the scientific literature on the possibility of ET life, thus
your extraordinarily naive treatment  of (weirdly coupled with a
bizarre obsession with) the ETH.

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                         'Chupacabra' Attacks Again

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 22:59:54 -0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:09:48 -0400
Subject: 'Chupacabra' Attacks Again


Hello,

Guess what, the goatsucker is back!

Released in Correiro Brazilian Journal, 10/28/99.

Ten animals - 8 goats and 3 sheep - were killed and had blood
sucked by a unknown predator in the last week on two farms in
the Cesario Lange region of Sorocaba, in Sao Paulo State.

The attacks are attributed to the chupacabra, a mysterious
predator that has been killing for almost 2 years in that
region.

The first attack occured on the Nova Esperana farm, last
Saturday at dawn.

According the landowner, Marco Antonio de Souza, 5 goats and 3
sheep were killed. They were found dead with a single spot in
their necks.

"It is very weird, because an animal that kills to eat smashes
their victims", said Souza.





THIAGO LUIZ TICCHETTI
Diretor Do Departamento de Publicao e Traduo Especializadas
( DEPTE - EBE-ET / Brasilia-Brasil) Publication Department and
Specialized Translation Director.

ICQ - 35119615
http://www.ebe-et.com.br









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

              Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:40:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:17:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:44:23 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Warren On Gleason, Nixon & Alien Craft/Bodies

 >>Could Nixon really slip away with Jackie Gleason?

 >>Greg Sandow

I got private e-mail, reminding me that Nixon did slip away
during an anti-war protest in Washington to mingle with the
protesters. So at least that once....

Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                            Article: Marfa Lights

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 19:20:55 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:23:55 -0400
Subject: Article: Marfa Lights


Greetings list -

An interesting article presenting some theories about the Marfa
Lights can be found at:

http://www.austin360.com/entertainment/xl/features/1999/10/28marfa.html

Enjoy.

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                           Ways To Ignore Reality

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 20:59:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:32:00 -0400
Subject: Ways To Ignore Reality

Ways To Ignore Reality (And Make Your Analyst Very Rich)

Hello all,

Caution, Humor Ahead...

First physical unreality, you see a UFO on landing legs with two
guys standing out side (Probably taking a leak) upon your
arrival they see you and not wanting  to disclose that the anti-
gravity drive is powered by a Ford Flathead V-8 they jump in and
head back to whence they came. Obivously a Floater in the
Observer's eye.

Secondly, Photgraphic unreality ,as in: You are some old
clodhopper in Oregon assuming that you neither have will or are
crafty enough to fake an elaborate hoax you see a UFO fly over
you take a Picture. This is a Phenomon known as Photographic
Hallucination, The Brownie Complex as it is known, especially
prevalent after WWII when Hasselblads and Minoltas came to the
U.S. it gave Brownie Owners ( and Brownies themselves
inferiority complexes and subsequent deluisions of grandeur) If
this occured today, Kodak would've spent spent millions  on
therapy.

Thirdly Multiple witness insanity - Induced by the apparent
onset of bright lights in the household the presence of Air
Guard jets many miles away, and the Camcorder getting  an
annoyinlgly real looking ah, well Object(s) -Probably another
formof Browine Complex Known as Didgital Envy.

Fourthly, (and one that I hold dear, may I never by God's Grace
ever be "cured" of) the unbelief in nothing miraculous ever
happened.Imagine a unreality in which there are five people
standing in a field at twilight, watching with awe , a silver,
disc shape cruise silently over another Oregon farm. Pelicans
flying in a Saucer shape-why obviously-Nothing like that can
happen-can it?

GT McCoy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

               CPR-Canada News: Another Formation - Viscount,

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 20:58:59 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:34:18 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Another Formation - Viscount,



CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


Another Crop Formation - Viscount, Saskatchewan

October 28, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Still another (!) crop formation reported to CPR-Canada this
afternoon by farmers Leon Viols and Debra McCrae at Viscount,
Saskatchewan, about forty miles east of Saskatoon.

Initially found at the end of September while combining, two
circles in wheat. One is about 30 feet diametre, the other about
20-25 feet. Both flattened right down to the ground, in neat,
smooth lay patterns. Circles are spaced a just few feet apart.
The circles and entire field have been combined, but as in other
cases, the circles themselves are still there, being flattened
hard to the ground and therefore not cut.

Farmers did not know who to report them to initially, then found
and contacted CPR-Canada via one of the local university
agricultural departments.

This is the tenth formation in Saskatchewan reported this year
and the nineteenth in Canada.

Initial diagram attached (viscount.gif; � Paul Anderson)

Further details when available.

Paul Anderson
Director
CPR-Canada

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/1999.html

A reminder for all Canadian subscribers / readers - your
assistance is welcome and needed - ANY reports of other
possible circles this year, please do let us know as soon as
possible! See Reporting and Field Research Guidelines on the
web site for more information:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310/reporting.html

REPORTING HOTLINE: 604.731.8522

_____________________________


CPR-Canada News is the e-mail update service of
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada (affiliate of Circles
Phenomenon Research International), is published
periodically or as breaking news develops and is available
free by subscription; to be added to or removed from the
mailing list, send your request, including "subscribe
CPR-Canada News" or "unsubscribe CPR-Canada News" and
e-mail address to:

mailto:psa@direct.ca

CPR-Canada welcomes your reports and submissions.
Forward all correspondence to:


CIRCLES PHENOMENON RESEARCH CANADA
Circles Phenomenon Research International

Main Office

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4  Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


� Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, 1999









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:21:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:47:40 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:03:45 -0200

 >I agree with Jerry Clark.

 >I don't beleive that still have people that believe that the
 >UFOs are imagination, and the ETs are a product of our Space Age
 >Culture. Don't you think that the fairies and little folk could
 >be aliens, but the people from that age didn't know how express
 >theirs sightings? I mean, when they saw a UFO in the sky, they
 >associated it with something that they know, like a ship ( see
 >the sketch of an airship over Oakland, California, apperead in
 >the San Francisco Call, in November 1896)

 >You have your opinon, of course, but you have to get arguments
 >to support your claims.



I can't believe there is such closed mindedness here involving
folklore and culture.  Have we forgotten the book "Dimensions"
by Jacques Vallee!?  Any serious investigtor CANNOT outright
dismiss this as one possibility of MANY! If they are then they
are in the wrong mindset to be a competent investigator.

Sincerely, T. Lemire -- "Thus these beings appear to us, not in
order to stay among us or become allied to us, but in order for
us to become able to understand them."

Written during the Middle Ages by Paracelsus in "Why These
Beings Appear to Us"










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:52:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:43:43 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 22:52:54 PDT

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT

 >Hey, Andy guy,

 >>In response to Dave Clarke's

 >>>The ET explanation for UFOs is simply an artefact of the era in
 >>>which we live. Go back 500 years Sean and if we had email I
 >>>would venture to suggest you would be blaming UFOs on the
 >>>fairies and little folk.

 ><snipped>

 >Congratulations on the Northbritspeak and a brave attempt to
 >change the subject.  But as I say, if you reduce astrobiology's
 >concerns to a folklore of elves and fairies, my friend (no sarcasm
 >here, and I assume you'll get the song allusion to follow), you
 >ain't goin' nowhere.

 >Jerry Clark


Jerry would you repeat those same words in your last paragraph
to Jacques Vallee while he authographs the copy of "Dimensions"
that you might want to re-read.

T. Lemire

--

"Thus these beings appear to us, not in order to stay among us
or become allied to us, but in order for us to become able to
understand them."

Written during the Middle Ages by Paracelsus in "Why These
Beings Appear to Us"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:03:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:56:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:37:40 +0100
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:44 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >All,

 >It might reminding readers of this report from 1996.

 >---------------
 >
 >            The Times, London, Friday 2 February 1996.

 >           UFO 'buzzed' airliner at Manchester Airport

 >               by Harvey Elliott Air Correpondent

<snip>

 >-----------------

 >The near-miss took place Jan 95 the official CAA report concluded:

 >-----------------

 >Having debated the various hypotheses at length the Group
 >concluded that, in the absence of any firm evidence which could
 >identify or explain this object, it was not possible to assess
 >either the cause or the risk to any of the normal criteria
 >applicable to airmiss reports. The incident therefore remains
 >unresolved.

 >ie it's an official UFO.

 >Neil.


Hi,

Except, Neil, that its really a meteor - at least in my view -
and a good example of how easy it is to read too much into
witness testimony.

I know most ufologists dont agree with me - which is fine  - but
this is far from an arbitrary conclusion (see my book 'Something
in the Air'). The case is a virtual rerun of the l948 Eastern
Airlines saga and differs markedly from the Heathrow sighting
under present discussion because the BA crew saw only a well lit
mass for a couple of seconds in pitch darkness (almost right on
top of my house in Derbyshire - one reason I have spent so much
time on this l995 incident).

For more see the last weeks debate on this BA sighting on UFORL.


Best wishes,

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                 Dark Object

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:06:07 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:58:31 -0400
Subject: Dark Object


Hello List,

For those of you that have been waiting patiently for the full
book version of the Shag Harbour Incident, it appears that your
wait will be over shortly. Dell Publishing has entered into an
agreement with myself and Chris Styles to publish the book,
probably sometime before next Summer. The ISBN number will be
made available in the next few weeks.

The book, titled, Dark Object - The Shag Harbour Incident,
according to my agent, will be available in the United States,
Canada, England, Australia and other countries throughout the
world.

I will be making up a web page in the next couple of days which
will be linked through my Maritime UFO Files site. I'll post
updates there.

Thanks,

Don Ledger
Maritime UFO FIles
http://www.xweb.ns.ca/maritime_ufo_file/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                     Re:

From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:14:50 -0400
Subject: Re:


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >public and end the secrecy himself.  He doesn't have to wait for
 >Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >position that sounds more credible everyday.

On the contrary, we are prepared to come forward immediately as
soon as common sense strategic plans can be actuated. This have
been described publicly and in writing for a couple of years.
Those of you who are naive enough to believe that you simply
call a press conference and it is a 'done deal'  are badly
misinformed.

If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.

We know who these players are we know who their handlers are.
That you are gullible enough to think that a matter this
sensitive is not continously being influenced by such assets is
your problem. We will not make it ours.

Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
organizations and researchers). When the support and means are
there to do this right it will be done. Until then, we can be
very patient....


Steven M. Greer M.D.
CSETI Director







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:26:05 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >public and end the secrecy himself.  He doesn't have to wait for
 >Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >position that sounds more credible everyday.

On the contrary, we are prepared to come forward immediately as
soon as common sense strategic plans can be actuated. This have
been described publicly and in writing for a couple of years.
Those of you who are naive enough to believe that you simply
call a press conference and it is a 'done deal'  are badly
misinformed.

If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.

We know who these players are we know who their handlers are.
That you are gullible enough to think that a matter this
sensitive is not continously being influenced by such assets is
your problem. We will not make it ours.

Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
organizations and researchers). When the support and means are
there to do this right it will be done. Until then, we can be
very patient....


Steven M. Greer M.D.
CSETI Director





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:00:08 +0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:21:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:33:12 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:41:31 +0800

 >>>Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 01:22:50 -0500
 >>>From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <>

 ><snip>

 >>You seem very defensive Amy, accusing at least three people so
 >>far of ridiculing or debunking.  There is no way to prove the
 >>case real or false, period.  It's subjective, each person's own
 >>beliefs influence their acceptance/rejection of cases.  If
 >>something doesn't sit right with me about this case I am sure
 >>you can appreciate it as my opinion.

 >Well that is three of us, the only three who took this seriously
 >enough to bother asking questions.  It's quite apparent to me,
 >'judging' by the way we three have been treated by this
 >researcher, that this is all a big waste of time and no matter
 >what questions you ask, you will never be given a
 >straight-forward answer without defense.

 >I say it's time to end this tattered thread and move on to some
 >more productive and interesting items,

<snip>

Hear, hear, someone with something productive to add to the
thread. :)  For what it's worth, I appreciated your view on
case. But I guess there always two sides to a tale, I mean
story, I mean experience...  :)

Cheers
Sharon







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                Re: Get Real

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:27:43 +0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:38:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 03:06:32 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:41:31 +0800

<snip>

 >I'm curious.  If I had only read this case on the internet,
 >viewed the scanned photographs on a web site and never met nor
 >interviewed any of the witnesses in person, who would be more
 >likely to know the details of the case - the one who conducted
 >the investigation or the one who only read about it on the
 >internet?

I guess in that case you probably shouldn't feel upset if people
don't believe the experience off the bat with out further
information or analysis:)

<snip>

 >I don't not know how this happened and until I have more
 >information, I would not want to appear so assuming as to
 >conjure my own answers without further study.  That's why I do
 >research and investigations - to search for answers hopefully so
 >I will not make a fool of myself by speculating too much.

Well thanks for sharing the facts to date, and we do apprciate
the time and effprt you put into the web site, but I think it's
only correct of us to withhold opinion of the case until all the
details are available, as a good researcher would.  But based on
what we have available to date, I sure wouldn't be putting my
life savings into this one just yet :)

<snip>

 >So, you prefer it to be by word of mouth only yet demand
 >evidence.  Gees, kinda hard to have it both ways - secret yet
 >shared, verbal yet physical.

I don't demand evidence, it would make life easier if the photos
of cases like these worked out just once though :) All I said
was an experience corroborated by an independant witness without
suspect photos ranks higher on my believable scale.

 >I don't get it, Sharon.  How can you assume to know more about
 >this case than anyone else when you never even met these people
 >in person or talked with them?

I never assume things Amy.  Just comment on the facts as
presented to me.  You wrote of a case, no doubt wanting some
feedback on it but don't appreciate the feedback you get.
You're the expert on this case, why would you care what I think?
As you said I never spoke to anyone etc. Take what I write or
leave it.  Either way it's just an opinion, an opinion not very
well based on facts because of the lack of them. I admit this,
freely, as anyone would.  Gee, I wouldn't even listen to what I
have to say :)

 >I don't care if you believe it
 >or not, that is your choice. What I cannot fathom is how you and
 >others can point to the glass door, say it was a hoax or
 >imagination when you can't even point to the actual, physical
 >glass door and present your arguments in person?

Your arguements are based on someone's personal account of a
very emotional situation.  Hmmm....

 >You say you
 >need physical evidence yet claim this door - you can only
 >imagine - was left closed on purpose.  You cannot touch or
 >examine this glass door, have not interviewed the witnesses
 >yourself yet you are so sure the door was left closed for
 >reasons other than accident or poor judgement.  I wonder how
 >this would stack up in a courtroom?

Just basing my opinion (though poorly informed) on the facts you
put forward and my own experiences in dealing with cases like
this. It's a debatable opinion, which can be influenced easily
as more facts come to light, but till then I have to go with gut
instnct.

 >Hey, that's an interesting concept!  You would be the
 >prosecution and I would be the defense

Snipped for stupidity because for starters this whole case
wouldn't even get looked at by any sane judge.  So there goes
the whole legal thing :)

 >You investigated?  Why didn't you just stay in the house and
 >tell your "mum" what you believed it was rather than actually
 >checking it out?

That's what I do, investigate stuff to get facts, proof etc.

 >The shrub was probably planted there on
 >purpose - strategically located and human shaped - just to panic
 >your "mum".  I wonder who did this?

My father who had the wrong glasses on when trimming the bush.

 >Did you open the door?

I did.  All the way.  No glare effect, and a gentle south
easterly blowing at the time.  I did not have a camera because I
knew what it was and didn't want to waste my time.

 >Why
 >or why not?

So she could see me all the way to the shrub.  Seemed logical to
me at the time.

 >id you remember to take photographs?

See above.

 >Why or why
 >not?

See above.

 >Sounds a little too convenient to me!  I don't have to be
 >there, examine the "evidence" or interview your "mum" to know
 >what actually happened.  I have it all figured out.  Not. <GBG>

I came to the same opinion on this case as I did on yours.
Mistaken experience based on an emotional state at the time.  No
evidence was presented to you so you did the best based on what
you had.

<snip>

 >But you can't expect everyone to
 >share your views.


We finally agree on something.  Nice chatting with you on this,
but I think as Sue so rightly pointed out it has been exhausted
on the facts that we have.

 >G'Day. ;>

 >Amy

Actaully G'Day is Hi, we just say Goodbye, or the full Good Day
if you're not in a rush :)

Cheers
Sharon









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 99 11:16:14 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:39:54 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 15:31:12 -0400
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 22:52:54 PDT


Andy,

 >This general interchange of views on what ufologists believe is
 >all very interesting but ultimately we're not going to get very
 >far because we can never reach an agreement. Which is fine but I
 >prefer to discuss the _facts- within ufology rather than the
 >speculation and belief, hence the contents of my previous posts
 >which have only had belief and not fact to counter them. Boring,
 >I know, but relevant.

Of course what self-styled skeptics and psychosociologists love
to discuss is belief, and not evidence, and who can blame them?
Their operating principle might be expressed this way: What I
know I _know_; what you know you only believe. No wonder
productive discussion is impossible.

 >>Tell that to the SETI crowd, and then get all those university
 >>presses to stop publishing books on extraterrestrial life, such
 >>as the one I just read which Oxford University Press will
 >>publish in February.  I'm sure they'll appreciate your insights,
 >>Andy. (See, I did it; no mere "attempt" there.)

 >Well, that's all arguable too Jerry. Astrobiology is a purely
 >theoretical 'science' for a start and the interest shown in it
 >is arguably an attempt to make the admirable, but boring,
 >exploration of space somewhat more 'sexy'. Sales of books -
 >academic or otherwise - and popularity of a subject does not
 >imbue that subject with any reality Jerry. You'll be telling su
 >there really _was_ a Blair Witch next!

Interesting that you compare science's search for ETI to the
Blair Witch project.  Interesting, too, that you dismiss all
exobiologists and exobiological literature with the same sorts
of ad hominems you usually reserve for ufologists who disagree
with you.  That may make you feel better, but from anybody's
perspective but  your own, it certainly doesn't accomplish
anything.

 >I didn't reduce astrobiology to a folklore of elves and fairies
 >Jerry. But I would disgregard astrobiology as being of little
 >relevance to what is actually reported in ufology and of no
 >relevance to the physical evidence available. Elves, fairies etc
 >are as interesting as Greys or any other apparent denizens of
 >our culture and consciousness - and I have yet to see evidence
 >which offers much to the contrary (and yes, I'm familiar with
 >Eddie Bullard's work).

In fact, there is nothing in the literature of exo- or
astrobiology that makes UFOs an outrageous notion.  Given a
densely populated galaxy (a view widely shared by scientists who
have given thought to the subject, as the SETI/ETI literature
attests), ET visitors are not only possible but probable.  Their
absence -- at least to the anti-UFO contingent -- is often used
by critics to argue that intelligent life is rare to nonexistent
in the universe.  Moreover, a number of  pro-ETI scientists
contend that, for a host of reasons, intelligent,
technology-generating beings would likely look like humanoids.
This idea is at least mentioned in just about every book I've
read on the subject.  One well-regarded scientific writer, the
mathematician John L. Casti, has even said ETs may well look
much like the gray entities of abduction lore -- this even
though Casti professes skepticism about UFOs.  Another SETI
writer, Edward Ashpole, did a whole book (The UFO Phenomena
[1995]) documenting the close match between exobiology and what
has been reported of UFO appearance and behavior.

In short, there is no a priori reason why ETs could not
be here or why they would not appear as they do in
UFO sightings and encounters.  To reduce the various
very interesting questions raised by ETI speculations and
UFO reports to fairylore or to Blair Witch amounts to
little more than an exercise in -- I am trying to be charitable
here -- sheer mental laziness.  It tells us more about you,
Andy, than about the larger questions that should
concern all of us.

Jerry Clark










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 99 11:34:19 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:41:41 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:52:45 -0400
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 99 22:52:54 PDT

 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:30:44 -0400
 >>>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 99 09:42:17 PDT


Todd,

 >>Congratulations on the Northbritspeak and a brave attempt to
 >>change the subject.  But as I say, if you reduce astrobiology's
 >>concerns to a folklore of elves and fairies, my friend (no sarcasm
 >>here, and I assume you'll get the song allusion to follow), you
 >>ain't goin' nowhere.

 >Jerry would you repeat those same words in your last paragraph
 >to Jacques Vallee while he authographs the copy of "Dimensions"
 >that you might want to re-read.

I don't want to get sidetracked on a discussion of Jacques
Vallee, on whom I have written extensively and critically.
If you're interested in my views, please contact me privately,
and I'll tell you what I've published on the subject.

Jerry Clark









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Sheriff Recalls 1966 UFO Encounter

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:11:43 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:45:02 -0400
Subject: Sheriff Recalls 1966 UFO Encounter


Greetings list -

Source: Richmond Times-Dispatch, Virginia, USA

http://www.gatewayva.com/rtd/dailynews/virginia/ufo29.shtml

Sheriff recalls UFO encounter in 1966 / He suspects craft
somehow linked to dog's death

BY MARK BOWES Times-Dispatch Staff Writer

If he hadn't seen it with his own eyes, Henrico County Sheriff
A.D. "Toby" Mathews said, he might not have believed it.

On a bright moonlit night 33 years ago this summer, Mathews
said, he saw a large unidentified flying object hovering
silently near his Varina farm. He suspects whatever was inside
the mysterious craft was responsible for snatching and snuffing
the life out of his dog.

"I really saw the thing, I really did," Mathews, 65, said this
week when asked to respond to talk of his close encounter. "And
I've never seen anything like that since then."

Mathews said he never publicly disclosed what he saw until now
because he felt no one would believe him. He talked about his
UFO experience this week after The Times-Dispatch learned that
he had told the story three years ago to his former chief deputy
during a Christmas dinner in Williamsburg.

Mathews, who's fond of sharing personal stories about his life,
was candid about his UFO experience, which he noted occurred
during a time when such sightings were reported with some
regularity by Richmond-area residents.

During the spring and summer of 1966 --when Mathews said he saw
a saucerlike object hover over a cornfield near his farm and
then disappear in a flash -- more than a half-dozen people,
including three other Richmond-area police officers, reported
spotting similar objects hovering over the city, Henrico and
Goochland County, according to news accounts in The
Times-Dispatch and The Richmond News Leader.

One Richmond patrolman told The News Leader that he chased the
UFO in his patrol car.

"If I live to be 100, I'll never forget it," said former Officer
William L. Stevens Jr. in a July 21, 1966, news story.

Mathews' UFO encounter had been the subject of gossip for years
and recently surfaced again as the local election season draws
to a close. Mathews, a two-term sheriff, is running for the
Varina District seat on the Henrico Board of Supervisors.

With just four days left until the general election, Mathews
this week recounted his UFO experience with little hesitation.
He said it occurred Aug. 9, 1966, after he returned home from a
psychology class at the former Richmond Professional Institute
(now Virginia Commonwealth University). He was a road sergeant
with Henrico police and was living alone at the time at his farm
on Charles City Road in the county's Glendale area.

At about 10:30 that evening, Mathews said, his German shepherd,
tied to a chain out back, began barking loudly, so he went
outside to investigate. After turning him loose, Mathews said
the dog, which he had acquired only three weeks earlier, ran to
the edge of an adjacent cornfield. He was astonished at what he
saw next.

"I happened to look up and there was that UFO right above the
cornfield, it was just hovering right up above the power lines"
about 200 feet in the air, Mathews said.

The craft, which Mathews described as white and about 30 feet in
diameter, made hardly a sound and emitted no light. The object
was about 4 or 5 feet wide at its widest point, which was in the
middle, he said.

"It was just like the ones you see on TV," Mathews said. "It was
a bright moon that night," so he got a good look at it.

Mathews said he ran back inside his house to get a flashlight,
and when he returned and shined it on the craft, the UFO turned
slightly, emitted a burst of light and "took off like a bullet,
just tremendously fast."

Mathews said he rechained the dog and went to bed after the
craft disappeared, and he got up about 5 the next morning and
went out to check on his dog. He let it run loose for a few
minutes, as was his routine, but the dog didn't come back.

Mathews said he canvassed the area, but the dog was nowhere to
be found. When he returned home, he was startled to find his dog
lying motionless in the middle of the road just beyond his
circular driveway. He was dead.

"He didn't have a mark on him -- no blood, no singe [marks], no
nothing," Mathews recalled. "It looked like he almost was
sleeping. And whatever killed him, they had taken his chain
collar off" and dropped it on the shoulder of the road. "I
couldn't believe how it got off him like it did."

Mathews said his neighborhood in those days was remote and
largely devoid of traffic at that hour. "I didn't see any cars
come through at the time." Mathews said he assumed that his dog
was killed by whoever, or whatever, was in the UFO. "The dog let
me know that they were there," he said.

The dog's death remained a mystery, Mathews said. He buried the
shepherd that morning in a meadow on his property.

Mathews said the city officer who saw a saucerlike object near
the State Fairgrounds a month earlier had urged him to notify
the news media about his encounter, but Mathews resisted.
Mathews was living alone at the time, and there were no other
witnesses, he said.

"I wasn't frightened by it; it was kind of awesome," Mathews
said of the object. "Of course, back in those days I was still
in the military reserve, and it didn't appear to be any type of
military craft at all. Because No. 1, it wouldn't have done what
it did" had it been a known military aircraft.

In December 1996, Mathews told his story to then-Chief Deputy
Patrick Haley and his wife, Brenda, during a Christmas dinner
party at the Seafarers Restaurant in Williamsburg.

"The way he told it was so specific and he was dead serious, he
wasn't joking," said Haley, who now is deputy coordinator of law
enforcement accreditation for the Virginia Department of
Criminal Justice Services. "We talked about this for months."

Haley, who resigned abruptly after about a year as the
department's No. 2 officer because he believed incompetent
leadership and dishonorable management practices by Mathews
created a host of problems with the sheriff's office, recalled
Mathews telling him a slightly different story about the
encounter.

Haley said he remembered Mathews saying the craft had landed and
emitted some kind of strong "pull" that drew him toward it,
although he managed to resist it. Haley also recalled Mathews
saying that his dog, after it was found dead, appeared to have
been burnt or singed.

Mathews, however, said those things didn't happen. And he
shrugged off how his strange encounter may be viewed by the
public.

"Well, I did see it," he said. "I really don't know what it
was."

� 1999, Richmond Newspapers Inc.

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:49:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:48:41 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 06:45:48 +0200 (MET DST)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

  Hello, Henny and List,

I fully agree with your statement, quite welcome after a long
exchange with "new" british ufologist who look rather old hat
to me (thank you also to Jerry Clark for his efforts at
clarification) :

 >As anyone who professes to be a serious UFO investigator should
 >know however, there are also cases in which solid flying
objects >fly at several times the speed of sound, suddenly turn
on a dime >and evade pursuing fighter aircraft. All in such a
manner that >we can see a technology at display that is clearly
not human in >origin. Cases such as these are recorded on radar
and witnessed >by reliable investigators or hundreds of members
from the >public.

 >The question whether we would call these craft ET seems to me
 >rather academic and is in fact a sidepoint. The real point is
 >that there is an intelligence operating in our skies from time
 >to time that is clearly not ours. And those UFOs are only
solved >when we label them as such.

I would add that these mysterious non-human manifestations seem
to be more frequent and more impressive these days, worldwide.

I am not disturbed by the statement that many UFOs may be
reduced to IFOs after careful analysis. What really bothers me
is the statement made, for instance, by Jenny Randles (message
of October 26) :

 >>We can often prove an IFO
 >>to reasonable degrees of certainty. A UFO is simply an
 >>unresolved case and may eventually become an IFO or stay a UFO.
 >>This means ufologists should pay more heed to IFO cases because
 >>they teach us useful lessons.

Of course, IFO can never mean, I suppose, a craft identified as
alien (non-human) ! So, such a statement simply closes the door
to the construction of a solid case for UFOs as alien crafts, if
I understand well the long discourse displaid on this list by
Jenny Randles, Andy Roberts, and David Clarke (I may have missed
other names).

This seems to be the common viewpoint of UFOIN, if we add the
names of Paul Devereux and Tim Matthews. I think this much more
an ideological attitude than a scientific one, in sharp contrast
with people like astronomer Hynek and prof. MacDonald, for
instance.

Now, about the methodology, I have some doubts as well.

Recently, Jenny Randles questioned the French COMETA report, for
its presentation of the famous Lakenheath case (message of July
25) :

 >>There is a good test of the objectivity of the COMETA report
 >>noted above that perhaps those who have read it (as I have not)
 >>can comment upon.

 >>In reviewing the 1956 Lakenheath/Bentwaters case as a good case
 >>what data did they use? The Condon report? The Jim McDonald
 >>assessment? Nick Pope's theories?

<snip>

 >>In l996 I was asked to research, write and
 >>present a documentary on UFOs and the British government for BBC
 >>television. As part of my six months working at the BBC I was
 >>able to use their resources to do some things I never had the
 >>chance (or money) to do before. One included tracking down and
 >>interviewing the RAF crew involved in that 1956 intercept case.
 >>To my amazement I learned that many of the preconceptions about
 >>this case were wrong.

<snip>

 >>So, the question is - as nobody at COMETA asked me for copies of
 >>the filmed interviews I made with the now elderly air crew - did
 >>they find them by some other way? Or did they base their report
 >>on the now somewhat dubious earlier sources?

The answer was the COMETA members were not aware of these new
testimonies. However...

In answer to this message, journalist Bernard Thouanel, who was
the editor of the report published by the magazine VSD, asked
Jenny Randles two days later to give him some material of her
inquiry, which he would publish in a forthcoming issue of VSD.
He gave me a copy of his message with his authorization to
reproduce it, and I think it appropriate time to do it :

"In fact, I am preparing the next special issue of VSD OVNI"
(UFOs) in which I would like to publish the testimony of the RAF
Venom crew members (anonymous or not, at their wish, but I would
prefer to have them fully named and ranked) concerning the
Lakenheath case."

Jenny Randles answered that, no, she could not assist him in his
request for contact with the RAF crew, for several reasons, the
main one being her contract with the BBC. (I have a private copy
of her reply).

Well, Jenny Randles raised that question as a "test of the
objectivity of COMETA". To me it is now a test of her
objectivity : how can you play such a trick, Mrs Randles ?

BTW, Ms. Randles, what is your appraisal, today, of the
Lakenheath case. Still a UFO? Soon to become an IFO?

Gildas Bourdais









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Where's Bill Barry?

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:20:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:50:53 -0400
Subject: Where's Bill Barry?


Dear Colleagues & List Fiends

-- Some time ago I made online inquires on the main UFO lists,
asking if anyone could tell me where I might find and how to
contact Bill Barry, author of 'Ultimate Encounter', the only
book about the Travis Walton case by an author with no ax to
grind about the case.

No luck.  So...  I'm asking again that anyone who may have a
clue as to Barry's whereabouts, etc., please contact me
directly.

Many thanks.

-- Cheers, KARL







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Kim Burrafato <lensman@stardrive.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:20:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:32:35 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >We know who these players are we know who their handlers are.
 >That you are gullible enough to think that a matter this
 >sensitive is not continuously being influenced by such assets is
 >your problem. We will not make it ours.

If you know who these nefarious background players are, then you
owe it to the public and the Ufology community to disclose the
names of these alleged spooks.  Your claim that these "assets"
are hell bent on spinning any rumored  imminent ET-UFO related
"disclosure" towards the direction of 'UFOs as threat,' is just
that, a claim.  You have not backed up your claim  by any solid
evidence of such an intentional influence program.  Just because
you say it is so, doesn't mean that it is.

 >Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
 >disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
 >We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
 >- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
 >organizations and researchers). When the support and means are
 >there to do this right it will be done. Until then, we can be
 >very patient....

I agree that any kind of ET "disclosure be factual, scientific,
evidence driven," but I don't see any reason that it must be
"hopeful," when the reality of the situation may indicate
otherwise. You seem to ignore the growing body of data that
significant numbers of people are apparently being abducted
against their will, and subjected to all manner of frightening
and intrusive alien procedures.  Additionally, according to
information released under FOIA requests, UFOs were reported
hovering over some of our most sensitive nuclear missile bases,
after which missile components were found to have malfunctioned.
I'd say that might be cause for a bit of alarm.  It doesn't take
an intelligence operative to see that there are a number
disturbing aspects to the ET-UFO phenomenon.  This starry-eyed
desire for a "hopeful" disclosure is wish fulfilling fantasy.
Until you present your evidence, you will merely be regarded as
a marginal voice from the fringe.  The time for disclosure is
now -- hopeful or not.  Show us your evidence, or get out of the
political arena and back into the UFO tour business.

Kim Burrafato
ISEP

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Stefan Duncan <swduncan@foto.infi.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:48:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:41:36 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

Put Greer's claims into his million dollar special he was
collecting money for last year would make a good Encounters of a
Third Kind II. He seems to tailor himself to the French man of
that movie, waving handsigns, sending musical notes into the
air, flashing lights, claiming alien intervention to his most
certain looking army death-spawn demise; communicating with
aliens away from a group of others, sending thoughts to ask if
his stomach is upset and with a pointed ET glowing tip finger
heal the stomach ailment; the controversial alleged director of
CIA/Greer meeting that now has been refuted; charging outrageous
seminar prices to learn how to mentally communicate with aliens
and coordinate UFO appearences; making claims of evidence but
never showing; announcing to the government he should be the
spokesperson between the aliens and earth. This reminds me of a
certain computer company that announced it had a piece of ET
hardware that would make computer chips unbelievably fast - but
is never shown.

And what is the most sickening, there are honest, nose to the
ground, hard working people trying to uncover the truth of
UFOs/ETs. They go unnoticed. And then someone appears with
outrageous claims gets the media attention, gets aired for
average intelligent people to hear such inane ego-centric
self-posturing grand illusive UFO/ET b.s. that anything worth
truely investigating will be laughed at.

I ask all UFO news services to please stop running releases of
wild claims. Greer's works belongs in fiction tabloids. A stand
must be made on individuals who make a mockery of sincere UFO
studies. If it is not, true investigations will never be taken
seriously.

I cringe to think that this man, tells our government he seems
himself as the representative of ufologists and that they should
let him stand on top of Mt. Mitchell with the world's biggest
spotlight and welcome mat.

Please, I ask all UFO news services to stop running their news
releases. One major reason for the new services to do so is:
Greer has not allowed interviews that question his
"questionable" claims. We are not to inquire on any of his
statements but to merely publish his news releases and claims.

AUFON has stopped running news releases. And I, Stefan Duncan,
will respond to every Greer news release to the public with a
warning - the man is a fraud.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:36:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:54:17 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

Dear Errol and List,

Recently, I've seen the promised land and it was barren. I've
been to the mountaintop and couldn't see a thing from there.

I have an announcement to make.

As an ex-closet dweller, I can tell you that anyone with truth
or answers has the responsibility to say them to the rest of us
poor suffering slobs. People like me have kept our mouths shut
for years and years and more years. Finally, the time comes for
one to exit that closet, to share and hope to learn, and all I
get is agita, and from those who say what they want to mean but
don't mean what they say.

It's all a crock of horse hockey.

It's what makes this subject such a joke. And some of the people
in this business. And that is part of the problem, people on the
outside are given to understand that it is a business. It aint.
No one makes much money out of it. A few books, an article or
two, a speaking engagement, a buck here, ten there. Nobody gets
rich in the business of UFOs, you just get looked at funny.

I've therefore come to the conclusion that most of this is ego.
People have to see their name in print. Their ideas too.
Degrees? What a crock. What I learned in school was information.
Knowledge comes from applying the information. You can have all
the information in the freaking world, but without the
knowledge, you have nothing. You are stupid. It took me thirty
years of being in the business of doing business to get
knowledge. And unless I get Alzheimer's, I'll go to my grave
still learning. And when I get to the other side, if there's
nuttin there, I am gonna be one, very pissed spirit!

Unfortunately, this business is a very serious and telling
tragedy which is perpetrated on innocent people, children even,
little boys and girls who never heard of Captain Video or his
space cadets, who never heard of Greer or Fromage or even you,
Kannappy. Yet like the old TV program, "You, are there!" We are
too. And very few of you have a clue.

I support truth and the search for it. I decry culpable
ignorance and I abhor those who claim to love and speak truth
and end up with hurt on their consciences. Truth. Say it or shut
up.

Ah, but then, where would this list be with only the truth? God
Himself even, wouldn't be able to contribute a word. None of us
maroons would understand, would we?

I do not deny that Greer has the information. Maybe he does, but
saying he does and not sharing it is a waste of time, money,
bandwidth and breath. For no one will believe until it is
proven.

So why?

Dr. Greer, I don't even know you. In fact, I know very few
people in this business by way of personal introduction, and I
have no opinion of you one way or another, your veracity or your
sincerity. But I do know this, if you've got the facts than
either share them or get off the pot, for you are guilty of that
which you accuse those who hold the truth from us, those same
people whom you claim are doing us harm with untruth and
disinformation.

So if you don't publish it, it's OK. But if you do, understand
all who read this, I ain't the only bugger out here in the
wilderness screaming with real pain. And when I hear more
horsehockey, it hurts me much more. Then I gotta start with my
medication again. And neither Gripple nor thorazine stops the
pain. Nothing will make it go away but truth. And so far, I
ain't heard it. There is a temporary analgesic though...

What does ease the pain, not just for me, but for some other of
the crazies out there, for a while at least, is a rant or two.
Over the teeth and thru my gummies, look out dummies, here it
commies..... (Eat your heart out Lehmburg) ...

 >>If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >>public and end the secrecy himself. He doesn't have to wait for
 >>Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >>industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >>UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >>suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >>witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >>position that sounds more credible everyday.

 >On the contrary, we are prepared to come forward immediately as
 >soon as common sense strategic plans can be actuated.

Common sense? By whom? Very uncommon here-a-bouts....

 >This have
 >been described publicly and in writing for a couple of years.

I'm a newcomer on the scene. Perhaps you may point me in the
correct direction? A vector must have not only magnitude, but
direction. Otherwise it's an arrow of energy (or hot air)
without a place to point.

You say, in essence.... "Yes, they are real, our government(s)
know about them, we know they know, we know who they are and
what they know, they know we know (etc.) ..." and in the same
breath you say, "Nya, nya, but we aren't telling.... !"

Would have been believable if you said it when you were able to
prove it.

 >Those of you who are naive enough to believe that you simply
 >call a press conference and it is a 'done deal' are badly
 >misinformed.

Ya, we know, too much at stake. Panic, loss of faith in the
governments of the earth, people with eyeballs bulging at the
very thought of killing the infidels and or the believers and or
the unbelievers and, etc.... Good, the place is too damned
overpoopulated anyway. Aint even enough land for cemeteries.

 >If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
 >civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
 >carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
 >to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
 >the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.

How long have you had this information. Obviously not long
enough to plan a very well done and careful disclosure. Uh, when
will you be ready? Any estimate? A week? A year? When hell
freezes over? How about July 4th?

 >We know who these players are we know who their handlers are.
 >That you are gullible enough to think that a matter this
 >sensitive is not continously being influenced by such assets is
 >your problem. We will not make it ours.

It's your problem too pal, especially since you've made it ours.
You're the one with the Motts. You said the words. We didn't
notice anyone squeezing your neck until you talked or choked to
death.

 >Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
 >disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
 >We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
 >- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the
 >UFO organizations and researchers). When the support and
 >means are there to do this right it will be done. Until then,
 >we can be very patient....

Well, maybe you can be very patient. But there are thousands of
us out here in the ether who are living proof that bullshit
walks and money talks. Of course, there are those occasions when
bullshit walks patently patiently. And sometimes, it talks.

But there is hope. The BS sometimes, (rarely, but sometimes)
has something to say. Like, "Hey, will somebody please get me
outa here? I stink!"

 >Steven M. Greer M.D.
 >CSETI Director

Jim Mortellaro, Ph.D. MBA








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:40:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 19:00:19 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.  I think you're
 >wrong,

Well at least we have established that I am entitled to have an
opinion, and that opinion is a well-informed one rather than the
"empty posturing" you would prefer to regard it as.

As to whether I am wrong, time will show that I am right.

But because so many people pass through ufology and stay only a
little while, I fear we will have to fight this tiresome battle
many more times in the future.

 >yours is not a conclusion other smart, hard-
 >working investigators, including those trained in the physical
 >sciences (McDonald, Hynek, Maccabee, Sturrock, et al.,
 >come to mind), have come to.  Perhaps your training as a
 >folklorist has given you too narrow a focus.

I've no doubt thosf those "trained in the physical sciences"
have arrived at different conclusions, because they are studying
a very narrow aspect of the subject themselves.

And you have unwittingly hit the nail on the head - it is
precisely because the physical sciences are so "narrow" in
themselves that the disciplines I have cited are more suited to
this subject.

You cannot study ufology as you would study the workings of a
automobile engine; ufology is a human science, it is bound up in
the beliefs and psychology of human beings.

You do not employ astronomers and optical physicists to study
how myth is created, and how the human brain perceives and
interprets anomalous phenomena, One would have thought this
concept would be obvious to someone as smart as Jerry Clark.

You can talk all you like about "astrobiology" and unprovable
arguments about the possibility of life in outer space.

The arguments of the SETI crowd might have some validity, but
they have absolutely no connection with some funny light someone
saw over Arkansas the other night.

The facts are we have no UFOs or aliens for your "physical
scientists" to study.

All we have are human beings, their claims and their beliefs -
and that is why only the human sciences, and especially those
which are cross-disciplinary (anthropology, folklore, sociology)
are of any use in this area.

And that's my point - you don't hire an optical physicist to
study religious mythology.


 >>Add to that a sound knowledge of folklore and cultural belief
 >>which led to a me being awarded a PhD - described by a panel of
 >>academics as "a valuable contribution to knowledge" - and I feel
 >>I am well qualified to comment, and certainly as qualified as
 >>Jerome Clark.

 >But not as well qualified as the physical scientists who have
 >worked on specific cases.

I disagree. All cases are based upon narratives produced by
human beings, the eyewitnesses, describing events which are to
all intents and purposes "supernatural" in the traditional
sense. Therefore they are as much open to study by the
folklorist as to the scientists you cite.

 >You can have all the folklore
 >knowledge in the world, and none of it is going to help you
 >explain the McMinnville photo, the RB-47 case, Socorro, or any
 >of the other classic UFO incidents on which the case for the
 >reality of UFOs as extraordinary unknowns rests.  I have no
 >doubt that your Ph.D. amounts to "a valuable contribution to
 >knowledge" -- you're a bright, interesting guy.  All I am saying
 >is that it doesn't help you explain the most puzzling UFO cases.

Yeah but what about all the other "classic" cases which have
since been explained: i.e. the Alexander Hamilton 1897 "calf-
napping", Aurora crash,  the Berwyn Mountains events, dare I
mention Sheffield incident, etc etc. They might have been
"difficult" to explain from a purely folklore perspective at
first sight, but they undoubtedly generated rumour and folklore,
whatever their explanation. Some, like the 1897 hoax, continue
to do so.

That is precisely why I claim UFOs are modern folklore - none of
these cases are "isolated" occurrences, removed from the culture
that spawned them, or from other "unexplained" UFO events.

Any kind of strange light in the sky is now habitually tagged as
a UFO equals ET craft by the media and the public, whatever its
explanation. My point again: UFOs are modern folklore. So I
would maintain that ALL of the cases you cite would benefit from
re-interpretation in the way I have dicussed.

 >>Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >>that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >>open-minded academics.

 >I note no physical scientists among them.  And those
 >sociologists, folklorists, psychologists, and historians -- do
 >they know anything about UFOs except that they don't exist?  And
 >what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
 >photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
 >an answer: say, just about nothing?

If there existed any conclusive photographic or instrumental
evidence to prove the existence of ET UFOs we would not be
having this discussion, so you have killed your own argument.

You cannot study something for which there is no physical
evidence. Once again, back to my earlier argument, the only way
you can do so is via the humanities, and via studying the
percipients themselves. Physical scientists are useless in this
context.

 >>As for "UFO phenomenon or the ETH", it's just a theory and
 >>despite your 'special pleading' it has not more evidence to back
 >>it up than any other. I think I will stick with the idea that
 >>the fairy folk are the flying saucer pilots, after all two can
 >>play at wearing cultural blinkers if that's the game we're
 >>playing.

 >Interesting argument for a proclamation without supporting
 >evidence.  For a insightful discussion of the limitations of
 >folklore as an approach to UFO study, I urge listfolk to read
 >"Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3 (new
 >series, 1991): 1-57.  The author, interestingly, is Thomas E.
 >Bullard, who also holds a Ph.D. in folklore from Indiana
 >University, which houses one of the world's best esteemed
 >folklore departments.

I have great respect for Dr Bullard, but his arguments are not
shared by any of the eminent folklorists of whom I am
acquainted. Among these I can point to the highly respected
Professor J.D.A. Widdowson, my PhD supervisor, who trained under
one of the mentors of modern folklore study, Herbert Halpert, at
the University of Newfoundland.

Professor Widdowson and the vast majority of folklorists in this
country with whom I am in regular contact share my views, indeed
I have been invited to present a lecture on UFOs as modern
folklore at the Folklore Society AGM next year.

And as for books, I would recommend anyone interested should
check out UFOs and Alien Contact by sociologist Robert
Bartholemew (James Cook University, North Queensland) and
psychologist George Howard (University of Notre Dame),
Prometheus Books, New York, 1998, who effectively deconstruct
the whole UFO myth in a superbly referenced volume.

For a folklore slant on modern UFO narrative, you can't do
better than Barbara Rieti's study of the fairy world of
Newfoundland in Strange Terrain (Memorial University,
Newfoundland, 1991).

So, although Jerry Clark likes to champion the views of Dr
Bullard, his conclusions are much more measured than Jerry would
have us believe, and are certainly not typical of folklore
scholarship in general.

And as for anthropologists, I dread to think what they would
make of Jerome Clark's conclusions!

 >>So my opinions are not welcome on this list?

 >Of course they are.  I get the impression, though, that dissent
 >from them isn't.

That's precisely the impression I got from your postings, so ditto.

 >>Presumably the "empty posturing" of the ETH believers is OK
 >>then... I don't see Jerry objecting as they all happily slap
 >>each other on the back, cracking jokes about  pelicanists and
 >>debunkers along the way. Sounds to me like a spot of intolerance
 >>is creeping in. Opinions are fine, as long as they are ones
 >>Jerry agrees with.

 >Huh? Should I apologize for presuming to disagree with you? Are
 >we to believe your words are carved on stone and carried down
 >from the mountaintop?

Nice thought, but sounds a lot of effort to go to when we can
tap away sending email messages.

Should I too apologise for disagreeing with you, or can we agree
to disagree?

 >Seriously: I did not mean to imply -- as surely you should have
 >known based on our past interaction -- that I deem nothing you
 >say of worth or interest in UFO discussion.  To the contrary,
 >you have much to contribute, and I've praised, both privately
 >and publicly, at least one of your investigations, which was a
 >model of thoroughness and sound analysis, to all available
 >appearances.

Fair enough then.


 >It was just a particularly broad, indefensible
 >statement that I am taking issue with.  As far as I can tell,
 >you yourself are backing away from it a little. And that does
 >you credit.

I've never had any problem with seeing another point of view;
and I would certainly never go to the extreme of claiming I know
all the answers, and can explain every case and rule out ET
visitors completely.

No one can make such sweeping statements as this, and I don't
believe any of my colleagues have.

We are simply approaching the subject in a sensible, analytical
way as any bona fide scientist *should* approach data.

But it seems doing it this way you just can't win, on the one
side you get the ridicule of your peers for having anything to
do with a subject that most people believe is completely staffed
by nutcases, and then on the other side you are assailed by the
ET believers as heretics and debunkers.

Caught in the crossfire, at the end of the day I have come to
the conclusion that if both extremes of opinion don't like us,
then we *must* be doing something right.

Thanks for an interesting and stimulating debate anyhow!

All best wishes,

Dave Clarke


"The Skeptick doth neither affirm, neither denie any position;
but doubteth of it."

-Sir Walter Raleigh.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                 Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy

From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:51:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 19:13:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:45:45 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 09:26:20
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Alien Contact Would Ignite Media Frenzy

 >Interestingly I suspect that all the so called astronomers who
 >have belittled UFOs, would suddenly "come around" and be
 >claiming that they knew all the time UFOs were real; how it was
 >somebody else in the astronomical community who was saying they
 >were not etc etc.

 >In that said initial media frenzy, the media would be
 >interviewing so called PHd experts from various universitys as
 >well.  I suspect that the main stream UFOlogists who have
 >actually been studying UFOs for years would be regulated to a 5
 >second sound bite while the astronomical and PHd experts would
 >have their faces all over the cameras.

 >After that nobody and I mean nobody (well perhaps Phil Klass)
 >would claim to have ever been skeptical about the existance of
 >UFOs/life elsewhere, although we would hear all the storys about
 >how these same skeptics sincerely believed but until now, the
 >evidence wasn't available blah blah.

 >Cheers,
 >Robert

There is a way to prevent this not unlikely outcome.  The UFO/ET
research/activist world has got to come to together in broad
based coalitions around designated projects and build as large a
political front as possible.  There are hundreds of
organizations, websites, email lists, and UFO/ET media outlets
representing millions of interested public.

Approach that public, enlarge it, and it will be much more
difficult for the mainstream press, the government and the newly
enlightened grant greedy university Ph.Ds to disregard ufology's
past work and future interests.

Steve Bassett








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:45:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 19:26:01 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

Robert writes:

 >>If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >>public and end the secrecy himself. He doesn't have to wait for
 >>Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >>industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >>UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >>suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >>witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >>position that sounds more credible everyday.

Hi Robert, Dr Greer, All,

Rob, I couldn't agree with you more if we were both standing in
the same shoes! I have asked Dr Greer _repeatedly_ to
substantiate some of the truly 'wild/outrageous' claims he has
made over the years. I have also taken offense at the fact that
he has 'presumed' to _designate himself_ 'our' representative
among 'our' elected officials in Washington DC! Balls!

This America doc. You want to "represent" me? Then you need my
_vote_! You need _consensus_. Otherwise, you are just what you
are, a 'self-anointed' joke. But I digress.

Dr Greer makes public statements such as: "98% of all reported
UFO abductions are the result of 'covert US military/government'
operations."

Well Mr Greer, if your claims are true, then what is needed is
for every able bodied man and woman to pick up a gun and march
on Washington immediately! All of those responsible should be
strung up in the trees -along with those who protect them- on
the lawn of the Capitol Building. You say in your note to
Robert; " we can be very patient...." Can "we" afford to be
"patient" doc? Can we?

Like Dick Cavett Dr Greer is fond of 'name dropping' and using
'hip insider buzzwords' such as the following:

a. "intel. cut-outs" - What the hell are, "intel. cut-outs"?
is that the latest and greatest 'jargon' in the conspiracy
community? I don't 'indulge' doc, you'll have to explain those
references for 'simple folk' like myself and the rest of the
"Great Unwashed."

b. "players" - you've been hanging out in DC too long doc!

c. "handlers" - Again, you've been hanging out in DC way too
much!

Doc, I've said it before and I'll say it again; You cannot
elect yourself the 'representative of the people,' or ufology
and appear in front of _our_ elected officials _without our (the
rest of us) consent!_

You've never really 'grokked' that have you? Like many other
things you choose to view it as an attack on your person, or the
ramblings of "naive" and "gullible" people. The condescending
tone you've chosen in your response to Rob shows that you don't.

As demonstrated in the following:

1. "Those of you who are naive enough to believe..."

2. "That you are gullible enough to think that..."

And the much 'broader' and 'broad brushed'...

3. "We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion'
paranoid-fest (besides thats been done already by the media
and the UFO organizations and researchers)."

In quote #1 and #2 you call Robert (us) naive and gullible. In
example #3 you whip out the shotgun and blast _every_ UFO
organisation and researcher with the same color. What an ego!

Get help doc.

Very few people take you seriously. Much less, as seriously as
you seem to take yourself.

Sincerely,

John Velez

________________________________________________
                  jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                                Re: Get Real

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:49:22 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:42:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Real


 >Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:28:52 -0500
 >From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Get Real
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:26:19 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Get Real

 >>Do you by any chance happen to have a dog?

 >So, you claim to see a "black wet nose" in a scanned image and
 >ask if I have a dog.  Mmmm, I wonder where this is leading?.
 >Good research there, Dave.  I have three cats.  Now tell me you
 >see three cat butts in the picture too.  Oh, and don't forget
 >the goldfish.  See any fish heads in the picture?  Really
 >scraping the bottom of the barrel on this one, Dave.  By the
 >way, do you wear glasses?  Do you suffer from periodic delusion
 >or hallucinations?  Do you perhaps use a computer screen that
 >may have dirt on it in the shape of a "black wet nose"?   Hey,
 >this is a fun game!  Let's play some more!

Yes all very amusing Amy you don't seem to be able to answer the
simplest questions, I asked if you have a dog?

A simple yes or no answer would have done, I don't recall asking
about fish or cats bottoms, or as you people call it 'butts'.

 >>Verbal accounts but nothing else to back it up.

 >And what do _you_ have to back up your claims?

I have never made any claims!

 >>Therefore how can I let anyone know that I actually contacted
 >>anyone without everyone else knowing who I contacted?

 >Perhaps we can think of a way to solve this.

Perhaps not, judging by the evidence presented I don't see why I
should spend any more time on this.

I hope your chosen line of research will turn up something
interesting one day.

Until then, goodbye for now.

Dave.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                              Filer's Files #43

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 17:49:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:55:56 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #43


Filer's Files #43 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
October 28, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.

THIS WEEKS FILES COVER NEW IMPORTANT EVIDENCE ON THE ROSWELL CRASH AND
SEVERAL IMPORTANT NEW SIGHTINGS.

NEIL ARMSTRONG SAYS LIFE IS OUT THERE SOMEWHERE

CAPE CANAVERAL -- The first human to set foot on a place beyond Earth found
an airless, waterless, lifeless world.  Nevertheless, Neil Armstrong is
convinced life thrives elsewhere in the cosmos.  "We have no proof," said
Armstrong, who stepped onto the moon 30 years ago. "But if we extrapolate,
based on the best information we have available to us, we have to come to the
conclusion that other life probably exists out there and perhaps in many
places."  Thanks to Todd  Halvorson of Florida Today

MASSACHUSETTS TRIANGLES

BROOKFIELD - Morgan Clements Director of WWUFORC reports that a witness
observed a Flying Triangle craft on October 22, 1999.  The witness stated, "
I have seen these triangle aircraft several times."  I was just walking home
in the woods behind where I live from scouting deer for the upcoming hunting
season.  It was getting pretty dark, so I was in a hurry and got tired
walking up the final hill.  I stopped to take a quick breather at 7:30 PM.
When all of a sudden one then two, three and then four Flying Triangle craft
went right by me in the bottom of the small valley.  They were totally silent
and appeared to be sneaking through the valley.  They were triangular in
shape and about 75 feet long and as wide.  There were no outside lights, but
being so close to them I could tell there was lighting inside.  I was scared!
  All of a sudden three large noisy planes came screaming by as if they were
chasing the triangles.  This is the second night I've seen these craft. I
thought I saw two craft the weeks before, but they caught me off guard.  I
caught them going over the ridge, but was not quite sure what I'd seen.
Morgan Clements  Director,  World Wide UFO Reporting Center
www.ufosightings.net  uforeports@aol.com.

NEW JERSEY

DOVER - On October 23, 1999, Anjali Shalit was driving west on Route 10
towards Dover.  Anjali wrote, " In the Parsippany area I noticed an extremely
bright light which appeared to be stationary in the sky at 10:10 PM."  I
thought it might be a plane heading directly towards me and looked for
blinking lights.  I saw, very faintly, a blinking blue light to (my) left
near the object.  I'm not sure there was one on the right.  There was almost
a full moon and the light was perhaps between a quarter and a third of the
size of the moon.  It was not quite as big as the end of my thumb at arm's
length.  It was much brighter than any star or planet I've seen in the sky,
and certainly much closer and stationary as I drove on.  I had the light in
view for about 5 minutes and when I looked again, there were two.  A second
light, appeared horizontally across from the first.  I saw no small blue
blinking light associated with the second light.  The second light was maybe
half way up to my elbow from the tips of my fingers.  The luminosity of both
lights appeared identical.  Again, there appeared to be no movement.  I think
I must have watched them for about ten minutes and then they disappeared.
Thanks to Anjali Shalit, STARBROOK@prodigy.net.

FLORIDA TRIANGLE WITH BLUE IONIZATION NEAR GULF BREEZE

PENSACOLA BEACH � On October 9, 1999, the witnesses were Red fishing in
Pensacola Pass when a strangely configured craft came into view over Fort
Pickens State Park at an altitude of 200 feet at a quarter of a mile.  The
witnesses are an ex-USAF Security Policeman and a retired US Army Chopper
pilot presently a city police officer.  The UFO was traveling west over the
Gulf of Mexico in a Zig Zag fashion at 7:57 PM.  The craft flew slow 100 to
300 knots sliding south and back to north in a continuing forward motion.
The craft moved in a Z pattern erratic with no sound. It seemed to be
suspended in flight at various positions.  The craft was silent with high
intensity blue arcing lights that fluctuated around the entire craft.  These
lights resembled electrical charges coming off an alternator's brushes.
Further observation revealed three larger lights in a triangle configuration
dimly lit with variable output glowing blue to pale yellow.  The UFO appeared
triangular in shape but this might be a deception as skin structure could not
be seen.  The FM radio receiver suffered extreme static during event.  The
craft changed locations in split seconds covering distances of approximately
half a mile to over a two miles instantaneously. At least four times it
hovered for 30 seconds with longest delay of about a minute and a half over
the southwestern boundary of Pensacola Naval Air Station.  One Aircraft was
launched from Sherman Field about three minutes into event but, seemed
unaware of the UFO and turned away in an easterly direction.  When the UFO
was first observed a trailing sound of a helicopter could be heard but never
could be observed.  The UFO left the area after fifteen minutes at 8:12 PM
local time moving west along the coast. One witness suffered from nausea for
about 10 minutes but the other was fine.  "I have never seen a conventional
craft operate in this manner nor has my friend."  Thanks to Peter Davenport,
UFO Reporting Center, http://www.UFOcenter.com

WISCONSIN ORBS OVER LAKE SUPERIOR

ASHLAND - On October 25, 1999, Jessica, 21 states, "I was walking my dog at
6:00 PM, and saw three orbs hovering over Lake Superior for about three
minutes."  "They flew off over the hills across the bay."  Thanks to: Morgan
Clements Director, World Wide UFO Reporting Center www.ufosightings.net.

OKLAHOMA DISC

HITCHCOCK -- Shelley Ritter writes: "My husband, our two children and I went
out target practicing, three miles west of Hitchcock on October 24, 1999.  At
6:45 PM, we noticed a jet with contrails.  Then all of a sudden out of
nowhere appeared a shiny round metallic object that was visible for about 45
seconds, it disappeared for about 30 seconds and then reappeared for another
45 seconds.  The object was round, shiny, and extremely bright.  It was about
3 to 5 miles away and about the size of a BB held out at arm's length.  We
thought that it was unusually strange that the sun was setting behind it, but
it was still shiny towards us, instead of having a shadow.  Thanks to Shelley
Ritter.

NEW MEXICO

SANTA FE - On October 3, 1999, My girlfriend her friend and I were sitting in
the hot tub enjoying the sunrise at 6:00 AM, when both of us saw a bright
light moving very fast from south to north.  It seemed to be around 3,000
feet t above ground and was not blinking like a plane.  It was going north
much faster than any jet.  It only took about 25 seconds to go from horizon
to horizon.  Thanks to Morgan Clements Director, WWUFORC at
www.ufosightings.net.

COLORADO ORBS

SAN JUAN MOUNTAINS -- Michael Curta State Director of Colorado MUFON reports
that Armando had a visual sighting in Ouray and San Miguel County on October
10, 1999.  Armando states, "At 7:05 PM, I was hiking along a ridge, in a
southerly route after sunset to return to camp.  I heard what I thought was a
whoosh, whoosh, whoosh, of a bird flying overhead.  I looked up and saw what
I first thought was a satellite, but the light would suddenly vary it's
speed, not traveling at a constant rate.  Also, I realized it was nearer to
the mountains, which were still quite visible.  As the point of light
approached the horizon line, I figured the reflection would disappear, and it
did, in two to three seconds, The light traveled across the entire mountain
range from Whitehouse  Mt. to Mt. Sneffels.  I estimate it was traveling
between 10 to 40 miles per second.  Less than ten minutes later two military
aircraft (my assumption) were flying in a similar course, parallel to each
other, 50 miles apart at an altitude too low for commercial planes in a
mountainous region.  Thanks to Michael Curta ufomedic@net1comm.com  and
Arechiga a_arechiga@hotmail.com

PILOTS SPOT HUGE FLYING TRIANGLE

Initial reports indicate an apparently very large triangle was seen by two
commercial jets on October 26, 1999, over Western US.  The planes were 100
miles from each other, and the object passed between them, and overtaking
them, headed east.  Both pilots reported that the object was "huge.  It was
as big as their fists held at arm's length.  Thanks to: Peter B. Davenport,
Director National UFO Reporting Center PO Box 45623 University Station
Seattle, WA 98145 director@ufocenter.com http://www.UFOcenter.com

NEIL MORRIS FINDS NEW EVIDENCE OF A CRASH AT ROSWELL

On July 7, 1947, Colonel Blanchard, Commander of the 509th Bomb Wing at
Roswell announced the Army had recovered a flying saucer and it was being
sent to Fort Worth, Texas.  On July 8, 1947, some debris from the alleged
saucer was flown from Roswell to Fort Worth aboard an aircraft and met by
Col. Thomas DuBose.  He carried the debris to 8th Air Force Commander,
General Roger Ramey's office.  J. Bond Johnson a photographer for the Fort
Worth Star Telegram was sent to General Ramey's office to photograph the
debris.  When J. Bond Johnson entered the General's office he was met by Col.
DuBose who suggested that he unwrap the debris, while DuBose looked for the
General.  Bond spread the debris out on the floor to set up his photo
session.  Later the General arrived holding a message.  Photographs were
taken of General Ramey, Col. DuBose and Intelligence Officer Major Marcel
with the debris.  These photographs are virtually the only public evidence
that remains of the debris.  They were used throughout the Air Force's
reports and explanations as proof that the debris was a Mogul balloon and a
kite like RAWIN radar reflector.  One glimpse at the photographs has
convinced many the debris was paper covered with thin metallic sheets of foil
and a few sticks of balsa wood that was a RAWIN reflector.

RPIT Director and now retired Colonel J. Bond Johnson writes: "Almost fifty
years later the international Roswell Photo Interpretation Team (RPIT) has
undertaken to evaluate these photographs."  Neil Morris, senior photo
interpretation specialist and a veteran technical staff member of the
Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Manchester in
England, is an original member of the RPIT group.  Morris and the RPIT group
for more than a year have carefully compared every part described in detailed
blueprints of the MOGUL and RAWIN devices with Roswell debris pieces
displayed and photographed.  The RPIT members have been unable to associate
any of the pieces examined through the use of modern computer enhancement
techniques with any parts expected to be found in a MOGUL/RAWIN crash.
Morris and with others have made some amazing discoveries.  They have
determined that key parts of the debris contains hieroglyphic like writing.
What originally was reported to be thin, paperbacked foil and solid wooden
sticks -- such as might be found in a MOGUL/RAWIN train -- actually appears
to be thick, massive sheeting attached to carefully formed and drilled hollow
beams.  The beams are covered with very unusual glyphs, which are undergoing
further examination.  Neil Morris states "I realize some people have
concluded that the RPIT project is nothing more than a wild goose chase
reading symbols into "smudge" marks etc. But I hope you will take the time to
go to the RPIT web sites to see some of the new discoveries."  Some of the
debris looks like a saw cut through thick aluminum.  This does not look like
any part of a Mogul Balloon train.  It looks like a saw cut or fracture in
the metal.  I live in the Northwest of Britain in the area that gave rise to
the "Industrial Revolution," the builders of the 18/19th century where "cast
iron" was often used.  It has a grainy, crystalline structure, when subjected
to high impact as from a demolition hammer it gives just this brittle type of
fractured edge.  I'm not for one-second saying this is cast iron, I'm just
suggesting whatever it is might have similar properties of structure, e.g.,
tough, crystalline almost ceramic like, but when pushed beyond it's limits
brittle, like smashed pottery.  Some of these type of fractures can also be
observed on the broken ends of some of the "sticks."  I also wonder if this
thick material is all solid, if you check the thickness around some of the
edges you can see that it varies, thinning out in areas which seem to have
sustained additional damage.  Shadows cast onto the edges also seem to hint
that the surfaces of the edges are not all flat, but sometimes slightly
"hollowed out" as though an inner "softer" core material might have been
eroded by whatever process generated the initial fracture damage.  I'm left
with the conclusion that this _is_ a large piece of 1/2 inch thick material
which is totally at odds with the "usual" explanations for the debris.
Morris states, "I'm not saying it's ET at this point, but as sure as hell
it's not part of a Mogul balloon train!"  But_ When numerous details within
these images fail to match the official blueprints of the ML307a- radar
reflector nominated by the USAF as being identified as the cause of the
wreckage within these images, I start to smell a rat.  I have footage of the
MOGUL launches showing the train configuration, I have details of the
equipment packages and instruments they carried, I see none of this in the
images, I therefore conclude, in my opinion, this is _not_ MOGUL debris.
Thanks to: Neil Morris and RPIT Project Director James Bond Johnson,

Editor's Note: At first glance I'll admit the debris looks like a RAWIN radar
reflector.  However, the new findings of the fracture damage to thick metal
infers a strong impact with the ground.  Several military witnesses describe
a large and long crash site that matches this finding.  Again the damage to
the debris indicates something crashed at high speed or in a free fall from a
high altitude.  This discovery tends to rule out a Mogul balloon train that
normally settles to Earth comparatively gently.  These structures only
fracture with an explosion or from a high speed impact.  These photographs
are evidence that tends to prove something other that a MOGUL RAWIN kite like
device is in the photographs. If Neil's analysis is correct its apparent
thick half inch beams were not used in the Mogul according to the Army Air
Force's own specifications.  I congratulate Neil Morris and members of the
RPIT team for their findings.  This debris is much more likely to be part of
some type of a craft, but certainly not part of the Mogul balloon.  The RPIT
discoveries are at http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/.  and
http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm

MORE INDICATIONS A CRAFT CRASHED AT ROSWELL

Excellent researcher Wendy Connors of Project Sign has obtained a taped
interview with Colonel Andrew Hemstreet, that states Alfred Loedding was sent
to Roswell, and was the only one at T-2 to know the whole story.  In 1947,
T-2's job was to acquire, collect, analyze and produce foreign aerospace
scientific intelligence for the Army Air Force.  It later became the Foreign
Technology Division.  Civilian aeronautical engineer Loedding was an expert
in such areas as Vertical Takeoff aircraft, the hydro bomb, rockets/fuel and
low aspect ratio aircraft.  Documents show Colonel Howard McCoy sent Loedding
to the Pentagon as the first liaison between T-2 Intelligence and the AF
Office of Intelligence (AFOIN).  This was done in July 1947 because General
McDonald wanted someone to work with Dr. Charles Carroll in setting up the
preliminary outline for a formal and parallel project to investigate the
"flying disc" phenomenon that was rapidly developing.  Loedding's expertise
was necessary because at the time the "boys at the Pentagon" were of the
opinion that the discs were advanced technology from Russia and invading US
airspace.  Loedding wouldn't tell any of them what he knew, even though the
Roswell incident was a big topic of conversation with the T-2 boys and
Loedding had been sent there.  Wendy says, "I had nowhere to go with this
statement since it was only his memory and really no way to back it up."
Then, from out of nowhere, during a discussion with a new source who knew
Loedding well (worked next to him for years), stated that Loedding was not
the one ordered to Roswell at the time of the incident.  (This source did not
know of Hemstreet's admission at the time because neither of us told him.)  I
was given the name of this person.  The Roswell crash is not a dead issue?
In my mind, it certainly should be maintained as a valid exercise in
Ufological research because at least one person from T-2 was ordered to go to
Roswell by Colonel McCoy.  Two separate confirmations by two different people
who did not know what the other had said.

Wendy says, "Our research is on-going.  Many yelling for the end of the
Roswell research don't have a clue to the reality of actual research."  They
sold out way too short when there are questions that still need answers.  I
do understand the simple concept that until enough documentation or
circumstantial evidence is presented the Mogul theory, or any other theory
can and should be questioned.  Theories exist and efforts should be to prove
their validity.  It is important that those researchers, so inclined, be
allowed to continue their work.  Those who call themselves researchers who
have not either been to Roswell, submitted FOIA's or even talked personally
to some of the people involved, have no valid opinion except their own belief
system or what they gleen from the work of others.  Nothing more.  I don't
think it was a flying saucer that crashed, but something damn well important
happened and that exceeded the secrecy of a balloon laying tattered on the
ground.  Thanks to: Wendy Conners.

Editor's Note: Congratulations to Wendy on some great research.  It seems
rather doubtful that Colonel McCoy would send aeronautical engineer Loedding
from Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio to Roswell, New Mexico to investigate a Mogul
Balloon. The balloon train was not classified, only its mission to listen for
Soviet nuclear explosions was classified.  T-2 personnel were not balloon
experts, their expertise was aircraft.  Its reasonable to assume that
Loedding flew to Roswell saw the wreckage and flew to the Pentagon to brief
his findings to the general staff.  He was then appointed key man for further
technical study of flying discs.  Loedding later patented a disc shaped
aircraft that is capable of flight.  It seems logical that his patent was
based on what he saw at Roswell.

THE GREAT UFO/ET AUTUMN FESTIVAL will be held at the Days Inn, Bordentown, NJ
by Pat Marcattilio on October 30 and 31.  Speakers include Antonio Huneeus,
Steven Basset, Peter Robins, Wendelle Stevens, myself and many others.  Call
(609) 631-8955 for reservations.

RECOGNIZING ABDUCTION EXPERIENCES PROGRAM October 30th in Sedona, Arizona
featuring Derrel Sims with Robert Dean and Dr. Ruth Mckinley-Hover Conference
begins at 10 AM and ends at 10 PM Lunch is included. Learn the signs and
symptoms of having been abducted. Explore both human and alien motives behind
the experience. Develop healing and Spiritual techniques for coping and
expanding the human potential. By Derrel Sims, see Dr. Chet Snow's website
at: http://people.delphi.com/sedonaconf

  BEFORE YOU BUY OR SELL A HOME SEE MY FREE REPORT --
All real estate agents are not the same?  Some real estate agents or sales
representatives are part timers and inexperienced.  Others are experts with
an excellent experience and capabilities.  When you are selling or buying
your home, you need to make sure you have the best real estate agent working
for you before you make any important financial decisions on one your biggest
investments!  Remember, the majority of people do not know the right
questions to ask, and what pit falls can cause major problems.  Picking the
right real estate agent can be a wonderful experience, and picking the wrong
one can be a big mistake that can waste your time and cost you thousands!
Find out, "What you need to understand before hiring any real estate agent!"
These are the questions that many agents do not want you to ask.  Learn how
you can obtain the best real estate agent for your needs.  To get a free copy
of this report, just call (609) 654-0020 or e-mail us at Majorstar@aol.com.
We can also help you with your own or corporate Worldwide Relocation to
Australia, Benelux, Canada, Cayman Islands, England, France, Guam, Hong Kong,
Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Papua New Guinea,
Philippines, Puerto Rico, and all 50 states of the United States.  We also
have help with associates that speak languages other than their native tongue.

US GOVERNMENT UFO PROOF RELEASED: Audio tapes of a genuine UFO Alert at
Edwards Air Force base and studied by the Foreign Technology Division at
Wright Patterson Air Force Base, are now available for distribution to the
public.  Lunar Astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell was at Edwards the night the UFO
chase occurred.  The 6th person to walk on the moon said, "The night it
happened I investigated it myself and this was a real event."  Sam Sherman's
audio documentary tape called THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE ENCOUNTER on the
night of October 7, 1965, uses the actual voice recordings provided by the
Air Force.  During this event 12 high tech luminous UFOs invade secure air
space and came down low over the runways at Edwards AFB.  Tower operator Sgt.
Chuck Sorrels spotted them and notified the Air Defense Command.  Sgt.
Sorrels is heard on the original tapes and in a new segment where he verifies
the event as it is heard on the archival recordings.  The UFOs are described
and a decision is made to launch F-106 fighter interceptors.  You are there
for an important part of UFO history.  Hear it for yourself, it's the best
UFO tape ever made.  Tape cost is $14.95 each plus $2.00 for shipping --
total $16.95 --(for overseas orders-out of US - add $6.00 shipping cost --
total -- $20.95) you can send either a personal check or money order to:
Independent International Pictures Corp, Box 565, Dept. GF, Old Bridge, New
Jersey 08857.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe
by contacting  Mufon@aol.com.  Filer's Files Copyright 1999 by George A.
Filer, all rights reserved.  Readers may post items from the Files on their
Websites provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and
list the date of issue that the item appeared.  Send your letters to me at
Majorstar@aol.com.  If you wish to keep your name confidential please so
state.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                             Cali/Colombia 1976

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:17:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 23:21:41 -0400
Subject: Cali/Colombia 1976


Dear Friends,

This is a request for help to get more information about a
strange event that happend in Cali /Colombia in 1976.

"We go onboard a UFO" said Conchita Alvarez de Hoyos. She left
her family and hometown together with four other individuals and
never came back.

The story was published in the newspaper EL PAIS on June 17,
1976. It was written that on Tuesday before this date the five
members of the center for extraterrestrial studies (CIREX) left
the town of Cali at five o'clock a.m. and headed towards the
Chisto-Ray mountain. They expected to meet a UFO there to start
for a "special mission".

"We do not know when we'll come back. Wish us luck", she said to
her parents minutes before Mrs. de Hoyos left them.

Mrs. de Hoyos was an excellent Parapschologist and
worked/studied at the University of Cali (this would need
further confirmation, jk).

Her father, Mr. Rogelio Alvarez, reported that his daughter
fell in trance from time to time since 8 years and has
received  several messages from extraterrestrials. It had
to do with Jupiters moon Ganymede.

It was said that several extraterrestrials already had or will
contact Conchita. In this context, there is a strange remark
that a yugoslavian photographer, Mr. Henry Janschitz
photographed a young Lady in Bogota and then collapsed. This
Lady should have been an extraterrestrial, too.

It was reported that on the day of the disappearance of Mrs. de
Hoyos and the the other four a light was seen travelling away
very fast from the mountain. On the top of the mountain the
abandoned car of Mrs. de Hoyos was found.

Mrs. de Hoyos never reappeared neither did her accompanists. The
was no sign of suicide, no traces, no dead bodies were ever
found.

I know that this story sounds a bit weird but we have several
points we can check, investigate and verify.

This contribution  is meant as a challenge for the South
American members of the list to help us to clear up what
happened in June 1976 in Cali. Maybe we have a real abduction
case here that never was thoroughly investigated. I have
photocopies of the articles from the newspaper EL PAIS from that
day and they are big ones, so there was obviously public
interest and a lot of rumour surrounding the incident.

Is there anyone who is interested and can provide further
information?

Thanks,

Joachim Koch, Berlin







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 29

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 23:47:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 23:31:29 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:49:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 06:45:48 +0200 (MET DST)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 > Hello, Henny and List,

 >I am not disturbed by the statement that many UFOs may be
 >reduced to IFOs after careful analysis. What really bothers me
 >is the statement made, for instance, by Jenny Randles (message
 >of October 26) :

 >>>We can often prove an IFO
 >>>to reasonable degrees of certainty. A UFO is simply an
 >>>unresolved case and may eventually become an IFO or stay a UFO.
 >>>This means ufologists should pay more heed to IFO cases because
 >>>they teach us useful lessons.

 >Of course, IFO can never mean, I suppose, a craft identified as
 >alien (non-human) ! So, such a statement simply closes the door
 >to the construction of a solid case for UFOs as alien crafts, if
 >I understand well the long discourse displaid on this list by
 >Jenny Randles, Andy Roberts, and David Clarke (I may have missed
 >other names).

Sorry but you do not 'understand well' anything I have said it
would appear. I repeat (patiently once again) that I do not
reject the possibility, even probability of some close
encounters relating to another intelligence. I have said so
repeatedly. So the claim that I am closing the door on seeking
to build such a case is arrant nonsense.

Have you actually read any of my books where I have strived for
20 years to build a positive case for unexplained UFOs? And in
many close encounters have done precisely that, I think.

But thats another issue not related to the quote above. This
refers to the 95% or so of cases we can explain as IFOs. I argue
that with these we often can prove a solution. We can never
prove any theory for the unsolved cases unless and until
physical evidence appears beyond the level we have seen so far .
As such IFO cases have a status that I consider under emphasised
by UFOlogists. We can learn from them.

The remaining cases not proven to be IFOs are, of course, a key
to the UFO mystery per se. This is the evidence we should focus
most effort upon and it is the very evidence that UFOIN will
address. Thats why there are reports in process on major close
encounters such as car stops, jet chases, radar trackings, etc .

UFOIN is not a negative organisation as so many of you seem to
be desperate to believe . I have no idea why this seems to be a
cause celebre. But it will emphasise solved cases as and when
that is the conclusion we reach about an investigation. I see no
need to apologise for that. So much of UFOlogy is concerned with
solving cases we have a responsibility not to ignore them.

However, there is no expectation of finding that negative
position always or often with the data. Nobody will be more
pleased than I as and when we find strong positive data on UFOs
as we will sometimes do I am sure - and it wont be swept under
any mat if we do either.

My point was not that UFOs can never become IFOs (where the
Identified object is identified as an alien craft). It is simply
that in general we can prove an IFO in conventional terms or we
can leave a case baffling and thus still a UFO. In those
instances the alien interpretation is one possible conclusion to
take on from there (strengthened - as many of you seem to forget
- by these  efforts to find solutions with the best cases).

But we can probably not prove by our present methodology that a
UFO is a spaceship. At least if anyone has ever succeeded in
doing that I would love to hear about it. This is an unrealistic
expectation which appears to have one of several explanations.
One of these is, of course, that there are no alien craft out
there to prove. But another, for instance, is that these craft
have a science so far beyond us that they produce effects that
are not amenable to our present deductive logic.

All that is obvious to me is that IFO data has the edge because
we can often reach firm conclusion about it. The unsolved cases
are by nature more contentious. This does not demean them. It
does not mean that none of them will ever be established as
evidence of another intelligence. But it does mean they lack the
closure that an IFO case can bring. Really I wasnt arguing much
more than that.

If you regard this as worrying or scepticism, fine. I am afraid
to me its just a fact of a UFOlogists life that we have to try
to work with.

 >This seems to be the common viewpoint of UFOIN, if we add the
 >names of Paul Devereux and Tim Matthews. I think this much more
 >an ideological attitude than a scientific one, in sharp
 >contrast with people like astronomer Hynek and prof. MacDonald,
 >for instance.

I have great respect for both of these men and knew Allen Hynek
in the last years of his life. I did not get the impression that
our  approach to UFOs was that far apart, to be honest -
although he was, of course, a far more learned person. But my
only ideology, as you put it, is as an investigator. It can be
expressed simply.

A UFO sighting is a collection of evidence. The job of an
investigator is to study that evidence free of any expectation,
preconceived theory or bias. All reasonable rational solutions
should be explored and matched against the evidence. If these
argue in favour of a solution then we should be willing to say
so. If they do not the case remains a UFO - ie unsolved - and
joins the pile of data supporting UFO reality (strengthened
according to how well an investigation was conducted). From then
it is the job of the theorist to argue what this unsolved data
means. It is not the job of an investigator whose role ends when
all reasonable options have been explored and a case is either
solved as an IFO or added to the ranks of the unexplained.

I am bemused as to why this philosophy - which has always been
mine and to my knowledge that of most others in UFOIN - seems to
be creating such a fuss. I thought all good UFOlogists acted
responsibly like this. Was I
mistaken?

 >Recently, Jenny Randles questioned the French COMETA report, for
 >its presentation of the famous Lakenheath case (message of July
 >25) :

 ><snip>

 >In answer to this message, journalist Bernard Thouanel, who was
 >the editor of the report published by the magazine VSD, asked
 >Jenny Randles two days later to give him some material of her
 >inquiry, which he would publish in a forthcoming issue of VSD.
 >He gave me a copy of his message with his authorization to
 >reproduce it, and I think it appropriate time to do it :

 >"In fact, I am preparing the next special issue of VSD OVNI"
 >(UFOs) in which I would like to publish the testimony of the RAF
 >Venom crew members (anonymous or not, at their wish, but I would
 >prefer to have them fully named and ranked) concerning the
 >Lakenheath case."

 >Jenny Randles answered that, no, she could not assist him in his
 >request for contact with the RAF crew, for several reasons, the
 >main one being her contract with the BBC. (I have a private copy
 >of her reply).

 >Well, Jenny Randles raised that question as a "test of the
 >objectivity of COMETA". To me it is now a test of her
 >objectivity : how can you play such a trick, Mrs Randles ?

You are misleading this list attrociously.

I was asked by Bernard Thouanel to tell nobody of our private
correspondance. I did as I was asked. Evidently either that was
a rather one sided request (if he cleared you to comment but has
not told allowed me to discuss my own messages!) or you do not
regard confidences in the same light that I do.

That said I must now of course tell people what really happened.

Yes, I was asked to help Mr Thouanel. So I sent him immediately
a copy of 'Something in the Air' with an account of the
Lakenheath pilots testimony. This would thus allow him to put
something in print about their story as soon as he wished.

How does that constitute no co-operation?

He did request supply of full details of the crew as you note.
But I again did not refuse. Witness details cannot just be
released here due to a law we have called the Data Protection
Act and our own Code of Practice for BUFORA/UFOIN investigators
that properly restricts what we can say to journalists such as
Mr Thouanel. This exists to protect witnesses and I stand by it.

So I reported straight back to Mr Thouanel that there were
several reasons why it would not be immediately possible to send
the data (one was indeed resolving the BBC copyright issue as my
programme was made for them and is still being re-run under
contract - although in case you are wondering - I am not being
paid for this - so there are no questions here of financial gain
preventing release of information to ufology).

Another problem was the fact that I had to get proper clearance
from the crews and our Official Secrets Act is still a real
issue with RAF pilots as you would know if you had ever
interviewed any of them.

But I told Mr Thouanel that this work would be done (and indeed
is being done for a UFOIN report to be issued early in the new
year ) . I have for some time committed to producing this report
(for which again I wont be paid a penny ). And I  added that I'd
be happy to let Mr Thouanel have a copy of this data when it was
completed .

Here is exactly what I told him (clearly Mr Thounels's embargo
on my talking in public is meaningless)...


'I do intend to document all of this material when I am freed by
both (the BBC) and by the witnesses to do so. I will happily
provide a copy to you at that time. '


Now kindly tell me and this list how the above actions and my
above reply equate with  a refusal to cooperate or can be termed
a trick? As far as I can see I did what I could to assist Mr
Thouanel - although evidently my trust and my sincere offer to
provide further material to him was misplaced.

I now hope that you will issue an apology for your unfounded
allegation to this list.

Sincerely.

Jenny Randles








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 20:47:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:10:37 -0400
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >Dave,

 >You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.  I think you're
 >wrong, and yours is not a conclusion other smart, hard-
 >working investigators, including those trained in the physical
 >sciences (McDonald, Hynek, Maccabee, Sturrock, et al.,
 >come to mind), have come to.  Perhaps your training as a
 >folklorist has given you too narrow a focus.

 >>Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >>that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >>open-minded academics.

 >I note no physical scientists among them.  And those
 >sociologists, folklorists, psychologists, and historians -- do
 >they know anything about UFOs except that they don't exist?  And
 >what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
 >photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
 >an answer: say, just about nothing?


Jerry,

How we Oh So manipulate the data to suit our purposes... tsk...
tsk...tsk... On your above paragraph, I have one statement and
one statement only: Jacques Vallee - Computer Scientist.

You obviously haven't read his book entitled "Dimensions" have
you? I believe it is you with too narrow of a focus.

T. Lemire - FI Trainee

--

"Thus these beings appear to us, not in order to stay among us or
become allied to us, but in order for us to become able to understand
them."

Written during the Middle Ages by Paracelsus in "Why These Beings
Appear to Us"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                      New Yorkers Watch Skies For UFOs

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:02:25 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:14:58 -0400
Subject: New Yorkers Watch Skies For UFOs


Greetings list -

From: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNBC/588318.asp

NYers watch skies for UFOs

Stillwater, NY, Oct. 29 � As the last Halloween of the
millennium approaches, the hundreds of members of UFO groups in
New York state are watching the skies more than ever and
investigating reports of unusual sightings. The 1990s have
produced more sightings in New York than in any decade since a
small New Mexico town called Roswell made unidentified flying
objects a mainstream topic.

Consider these reports:

April 10, 1978 � A shiny oval object is reported over the
treeline of Saratoga Lake. Witnesses said that it moved
sideways, hovered, then descended and disappeared 40 minutes
later.

April 6, 1978 � A police officer and his family report a large
oval object hovering near their home in Baldwinsville, Onondaga
County. A bright flash of light followed 10 minutes later and
power was cut off to 3,000 homes. They said a helicopter
appeared and the object flew away. Four others in two separate
sightings in the county report similar sights the next night.

Oct. 17, 1973 � Sixteen witnesses, including a policeman, report
a rotating object in the sky with alternating colored lights.
For 40 minutes it hovered over Gloversville, then darted away.

These kinds of sightings are no joke to those who take them
seriously. Databases are being compiled to track for the first
time sightings nationwide and New York state�s more than 200
reports since a Saturn-shaped object was reported flying slowly
over Norwood, St. Lawrence, on July 3, 1884.

"More and more people are starting to be open to this," said
James Bouck, a state regional director for the New York chapter
of the Mutual UFO Network, and a UFO investigator. "More people
believe there is something out there, something visiting us, or
something the government isn�t telling us."

A Gallup poll in 1996 found that 71 percent of Americans said
they believe the government is hiding something and that
officials know about UFOs. Forty-five percent said they believe
UFOs have visited, and 12 percent said they have seen a UFO.

UFOs and aliens are linked to the Halloween season by more than
costumes and Orson Wells� 1938 broadcast of a Martian invasion
that panicked thousands. Bouck, who is compiling the state
database, said that now is the busiest time for reports, despite
the fact that more people are outside in warmer months.

However, skeptics maintain that there are simple, everyday
causes for 90 percent to 95 percent of these reports. Two who
will tell you that are Bouck and Mike Scritchfield of Rochester,
a UFO investigator with the group Skywatch. Their objective is
to prove the sightings are anything but out of this world. They
almost always do. But among the cases for which no Earthly cause
is determined, a few patterns appear to be emerging:

These investigators aren�t the techno-geek conspiracy theorists
of the X-Files or other TV programs and movies. Bouck is a state
auditor. Scritchfield, a retired chief warrant officer in Army
Intelligence, is a college tennis coach working on his doctorate
in education. They don�t say "these are reports of alien ships."
They call them as they see them � objects that are unidentified,
flying.

"Some say we�ve been visited for breeding, or to warn us of
impending doom, or just studying us. It depends on who�s idea
you want to consider," said Bouck. "We want to stay open to the
possibility of whatever we learn � we don�t have enough
information, we don�t have a smoking gun."

Critics from government officials to science-based magazines
such as The Skeptical Inquirer also point to a lack of proof.
Where is even one chunk of hardware? One undeniable photo? A
footprint?

The counter-argument is as fervent as it is unprovable.

"I think there�s substantial evidence that the government knows
a lot more than it�s talking about," said Dana Schmidt, state
director of MUFON. "If there�s nothing to it, one wants to know
why are they are keeping the secretive approach?"

The theory has it that hardware and more have been collected and
secreted away by the government for research and to avoid mass
panic. One of these research sites was long rumored, but never
proven, to be at the former Rome Air Force Base in Oneida
County.

The explosion of interest in UFOs fueled by television, movies,
books and magazines could be because the government duped the
entertainment industry.

"What better way to acclimate the public to the idea of
extra-terrestrial life?" said Scritchfield, who worked in an
Army Intelligence unit unrelated to the paranormal. "In a
counter-intelligence mode, you start feeding bits and pieces.
You get the public accustomed to thinking there is
extra-terrestrial life out there, and somewhere down the road a
ship lands in the mall in Washington or the government makes an
announcement."

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                 Re: Huge Fireball Leaves Canadians Puzzled

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:16:09 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:24:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Huge Fireball Leaves Canadians Puzzled


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 06:44:44 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Huge Fireball Leaves Canadians Puzzled

 >Source: http://www.vny.com/cf/News/upidetail.cfm?QID=124592

 >Huge fireball leaves Canadians puzzled

 >Friday, 29 October 1999 1:03 (GMT)

 >(UPI Spotlight)
 >Huge fireball leaves Canadians puzzled

 >HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, Oct. 28 (UPI) - Canadian officials and
 >scientists were trying Thursday to determine the nature of a
 >huge fireball seen streaking over the Maritime provinces
 >Wednesday night. Lt. Cmdr. Glenn Chamberlain, at the search and
 >rescue center in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said several people
 >called to say they had seen the fireball, which was visible for
 >about 12 seconds.

Hi List,

No two ways about it, this was a fireball of considerable size.

A local astronomer, David Lane, estimated that it could have run
upwards of a ton or so. Part of it broke up into a meteor train.

It was seen all up and down the eastern seaboard with reports
coming in from as far south as Bostton and as far north as
northern New Brunswick. It was seen by thousands near the coast.

Reverberations and shock waves were felt as it broke up.

It hasn't been determined yet as to exactly where it might have
impacted or whether it hit land or water. Make no mistake. This
was an IFO.

Even my daughter observed it, strung out in a chain of 6 or 7
golden colored objects streaming down to the east.

Best,

Don Ledger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:44:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:31:51 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Stefan Duncan <swduncan@foto.infi.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:48:09 -0400

 >>From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >Put Greer's claims into his million dollar special he was
 >collecting money for last year would make a good Encounters of a
 >Third Kind II. He seems to tailor himself to the French man of
 >that movie, waving handsigns, sending musical notes into the
 >air, flashing lights, claiming alien intervention to his most
 >certain looking army death-spawn demise; communicating with
 >aliens away from a group of others, sending thoughts to ask if
 >his stomach is upset and with a pointed ET glowing tip finger
 >heal the stomach ailment; the controversial alleged director of
 >CIA/Greer meeting that now has been refuted; charging outrageous
 >seminar prices to learn how to mentally communicate with aliens
 >and coordinate UFO appearences; making claims of evidence but
 >never showing; announcing to the government he should be the
 >spokesperson between the aliens and earth. This reminds me of a
 >certain computer company that announced it had a piece of ET
 >hardware that would make computer chips unbelievably fast - but
 >is never shown.

 >And what is the most sickening, there are honest, nose to the
 >ground, hard working people trying to uncover the truth of
 >UFOs/ETs. They go unnoticed. And then someone appears with
 >outrageous claims gets the media attention, gets aired for
 >average intelligent people to hear such inane ego-centric
 >self-posturing grand illusive UFO/ET b.s. that anything worth
 >truely investigating will be laughed at.

 >I ask all UFO news services to please stop running releases of
 >wild claims. Greer's works belongs in fiction tabloids. A stand
 >must be made on individuals who make a mockery of sincere UFO
 >studies. If it is not, true investigations will never be taken
 >seriously.

 >I cringe to think that this man, tells our government he seems
 >himself as the representative of ufologists and that they should
 >let him stand on top of Mt. Mitchell with the world's biggest
 >spotlight and welcome mat.

 >Please, I ask all UFO news services to stop running their news
 >releases. One major reason for the new services to do so is:
 >Greer has not allowed interviews that question his
 >"questionable" claims. We are not to inquire on any of his
 >statements but to merely publish his news releases and claims.

 >AUFON has stopped running news releases. And I, Stefan Duncan,
 >will respond to every Greer news release to the public with a
 >warning - the man is a fraud.

Yah, shut the guy up. Turn him off. Limit only truth to this
venue.

While I am outraged as much (if not more) than the next guy at
such claims without portfolio, I am not for supressing anyone's
right to express them. Even if it's horse hockey.

Whassamatta with you, S. Duncan? Shutting anyone up is against
the rules. Suppose someone vehemently objected to your opines?
Would we have the right to stop running your kaka?

Come on dude, lighten up. Aint nobody who has not the God given
right to make a complete ass of him or her self. Or even say
something stupid. I do it all the time. And quess what, so did
you, just now... altho I really can't assign a whole lot of
angst your way, under the circumstances.

Plead guilty with an excuse and you'll get off without a fine or
even a reprimand. I promise.

Oh, and have one on Gesundt. I'll send you a case.

J. Jaime Gesundt

PS: Thanks Docca Kanappy, for helping to make me literate. It's
a tough job but somebody's gotta['q' removed --ebk] do it.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                         Re: Ways To Ignore Reality

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:59:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:35:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Ways To Ignore Reality


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Ways To Ignore Reality(and make your anaylist very rich)
 >Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 20:59:39 -0700

 >Ways To Ignore Reality (And Make Your Analyst Very Rich)

 >Caution, Humor Ahead...

 >First physical unreality, you see a UFO on landing legs with two
 >guys standing out side (Probably taking a leak) upon your
 >arrival they see you and not wanting  to disclose that the anti-
 >gravity drive is powered by a Ford Flathead V-8 they jump in and
 >head back to whence they came. Obivously a Floater in the
 >Observer's eye.

 >Secondly, Photgraphic unreality ,as in: You are some old
 >clodhopper in Oregon assuming that you neither have will or are
 >crafty enough to fake an elaborate hoax you see a UFO fly over
 >you take a Picture. This is a Phenomon known as Photographic
 >Hallucination, The Brownie Complex as it is known, especially
 >prevalent after WWII when Hasselblads and Minoltas came to the
 >U.S. it gave Brownie Owners ( and Brownies themselves
 >inferiority complexes and subsequent deluisions of grandeur) If
 >this occured today, Kodak would've spent spent millions  on
 >therapy.

 >Thirdly Multiple witness insanity - Induced by the apparent
 >onset of bright lights in the household the presence of Air
 >Guard jets many miles away, and the Camcorder getting  an
 >annoyinlgly real looking ah, well Object(s) -Probably another
 >formof Browine Complex Known as Didgital Envy.

 >Fourthly, (and one that I hold dear, may I never by God's Grace
 >ever be "cured" of) the unbelief in nothing miraculous ever
 >happened.Imagine a unreality in which there are five people
 >standing in a field at twilight, watching with awe , a silver,
 >disc shape cruise silently over another Oregon farm. Pelicans
 >flying in a Saucer shape-why obviously-Nothing like that can
 >happen-can it?

 >GT McCoy

To my fiend Docca GT McCoy goes the coveted, "Best Rant of the
Year" award for excellence in expressing in better woids what
Gesundt can't express wit any woids.

The prize is two, not one but _two_, ten gallon jugs of our
latest brew, GrippleViagra Con Gas Sin Aiello.  We aint sure how
to spell aiello but after a sip or two, it won't matter diddly
how you spell it.  Of course, with all that help, we can't let
it go with just the ViVinno... we also send along a gross of Pia
dolls.

You gonna need 'em all, Doc!

Here's to you GT.  A man after me own heart.

J. Jaime Gesundt (Docca of most stuff)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Amy Hebert <yelorose@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:17:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:40:30 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
 >disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
 >We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
 >- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
 >organizations and researchers).

In other words, you want only disclosure that is "hopeful",
positive and promotes "aliens" as the good guys. What if this
is not the case?  Will you allow other scenarios to exist even
if they do not support your belief systems?

When asking for disclosure, we cannot specify the type of
disclosure we will accept. The goal is truth not warm fuzzies.

Amy
Home Page: "http://TheVanguard.tripod.com"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 01:22:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:44:48 -0400
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:20:29 -0700
 >From: Kim Burrafato <lensman@stardrive.org>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>,
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

<snip>

 >according to information released under FOIA requests, UFOs
 >were reported hovering over some of our most sensitive nuclear
 >missile bases, after which missile components were found to
 >have malfunctioned. I'd say that might be cause for a bit of alarm.
 >It doesn't take an intelligence operative to see that there are a
 >number disturbing aspects to the ET-UFO phenomenon.

Alarm?

Actually, and I'm obviously speculating here, I would say those
nuclear incidents bode well for Dr. Greer's belief that most ETs
are benevolent. The ETs allegedly shut down these missiles.
They didn't set them off. To me, it's an obvious warning to us
that we need to grow up and do away with nukes. Just an
opinion.

Also, it isn't as easy as most people think for Greer to just
come foward with his witnesses. Many, not all, need some
promises that they will not be prosecuted or punished for
breaking any security oaths. The ones that testified in DC a
couple of years ago were willing to do that without that
promise.

At least Greer is trying. I don't agree with a lot of what he
says but so what. He's trying to get things done. That's a lot
more than most people on this field are doing.

I agree that there are disturbing aspects to the UFO/ET matter
but let's find out who/what is behind it before we jump to
conclusions.

BTW, some people say Greer broke protocol by writing about his
1993 meeting with James Woolsey. Well, if he did, and some doors
have closed on him in Washington and he has burned bridges, so
what? Woolsey & Congress have had some of this evidence of the
reality of UFOs for almost 7 years and what have they done?
Nothing. Screw protocol, this is too important a subject. The
clean energy implications alone should make this topic the
number one story in the news every night.

Joe speculating in Tampa








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                           Re: Cali/Colombia 1976

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 05:05:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 10:08:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Cali/Colombia 1976


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:17:15 -0400
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Cali/Colombia 1976
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear Friends,

 >This is a request for help to get more information about a
 >strange event that happend in Cali /Colombia in 1976.

 >"We go onboard a UFO" said Conchita Alvarez de Hoyos. She left
 >her family and hometown together with four other individuals and
 >never came back.

 >The story was published in the newspaper EL PAIS on June 17,
 >1976.   It was written that on Tuesday before this date the five
 >members of the center for extraterrestrial studies (CIREX) left
 >the town of Cali at five o'clock a.m. and headed towards the
 >Chisto-Ray mountain. They expected to meet a UFO there to start
 >for a "special mission".

 >"We do not know when we'll come back. Wish us luck", she said to
 >her parents minutes before Mrs. de Hoyos left them.

 >Mrs. de Hoyos was an excellent Parapschologist and
 >worked/studied at the University of Cali (this would need
 >further confirmation, jk).

 >Her father, Mr. Rogelio Alvarez, reported that his daughter
 >fell in trance from time to time since 8 years and has
 >received  several messages from extraterrestrials. It had
 >to do with Jupiters moon Ganymede.

 >It was said that several extraterrestrials already had or will
 >contact Conchita. In this context, there is a strange remark
 >that a yugoslavian photographer, Mr. Henry Janschitz
 >photographed a young Lady in Bogota and then collapsed. This
 >Lady should have been an extraterrestrial, too.

 >It was reported that on the day of the disappearance of Mrs. de
 >Hoyos and the the other four a light was seen travelling away
 >very fast from the mountain. On the top of the mountain the
 >abandoned car of Mrs. de Hoyos was found.

 >Mrs. de Hoyos never reappeared neither did her accompanists. The
 >was no sign of suicide, no traces, no dead bodies were ever
 >found.

 >I know that this story sounds a bit weird but we have several
 >points we can check, investigate and verify.

 >This contribution  is meant as a challenge for the South
 >American members of the list to help us to clear up what
 >happened in June 1976 in Cali.   Maybe we have a real abduction
 >case here that never was thoroughly investigated. I have
 >photocopies of the articles from the newspaper EL PAIS from that
 >day and they are big ones, so there was obviously public
 >interest and a lot of rumour surrounding the incident.

 >Is there anyone who is interested and can provide further
 >information?

 >Thanks,

 >Joachim Koch, Berlin


Dear Joachim:

This will probably help very little.

The *U* Database lists an event for 17 July 1977 East (Ost) of
Cali. Numerous observers saw 3 white glowing rings apparently
maneuvering over a nearby hill.

Virtually no other information is available from the source,
which was the Republicaine (de?) Lorraine in France.

My direct source is LDLN (Lumieres dans la Nuit, then a very
good journal) Issue #159.

I am sorry that I cannot help much more than that.

Best wishes regardless

- Larry Hatch







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 30

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #323

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:17:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:56:51 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #323


I sense divergent consciousness, between the stars it's free --
as speculation pushes me beyond what science sees. And not the
science we'd respect, but the science of malfeasance. The
science of the narrow band. That science of convenience.

You want (you sneer?) examples -- I provide you just two men
(thanks to Aristotle all the women won't be factored in). They
couldn't be more polarized, each stares across the gulf at the
ethics of the other, with but ONE concerned with self.
Scientists like Edison are a sullen, craven lot.  Scientists
like Tesla ARE torpedoed, ruined -- shot. Tesla might have freed
folk-kind. Thomas  wanted wage slaves. Tesla wanted all the
stars, and Thomas was, at last, unbrave.

They _talk_ impartiality, these men of *sacred* science; they
wear the cloak so admirably, so *convincing* their reliance.
They smirk and point around them at the grandeur of their work,
like it's them that gives the gold ring at the *ride*, and
you're the jerk.

But, then, they look away from what you've SEEN with sober eyes.
They ridicule the stuff that hovers high in day/night skies.
Ignoring what they want to (and addicted to their dollars),
their knots are cinched up high and fast; they've leashes on
their collars.

"Somewhere there is other life, as smart or smarter (yeah!)."
They all admit this frequently in a yarn that they may yell.
"But *they're* not *here*," is their advice, "they cannot make
the trip"!  And "why?" -- "well, WE can't do it"! What hubris,
then, is THIS?

I think there's more than they let on. I think their shop's
controlled. I think that they're not living UP to what they
would extol. I think they're NOT impartial. I think that they're
too proud. I think that they've forgotten what the ancients said
out LOUD! I think they sell us way too short (they grovel, bow
and please). I think they think they're centered, but they're
thinking on their knees. I think they lead us down the dimmest
SLOPE of prim rose paths. I think they wound egregiously -- do
disservice at the last.

I'm a conscious mote of conscience and I want to know the truth
. . . (good or bad) it's likely preferable -- to a *scientist's*
abuse. Plato knew the difference, and included what's
unmeasured; Aristotle used his hubris to diminish what we'd
treasure. We should reexamine Plato for imagination's value, and
diminish Aristotle who has mislead, duped, and failed you.

The FACT that *something's* happening is apparent in the "word".
Written and historical it's there -- you may have heard. This is
stuff  NOT learned in schools where we are trained to be mere
tools -- bereft of our identities, and shoved to callused,
bloody knees! We would stand upon our feet, and live what's REAL
-- a real treat! We would ask the bigger questions, take along
our heart's suggestions -- build to last for just rewards and
breed less folks, for less is MORE! Very few are *hurt* (some
churches) those *contrived* -- suppressing urges they employ in
unfair ways to cripple spirits they DELAY. Bad news won't
improve with age. Crass denial never pays. Change is coming, not
all bad, most of it will make you glad; all the misery that is
caused is caused by those who set proud jaws.

Prepare for new foundations that are pushed up by degrees.
Prepare to leap to settled feet, and rest your callused knees.
Prepare to have the skies spread wide with bracing winds of
change denied by those that live upon the flesh of those without
a clue or guess. Feel its fingers touch your face, and pull you
to a higher place (that you have earned for being born!) -- you
stand respected and (yes!) un-scorned!  Soar and cleave, be
unafraid! Be filled with purpose, bright -- ablaze! You're the
center of it all! You have free will! You've heard the call!
You're important! You're the man! Your history's nothing but the
plan to keep you down and worthless, beaten -- useful as their
neutered cretin! Take a breath and feel virtue. Let these winds
of change alert you! Know that you are not alone to bear what
changes change proposed. YOU'RE "divergent consciousness"  --
I've found     between the stars!  And just like me you know
there's MORE; you're lucid, and you ARE.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

We locally demonstrate it disaster after natural disaster,
tirelessly, over and over again -- NOT taking advantage if those
times where we are at our best as transient conditions provide
their worst. Later on, some *David* covets someone else's
desirable ass, the *rules* aren't flexible enough for rational
sharing (of an inexhaustible resource I might add <g>) --
reptile brained prerogatives work out their conveniently short
sighted calculations, and the general suffering is increased.
It's clear we have to struggle against something to stay sharp,
but we grind against each other while the common problem
continues to kick our unbalanced and misdirected ass.

It doesn't have to be that way. . . we should be living on
healthy island planetoids, pregnant with satisfaction and
vitality . . . endless gardens of technological *magic* out in
the asteroid belt -- by now . . . but for the ubiquitous
tyrannies and pernicious pogroms of the conspiring, and
*convenient* sociopathic conservative.

Restore John Ford!

--
Visit a Virtual Art Gallery in Cyberspace!
Ponder the Wit & Wisdom of Ching Chow!
View "Unstill Life" -- Animation . . . and more.
Consider Matter, Mind & Movement.
See the current HTML "Apology to MW" with illustration.
Take a ride in the Teleporter and check the inexplicable.
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 30 October>**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- Send your checks and
money orders to _me_, Alfred Lehmberg
(cut out the lawyers, they got theirs) at:
304 Melbourne Drive, Enterprise AL, 36330. Strict records kept.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at the
fundamentalist's stake.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                               New at Magonia

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:14:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:22:06 -0500
Subject: New at Magonia


I should say, what's new at new improved Magonia!


http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/

30/10/99

More Secrets Than Lies

Kevin McClure continues his investigation into the evidence for
Nazi UFOs (NB: 65K file download)


Magonia Monthly Supplement #20

Hudson Valley - the controversy continues: a microlightist
writes; Phil Klass spills the beans; Martin Kottmeyer on the
Aston CE3K; Nigel Watson and Granville Oldroyd on Spithead UFOs
of 1914; more!


Magonia Monthly Supplement #19

Pelicans, making ufology hard to swallow; ridicule and ufology
by John Rimmer;

WWI UFOs
by Nigel Watson


Mark Pilkington

"A heathen conceivably, but not, I hope, an unenlightened one."
Lord Summerisle
------------------------------------------------
Magonia Online




http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 99 10:19:40 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:25:03 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 20:47:22 -0400
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT

 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Todd,

 >>>Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >>>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >>>that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >>>open-minded academics.

 >>I note no physical scientists among them.  And those
 >>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists, and historians -- do
 >>they know anything about UFOs except that they don't exist?  And
 >>what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
 >>photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
 >>an answer: say, just about nothing?

 >How we Oh So manipulate the data to suit our purposes... tsk...
 >tsk...tsk... On your above paragraph, I have one statement and
 >one statement only: Jacques Vallee - Computer Scientist.

 >You obviously haven't read his book entitled "Dimensions" have
 >you? I believe it is you with too narrow of a focus.

Of course I've read Dimensions.  I've read virtually everything
-- including magazine articles and journal papers (though not, I
confess, his science fiction) -- Vallee has ever written,
sometimes more than once.  I've actually read Passport to
Magonia -- Vallee's first venture into occult ufology -- three
times.  Vallee and I even once spent a long evening, in an
Italian restaurant in Chicago, in a cordial and comprehensive
discussion of our differing views. You seem to assume that the
simple act of reading Vallee is synonymous with the decision to
take his word for it.

Ironically, in the instance you provide, the problem is the
reverse of what I'd been criticizing in my exchanges with
Roberts and Clarke.  Here, instead a folklorist attempting
physical science, in Vallee we have a physical scientist
attempting folklore. Not a pretty sight.

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:02:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:29:20 -0500
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:26:05 -0400
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >>If Greer has all the information he claims to have, he could go
 >>public and end the secrecy himself.  He doesn't have to wait for
 >>Congress, the White House, the so called evil military
 >>industrial complex, or some covert govt agency working on the
 >>UFO problem to disclose information. Previously it had been
 >>suggested that the reason he doesn't go public, is because the
 >>witness's would not stand up to independent verification. A
 >>position that sounds more credible everyday.

 >On the contrary, we are prepared to come forward immediately as
 >soon as common sense strategic plans can be actuated. This have
 >been described publicly and in writing for a couple of years.

I recall some of these disclosure tales that are always being
talked about for 3 years as happening shortly/very soon and so
forth.  Although always in the future tense.

Bottom line on those is 5 years from now we will still be
getting lengthy emails about how its going to happen soon blah
blah.

 >Those of you who are naive enough to believe that you simply
 >call a press conference and it is a 'done deal'  are badly
 >misinformed.

You are the one claiming to know all the plans, is aware
of all this information, and you sit around waiting for
somebody else to disclose the information in a manner that
suits you.
 >
 >If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
 >civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
   I recall various stories how folks were  working
with this or that committee and or Congressional staffers.
Supposedly the Congressional people claiming that "they" were
interested in holding hearings and were sympathetic to
ending UFO coverup.
   Like I said at the time, this is the same story they
tell everybody that walks through Congressional doors with
an issue they want somebody to do something about.
   The bottom line is Congress will not hold hearings
UNLESS the issue is politically expiedent and or has some
massive public out cry behind it.  For example, if the country
was in the middle of a UFO flap like 52 and or 66, you would
stand a far better chance at getting hearings because people
by the millions are calling the Congress people up.
  If Republicans or Democrats
thought they could one up each other with an issue such as
this you MIGHT generate some intest.
 >carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
 >to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
 >the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.
   So, in your mind (bias is more accurate) anything that doesn't
go along with your apparent theory that ET's are the most
wonderful race of beings in the galaxy, further that are the savior of
the planet and only GOOD can flow from them is apparently
an  "intel cut-outs who only one goal..."
   As I mentioned before, if the many abduction accounts are true,
those accounts are not from a race of beings intent on the good of the planet.
Naturally I would expect you to rationalize these away by claiming
that any "bad" abduction was in fact part of the evil military industrial
intelligence community, WHILE all the so called good that came
from ET abductions was in fact this wonderful race of beings,
bent on ending the ills of humanity .. blah blah.

 >We know who these players are we know who their handlers are.

One would suspect that since you won't name them, or the
civilian UFO initiatives that are involved, you lack the
necessary proof needed to make your case.

 >That you are gullible enough to think that a matter this
 >sensitive is not continously being influenced by such assets is
 >your problem. We will not make it ours.

Been listening to this story about so called informants/insiders
and upcoming UFO/ET reality claims for years, but no one
including yourself has every stepped forward and offered any
kind of evidence.  Only shadowy storys, from shadowy figures
that can't ever be totally checked out or verified by anyone
other then the person unloading the story to the general UFO
community. You weren't around then, but years ago one of these
so called government insiders in a one hour TV special we
learned the vital, can't live without fact, that  supposedly
aliens just adore strawberry icecream.

 >Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
 >disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful

So _if_ the disclosure dosen't have lots of "hope" about how
wonderful aliens are, it is unreasonable..at least in your mind?
I guess it goes along with your personal opinion.

 >We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
 >- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
 >organizations and researchers). When the support and means are

Define "support and means."  One could suspect that this means
pumping loads of cash into CETI coffers, while others would
think that you are just using this as a means to put people off.

 >there to do this right it will be done. Until then, we can be
 >very patient....

Its called 5 years from now we will still be hearing talk about
something to happen sometime in the immediate future. Cheers,

Robert








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 99 11:23:38 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:45:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:40:30 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>

 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Dave,

 >>You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.  I think you're
 >>wrong,

 >Well at least we have established that I am entitled to have an
 >opinion, and that opinion is a well-informed one rather than the
 >"empty posturing" you would prefer to regard it as.

I regard as empty posturing the assertion that the ETH and the
larger notion of ETI are equivalent to a belief in elves and fairies.
I would like to think that you would have a more interesting
argument than that by now well-worn cliche.  Notions such as
ETH and ETI may be right or wrong, but they are not mere
superstition.

 >As to whether I am wrong, time will show that I am right.

Uh huh.  You don't mind if I don't hold my breath, do you?

 >But because so many people pass through ufology and stay only a
 >little while, I fear we will have to fight this tiresome battle
 >many more times in the future.

Sorry to have to tell you this, Dave, but I plan to stay right
here.

 >>yours is not a conclusion other smart, hard-
 >>working investigators, including those trained in the physical
 >>sciences (McDonald, Hynek, Maccabee, Sturrock, et al.,
 >>come to mind), have come to.  Perhaps your training as a
 >>folklorist has given you too narrow a focus.

 >I've no doubt thosf those "trained in the physical sciences"
 >have arrived at different conclusions, because they are studying
 >a very narrow aspect of the subject themselves.

Yes, they are.  They're studying the cases at the core of the
UFO phenomenon, the cases that will eventually determine whether
or not UFOs exist as extraordinary unknowns, namely CE2s and
the like.  No elves and fairies here.

 >And you have unwittingly hit the nail on the head - it is
 >precisely because the physical sciences are so "narrow" in
 >themselves that the disciplines I have cited are more suited to
 >this subject.

Nope.  The disciplines you have cited are not qualified to study
physical evidence.

 >You cannot study ufology as you would study the workings of a
 >automobile engine; ufology is a human science, it is bound up in
 >the beliefs and psychology of human beings.

And so is just about everything human beings participate in. So
what?  But it takes a physical scientist to analyze landing
traces, radar records, photographs, and other hard evidence.  Of
course, as you reveal, you harbor a strange notion of the very
process of scientific inquiry, as is revealed in what follows.

 >You do not employ astronomers and optical physicists to study
 >how myth is created, and how the human brain perceives and
 >interprets anomalous phenomena, One would have thought this
 >concept would be obvious to someone as smart as Jerry Clark.

Since you have already decided UFOs are a "myth," I guess
those physical scientists -- whose evidence suggests otherwise --
are unwelcome at your table.  From my perspective, however,
you're serving up empty calories while vehemently declaring your
meal to be the only nutritional one.

 >You can talk all you like about "astrobiology" and unprovable
 >arguments about the possibility of life in outer space.

 >The arguments of the SETI crowd might have some validity, but
 >they have absolutely no connection with some funny light someone
 >saw over Arkansas the other night.

I am sure you are sincere in your belief, Dave, but your
touching sincerity does not make your statement of faith any
more persuasive to those of us who think such questions will be
settled by evidence.

 >The facts are we have no UFOs or aliens for your "physical
 >scientists" to study.

We have all sorts of UFO evidence to study.  If you want to
learn how a physical scientist goes about investigating reports,
may I suggest a trip to the University of Arizona and a week or
two's immersion in the James McDonald files? Here you'll learn
the difference between hard science and soft science, and
perhaps you'll shake your fatal addiction to the latter.  You
might also read Peter Sturrock's brand new book, The UFO Enigma,
which also documents how physical scientists can -- and do --
study UFO evidence.

 >All we have are human beings, their claims and their beliefs -
 >and that is why only the human sciences, and especially those
 >which are cross-disciplinary (anthropology, folklore, sociology)
 >are of any use in this area.

 >And that's my point - you don't hire an optical physicist to
 >study religious mythology.

Apparently you harbor the strange view that I have argued
physical scientists should be studying contactee literature.
I'll leave that up to the religious scholars and the
folklorists, who can actually make themselves useful in this
area.

 >>>Add to that a sound knowledge of folklore and cultural belief
 >>>which led to a me being awarded a PhD - described by a panel of
 >>>academics as "a valuable contribution to knowledge" - and I feel
 >>>I am well qualified to comment, and certainly as qualified as
 >>>Jerome Clark.

 >>But not as well qualified as the physical scientists who have
 >>worked on specific cases.

 >I disagree. All cases are based upon narratives produced by
 >human beings, the eyewitnesses, describing events which are to
 >all intents and purposes "supernatural" in the traditional
 >sense. Therefore they are as much open to study by the
 >folklorist as to the scientists you cite.

The sorts of arguments you're using have been thoroughly trashed
by a number of folklorists, including David Hufford, Thomas E.
Bullard, Bill Ellis, and more.  You tend to speak as if from on
high -- as if your degree grants you the authority to render
sweeping judgments to which we lesser mortals can only nod our
heads in unison, and vigorously -- when in fact, as I know from
my own interactions with folklorists, many are sympathetic to
anomalous claims, closet or not-so-closet heretics.  (An
example: a book written by two prominent British folklorists on
the lore of merfolk; at the end they conclude that a real
mystery exists and probably a real unknown animal at its core.)
They have more respect for human experiences than you seem to
have.  What you're falling victim to here is what Hufford ably
skewers as the "tradition of disbelief."

In any case, "all cases" are not "based upon narratives produced
by human beings," at least any more than any other human
experiences are.  CE2s can give us evidence that can be taken
into the laboratory or otherwise analyzed.  Any assessment of
the UFO evidence that expects us to take it seriously has to
take it into account.

 >>You can have all the folklore
 >>knowledge in the world, and none of it is going to help you
 >>explain the McMinnville photo, the RB-47 case, Socorro, or any
 >>of the other classic UFO incidents on which the case for the
 >>reality of UFOs as extraordinary unknowns rests.  I have no
 >>doubt that your Ph.D. amounts to "a valuable contribution to
 >>knowledge" -- you're a bright, interesting guy.  All I am saying
 >>is that it doesn't help you explain the most puzzling UFO cases.

 >Yeah but what about all the other "classic" cases which have
 >since been explained: i.e. the Alexander Hamilton 1897 "calf-
 >napping", Aurora crash,  the Berwyn Mountains events, dare I
 >mention Sheffield incident, etc etc. They might have been
 >"difficult" to explain from a purely folklore perspective at
 >first sight, but they undoubtedly generated rumour and folklore,
 >whatever their explanation. Some, like the 1897 hoax, continue
 >to do so.

Weird.  I don't recall saying anywhere that hoaxes or
misperceptions don't occur.  In fact, I debunked the Hamilton
case myself, back in 1976.  I didn't do it, however, as a
folklorist; I did it as an investigator.  With the arguable
exception of the Hamilton story (which appeared in Jacques
Vallee's first book), none of the other cases you cited could be
considered "classics."  I think you've made my point.

 >That is precisely why I claim UFOs are modern folklore - none of
 >these cases are "isolated" occurrences, removed from the culture
 >that spawned them, or from other "unexplained" UFO events.

 >Any kind of strange light in the sky is now habitually tagged as
 >a UFO equals ET craft by the media and the public, whatever its
 >explanation. My point again: UFOs are modern folklore. So I
 >would maintain that ALL of the cases you cite would benefit from
 >re-interpretation in the way I have dicussed.

On what evidence, may I ask?  I hope you plan to apply sounder
reasoning than you've shown us so far, or any we've seen from
eager-beaver would-be skeptics who in recent months have regaled
us with ludicrous, easily disprovable "explanations" for several
classics..

 >>>Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >>>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >>>that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >>>open-minded academics.

I'm sure Sheffield is a nice town, Dave.  Don't put it down, or
I'll be forced to follow your example and judge my own beloved
Canby "one small hick Minnesota town. "  Actually, come to think
of it, John Rimmer did it for me the other week on this very
list.  Oh well, we can't _all_ live in London.

 >>I note no physical scientists among them.  And those
 >>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists, and historians -- do
 >>they know anything about UFOs except that they don't exist?  And
 >>what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
 >>photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
 >>an answer: say, just about nothing?

 >If there existed any conclusive photographic or instrumental
 >evidence to prove the existence of ET UFOs we would not be
 >having this discussion, so you have killed your own argument.

If "conclusive" evidence one way or another existed, they
wouldn't be UFOs, would they?  Science, alas, continues its work
in all sorts of areas even when conclusive answers and evidence
aren't there, or have yet to be uncovered.  (Do you ever read
books on the hard sciences?  Sure doesn't sound like it.)  If
science demanded "conclusive evidence" before it even started,
there would be no science.  Nature and the universe do not yield
their secrets easily.  You are underscoring, I am afraid, the
strong -- though, I hope, unconscious -- antiscientific bias you
bring to your work.  Your focus, I am learning, is even narrower
than I had suspected.

 >You cannot study something for which there is no physical
 >evidence. Once again, back to my earlier argument, the only way
 >you can do so is via the humanities, and via studying the
 >percipients themselves. Physical scientists are useless in this
 >context.

See above.

 >>>As for "UFO phenomenon or the ETH", it's just a theory and
 >>>despite your 'special pleading' it has not more evidence to back
 >>>it up than any other. I think I will stick with the idea that
 >>>the fairy folk are the flying saucer pilots, after all two can
 >>>play at wearing cultural blinkers if that's the game we're
 >>>playing.

 >>Interesting argument for a proclamation without supporting
 >>evidence.  For a insightful discussion of the limitations of
 >>folklore as an approach to UFO study, I urge listfolk to read
 >>"Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3 (new
 >>series, 1991): 1-57.  The author, interestingly, is Thomas E.
 >>Bullard, who also holds a Ph.D. in folklore from Indiana
 >>University, which houses one of the world's best esteemed
 >>folklore departments.

 >I have great respect for Dr Bullard, but his arguments are not
 >shared by any of the eminent folklorists of whom I am
 >acquainted. Among these I can point to the highly respected
 >Professor J.D.A. Widdowson, my PhD supervisor, who trained under
 >one of the mentors of modern folklore study, Herbert Halpert, at
 >the University of Newfoundland.

And I'll bet you any amount of money you want to offer that
neither has done remotely the amount of research and analysis of
UFO matters  that Eddie Bullard has.  David Hufford, one of
America's most respected and influential folklorists, has told
me of his deep admiration for Bullard's work, which -- I might
add -- has been published in the flagship Journal of American
Folklore. I hope I am not telling tales out of school, but
mainstream academia is taking note of his splendid scholarship,
and a university press has approached him to do a booklength
study of abductions and the UFO phenomenon. I'm afraid that on
UFOs, I'll take Bullard over Widdowson and Halpert any day of
the week, any minute of the hour, any second of the minute.

 >Professor Widdowson and the vast majority of folklorists in this
 >country with whom I am in regular contact share my views, indeed
 >I have been invited to present a lecture on UFOs as modern
 >folklore at the Folklore Society AGM next year.

Where I'm sure you will tell them exactly what they want to
hear. No heretic is Dr. David Clarke.

 >So, although Jerry Clark likes to champion the views of Dr
 >Bullard, his conclusions are much more measured than Jerry would
 >have us believe, and are certainly not typical of folklore
 >scholarship in general.

Eddie Bullard is a friend of mine.  I've known him for years,
and we have, over time, talked for many hours. I've read
everything he's ever written.  We agree about 95% of the time.
(Our one significant area of disagreement is over the
significance of the 1896-97 wave.) Nobody has ever written more
intelligently, more knowledgeably, and more even-handedly than
Bullard on the abduction phenomenon. I believe that the best
(relatively) short essay ever written on the subject, a model of
how a difficult, contentious subject can be approached with
reason, restraint, and intellectual rigor (and, I might add,
without polemics), is Bullard's entry "Abduction Phenomenon" in
The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp. 1-26.  I urge all of you who
are interested to go to the reference section of your local
library and read it.  If you're lacking intellectual nourishment
in your consumption of UFO literature, Bullard's piece will give
you all the vitamins and minerals you could want.

Most of all, it shows how a folklorist can make a genuine
contribution to this subject without ever straying into areas
beyond his particular expertise.  Here you'll find no ringing
bloviations about "myths" and "religion," or the futility of
scientific inquiry in the face of uncertainty, just a sober
effort to get discern signals, if they exist, amid noise.  All
of us, including me, including Clarke, including Clarke's
folklore colleagues, could learn from this brilliant, modest
man.

Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:06:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:49:25 -0500
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 02:14:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

  <snip>

 >On the contrary, we are prepared to come forward immediately as
 >soon as common sense strategic plans can be actuated. This have
 >been described publicly and in writing for a couple of years.
 >Those of you who are naive enough to believe that you simply
 >call a press conference and it is a 'done deal'  are badly
 >misinformed.

 >If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
 >civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
 >carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
 >to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
 >the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.

<snip>

 >Ultimately all we ask is something quite reasonable: that a
 >disclosure be factual, scientific, evidence driven and hopeful
 >We are not interested in a xenophobic 'Alien Invasion' paranoid
 >- fest (besides thats been done already by the media and the UFO
 >organizations and researchers). When the support and means are
 >there to do this right it will be done. Until then, we can be
 >very patient....

Dear Dr. Greer,

I know _everything_.  But I wont tell you.  The conditions for
disclosure are not right.

Since they can _never_ be, I will keep my secret.  And the rest
of you people are full of it.

What secret?

I know _everything_.  But I won't tell you.  The conditions for
disclosure...

<yawn>

The trick is an old one.

I will tell you only that I can't tell.

Please state your purpose, sir.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 20:18:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:05:00 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:40:30 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 13:41:10 PDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 16:39:36 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >You cannot study ufology as you would study the workings of a
 >automobile engine; ufology is a human science, it is bound up in
 >the beliefs and psychology of human beings.

Actually it is both. There are clearly physical stimuli behind
many UFO sightings. What these are range from mundane things
like the fireball meteor I argue can explain the British Airways
l995 case, through novel scientific energy phenomena akin to
ball lightning, and on to perfectly feasible (but as yet
unproven) exotic craft crewed by another intelligence.

It is not wrong to rely on physical scientists to study the data
appropriate to them. The problem comes when they do so in
isolation unaware of the contribution of sociologists and
folklorists. These peoples role comes precisely because we have
a sequence of evidence in UFOlogy:

There is the stimulus - the thing that triggers the UFO sighting
There is the perception of that stimulus as a UFO
There is the report of that perception to the world.

Generally we only get to see the final stage, as rarely are UFOs
captured raw and we have the stimulus itself to study. A few
automatic photo cases offer this (eg one case I worked on was
the Birchwood Mall video footage where an object was captured by
security camera and we were called in to troubleshoot.)

However, because nearly all the time we are dealing with the
perception and the report (not the stimulus) we all have to
track back to try to identify what was seen. in that process it
is not the astronomer or engineer who is best qualified, surely,
but the perceptual psychologist, the sociologist and, yes, the
folklorist. They can help us to understand how what was seen
becomes what was reported for very rarely are the two quite the
same thing.

As such it is foolish to argue about who is the right person to
comment on UFOs. This is truly a cross disciplinary study and
the real danger comes when either physical science or social
science assumes omnipotence and claims sole custody of the
mystery.

I think one of ufology's greatest problems is that it straddles
this middle ground. It is a physical science without any real
physical evidence and a social science that has the unexpected
complication that it is not illusionary or imagintive but based
upon a living reality. I am not sure either side of this divide
fully appreciates the problems that this brings to their role.
Both have to learn to compromise. Few seem mindful to do that.

When I get accused of sitting on the fence, what is really
happening, I think, is that people are not recognising - as I
hope that I do - that ufology literally is something that is
unique. I mean that in the sense that it does sit between two
warring opinions. A real war of the worldviews in fact. But as
with many wars neither side is entirely right or entirely wrong.

The two opposing quotes from the messers Clark/e sum this up for
me. Viz:

 >Any kind of strange light in the sky is now habitually tagged as
 >a UFO equals ET craft by the media and the public, whatever its
 >explanation. My point again: UFOs are modern folklore. So I
 >would maintain that ALL of the cases you cite would benefit from
 >re-interpretation in the way I have dicussed.

 >>And
 >>what would a social scientist have useful to say about physical,
 >>photographic, or instrumented evidence, anyway?  May I venture
 >>an answer: say, just about nothing?

Both these statements - rather than be in vicious opposition as
offered - are actually both true. But they are also both wrong.

What I mean is that UFOs themselves are not folklore. UFOs are
usually real. The folkore is the spin off from the UFO events
via the beliefs, perceptions and cultural responses. We do need
to understand these processes because they help us appreciate
the full picture. All cases will gain from a folklore or social
once over as Dave says. But like Jerry says there will be cases
that this spring clean will not resolve. Because some UFOs are
physically real and genuinely perplexing. Social science will
help us appreciate how these anomalies  were perceived,
reported, believed in etc. It may not tell us what they were.
But in some events it clearly will unravel how a mundane
stimulus becomes a believed in UFO myth. Both things happen in
this confusing, complex mesh we call 'Ufology'.

In other words, both these approaches have their value in all
cases but one or other will be dominant and will ultimately lead
us towards resolution according to the nature of the specific
case in question. McMinnville, for instance, wont be solved by
folkore studies. The Peak District non crash can be unravelled
that way. We should wake up to that recognition and appreciate
this is not a battle between two sides slugging it out but a
joint attack on a very tough mystery into which we are all
contributing.

 >So, although Jerry Clark likes to champion the views of Dr
 >Bullard, his conclusions are much more measured than Jerry would
 >have us believe, and are certainly not typical of folklore
 >scholarship in general.

One thing that really strikes me about Eddie (whose work I
personally consider invaluable) is his willingness to be truly
open minded. He accepts both the strengths and weaknesses of
both perspectives and doesnt jump to conclusions. I think hes
right. He knows the value of soft science in understanding the
process of how UFOs become UFO reports. But he accepts the
limitations of folklore. He knows it cannot alone explain
everything. But whilst he emphasises that some physical reality
seems to lurk behind the UFO mystery his insight allows useful
perceptions. One that struck me was his comment as to how we
seem not to really believe that aliens are physically abducting
us because if we did those of us aware of that fact would have a
hard time coping day to day with the knowledge.

Thus, because we dont all seem to never want to be alone, or
refuse to drive over the moors late at night, or take anti alien
karate lessons, or whatever, then deep down we appear to know
this is not a reality. But it is not a myth either.

To me thats why ufology is so fascinating. The answer just isnt
as obvious as many people think it is. It truly is the greatest
riddle of the millennium.

Thats how I see UFOIN developing and I am frankly shocked and
disturbed that so few ufologists appear able to regard what we
are doing in the spirit that we intend but want to regard us as
some sort of debunking avenging angel.

What that may hint at (so someone recently put it to me) is an
inferiority complex about the strength of ufology's hard
evidence. I hope not. But  if anyone is seriously worried that a
tiny band of British UFOlogists  - who are not even trying to
commit ufological homicide - might actually have a chance of
succeeding then perhaps we should all ask ourselves why that
prospect is causing such disquiet?

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:57:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:06:46 -0500
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Steven M. Greer <DrSGreer@cs.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:08:37 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:26:05 -0400
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

 >If the Congress will not hold hearings (the best venue) then a
 >civilian led disclosure will need to be done very well and very
 >carefully. In particular, we are not interested in selling out
 >to intel. cut-outs who have only one goal: a disclosure spun in
 >the desired direction of 'Independence Day', the movie.

It is my understanding that your witnesses are only prepared to
discuss their testimonies under oath infront of formal
congressional hearings. If this is the case then how do you
propose to initiate a civilian led disclosure? Discussions in
another forum suggest that a UFO documentary is in preparation,
the questions are if the witnesses will only talk under oath
what is the content of CSETI's documentary? What actual plan is
in place to disclose the witness testimony?

It is also my understanding that a large sum of money is
required for this documentary and that CSETI are requesting
donations. Obviously these donations are requested on behalf of
CSETI which is a non-profit organisation, yet your speaker fees
are paid to you personally, and also the royalties from your
book go to a company called Crossing Point Inc of which you are
a director. As the founder and international director of CSETI
how do you justify requesting donations for a non profit
organisation when your are profiting personally from the
information gained by CSETI?

Tony








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                        'War Of The Worlds' Revisited

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:21:27 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:16:44 -0500
Subject: 'War Of The Worlds' Revisited


Greetings list -

As we approach the 61st anniversary of the Orson Welles "War of
the Worlds" radio broadcast, Space.com presents a trio of
interesting articles looking back at the event.

War of the Worlds: Could It Happen Now?
http://www.space.com/area51/war_worlds_main_991029.html

War of the Worlds: Why the Hoax Worked
http://www.space.com/area51/war_worlds_hoax_991029.html

War of the Worlds: Why Do We Fear Martians?
http://www.space.com/area51/war_worlds_fear_991029.html

Enjoy.

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                            Aliens Stole My Title

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:58:21 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:22:57 -0500
Subject: Aliens Stole My Title


Hi,

I want to report a terrible new phenomenon - biblionapping - or
abduction of book titles.

I have been victim of this awful crime too often for chance to
be an explanation. My title 'Alien Contact' (first published in
l982) was adopted by Tim Good (he had the grace to apologise -
telling me that his US publisher reported that my books were
unknown outside Buxton and his were not so it didnt matter) (a
rather liberal reading of what he told me, of course, I freely
admit).

When my book called 'Abduction' (l988) was adopted by Professor
John Mack  I knew something was up - even though my US publisher
had for some bizarre reason retitled mine for its New York
release to  'Alien Abductions - Mystery Solved' (not a clue why
as I never make such a claim in the book!) So  Professor Mack
did have an excuse, I guess. Still...

Worried thoughts that this was a campaign to stop my work
reaching the US mounted by Update list members began to swirl
between bouts of paranoia. But I decided that two examples were
not enough upon which to jump to conclusions.

But in l995 Peter Hough and I wrote a book on claims about what
life was like after death (via mediums etc). We called it
'Postcards from Heaven', but this was relegated to a sub title
by our publisher who adopted their alternative inspired title -
'Life after death and the world beyond'. A year later the
Lighthouse Family had a number one album and made millions with
our title - 'Postcards from Heaven'.

Now I knew that the aliens were behind this sinister plot.

I now hear this week that an American author has published 'The
Paranormal Sourcebook' and is confusing people who think it is
my book (first released in l996 and updated early this year as a
fully revised 'Millennium' version). Coincidence is no longer an
option. There has to be a dastardly cover up of some occult
purpose.

After discussion with my editor we are now to rename ours 'The
Paranormal Sauce Book' (with newly revised chapters such as
Bechemel from Betlegeuse, How ghosts make sauce go white, UFO
authors join the gravy train).

I have decided to take swift action and ensure no further titles
are hijacked. I therefore announce that my next book (Time
Storms) is to be retitled Zeepglipbxxxcqyziklyrpr. If anyone
pinches that title they can expect a visit from the Mooblipops
(my new copyright name for MIB). Sorry but extreme measures are
clearly necessary to protect my work.


PS: In case anyone doesnt get it. Whilst the above facts about
book titles are quite true this is of course all in fun. I do
know titles cannot be copyrighted. I also got my own back on Tim
by naming a l997 book 'Alien Contact' (and it did far better
than the original 15 years before!) Mind you I still got
attacked in Magonia for 'recycling titles' as it was put.
Evidently they did not appreciate this UFOlogical in joke. For
now Time Storms is still to be called Time Storms. I think.

Best wishes,

Jzxlptrroy Rndlseeessqprty

(Jenny Randles)
(authors names might be next so I am playing safe)










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Bassett &

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 17:36:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 17:36:47 -0500
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Bassett &

Our first guest tonight is the founder of Paradigm Research
Group, author of the Paradigm Clock website and the only
lobbyist registered to represent the interests of UFO/ET
research/activist organizations in Washington, DC.

He was with us several weeks ago when he gave us some insight
into his work and the clients he represents. He also announced
the formation of X-PPAC - The Extraterrestrial Phenomena
Political Action Committee. Tonight Steve will update us on
his current projects.


   --------------------
  /// Victor Viggiani
---------------------

Our second guest tonight has a Bachelor of Arts degree in
sociology and psychology and currently is an education
administrator with a Masters degree in educational
administration.

He's been involved in ufology for over 25 years. Initially his
major interest was research and investigation of sightings, but
over the last 8 years he has directed his research efforts to a
more journalistic approach, with a keen interest in disclosure
and public education about UFO phenomena.

He's had articles published by local Toronto magazines, Ryerson
Press, various internet web sites and professional journals on
UFO issues. He's worked closely with individuals who claim to
have been abducted by 'alien beings'. He has met and worked with
Dr. John Mack and Budd Hopkins to further extend understandings
of the abduction phenomenon. Victor will be discussing some of
his current cases with us.


Join Steve Bassett, Victor Viggiani, Jonn Kares and I this
evening, at 9:00pm Eastern, as we discuss these Strange Days...
Indeed on:

CFRB 1010 AM - 50,000 watts 'Clear-Channel'

6070khz Shortwave

you can also listen via Media Player at:

www.cfrb.com/

You'll need to access the site using Internet Explorer since
Media Player seems to choke using any version of Netscape -
thanks Mr. Bill!


To call the program dial:

On-Air     416-872-1010
            1-800-561-CFRB
            *TALK [local mobiles]

Errol Bruce-Knapp







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

             Whitley Striber to speak at MindScience Foundation

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:00:56 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:37:37 -0500
Subject: Whitley Striber to speak at MindScience Foundation


Hello all,

Was thumbing through Austin's Nov/Dec 1999 issue of Whole
Health-Your Guide to Health & Well Being. There is also info at
the url below.


SMiles
-=-=-=-=-


http://www.mindscience.org/calendar.htm

Mind Science Foundation Speakers Series Presents

UFO's: THE NEW PROOF
Whitley Strieber

Monday, Nov. 1, 1999
6:30pm McAllister Auditorium
1300 San Pedro Avenue
Call (210) 821-6094


Widely recognized for 'personalizing' contacts with apparent
aliens through his blockbuster novels Communion, Transformation
and Breakthrough, Whitley Strieber explores provocative new
evidence proving that strange objects are sighted within our
atmosphere. Materials from his NBC special based on NASA video
footage, film taken by private citizens, and footage never
before shown to the public, impact what we now believe about
UFO's and aliens. In the wake of increased civilian sightings,
is declassification of government UFO archives next?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:25:46 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:45:11 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 23:47:10 +0100

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:49:26 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Recently, Jenny Randles questioned the French COMETA report, for
 >>its presentation of the famous Lakenheath case (message of July
 >>25) :

 ><snip>

 >>Well, Jenny Randles raised that question as a "test of the
 >>objectivity of COMETA". To me it is now a test of her
 >>objectivity : how can you play such a trick, Mrs Randles ?

 >You are misleading this list attrociously.

<snip>

To Mrs Jenny Randles and the List

In order to answer to your message of October 30, I have asked
journalist Bernard Thouanel his reaction : you will find it as a
second part of this message, sent with his approval of course. I
admit that I have used his private exchange a bit too fast. He
did authorize me to use abstracts of his E-Mail message to you
and mention your answer (and he explains the reason why), but he
had asked for me to submit my message to him before sending it,
which I forgot to do. However, as you will see, apart from that,
we are fundamentally in agreement.

First, I inform you that I made my message at the request of the
Cometa.

I can tell you that they were quite upset by your questioning,
coming just after violent attacks by two French ufologists,
Pierre Lagrange in the French press and Perry Petrakis on the
Internet, a few days after the publication of their report by
the magazine VSD "Special Issue" in July.

UFO UpDates subscribers may recall the very negative message of
Petrakis which was passed on this list on July 22, less than one
week after the publication of the report in France.

Then came your message of July 25 questioning the quality of
their work, before having had any chance to look at it. It was
resented as a very unfriendly attitude by Cometa.

These attacks led me to write urgently a summary of their
report, although I had no connection with them at the time. They
approved it, I passed it on the Internet at the beginning of
August, and they thanked me for that.

You claim now that your statement was perfectly normal. Well, I
maintain it was not, and the reason why is very simple to grasp
:

You reproached the Cometa to not have asked you for your new
testimonies of pilots on the Lakenheath case. But you knew that,
if they had asked for a documented file on them, you could not
have given it !

So, if we juge the situation from an objective viewpoint, all
you could give was a few pages in your book " Something in the
Air " (" Danger in the Air " in the American edition), and maybe
a copy of the BBC show. Clearly not enough to attack them the
way you did.

OK, they did not have your book. I suspect that, even if they
had it, they might have decided not to mention it and preferred
to wait for more solid official documentation.

I maintain that it was a pretty bad trick on your part, just at
the moment when the report was under violent attack by Petrakis
on the Internet, and by Pierre Lagrange in the French press.

For the record, Lagrange signed a full page article in the well
known newspaper " Liberation ", as soon as July 21, with this
grotesque accusation :

" Between " X Files " and " Independance day ", the report of "
experts " published by VSD feeds the disinformation on UFOs by
ridiculing the subject. But ufologists are far from being all
crazy people ".

And the French weekly " L’Express ", quoting the same
Lagrange, titled " UFOs : A delirious report ". After that,
there was deafening silence in the French medias (recently, a
CableTV debate show on UFOs did not even mention it).

Very recently, there has been an article by Perry Petrakis in
his own UFO review," Phenomena ", attacking again violently the
Cometa report. In this article, your message of July 25 is
entirely reproduced, translated in French, and presented as a
major argument against the report.

What is going on ? Why all these violent attacks against a
report which surely is not perfect, but has the merit of voicing
a positive opinion on UFOs from a batch of senior military
officers ? I suspect that the answer is that they have thrown a
stone in the pond of UFO secrecy, and some people don't like
that ! They had the courage to consider seriously the Roswell
case and to question the American policy of secrecy regarding
UFOs. Pretty embarassing, coming from several French generals,
isn't it?

One more word on the never ending question of evidence of alien
presence on this planet. To me, there is a mountain of evidence
of that presence, and it’s a kind of surrealistic debate to
question it. You just have to read the Twining letter of
September 1947, for instance, to begin to grasp that.

Gildas Bourdais


Now herewith is the message sent to me by journalist Bernard
Thouanel, with his authorization to transmit it on UFO UpDates
(written in English for that purpose) :

Dear Gildas,

After the recent publication this autumn of an article written
by ufologist Perry Petrakis in his magazine "Phenomena" n° 42,
entitled "The War of the Worlds as viewed by COMETA", and
precisely the last part  (pages 18 and 19) showing the position
of the british ufologist, Mrs Jenny Randles about the 1956
Lakenheath case, and after an in depth discussion of it with
several Cometa members, on one side, and yourself on another
side, I decided to react and communicate an abstract of my
E-Mail private correspondence I had this summer with Mrs
Randles, precisely on lastJuly 26th.

Several days later, in october,  you mentionned over the phone
that you intented to publish a message on the UFO Updates list
using some elements of these E-Mail messages between Mrs Randles
and myself.

At this time,  and regarding the situation, I gave you my full
agreement to use parts of this exchange on the only condition
that you would  submit your message to me before sending it, in
the view of verifying that any private details could be wrongly
given to the  List.

I would have greatly appreciated to receive a copy of your
message before it was sent on UFO Updates, but for a reason I
could not explain, you did not do it.

Secondly, Mrs Randles is right when she says that our exchange
was done  under privacy at this time. I proposed her such an
agreement because at this time the Cometa and my publisher, Mr.
François Siegel, advised me not to make publicity over the
web, as objectively, I was involved officially in the
publication of the Cometa Report.

But I disagree when Mrs Randles explains to you that she
supplied me with a  copy of his book  entitled "Danger in the
Air", with her permission to use information  she wrote in it on
the Lakenheath case, for making an article in the next  V.S.D.
"Hors-Serie". Anyway, acting such a way without having the
written permission of both author and publisher would mean a
possible copyright infringement. It was simply and purely  an
exchange, by which I mailed her a copy of the Cometa Report
published by VSD "Hors-Serie", and Mrs Randles sent me a copy of
her book "Danger in the Air"  just for a possible review in the
magazine.  Period. I note that Mrs Randles never aknowledged to
have well  received the copy of the report mailed to her
address.

Third, although I proposed her an exchange of documents
involving UFO sightings by French  pilots (and possibly an
introduction to the pilots), I confirm that Mrs Randles seems
very reluctant, and did not want to (or could not) introduce me
to the RAF retired crews involved in the 1956 Lakenheath case
(nearly 44 years ago!)  or give me any official documents she
obtained, mainly because of her contract with BBC, as she
claimed, and (right or wrong), because of the Official Secrets
Act regarding RAF crews.

I respect her position as she is totally free to cooperate
or not with  a foreign aerospace journalist.

But I am very amazed to discover what she claimed in
her last message to UFO Updates.

Incidently, she never informed or proposed me that next year I
could receive a UFOIN  report about the 1956 case in the near
future.

As a matter of fact, this association (as British Ufology
rebirth!) did not exist at the time of our correspondence in
July.

As far as I know, Mrs Randles did not propose either to send me
a video tape  showing the BBC interview with the RAF retired
Venom crews, which was aired several years ago on the T.V.
channels in England, and presumably in the USA.

It goes without saying that I would have appreciated such a
proposal, and possibly would have introduced Mrs Randles to the
Cometa, for an additional information  on the Lakenheath case.
But she did not.

So, I am wondering why Mrs Jenny Randles made so much noise
about  the Cometa investigation policy concerning the 1956
Lakenheath case on the UFO Updates list and possibly on other
lists, if she could not provide them with all the details she
has, or if she would not have the will to communicate the
official documents and the interview transcript she obtained to
the Cometa or/and journalists.

There is a nonsense here I could not understand
from Mrs Randles.

I don't find personally this is effectively a very cooperative
way of thinking.


That's all I can say about this.

Sincerely,

Bernard Thouanel
Editor-in-Chief

V.S.D. "Hors-Serie"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:28:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:47:11 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 99 11:16:14 PDT


 >Of course what self-styled skeptics and psychosociologists love
 >to discuss is belief, and not evidence, and who can blame them?
 >Their operating principle might be expressed this way: What I
 >know I _know_; what you know you only believe. No wonder
 >productive discussion is impossible.

This is a poular misconception among the saucerian faithful
Jerry. All the sceptical and PS people I know are _more_ than
happy to get out in the field and study whatever evidence they
can find. Unfortunately this is usually very little. But to
argue that we don't is just silly and completely untrue. As you
well know from seeing work done by Dave, Jenny and myself we do
whatever is necessary when we work on a case. That our
conclusions are often (but not always) that of an IFO nature
only reflects what we find, and can demonstrate we have found,
not our believe systems.

 >Interesting that you compare science's search for ETI to the
 >Blair Witch project.

No Jerry, that bit was a _joke_,, one which clearly didn't make
it across the Atlantic in one piece!

 >Interesting, too, that you dismiss all
 >exobiologists and exobiological literature with the same sorts
 >of ad hominems you usually reserve for ufologists who disagree
 >with you.  That may make you feel better, but from anybody's
 >perspective but  your own, it certainly doesn't accomplish
 >anything.

Had you read more carefully Jerry you would have noticed
I used no ad hominems, merely questioned the motives
which lay behind the popularisation of all things space.

 >In fact, there is nothing in the literature of exo- or
 >astrobiology that makes UFOs an outrageous notion.  Given a
 >densely populated galaxy (a view widely shared by scientists who
 >have given thought to the subject, as the SETI/ETI literature
 >attests), ET visitors are not only possible but probable.

I don't doubt that for a second. But the disciplines you mention
are, at present, purely theoretical as they have nothing to
study. That's just a teensy bit problematic when applied to the
study of UFOs etc, because there is no biology to study there
either, as the entities only exist in narrative form. And just
because _some_ scientists believe the galaxy is densely
populated it doesn't mean it is!

 >  Their
 >absence -- at least to the anti-UFO contingent -- is often used
 >by critics to argue that intelligent life is rare to nonexistent
 >in the universe.  Moreover, a number of  pro-ETI scientists
 >contend that, for a host of reasons, intelligent,
 >technology-generating beings would likely look like humanoids.

They may well do - but at this moment on planet earth, in the
subject of ufology, their contentions have no relevance because
of the lack of evidence to back them up. And that _despite_ the
interest shown by the physical scientists you mention.

 >This idea is at least mentioned in just about every book I've
 >read on the subject.  One well-regarded scientific writer, the
 >mathematician John L. Casti, has even said ETs may well look
 >much like the gray entities of abduction lore -- this even
 >though Casti professes skepticism about UFOs.  Another SETI
 >writer, Edward Ashpole, did a whole book (The UFO Phenomena
 >[1995]) documenting the close match between exobiology and what
 >has been reported of UFO appearance and behavior.

All very interesting but again, in view of the lack of evidence,
amounting to zilch. Just because it's in a book doesn't make it
true Jerry!

 >In short, there is no a priori reason why ETs could not
 >be here or why they would not appear as they do in
 >UFO sightings and encounters.

Well, no, Jerry - assuming of course that they exist in the
first place... and your evidence for that is?

 > To reduce the various
 >very interesting questions raised by ETI speculations and
 >UFO reports to fairylore or to Blair Witch amounts to
 >little more than an exercise in -- I am trying to be charitable
 >here -- sheer mental laziness.

Discounting my feeble attempt at humour with the Blair Witch we
must agree to disagree about the fairylore aspect. I've gone
both ways on this. At first I was sure fairylore was relevant to
ufology, then I changed my mind (after speaking to Eddie Bullard
and reading his stuff). Now I'm back at my original position
again.

 >It tells us more about you,
 >Andy, than about the larger questions that should
 >concern all of us.

This is number four in Jerry's tried and tested 'Sarcasm for
beginners' series. I think I've collected 'em all now! Do I get
an album to stick 'em in. You could give them away on the front
of IUR Jerry!

Elsewhere in a reply to the esteemed Dr Clarke you noted that
some of the case he mentioned weren't 'classics'. Unfortunately
the somewhat American-centric world view of ufology mentions
very few UK cases (there aren't that many in your excellent UFO
Encyclopedia Jerry). But they exist and the UK ones dave
mentioned _are_ classics here at least. I would also content
that the Aurora case he mentions is a classic too.

I realise that by Jerry's spin-doctoring listers may get the
idea that certain UK sceptics are convinced that everything can
be reduced to an IFO. Let's clear this up again.

What we _are_ saying is that as many cases - even 'good' cases
_are_ reducable to IFOs then _all_ UFO cases have that
potential. I fully accept there are many as yet unsolved cases,
but that fact, coupled with the prevailing myth of the late 20th
century does not make them ET in origin.

On that subject I happen to think that the Shag Harbour case is
a really good example of a UFO and I look forward to reading Don
Ledger's book about it in due course. Is anyone aware of
anything critical which has been written on that case?

Happy Trails

Andy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                          Re: Aliens Stole My Title

From: Karl T Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:44:30 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:49:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Aliens Stole My Title


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Aliens Stole My Title
 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:58:21 -0000


Jenny & List Fiends --

 >PS: In case anyone doesnt get it. Whilst the above facts about
 >book titles are quite true this is of course all in fun. I do
 >know titles cannot be copyrighted. I also got my own back on Tim
 >by naming a l997 book 'Alien Contact' (and it did far better
 >than the original 15 years before!) Mind you I still got
 >attacked in Magonia for 'recycling titles' as it was put.
 >Evidently they did not appreciate this UFOlogical in joke. For
 >now Time Storms is still to be called Time Storms. I think.

 >Best wishes,

 >Jzxlptrroy Rndlseeessqprty

 >(Jenny Randles)
 >(authors names might be next so I am playing safe)

Lovely Halloween laugh, Jzxlptrroy! -- Cheers, Kzrilarghgliphznix







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                      FYI - Alien Base by Timothy Good

From: Lucius Farish <weblf123@webtv.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:19:41 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:53:29 -0500
Subject: FYI - Alien Base by Timothy Good


[Non-Subscriber Post]

ALIEN BASE by Timothy Good

Praised by Arthur C. Clarke, ALIEN BASE represents nearly forty
years of research by best-selling author and internationally
acknowledged expert Timothy Good into claims of actual contacts
with extraterrestrial beings.

Nowadays, stories of abductions by small, bug-eyed beings have
become fashionable.  This has led to an unbalanced perspective.
In redressing the balance, Timothy Good, author of ABOVE TOP
SECRET and ALIEN CONTACT, shows in his latest book, ALIEN BASE,
that descriptions of extraterrestrial beings are far more
diverse than we suppose.  He recounts, for example, numerous
encounters with human-appearing aliens dating from the turn of
the century, many from his own unpublished files.

ALIEN BASE also includes a truly astonishing collection of
photographs, some showing actual extraterrestrial beings.

Written by an author renowned for his scholarly and
unsensational approach to the UFO subject, ALIEN BASE
nevertheless makes the sensational claim that several alien
species have established bases on Earth.

"...certainly very impressive" -- Sir Arthur
     C. Clarke

"An astonishing work which contains new       reports of USO
(unidentifed
     submergible object) sightings, animal
     mutilation files, grounded UFOs and a
     fascinating photo section" -- UFO
     MAGAZINE

"ALIEN BASE is packed with new,
     startling and hitherto unpublished
     reports of interplanetary encounters -
     including retrievals of alien craft and
     bodies, eye-witness accounts from
     military and civilian pilots, and one-to-
     one meetings with visitors from outer
     space - based on an impressive weight
     of testimony" -- The Scotsman

"...will come to be regarded as pivotal in
     shaping our understanding of the
     phenomenon of alien contact" --
     MUFON UFO JOURNAL

ALIEN BASE is published by Avon Books (a HarperCollins Company) at
$15.00.
ISBN 0-380-80449-2.

      www.avonbooks.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Oct > Oct 31

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 18:58:12 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Sat, 30 Oct 99 11:23:38 PDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 15:40:30 -0400
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I regard as empty posturing the assertion that the ETH and the
 >larger notion of ETI are equivalent to a belief in elves and fairies.
 >I would like to think that you would have a more interesting
 >argument than that by now well-worn cliche.  Notions such as
 >ETH and ETI may be right or wrong, but they are not mere
 >superstition.

That's where we will have to agree to disagree. I find the
notion quite an interesting argument, and certainly as
interesting as the "now well-worn cliche" that UFOs are visitors
from outer space.

Your adherence to that particular theory, to use the phrase you
are so fond of, says more about you than it does about UFOs and
their ultimate origins.

 >>And you have unwittingly hit the nail on the head - it is
 >>precisely because the physical sciences are so "narrow" in
 >>themselves that the disciplines I have cited are more suited to
 >>this subject.

 >Nope.  The disciplines you have cited are not qualified to study
 >physical evidence.

You miss my point. What physical evidence?

We hear a lot about physical evidence, viz the "highly significant"
radiation supposedly left by the UFO in Rendlesham Forest.
Eventually, a physical scientist looked at the so-called evidence
and found it was not significant at all.

The "evidence" was only significant because someone like you
proclaimed it to be - folklore in the making, I would say.

How much more of the "physical evidence" you make so much
of will equally melt away when it is looked at by physical
scientists who have no vested interest in the subject?

Going back to Rendlesham, radiation experts quickly dismissed
the significance of those readings, but that in itself tells us nothing
about what the people who *believed* those initial claims
(including me!) then went on to do -
i.e. use the Rendlesham "radiation" as further evidence to
suggest UFOs are real and extraterrestrial because the evidence
proves they  *do* leave ground traces.

That claim, added to the growing folklore of the subject, helped convince
a few more people, and added to the growing mythology.

That's just one example of why claims about "physical evidence"
  leave me unconvinced.

But that's not to say there isn't more convincing physical evidence
elsewhere, and I'm ready to see what properly qualified physical
scientists have to say about it.

Jenny has made a good point elsewhere that both physical scientists
and the disciplines I have cited can complement each other
in the study of UFOs.

I was not trying to suggest that physical scientists have no role to play,
but countering your "empty posturing" which I interpreted as a
sweeping dismissal of the contribution which human and social
scientists can make to the study of this phenomenon.
Only someone with a completely closed mind could suggest that;
and I don't believe you have one.

 >Since you have already decided UFOs are a "myth," I guess
 >those physical scientists -- whose evidence suggests otherwise --
 >re unwelcome at your table.  From my perspective, however,
 >you're serving up empty calories while vehemently declaring your
 >meal to be the only nutritional one.

Nice prose but this meal is simply fairy food. I don't dismiss
the usefulness of physical scientists, because if you were to
take a look at my writings on this subject I regularly invoke
the work of Persinger, Derr and others who have studied
earthquake lights/earthlights and other
geophysical/meteorological aspects of the phenomena that *are*
undoubtedly real, and of which there is plentiful evidence.

Where I don't see the evidence, is in regards to the much
trumpeted "proof" of extraterrestrial UFOs, which seems to be a
particular obsession of Jerry Clark.

 >>You can talk all you like about "astrobiology" and unprovable
 >>arguments about the possibility of life in outer space.

 >>The arguments of the SETI crowd might have some validity, but
 >>they have absolutely no connection with some funny light someone
 >>saw over Arkansas the other night.

 >I am sure you are sincere in your belief, Dave, but your
 >touching sincerity does not make your statement of faith any
 >more persuasive to those of us who think such questions will be
 >settled by evidence.

I agree - so let's see the evidence!

 >The sorts of arguments you're using have been thoroughly trashed
 >by a number of folklorists, including David Hufford, Thomas E.
 >Bullard, Bill Ellis, and more.  You tend to speak as if from on
 >high -- as if your degree grants you the authority to render
 >sweeping judgments to which we lesser mortals can only nod our
 >heads in unison, and vigorously -- when in fact, as I know from
 >my own interactions with folklorists, many are sympathetic to
 >anomalous claims, closet or not-so-closet heretics.

Not so - I may be sweeping, but I'm certainly not dismissive of
anomalous claims. I agree with the tradition you are describing,
that there are real anomalous phenomena at the core of much of
the UFO/paranormal pantheon and much folklore itself.

My writings on this subject - dating back to 1981 - demonstrate
that has always been my stance.

It's just that I do not accept that this core experience _has_
to be extraterrestrial in nature - to me, that is where the
modern myth takes its place.

A modern myth, born in the USA and exactly what you would
expect in the late 20th century.

In 1897 people expected to see Jules Verne airships, and saw
them; in 1913 people expected to see Zeppelins, and saw them.
Why are ET UFOs any different in 1999?

That's the cultural part - ie. the interpretation, as Isaac
Asimov is supposed to have said when told "so many people have
seen objects that looked like spaceships that 'there must be
something in it'... "Maybe there is, but think of all the people
in the history of the world who have seen ghosts and spirits and
angels. It's not what you see that's suspect, but how you
interpret what you see." That is my whole point, and what you
seem to be missing - there can be a real phenomena - and one
which physical scientists can study - without it necessarily
being ET in nature.

So there may be some folklorists who subscribe to a "tradition
of unbelief", but I'm not one of them.

 >>>Among these I can count equally well qualified and experienced
 >>>sociologists, folklorists, psychologists and historians, and
 >>>that's just in one small hick Yorkshire town, noted for its
 >>>open-minded academics.

 >I'm sure Sheffield is a nice town, Dave.  Don't put it down, or
 >I'll be forced to follow your example and judge my own beloved
 >Canby "one small hick Minnesota town. "  Actually, come to think
 >of it, John Rimmer did it for me the other week on this very
 >list.  Oh well, we can't _all_ live in London.

Sheffield's a lovely place actually - if you don't mind the odd
Tornado jet crashing into the moors while pursuing ET, that is.
It would be great if you could pay the home of the Full Monty a
visit sometime, join me for a Guinness or two in one of the
plentiful pubs, and you might find that our views are not as
divergent as what you seem to believe!

All best wishes,


Dave Clarke