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

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Nov 1999

  Nov 1:

   Obituary: Stefan Michalak - Chris Rutkowski [92]
   Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy - Jim Mortellaro [79]
   Re: Aliens Stole My Title - Jim Mortellaro [43]
   Gravity Waves Control - Eduardo Gomez [25]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [69]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [52]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Neil Morris [46]
   Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations? - Bob Young [27]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [536]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [160]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [196]

  Nov 2:

   Mars Observer Found - Brian Cuthbertson [29]
   CE2s And Frustrated Science - Jerome Clark [112]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Larry Hatch [49]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [31]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Henny van der Pluijm [50]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Neil Morris [98]
   Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations? - Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland [58]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [141]
   UFO Delta Night Lights? - John Auchettl [20]
   Nick Pope's Weird World - Georgina Bruni [120]
   A Modern Myth, Born In The USA? - John W. Auchettl [62]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - Donald . Ledger [18]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [194]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [24]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [45]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [31]

  Nov 3:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [34]
   SETI and the Moon - Nick Balaskas [58]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [14]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [33]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Scott Caput [76]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Jim Mortellaro [77]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Todd Lemire [36]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Rory Lushman [65]
   Alien Egg Toy Mistaken for Human Foetus - Ian J. Darlington [19]
   Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO - neil morris [30]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Moderator UFO UpDates [98]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [23]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [14]
   Sighting Info Request - Wales Oct 12/99 - Marc Bell [18]
   Re: Nick Pope's Weird World - Eduardo Gomez [14]
   Australian Sighting Reports Oz Files 04.11.1999 - Robert Frola [154]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Marty Murray [45]
   'Lasers' - Eduardo Gomez [29]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [189]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [126]
   Re: Philip Taylor Kramer - David** CTR **" [12]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [52]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [104]

  Nov 4:

   UFO Desk - Diana Botsford Interview - Paul C. WIlliams [22]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Peter Brookesmith - Duke of
   Mendoza [201]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Rebecca Keith [41]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [166]
   UFO Report: Toledo, Ohio [October 15, 1999] - Kenny Young [11]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 28 - Joseph Trainor [503]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [48]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [75]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [119]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [110]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Henny van der Pluijm [30]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [262]
   Re: 'Lasers' - Sean Jones [15]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Andy Roberts [150]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [24]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [24]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [116]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [162]

  Nov 5:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Stephen Lewis [29]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [60]
   Re: 'Lasers' - Nick Balaskas [23]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - James Easton [123]
   UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been - Brian Cuthbertson
   [43]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Peter Brookesmith, Duke of
   Mendoza [43]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Peter Brookesmith, Duke of
   Mendoza [20]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Peter Brookesmith, Duke of
   Mendoza [75]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Greg Sandow [141]
   'Into The Unknown'? - Dan Geib [25]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [22]
   Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In - Stig Agermose [66]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - John Auchettl [248]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [93]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [53]
   Filer's Files #44 -- 1999 - Majorstar@aol.com [308]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [23]

  Nov 6:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dave Bowden [58]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [42]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Henny van der Pluijm [23]
   Recent NIDS Reports - Colm Kelleher - NIDS [24]
   Re: 'Lasers' - Eduardo Gomez [40]
   Re: Gravity Waves Control - Eduardo Gomez [27]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Eduardo Gomez [11]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Greg Sandow [13]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Greg Sandow [179]
   Re: Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In - Gavin A. J. McLeod
   [22]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [41]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [18]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [31]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Serge Salvaille [30]
   Woods Request and MJ12 - Murray Bott [183]
   Project/Operation "Majic" - Murray Bott [135]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #324 - Alfred Lehmberg [116]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [31]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Larry Hatch [48]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [88]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Greg Sandow [16]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [36]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [134]

  Nov 7:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [187]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [15]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [54]
   'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments - Bill Chalker [87]
   UFOIN - Dave Baker [70]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Alfred Lehmberg [43]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [178]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [108]
   The Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia Project - John Hayes [46]
   Re: 'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments - Andy Roberts [30]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Woods & Ledger - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [27]
   Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [109]
   Official Italian 'MJ-12' Documents? - Nick Balaskas [30]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [154]
   Arnold�s UFO-Film? - Werner Walter [9]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Rudiak [380]

  Nov 8:

   [SO] Preview: The Face on Mars Processed... - Steve Wingate [39]

  Nov 9:

   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Stan Friedman [93]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [62]
   Housekeeping - Globalserve Suffers 'Nother - UFO UpDates - Toronto [7]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [29]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [32]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [38]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [29]
   Re: Project/Operation "Majic" - Robert Gates [23]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Henny van der Pluijm [13]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [80]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [73]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Larry Hatch [79]
   Re: Project Pounce - Michael McHugh [20]
   Australian DoD UFO File Location - John Auchettl [193]
   Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell? - Sue Kovios [20]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [113]

  Nov 10:

   NSA UFO Declassifieds - Sue Kovios [10]
   Further Re: Cosmic Crashes? - Bill Chalker [8]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [205]
   Re: Project/Operation "Majic" - Stan Friedman [41]
   Re: Woods Request and MJ12 - Stan Friedman [139]
   Re: Paul Ferrughelli & NSRC - Stephen Lewis [25]
   'Manises' UFO Case Solved - James Easton [94]
   Triangular Satellite Formations - Jacqueline Cosford [35]
   Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California - Todd Lemire [16]
   Chupacabras - Thiago Ticchetti [26]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [28]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jerome Clark [40]
   Collaboration Request By An Italian Editor - Adriano Forgione [19]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Ed Stewart [149]
   Re: Triangular Satellite Formations - Jim Mortellaro [49]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Alfred Lehmberg [57]
   Re: Woods Request and MJ12 - Ed Stewart [58]
   Re: Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell? - Stan Friedman [32]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Brian Cuthbertson [54]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Marie Ivey [17]
   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey - Larry Hatch [24]
   Re: Project/Operation "Majic" - Murray Bott [35]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Brian Straight [20]
   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey - Larry Hatch [27]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [100]
   [anomalit] BAR 199910 - Bufo Calvin [152]

  Nov 11:

   Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures - Joachim Koch [46]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Brian Cuthbertson [39]
   Phoenix Police Chopper & UFO (Transcript) - Stig Agermose [48]
   Re: Clinton speaks of Alien Attack - Stephen MILES Lewis [9]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Mark Cashman [141]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Mark Cashman [27]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Mac Tonnies [22]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Mark Cashman [20]
   Re: Project/Operation "Majic" - Alintelbot@aol.com [17]
   Re: UFO Delta Night Lights? - John Auchettl [113]
   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - - Todd Lemire [43]
   Are We Alone? [Was: British Ufology...] - David Rudiak [217]
   Re: Project/Operation "Majic" - Stan Friedman [52]

  Nov 12:

   Re: Are we Alone? - Graeme Best [83]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 29 - Joe Trainor [498]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Ed Stewart [67]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [37]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [57]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [40]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Eduardo Gomez [25]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Dennis Stacy [49]
   Washington State Near Top In UFO Sightings - Blair Cummins [79]
   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Larry Hatch [53]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [145]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [149]
   Answers about the Chupacabras - Thiago Ticchetti [35]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [478]
   Fireball Puzzles Volusia County Residents - Blair Cummins [35]

  Nov 13:

   Re: Pulsating UFOs Over Washington State - KAnder6444@aol.com [33]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [32]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [32]
   Filer's Files #45 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [382]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Mark Cashman [21]
   The Drake Equation - Eduardo Gomez [26]
   Re: Are We Alone? - David Rudiak [139]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [42]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Nick Balaskas [67]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   UFO News piece, WRTV Indianapolis - Kenny Young [46]

  Nov 14:

   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jim Mortellaro [123]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Rudiak [135]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Larry Hatch [39]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Larry Hatch [45]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #325 - Alfred Lehmberg [86]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Larry Hatch [105]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [59]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Greg Sandow [48]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [45]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Gavin A. J. McLeod [44]
   Heads up! The Leonids Are Coming - Jacqueline Cosford [21]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Eduardo Gomez [25]
   Re: Egyptair Flight 990 - Eduardo Gomez [37]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [116]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Nick Balaskas [55]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [122]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Bill Jacobs [34]
   Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here - Stephen MILES Lewis
   [55]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Dennis Stacy [94]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Asgeir W. Skavhaug [55]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Stan Friedman [83]
   Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun - ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto [58]

  Nov 15:

   Re: The Drake Equation - Mac Tonnies [31]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Jim Mortellaro From: Jsmortell@aol.com [73]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gary Alevy [53]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Mark Cashman [103]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Mark Cashman [72]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Mark Cashman [57]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Mark Cashman [29]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Mark Cashman [40]
   UFO Scotland? - James Easton [5]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Bob Young [28]
   CPR-Canada News: Formation at Lowville, Ontario - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [66]
   Re: Are We Alone? - David Rudiak [105]
   UFO Shapes & Balloons [was: Re: British Ufology... - Eduardo Gomez [54]
   Astrobiology [was: Re: Are we Alone? ] - Eduardo Gomez [26]
   UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' [Was: Re: British - John Rimmer [42]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Tim Matthews [18]
   Re: Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here - Stan Friedman [49]
   Exagerated Demise Reports, McCoy, GT & Hobbes - Jim Mortellaro [77]
   Russian Booster Controversy Really Heats Up - Kenny Young [158]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Henny van der Pluijm [17]
   Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re: - Dennis Stacy [246]
   UFO*BC Website Update 11-99 - UFO*BC [31]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Bob Young [23]
   Astronomers Prove Extrasolar Planets Real - Stig Agermose [90]
   NSW - Oz: Seven Fishermen & Video Of Sighting - Stig Agermose [35]
   Time For A Cease Fire? - Jenny Randles [75]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Steven Kaeser [49]
   Re: Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun - Bruce Maccabee [37]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Ed Stewart [64]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jim Deardorff [54]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [26]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [78]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [148]
   AIC Website Back Online - John Velez [24]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Jim Mortellaro [120]
   How On Earth Do You Lure Little Green Tourists? - Steven J. Dunn [62]
   Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons - Jim Mortellaro [101]
   Minister To Open Britain's X-Files - United Kingdom UFO Network [84]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [50]

  Nov 16:

   Re: The Drake Equation - Stan Friedman [51]
   Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage - David Rudiak [62]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Terry Blanton [36]
   Astrobiologists Flying High To Study Leonid Meteors - NASA Ames
   Research Center [117]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Bill Jacobs [48]
   Re: Are we Alone? - Pat McCartney [29]
   Housekeeping - Posting Rules - UFO UpDates - Toronto [67]
   Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' - James Easton [201]
   [lunascan] Village On The Moon? - Francis Ridge [15]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Eduardo Gomez [14]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Terry Blanton [36]
   Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons - Eduardo Gomez [104]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Eduardo Gomez [15]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Eduardo Gomez [28]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Eduardo Gomez [15]
   Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea - Bill Chalker [45]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Alfred Lehmberg [21]
   Crop Circle Music - Patricia Mason [20]
   Re: The Drake Equation - David Rudiak [122]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Brian Straight [69]
   Re: Egyptair Flight 990 - Brian Straight [14]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jim Mortellaro [63]
   Re: Sour Grapes and Science - Jim Mortellaro [21]
   Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage - Dennis Stacy [73]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Eduardo Gomez [12]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - John Rimmer [37]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [147]

  Nov 17:

   Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings - Kenny Young [34]
   More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings - Kenny Young [26]
   Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings - Kenny Young [20]
   Video Shot In Indiana - To Be Televised - Kenny Young [17]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Sean Jones [42]
   Sighting Report OZ File 10.11. 1999 - Robert Frola [33]
   Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage - Dennis Stacy [171]
   Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999 - Robert Frola [46]
   Sighting Report OZ File 20.10.1999 - Robert Frola [21]
   Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999 - Robert Frola [37]
   A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Bruce Lanier Wright [12]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Stan Friedman [93]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [28]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [26]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Nick Balaskas [37]
   Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons - Jim Mortellaro [155]
   Re: The Drake Equation - UFO UpDates - Toronto [26]
   ET Counter Program - John Auchettl [96]
   Re: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea - Larry Hatch [63]
   Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings - Diane Lovett [26]
   Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night - Stan Gordon [42]
   Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings - Terry Blanton [14]

  Nov 18:

   Re: The Drake Equation - Steven Kaeser [21]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Marty Murray [24]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Eduardo Gomez [30]
   Re: The Drake Equation - ed gehrman [106]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [25]
   Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Stan Friedman [21]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jim Mortellaro [51]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [18]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Jacqueline Cosford [36]
   Re: - Matt DeBow [61]
   Re: Crop Circle Music - Jacqueline Cosford [27]
   Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Larry Hatch [25]
   Re: Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night - Larry Hatch [54]
   Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' - Roy J Hale [26]
   Re: Crop Circle Music - Roy J Hale [26]
   Pamela Stonebrooke's Reptilian Encounters - Stig Agermose [192]
   Papua New Guinea 'UFO' Satellite? - Dr Ron Barnett [43]
   Papua New Guinea UFO Like Star Wars - Dr Ron Barnett [58]
   Thousands Watch UFO Over ENB Sky - Dr Ron Barnett [83]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 30 - Joseph Trainor [496]
   Stormy Night For Astrobiologists Studying Leonid - NASANEWS [159]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [14]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Terry Blanton [26]

  Nov 19:

   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [14]
   Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Matt DeBow [61]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jim Mortellaro [70]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Steven Kaeser [49]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - "Jenny Randles" [51]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jenny Randles [51]
   Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Gary Alevy [13]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [53]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Greg Sandow [13]
   Additions to Project 1947 Website - Jan Aldrich [42]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Mac Tonnies [52]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jim Mortellaro [122]
   Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' - Tony Spurrier [33]
   Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' - Larry Hatch [41]
   Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Stan Friedman [30]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Tim Matthews [88]
   Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa - Ed Stewart [53]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Gildas Bourdais [34]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Henny van der Pluijm [28]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [55]
   Roswell - Question - Anthony Chippendale [9]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [132]
   'Dogon' Anthropologist Germaine Dieterlen Dies - Bruno Mancusi [28]

  Nov 20:

   Laura Lee E-News - November 20, 1999 - Laura Lee [214]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Nick Balaskas [56]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Dennis Stacy [59]
   Filer's Files #46 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [374]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [61]

  Nov 21:

   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Tony Spurrier [20]
   25 Years After Arecibo Signal... - Stig Agermose [151]
   Fireball Over Midwest Stuns - Stig Agermose [75]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [17]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #326 - Alfred Lehmberg [92]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Todd Lemire [60]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Bob Young [37]
   Issue 103 - Pt1 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO
   Network [366]
   Issue 103 - Pt2 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO
   Network [347]
   Issue 103 - Pt3 - United Kingdom UFO Network - United Kingdom UFO
   Network [347]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Marty Murray [39]
   Re: The Drake Equation - David Rudiak [114]
   Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go? - John Velez [31]
   Re: Krapf & 'The Contact Has Begun' - Predictions - Mac Tonnies [26]
   UFOs and Nanotechnology [was: The Drake Equation] - Mac Tonnies [81]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Michael - EBK [33]

  Nov 22:

   Book Review: 'Captured by Aliens' - Blair Cummins [72]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [58]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Bob Young [25]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [132]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - John Rimmer [40]
   Happy Bird Day - Jim Mortellaro [40]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [45]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [77]
   Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go? - GT McCoy [48]
   Light From Distant Planet Detected - Stig Agermos [67]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Alfred Lehmberg [109]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [39]
   Re: - Michel Potay [22]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [96]

  Nov 23:

   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Roy J Hale [22]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Roy J Hale [38]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [33]
   Nov.16, 1999 Midwest fireball(s) - Andrei Ol'khovatov" [18]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - Jim Mortellaro [133]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [83]
   Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go? - John Velez [45]
   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - John Rimmer [51]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Sharon Kardol [22]
   Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go? - John Velez [66]
   Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go? - Larry Hatch [39]
   Re: Beware Of Contrails? - Stig Agermose [67]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Tony Spurrier [29]

  Nov 24:

   Re: UFO UpDates FAQ? - Jerome Clark [15]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Bob Young
   <YoungBob2@aol.com [23]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Michael J. Woods [39]
   Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn! - John Rimmer [148]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Alfred Lehmberg [31]
   The Man Who Keeps the FBI's Secrets - Stig Agermose [144]
   Re: CPR-Canada News: New Web Site Address - Paul Anderson -
   TMP/CPR-Canada [49]

  Nov 25:

   Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99 - Todd Lemire [55]
   MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Murray Bott [75]
   Perils of UFO Research - Michael J. Woods [82]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Sharon Kardol [29]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Stan Friedman [15]
   BBC Is Looking For Hoagland - Philip Mantle [15]
   John Mack on 'Today Show' 11/26 - Will Buech [13]
   Re: Perils of UFO Research - Terry Blanton [17]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Bob Young [31]
   Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures - David Gullick [48]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Jim Mortellaro Jsmortell@aol.com [69]
   Re: Happy Bird Day - Alfred Lehmberg [50]
   USAF UFO Annotated Bibiography 1969 - Todd Lemire [19]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 31 - Joseph Trainor [618]

  Nov 26:

   Re: Perils of UFO Research - Dave Bauer [33]
   Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Joachim Koch [91]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Bob Young [11]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Bob Young [9]
   Re: Are We Alone? - Jacqueline Cosford [89]
   Re: Perils of UFO Research - Bruce Maccabee [95]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Tony Spurrier [25]
   Commander Frank Borman and UFOs - Luis Eduardo Pacheco [9]
   Re: Perils of UFO Research - Rebecca [23]

  Nov 27:

   Filer's Files #47 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [358]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Jim Deardorff [54]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jerome Clark [44]
   Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures - Joachim Koch [28]
   Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra - Sean Jones [13]
   Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra - Jacques Poulet [24]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Tony Spurrier [17]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [57]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [57]
   Oliver Castle 'Crop-Circle' Formation? - Jim Deardorff [192]
   Re: Commander Frank Borman and UFOs - Todd Lemire [17]
   Cattle In Thousands Stampede - Queensland, Oz - Tony Robb - PRA [68]

  Nov 28:

   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 11-26-99 - Rense E-News [240]
   Frankovich - 'Where Heavens Meet' - Philip Mantle [27]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Roy J Hale [22]
   Re: Cattle In Thousands Stampede - Larry Hatch [33]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Larry Hatch [35]
   Re: Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99 - Todd Lemire [55]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [91]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jerome Clark [41]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - David Clarke [106]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #327 - Alfred Lehmberg [102]
   Re: Help Requested - Philip Mantle [12]
   Tonight - Chris Rutkowski on 'Strange Days... - EBK [33]

  Nov 29:

   Re: Help Requested - Bruno Mancusi [22]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jerome Clark [49]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [17]
   Re: The Drake Equation - David Rudiak [248]
   Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn! - Georgina Bruni [127]
   CPR-Canada News: Update on Viscount, Sask - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [140]
   Uri Geller - Warp Speed On UFO Physics - Blair Cummins [43]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Robert Gates [94]
   Sighting Report OZ File 0398 26.11.1999 - Diane Harrison [56]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Brian Straight [26]
   Robinson's Socorro Explanation - Jerry Cohen [56]
   UFO/Balloon? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [45]
   On False Memory - Brian Cuthbertson [22]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [118]
   Re: Earth's Twin In Space? - Erol Erkmen andromeda@mail.koc.net ()
   [382]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Dave Bowden [51]

  Nov 30:

   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [253]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Brian Cuthbertson [18]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Sharon Kardol [22]
   The UFO, The Sheriff & His Dog's Collar - Len Fedullo [129]
   Satellite Pictures? - Melanie Mecca [17]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jim Mortellaro [23]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Bob Young [32]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [77]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Kevin Randle [44]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [70]
   Re: UFO/Balloon? - Terry Blanton [60]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jerome Clark [40]
   [SO] TLC Airs 'UFO' Footage Dec 04 - Christopher O'Brien [27]
   The Drake Equation & 6 New Planets - Dennis Stacy [15]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [32]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [16]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Stan Friedman [184]
   Re: The Drake Equeetion & The NY Times - Dennis Stacy [10]
   CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Tony Craddock [31]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Nick Balaskas [32]

   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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                          Obituary: Stefan Michalak

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:51:26 +1800 (CST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 09:05:57 -0500
Subject: Obituary: Stefan Michalak


It is with great sadness that I report the passing of Stefan
Michalak, last week, at age 83.

Michalak was known to ufologists as the witness in one of the
most puzzling and well-documented CE2 cases on record. His close
encounter with an unidentified craft in the Canadian wilderness
in 1967 left him physically scarred. Medical examinations by
Canadian and American physicians could not offer a definitive
explanation of his wounds and aftereffects.

Until recently, despite the incredible amount of evidence in
support of his claimed experience, there were no explanations
offered by skeptics regarding "what really happened." Only two
published works have dealt with the case in any detail, offering
two greatly contrasting explanations. One skeptic simply noted
Michalak must have been a hoaxer, without addressing any of the
case's major details, while the other implied that Michalak must
have been the victim of a secret aerospace experiment. Neither
explanation was satisfactory.

I first met Michalak as a youth, when one of my playmates told
me his father had been burned by a flying saucer. At the time, I
was more interested in riding my bicycle and playing baseball
with my school friends than I was in my friend's father laying
sick in his bed. When I reached university and began reading
about UFOs and other scientific controversies, I realized that
no comprehensive study had ever been done on what I believed to
be the most significant UFO case in North America. I
re-established contact with my childhood friend and his family,
and spent many hours talking with them about their shared
experience. I say shared experience, because Michalak's entire
family was affected by what had occurred. They spoke bitterly
about their treatment at the hands of both media and
investigators, and understandably wished that the world would
simply leave them alone. However, Michalak himself stubbornly
refused to give in to pressure, and boldly and tirelessly told
visitors and callers about his experience. More significantly,
he did not alter the details of his story with each telling, and
he did not believe he had seen a craft from another world. He
said, realistically, that he did not know what the object had
been.

When Michalak went to the Mayo clinic following his experience,
he went as an outpatient, since Canadian medical insurance would
not cover his expenses. But he, himself, wanted to know what was
wrong with him. One can ask, logically, why an alleged hoaxer
would go to such trouble and expense. Regardless, however, the
psychiatric assessment of Michalak proved to be most
interesting; the examining physician found Michalak to be an
exceptionally stable and well-adjusted individual, with no
psychopathology or indication he was prone to making up stories.

I remember one incident very well which indicates Michalak's
character. When NBC flew his family and myself to the set of
Unsolved Mysteries, I had opportunity to spend many hours with
his family. We talked about many things, and I became further
convinced that his family was as mystified by his experience as
anyone else. But the most telling event took place while they
were filming him for the program.

Just before rolling film, the director wanted Michalak to relax
and feel more comfortable in front of the cameras. He began
talking with him about the weather, his work, what Canada was
like and other nonchalant topics. Then, the director said,
"Well, Steve, I guess your being burned by the UFO was the most
incredible thing that has ever happened in your life." To the
surprise of everyone on the set, Michalak answered, "Oh, no, it
wasn't." Prodded further, Michalak bravely told the story of his
experiences in the Nazi death camps, speaking bluntly and
unwaveringly about the atrocities he witnessed firsthand. No one
dared interrupt his story, and when he was finished, the set was
filled with a stunned silence; the entire crew was awestruck.
Later, one of the crew said to me, "This guy is the most
credible we've ever interviewed. What's being burned by a flying
saucer compared with Nazi ovens?" From that moment on, Michalak
was treated with much respect and dignity, justly deserved. The
questioning regarding the UFO turned from "Did it really
happen?" to "What happened?"

I don't know what transpired that spring afternoon in the
Canadian Shield. I know what Michalak told me, and I know that
he was not type of person to make up tall tales. I believe all
investigating bodies were truly puzzled by the case, and
desperately grasped for straws that would answer some of the
questions. Michalak alone knew, and we may never have all our
questions answered.

I offer condolences to his family, not only from myself but from
the entire ufological community. I was honoured to know Stefan
Michalak, and
he will be missed.

Chris Rutkowski
30 October 1999

--
Nobody in particular

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for the latest consumer electronic gadgets or computer
equipment? eBay has thousands of audio equipment, computer
games & accessories.  You never know what you might find at eBay!
http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/1142

-- eGroup Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/canufo/?m=1
-- Free email groups at eGroups.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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                     Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:07:49 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 09:17:14 -0500
Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: When Disclosure Serves Secrecy
 >Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:06:30 -0700

 >>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.


I just got rid of some sand in my left kidney.  It hurt a lot.
It hurt so much that the tears flowed.  Then, this morning we
all received the sad news of yet another major loss of life.
Even our small group, here in NY, of disastercom volunteers were
called out to help. In spite of the fact that the plane went
down in international waters, the US will head the investigation
and the retrieval.

I couldn't make it as I was still on demerol.  But I wrote this
to some friends, and thought I would share it with you, as it
applies to subjects discussed in this venue...



"The sand in my side is gone but the tears are still there.  Not
for me but for the lies, another piece of undigested beef.
Another line of bullshit.  Even if it was an accident, our
people should, by now, have lost faith in anything we are told
by those whom we elect to represent our interests.

We are not children.  We are adult citizens being treated like
children.  Already we are beginning to act like the children
they wish us to become.

We deserve more than swamp gas, empty fuel tanks replete with
vapor, a failure to use metric by one manufacturer (there have
been 18 "failures" in spacecraft to Mars out of 32) and
tragedies which are as wispy as the willow.  The time for truth
has long past.

When we finally learn truth, the real truth, no matter what the
subject, we shall lose our governments at the same time.  They
shall not be able to govern.  Which is what these bastards may
fear the most. Which is why American soldiers are being trained
to kill American Citizens.  Yet again, the truth shall set it's
fee.  And we shall not be able to afford it.

Is the US a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic?

Those of you who know the correct answer understand more than
the rest.  Those who do not, but care, should look it up.  Those
who care not, should continue doing what you've been doing all
along.  Nothing.  And deserve everything that comes to you.

Jim Mortellaro, Jr.






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

                          Re: Aliens Stole My Title

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:17:02 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 11:30:18 -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

 >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...

<snip>

 >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.

<snip>

 >Jzxlptrroy Rndlseeessqprty

 >(Jenny Randles)
 >(authors names might be next so I am playing safe)

We are sorry to inform you, Ms. Rndlseeessqprty, that the great
J. Jaime Gesundt has written a new book, published by the Canal
Street UFOlogical Society et Al, titled,
Zeepglipbxxxcqyziklyrpr.

This is the story of how a young lady from Brobdignag, made it
big after investing in Gripple Dripple, and now writes books on
the subjects of God, The Universe and Everything.  She also
becomes romantically involved with J. Jaime, who has a
reputation ... uh ...  well, a reputation.  You must read the
book.

J. Jaime Gesundt,
Publisher






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

                            Gravity Waves Control

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 11:45:48 -0500
Subject: Gravity Waves Control


Hello:

I just subscribed to this list, and I assume there are a few
scientists here (not that I'm really one myself).

The first time I've heard of gravity as being a wave (thus
capable of being amplified, modulated, etc) was through Bob
Lazar's claims. His story is very interesting, as much as the
laws of physics and processes involved in it, but I thought none
of that had been proved.

After more than a decade of reading for the first time the book
"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan, I bought the (sadly condensed) current
edition to read it again, and in Chapter XII, page 246, he
writes:

"There may be other methods of communication that have
substantial merit:

...optical or infrared lasers; pulsed neutrinos; modulated
gravity waves..."

That last sentence surprised me. How advanced is humanity when
it comes to gravity modulation, amplification, etc.? Also, can
we artificially create streams of neutrinos?

I though they were quite unsubstantial... I mean, almost no mass
at all.

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 03:30:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 12:05:39 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

David Clarke wrote:

 >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.

David

Re Rendlesham: With regards to the "experts" quickly dismissing
the radiation reading significance; may I remind you (which is
public knowledge) that this expert opinion was based on Lt
Colonel Halt's memorandum, not on "factual records" relating
specifically to the readings. Don't forget, Halt didn't even
give the correct dates! Having investigated this case for three
years I can assure you that this is only a fraction of the case
as a whole and contrary to what you suggest, it has nothing to
do with mythology.

You are acting like a typical sceptic, taking one or two
fragments of a case you have not investigated and debunking it.
It is comments like yours David, based on one sided views, that
are so destructive. How many more cases are "your gang"
intending to debunk without  _really_ investigating them?

Far too much time has been spent on debating the Rendlesham
radiation readings and the lighthouse theory, and that, in my
opinion is why this case has suffered over the years. When you
read my book on the Rendlesham investigationt, you can be sure
it will take a very brave sceptic to still admit to the
lighthouse theory - animal scratchings and the rest of the
nonsense offered for the case.

 >A modern myth, born in the USA and exactly what you would
 >expect in the late 20th century.

Nonsense! Eastern Europe was having UFO sightings before the US
was born. Why, they even had an encounter in July 1947, which is
supposedly when the US had their first known "famous" sightings.

 >In 1897 people expected to see Jules Verne airships, and saw
 >them;

Really! Bucharest 5 March 1843: 'It was _pyramidal in shape_,
and the side turned towards the horizon was shorter and not so
strongly lit up. The other side was broader and more radiant.'
Biblioteca Academiei (1) "Manuscris romanesce" 4043,f.1.

 >in 1913 people expected to see Zeppelins, and saw them.

Really! Bucovina 1905:'Doctor I.P, now retired, who comes from
Craiova, saw one summer evening in 1905 at Horodnicul de Sus
...an elongated _saucer shaped_ object bigger than the moon. It
was vividly lit up with its own source of lighting and flew
steadily westwards.'

 >Why are ET UFOs any different in 1999?

They are no different. They were seeing saucers and triangles
that they could not explain, just as we see them today. The only
difference is that we are more educated on flying machines.

 >So there may be some folklorists who subscribe to a "tradition
 >of unbelief", but I'm not one of them.

Really!

There is even a 1959 Polish report of a captured creature who
came from a metal crashed object. The creature who spoke no
known language, was wearing a strange type of uniform which was
impossible to remove. The metal type material had no seams and
special tools had to be used and a great deal of effort before
they could cut through it. The creature's organs were very
different from humans, as was its blood. It also had a different
number of fingers and toes. The creature died when the doctors
removed a strange type of armband. ...Does all this sound
familiar? How can you claim that the ET story began with the
Americans? You might like to know that the latter was known
before the 1947 Roswell story became public knowledge.

Georgina Bruni





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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:39:44 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:14:43 -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

<snip>

 >>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.

<snip>

Jerry,

Isn't this a rather gross mischaracterization?

It's been my understanding -- but correct me if I'm wrong --
that SETI scientists are searching for radio evidence of ET
intellgence precisely because they think that ET visitors
_aren't_ probable, that is, are not here now. They may well
think the galaxy is densely populated, but that's not the same
at all as saying that "ET visitors are not only possible but
probable," as you have it.

The standard argument within the scientific community at large
has always been, "Er, um, yes, we don't deny that intelligent
life exists elsewhere in the galaxy or universe, but damned if
we can see anyway for it to get from there to here."

As for how "automatic" life, let alone intelligent, space-faring
life, is in the universe, there's some internal debate within
the scientific community on that issue as well. I interviewed
astronomer Michael Hart on just that subject some 15 years ago,
so it's not a new one. His conclusion? Hey, it ain't as simple
to get those basic amino-acids together as you think it is.

Life, even a life-friendly planet, is not the given that most
people think it is, despite the huge number of stars, galaxies,
and, presumably, planets in the known universe. Just as most
evolutionists now no longer assume that intelligent human life
on this planet was a necessary given, but, rather, a happy
convergence of a huge number of events, any one of which -- had
it gone the other way -- would have thrown a fatal spanner in
the works. In which case we wouldn't be typing this, and you
wouldn't be reading it.

So if we're going to cover the range of SETI and exobiology
literature, let's cover the whole of it. For starters, you might
try "Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage? The Permanent Revolution
in the Earth Sciences" by Mike Davis, which appeared in The
Anomalist 5. I know you've got a copy of same -- I just can't
seem to get you to read it and address it. Think of my Davis as
your Bullard and maybe you'll get the picture. If anyone's
writing more brilliantly on the history of the planet Earth,
I've yet to read it.

And the key word here is history. It may not be what you think
it is.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 06:54:37 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:17:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


M/c Airmiss 1995

 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:03:02 +0100


 >>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

 >>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.

Jenny,

I respect your views and have only read the CAA Airmiss report
on this case, where both the Capt and 1st officer on the flight
described the object as "solid" and "wedge shaped", that's not
reading anything into it, thats just what they reported to the
enquiry.

Also the sighting is estimated to have lasted aprox 2 seconds
in which time the object moved from ahead/right to rear/right,
observed throught the flight deck frount right and right side
windows. If you extend the plain of that viewing angle (of a
guestimate some 70 degrees?)out umpteen miles to take in a meteor
at high altitude it's going to have to be moving at a _hell_ of
a lick to travel across that visible track of distant sky in
just 2 seconds. Havn't got my calculator handy but it might be
worth looking at the numbers even if they are only ball park
figures, it might indicate if it's the right ball park or not.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                    Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:04:30 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:20:25 -0500
Subject: 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

 >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.

Hello, Mark, Minna:

Autokinetic motion of the muscles of the eyes are normally
"filtered out" by the brain.  This affect is highly suggestible.
Others present mentioning motion of a distancel light can easily
cause a witness to notice this "falling leaf effect".  "Tired
eyes" are not the cause, since this happens at all times, but is
just not noticed normally.

As a test, go outside now and observe bright Jupiter in the
evening or brilliant Venus in the morning sky.  Within seconds
most people will be able to see a swinging motion.  For moving
objects, such as planes or satellites, this appears to be a
stopping and starting or zigzagging.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:21:22 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:33:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:25:46 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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


Hi,

Firstly, let me apologise to list members for the length of this
reply. I do hope some of you do me the service of reading it
because I think  it offers salutary lessons and I am more than a
little distressed by how such nonsense can be published on this
list. My only recourse is to try to make you see the truth as
distortions must be set right - especially when the people
responsible plain refuse to say sorry.

I must admit that I have better things to do with my time than
forever answer questions to this list from people intent on
abuse, or who mislead , then try to find excuses . So I am
afraid you wont be getting regular comment from me in the
forseeable future. I am sure many of you will be pleased to hear
that.

But I want this Bourdais/Thouanel situation clearly understood
first. If you like you can read what folllows in chapters like a
horror novel!

Mr Bourdais reported :


 >>>Recently, Jenny Randles questioned the French COMETA report, for
 >>>its presentation of the famous Lakenheath case (message of July
 >>>25) :

Questioned is all that I did. I did not 'attack' it or anything
of the sort as Bourdais alleges later in his reply. My Updates
posting responded to various UFOlogists comments on how much the
report relied upon access to official data and how much was
simply a group of military officers reading the UFO literature
and commenting - as they were naturally entitled to do. This
would not mean their report is worthless but it is obviously
important we understand the genesis of the data they published
(especially given its curious ideas about Roswell).

So I merely argued that one test was the Lakenheath 1956 case.
It was reported to be in the Cometa study. I knew, from my
surprise contact with the air crew in l996, that the details of
the case in Condon etc were wrong. All my own references to the
case pre l996 followed the traditional line of a single seater
venom visually intercepting the UFO. In fact there were two two
seaters and no witness visually saw anything. They did have a
radar target. But the famous claim in ufology about a 'cat and
mouse' game whereby the UFO flew behind the venom was a
misreading of the facts as I learned first hand from the crew.

My point about Cometa was quite simply that whichever version of
the case they had would help us determine their sources for the
data in the report. If they had the correct version then they
had an inside track via military records. If not then one would
have to assume their data merely came from a reading of the UFO
literature.

Now I dont see that as an 'attack' on Cometa - just a sensible
way for us to understand the basis of this fascinating and
highly touted report. UFOlogists were denied any opportunity to
talk to Cometa staff or even to Bernard Thouanel, the editor of
the published version of the report, as French ufologists have
noted. They were all staying out of the public debate. As such
the above comment was one way ufology could gain an insight.

That is all.

 >><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 ?

I have never suggested it is a matter of objectivity. That is .
It is equally outrageous for this man to stand by his trick
allegations .

 >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.

 >we are fundamentally in agreement.

Which is a very good warning for any French UFOlogists reading
this list regarding placing trust in Mr Thouanel I am afraid, as
you will see.

 >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.

So, Cometa were upset by someone wanting to know whether their
information came from official records or via reading a few UFO
books? That is enlightening. I trust most people on this list
agree with me that how UFOlogy regards the importance of Cometa
has to depend to some extent on where the report's information
originates?

They weren't willing to come onto the net and tell us. I offered
- in a completely responsible and none agressive fashion - a
test to French UFOlogists that just happened to provide such an
insight. I had no idea what the answer would be - not having
seen the report . It could have transpired that Cometa had had
access to NATO files on Lakenheath . If so we would have all
been impressed. As we now know that wasn't the case.

But I find it extraordinary that to pose a perfectly legitimate
question about a report Cometa itself was promoting to the UFO
community and the French public  in  a big way was perceived as
some sort of vicious attack!

The only vicious attack here is this incredible rubbish about my
deception and lack of 'objectivity ' - for which I still expect
an apology on this list Mr Bourdais.

If you run away , that will speak volumes.


 >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.

My message did NOT question the 'quality' of their work, but the
source of their information. I can see the difference. Are
Cometa unable to do so?

God help the French people if their military officers get so
upset because someone quite reasonably wonders where they got
information about UFOs from that they are marketting to the
public in a mass production news stand magazine.

I know the French dont like the British very much (they are
currently rather upset at losing the beef war) but really. This
is silly and not a little
worrying.

 >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.

Aha, so you are the Cometa mouthpiece. That says a lot. Of
course, had Thouanel or anyone at Cometa had the guts to come
onto the net and answer questions at the time then nobody would
have had to ask questions in relative ignorance of the facts -
regardless of how mild my question itself actually was and how
non agressively directed. But they didnt. So I think we were
more than entitled to seek out tests of the origin of the data
in the Cometa report.

It transpires that the report itself cites (for the UK) Tim Good
and Nick Pope. Much as  I respect both these individuals and
have no qualms about the credibility of their data, it makes my
point that the Cometa team were not basing their findings on any
access to official data but by reading UFO books. It would not
have mattered if those books were Jerry Clark's, Allen Hynek's
or my own.  Thats not the point and I would still argue the same
way. This reliance for data has to make a difference to how
anyone evaluates the information put before us. We have to know
its limitations. Now we do. > >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 !

No, I pointed out that Cometa had not asked me for copies and
made clear that if they had I would have made efforts to provide
them. I still would have needed approval to hand over data
involving MoD events to military officials of a foreign country.
I am amazed if anyone considers that to be unreasonable. But my
point was not  - their report is rubbish because they did not
talk to me. I dont doubt they had never even heard of me as none
of my books have ever been published in France. My point was
that because of the unique circumstances of the l956 case, if
they did not get info from me  (as I reported they had not) and
yet the info in their report was still correct (and as I repeat
at this point I did not know)  then this fact proved they had an
inside track on the case of some sort. Thats all.

At no time did Cometa ask me for a documented file on the case.
They still havent. Bernard Thouanel in his e mails to me said -
and I quote below to prove this to be another misdirection of
yours Mr Bourdais  - that he was not acting on behalf of Cometa
but as a French reporter writing a news article on UFOs. Viz:


(Thouanel said to me...)

  Regarding the Venom case, I must clarify that I am not a Cometa
  member and in that case, this is a personal request and not a
  request issued from Cometa.

  Meaning that, fortunately all opinions published in this report
  are not mine as I did not participated in the writing.

  In fact, I am preparing the next special issue of VSD "OVNIS"
  (UFOs) in which I would like to publish the testimony of the
  RAF Venom crew members



As a consequence, all the factors of the UK Code of Practice for
investigators came into play. This forbids me from handing over
witness names, addresses, phone numbers, military rank and
serial numbers etc, to a reporter,  which is what I was asked to
do.

If I had been asked to send a copy of the BBC film I would have
done so, provided the BBC cleared me (it is their programme ).
If I had been asked to assist the official Cometa report, before
or afterwards, I would have sought permission to so do. But I
was in fact being asked to send witness confidential info to a
reporter for a news story. Thats a totally different scenario
from the one you paint to this list.

 >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.

Here we go again. Let me shout this in hope it might get
through. I did _not_ attack them. Read the UpDate posting. I
suggested a test of the source of the Cometa info by judging
their account of the Lakenheath case alongside the two versions
(the one in Condon and various UFO books) and the one I got from
the air crew direct. Anyone who regards that as an attack as
opposed to a reasonable question has an odd way of looking at
things.


The info I was able to send was the most detailed account I had
so far put in print of the case, explaining over several pages
how the air crew story differed from the traditional UFO
version. That was certainly enough to make my point to Mr
Thouanel, and to allow the Cometa data (that he had and I did
not) to be re-evaluated. It was not my job to provide Cometa
with a fully documented report on the case and they had never
even asked me to do so.


 >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.


They would have had a long wait in the UK with our official
secrets act and no available official reports on Lakenheath!

To ignore my report would have been their perogative. I was not
- I repeat not - saying boo hoo, why didnt they quote me. I was
trying to establish the calibre of their sources for the report
on this case.

Put simply. If they were first hand (as were mine) they would
have one version of events. If they were merely taken from a UFO
book (any UFO book including my own pre l996) they probably
would have the old version. Knowing which gives us an
understanding of where Cometa got its data.

What is hard to follow about this chain of logic???

We now know their sources on Lakenheath were other UFO books -
not one of whom are written from interviews with the air crew.
So if indeed Cometa's attitude was - as you seem to infer -
we'll take seriously a book by one writer we trust, like Tim
Good, but not someone reporting first hand what the witnesses
allege, then that is by itself an interesting insight. Its their
privilege of course, but I hope some would regard that as
somewhat lacking in balance.

 >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.

Your definition of a bad trick is to ask a totally non
antagonistic question or propose a check on sources of
information? Are you serious?

If so what was Cometa's decision to say nothing or to decline to
answer questions about their report to UFOlogy? I guess in your
world view that would be an heroic act?

I am having a really hard time following your position on this.


 >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.


Well, I am sorry if that upsets you. But if you are implying
thats my fault, as usual you are way off beam. Possibly, just
possibly, Phenomena felt it was a legitimate question to
discuss. I havent read their article so I cannot say. But I
trust you are now not trying to twist this round to some anti
Cometa conspiracy involving Perry Petrakis and myself, because
thats absurd.

As I keep saying (until you get it) I just saw a way to check
the sources of the Cometa report because they themselves were
declining to talk to ufology. I posted it on the net. Bernard
Thouanel replied. I helped him every way I could. And I would
have reported back to Updates on the outcome but I was forbidden
from talking by his request (viz):


(Thouanel said to me...)

  Last thing, please understand that my mail has to be kept
  private, and I would be most grateful to not mention to the
  list I contacted you, as the Cometa requested me to be very
  quiet


Unlike you I take confidences seriously and if asked to say
nothing, do say nothing, if required by our voluntary code of
practice not to reveal witness information to a journalist, then
I dont.

 >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 dont know. Why not ask someone who has made a 'violent
attack'. But as you obviously argue that  I have, kindly quote
the posting where I make such an attack? The only one you have
referred to does no such thing. . If you describe that as a
'violent attack' then I think many people will draw their own
conclusions. I have no idea why Phenomena reported what they
did, but if you are imagining that I asked them to do so, you
are wrong.


 >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.

Fine, but why did not Mr Thouanel ask me about this? Our last
communication (on 25 August) was totally amicable. As noted I
cannot be responsible for what Phenomena magazine make of this
issue, but I dont condemn them for regarding it as a legitimate
point. But here we see the following sequence of events that
says a lot about this French reporter.

In July I ask a question about the Cometa report sources. Mr
Thouanel contacts me privately on this. For a month we exchange
info on the case and promise to keep each other updated. I
promise to send him a copy of my full report when it is
completed. But he insists I tell nobody of this exchange.
Meanwhile a French UFO magazine (aware only of the original
Update posting - entirely because Thouanel has insisted on
secrecy) comments about it. What does Thouanel do? E Mail me and
say, have you seen this? Cometa are a bit peeved. What shall we
do? I suggest you tell Updates about our communication and
cooperation?

Er, no. He runs to a third party, breaks the confidence he
himself placed me under without even bothering to inform me he
is doing so and provokes this spurious attack on me.

It rather shows to all of you out there the danger of trying to
play fair with journalists. Dont expect them to reciprocate.

 >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.

Which, of course, vindicates much of what I said earlier about
why we were all forced to quiz the basis of the Cometa report
without any help or clarification from them or Mr Thouanel.
Thank you for that at least. Although it still does not explain
why you went behind my back to Mr Bourdais as a consequence of
some French UFO article you appear somehow to be taking out on
me!

 >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".

I assumed this was implicit in our exchange. Mr Thouanel asked
for info on the case for publication. I immediately offered him
my book as the most complete account then available. He did
indeed send me the Cometa report in exchange. But I sent my book
on the day after our exchange (July 26). I did not get the
Cometa report until a month later. So I certainly responded
immediately in all good faith here.

I never imposed any restrictions on his use of the information
and books are frequently used by writers as sources of data. The
Cometa report itself clearly relied on such information. As
Thouanel well knows he could have easily paraphrased the data in
the book about the case and indeed if he had requested
permission to quote anything from it I'd have given it without
hesitation. Fact is he didnt ask, but I reasonably assumed he
was intent on simply incorporating his own recounting of the
pilot stories into his report and could do so without seeking
permission. This he obviously knows and must do all the time as
a reporter.

In any case, I sent him the book not for Cometa. I was never
contacted by them or asked to send them anything. I sent it him
so he could see for himself what the difference was between the
air crew version of events and the traditional version in UFO
books. As I repeat when I sent it I had no idea if the Cometa
report already had such info (via NATO, the MoD, or whatever) .
If not this was the only way to so inform and update them.

More fool me for actually bothering to try to help. Obviously it
was greatly appreciated!

But the crucial point is that I never once failed to respond to
any request for assistance from Mr Thouanel - which is why he
and Bourdais still owe me a whopping apology.

 >t 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.

At no time did I ever suggest he review it in a magazine. Why
would I? The book is not even published in France so it would
serve no purpose. He knows perfectly well I sent it to him to
answer his questions on this case as best I could at that time.
He asked for information for an article he was writing. I sent
the book to give him that data. It was the easiest way to do
this quickly.  And I am astounded that this gesture (which cost
me not a small amount of money) is being tossed back at me as if
it had some ulterior motive.  If I had been dealing with him as
a journalist reviewing my book I would have got the publisher to
send him a copy - not gone out and bought one to send him.
Disgraceful.

 >I note that Mrs Randles never aknowledged to
 >have well  received the copy of the report mailed to her
 >address.

Untrue. I advised (19 August) that they had not arrived. Mr
Thouanel replied saying they must have got mislaid and would
send a replacement package. He did. It arrived. I said thank
you. That was a week or so later.

 >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.

Again, this is rubbish. As I have stated before I explained the
various reasons I could not supply - just like that - to a
reporter the sort of details of the air crew requested. Not
without various clearances that would take time. But I made
abundantly clear that I would send Mr Thouanel a full report as
soon as I could. He knows that. Why he is suggesting otherwise?
And how on earth can anyone construe that as my being reluctant
to help? Please  tell me.

Here yet again is the message I sent him (27 July) to which he
replied:   VIZ:

(I said to Mr Thouanel ...)

  Thank you for your message. I have despatched a copy of the
  book as promised.

  I suspect it may prove difficult in the short term to assist in
  your request for contact with the RAF air crew. There are
  several reasons, the principle of which is my contract to the
  BBC.

  I do intend to document all of this material when I am freed by
  both them and by the witnesses to do so. I will happily provide
  a copy to you at that time.


 >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.

Why? All I did was bore this list with a long account of what
happened, made necessary by the frightening reactions of
yourself and Mr Bourdais to my sincere attempts to help you out.
At what point did I do anything other than that?

 >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.

Which is why the name UFOIN was not used. What Mr Thouanel is
unaware of (not his fault but it shows how leaps of logic to
imagine deceptions that dont exist are occurring) is this. From
mid summer onward, a group of British ufologists had got
together to plan the creation of a new network. In July/August
when Mr Thouanel and I were in contact these discussions were
progressing towards UFOIN - which we formerly constituted in
September. But we had already decided to create an  alliance and
publish special reports on selected cases. We just had details
to work out.

I had anyhow long been planning the full transcript and
documentation of the Lakenheath l956 case. Indeed I answered
questions on UFORL about this and made the same promise. There
had been many reasons for the delay and, as I told UFORL , one
of these was getting BBC clearance, then the sheer task of
transcribing many interview tapes for which access to special
equipment is needed making it a slow job.

The creation of the new team this summer gave me the impetus to
prove our worth to ufology by our mitually agreeing to fast
track several important publications. It was decided that one of
the first three was to be my full data on Lakenheath and in that
regard I have been chasing up leads since July (as Mr Thouanel
knows because I told him this in subsequent postings) VIZ:


(I said to Mr Thouanel ....)

  Incidentally, my investigation into the l956 case has taken a
  new positive step and I have established contact with one of
  the very senior officers involved. His insights throw even
  further confusion into the story.


So, he was aware that I was working on this report with a new
probe into the evidence. He had my firm promise I would send him
a copy as soon as it was ready. It only became a report to be
issued under the UFOIN banner when we adopted that name in
September, but the report itself was coming exactly as I told
him that it was well before then.

Any claim to the contrary is simply untrue.

 >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.

If you had ever asked for that I would have sought permission to
send it, Mr Thouanel. I would have had to clear that with the
broadcaster as you surely understand. But if you had requested
it I would have done so. I obviously assumed that you were happy
with the account of the case I had sent and my promise of a full
report when ready. If not and you wanted the footage, all you
had to do was ask. After all we exchanged around 12 e mails
during July and August. So you certainly had opportunity to ask
me - as well as having my unlisted phone number that I gave to
you.

So that this list can see the  open, friendly communications we
had during this period I will summarise them below. If you
dispute any of this Mr Thouanel justify doing so with any
evidence.

Otherwise I trust the list will see from the information below
that far from some sort of intransigence on my part I was
helping whenever I could.

25 July. I was first requested to send info on the case after my
Update posting. I replied same day with the promise to send the
book (as I did next day) . Mr Thouanel offered a copy of the
Cometa report. No restrictions were placed on either party for
use of this material.

27 July. In response to request for full pilot details I
explained why this was not immediately possible, but that I was
preparing a full report on the case and would send him a copy as
soon as it was available.

19 August. After his thank you for receipt of book (early
August) I noted that no Cometa report had yet arrived. He
promised to post again. I reported to him voluntarily on
progress on the full report, indicating my new contact with a
leading military source directly involved with the incident and
with whom I was that week discussing the case with interesting
new leads.

19 - 21 August.  We exchanged several messages in which Mr
Thouanel posed specific questions about the case from the book.
I answered him each time.

23 August.  We mutually agree to keep in touch and help each
other in future as and when we could.

23 - 25 August. I thank for receipt of Cometa report.  He asks
several questions on other aircraft cases in my book. I answered
as best I could.

We have not communicated since, but I dont think I have received
any messages that I failed to answer.

Moreover, the other person referred to by Mr Thouanel as the
only ufologist working with Cometa on aircraft cases is
Dominique Weinstein in Paris. She and I have exchanged messages
and mutual support over the past few weeks - thus maintaining my
policy of direct cooperation initiated with  Mr Thouanel in
July. We also have exchanged case data. I have promised to go
through her research adding further UK cases and adding any
details. I fished out some older case summaries of UK mid air
sightings to add to her research project and sent these to
Paris. I also promised to send her a copy of the l956 report as
soon as it is ready (hopefully early next year).

As I trust you can see from all of the above the facts are in
total contradiction to the suggestion that I visciously attacked
Cometa, then pulled a trick and declined to cooperate.

But you can bet I'll think more than twice before doing so
again.

So, Mr Thouanel and Mr Bourdais - I am still waiting for the
apology I believe that I am more than entitled to receive given
the way you have miserably misrepresented my friendly
assistance.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:37:44 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:28:50 -0500
 >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: Fri, 29 Oct 99 11:16:14 PDT


Andy,

 >>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.

Yes, it's true that you and Dave Clarke -- Jenny seems to be
trying to draw some distance from your and Clarke's more extreme
statements -- have investigated some cases.  As you know, IUR
has published articles by both of you based on those
investigations.  I maintain, however, that psychosociological
theory is antiempirical and has more of the spirit of literary
criticism than of science.  The "skeptical" literature has its
own problems, about which a large and growing literature has
grown. All of us, including "skeptics" and psychosociologists,
would all do well to be more modest in making knowledge claims.

 >>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.

What you said struck, and strikes me, as amounting to an ad
hominem.  You seemed to assume that writers and publishers in
this area couldn't possibly be sincere; their true motive is to
sell books.  There are legitimate criticisms to be made of ETH/
SETI/ETI; this is not one of them.  I was never especially fond
of Carl Sagan myself, but it never occurred to me that he didn't
mean exactly what he said.

 >>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!

As for the latter: of course it doesn't.  It is not, however,
just "some" scientists who believe the galaxy is densely
populated. It's a widely held view, for complex reasons you can
read about in nearly every scientific and popular book written
on the search for ETI -- the sorts of books, if I can judge from
the odd arguments used by people who share your beliefs, you and
your fellow partisans don't appear familiar with.

 >>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.

Actually, if you remove UFOs from the equation, no evidence
exists for intelligent ET life -- as critics of SETI have often
pointed out.  Critics have argued that at least ufologists are
working from a body of evidence, whereas the anti-UFO theorists
of SETI are operating from theories the evidence for which is
only inferential.  As for the strength of the UFO evidence -- no
offense -- but I'd take the judgment of a James McDonald over
that of an Andy Roberts any time.  Even the Condon Committee,
with all the ill will in the world, couldn't establish the
nonexistence of evidence for the UFO phenomenon.

 >>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!

Evidence for what?  UFOs or SETI?  The former, of course, is on
far more solid ground. Maybe ufology will save SETI yet.

 >>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?

What a strange argument.  My point, let me repeat, was this: For
lots of complicated reasons with which you would be familiar if
you bothered to read the scientific ETI literature, many
scientists who have reflected on the question think it is likely
that the galaxy (not to mention the larger universe beyond) is
densely populated with intelligent civilizations. That being the
case, it would not be surprised -- it might even be expected --
that we would see evidence of this in, for example, the
appearance of ET spacecraft in the earth's air space.  This is a
perfectly respectable scientific hypothesis.

Therefore, the notion that the earth may be being visited is
not, as our hyperbolic friend Dave Clarke would have us believe,
akin to belief in elves and fairies.  When we have decades'
worth of puzzling UFO reports, many of them of structured
craftlike objects with extraordinary performance
characteristics, and these reports remain unsolved even after
extensive investigation, and we have evidence (in the form of
radar trackings, ground traces, photos, and other CE2-like
physical evidence), it is not unreasonable to wonder if indeed
ETs have found their way here.  That may be right, or it may be
wrong, but it is not an absurd hypothesis on its face.

 >>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!

What sarcasm -- besides yours, I mean?

 >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 stand by what I said.  Ony in Andy Roberts's mind are the IFOs
Clarke cited "classic" UFO cases.

 >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.

What an odd argument, more a statement of faith than an
acknowledgement of a fact repeatedly demonstrated over time:
that the best UFO cases tend to stay unsolved over time, even
after repeated scrutiny.  Your argument makes about as much
sense as one that would hold that because some people die in car
accidents, all of us are fated to die in car accidents.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 1

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:56:00 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:42:36 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >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: 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>


Dave,

 >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.

Odd.  "Adherence" to what particular theory?  I am at a loss to
understand what you're saying.  You're the one who adheres to a
theory: that UFOs are, to all intents and purposes,
superstitious nonsense and amount to no more than modern
fairylore.  You also hold -- or have held, since later in this
posting you begin to indicate differently --  that it should be
of interest only to folklorists and social scientists.  I
disagreed and pointed to the problems such a sweepingly
dismissive approach tries to sweep under the rug. I wasn't
advocating any theory beyond the idea that behind the most
puzzling UFO reports, we may find extraordinary unknowns. My
position, if defined, might be something like a variety of
agnosticism; yours, on the other hand, is advocacy by any
definition.

 >>>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?

And you seem to have missed the literature on CE2s. Is it any
wonder why, for all of your undoubted intelligence and
education, it is hard to take seriously your sweeping
pronouncements against the UFO phenomenon?

 >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.

And it's folklore in the making only because someone like you
has proclaimed it to be.

 >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?

To the contrary, that evidence remains puzzling, and it was
enough to impress a panel of skeptical to open-minded physical
scientists who looked at it.  See Peter Sturrock's new book for
details.  Ted Phillips is set to release a definitive account of
his years' worth of investigation, with the aid of physical
scientists and laboratories, on the Delphos, Missouri, CE2.  And
there is, of course, a lot more, none of it -- it seems clear --
of any interest to you whatever.

 >that's just one example of why claims about "physical evidence"
 >leave me unconvinced.

That sort of reminds me of the cliched dismissal of UFOs you
sometimes encounter in books, where the author says, "I know
UFOs don't exist because once I saw one and it turned out to be
Venus."

 >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.

Are you?  I'd be surprised.  Already, in previous postings on
thist list, you've tried to argue that physical scientists don't
belong in this field since it's all "myth" and "religion" and
only social scientists have anything useful 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.

Well, I'm glad that you are now expressing a healthy change of
mind.  Maybe there's hope for you yet.

 >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.

As I have written over and over and over and over and over
again. there is a useful role for persons from all kinds of
backgrounds in ufology.  I have, for example, taken a historical
approach, as have many other colleagues (with Project 1947 and
the Sign Historical Group).  Eddie Bullard has taken a folkloric
approach, and there are psychologists, sociologists, and others
who have made useful contributions.  None who had anything
useful to say, however, has tried to claim that his or her
particular discipline told us all we need to know about UFOs.

Of course UFOs, like anything else in society, have created
their own folklore and sociology, and those things are worth
studying; in fact, I find them quite interesting.  What I do not
think, however, is that the story ends there.  The point of
origin for all of this is the UFO phenomenon itself, which
remains as puzzling and challenging as it did when it first came
into popular consciousness in 1947.  The cases that (short of a
White House landing) will determine whether or not UFOs are
extraordinary unknowns are those in which investigatable
objective, physical evidence is present.  All of the
folklorists, sociologists, historians, and psychosociologists in
the world have nothing interesting to say on this subject.  Only
physical scientists can deal adequately with such evidence, and
that is why it will be they, not the armchair psychosociological
literary critics, who will solve the UFO mystery.

 >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.

I've said this before, but I'll say this again: I have never
seen people so obsessed with the ETH as those who, like Clarke
and his friends, consider it a despised heresy.  If you go back
and read the archives of this list, you will find in the great
majority of cases that it was anti-ETH obsessionists who brought
the ETH into the discussion; more moderate ufologists, such as
the undersigned, were only responding to dubious claims, not
advocating the ETH as such. I hold the essentially agnostic
position that the ETH is neither unreasonable nor proved.
That's all. But even that little is enough to drive the likes of
Clarke into fits.  What I want to know is, why is the very
notion that the ETH is not an absurd myth so threatening?  Now
there's question for the social scientists to take up.

While immersing myself in UFO literature for my encyclopedia
series I wrote, I got interested in the question of how
ufologists dealt with the ETH over time (see the long entry
"Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Ufology"). I was surprised to
learn, after a pretty thorough review at least of the
English-language literature, how relatively little time
ufologists had spent on it.  The ETH was sort of assumed (not
unreasonably) but seldom the subject of much concentrated
reflection.  Mostly, ufologists

functioned as pragmatists; they were far more interested in
collecting data and investigating reports than they were with
unverifiable speculations about the Larger Meaning of It All. I
think this tells us something interesting: namely, that unlike
their obsessed critics, who grow ever more wildly indignant that
anybody anywhere could even be open-minded to the heresy, the
ufologists were not ideologues, just pragmatists. Dave, by your
firm advocacy, you've revealed yourself to be an ideologue.  By
which I certainly don't mean you have nothing of interest to say
-- of course you do -- but in that sense, you are the believer,
many of the rest of us the doubters, the ones with a greater
degree of respect for the tentativeness of our knowledge of this
baffling phenomenon.

 >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.

The deeper I get into your message, the more backtracking you
do.  Well, that's to the good.  Maybe one day you'll even drop
useless buzz words such as "modern myth" from your writing, and
then maybe we can talk productively.

 >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?

Since I have a life, I am not going to go into this, but it's a
subject

I've spent a lot of time researching and in fact write about in
the encyclopedia.  You're simply wrong here, recycling a cliche
which arguably I bear responsibility for; I appear to have been
the first to use arguments like yours, in articles in FSR in the
mid-1960s. To all appearances, in fact, the UFO phenomenon has
maintained pretty much the same appearance since it entered the
world in the early 19th Century.  The "Jules Verne airships"
were essentially the invention of imaginative journalists; they
were not what people were seeing, as is clear when you compare
reports not published in newspapers with those that were.
"Airship" UFOs continue to be reported, though ufologists have
remained oblivious to their significance.  The matter is
discussed in my encyclopedia, and I don't intend to go into it
here.  I am about to start work on a new book -- something I've
wanted to do for a long time, a definitive look at the contactee
subculture -- and as much fun as bloviating on the list is, the
pay ain't very good.

 >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.

No, there cannot be "a real phenomena." No such animal exists in
the grammatical universe.  There can only be "a real
phenomenon." And I don't know who is arguing that it _has_to be
ET.  Not me.  I have argued only that this is a defensible
tentative interpretation, better than most but yet to be proved.
Maybe you'd have a more persuasive argument if yours weren't so
dependent on the creation of strawmen.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                             Mars Observer Found

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:43:52 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:32:50 -0500
Subject: Mars Observer Found




-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Mars Observer Found
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 19:20:01 PST
From: harry@brain.jpl.nasa.gov (Harry Langenbacher)
Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny.reruns

Seen on a hall wall at JPL:


(each letter appears to have been cut out of a magazine and
pasted on the paper )


     we have your
   satelite if you
    want it back
   send 20 billion
     in martian
   money. No funny
     business or
   you will never
    see it again


  --

 From the RHF archives as selected by Brad Templeton, Maddi
Hausmann  and Jim Griffith.

This newsgroup posts former jokes from the newsgroup
rec.humor.funny.

Visit http://www.netfunny.com/rhf to browse the RHF pages and
archives on the web.


  --

 From the RHF archives as selected by Brad Templeton, Maddi
Hausmann  and Jim Griffith.

This newsgroup posts former jokes from the newsgroup
rec.humor.funny.

Visit http://www.netfunny.com/rhf to browse the RHF pages and
archives on the web.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                         CE2s And Frustrated Science

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 13:41:19 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:34:46 -0500
Subject: CE2s And Frustrated Science


Gentle listfolk:

In recent exchanges between British neoskeptics and me, the
subject of close encounters of the second kind has been brought
up -- at least by me.  To clarify the significance of this
aspect of UFO experience, I would like to reproduce here a
slightly abridged version of an essay that appears in the CE2
entry of my UFO Encyclopedia.  I hope you find it interesting
and useful:

CE2s and frustrated science

By their nature CE2s ought to be the most important of all UFO
cases. Landing-trace incidents in particular ought to have the
potential to settle the issue of whether UFOs are "real," that
is, exist as extraordinarily anomalous phenomena. At least in
theory, they take UFO experiences out of the realm of purely
anecdotal testimony and into the laboratory, where hard evidence
can be scrutinized and documented.

Unfortunately, the resistance to UFOs by many scientists ensures
that the kind of investigation CE2s require is seldom
accomplished.  A properly conducted inquiry requires
scientifically trained investigators who have access to the
necessary field instruments.  It also must have laboratories and
personnel willing and able to analyze samples or other relevant
materials.  Since all of this is expensive, the investigation
must also be well funded.

In practice such circumstances hardly ever obtain.  Few
scientists actively investigate UFO reports, and nearly all
those who do work in a private capacity, on their own time.
They usually finance their research with their own money or with
limited funds provided by UFO organizations, themselves
operating on shoestring budgets. In most cases, if a laboratory
gets involved at all, it is because one of its employees is
curious enough to study the material in his or her spare time,
usually at night or on weekends when the facility is closed.
Often the scientist will ask that neither his name nor the
laboratory's be publicized.  Even then, because he is
essentially working alone, his analysis will be confined to what
he can determine from the limited perspective of his specific
expertise. A full analysis would have the sample subjected to a
range of tests by scientists and technicians possessing a
variety of specialized knowledge.

Thus the frequently expressed allegation that no good physical
evidence for UFOs exists becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.  A
great deal of potential evidence can be found in CE2 reports (of
which it is safe to say most critics have never heard), but
because -- so elite opinion has it -- UFOs are heretical
phenomena fit only for ridicule and dismissal, the ordinary
processes of scientific inquiry are unavailable to them.  The
equation runs something like this:  If UFOs existed, there would
be physical evidence of them; since they don't exist, there can
be no physical evidence. Therefore the very notion of UFO
physical evidence is illegitimate, and not many scientists are
willing to tie their reputations and careers to the study of
illegitimate notions.

Even the fullest investigation of a single case to date had to
be folded when funding to pursue one crucial aspect -- the
effect of electromagnetic waves on plant and molecular systems
-- did not materialize.  Nonetheless, the Trans-en-Provence CE2
had the good fortune of being investigated by an agency, Groupe
d'Etudes des Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non Identifies (GEPAN), of
the French government. After an elderly man reported seeing a
disc-shaped object land near his garden on January 8, 1981, the
Gendarmerie and GEPAN launched an extensive inquiry.  Botanical
samples were taken to the National Institute for Research in
Agronomy and subjected to tests and analyses.  The results,
released in GEPAN's Technical Note 16 (1983) and reported in 66
pages of small print, indicated that something extraordinary,
apparently technological, had interacted with the soil and
plants, with measurable but not explainable effects possibly
caused by an "electromagnetic field."

Samples from a 1971 Kansas landing-trace case, the Delphos CE2,
were examined by scientists in a number of laboratories in the
United States and England.  Some of the samples seemed
sufficiently unusual to frustrate hoax and other theories which
posited conventional causes. Beyond that little more could be
said.  As Michael D. Swords has remarked,"What the relationships
of these materials may have been to one another is unknown. The
chemistry was never pursued far enough to describe any of these
structures sufficiently.  Consequently this becomes


another in a long series of missed opportunities to discover
something new in nature, because of the lack of social
willingness or support by the scientific community to push this
research to a conclusion."

The Trans-en-Provence and Delphos cases are the two most
extensively investigated landing-trace CE2s (at least known
ones; it is possible that classified studies are filed in
government archives around the world).  Another
physical-evidence incident, involving not landing traces but
extensive damage to a police car, brought Allan Hendry of the
Center for UFO Studies to the site within hours.  Hendry quickly
enlisted the services of experts and laboratories anad carefully
documented the occurrence of an anomalous event and anomalous
effects.

************

These words were written in the mid-1990s.  Since then, though
the shameful neglect of CE2s by scientists (and, as we have
seen, neoskeptical ufologists) has continued, there has been a
hopeful sign or two.  Ted Phillips, original investigator of the
Delphos CE2 (it happened in Kansas, not Missouri, as I
mistakenly assert in another posting), has been able to follow
up and close a lot of loose ends, and he promises to release a
bulky, definitive account of this extraordinary episode.

Skeptics have jumped on Trans-en-Provence, though with little
success, though GEPAN head Jean-Jacques Velasco would do well to
put his demolition of their case (loaded, he says, with serious
errors of fact) into print and not confine to private answers to
ufologists.

Chris Rutkowski, in his moving tribute to the recently deceased
Stefan Michalak on this list, reminds us of another deeply
puzzling CE2, and to a whole category of CE2: physiological
effects on witnesses.  I hope that all interested listfolk will
turn their attention to Chris's splendid extended account of
Michalak experience in JUFOS 5 (new series, 1994): 1-34.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:42:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Gravity Waves Control


 >I just subscribed to this list, and I assume there are a few
 >scientists here (not that I'm really one myself).

 >The first time I've heard of gravity as being a wave (thus
 >capable of being amplified, modulated, etc) was through Bob
 >Lazar's claims. His story is very interesting, as much as the
 >laws of physics and processes involved in it, but I thought none
 >of that had been proved.

 >After more than a decade of reading for the first time the book
 >"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan, I bought the (sadly condensed) current
 >edition to read it again, and in Chapter XII, page 246, he
 >writes:

 >"There may be other methods of communication that have
 >substantial merit:

 >...optical or infrared lasers; pulsed neutrinos; modulated
 >gravity waves..."

 >That last sentence surprised me. How advanced is humanity when
 >it comes to gravity modulation, amplification, etc.? Also, can
 >we artificially create streams of neutrinos?

 >I though they were quite unsubstantial... I mean, almost no mass
 >at all.


Dear Edoardo:

This is highly speculative on my part, but I have had similar
thoughts.

IF we assume that those responsible for some UFOs have somehow
managed to manipulate gravity for the sake of propulsion;  then
it would seem almost child's play for them to use those same
principles for long distance communications.

Consider this:

Long before the steam engine was used for transportation, fire
steam and smoke were used for signaling purposes.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the electric telegraph
preceded the electric train by quite a few years.

If gravity particle/waves can be manipulated, modulated or
otherwise controlled, they might eventually lead to novel means
of communication.

If some other civilization is already doing this, their signals
would be as invisible and undetectable to us, in our present
state of development, as radio signals would be to some
completely non-technical society out in the boondocks...

Ah, but that is all speculation. Nevertheless, I watch for
developments, however small and tentative, in these and similar
fields of physics.

And,  I'm no scientist either.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 17:38:18 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:44:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 03:30:42 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Georgina,

 >>A modern myth, born in the USA and exactly what you would
 >>expect in the late 20th century.

 >Nonsense! Eastern Europe was having UFO sightings before the US
 >was born. Why, they even had an encounter in July 1947, which is
 >supposedly when the US had their first known "famous" sightings.

You're quite right, of course.  The UFO phenomenon -- though it
wasn't known by that name, obviously -- was an international
occurrence long before anybody thought to call them "flying
saucers."  As long ago as 1864, to cite one more lurid instance,
a French newspaper was reporting a story that sounds much like a
modern crash/retrieval tale, and in 1877 an Argentine paper
picked up the yarn and changed a few details.  New Zealand's
Otago Times for July 29, 1909, carried a letter from a reader
who thought that the "airships" being reported in that nation at
the time might be "atomic-powered spaceships" from Mars.

In short, the UFO phenomenon -- as well as the ETH -- is neither
a "modern myth" born in the USA (the root of all evil and
delusion, as various list correspondents have repeatedly assured
us) nor a fantasy we could "expect in the late 20th Century."
Maybe the moral of the story is that a folklorist need not a
good historian make.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 02:01:03 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:50:28 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 03:30:42 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >David Clarke wrote:

 >>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.

 >David

 >Re Rendlesham: With regards to the "experts" quickly dismissing
 >the radiation reading significance; may I remind you (which is
 >public knowledge) that this expert opinion was based on Lt
 >Colonel Halt's memorandum, not on "factual records" relating
 >specifically to the readings. Don't forget, Halt didn't even
 >give the correct dates! Having investigated this case for three
 >years I can assure you that this is only a fraction of the case
 >as a whole and contrary to what you suggest, it has nothing to
 >do with mythology.

 >You are acting like a typical sceptic, taking one or two
 >fragments of a case you have not investigated and debunking it.
 >It is comments like yours David, based on one sided views, that
 >are so destructive.


Dear Georgina,

Thank you for correcting David Clarke with his fruitless
approach. From time to time, it needs to be said that debunkers,
whether they think of themselves as skeptics or even friendly
skeptics, have damaged the field of Ufology and continue to do
so.

What will happen is that Dr. Clarke will participate in public
debates about UFOs, will speak to the press, will argue with his
colleagues and will possibly hold lectures as a representative
of UFOIN (self styled as the 'New British Ufology'), and will
explain the UFO phenomenon as being without physical evidence
and merely the result of late 20th century mythology and
folklore.

You and I know this is untrue, but Mr. Clarke is not of the type
to learn quickly from other people's perspectives. That much is
clear even from the exchanges on this list. Most of his
colleagues, students and the audience of the various media will
take his conclusions for truth and thus a new cycle of ignorance
about UFOs is born.

Indeed, destructive.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 07:20:24 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 08:25:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:03:02 +0100

 >>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

 >>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.


M/c Airmiss 1995.

Jenny and List,

Did some scribbling over yesterday and lunch came up with this
rough mode from the details in the CAA report.

Granted these are "ball park" figures at best, but they do seem
to indicate the object seen was nearer to the BA flight rather
than a distant one which would have to have had incredible speed
to match the reported scenario.

Neil.

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


A simple attempt to model the Manchester Airport Airmiss of 1995.

  BA Flight
  200mph aprox
     ^
     ^
     ^
     ^        Unknown in sight aprox 2 secs
     ^                 V t1
     ^                /V
     ^               / V
     ^              /  V
     ^             /   V
     ^            /    V
     ^           /     V
     ^          /      V
     ^         /       V
     ^        /        V
     ^       /         V
     ^      /          V
     ^     /           V
     ^    /            V
     ^   /             V
     ^  /              V
     ^ /       D       V
     ^/--70-----------V D = Distance of nearest approach
        \              V
             \         V
                  \    V
                       V t2   t1->t2 = 2secs

Figures assume sighting lasted 2 seconds and unknown travelled
an aprox 70 degree arc of visibility as reported by the crew
viewing the object through the frount right cockpit window and
tracking it round through the right side cockpit window until it
was lost passing to the rear of the plane.

A parallel but opposite course is assumed.

Using simple trigonometery a table can be prepared for various
distances of "D" and the resulting distance and speed travelled
between T1 and T2 of the "unknown" estimated from the aprox
observation time of 2 seconds.

  (D)istance.           T1-T2 Length.                 Speed Required.

   100 feet               292 feet                        -100 mph

   300 feet               877 feet                          98 mph

   600 feet              1750 feet                         395 mph

  1200 feet              3500 feet                         993 mph

                 estimates for more distant objects

   0.5 mile              1.46 miles                       2428 mph

   1.0 mile              2.90 miles                       5000 mph

  10.0 miles             29.0 miles                      52000 mph

  25.0 miles             73.0 miles                     130000 mph

  50.0 miles            146.0 miles                     262000 mph

To remain sub-sonic the "unknown" would have to remain below
aprox 780 mph this would place the distance from the BA flight
in the region below 1000 feet.

The speed required figure has had the 200 mph of the BA flight
deducted and reflects the true ground speed of the "unknown", as
indicated by the negative figure in the first table entry at 100
feet distance, the "unknown" would have to have been travelling
in the same direction and being overtaken by the BA flight to
produce the observed results.

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

-------------------------------------------------------
                      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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?

From: Minna Laajala - UFO-Finland <ufofinland@saunalahti.fi>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 11:56:23 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 08:27:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:04:30 EST
 >Subject: Ways To Make Sight-Observations?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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.


 >Hello, Mark, Minna:

 >Autokinetic motion of the muscles of the eyes are normally
 >"filtered out" by the brain.  This affect is highly suggestible.
 >Others present mentioning motion of a distancel light can easily
 >cause a witness to notice this "falling leaf effect".  "Tired
 >eyes" are not the cause, since this happens at all times, but is
 >just not noticed normally.

 >As a test, go outside now and observe bright Jupiter in the
 >evening or brilliant Venus in the morning sky.  Within seconds
 >most people will be able to see a swinging motion.  For moving
 >objects, such as planes or satellites, this appears to be a
 >stopping and starting or zigzagging.

Dears Mark, Bob, list:

As a new "researcher" I find the alternative theories about the
ways to make an observation or have a experience very
interesting. I don�t intend to debunk all the cases I hear and
know with a "scientific sledge". That�s why I do agree with you
Mark about the cases that can�t be solved by these theories.

I think there`s theories we haven�t foud out yet. I also think
there`s many cases, which can�t be explained with the theories I
offered, and as well There`s many cases, which can`t be
explained with any current theories yet, because I doubt there
might be theories we haven�t comprehended yet. But a human is
curious, so that time will be ahead, for sure.

I think it�s important to differ the origins of the experiences
and observations, if not for other reasons, for at least because
it saves the time and efforts of the researchers.

I have seen the phenomenon Bod described. Jupiter is right now
really bright at the early night here, and it did seem to try to
swing, mostly it looked like it wanted to get loosed and start
to fly across the sky. But if Jupiter will, we might be in a
trouble...

I wonder: has anyone made a research about how big part of the
experiences and observatios are caused by these phenomenons in
human`s brains? I know there has been a lot of researches the
researchers has made, and many, if not all of them have noticed
there�s plenty of "faulse alarms" among observation-reports, but
has anyonw studied what are the percentages of each
"phenomenon", that causes these happenings?

asks Minna












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 06:22:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 08:35:09 -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: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 12:28:50 -0500
 >>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: Fri, 29 Oct 99 11:16:14 PDT

Hi Jerry,

You wrote

 >Yes, it's true that you and Dave Clarke -- Jenny seems to be
 >trying to draw some distance from your and Clarke's more extreme
 >statements -- have investigated some cases.  As you know, IUR
 >has published articles by both of you based on those
 >investigations.  I maintain, however, that psychosociological
 >theory is antiempirical and has more of the spirit of literary
 >criticism than of science.  The "skeptical" literature has its
 >own problems, about which a large and growing literature has
 >grown. All of us, including "skeptics" and psychosociologists,
 >would all do well to be more modest in making knowledge claims.

But how _can_ you maintain that the psycholsociological approach
to ufology is 'antiempirical' when you have proof - not
evidence! - that PS ufologists are using empirical methods? We
draw our conclusions from what we discover 'in the field',
simple as that. Whether we align ourselves with the PSH or ETH
is largely immaterial, when all we are interested in is
resolving a case.

Jerry wrote

 >What you said struck, and strikes me, as amounting to an ad
 >hominem.  You seemed to assume that writers and publishers in
 >this area couldn't possibly be sincere; their true motive is to
 >sell books.  There are legitimate criticisms to be made of ETH/
 >SETI/ETI; this is not one of them.  I was never especially fond
 >of Carl Sagan myself, but it never occurred to me that he didn't
 >mean exactly what he said.

But Jerry, sincereity doesn't enter into it with publishers -
their true motive _is_ to sell books! I'm sure all writers are
sincere in their belief. Those you mention are no doubt just as
sincere as the ones Dennis Stacy mentions, who hold opposing
views and beliefs to the ones quoted by you.

Jerry wrote

 >Actually, if you remove UFOs from the equation, no evidence
 >exists for intelligent ET life -- as critics of SETI have often
 >pointed out.  Critics have argued that at least ufologists are
 >working from a body of evidence, whereas the anti-UFO theorists
 >of SETI are operating from theories the evidence for which is
 >only inferential.  As for the strength of the UFO evidence -- no
 >offense -- but I'd take the judgment of a James McDonald over
 >that of an Andy Roberts any time.

I rather think your first sentence here sums up what I've been
getting at. There _is_ no evidence for intelligent ET life, and
certainly none held by ufologists. Just a set of beliefs. But
before you get into a  froth Jerry I don't doubt that evidence
of sorts exists within ufology but that all the evidence which
has been resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin.

So all ufologists can honestly say is that there is no evidence
for intelligent ET life but we do have some evidence, none of
which as it becomes explained has indicated that intelligent ET
life either exists or has visited earth.

Whether you would take James McDonald's judgment over mine is
immaterial and doesn't alter current reality - ie no evidence of
ET.

Jerry wrote

 >Therefore, the notion that the earth may be being visited is
 >not, as our hyperbolic friend Dave Clarke would have us believe,
 >akin to belief in elves and fairies.  When we have decades'
 >worth of puzzling UFO reports, many of them of structured
 >craftlike objects with extraordinary performance
 >characteristics, and these reports remain unsolved even after
 >extensive investigation, and we have evidence (in the form of
 >radar trackings, ground traces, photos, and other CE2-like
 >physical evidence), it is not unreasonable to wonder if indeed
 >ETs have found their way here.  That may be right, or it may be
 >wrong, but it is not an absurd hypothesis on its face.

No, it's not at all unreasonable to wonder if ETs have not found
their way here. Wondering about an the existence of unproven
entities has been a feature of religions for millenia. To date
it has come to nothing other than a lot of bickering other than
'my evidence is better than yours'. Ufology is no different!

And has Dave C noted this belief shifts with time and culture.

In your reply to Dave Clarke's posting you note:

 >I've said this before, but I'll say this again: I have never
 >seen people so obsessed with the ETH as those who, like Clarke
 >and his friends, consider it a despised heresy.  If you go back
 >and read the archives of this list, you will find in the great
 >majority of cases that it was anti-ETH obsessionists who brought
 >the ETH into the discussion; more moderate ufologists, such as
 >the undersigned, were only responding to dubious claims, not
 >advocating the ETH as such. I hold the essentially agnostic
 >position that the ETH is neither unreasonable nor proved.
 >That's all. But even that little is enough to drive the likes of
 >Clarke into fits.  What I want to know is, why is the very
 >notion that the ETH is not an absurd myth so threatening?  Now
 >there's question for the social scientists to take up.

Your contention that Clarke et al are 'obsessed' is a bit off
the mark Jerry. The ETH obsession is held by the majority of
active ufologists (certainly in the UK) and is the over-riding
explanation and focus of the majority of  media discussions of
UFOs. It is also the fuel which drives the UFO book and magazine
publishing industry (all sincere I'm sure!).

When so much is hung on on such a paucity of evidence and
fervour of belief it seems reasonable to rail against it and to
point out the fundamental flaws in its argument.

......And I say this in light of the above - ie no evidence of
ET on earth.

I wrote

 >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.

Jerry replied

 >>What an odd argument, more a statement of faith than an
 >>acknowledgement of a fact repeatedly demonstrated over time:
 >>that the best UFO cases tend to stay unsolved over time, even
 >>after repeated scrutiny.

Now, are you really saying that 'the best UFO cases tend to stay
unsolved over time' or that UFO cases become  'best cases' by
dint of them being unsolved over a period of time Jerry?
Is a case only judged as 'classic' after a period of time,
when it has remained unsolved? Because if that is the case your
agument collapses on several 'classic' UK cases which have
trundled on for years and then been solved. Cracoe and Berwyn
are two cases in point here. I'm sure Jenny, Dave or any other
sceptical ufologist could come up with many more.
Please define 'classic' and 'best' with reference to UFO cases.

 >>Your argument makes about as much
 >>sense as one that would hold that because some people die in car
 >>accidents, all of us are fated to die in car accidents.

Your logic fails you again Jerry. It does not mean that at all.
What I said meant simply that as, the majority of UFO cases have
fallen to become IFOs then _all_ UFO cases have the _potential_
to become IFOs. Argument by twisted analogy wasn't necessary
here and merely served to demonstrate your lack of rigour as to
what is happening within ufological thought and practice.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                           UFO Delta Night Lights?

From: John Auchettl <praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 09:26:49 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:18:41 -0500
Subject: UFO Delta Night Lights?



              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia
                    SIGHTINGS

EBK Researchers,

UFO DELTA NIGHT LIGHTS?

To all enquiring minds. A WEB PAGE image sent to us (at PRA ) by
a member of the Joint Logistic Unit - South [JLU-S] Royal
Australian Air Force [RAAF] has some interesting vision. We see
an F-117 Nighthawk refuelling from a 100th Aerial Refuelling
Wing KC-135R Stratotanker. Yet the vision could be what we call
in Oz a "Delta Night Light". Keep it in your files.

* Take a look -

http://www.af.mil/photos/Mar1999/0024f003.html

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
--End-------------------------------------------------->







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                           Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 14:21:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:21:31 -0500
Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World


Nick Pope's Weird World  Hot Gossip UK November'99

http://www.hotgossip.co.uk/pope.html


Welcome to November's column, and the latest news and gossip
about ufology, the paranormal and anything else that catches my
eye.

Leeds Conference

I had planned to write an account of all the news and gossip
from the Leeds conference organised by UFO Magazine, but there's
already been a fair bit about it on the Internet, together with
a detailed account that ran in the November/December edition of
UFO Magazine itself, which hit the news-stands a couple of days
ago. Accordingly, I won't say much, aside from saying that I
thought it was a very good conference. UFO Magazine managed to
bring speakers from Germany, America and France, as well as
British speakers, and it's this that makes these events special,
because there aren't too many conferences that have the
resources to do this. The UFO phenomenon is a global one, but
unless we have the opportunity to hear and meet researchers from
overseas, we run the risk of developing an insular view of
ufology. The Internet can help break this down, but there's no
substitute for actually meeting these people face to face.

Ufology And Popular Culture

I'm sure many of you have seen the new television advertisement
for the Ericsson T28 mobile phone. It's a slick production based
around an alien abduction, with the hapless victim being taken
up a beam of light and into a craft where the aliens mistake his
cellphone for the intelligent life (The long version even
features a cow that's been taken on board!). It's witty and
visually striking, but the interesting thing is that it was made
at all. Advertisements only work when they tap into something
with which the audience is familiar, so it's an interesting
indictor of the extent to which the basic abduction scenario is
now embedded into the public psyche. Interestingly - and I don't
know if the producers were aware of this - it's not the first
time that the abduction scenario has been used to sell mobile
phones. There was a similar advertisement that ran in America in
1992, for AT&T. It showed a golf buggy being drawn up a beam of
light towards a UFO, and the slogan was "At a time like this,
whose cellular phone would you rather own?". A few years later a
British advert showed a car being similarly drawn up a light
beam, with one of the people on the ground saying "You'd better
ring the Royal.".

Operation Thunder Child

I've been out promoting my new book, Operation Thunder Child,
and have done various television, radio and other media work
over the past month or so, ranging from The Big Breakfast on
Channel Four, to Steve Wright's show on Radio 2. I've noticed
two interesting things. First, interest in ufology among
researchers, producers and presenters hasn't waned, even though
the market for UFO books has slumped in the aftermath of the
Summer 1997 peak. Secondly, so much more promotional work is
done on the Internet these days. I've done two live Internet
interviews and another interview specifically for an Internet
site, in the past few weeks. In addition, a lecture I gave was
publicised on the popular UFO Updates site, and a review
appeared on CNI News. I hope this encourages other authors, and
if I might offer one tip, it's a plea to make sure your
publishers are alive to the power of the Internet when it comes
to marketing your books.

My Role At The MOD

There have been several recent Internet posts about my work at
the Ministry of Defence, and regrettably, some of what has been
claimed is inaccurate. It all started when James Easton wrote to
the MOD asking for some details about their policy and views on
UFOs, and enquiring about my official research and
investigation. From what I understand, Easton has only quoted
selectively from the MOD's reply, and this has resulted in a
misleading picture being given. The situation has been further
complicated because Easton's subsequent post has been picked up
by other researchers who have subjected it to their own
interpretation. I thought I'd set the record straight, and to do
so, we need to look at the statements in the MOD letter:

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

I described my work with abductees in chapter 8 of The
Uninvited, while my work on crop circles and animal mutilations
was set out in chapters 5 and 6 of Open Skies, Closed Minds.
Both books were cleared by the MOD.

"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 concerned non-operational RAF activities overseas and
diplomatic clearance for military flights abroad."

I've always made it clear that I had other duties aside from
those connected with the UFO phenomenon. These included work on
clearing some of the books written by military personnel about
their Gulf War experiences (In my previous tour of duty I'd done
Gulf War-related work in the Air Force Operations Room - part of
the Joint Operations Centre). While I did do some diplomatic
clearance work, this was an additional task that I only acquired
in the final few months of my three year tour of duty. In
practice, the Administrative Officer in Sec(AS)2a did most of
this work, as well as providing clerical support to my boss and
me.

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

This statement describes the current situation in Sec(AS)2a, and
I couldn't possibly comment on that. What I can say is that
during my tour of duty the situation was somewhat different. A
considerable percentage of my time was spent investigating UFO
sightings from both public and military sources. I also prepared
material for media enquiries, and drafted replies for defence
ministers to send to Members of Parliament who asked about MOD
policy on UFOs, or enquired about particular UFO incidents.

I can't respond to every Internet post that makes misleading
statements about my official research and investigations, but in
this instance a genuine MOD letter was being selectively quoted
from and misinterpreted. I don't know if this is because those
concerned have genuinely misunderstood the position, or whether
it was a deliberate attempt to downplay my role, but in either
event, I hope this has cleared up any confusion.
_____________________________________________

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.
_____________________________________________

   � Hot Gossip UK 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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                       A Modern Myth, Born In The USA?

From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 09:21:50 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:25:17 -0500
Subject: A Modern Myth, Born In The USA?


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 17:38:18 PST
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 03:30:42 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>A modern myth, born in the USA and exactly what you would
 >>>expect in the late 20th century.

 >>Nonsense! Eastern Europe was having UFO sightings before the US
 >>was born. Why, they even had an encounter in July 1947, which is
 >>supposedly when the US had their first known "famous" sightings.

 >You're quite right, of course.  The UFO phenomenon -- though it
 >wasn't known by that name, obviously -- was an international
 >occurrence long before anybody thought to call them "flying
 >saucers."  As long ago as 1864, to cite one more lurid instance,
 >a French newspaper was reporting a story that sounds much like a
 >modern crash/retrieval tale, and in 1877 an Argentine paper
 >picked up the yarn and changed a few details.  New Zealand's
 >Otago Times for July 29, 1909, carried a letter from a reader
 >who thought that the "airships" being reported in that nation at
 >the time might be "atomic-powered spaceships" from Mars.

 >In short, the UFO phenomenon -- as well as the ETH -- is neither
 >a "modern myth" born in the USA (the root of all evil and
 >delusion, as various list correspondents have repeatedly assured
 >us) nor a fantasy we could "expect in the late 20th Century."
 >Maybe the moral of the story is that a folklorist need not a
 >good historian make.

 >Jerry Clark



              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

Jerry & EBK Researchers,


Well said Jerry - 'the UFO phenomenon as well as the ETH  is
neither a "modern myth" born in the USA'. That's a fact!

This is just one of our Oz facts.

1868, 25th July,
Parramatta [33:49S 151:00E]
New South Wales,
Sydney, Australia

A surveyor has what he best describes as a "vision". He reports
heads floating by him and the vision of an "ark" moving along
the same path he was on. He then reports that the ark then makes
a landing in Parramatta Park. As the encounter goes on he
reports that he is shown around the ark.

In the end the report concludes - "I fell, I suppose, into my
usual sleeping state, waking next morning deeply impressed with
visions of the night."

 >From the Memorandum book of Charles Burmingham, 1873.

Historic Parrarnatta Park is the site of the first Governor's
House and the first observatory in Australia.

Good hunting,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 11:17:07 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:27:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 07:20:24 -0800
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO
 >>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:03:02 +0100

 >>>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


Hi Neil,

Just one little comment. Speed of sound at around 1,000 feet is
down around 676 miles per hour. It in the 780 mph range up at
30,000+ feet.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 99 10:16:25 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:30:57 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 06:22:01 -0500
 >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, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST


Andy,

 >>Yes, it's true that you and Dave Clarke -- Jenny seems to be
 >>trying to draw some distance from your and Clarke's more extreme
 >>statements -- have investigated some cases.  As you know, IUR
 >>has published articles by both of you based on those
 >>investigations.  I maintain, however, that psychosociological
 >>theory is antiempirical and has more of the spirit of literary
 >>criticism than of science.  The "skeptical" literature has its
 >>own problems, about which a large and growing literature has
 >>grown. All of us, including "skeptics" and psychosociologists,
 >>would all do well to be more modest in making knowledge claims.

 >But how _can_ you maintain that the psycholsociological approach
 >to ufology is 'antiempirical' when you have proof - not
 >evidence! - that PS ufologists are using empirical methods? We
 >draw our conclusions from what we discover 'in the field',
 >simple as that. Whether we align ourselves with the PSH or ETH
 >is largely immaterial, when all we are interested in is
 >resolving a case.

I didn't realize you consider yourself a psychosocial ufologist.
I thought I was making a distinction between psychosociological
rhetoric -- of the sort in which Magonia traffics -- and the
neoskeptical approach you employ.  I'm sorry I didn't make
myself clearer.  I have clearly acknowledged the investigation
you've done in previous postings, not to mention the next issue
of IUR.  It is safe to say, however, that you will never permit
a UFO to rear its ugly head in any investigation you conduct;
one way or other, persuasively or unpersuasively, the case will
be "solved," because that's your ideological bias, and, as
you've made clear repeatedly, it's a strong one indeed.

 >>What you said struck, and strikes me, as amounting to an ad
 >>hominem.  You seemed to assume that writers and publishers in
 >>this area couldn't possibly be sincere; their true motive is to
 >>sell books.  There are legitimate criticisms to be made of ETH/
 >>SETI/ETI; this is not one of them.  I was never especially fond
 >>of Carl Sagan myself, but it never occurred to me that he didn't
 >>mean exactly what he said.

 >But Jerry, sincereity doesn't enter into it with publishers -
 >their true motive _is_ to sell books! I'm sure all writers are
 >sincere in their belief. Those you mention are no doubt just as
 >sincere as the ones Dennis Stacy mentions, who hold opposing
 >views and beliefs to the ones quoted by you.

I'm glad you have clarified your view that the writers of these
books (and without writers the books wouldn't exist) are
sincere.  As for saying publishers want to sell books -- well,
that's saying nothing at all.  _Of course_ publishers want to
sell books, whether those books are about gardening, the
collapse of the Ottoman Empire, or dulcimer-making.

 >>Actually, if you remove UFOs from the equation, no evidence
 >>exists for intelligent ET life -- as critics of SETI have often
 >>pointed out.  Critics have argued that at least ufologists are
 >>working from a body of evidence, whereas the anti-UFO theorists
 >>of SETI are operating from theories the evidence for which is
 >>only inferential.  As for the strength of the UFO evidence -- no
 >>offense -- but I'd take the judgment of a James McDonald over
 >>that of an Andy Roberts any time.

 >I rather think your first sentence here sums up what I've been
 >getting at. There _is_ no evidence for intelligent ET life, and
 >certainly none held by ufologists. Just a set of beliefs. But
 >before you get into a  froth Jerry I don't doubt that evidence
 >of sorts exists within ufology but that all the evidence which
 >has been resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin.

The evidence on which the nonufological case for ETI rests is
inferential and reasonable, and most scientists outside astro-
or exobiology deem it perfectly legitimate, since a lot of
science deals with things that aren't proved to be true but for
various reasons are considered possible or likely enough to
merit inquiry with a decent chance for payoff.  My point was
simply that no direct evidence outside ufology exists.  In the
SETI context, of course, direct evidence would be a signal of
indisputably ETI origin.

Incidentally, here's a prediction: If SETI continues without
success, at some point some of its scientists, probably not of
the current generation but almost certainly the next, will urge
a reexamination of the UFO phenomenon for evidence of ET
visitation.

As for your statement that "all the evidence which has been
resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin," this is
historically false and even ludicrous.  Not even the Condon
Committee, with all the ill will in the world, could
substantiate that bizarre allegation. But it does serve to
stress my point that, in an Andy Roberts investigation, no UFO
will ever emerge, even if an explanation has to be force-fit.
You have your mind made up, and all "facts" must now conform.

 >So all ufologists can honestly say is that there is no evidence
 >for intelligent ET life but we do have some evidence, none of
 >which as it becomes explained has indicated that intelligent ET
 >life either exists or has visited earth.

I guess you've lost me there.  If you're interested in reading
some actual scientific work on the connection between the ETI
search and the UFO phenomenon, you could read Edward Ashpole's
book and also Michael D. Swords's illuminating essays on the
subject.  My point remains: the ETH, right or wrong, is a
perfectly respectable scientific approach to the UFO phenomenon.
You have yet to demonstrate otherwise.

 >>Therefore, the notion that the earth may be being visited is
 >>not, as our hyperbolic friend Dave Clarke would have us believe,
 >>akin to belief in elves and fairies.  When we have decades'
 >>worth of puzzling UFO reports, many of them of structured
 >>craftlike objects with extraordinary performance
 >>characteristics, and these reports remain unsolved even after
 >>extensive investigation, and we have evidence (in the form of
 >>radar trackings, ground traces, photos, and other CE2-like
 >>physical evidence), it is not unreasonable to wonder if indeed
 >>ETs have found their way here.  That may be right, or it may be
 >>wrong, but it is not an absurd hypothesis on its face.

 >No, it's not at all unreasonable to wonder if ETs have not found
 >their way here. Wondering about an the existence of unproven
 >entities has been a feature of religions for millenia. To date
 >it has come to nothing other than a lot of bickering other than
 >'my evidence is better than yours'. Ufology is no different!


What a load of nonsense.  Again, you make my point: your own
illiteracy in the scientific ETI literature relegates you to the
spouting of absurd cliches, in which the notion of intelligent
life in the cosmos becomes no more than a religious illusion, on
no more evidence than your own fervent belief.  I'd say you're
better at rhetoric than at science, but I'm not so sure you're
all that good at rhetoric, either.

 >In your reply to Dave Clarke's posting you note:

 >>I've said this before, but I'll say this again: I have never
 >>seen people so obsessed with the ETH as those who, like Clarke
 >>and his friends, consider it a despised heresy.  If you go back
 >>and read the archives of this list, you will find in the great
 >>majority of cases that it was anti-ETH obsessionists who brought
 >>the ETH into the discussion; more moderate ufologists, such as
 >>the undersigned, were only responding to dubious claims, not
 >>advocating the ETH as such. I hold the essentially agnostic
 >>position that the ETH is neither unreasonable nor proved.
 >>That's all. But even that little is enough to drive the likes of
 >>Clarke into fits.  What I want to know is, why is the very
 >>notion that the ETH is not an absurd myth so threatening?  Now
 >>there's question for the social scientists to take up.

 >Your contention that Clarke et al are 'obsessed' is a bit off
 >the mark Jerry. The ETH obsession is held by the majority of
 >active ufologists (certainly in the UK) and is the over-riding
 >explanation and focus of the majority of  media discussions of
 >UFOs. It is also the fuel which drives the UFO book and magazine
 >publishing industry (all sincere I'm sure!).

I stand by what I said.  It always amazes me how, as Clarke did,
I get accused of "believing" in the ETH and, moreover, deeming
it to be "proved" when I have repeatedly said no more than that
it is a reasonable, though unproved, possible explanation for
the most puzzling UFO reports.  Few American ufologists, in my
experience and (considerable) reading, seem as obsessed with the
ETH as their critics, who bring it, along with the usual company
of strawmen, into every ufological exchange that fails, even
implicitly, to hew the "religion/mythology/folklore/nonsense"
party line.  It's as if believers in the latter were desperate
to defend a fragile faith. Outside the faith, ufologists tend to
be pragmatists and, while viewing the ETH as a possible
theoretical framework, don't talk about it much, preferring to
devote virtually all of their time to data collection and
investigation.

Yes, it's true that naive and often sensationalistic stuff about
ETs colors treatments of UFOs in popular culture.  So what?
UFO Updates is a forum for persons who participate in the subject
on a deeper level.

 >>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.

Stop speaking in cliches, Andy, and stop setting up strawmen.
Can you neoskeptics do no better?  If anyone who has ever said
that unsolved UFOs _must_ be of ET origin, it is not I, so drop
it, okay?  I simply stated that the hypothesis that some
unsolved UFOs may turn out to be of ET origin is defensible.  I
can already here the strawmen shouting, yet again, that I claim
ET origin is "proved." This is really getting annoying.  On
second thought, boring.

 >Now, are you really saying that 'the best UFO cases tend to stay
 >unsolved over time' or that UFO cases become  'best cases' by
 >dint of them being unsolved over a period of time Jerry?
 >Is a case only judged as 'classic' after a period of time,
 >when it has remained unsolved? Because if that is the case your
 >agument collapses on several 'classic' UK cases which have
 >trundled on for years and then been solved. Cracoe and Berwyn
 >are two cases in point here. I'm sure Jenny, Dave or any other
 >sceptical ufologist could come up with many more.
 >Please define 'classic' and 'best' with reference to UFO cases.

There's a whole list of classic cases in my encyclopedia.
That's why they're there.  Go look at the table of contents if
you can't figure out what might constitute a "classic" case.
Since you seem confused, let me clarify it for you: I'm not
talking about classic IFO cases (there are, of course, such; the
Mantell incident is one such). I am talking classic UFO cases.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:32:50 -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: Mon, 01 Nov 99 17:38:18 PST

Dear Jerry

 >In short, the UFO phenomenon -- as well as the ETH -- is neither
 >a "modern myth" born in the USA (the root of all evil and
 >delusion, as various list correspondents have repeatedly assured
 >us) nor a fantasy we could "expect in the late 20th Century."
 >Maybe the moral of the story is that a folklorist need not a
 >good historian make.

I agree. I also think there is a role for folklorist's in
ufology, but to suggest (as David Clarke appears to suggest)
that the subject itself is based on mythology is preposterous.
This is an insult to all those witnesses, researchers and
investigators who have been involved in the subject down the
years.

I also strongly object to the group's comments about our
American and French colleagues. I assure you Jerry, that they do
not speak for all Brits. The last hilarious piece about the
French not liking us very much and upset over the "beef" war, is
a point. What on earth has this to do with anything being
discussed on this list?

Georgina Bruni







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:35:18 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 02:01:03 +0100 (MET)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Dear Henry

 >Thank you for correcting David Clarke with his fruitless
 >approach. From time to time, it needs to be said that debunkers,
 >whether they think of themselves as skeptics or even friendly
 >skeptics, have damaged the field of Ufology and continue to do
 >so.

I am always happy to listen to a sceptic's theories providing
they are constructive, but unfortunately (as many of us know)
most of their arguments are based on one or two fractions of a
case which they claim points to the case as a whole being
solved. It is this mentality which makes me sceptical of the
sceptics.

 >What will happen is that Dr. Clarke will participate in public
 >debates about UFOs, will speak to the press, will argue with his
 >colleagues and will possibly hold lectures as a representative
 >of UFOIN (self styled as the 'New British Ufology'), and will
 >explain the UFO phenomenon as being without physical evidence
 >and merely the result of late 20th century mythology and
 >folklore.

I do not think that UFOIN is being taken too seriously. I shall
be very surprised if any respectable researcher/investigator
become involved with such a gang. The archives of UFO UpDates is
a record of how they have attacked individuals, UFO Groups and
even other countries. This self proclaimed group is (in my
opinion) an embarrassment for British researchers, and believe
me, there are some very respectable and dedicated people here
who are genuinely involved in researching the subject without
stooping to personal attacks, etc.

 >You and I know this is untrue, but Mr. Clarke is not of the type
 >to learn quickly from other people's perspectives. That much is
 >clear even from the exchanges on this list. Most of his
 >colleagues, students and the audience of the various media will
 >take his conclusions for truth and thus a new cycle of ignorance
 >about UFOs is born.

This is not meant specifically for David Clarke, but a prominent
British journalist recently told me that when he investigated a
UFO case, he was amazed at how it became clouded over by self
proclaimed experts (or words to that effect) calling the press
to put forward their sceptical opinions. His conclusion was that
they were just in it to make a name for themselves.

Georgina Bruni






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 2

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 99 12:19:20 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 17:37:15 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 06:22:01 -0500
 >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, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST


Andy,

 >I rather think your first sentence here sums up what I've been
 >getting at. There _is_ no evidence for intelligent ET life, and
 >certainly none held by ufologists. Just a set of beliefs. But
 >before you get into a  froth Jerry I don't doubt that evidence
 >of sorts exists within ufology but that all the evidence which
 >has been resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin.

This is a second go-round at this paragraph.  I'd answered it in
a posting I sent out a couple of hours ago.  Rereading what
you've said, however, I see that I missed your point, which was
a more subtle one than I first took it to be.  Sorry for the
misunderstanding.

IFOs are solvable because they involve known phenomena and
processes.  Most IFO cases are easily solved for this reason, a
few less easily.  Proving that the unexplained cases, the UFOs,
are generated by extraterrestrials is an infinitely more
difficult question, since (1) we know nothing about ETs and (2)
presumably they're very smart, and if they don't want their
presence known, or at least conclusively established, they are
going to act with a certain, or a great, degree of cunning.  The
persistence of puzzling cases both argues for a real UFO
phenomenon and suggests a strategy of relative concealment.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:33:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 06:18:32 -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: Tue, 02 Nov 99 12:19:20 PST

 >IFOs are solvable because they involve known phenomena and
 >processes.  Most IFO cases are easily solved for this reason, a
 >few less easily.

No, Jerry, IFO "cases" are not solvable. There is no such thing
as an IFO "case". IFOs are what UFO cases become once someone
has demonstrated that they have a mundane origin. When they are
initially reported as a UFO case no-one knows that they involve
known phenomena and processes. That's what ufologists are
supposed to find out.

 > Proving that the unexplained cases, the UFOs,
 >are generated by extraterrestrials is an infinitely more
 >difficult question, since (1) we know nothing about ETs

Yes, absolutely nothing whatsoever, even such basic facts as
whether they exist at all or whether the universe is absolutely
chockablock with them, despite, in that memorable phrase,
"deserts of arid speculation" . Glad we agree on that.

 > and (2)
 >presumably they're very smart, and if they don't want their
 >presence known, or at least conclusively established, they are
 >going to act with a certain, or a great, degree of cunning.  The
 >persistence of puzzling cases both argues for a real UFO
 >phenomenon and suggests a strategy of relative concealment.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry, you're coming dagerously close here to the arguement that
the very existence of unexplained UFO cases proves the existence
of fiendishly cunning extraterrestraials. You can't *really* be
saying that, can you?

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                              SETI and the Moon

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 19:30:02 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 06:16:42 -0500
Subject: SETI and the Moon


 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:39:44 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

<snip>

 >It's been my understanding -- but correct me if I'm wrong --
 >that SETI scientists are searching for radio evidence of ET
 >intellgence precisely because they think that ET visitors
 >_aren't_ probable, that is, are not here now. They may well
 >think the galaxy is densely populated, but that's not the same
 >at all as saying that "ET visitors are not only possible but
 >probable," as you have it.

SETI scientists have added different types of equipment and new
techniques in their search for E.T.I.  Some are now even looking
for E.T.I. in Earth's immediate backyard in space.  For example,
our scientist and radio astronomer friend from Ukraine, Alexey V.
Arkhipov, recently started a new two year project, "Search for
Alien Artifacts on the Moon II" which will catalogue strange
lunar objects as small as 10 metres in size which may have
originated from beyond the Earth-Moon system.  The SETI League,
of which Dr. Arkhipov is a regional coordinator, has even offered
to publish the results of his lunar SETI archaeology project.

With his help in locating some early Soviet orbital data and with
leads I have got from Canadian space scientists, there is the
likelyhood that certain objects currently in Earth orbit may turn
out to be additional natural satellites of the Earth, like the
Moon (an important discovery in itself), or possibly even alien
space probes.

 >The standard argument within the scientific community at large
 >has always been, "Er, um, yes, we don't deny that intelligent
 >life exists elsewhere in the galaxy or universe, but damned if
 >we can see anyway for it to get from there to here."

There is still lots of resistance by some scientists to even
consider the possibility that E.T.I.s may be much closer to us
than they care to know about.  Unfortuantely articles with their
views continue to dominate the literature, even to the extent of
ridiculing even fellow astronomers and experienced observers of
the sky who even suggest that they observed sometime that science
says cannot be.

For example, the September 1999 issue of "Sky and Telescope"
published a debunking article titled "The TLP Myth: A Brief for
the Prosecution".  Although the two authors of this article make
mention of the 1968 NASA report "Chronological Catalog of
Reported Lunar Events" they make no mention of the more recent
1978 Cameron report "Lunar Transient Phenomena Catalog" which
lists a total of 1468 unexplained lights, objects and events on
or in the vicinity of our "dead" Moon dating back to 1540 AD.  I
personally know of astronomers who have seen these TLPs and
which were confirmed by colleagues but are reluctant to report
them in order to protect their reputations.  I think it is safe
to suspect that the total number of such TLP sightings may be
many times larger still.  Recently a lunar probe, one of the
first since the Americans stopped sending spacecraft to the Moon
about a quarter century ago, has even detected a TLP event.

I am encouraged that at one time rocks falling out of the sky
and ball lightning were also dismissed by scientists.  TLPs and
alien artifacts will soon be accepted as science fact too.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:35:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 06:20:40 -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: Tue, 02 Nov 99 10:16:25 PST

 >I didn't realize you consider yourself a psychosocial ufologist.
 >I thought I was making a distinction between psychosociological
 >rhetoric -- of the sort in which Magonia traffics -- and the
 >neoskeptical approach you employ.  I'm sorry I didn't make
 >myself clearer.

I'd be very grateful if you could make yourself clearer, and
explain exactly what that distinction is.

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:22:26 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 06:23:37 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:16 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 02:01:03 +0100 (MET)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Thank you for correcting David Clarke with his fruitless
 >>approach. From time to time, it needs to be said that debunkers,
 >>whether they think of themselves as skeptics or even friendly
 >>skeptics, have damaged the field of Ufology and continue to do
 >>so.

 >I am always happy to listen to a sceptic's theories providing
 >they are constructive, but unfortunately (as many of us know)
 >most of their arguments are based on one or two fractions of a
 >case which they claim points to the case as a whole being
 >solved. It is this mentality which makes me sceptical of the
 >sceptics.

This is a typical rhetorical response to criticism: perhaps Ms.
Bruni could mention some of the "constructive" sceptical
theories she is happy to listen to? No doubt she will soon be
telling us that some of her best friends are sceptics.

 >This is not meant specifically for David Clarke, but a prominent
 >British journalist recently told me that when he investigated a
 >UFO case, he was amazed at how it became clouded over by self
 >proclaimed experts (or words to that effect) calling the press
 >to put forward their sceptical opinions. His conclusion was that
 >they were just in it to make a name for themselves.

No chance of mentioning any names though, I suppose?


--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:01:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:09:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Gravity Waves Control

 >>I just subscribed to this list, and I assume there are a few
 >>scientists here (not that I'm really one myself).

 >>The first time I've heard of gravity as being a wave (thus
 >>capable of being amplified, modulated, etc) was through Bob
 >>Lazar's claims. His story is very interesting, as much as the
 >>laws of physics and processes involved in it, but I thought none
 >>of that had been proved.

 >>After more than a decade of reading for the first time the book
 >>"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan, I bought the (sadly condensed) current
 >>edition to read it again, and in Chapter XII, page 246, he
 >>writes:

 >>"There may be other methods of communication that have
 >>substantial merit:

 >>...optical or infrared lasers; pulsed neutrinos; modulated
 >>gravity waves..."

 >>That last sentence surprised me. How advanced is humanity when
 >>it comes to gravity modulation, amplification, etc.? Also, can
 >>we artificially create streams of neutrinos?

 >>I though they were quite unsubstantial... I mean, almost no mass
 >>at all.

 >Dear Edoardo:

 >This is highly speculative on my part, but I have had similar
 >thoughts.

 >IF we assume that those responsible for some UFOs have somehow
 >managed to manipulate gravity for the sake of propulsion;  then
 >it would seem almost child's play for them to use those same
 >principles for long distance communications.

 >Consider this:

 >Long before the steam engine was used for transportation, fire
 >steam and smoke were used for signaling purposes.

 >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the electric telegraph
 >preceded the electric train by quite a few years.

 >If gravity particle/waves can be manipulated, modulated or
 >otherwise controlled, they might eventually lead to novel means
 >of communication.

 >If some other civilization is already doing this, their signals
 >would be as invisible and undetectable to us, in our present
 >state of development, as radio signals would be to some
 >completely non-technical society out in the boondocks...

 >Ah, but that is all speculation. Nevertheless, I watch for
 >developments, however small and tentative, in these and similar
 >fields of physics.

 >And,  I'm no scientist either.


Hello list and all.

This is just an idle observation, so bear with me.

Do any of you out there recall the story (America's Most
Wanted/Unsolved Mysteries) of the bass player (I cannot recall
his name from Iron Butterfly and his mysterious disappearance?

Apparently the guy was a good student in college before and
after being in the band. He turned out to be a very gifted
scientist(just like his father).

Along with his father he was working on (among other things) a
way of using gravity waves to communicate. They speculated that
you could converse with any place in the galaxy almost
instantly.

The way the story goes, he and his father claimed to make a huge
breakthrough in their research just before his disappearance. He
is still missing to the best of my knowledge.

Years later, they found his burned out van in a place that they
searched immediately after his disappearance and found nothing.
Who would have snatched him?

Just a thought...

--
Scott R. Caput

The brain is by far the most complexly organized piece of matter
we know. It is enormously more complicated in structure than a
star is, for instance, which is why astronomers know so much
about stars, and psychologists know so little about brains.

                        Isaac Asimov








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

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 23:58:44 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:18:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Gravity Waves Control

 >>I just subscribed to this list, and I assume there are a few
 >>scientists here (not that I'm really one myself).

 >>The first time I've heard of gravity as being a wave (thus
 >>capable of being amplified, modulated, etc) was through Bob
 >>Lazar's claims. His story is very interesting, as much as the
 >>laws of physics and processes involved in it, but I thought none
 >>of that had been proved.

 >>After more than a decade of reading for the first time the book
 >>"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan, I bought the (sadly condensed) current
 >>edition to read it again, and in Chapter XII, page 246, he
 >>writes:

 >>"There may be other methods of communication that have
 >>substantial merit:

 >>...optical or infrared lasers; pulsed neutrinos; modulated
 >>gravity waves..."

 >>That last sentence surprised me. How advanced is humanity when
 >>it comes to gravity modulation, amplification, etc.? Also, can
 >>we artificially create streams of neutrinos?

 >>I though they were quite unsubstantial... I mean, almost no mass
 >>at all.

 >Dear Edoardo:

 >This is highly speculative on my part, but I have had similar
 >thoughts.

Whilst I try not to have too many thoughts, as they mess up my
ability to concentrate on testing my new products, I have had a
few recently.  Thoughts, that is.  Such a shame, too. Every time
this occurs, I lose my train of thought on some new inebriatory
substance.

Anyway, one must needs make a few assumptions in order to
attempt a thought or two on how UFOs might propulse.  So sorry
to have had this other thought, which generated the new word,
"propulse!"  Good word that.

For example, UFOs exist and are craft from somewhere or
sometime else.  They maneuver in ways which would preclude a
flesh bearing entity being on board without losing body parts.
Not to mention the inability of any material we know to
withstand such accelerations.

Another assumption is that if indeed these vehicles are real,
then they belong to one hell of an advanced society. Such a
society would not likely create materials or for that matter,
beings, which would withstand that kind of force.  They would
rather create a vehicle which would not experience forces to
begin with.  And so, protect the occupants similarly.  Nothing
else makes any sense.

The one force which had to be overcome is gravity, which is very
likely being manipulated in order to move their craft.

 >IF we assume that those responsible for some UFOs have somehow
 >managed to manipulate gravity for the sake of propulsion;  then
 >it would seem almost child's play for them to use those same
 >principles for long distance communications.

 >Consider this:

 >Long before the steam engine was used for transportation, fire
 >steam and smoke were used for signaling purposes.

 >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the electric telegraph
 >preceded the electric train by quite a few years.

 >If gravity particle/waves can be manipulated, modulated or
 >otherwise controlled, they might eventually lead to novel means
 >of communication.

 >If some other civilization is already doing this, their signals
 >would be as invisible and undetectable to us, in our present
 >state of development, as radio signals would be to some
 >completely non-technical society out in the boondocks...

 >Ah, but that is all speculation. Nevertheless, I watch for
 >developments, however small and tentative, in these and similar
 >fields of physics.

 >And,  I'm no scientist either.


I have all the answers, Larry.  But the timing isn't right.  You
regular folks aren't ready for it.  So I aint tellin you nuthin.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 21:24:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:21:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Jerry Clark wrote:

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Sat, 30 Oct 99 10:19:40 PDT

 >>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!

 >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


Thanks Jerry for bringing a bit of constructive criticism and
helping me realize one of my "downfalls" shall I say.  I shall
be obtaining the IUR's that you referred to me in the very near
future concerning your articles on Vallee.  How shortsighted of
me.

Sincerely, Todd 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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Rory Lushman <Oubliette@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:06:28 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:24:51 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:16 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Rory Lushman <Oubliette@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 10:00
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >I do not think that UFOIN is being taken too seriously. I shall
 >be very surprised if any respectable researcher/investigator
 >become involved with such a gang. The archives of UFO UpDates,
 >a record of how they have attacked individuals, UFO Groups and
 >even other countries. This self proclaimed group is (in my
 >opinion) an embarrassment for British researchers, and believe
 >me, there are some very respectable and dedicated people here
 >who are genuinely involved in researching the subject without
 >stooping to personal attacks, etc.

Says Miss Bruni, the messenger for Mr Pope's personal attack on
a Northern researcher. She will of course cop out and say she
hever wrote it but is just passing it on. Let's not forget she
still posts Nick's gossip but then claims there are so many
definitions of gossip.

You are also wrong about UFOIN being taken seriously. You
presume much Georgina. Every group, whether local, national or
international has those that feel strongly against it. This is a
part of life. UFOIN are not out to replace anybody but are just
a broad band working together, what's wrong with that.

UpDates will always have those who disagree or have the opposite
view, this is what it is about. We can live with that. Why is it
when anyone disagrees, its called an attack. We have the right
to disagree and if people don't like that, they don't have to
listen.

As for being an embarrassment, I couldn't think of anything more
embarrassing than having to be Nick's messenger via a gossip
column.

Live with it folks, UFOIN will be around for a while. We are
prepared to work with others but that is a problem for a few. It
seems that people don't want others to cooperate and would like
to try and pull any union apart.

 >His conclusion was that they were just in it to make a name
 >for themselves.

I'm sorry but this is a case of the pot calling the kettle
black. Who more than Mr Pope is in it for themselves. Putting
UFOIN to aside for one moment and look at many of the groups up
and down the UK, working hard and travelling the country to
investigate cases. Interviewing many witnesses in their own
time, yet not getting one bit of publicity from it.

How much would it cost for Nick to give a lecture at at a
conference. The man who proclaims himself as UK's Fox
Mulder...please Georgina, give us a break.

There are many who are in ufology for the fame game and its
these who use their celebrity status to keep all others at arms
length. Have you noticed these very people, are never present on
UpDates or you have to go through an agent to get to them.

Long before being involved with UFOIN I booked Jenny Randles to
speak at two conferences and she only asked for expenses to and
from the venue and to be honest I can't recall her collecting
them. Jenny is beyond doubt the UK's most well known researcher
and if she can charge so little to give a talk, why can't the
the Nick's of this world.

Any member of UFOIN can be contacted at any time as can most of
the hard working groups and individauls across the globe.

Rory Lushman
Proud to be involved with UFOIN.
If replying, please go through my agent, Grabbit And Run.










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

                   Alien Egg Toy Mistaken for Human Foetus

From: Ian J. Darlington <ian@interweb-design.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:43:58 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:27:06 -0500
Subject: Alien Egg Toy Mistaken for Human Foetus


Alien Egg Toy Mistaken for Human Foetus
BBC Ceefax 11/3/99

A toy designed to resemble an alien baby closed down a train
station after it was mistaken for a human foetus.

Police and paramedics rushed to the London Underground station
at Buckhurst Hill, Essex after a supervisor found one of the
Alien Eggs on a platform.

The mistake was only realised when it was examined by doctors in
a hospital.

The �1.99 ($3.27) Alien Egg contains what looks like a tiny baby
curled up in a foetal position amid a covering of sticky goo.

----ENDS----

Regards,

Ian Darlington.
Editor/Webmaster 'Skywatchers'.

Cornwall UFO Research Group
http://www.interweb-design.co.uk/cuforg
mailto:cuforg@interweb-design.co.uk
ICQ 12387110









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

                      Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

From: neil morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:39:59 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:31:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO


 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 11:17:07 -0300
 >From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

 >>Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 07:20:24 -0800
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Press Report on Heathrow UFO

 >Hi Neil,

 >Just one little comment. Speed of sound at around 1,000 feet is
 >down around 676 miles per hour. It in the 780 mph range up at
 >30,000+ feet.

 >Best,

 >Don Ledger

Don and List,

Mmmmm,

and I "nicked" the figure from an online physics source too
<BG>.

It also depends on temp and air pressure at the time I guess
also, but taking Don's figure at face value and the BA flight
being at 4000 ft I guess that would drop the speed to say aprox
700 mph or so. That brings the range within which the object
would need to be to remain sub-sonic down even further.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Moderator UFO UpDates
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:43:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control





 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:01:08 -0500
 >From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 >>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

<snip>

 >Hello list and all.

 >This is just an idle observation, so bear with me.

 >Do any of you out there recall the story (America's Most
 >Wanted/Unsolved Mysteries) of the bass player (I cannot recall
 >his name from Iron Butterfly and his mysterious disappearance?

 >Apparently the guy was a good student in college before and
 >after being in the band. He turned out to be a very gifted
 >scientist(just like his father).

 >Along with his father he was working on (among other things) a
 >way of using gravity waves to communicate. They speculated that
 >you could converse with any place in the galaxy almost
 >instantly.

[Philip Kramer was only with Butterfly for its last incarnation -
1975 on ebk]

This story rang a bell for me - I did a search of the archives here and
came up with the following from Don Allen's old FIDO UFO conference:

-----



Date: 07-09-95 (22:06)
   To: ALL
From: Rick Trentham
Subj: FTL Radio?
Conf: F-UFO

Today, July 07, 1995, the Phil Donahue show featured a missing
persons case concerning Philip "Taylor" Kramer, formerly of the
rock group 'Iron Butterfly', and currently head of the Thousand
Oaks, CA firm of Total Multi Media, a computer firm that among
other projects produces CD-ROM manuals for the U.S. Navy.

On Feb. 12 of this year, Taylor Kramer went to the airport to
pick up an arriving business associate.  Between 11:00 AM and
noon, Taylor made several phone calls on his cell phone,
including one to his wife, Jennifer, telling her that the plane
was late and he was returning to his hotel without the person
he had gone to meet, and that he "would have a big surprise" for
her when he got there; he also made a call to the answering
machine of his friend & business partner, Ron Bushy.

The last known call Taylor made from his cell phone placed him
at the Tampa exit to the Ventura freeway about noon, Feb. 12,
1995.

Since then, Kramer has been missing; his vehicle has not been
found, there has been no activity recorded on his credit cards
(and he did not usually carry any cash).

It has been speculated that he may be suffering from a
dissociative fugue state, and is unable to remember who he is;
there have been a few sightings in the southern California area
of a man fitting his description asking for change to call his
family, who was later identified from missing persons flyers as
Kramer, who is 6'5" and tends to stand out.

Also, his wife believes that about 7:30 on Feb. 28 she received
voice mail from her husband, who lethargically said hello twice
and hung up.

Kramer, who with Ron Bushy, was in the rock group 'Iron
Butterfly', is considered to be a computer genius, and has a
backgound working in aerospace and defense projects, including
work on the guidance system for the MX missile.

It was speculated that his disappearance might be related to a
project he and his father had worked on for the past thirty
years.

According to comments made by his family and business partner,
the project he was trying to patent involved "mega-mathematics"
concerning transmitting electronic data through computer systems
AT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEEDS, AND BY RADIO SIGNALS TO OTHER
PLANETS.

According to the response given by Kramer's family to Phil's
question about it taking eight minutes for light to travel from
the sun to the earth, Kramer's development would make it
possible for electronic signals to cover the same distance "in
less than a second," and would permit communication "with other
planets, if there's anyone out there." It was stated that this
technique would affect all current and emerging technologies,
and since foul play has not been ruled out in Kramer's
disappearance, it is suspected that it may have something to do
with his project and its potential impact on other firms.

If true, this project brings to mind the April first 'New
Scientist' report about possible FTL data transmissions.  If
Kramer has developed an FTL radio, or at least laid solid
theoretical groundwork for one, it might tend to explain why the
SETI Project has come up dry so far, as well as his potential
disappearance, if you postulate alien contact, government cover
up, etc.

Don Allen, Kurt Lochner, & others on the echo might wish to
check into this report to determine if the project really does
involve FTL technology, or if the statements made were the
result of nontechnical persons attempting an explanation for
some other method of speeding up
eletronic data transmissions.

Sincerely,
Rick Trentham

...Note: T-Rex in mirror is hungrier than it appears...
* Origin: The Voltage Drop<615-332-2637> (1:362/619)

<<<>>>






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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:01:22 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:08:17 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:22:26 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

John

 >This is a typical rhetorical response to criticism: perhaps Ms.
 >Bruni could mention some of the "constructive" sceptical
 >theories she is happy to listen to? No doubt she will soon be
 >telling us that some of her best friends are sceptics.

I recently found it interesting to discuss a case with a defense
journalist. He put some valid points forward which I took note
of because they were intelligent.

Yes John, I do have numerous friends who are very sceptical of
this subject.

 >>a prominent
 >>British journalist recently told me that when he investigated a
 >>UFO case, he was amazed at how it became clouded over by self
 >>proclaimed experts (or words to that effect) calling the press
 >>to put forward their sceptical opinions. His conclusion was that
 >>they were just in it to make a name for themselves.

 >No chance of mentioning any names though, I suppose?

It's mentioned in my book which is due to be published next year.

Georgina Bruni






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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:01:20 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:10:47 -0500
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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:06:28 -0000

 >As for being an embarrassment, I couldn't think of anything more
 >embarrassing than having to be Nick's messenger via a gossip
 >column.

Hi Rory

As the Editor in Chief of Hot Gossip UK magazine I post Nick
Pope's column to UFO Updates, certainly. This came about when I
used to post it along with my own. When I took a break from my
column I saw no point in not sending Nick's. I have no problem
with this as it only takes a minute of my time.

Georgina Bruni










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

                   Sighting Info Request - Wales Oct 12/99

From: Marc Bell <MARC@wufog.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:03:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:14:09 -0500
Subject: Sighting Info Request - Wales Oct 12/99


Can anyone help with the following sighting report:-

I recently recieved a phone call report, then from what I assume
to be a second source (i.e. one male, one female) a written
request. But could be connected?

This event was claimed to have occured near Lampeter
(Ceredigion, Wales) on the afternoon of the 12th October 1999.

The written report being....

'It happened on 12th/10/99 on the road from Newcastle Emlyn to
Lampeter, it happened as my friend was not far from Lampeter.
Now round here the RAF test fly their jets around the mountains
all the time. Lampeter is surrounded by small mountains. She was
in her car driving along when she saw 2 jets fly across, nothing
strange in that. But just after them came a saucer shaped object
(this was at a distance), but it was going in the same direction
as the jets. The time was not long before 2pm.'

Hopefully someone might be able to help?

All the best,

Marc Bell (WUFORG)







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

                         Re: Nick Pope's Weird World

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 01:35:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:39:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Nick Pope's Weird World



 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 14:21:27 +0000
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World

 >I'm sure many of you have seen the new television advertisement
 >for the Ericsson T28 mobile phone. It's a slick production based
 >around an alien abduction, ....

No, but I've seen a few times a TV commercial for Volswagen,
where the new beetle floats in the air and spins really fast,
while you read: "reverse engineered from UFOs" :)

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

               Australian Sighting Reports Oz Files 04.11.1999

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 00:55:12 +1100
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:17:31 -0500
Subject: Australian Sighting Reports Oz Files 04.11.1999

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AUSTRALIAN SIGHTING REPORTS
OZ FILES 04.11.1999
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1800 Callin Code: 00360  30.10.1999

Date: 30.10.99
Day: Saturday
Duration: 1.hour
Time Reported:  11.30pm
Source: Terry & Nicole
Location: Deception Bay  Queensland
Tel:
Report given to nearest rep: AUFORN Jan Stone  QLD

Report:

Shape: No clear shape
Size: 5 cent piece
Objects: 4
Colour:Bright orange all
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Duration: 3 minutes or more
Direction: Easterly
Witnesses: 2

Nicole said:  I was first to step out of our car when I noticed
these four strange lights in the sky. I saw  4  bright orange
coloured lights travelling in formation. I called to my husband
to get  out of our car and have a look, but before he did the
car lost  some power  the radio went up and down has the objects
passed over head. I was really scared I  yelled at Terry get out
of the car and have a look at these lights.

My neigbours must have heard me yell  at Terry because they too
came out and saw what Terry and I was looking at. We all stood
there watching these objects.

The objects acted rather strangely. One zig-zaged then broke
away from the others the others stayed for 10 minutes then
another broke away then another 1 slowly vanished then the final
one flased vanishing across the bay  and out to sea.

My neighbours called B105 to see if anyone else had seen these
things but they laughed at him, so he hung up on them, then he
called the Airport but they wouldn't tell him if they had
anything on their radar. I called 013 and asked if there was a
number to call to report a UFO.

Jan said  Nicole was still quite upset by what she had seen and
was still afraid incase the objects might come back. She was
also upset because no one took her seriously about what she had
seen.

Nicole thanked Jan  for calling her and was relieved to have someone
to talk to. END

Regards Diane Harrsion
Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network

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

1800 Callin Code: 00361 02.11.1999

Date: 02.11.99
Day: Tuesday
Duration: 1.half hours
Time Reported:  9.15pm
Source: Darren Paterson
Location: Rowvill Victoria
Report given to nearest rep: AUFORN Diane Harrison  QLD
Tel 03  976
Report:

Shape: No clear shape
Size: of 2 stars
Objects: 1
Colour:Bright white star like with red light
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Direction: North
Witnesses: 2 or more

Darren said: I had been watching the object with my girlfriend
on the driveway of our house. It was a clear night so we thought
we would sit outside and this was when I noticed a star like
object but it was bigger than a star. It was doing zig zags in
the sky, clockwise first then anti-clockwise . We looked at each
other in amassment, I believe in UFOs but never thought I would
see one.

Comment: Diane, Darren was observing the object while I was
talking to him on the phone. I asked him if he had a video
camera he said he thought  he had but couldn't find it. I told
him  to tell his girlfriend to call the neigbours out to have a
look and see if they could make out  what  the object  could be.

(Q) Darren Could it be a star or the planet Venus
(A) No I'm a keen astronomer and I can tell a planet from a star
and star from a plane and this was not a plane, planes don't act
like that.

(Q) Do you have a camera I would like you to try and take some
photos of it.
(A) I have taken around 6 photos I could see it the view finder
I hope I held the camera firm enough to get a good shoot.

Darren said he would send a copy of the photos to us when gets
them developed.

Still under investigation

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network

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

1800 Callin Code: 00362 03.11.1999

Date: 03.11.99
Day: Wednesday
Duration: 4 minutes
Time Reported: 11.03pm
Time of  Sighting: 9.10pm
Source: Barry ?
Location: Fremantle, Perth
Report given to nearest rep: AUFORN Diane Harrison  QLD
Tel 0418938


Report: Due to Mobile phone number left on the Hotline I left a
message for him to call me back


Shape: No clear shape
Size: of  star
Objects: 1
Colour:Bright white star like
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Direction: West out to sea
Witnesses: 1

Barry said: I feel strange calling because I don't believe in
UFOs but I saw  this object and it flared then moved at least a
metre to the left very fast. It did this twice  what do you
think it could be?

(A) It could be a Geo. Stationary iridium satellites and your
eyes could have made the object appear to move.

Barry:  But it moved left fast so it wasn't stationary but your
right I could have appeared to move, my eyes could have played
tricks on me.

(A) I'm  sorry Barry I'm not sure what you saw it could have
been a number of things.

Comment to list: Why is it everyone thinks you have the
answer to what they see :>) Sounds like an iridium satellite

Regards Diane
Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network

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

1800 Callin Code: 00363 02.11.1999

Date: 02.11.99
Day: Tuesday
Duration: 5 seconds
Time Reported:  9.14pm
Source: Nick P
Location: Mermaid Waters, Gold Coast, QLD
Report given to nearest rep: AUFORN Diane Harrison  QLD
Tel 03  976
Report:

Shape: Small rectangle
Size:  not sure
Objects: 1
Colour: Silver
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane "very fast"
Direction: Northerly
Witnesses: 1

Report:

Nick Said: He had just gone outside onto the balcony for a smoke
and this was when he noticed the object flying through the sky
at an incredible speed.

He said: I know  for sure it  wasn't a meteorite because I have
been a keen  sky watcher since the last big meteorite shower and
can tell the difference.

Report form sent out.

Regards Diane
Co Director The Australian UFO Research Network






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

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Marty Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:03:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:42:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:01:08 -0500
 >From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 >>>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
 >>>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Gravity Waves Control

Scott Caput writes:

 >Hello list and all.

 >This is just an idle observation, so bear with me.

 >Do any of you out there recall the story (America's Most
 >Wanted/Unsolved Mysteries) of the bass player (I cannot recall
 >his name from Iron Butterfly and his mysterious disappearance?

 >Apparently the guy was a good student in college before and
 >after being in the band. He turned out to be a very gifted
 >scientist(just like his father).

 >Along with his father he was working on (among other things) a
 >way of using gravity waves to communicate. They speculated that
 >you could converse with any place in the galaxy almost
 >instantly.

 >The way the story goes, he and his father claimed to make a huge
 >breakthrough in their research just before his disappearance. He
 >is still missing to the best of my knowledge.

 >Years later, they found his burned out van in a place that they
 >searched immediately after his disappearance and found nothing.
 >Who would have snatched him?

 >Just a thought...


 >Scott R. Caput

Howdy Scott!

The fellow that you speak of was Philip Taylor Kramer, and his
remains were indeed found, along with his van, at the bottom of
a steep canyon in California. (Not burned out, just crashed)
There are some odd aspects to this case that could point to some
sort of conspiracy, but my own thoughts are that Kramer realised
his theories were useless, plus he owed a lot of people money,
his business was doomed, and so he did himself in. Simple as
that. For a complete rundown of the story read the good article
about this in the October issue of Maxim magazine.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                                  'Lasers'

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 02:02:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:44:54 -0500
Subject: 'Lasers'


I've never played around with one of those laser pens, but how
strong are they? If you point one to the clouds, could you get
to see a red dot or something reflected on them? I ask because a
bout 3 years ago I saw a distant, but large and bright red dot
(or ball?) in the sky (I don't remember if it was cloudy or
not).

I thought someone was playing around with a laser or something,
and bouncing it, but it wasn't moving fast back and forth (I
would shake the laser like crazy), instead it was moving away
from my location very, very slowly...

I don't believe that was more than a laser or something, but it
reminded me of another red ball of light that I saw about 15
years ago, while living in an undeveloped country where kids
didn't have lasers, and it occurred during a perfectly clear
night.

The ball of light just "grew" right on top of me, and then
shrunk, very smoothly and noisless. I know this will sound
weird, but I was out looking at the sky because I felt the
urgent need to go out and do so, knowing that something
interesting was about to happen. I even woke up from bed to go
out. I like to remember that as a nova, or some similar cosmic
phenomenon, but I have no clue what it was.

I have two other stories, but they get even stranger and I don't
want to get the ussual flames. I just want to know if pen lasers
are strong enough to hit the clouds...



--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:53:07 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:56:00 PST
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Jerry,

 >"Adherence" to what particular theory?  I am at a loss to
 >understand what you're saying.

So you're not a believer in the ETH?

Have I been mixing you up with another Jerome Clark?

Sorry, the ambiguous way you like to dress it up is: "defensible
tentative interpretation, better than most but yet to be
proved"; which is no better than invoking elves and fairies, but
at least we now have you accepting that the "physical evidence",
as it stands, amounts to nothing - hence the "yet to be proved."

 >You're the one who adheres to a
 >theory: that UFOs are, to all intents and purposes,
 >superstitious nonsense and amount to no more than modern
 >posting you begin to indicate differently --  that it should be
 >of interest only to folklorists and social scientists.

You are confusing "UFOs" with the mythology surrounding alleged
ET visitants.

I've no doubt people see "UFOs" and that there are unknown
phenomena at the root of a small percentage of those sightings.

These unknowns could be natural phenomena currently on the
fringes of accepted science,as equally as they could offer
evidence of ET.

But I don't see you giving that "tentative interpretation" equal
billing in your writings, hence my conclusion that you are
allowing your beliefs and prejudices to cloud your
interpretation of data.

What I see as equivalent of superstition is the belief system
which equates UFO with alien spaceship. You can protest all you
like, but it will not alter the fact that this interpretation is
a product of the late 20th century space age.

Even in the early stages of the phenomenon in 1947, opinion
polls show that a large percentage of Americans believed that
flying saucers were something to do with the Russians or secret
weapons.

The culture of belief in ET UFOs is a new phenomenon - it did
not exist in 1909, despite the odd tongue-in-cheek speculation
of isolated newspaper staffers.

I challenge you to present evidence which suggests otherwise. It
simply does not exist.

 >>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.

 >Well, I'm glad that you are now expressing a healthy change of
 >mind.  Maybe there's hope for you yet.

Ditto - I've always accepted that there are many different ways
of approaching the study of this phenomenon, as my writings
testify. Your lack of familiarity with them only adds to my
suspicion that your view of the UFO subject is primarily a US-
centred one (as does the paucity of UK entries in your otherwise
excellent Encyclopedia). Hence my points about wearing cultural
blinkers.

 >Of course UFOs, like anything else in society, have created
 >their own folklore and sociology, and those things are worth
 >studying; in fact, I find them quite interesting.  What I do not
 >think, however, is that the story ends there.  The point of
 >origin for all of this is the UFO phenomenon itself, which
 >remains as puzzling and challenging as it did when it first came
 >into popular consciousness in 1947.  The cases that (short of a
 >White House landing) will determine whether or not UFOs are
 >extraordinary unknowns are those in which investigatable
 >objective, physical evidence is present.  All of the
 >folklorists, sociologists, historians, and psychosociologists in
 >the world have nothing interesting to say on this subject.  Only
 >physical scientists can deal adequately with such evidence, and
 >that is why it will be they, not the armchair psychosociological
 >literary critics, who will solve the UFO mystery.

All very grand, but fifty years of studying these cases which
Jerry assures us are so rich in physical evidence has not
provided us with any proof - he accepts that himself in his more
lucid moments, for instance "yet to be proved" as a caveat
tagged on the end of his long-winded "interpretation."

Jerry's reference to landings on the White House lawn underlines
what I have said about his own bias towards one single
interpretation of the "unknowns", ie. that they are ET craft.

The classic cases he keeps banging on about look more and more
like sacred cows, elevated beyond questioning as icons of faith.

To suggest any of them might have a less exotic explanation is
tantamount to the questioning of the virgin birth, as the furore
over Socorro has highlighted. So until conclusive evidence is
forthcoming, as I have said over and over again, all we have are
the claims and beliefs of the people who say they have seen UFOs
- not much use to physical scientists, but the very stuff of
folklore.

 >What I want to know is, why is the very
 >notion that the ETH is not an absurd myth so threatening?  Now
 >there's question for the social scientists to take up.

It's not threatening at all, I for one would be overjoyed to see
evidence of ET visitations. But belief does not equal evidence!
I can only speak for myself, but I'm simply trying to get to the
bottom of what Jerry Clark believes and how he has arrived at
his conclusions, and based upon what evidence.

UpDates is providing me with a rich source of information for my
current research project!

 >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?

 >You're simply wrong here, recycling a cliche
 >which arguably I bear responsibility for; I appear to have been
 >the first to use arguments like yours, in articles in FSR in the
 >mid-1960s. To all appearances, in fact, the UFO phenomenon has
 >maintained pretty much the same appearance since it entered the
 >world in the early 19th Century.

Elsewhere, in a reply to Georgina Bruni, Jerry suggests that I
might be a better folklorist than a historian.

Whatever my shortcomings, I make a better historian than does
Jerry Clark.

My comments on the 1897 wave - and the rest of the "phantom
airship" waves for that matter - are not wrong, for they are
based on many years' study of original documents. For 1909 alone
I have conducted extensive archive research at the British
Library, consulting the files of more than 80 newspapers and
magazines, the results of which are due to be published in
Fortean Studies vol 6 this winter.

I'm now in the process of applying for British Academy funding
for a parallel study of airship/UFO rumours during the First
World War, based upon hundreds of formerly secret documents
discovered at the Public Record Office.

Similarly for the 1913 wave the results of my research, and that
of colleagues Nigel Watson and Granville Oldroyd, are available
through the Fund for UFO Research, and demonstrate the
inadequacies of UFO interpretations of the airship data.

So I believe I am qualified to comment on this subject - indeed,
more so than Jerry or anyone apart from Dr Bullard and my two
colleagues.

So Jerry, let's see who is the good historian and who isn't.

If the UFO phenomena has maintained pretty much the same
appearance since it entered the world earlier this century, then
where are the descriptions of "flying saucers" and
triangular-shaped, delta-winged craft in the accounts from 1897
and 1909?

They simply do not exist; for the accounts from this era
describe giant dirigibles, some of them with huge whirring fans
and flapping wings; the crews were not the "greys" but ordinary
US citizens with such extraordinary names as Wilson.

Descriptions of these fabulous airships were clearly drawn from
the popular fiction of the day, particularly the belief that an
inventor had perfected in great secrecy a machine which could
conquer the air.

There is nothing to suggest that anything more than classic
misidentification, wish-fulfilment and journalistic hoaxing was
at the root of the US scare at least. If I understand Bullard's
comments in The Airship File, he is of the same opinion.

What's all the more significant are the appearance of classic
motifs in the airship material that has resurfaced again in ET
belief - ie. "crashed spacecraft" (Aurora), animal mutes (Leroy,
Kansas).

In Britain, it was the fear of invasion by Germany, and the
belief that Zeppelins were capable of crossing the Channel in
secrecy, which created the airship scares. Bright stars, fire
balloons and war nerves did the rest.

No amount of spin-doctoring will convince any scholar worthy of
the name that the airship waves provide evidence of early ET
visitations. Lets hope that Jerry does not persist in promoting
bad history as well as bad science.

 >The "Jules Verne airships"
 >were essentially the invention of imaginative journalists; they
 >were not what people were seeing, as is clear when you compare
 >reports not published in newspapers with those that were.

How does Jerry know what people were "seeing" in 1897?
Does he have some kind of hotline beyond the grave?

How many airship reports have survived outside the newspaper
accounts published at the time?

If Jerry is referring to the vague memories of people more than
half a century after the events they are describing, that kind
of "evidence" isn't going to convince anyone.

See Nigel Watson's piece on the Spithead UFOs of 1914 on the
Magonia Monthly Updates for a classic example of how time can
distort memory. In this case someone's recollection of a fleet
of UFOs overflying the British fleet inspection before the
outbreak of the Great War proved to have a very prosaic origin!

Using historical cases as evidence of pre-1947 UFOs can be a
double-edged sword; and those who claim to be historians of the
subject appear to do very little checking of the original
sources themselves.

 >No, there cannot be "a real phenomena." No such animal exists in
 >the grammatical universe.  There can only be "a real
 >phenomenon."

This just goes to prove that pedants are alive and well on both
sides of the big pond, so at least we have something in common!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 22:58:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 03:30:42 +0000
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

Georgina,

 >>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.

 >Re Rendlesham: With regards to the "experts" quickly dismissing
 >the radiation reading significance; may I remind you (which is
 >public knowledge) that this expert opinion was based on Lt
 >Colonel Halt's memorandum, not on "factual records" relating
 >specifically to the readings.

That doesn't make his opinion right!  Hence my point....

 >Don't forget, Halt didn't even
 >give the correct dates! Having investigated this case for three
 >years I can assure you that this is only a fraction of the case
 >as a whole and contrary to what you suggest, it has nothing to
 >do with mythology.

Good - I'll look forward to reading your book and seeing your
evidence to the contrary.

Let's hope you can provide it, and that the book lives up to all
the hype you have been giving it, because hype does not equal
good product.

Those who have been disappointed by Star Wars The Phantom Menace
will know exactly what I mean.

 >You are acting like a typical sceptic, taking one or two
 >fragments of a case you have not investigated and debunking it.

Are you saying no one is now entitled to comment on Rendlesham other
than you, simply because you've written a book about it?

 >It is comments like yours David, based on one sided views, that
 >are so destructive. How many more cases are "your gang"
 >intending to debunk without  _really_ investigating them?

I don't debunk anything - I investigate and report what I find.
Perhaps you would like to consult the BUFORA archives, and you will
find evidence of my thorough investigations, dating back to 1981,
several hundred of them in fact.

If you don't like my conclusions, then I'm sorry. But fantastic
claims require fantastic evidence, and I haven't found any.

So you are on very dodgy ground if you are trying to suggest I
don't investigate - I have an archive filled with tapes, notebooks
and case reports dating back 20 years to prove it.

 >Far too much time has been spent on debating the Rendlesham
 >radiation readings and the lighthouse theory, and that, in my
 >opinion is why this case has suffered over the years. When you
 >read my book on the Rendlesham investigationt, you can be sure
 >it will take a very brave sceptic to still admit to the
 >lighthouse theory - animal scratchings and the rest of the
 >nonsense offered for the case.


What will be even more interesting is to see if Georgina Bruni
makes any mention of the work of James Easton, and the contents
of the original statements made by the airmen in 1980, in her
new book. No one who calls themselves objective can dismiss the
conclusion that the lighthouse and other light sources played a
very major role in what happened in that forest.

That's not me being skeptical - that's from the *signed
testimony* of the percipients themselves, whatever they are
claiming today.

At the end of the day, it is in Georgina's interest to perpetuate a mystery
from this case - if there was no mystery, there is no book contract,
no lucrative lecture tour, TV appearances, fame, money, etc.

But of course, those considerations played no part in Georgina's decision
to write a book on the case, did they?

 >>A modern myth, born in the USA and exactly what you would
 >>expect in the late 20th century.

 >Nonsense! Eastern Europe was having UFO sightings before the US
 >was born. Why, they even had an encounter in July 1947, which is
 >supposedly when the US had their first known "famous" sightings.

Oh dear - if you had thought a bit about what I had said, you
would not have made such an embarrassing statement.

I did not say no one saw UFOs before 1947, simply that there was
no developed cultural belief surrounding UFOs as ET visitors
before the end of the 20th century.

My point was that before 1947 people saw UFOs all right, but
they interpretedwhat they saw in religious and other terms - ie.
as fiery dragons, fairy lanterns, phantom Zeppelins, etc, in
terms appropriate to their culture.  That draws no conclusions
about *what* was actually seen, only that people's background
and culture affect how they interpret what they see!

There is a _massive_ difference between the two.

 >>In 1897 people expected to see Jules Verne airships, and saw
 >>them;

 >Really! Bucharest 5 March 1843: 'It was _pyramidal in shape_,
 >and the side turned towards the horizon was shorter and not so
 >strongly lit up. The other side was broader and more radiant.'
 >Biblioteca Academiei (1) "Manuscris romanesce" 4043,f.1.

And this proves that people in Romania believed in ET UFOs in 1843?
I think not.

 >There is even a 1959 Polish report of a captured creature who
 >came from a metal crashed object. The creature who spoke no
 >known language, was wearing a strange type of uniform which was
 >impossible to remove. The metal type material had no seams and
 >special tools had to be used and a great deal of effort before
 >they could cut through it. The creature's organs were very
 >different from humans, as was its blood. It also had a different
 >number of fingers and toes. The creature died when the doctors
 >removed a strange type of armband. ...Does all this sound
 >familiar? How can you claim that the ET story began with the
 >Americans? You might like to know that the latter was known
 >before the 1947 Roswell story became public knowledge.

Oh dear again.

Yes this does sound familiar. But what is familiar about it is
that you have demonstrated how willing you are to swallow any
old yarn about crashed UFOs, stories which in fact date back to
the 1897 Aurora "airship" crash, and even further back than
that.

That doesn't make them real - as even the esteemed Jerome Clark
accepts these stories were newspaper hoaxes.

Your credulity doesn't provide much faith in your ability to
differentiate between fact and fiction; let's hope this does not
extend to the Rendlesham case too.

Have you checked out the Polish report? Have you traced it to
its original source?

No, like most "UfOlogists" you just read it somewhere and accepted
it as fact.

And then you claim that UFOs have nothing to do with mythology!
If I needed more evidence for my proposition, then you have
surely delivered it for me on a plate.

Thanks!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                          Re: Philip Taylor Kramer

From: Kirby, David N (David)** CTR **" <davkirby@lucent.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:16:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 23:02:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Philip Taylor Kramer


[Non-Subscriber Post]

I am not a subscriber, but I look at the current postings every
day. I did a little research and found that a van and skeletal
remains were found at the base of a deep ravine in May of 1999,
and that they are believed to be those of Philip Taylor Kramer.

It is believed that he fell into a Dissociative Fugue state and
committed suicide...although there are aspects to this story
that are decidedly sinister...your more conspiratorially minded
readership may have fun with this one.

Here's a link:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/4527/story.html




Dave Kirby










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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 99 15:26:41 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 23:05:57 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:33:00 +0000
 >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, 02 Nov 99 12:19:20 PST


John,

 >>IFOs are solvable because they involve known phenomena and
 >>processes.  Most IFO cases are easily solved for this reason, a
 >>few less easily.

 >No, Jerry, IFO "cases" are not solvable. There is no such thing
 >as an IFO "case". IFOs are what UFO cases become once someone
 >has demonstrated that they have a mundane origin. When they are
 >initially reported as a UFO case no-one knows that they involve
 >known phenomena and processes. That's what ufologists are
 >supposed to find out.

We have plenty of IFO cases, and there is always something to be
learned from them.  We also have UFO cases which, to all
available appearances, don't give us much reason to hope that
they are only potential IFO cases.

 >>Proving that the unexplained cases, the UFOs,
 >>are generated by extraterrestrials is an infinitely more
 >>difficult question, since (1) we know nothing about ETs

 >Yes, absolutely nothing whatsoever, even such basic facts as
 >whether they exist at all or whether the universe is absolutely
 >chockablock with them, despite, in that memorable phrase,
 >"deserts of arid speculation" . Glad we agree on that.

That's why I suspect that, possibly within the lifetimes of at
least some on this list, ETI scientists will have to abandon
their traditional anti-UFO bias and begin to take serious stock
of the possibility that the ETH has merit, after all. It'll be
interesting to watch.  I think we can safely assume that UFOs
aren't about to go away, so those future scientists will be able
to turn their attention to, rather than away from, the UFO
phenomenon of their time.

 >>and (2)
 >>presumably they're very smart, and if they don't want their
 >>presence known, or at least conclusively established, they are
 >>going to act with a certain, or a great, degree of cunning.  The
 >>persistence of puzzling cases both argues for a real UFO
 >>phenomenon and suggests a strategy of relative concealment.

 >Jerry, you're coming dagerously close here to the arguement that
 >the very existence of unexplained UFO cases proves the existence
 >of fiendishly cunning extraterrestraials. You can't *really* be
 >saying that, can you?

Huh?  Just about every ETI theorist, whether addressing safely
distant ETs or visiting ones, in one way or another comes around
to addressing the interesting question of whether ETs would want
to reveal their existence/presence openly.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 3

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:12:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 23:13:12 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:16 +0000
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Georgina,

Nice to see you out of the woodwork!  Your comments on UFOIN
obviously beg a response.

 >I do not think that UFOIN is being taken too seriously. I shall
 >be very surprised if any respectable researcher/investigator
 >become involved with such a gang.

You must be in a state of suprise then Georgina, as we have had
support from ufologists around the world as well as in the UK.
There are many respectable researchers involved.

 >The archives of UFO UpDates is
 >a record of how they have attacked individuals, UFO Groups and
 >even other countries.

No, actually it shows how a group of knowlegeable sceptics have
spoken out against poor investigation, false conclusions and the
most amateurish of ufologists.

 >This self proclaimed group is (in my
 >opinion) an embarrassment for British researchers, and believe
 >me, there are some very respectable and dedicated people here
 >who are genuinely involved in researching the subject without
 >stooping to personal attacks, etc.

How else can we be a group if not self proclaimed? I'm sure
you're point is true but you are mistaken about 'personal
attacks'. Surely if practitioners of any art or science are
carrying it out badly, lying about their sources of information
and/or making parts of cases up (as in the Sheffield Incident
for one), then it is reasonable for others in the same area of
study to point this out?

Or would you rather have it as a subject in which anything can
be said and both the author and the subject matter be inviolate?
That would make ufology a lovely, cosy, place where the maddest
of ideas could be accomodated with no criticism and the whole
subject would be hermeticaly sealed from reality. Is that what
you _really_ want?

I think what actually annoys you and others about UFOIN is the
fact that UK sceptics have come together in a cohesive grouping
and at last are actively resisting the pseudo-scientific
nonsense passed off as ufology. Not only by criticism either but
by active research and the publication of this research.

Let's just look at two examples which have come my way today
which more than adequately illuminate the fact that ufology,
certainly in the UK is inhabited by some very strange thinking,
ideas and people. These two alone justify the existence of
UFOIN. See what you think. Before you read them consider that
the two people in question are well known UK ufologists, the
sort of people who make up the foot soldiers of active ufology,
who buy into the subject wholesale and who feed back into it as
part of the loop.

Firstly I was forwarded an email which has apparently appeared
on an email list called UFOR. It was posted by a well known ETH
oriented ufologist by the name of Miles Johnstone. He is a
supporter of your friend Nick Pope and of the ideas prevelant in
this country about greys, underground bases, cover ups and the
whole sad charade. Some of you may also remember Miles as a
supporter of Max Burns and his fantasies.

This is what Miles told the world:

 >From: Miles Johnston <TMilesJ@compuserve.com>

 >Randles and Roberts:-

 >Warning this lot are self professed Government insider dis-informers.

 >Their logic would argue the Sun is ball lightning.

 >Stay WELL and Truelly as far AWAY from this lot, including a Tim Matthews,
 >as you can run.

 >Simply Do NOT get involved.  They are BAD NEWS.

 >Miles J

Wow! OK, the poor guy can't spell or compose sentences but hey,
he's a ufologist! What really bugs me is that he and his ilk
actually _believe_ that Jenny and I are working for the
government. It's _not_ a joke for Miles and his chums. This sort
of idea is rife in the very UFO 'community' you are supporting
Georgina. Dwell on it a while. Think what must be going on in
these people's minds to make them draw these conclusions.

Then we have the latest issue of UFO Magazine (the UK version).
Here an article by one David Cayton discusses the alleged animal
mutilation phenomena in the UK. It's long, rambling, based on
some very shaky ideas, full of paranoia and ultimately pointless
as it proves nothing. Par for the course in a newsstand UFO
magazine really. In his final paragraph Cayton wonders:

'Will the information contained in this article finally silence
the detractors and hopefully eradicate once and for all the
tiresome sceptics from the stage or our television screen?'.

Here's the problem at the very heart of ufology - and the reason
why UFOIN was necessary. Do these people want to 'eradicate' and
'silence' sceptics? Why do they want that? In my observations of
the subject since 1983 I have come to the conclusion that this
sort of feeling exists because  when sceptics become actively
involved the bell is rung and playtime is over. These people do
not like to have their ideas, motives or evidence challenged in
any way. Sceptics, on the other hand, are more than happy to
debate and justify their position and to back their claims up
with checkable facts.

But without these rambling articles and unproven ideas the
hermetically sealed world is broken. People can no longer make a
profit out of books, magazines or lecture appearances
(scepticism is unfortunately a poor paying job, which is
presumably why we have to work for the government!) or talk
nonsense to people just as eager to hear nonsense.

So there y'go Georgina. This is why UFOIN exists and why we take
the stance we do.

Anyway, it's late. I have hostages to feed.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                     UFO Desk - Diana Botsford Interview

From: Paul C. WIlliams <paulw@escape.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 20:01:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 08:12:57 -0500
Subject: UFO Desk - Diana Botsford Interview


All,

This coming Sunday night/Monday morning at one am you can hear
an interview I've recently recorded with Ms. Diana Botsford of
Destinationspace.net. Ms. Botsford formerly ran the UFO chat at
MSN. Please join us for a most interesting talk. You can hear
the show by going to my website this coming Monday morning at
one am east coast time. That's Sunday night/Monday morning at
one am. You will hear my good friend Sidney Smith introduce the
show, and shortly thereafter he will introduce UFO Desk. After
UFO Desk please stick around for Sidney's Carrier Wave. It is a
show that is most unusual. And of course please drop me an email
with your thoughts, critisms, etc.

Much thanks in advance. To hear stream, please click on WEBCAST.
That will launch your real player. All programs on WBAI NY are
webcast thanks to the good folks at www.porus.com. Please check
them out for your ISP needs. All the best.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 08:35:04 -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: Thu, 28 Oct 99 17:38:29 PDT


Responding to John Rimmer's message of Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:07:59
+0100, Jerome wrote:

 >>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.

No doubt calling the Red Giant of Mortlake "wacky" is Jerome's
idea of a non-ad-hominem joke, so I imagine he won't mind my
calling him habitually misrepresentative of the PSH and his
comments on it more often than not barking mad. There, that was
hilarious, wasn't it?

Fact is, Swords appears to be ignorant of current discussions
among evolutionists (for which see Richard Dawkins's "The Blind
Watchmaker", almost anything by Stephen Jay Gould since
"Wonderful Life", and Stephen Rose's brilliant "Lifelines").
Besides relying on outdated scientific thought, Swords seems
radically not to understand the most crude essential tenets of
Darwinism, and specifically is absolutely and utterly wrong in
his knowledge and treatment of convergent evolution. Appeals to
the entirely speculative hypotheses of exobiology, conducted
even as they are by respectable professional scientists, won't
let either Swords or Jerome wriggle out of these failings, or
Swords's extraordinarily tendentious deployment of the
scientific literature with which he is (or admits to being)
familiar.

Here and there in Swords's writings are clear hints of the
reason for his preference for antiquated science. For, from a
widely available piece, redacted from Swords's MUFON Symposium
presentations but not signed by him, we may divine that he
simply cannot accept the idea of a godless Universe, operating
undirected within the bounds of its own physical laws:

"[Carl Sagan, George Gaylord Simpson and Stephen Gould] believe
in a Darwinian model of evolutionary change.

"In this view, evolution is a totally random process, with no
'guiding force.' Thus, in a galaxy of tremendous diversity, with
a biology of totally random change [sic], any one form of
creature is as likely as another. There is, consequently, no
chance that any two life-forms from different planets would look
similar."

['Modern Biology and Extraterrestrials' in Bill Fawcett (ed.),
Making Contact, Wm Morrow 1997, pages 205-18. (Thanks to Peter
Rogerson for drawing this to my attention.) The article is based
on Swords's 1991 MUFON Symposium paper.]

But the above is neither an honest, nor an accurate, portrayal
of Darwinian thought, or of molecular biology. Swords is
confusing the scientific views of macroscopic change and
microscopic change, and traduces his targets' integrity. Rather
oddly, he then contradicts himself by going on, in this piece,
to discuss the (quite proper) limits of 'randomness' as that
occurs within the confines set by any creature's individual
structure and biochemistry - boundaries whose legitimacy Sagan,
Simpson and Gould would not waste breath to dispute.

More revealing of where Swords's heart truly lies, however, is
what follows - this from the original, unvarnished 1991 MUFON
paper, complete & replete with its antick Capitals:

"Paleontologists, such as Simpson and Gould, are the ultimate
'grand-children' of Darwin. They are the knighthood who wave the
victorious banners of materialist evolution in the faces of
their hated enemies, the world's religions. The rituals of their
schooling, their intellectual Rites of Passage, program them
with the Dogma of Random Change, so as always to be on guard
against hints of directed advancement, design or purpose in the
universe." [Michael J. Swords, 'Modern Biology and the
Extraterrestrial Hypothesis', MUFON Symposium Proceedings 1991,
page 59. Swords descends to rant here. It would be hard to
excavate any sentiments hostile to religion from Gould's
writings, although his arch-foe Richard Dawkins is an
inveterate, and intolerant, proselytizer of atheism, especially
in unsolicited letters to the press.]

'A thinker who has already accepted such a statement, whether
consciously or not, cannot even imagine that ETs would show any
similarity to humans,' continues Fawcett's redacted version at
this point.

So Swords's real objection, it transpires, is not to the
evidence, arguments, or experimental results that Darwinists
invoke to support their conclusions, but to Darwinism, per se.
And why? Because the theory has no place for a divine guiding
hand such as the Judaeo-Christian God's. But no science reserves
such a driving seat for the Almighty. Swords's complaint against
Darwinist biology applies equally to particle physics, organic
chemistry, geology, astronomy, or any other scientific
discipline deserving the name. Either Swords is not at heart a
scientist, and is driven to apologize for much ufological wisdom
[phrase (c) Ed Stewart] by religious requirements - in which
case he should be honest and admit it; or, his invocations of
science in support of ETI and the ETH are meaningless, because
they are ultimately impelled by principles that belong outside
science.

However, it should come as no surprise to find a ufologist
masking a core of religious faith with the magician's cloak of
'science'. Swords himself has more openly referred to his
religious outlook elsewhere: in 'Abductions: Looking Back,
Looking Ahead' (Journal of UFO Studies ns1 (1989), pages
159-61), he writes: 'My religious upbringing... provides me with
another sort of parallel-reality involving intelligent activity
and beyond the ken of science. But I tread softly when
attempting to apply these ideas to any phenomenon before the
"mundane alternatives" have been fully investigated.'

But not so softly, apparently, that he will not demand of
Darwinism what it cannot supply. [For discussions of the
parallels between ufology and religion and paranormalists'
love-hate relationship with science, see Peter Brookesmith,
'Meanwhile, Back at the Ranch', Magonia 63 (May 1998), pages
3-10, and James R. Lewis's insightful if uneven The Gods Have
Landed, State University of New York 1995.] The double-bind
involved in UFO believers' love-hate transactions with science
may well explain ufology's addiction to abusing scientists for
'ignoring' their pet obsession. Even so, not all scientists are
immune from a craving for the divine. The UFO-driven but
essentially theochreiastic belief in extra-terrestrial
intelligence is paralleled by the allegedly scientific quest to
detect ET signals from space; one suspects they have common
roots. Historian of science Michael J. Crowe remarks of SETI and
its leading prophet, the late Carl Sagan:

"Persons skeptical of traditional Christian conceptions of
heaven or the afterlife have imagined planetary paradises
populated by angelic extraterrestrials.... Sagan, although
disparaging the messianic motives of some flying saucer
enthusiasts, has suggested that the mere detection of an
extraterrestrial radio signal would provide 'an invaluable piece
of knowledge: that it is possible to avoid the dangers of the
period through which we are now passing....' Furthermore,
according to Sagan, 'it is possible that among the first
contents of such a message may be detailed prescriptions for the
avoidance of technological disaster' .... Such passages support
the thesis, advanced by Karl S. Guthke in his study of the
extraterrestrial life debate, that pluralism (belief in
intelligent life on other worlds) ... has become 'the myth of
modern times' and a 'religion or alternate religion'."

[Michael J. Crowe: The Extraterrestrial Life Debate
1750-1900, Cambridge University Press, 1986. Thanks to Jerome
Clark for drawing this passage to my attention.]

As Swords's labors show, belief in a connexion between reported
'alien' humanoids and the existence of extra-terrestrial
intelligences cannot be justified by science - not even by his
selective, partisan, and equally outdated accounts of both
planetary formation and biological evolution. And so his
arguments offer us no reason - new, old, natural or unnatural -
to regard what people call UFOs as extra-terrestrial craft. A
proper acquaintance with Darwin would certainly make it plain to
anyone that, while the Universe may be teeming with microbial
life, the evolution of *intelligent* life from it is by no means
a foregone conclusion.

Still more certainly, Swords fails to justify Jerome Clark's
insistence that the ETH is a reasonable or scientifically
respectable hypothesis.

The ETH is, as many have remarked, essentially unfalsifiable,
and to that extent unscientific. Nor should the foregoing be
taken as saying that extra-terrestrial intelligence is
'unlikely' to exist, because that formulation requires an
ability to state some kind of odds on or against. We simply
don't know how common ETs are, 'out there' where the truth
obtains. But what we do know about our planet allows us to draw
two properly tentative but properly scientific conclusions.

First, our current knowledge of other planets and other
star systems tells us that the Earth - and indeed our Solar
System - appear to be unusual and may even be unique. Second, the
mechanics of Darwinian evolution tell us that the advent of
intelligence of the distinctive human kind on Earth cannot be
predicted at any point from the rise of single-celled organisms
early in the planet's history. Ergo, its appearance cannot be
taken for granted elsewhere either.

Further, the specific cultural circumstances in Western Europe
that led to the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the rise of
industry, science, and technology are historically unique (we
discount here the achievements of Atlantis). Human history
itself is a chronicle of contingent and fractal events - of
*accidents*, which we have no reason to think (much as we might
like to) have been repeated elsewhere. The only sane starting
point for ufological research is the null hypothesis - that
UFOs, or 'true extraordinary unknowns' or however you want to
define those UFOs that don't devolve into IFOs, are not
extra-terrestrial spaceships, whatever they are. There are
plenty of other mundane possibilities to promote, after all, if
you want to exercise your speculative imagination. And, yes, I
do think SETI is based on false premises (and am not without
professional astronomer friends who agree with me; 'science' is
not as monolithic as Jerome likes to suggest), and is a vast
waste of resources. This is almost the only issue on which I
agree with Stan Friedman.

Having said all that, I shall not be astonished to witness an
outbreak of squawking, or a studied failure to respond at all,
of the kind that makes it barely worth engaging in ufological
dialogues (they are not debates). Most of the time these days I
have vastly more fruitful things to think about. Still, this
thread has been one of the few worth reading in months.

Best wishes
Peregrine, Duke of Mendoza
Occam's Water Boy







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

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:20:49 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 08:25:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates

 >>Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:01:08 -0500
 >>From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 >>>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 14:05:22 -0800
 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

 ><snip>

 >>Hello list and all.

 >>This is just an idle observation, so bear with me.

 >>Do any of you out there recall the story (America's Most
 >>Wanted/Unsolved Mysteries) of the bass player (I cannot recall
 >>his name from Iron Butterfly and his mysterious disappearance?

 >>Apparently the guy was a good student in college before and
 >>after being in the band. He turned out to be a very gifted
 >>scientist (just like his father).

 >>Along with his father he was working on (among other things) a
 >>way of using gravity waves to communicate. They speculated that
 >>you could converse with any place in the galaxy almost
 >>instantly.

 >[Philip Kramer was only with Butterfly for its last
 >incarnation - 1975 on  --ebk]

 >This story rang a bell for me - I did a search of
 >the archives here and came up with the following from
 >Don Allen's old FIDO UFO conference:

<snip>

Kramer's body has been discovered according to Art Bell.

The disapperance of Kramer was featured on Art Bell's show and
even Ed Dames got into the act by remote viewing where Kramer's
body might be. So, I checked Art's site for an update and I
found this:

6/03/99 Thu/Fri

[...]

2nd hour.... Art has confirmation that the remains found in a
van down a deep gorge is indeed those of Phillip Kramer, the
Iron Butterfly bass player. No one knows if it was an accident
or suicide. Art says this is a bonk for Ed Dames regarding where
Ed sais he would be found.

So, there ya go.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 23:44:35 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 08:38:16 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject:  British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:56:00 PST
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Jerry,

 >>"Adherence" to what particular theory?  I am at a loss to
 >>understand what you're saying.

 >So you're not a believer in the ETH?

 >Have I been mixing you up with another Jerome Clark?

 >Sorry, the ambiguous way you like to dress it up is: "defensible
 >tentative interpretation, better than most but yet to be
 >proved"; which is no better than invoking elves and fairies, but
 >at least we now have you accepting that the "physical evidence",
 >as it stands, amounts to nothing - hence the "yet to be proved."

Evidence can be the testimony of one who bears witness; the
physicality of the evidence relates to it's orientation,
sometimes at the expense of the mental, spiritual, or social.
In other words, whether one invokes the phisicality of elves or
UFOs, physical evidence can be and often is in a court of law,
the testimony of the observer.

 ><snip>

 >I've no doubt people see "UFOs" and that there are unknown
 >phenomena at the root of a small percentage of those sightings.

 >These unknowns could be natural phenomena currently on the
 >fringes of accepted science,as equally as they could offer
 >evidence of ET.

 >But I don't see you giving that "tentative interpretation" equal
 >billing in your writings, hence my conclusion that you are
 >allowing your beliefs and prejudices to cloud your
 >interpretation of data.

That much depends on the observer does it not?  And not on the
commentary of the ex-spurt interloper who lends his or her
interpretation of what the observer, aka witness, saw or
experienced. My prejudice is due to memories which go back
before 1945. Clearly if this were a court of law and the
testinmony given was say, for the crime of murder one, my
testimony would clearly be accepted for what it is, evidence,
aka, proof.  Would it not?

 >What I see as equivalent of superstition is the belief system
 >which equates UFO with alien spaceship. You can protest all you
 >like, but it will not alter the fact that this interpretation is
 >a product of the late 20th century space age.

What I see is as equivilent of a belief system predicated on my
own witness to events, sightings and what is likely abduction
scenarios. What you see is a lack of evidence and the equivilent
of superstition. But what is not altered is what I saw, heard
and experienced, not what you thought it may have been.

Your view is prejudiced to the extent that you have already made
the decision.  Even in my case, an "experiencer," I have not
come to a conclusion, a decision, as to what exactly happened to
me.  But something happened to me.  What does that make you?  A
researcher? A skeptic?  A scientist?

I see you as a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his
own opinions and prejudices.  A bigot.

 >Snip

 >Ditto - I've always accepted that there are many different ways
 >of approaching the study of this phenomenon, as my writings
 >testify. Your lack of familiarity with them only adds to my
 >suspicion that your view of the UFO subject is primarily a US-
 >centred one (as does the paucity of UK entries in your otherwise
 >excellent Encyclopedia). Hence my points about wearing cultural
 >blinkers.

Perhaps there is a paucity of interest on the other side of the
pond, in the subject.

 ><snip>

 >All very grand, but fifty years of studying these cases which
 >Jerry assures us are so rich in physical evidence has not
 >provided us with any proof - he accepts that himself in his more
 >lucid moments, for instance "yet to be proved" as a caveat
 >tagged on the end of his long-winded "interpretation."

 >Jerry's reference to landings on the White House lawn underlines
 >what I have said about his own bias towards one single
 >interpretation of the "unknowns", ie. that they are ET craft.

It is one interpretation which may have merit.  It may not.  But
to this "experiencer," you appear to have made up your mind.
Which is why I've injected my two cents plain.  (That's American
for a club soda, it used to cost two pennies).  Are you
listening? You've made your mind up and I have not.  That
statement speaks volumes, to me.

 >The classic cases he keeps banging on about look more and more
 >like sacred cows, elevated beyond questioning as icons of faith.

 >To suggest any of them might have a less exotic explanation is
 >tantamount to the questioning of the virgin birth, as the furore
 >over Socorro has highlighted. So until conclusive evidence is
 >forthcoming, as I have said over and over again, all we have are
 >the claims and beliefs of the people who say they have seen UFOs
 >- not much use to physical scientists, but the very stuff of
 >folklore.

Folklore eh?  You mean when folks' education consisted of what
they were taught in school in the centuries preceeding this one?
There is a difference in timing which mitigates your opine.

<snip>

 >Descriptions of these fabulous airships were clearly drawn from
 >the popular fiction of the day, particularly the belief that an
 >inventor had perfected in great secrecy a machine which could
 >conquer the air.

Just how _clearly_ are they drawn? As a nobody, I have not been
able to discern the "clearly" part of your statement.

 >There is nothing to suggest that anything more than classic
 >misidentification, wish-fulfilment and journalistic hoaxing was
 >at the root of the US scare at least. If I understand Bullard's
 >comments in The Airship File, he is of the same opinion.
 >
 >What's all the more significant are the appearance of classic
 >motifs in the airship material that has resurfaced again in ET
 >belief - ie. "crashed spacecraft" (Aurora), animal mutes (Leroy,
 >Kansas).

 >In Britain, it was the fear of invasion by Germany, and the
 >belief that Zeppelins were capable of crossing the Channel in
 >secrecy, which created the airship scares. Bright stars, fire
 >balloons and war nerves did the rest.

 >No amount of spin-doctoring will convince any scholar worthy of
 >the name that the airship waves provide evidence of early ET
 >visitations. Lets hope that Jerry does not persist in promoting
 >bad history as well as bad science.

 >>The "Jules Verne airships"
 >>were essentially the invention of imaginative journalists; they
 >>were not what people were seeing, as is clear when you compare
 >>reports not published in newspapers with those that were.

 >How does Jerry know what people were "seeing" in 1897?
 >Does he have some kind of hotline beyond the grave?

How do you sir, know what they were not seeing?  Are we talking
likielyhood here, or opinion?

 >How many airship reports have survived outside the newspaper
 >accounts published at the time?

 >If Jerry is referring to the vague memories of people more than
 >half a century after the events they are describing, that kind
 >of "evidence" isn't going to convince anyone.

 >See Nigel Watson's piece on the Spithead UFOs of 1914 on the
 >Magonia Monthly Updates for a classic example of how time can
 >distort memory. In this case someone's recollection of a fleet
 >of UFOs overflying the British fleet inspection before the
 >outbreak of the Great War proved to have a very prosaic origin!

 >Using historical cases as evidence of pre-1947 UFOs can be a
 >double-edged sword; and those who claim to be historians of the
 >subject appear to do very little checking of the original
 >sources themselves.

 >>No, there cannot be "a real phenomena." No such animal exists in
 >>the grammatical universe.  There can only be "a real
 >>phenomenon."

 >This just goes to prove that pedants are alive and well on both
 >sides of the big pond, so at least we have something in common!

 >All best wishes,

 >Dave Clarke

And speaking to pedants is something which pleases me, because
it gives me the opportunity of understanding what the phrase
"Capa Tosta" means.  Pedantics appears to be the language spoken
in UK.  And the pedants there appear to specialise in lacking
open mindedness.

I admit having made this my fight.  But it is merely because
someone yet again, has told me what I have or have not seen, not
having seen it themselves.  Yet again, someone has decided on
the truth or what it shant be.  It shant be what your pair of
dimes allows it to be.

I make no claims about what has happened to me and thousands
like me. Which is the difference between the pedantic and the
realist.  I really don't know.  You do.

You are blessed.  Thank you for sharing.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                 UFO Report: Toledo, Ohio [October 15, 1999]

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 10:14:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:27:58 -0500
Subject: UFO Report: Toledo, Ohio [October 15, 1999]


A UFO sighting report from near Toledo, Ohio on October 15, 1999
is available for inspection on the internet at the following URL
location:

         http://home.fuse.net/ufo/toledo99.html

A very special thanks to researcher Todd Lemire for his timely,
quality and exhaustive summary/investigation of this UFO
sighting report. Todd is a MUFON field-investigator trainee in
the State of Michigan. His E-mail address is:
tlemire@earthlink.net

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 28

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 15:22:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:29:50 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 28

:
:

      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 28
November 4, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

UFO EXPLODES OVER
NORTHERN BRAZIL

      On Saturday, October 9, 1999, at 4 p.m.,
a large luminous UFO flew over the town of
Sao Felix do Xingu in Para state, Brazil
and then exploded in mid-air over the rain
forest about 40 kilometers (25 miles) to
the west.
      The story was aired on Monday, October 25,
1999, on the Brazilian TV network Bandeirantes.
According to the report, "hundreds of people,"
including "four tribes" of the forest-dwelling
Kaiyapo people, "spotted a bright object flying
over the city, leaving a smoke trail behind it."
      Eyewitness Gildemar de Sousa reported,
"It was something like a big explosion, like a
bomb, that trembled the ground."
      Following the explosion, two geologists,
Romulo Angelica and Melio Rezende left the
rivefront town of Maria Preta by motorboat
and traveled up the Rio Xingu to the crash site.
There they took photos and samples and
interviewed Kaiyapo people who had witnessed
the explosion.
      The blast site was in the foothills of the
Serra do Cachimbo, near the border of Para
and Mato Grosso states.  The Kaiyapo are
an indigenous Native American people of
the region.
      Kruakruque, a Kaiyapo chief, said,
"That thing was very, very big.  The ground
shook up."
      According to Brazilian ufologist Vittorio
Pacaccini, "With the help of two other Kaiyapo
Indians, the exploration team finally got to the
crash site where parts of the woods were still
on fire 16 days after the incident.  What they
found there was unexpected--hundreds of trees
completely uprooted and still burning or smoking
but no residue or trace of any aircraft" was found
at the site.
      Romulo Angelica said, "We found this very
strange because we at least should have a crater
here.  But there is no crater anywhere around.
We honestly don't know what happened."
      No trace of nuclear radiation was detected
at the crash site.
      "There was a weird and unrecognizable smell
in the air," Bandeirantes correspondent Renaldo
Vilhena reported, "It was not the smell of burned
wood or gunpowder.  Not even burned fuel."
      Sao Felix is on the Rio Xingu about 650
kilometers (390 miles) north of Brasilia, the
national capital.  (Muito obrigado a Vittorio
Pacaccini e Thiago Luiz Tichetti por eso caso.)
(Editor's Noe:  This isn't the only strange incident
in the state of Para.  Sir Richard F. Burton, a
famous British traveler of the Victorian Age,
wrote, "The people here have stories of
estrondos (sudden loud noises like claps
of thunder--J.T.) and superhumanities which
await on them indications of buried treasure.
At Breja, there is an olho de agua (cavern)
where the clashing of steels rods (heavy
machinery?) can be heard."  See Burton's
1869 book Travels in the Brazilian Highlands.
There have long been rumors of an
underground alien base in Para.)

CHUPACABRA STRIKES
AGAIN NEAR SAO PAULO

      Chupacabra attacked two fazendas (farms)
in the state of Sao Paulo in southern Brazil
on Saturday, October 23, 1999, killing a total
of eight goats and three sheep.
      The attacks took place in a rural area
outside the large city of Sorocaba, which is
176 kilometers (110 miles) west of Sao Paulo
city.
      The first attack took place Saturday morning,
October 23, at a fazenda called Nova Esperanca
(Portuguese for New Hope--J.T.), and three goats
"were found dead and drained of blood.  On each
animal there was only a single nick near the
throat."
      The second attack took place a short while
later on a fazenda near Cesario Lange, S.P.
The owner, Marco Antonio de Souza, said five
goats and three sheep were found dead, with
the bodies drained of blood.
      "The attacks were attributed to the
Chupacabra, a mysterious predator which
attacked farms in the region two years ago."
(See the newspaper Correio Brasiliense of
Brasilia for October 26, 1999, "Chupa-cabras
mata animais."  Muito obrigado a Pedro Cunha
por eso caso.)

HOVERING UFO SEEN BY
HUNDREDS IN SICILY

      On Saturday, October 23, 1999, around
noontime, a luminous hovering UFO was
sighted above the summit of Mount Etna
in Sicily and remained there, performing
small maneuvers, for ten minutes.
      The oval-shaped UFO was seen by
hundreds of people in the city of Adrano,
southwest of the volcano, and in the smaller
towns of Belpaso and Viagrande.
      The UFO was described as "a white
circular object with a dark central mass that
appeared scorched...The object changed its
position vertically, horizontally and frontally
and also its shape."
      "In Adrano, a movie house owner and a
TV newsman videotaped the object for several
minutes and described it as a disco volante.
(Italian for flying saucer--J.T.)"  (See the Italian
newspapers La Sicilia for October 24, 1999
and Il Messagero for October 25, 1999. Grazie
a Edoardo Russo, Davide Ferrara, Roberto
Labanti, Gildo Persone, Goffredo Pierpaoli e
Antonio Rampulla di Centro Italiano di Studi
Ufologici (CISU) per questo rapporto.)

LIGHT-STUDDED UFO SEEN
NEAR LHASA, TIBET

      On August 18, 1999, at 4 a.m., the witness
was riding in a taxicab just west of Lhasa, the
capital of Tibet, when he spotted an unusual
light in the dark night sky.
      "The oval-shaped UFO had bright lights like
a Las Vegas sign," the witness reported, and
compared the object's luminosity to the brightness
of a car's headlights "several blocks away...It
hovered overhead for about 40 minutes."
      "I was driving in a taxi to the airport, which
is about two-and-a-half hours away from Lhasa,"
he said, "And the driver pointed out an object
in the sky and said, 'UFO!'"
      The taxi driver "indicated that he had seen
five (UFOs).  He also came to something alongside
the road and pointed to it to show us something.
But it was dark and I missed it.  He indicated that
a UFO had landed there.  I watched the object in
the sky with the blinking lights on it, and I didn't
recognize it as anything I had ever seen.  I believe
it was a UFO, and it hovered over us for about
40 minutes."  (Many thanks to Jeroen Wierda of
Picard UFO Research International for this report.
You can read more at PUFORI's website at
http://www.pufori.org.)
(Editor's Comment:  If any UFO Roundup readers
have information about one or more UFO landings
in Tibet during the past year, please send me
an email.  Thanks!)

PHOTOG CATCHES UFOs
ON FILM IN JAPAN

      On Sunday, October 24, 1999, at 10 a.m., the
eyewitness, a 28-year-old female commercial
photographer from Point Pleasant, New Jersey, was
on vacation in Japan and driving through open
countryside in Yamanashi prefecture, just
southeast of Kofu city.
      Pulling over to the side of the highway, she had
a panoramic view of the stratovolcano Fujiyama
against a clear blue sky.
      "Mount Fuji had a powerful effect on me,"
she reported, so she got out her camera and
begin snapping pictures with its 100-300 Macro
lens.  She snapped 11 photos of the mountain
and then proceeded on her way.
      When the roll of film was developed, however,
she found images of "two UFOs, at one time
traveling side-by-side.  The photos show a
transparent magenta light that leaves a trail
behind it.  In one photo, there appears to be a
powerful light source that emits a strange
magenta/green energy.  Also, at some points,
they appear to hover over Mount Fuji.  I am a
portrait/freelance photographer.  I have over
and over again tried to find a rational explanation
for these unusual photos."  (Many thanks to
Jeroen Wierda of PUFORI for this report.)

GIANT FIREBALL APPEARS
OVER NEW BRUNSWICK

      "A spectacular fireball passed over the
Maritimes Wednesday (October 27, 1999)
rattling houses, lighting up the night sky and
sparking a deluge of phone calls to emergency
centres."
      "There are unconfirmed reports that pieces
of meteorite that struck the Oyster Pond area of
the Eastern Shore, and northern New Brunswick,
where a fire was reported near St.-Quentin."
      "Fire crews could not be reached, but
nobody in the New Brunswick town's all-night
gas station had heard or seen anything."
      "The light show, described as comet-like
and accompanied by sonic booms, had police
and Rescue Coordination Centre officials after
calls started flooding in at about 9:30 p.m."
      "Callers heard an airplane was on fire or a
satellite might be disintegrating were the ones
but their concerns were generally discounted."
      "Air traffic controllers at Moncton reported
that two planes in the area saw 'a fireball of
some sort lasting for about 12 seconds,' said
military spokesman Lt.-Cmdr. Glenn Chamberlain."
      "But no aircraft had reported trouble, and
the North American Air Defence Command
(NORAD) had not tracked any fallen man-made
debris such as satellites, he said."
      "The first report was a 911 call from Liverpool
shortly after 9:30 p.m., and calls were soon
coming from Yarmouth to Cape Breton and as
far west as Quebec."
      "Maureen Elm of Stewiacke said the fireball
appeared to pass indirectly overhead and her
daughter heard a boom to the west a few seconds
later."
      "'It sounded like it hit, and it rattled our
windows here at home,' she said."
      "Dave Dawe, duty manager at Halifax
International Airport, said he saw the flash and
thought it was a flare.  'It was bizarre--everything
lit up.'"
      "Parrsboro resident Donald Lake saw 'a bright
yellow ball and a long trail' streak across the sky."
      "Astronomer David Lane," a university professor,
"said witnesses probably felt the shock wave of
explosions when the meteor began fragmenting,
rather than the rattle of impact."  (See the Halifax,
N.B. Herald for October 28, 1999, "'Bizarre' fireball
lights up sky, emergency lines,' by Barry Dorey.
Copyright 1999 by the Halifax Herald Ltd., all
rights reserved.  Many thanks to John Hayes for
forwarding the newspaper article.)
(Editor's Comment: First South Africa, then Brazil,
now Canada's New Brunswick province.  If these
are Leonid meteors, they are three weeks early.
And if they are meteors, we could be in for a wild
Leonid meteor shower this month.)

TWO CROP CIRCLES FOUND
IN SASKATCHEWAN

      Two crop circles were found at the end of
September by two farmers combining a wheat
field in Viscount, Saskatchewan, Canada
(population 60).  The formation was reported
Thursday, October 28, 1999 to Circles
Phenomenon Research (CPR)-Canada.
      The circles were found by farmers Leon
Viols and Debra McRae.  "Two circles in wheat,
One is about 30 feet diametre (9 meters), the
other about 20 to 25 feet (6 to 7 meters).  Both
flattened right down to the ground in neat
swirled lay patterns.  Circles are spaced just
a few feet apart."
      "The circles and extra field have (since)
been combined, but the circles themselves are
still there, being flattened hard to the ground
and therefore not cut."
      Viscount is on Provincial Highway 16 about
50 miles (80 kilometers) southeast of
Saskatoon.  (Many thanks to Paul Anderson of
CPR-Canada for this report.)

NEW WITNESS COMES
FORWARD IN DANDRIDGE

      A new witness has come forward in the
Dandridge, Tennessee UFO case.
      Kristen P. 17, now living in Sevierville,
Tennessee (population 7,178) contacted
UFO Roundup and said she saw a UFO in
Dandridge on July 4, 1999.
      Kristen reported, "On July 4th this year,
my boyfriend and I were having a late night
picnic" at Lake Douglas in Dandridge.
"My father lives very close to the lake.
We had finished (having supper) and laid
down to look at the stars.  There were four
(UFOs) this time, and I knew exactly what
they were.  Only one was much larger than
the other three and had a reddish light on
the top of it.  They were traveling so fast, my
boyfriend didn't really get a good look at
them.  He didn't believe me when I told them
what they were.  Typical."
      Dandridge, Tenn. (population 1,540) is
23 miles (36 kilometers) east of Knoxville.
(Email Interview)

UFO SPOTTED NEAR NEW
SAN DIEGO STADIUM

      On Sunday, October 31, 1999, at 12:10 a.m.,
William F. spotted a green UFO "moving from
east to west" about "ten feet above the trees
from my point of view on Golden Hill" is San
Diego, California.
      The UFO "was going toward the bay over
the southern half of San Diego.  I would estimate
over the Commercial Street area, now the new
stadium district.  It was descending on a
downward angle.  About a five-degree slope."
      "Moving much faster than your average
airplane or helicopter, very quietly, slowing down
to a dead stop over the bay.  Then it turned red
and made a sharp right-angle (90-degree) turn
to the south.  I last saw it heading east about
a mile and a half south of where I had originally
spotted it."
      "I've seen missiles go that fast," he added,
"but never one stop dead and then make a
right-angle turn."
      San Diego (population 1,110,600) is
located 124 miles (198 kilometers) south
of Los Angeles.  (Email Form Report)

Y2K: PHONE COMPANIES
WARN OF NEW YEAR'S
DAY SHUTDOWN

      "Major phone companies are sending an
unusual New Year's plea to their customers:
Don't pick up that phone!"
      "They fear millions of people will check
for a dial tone just after midnight on Jan. 1 to
see whether their phone service survived the
Y2K bug."
      "Add them to all the folks who ring in the
New Year by calling family, and there's a
potential for a telecommunications traffic jam.
Some callers who pick up their handsets might
hear nothing or get a fast busy signal."
      "But that won't necessarily indicate that
Year 2000 problems have wrecked the network,
say companies."
      "'Just becuse you pick up the telephone at
or around midnight Dec. 31st and get a busy
signal doesn't mean you've been bitten by the
Y2K bug,' said Bill Kula of GTE."
      "The big phone companies say they've already
solved their Year 2000 computer problems after
spending more than $3.8 billion to upgrade their
networks and supporting systems.  Yet they are
shelling out extra cash to urge consumers not
to flood the system at midnight.  They are using
inserts in phone bills, grassroots information
sessions and advertising to spread the word."
      "'I think some folks will be disappointed
because they will try to call other countries
and some of those calls might not go through,'
said AT&T spokesman Dave Johnson."
      "Phone companies, bracing for congestion,
are urging consumers not to pick up their phone
just to see if the line is working and are hoping
they will space out their calls."
      "'Don't even test it' is the advice of Bell
Atlantic spokesman Jim Smith.  'It's going to
work.  Don't make yourself nervous by running
into a backed-up network.'"
      "Several companies anticipate some
phone system blockages--particularly in the
hours right after midnight and in the morning
when people are calling relatives."
      "Estimates vary.  But one high-end figure
predicts the number of people picking up their
phones then will be 11 times that of Mother's
Day, one of the year's busiest calling times,
said Dave Bolger of the U.S. Telephone
Association, which represents phone
companies."
      "Consumers can clog the system without
even dialing because just taking the phone off
the hook engages the system.  Once the
system reaches a certain threshold, machines
monitoring the traffic might block dial tones
or send fast busy signals."  (See the Duluth,
Minn. News-Tribune for October 30, 1999,
"Y2K phone advice: Don't check dial tone,"
pages 1A and 6A.)
(Editor's Comment: This doesn't make me
nervous.  What makes me nervous is the fact
that back in January 1999, while planning
for Operation COMEX/MOBEX 99, the big
National Guard call-up, one of the exercise
scenarios was "a simulated comm-out."
See UFO Roundup, Volume 4, Number 3
for details.  Now we have the big phone
companies warning about just such a
'comm-out."  Coincidence?)

from the UFO Files:

1870: STRANGE EVENTS AT
           NEWBURYPORT

      A strange series of ghostly phenomena took
place at the old schoolhouse on School Street
in Newburyport, Massachusetts, located about
40 miles (64 kilometers) north of Boston.
      The phenomena began in September 1870
when 'every day a mysterious yellow glow spread
over the classroom, windows and blackboards.
It usually started near the hall door and spread
silently over the room.  After about two minutes,
it faded away."
      "It did no harm while it cast its light over
the room, but afterwards the students and the
teacher, Miss Lucy A. Perkins, felt weak
and ill."
      "The yellow radiance was not the only
unusual occurrence.  There was also a breeze
of cold air that swept through the room, even
when the doors and windows were tightly shut.
The chill breeze rattled the papers and faded
map hanging on the wall and shook the hanging
lamp.  This too made the teacher and children
slightly ill, but they kept on with their studies
day after day, bravely trying to ignore these
strange events."
      "A high-pitched laugh began to be heard
occasionally.  The eerie sound echoed in the
tiny attic, the small coal cellar and the
vestibule."
      "The climax came on November 1 (1870).
During a geography lesson, Miss Lucy called
upon a student to recite.  In the midst of a
sentence, he suddenly stopped and pointed
to the vestibule.  There stood a boy with his
arm upraised."
      "The boy stood silently, his arm and his face
and jaw bound in a white cloth as though he had
an injured jaw or a toothache.  Then, as they all
watched, he slowly vanished.  From that time on,
the schoolhouse was plagued no more."
      "Three local boys with a reputation for mischief
were questioned in an attempt to solve the
mystery, but the authorities decided they had
no part in the events.  To this day, the yellow glow,
the cold breeze and the boy with the upraised arm
and bandaged jaw have never been explained."
      What's interesting about this case is the part
the old Newburyport school, built in the 1700s,
played in the lives of two of the USA's most
notorious Illuminati.
      The first was Timothy Dexter, a leather goods
merchant who became a wealthy currency speculator.
Born in Malden, Mass. on January 22, 1747, the
son of Nathan and Esther (Brintnall) Dexter, he
arrived in Newburyport in 1769 and married
Elizabeth Lord the following year.
      In 1792, Dexter purchased the mansion at
201 High Street, Newburyport, with is distinctive
golden eagle on the roof, and contributed much
money to the construction of the school.
      But Dexter's Illuminati ties didn't sit well
with the Newburyport Presbyterians.  Dexter
held a mock funeral for himself and then "beat
his wife for not giving vent to sufficient grief."
      So he moved his family to Chester, New
Hampshire, where he caused a lot of comment
when he "kept a coffin on the front porch."  On
the coffin was an intriguing slogan--Death is an
eternal sleep.  It meant nothing to the New
Hampshire farmers, but then again none of them
had ever been to the Loge des Neufs Soeurs
(Lodge of the Nine Sisters) in Paris, then world
headquarters of the Illuminati.  The same motto
appeared in the lodge's council room.
      Returning to Newburyport, Dexter busied
himself with his occult activities and in 1802
published a strange book, Pickles for the
Knowing Ones."  The last chapter of the book,
entitled "Salt and Pepper to Taste" contained
page after page of commas and periods.
(Obviously a coded mesage from Europe--J.T.)
      Dexter died in Newburyport on October 23,
1806.  What his long-suffering wife said or did
at his real funeral was not recorded.
      But the old Newburyport school has an
even more prominent Illuminatus in its history.
In 1824, the teacher there was none other
than Albert Pike.  (See Strangely Enough! by
Carroll B. Colby, Sterling Publishing Co., New
York, N.Y., 1959, pages 145 and 146.  Also
Life of Timothy Dexter by S.l. Knapp,
Newburyport, Mass., 1838.)

      We'll be back in seven days with more UFO
and paranormal 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.

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

**************************************************
This weeks advertiser:

Zing

http://www.directleads.com/ad.html?o=588&a=cd3492

Your Images Come ALIVE!

Turn your pictures into an interactive screensaver,
wallpaper, or use them while you surf the web. Use
your own images or choose from thousands - Extreme
Sports, Celebrities, Jokes, and more. New images
daily. ZingViewer - Install Now - It's Free!
**************************************************






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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 10:52:51 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:33:23 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@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: Thu, 28 Oct 99 17:38:29 PDT

 >Responding to John Rimmer's message of Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:07:59
 >+0100, Jerome wrote:


 >>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.

 >No doubt calling the Red Giant of Mortlake "wacky" is Jerome's
 >idea of a non-ad-hominem joke, so I imagine he won't mind my
 >calling him habitually misrepresentative of the PSH and his
 >comments on it more often than not barking mad. There, that was
 >hilarious, wasn't it?

 >Fact is, Swords appears to be ignorant of current discussions
 >among evolutionists (for which see Richard Dawkins's "The Blind
 >Watchmaker", almost anything by Stephen Jay Gould since
 >"Wonderful Life", and Stephen Rose's brilliant "Lifelines").
 >Besides relying on outdated scientific thought, Swords seems
 >radically not to understand the most crude essential tenets of
 >Darwinism, and specifically is absolutely and utterly wrong in
 >his knowledge and treatment of convergent evolution. Appeals to
 >the entirely speculative hypotheses of exobiology, conducted
 >even as they are by respectable professional scientists, won't
 >let either Swords or Jerome wriggle out of these failings, or
 >Swords's extraordinarily tendentious deployment of the
 >scientific literature with which he is (or admits to being)
 >familiar.

Hilarious.  Take it up with Swords, guy. I'm forwarding your
message to him.  Knowing him and knowing you, I have no idea who
knows the relevant science better.  Sorry, but it isn't you.

Your remarks about Swords and his motivations, by the way, are
precisely why I am not a PSHer or skeptic.  To be one, you can't
come to grips with someone's real arguments or motivations. The
caricature you make of Swords does you no credit, but it is,
alas, characteristic of your approach.

If Swords has anything he wants to say in response, I'll post it
on the list.  He's more than able to defend himself, and I'll
let him do it should he be interested.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:41 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:44:04 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:19 +0000
 >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: Mon, 01 Nov 99 17:38:18 PST

  Dear Mrs Bruni,

 >I also strongly object to the group's comments about our
 >American and French colleagues. I assure you Jerry, that they do
 >not speak for all Brits. The last hilarious piece about the
 >French not liking us very much and upset over the "beef" war, is
 >a point. What on earth has this to do with anything being
 >discussed on this list?

Georgina Bruni

Thank you for your comment on the "beef war" ! Yes, better laugh
about it than cry. Being French, I want to assure all British
people That I have only good feelings for them, as well as
Americans by the way. I have just been invited at the Leeds
conference to present the Cometa report, and I received a very
friendly welcome from everyone there  : the organizers, the
other speakers (with a special mention to Tim Good who offered
me an excellent whisky at the bar), and the public.

Now this is also my answer to Ms Jenny Randles. I just tried to
answer on a copy of her very long message of November 1, but my
machine blocked and I don't know why. She challenges me to
answer, so I comply, but as briefly as possible.

The main point, the bottom line of this dispute with Ms Randles
remains the same to me :

She questioned the Cometa, just a few days after the publication
of their report, on her new witnesses for the Lakenheath case.
But she knew that they could not have a documented file on these
military pilots because they were not available, under the UK
official secrets act. She said that when journalist Bernard
Thouanel asked her precisely that a couple of days later, and
she said it again in her message, when answering my remark that
the Cometa would have wanted more official sources of
information than her book  :

 >They would have had a long wait in the UK with our official
 >secrets act and no no available official reports on Lakenheath !

So, I repeat, for the last time because it's becoming very
tiresome, that this questioning was a pretty bad move,
especially since it was made in the midst of violent attacks by
Pierre Lagrange in the french press, and Perry Petrakis on the
internet.

Now, for those who are surprised by these attacks and don't
understand the situation in France, I confirm that the french
medias remain very negative of UFOs, as well as the intellectual
and scientific world. On the other hand ordinary people are much
more open, I can see that evryday.

As for french ufology, it is in bad shape, and one of the
reasons is the very negative work being done since decades by a
lot of people. At the present time, there are only two ufo
magazines available on the newstands and they are both very
sceptical on UFOs : "Anomalies", led by Lagrange, and
"Phenomena" by Petrakis.

Here is just an exemple that everybody will appreciate: the way
they presented the Sturrock report in 1998.

In "Anomalies", the article was entitled "OVNIs: La science
s'encanaille" (No 5, March 1999) which means that scientist have
associated with bad, mischevious people (these being the
ufologists !).

In "Phenomena", the article was entitled : "La science au chevet
de l'ovni" (No 40) which means that scientists have come to the
bed of sick ufology !

I could fill a few pages with quotations like that. BTW, Jenny
Randles laments that the Cometa authors refuse to talk to
ufologists. I am aware of that and I regret it but their
attitude is the result of such litterature !  However, I can
assure you that it is not a complete refusal, since I and a few
others that I know have good contacts with them. But, yes, they
won't talk to Lagrange and Petrakis !

Regards to all,
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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:22:22 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:46:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:47 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi David

 >>Re Rendlesham: With regards to the "experts" quickly dismissing
 >>the radiation reading significance; may I remind you (which is
 >>public knowledge) that this expert opinion was based on Lt
 >>Colonel Halt's memorandum, not on "factual records" relating
 >>specifically to the readings.

 >That doesn't make his opinion right!  Hence my point....

Good, we are agreed on that


 >Let's hope you can provide it, and that the book lives up to all
 >the hype you have been giving it, because hype does not equal
 >good product.

A huge exaggeration! I have not been hyping the book, just merely mentioned
it a couple of times.

 >Those who have been disappointed by Star Wars The Phantom Menace
 >will know exactly what I mean.

It is not fiction David

 >I don't debunk anything - I investigate and report what I find.
 >Perhaps you would like to consult the BUFORA archives, and you will
 >find evidence of my thorough investigations, dating back to 1981,
 >several hundred of them in fact.

Several hundred? That sounds like a lifetimes work. I don't know
any investigator who could claim to have done a thorough
investigation on so many cases. Considering you are in you early
30s, that's some going.

 >So you are on very dodgy ground if you are trying to suggest I
 >don't investigate - I have an archive filled with tapes, notebooks
 >and case reports dating back 20 years to prove it.

One's you have thorougly investigated? Congratulations.

 >What will be even more interesting is to see if Georgina Bruni
 >makes any mention of the work of James Easton, and the contents
 >of the original statements made by the airmen in 1980, in her
 >new book. No one who calls themselves objective can dismiss the
 >conclusion that the lighthouse and other light sources played a
 >very major role in what happened in that forest.

Due to a publishing contract I am not at liberty to discuss details,
but can assure you that an in depth investigation of the latter has
been done by myself.

 >At the end of the day, it is in Georgina's interest to perpetuate a mystery
 >from this case - if there was no mystery, there is no book contract,
 >no lucrative lecture tour, TV appearances, fame, money, etc.

I did not perpetrate a mystery - the mystery was already there.
In fact, contrary to your rather bitchy comments, I did not
investigate this case for any of the reasons you imply, but
because it fascinated me. One cannot get a book deal based on no
case, one has to offer a synopsis based on one's investigation.
So the book was not my original intention, but as a result of my
work.

 >But of course, those considerations played no part in Georgina's
 >decision to write a book on the case, did they?

No, they certainly did not.

 >My point was that before 1947 people saw UFOs all right, but
 >they interpretedwhat they saw in religious and other terms - ie.
 >as fiery dragons, fairy lanterns, phantom Zeppelins, etc, in
 >terms appropriate to their culture.  That draws no conclusions
 >about *what* was actually seen, only that people's background
 >and culture affect how they interpret what they see!

In many instances that is true, but there are still reports
where witnesses do not know what they saw. Coming forward in
time, there is a Swedish case (1946) whereby the witness claims
to have seen human type entities. He classed them as aliens.
This was before the American era you mention.

 >And this proves that people in Romania believed in ET UFOs in 1843?
 >I think not.

I was not saying they believed in ET UFOS, I was merely pointing
out that they did not always see them as modern day inventions
as you suggested.

 >Yes this does sound familiar. But what is familiar about it is
 >that you have demonstrated how willing you are to swallow any
 >old yarn about crashed UFOs, stories which in fact date back to
 >the 1897 Aurora "airship" crash, and even further back than
 >that.

Here we go! Just because I point out that there were such cases
reported, you insult me personally. That is not so, I have not
investigated these cases which would be very difficult
considering their age and the language barrier. Therefore I
cannot claim to have any real knowledge of them.

You are going into personal attack mode again David. It does not
become you and only proves what I have been saying all along.

 >Your credulity doesn't provide much faith in your ability to
 >differentiate between fact and fiction; let's hope this does not
 >extend to the Rendlesham case too.

Insults again. Typical nasty tactics which do nothing for your
own credibility.

 >Have you checked out the Polish report? Have you traced it to
 >its original source?

As aforementioned, I have not investigated these cases. They
were reported in the press at the time. The Polish case was
apparently reported in Wiezoor Wybrzeza. The original story came
from investigators Julian Weverbergh and Ion Hobana. The source
of my information was from their published works "UFOs From
Behind The Iron Curtain , first published in 1974.

 >No, like most "UfOlogists" you just read it somewhere and accepted
 >it as fact.

I am not a ufologist

I did not accept it as fact but was pointing out that there had
been reports. The aforementioned investigators, are in my
opinion very good in what they have produced. It does not mean
that I personally have accepted the stories as fact.

Your obnoxious attitude only proves once again that you are
insulting the work of investigators that you know nothing about
and yet you expect people to read your reports (hundreds of
them) and take your word for it.

For the record:

Weverbergh, a former teacher, was also a correspondent for the
Dutch paper Vrij Nederland and Hobana had a degree in philology
at Bucharest University. (which is probably why he was able to
research so many European cases) He wrote several scientific
essays and was the scientific editor of the Bucharest daily
newspaper Scinteia and secretary of the Rumanian Writers's
Union.

 >And then you claim that UFOs have nothing to do with mythology!
 >If I needed more evidence for my proposition, then you have
 >surely delivered it for me on a plate.

Then you are the fool David

Georgina Bruni







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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:22:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:52:59 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!



 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:12:56 -0500
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Nice to see you out of the woodwork!  Your comments on UFOIN
 >obviously beg a response.

Hi Andy

 >You must be in a state of suprise then Georgina, as we have had
 >support from ufologists around the world as well as in the UK.
 >There are many respectable researchers involved.

Congratulations. Anyone we know?

 >No, actually it shows how a group of knowlegeable sceptics have
 >spoken out against poor investigation, false conclusions and the
 >most amateurish of ufologists.

That is not a problem. Does that mean Jenny has decided to be a
definite sceptic now?

<snip>

 > Surely if practitioners of any art or science are
 >carrying it out badly, lying about their sources of information
 >and/or making parts of cases up (as in the Sheffield Incident
 >for one), then it is reasonable for others in the same area of
 >study to point this out?

I absolutely agree with you, there is no doubt about that. What
I have difficulty with, as with the Sheffield case, dirty linen
was being aired about which, although worth a mention, was in my
opinion, completely OTT. List members were bombarded with
intricate details about Max Burn's drug dealings. Your group
have insulted several witnesses, researchers, publications and
cases, often in a very personal way. Tim Matthews list was full
of this, and he is a member of your group, is he not?

 >Or would you rather have it as a subject in which anything can
 >be said and both the author and the subject matter be inviolate?
 >That would make ufology a lovely, cosy, place where the maddest
 >of ideas could be accomodated with no criticism and the whole
 >subject would be hermeticaly sealed from reality. Is that what
 >you _really_ want?

No Andy, I am glad that there are people out there who question
other people's research and the subject in general. In order to
get to the truth I have had to do this with the Rendlesham case,
and I know that I will upset many people when my investigation
is revealed. It is something I had not anticipated, but
nevertheless, the truth must be told.

 >I think what actually annoys you and others about UFOIN is the
 >fact that UK sceptics have come together in a cohesive grouping
 >and at last are actively resisting the pseudo-scientific
 >nonsense passed off as ufology. Not only by criticism either but
 >by active research and the publication of this research.

That is not strictly true, not from where I sit anyway. I am
always happy to listen to sceptics. Rob Irving and science
writer Ian Ridpath and I have had many debates, and although we
disagree on several points, I have found them to be perfect
gentlemen who do not leave the subject matter to stoop to really
nasty personal attacks.

 >Firstly I was forwarded an email which has apparently appeared
 >on an email list called UFOR. It was posted by a well known ETH
 >oriented ufologist by the name of Miles Johnstone.

 >>Randles and Roberts:-
 >>Warning this lot are self professed Government insider dis-informers.

I see your point. Of course the idea that you and your
colleagues are working for any British government agency, is
absolute nonsense. There is no way that they would employ any of
you. That is not meant to be offensive, but you are all too
unsubtle and unqualified to play the part.

 > This sort of idea is rife in the very UFO 'community' you are supporting
 >Georgina. Dwell on it a while. Think what must be going on in
 >these people's minds to make them draw these conclusions.

I do not support these ideas Andy, and I cannot claim to be a
part of the UFO community as such. I am most certainly very
interested in the subject, but I am not a part of any
organisation , nor do I follow any rules and regulations made by
any such organisations, or other people for that matter. I am my
own person.

 >Then we have the latest issue of UFO Magazine (the UK version).
 >Here an article by one David Cayton discusses the alleged animal
 >mutilation phenomena in the UK. It's long, rambling, based on
 >some very shaky ideas, full of paranoia and ultimately pointless
 >as it proves nothing. Par for the course in a newsstand UFO
 >magazine really. In his final paragraph Cayton wonders:

I respect your concern, but please do not dismiss this man
without having carried out your own thorough investigation
first. At least he has tried to contact the right authorities.
There is a case for animal mutilations and I believe there is a
lot of work to be done in that area, which our American
colleagues are doing at present.

Sceptic Rob Irving has achieved some very good work on horse
mutilations, but sceptics don't seem to have taken the challenge
on the cattle mutilations which are clearly a phenomena.

 >Here's the problem at the very heart of ufology - and the reason
 >why UFOIN was necessary. Do these people want to 'eradicate' and
 >'silence' sceptics? Why do they want that?

Could it be because they shout the loudest <G>?

Probably what it means is that they are trying to prove the
sceptics are wrong.

 >In my observations of the subject since 1983 I have come to the
 >conclusion that this sort of feeling exists because  when
 >sceptics become actively involved the bell is rung and playtime
 >is over.

No, no, no! Playtime just begins when the sceptics come out to
play - and play they do. Most of them would be far better to get
on with their homework

 >These people do not like to have their ideas, motives or
 >evidence challenged in any way. Sceptics, on the other hand, are
 >more than happy to debate and justify their position and to
 >back their claims up with checkable facts.

Then answer this Andy: why do they only take one or two
fractions of a case and investigate those specific areas which
fit into their selected theories?

BTW, what happened to your witty column?

Greetings
Georgina







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

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:55:29 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:54:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >First, our current knowledge of other planets and other
 >star systems tells us that the Earth - and indeed our Solar
 >System - appear to be unusual and may even be unique. Second, the
 >mechanics of Darwinian evolution tell us that the advent of
 >intelligence of the distinctive human kind on Earth cannot be
 >predicted at any point from the rise of single-celled organisms
 >early in the planet's history. Ergo, its appearance cannot be
 >taken for granted elsewhere either.

 >Further, the specific cultural circumstances in Western Europe
 >that led to the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the rise of
 >industry, science, and technology are historically unique (we
 >discount here the achievements of Atlantis). Human history
 >itself is a chronicle of contingent and fractal events - of
 >*accidents*, which we have no reason to think (much as we might
 >like to) have been repeated elsewhere.

Dear Peter and List,

Thank your for your studied contribution to this debate. I have
to correct you here on the uniqueness of the European growth
spurt in technology and science, however.

Centuries ago similar periods of fast technological progress
have happened in places. In Sumeria (present day Iraq, thousands
of years BC), (roughly 400 - 300 BC), China (roughly between 0
and 500 AD) and the Arab world (preceding the European
Renaissance).


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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:59:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject:  British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:56:00 PST
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dave,

 >>"Adherence" to what particular theory?  I am at a loss to
 >>understand what you're saying.

 >So you're not a believer in the ETH?

Huh?  Looking at this question (not to mention the polemical and
predictable use of the word "believer"), I am at a loss.  Can
you read?  I have addressed this question repeatedly.

 >Have I been mixing you up with another Jerome Clark?

There is this Jerome Clark, and then there's the one you've
conjured up in your imagination.  Since the Jerome Clark you're
often addressing is one I don't know personally, I can only
assume that yes, you are confusing me with the second Jerome
Clark.

 >Sorry, the ambiguous way you like to dress it up is: "defensible
 >tentative interpretation, better than most but yet to be
 >proved"; which is no better than invoking elves and fairies, but
 >at least we now have you accepting that the "physical evidence",
 >as it stands, amounts to nothing - hence the "yet to be proved."

What has "yet to be proved"?  Your theory that UFOs amount to no
more than elves and fairies?  I would love to see a falsifiable
version of that.

 >>You're the one who adheres to a
 >>theory: that UFOs are, to all intents and purposes,
 >>superstitious nonsense and amount to no more than modern
 >>posting you begin to indicate differently --  that it should be
 >>of interest only to folklorists and social scientists.

 >You are confusing "UFOs" with the mythology surrounding alleged
 >ET visitants.

I have said repeatedly -- apparently, dealing with you
neoskeptics one has to express oneself over and over again in
order to be misrepresented yet again -- UFOs are _unidentified_
flying objects.  If they were extraterrestrial spacecraft (or,
for that matter, elves and fairies), they wouldn't be UFOs.
There would be no controversy, at least concerning their reality
and essential identity.

 >I've no doubt people see "UFOs" and that there are unknown
 >phenomena at the root of a small percentage of those sightings.

 >These unknowns could be natural phenomena currently on the
 >fringes of accepted science,as equally as they could offer
 >evidence of ET.

It would be an interesting natural phenomenon that took on the
appearance, as UFOs do in many of the most puzzling cases, the
appearance of craft with windows, metallic structure,
aerodynamic design, and occupants.  If you're holding out hope
for "natural phenomena currently on the fringes of accepted
science," you're the one who's proposing the more extraordinary
hypothesis.  I've never heard of anything in nature that took on
the appearance of a technological construct.

 >But I don't see you giving that "tentative interpretation" equal
 >billing in your writings, hence my conclusion that you are
 >allowing your beliefs and prejudices to cloud your
 >interpretation of data.

You know what?  That's _exactly_ the problem I have with your
approach.  The difference between us is that I tend not to make
sweeping pronouncements I can't verify, whereas you do it all
the time.  I would urge you to take on a more modest approach,
in which you demonstrate a deeper respect for the tentativeness
of our knowledge of the UFO phenomenon.

 >What I see as equivalent of superstition is the belief system
 >which equates UFO with alien spaceship. You can protest all you
 >like, but it will not alter the fact that this interpretation is
 >a product of the late 20th century space age.

What, by the way, is the difference between a "belief system"
and a "belief"?  Or is "belief system" one of those cant words,
like "lifestyle"?  I've never been able to figure out the
difference between "life" and "lifestyle."  And if you don't
believe me, next time you see "belief system" or "lifestyle" in
print, substitute "belief" for the former and "life" for the
latter, and I'll bet you find that the meaning remains _exactly_
the same.

In any event: The explicit connection between unusual aerial
structures and the idea of ET visitation was made at least as
early as the mid-19th Century.   The notion of a "plurality of
worlds" -- an inhabited universe, with all that implies
(including visitation) -- is an ancient human concern.  Maybe
you ought to read the books dealing with the latter subject.
You seem weirdly presentist in your views.

 >Even in the early stages of the phenomenon in 1947, opinion
 >polls show that a large percentage of Americans believed that
 >flying saucers were something to do with the Russians or secret
 >weapons.

Which was natural enough.  It's what Hynek (whom you would do
well to reread -- or maybe read) calls the "escalation of
hypotheses."  Society, just like the individual witness, went --
reasonably -- to what seemed the least extraordinary and most
familiar interpretation.  It was only after such interpretations
failed that society went to other approaches to explain the
reports.  That's why, incidentally, the Air Force was ahead of
the public in speculating about ET visitors; the Air Force knew,
as the public did not, that UFOs were doing things even the most
advanced earthly technology could not match.

 >The culture of belief in ET UFOs is a new phenomenon - it did
 >not exist in 1909, despite the odd tongue-in-cheek speculation
 >of isolated newspaper staffers.

But then, of course, UFO sightings were a fairly unfrequent
occurrence. They weren't around long enough to merit a name or
to cause anybody before Charles Fort to grasp that here was an
international phenomenon occurring over time.  It was only after
waves became a recurrent feature of the phenomenon, after World
War II, that society as a whole could not ignore the occurrence
of some very odd things in the earth's atmosphere.  When the
public concluded that UFOs were not from a terrestrial nation
and the objects showed up on radar, left landing traces, and
were seen by credible, trained observers, that's when
speculation turned toward the ETH.  Nothing irrational or
inexplicable here.  The public may be right, or it may be wrong,
but it's hardly crazy.

 >>>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.

 >>Well, I'm glad that you are now expressing a healthy change of
 >>mind.  Maybe there's hope for you yet.

 >Ditto - I've always accepted that there are many different ways
 >of approaching the study of this phenomenon, as my writings
 >testify. Your lack of familiarity with them only adds to my
 >suspicion that your view of the UFO subject is primarily a US-
 >centred one (as does the paucity of UK entries in your otherwise
 >excellent Encyclopedia). Hence my points about wearing cultural
 >blinkers.

Yeah, the US _is_ the center of all evil and irrationality.  If we'd
only listen to the wisdom of the Brits, who do know everything.

 >>Of course UFOs, like anything else in society, have created
 >>their own folklore and sociology, and those things are worth
 >>studying; in fact, I find them quite interesting.  What I do not
 >>think, however, is that the story ends there.  The point of
 >>origin for all of this is the UFO phenomenon itself, which
 >>remains as puzzling and challenging as it did when it first came
 >>into popular consciousness in 1947.  The cases that (short of a
 >>White House landing) will determine whether or not UFOs are
 >>extraordinary unknowns are those in which investigatable
 >>objective, physical evidence is present.  All of the
 >>folklorists, sociologists, historians, and psychosociologists in
 >>the world have nothing interesting to say on this subject.  Only
 >>physical scientists can deal adequately with such evidence, and
 >>that is why it will be they, not the armchair psychosociological
 >>literary critics, who will solve the UFO mystery.

 >All very grand, but fifty years of studying these cases which
 >Jerry assures us are so rich in physical evidence has not
 >provided us with any proof - he accepts that himself in his more
 >lucid moments, for instance "yet to be proved" as a caveat
 >tagged on the end of his long-winded "interpretation."

You are clearly unable to grasp the simple notion that because
something has not been "proved" (whatever that means in the
context of the UFO controversy), science suspends judgment. Not
being proved is not the same as being disproved, which is why
your sweeping claims about the phenomenon are meaningless. Not
being proved means only that we don't know, which means we had
better spend more time in investigation than in rhetorical
workouts.

 >Jerry's reference to landings on the White House lawn underlines
 >what I have said about his own bias towards one single
 >interpretation of the "unknowns", ie. that they are ET craft.

 >The classic cases he keeps banging on about look more and more
 >like sacred cows, elevated beyond questioning as icons of faith.

This, alas, is the kind of gasbag rhetoric which seems to
underlie your case.  Since it is you who are making claims that
cannot be supported empirically, it is you, I fear, who are
bowing before "icons of faith."  Me, I realize that our
knowledge of the UFO phenomenon is tentative at best, that the
sorts of scientific resources needed to address something this
complex have not been brought to bear, and that we have a whole
lot to do before we can start feeling complacent about what we
know and don't know.  In a sort of perverse way, I admire your
certainty, though not your rhetoric.

 >To suggest any of them might have a less exotic explanation is
 >tantamount to the questioning of the virgin birth, as the furore
 >over Socorro has highlighted. So until conclusive evidence is
 >forthcoming, as I have said over and over again, all we have are
 >the claims and beliefs of the people who say they have seen UFOs
 >- not much use to physical scientists, but the very stuff of
 >folklore.

More gasbag rhetoric.  I'd take one investigative report from a
James McDonald, a Walt Webb, or whomever, over a library full of
this sort of stuff.  Call me naive, but I think it will be
empirical evidence, not self-righteous rhetoric, that will
eventually solve the -- manifestly still unsolved -- UFO
mystery.

 >>What I want to know is, why is the very
 >>notion that the ETH is not an absurd myth so threatening?  Now
 >>there's question for the social scientists to take up.

 >It's not threatening at all, I for one would be overjoyed to see
 >evidence of ET visitations. But belief does not equal evidence!

I couldn't agree more with the latter and hope that in the
future you will spend more time studying evidence than engaging
in polemics. And no, I don't think for a second that you "would
be overjoyed to see evidence of ET visitations."  That evidence
would make you look like a fool, and nobody wants to be made to
look like a fool.  If such evidence were to emerge, your critics
would have a field day quoting what you've written on this list
and elsewhere on how ET visitation is as realistic as elves and
fairies, and you would feel very, very bad.

In point of fact, I'm not sure _I_ would be overjoyed to see
evidence of ET visitations.  It's much more psychically comforting
to believe UFOs are all delusions, the cultural creations of those
crazy Americans, or whatever.

 >I can only speak for myself, but I'm simply trying to get to the
 >bottom of what Jerry Clark believes and how he has arrived at
 >his conclusions, and based upon what evidence.

What a load of ... well, you know.  Probably nobody in the
English- speaking world has written and published as much as I
have on the UFO controversy in all its aspects.  If you were
genuinely curious, you'd have no problem finding out what I
think and how I've arrived at my conclusions, based on what
evidence.  And you call yourself a scholar?

 >UpDates is providing me with a rich source of information for my
 >current research project!

You call yourself a scholar?


 >>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?

 >>You're simply wrong here, recycling a cliche
 >>which arguably I bear responsibility for; I appear to have been
 >>the first to use arguments like yours, in articles in FSR in the
 >>mid-1960s. To all appearances, in fact, the UFO phenomenon has
 >>maintained pretty much the same appearance since it entered the
 >>world in the early 19th Century.

 >Elsewhere, in a reply to Georgina Bruni, Jerry suggests that I
 >might be a better folklorist than a historian.

 >Whatever my shortcomings, I make a better historian than does
 >Jerry Clark.

So you say.  Then let's see some evidence of it.

 >If the UFO phenomena has maintained pretty much the same
 >appearance since it entered the world earlier this century, then
 >where are the descriptions of "flying saucers" and
 >triangular-shaped, delta-winged craft in the accounts from 1897
 >and 1909?

There is no such thing as "the UFO phenomena."  I think you mean
"phenomenon."

See the discussion in The UFO Encyclopedia.  Since I have a
life, as I've already said, I am not going to get into an
endless list discussion on these matters.

 >>The "Jules Verne airships"
 >>were essentially the invention of imaginative journalists; they
 >>were not what people were seeing, as is clear when you compare
 >>reports not published in newspapers with those that were.

 >How does Jerry know what people were "seeing" in 1897?
 >Does he have some kind of hotline beyond the grave?

Nope, just access to direct turn-of-the-century witness
accounts, as opposed to the reports in the sensationalist press.

 >How many airship reports have survived outside the newspaper
 >accounts published at the time?

 >If Jerry is referring to the vague memories of people more than
 >half a century after the events they are describing, that kind
 >of "evidence" isn't going to convince anyone.

No, I guess not, given your fervid ideological bias.  In any
case, the witnesses' memories were not "vague" but quite
specific.  But I know they're of no interest to you.  You
already have your mind made up.

Cordially (if exasperatedly),

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                                Re: 'Lasers'

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 20:23:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:09:51 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Lasers'


 >Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 02:02:17 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: 'Lasers'

Hi Eduardo


 >I've never played around with one of those laser pens, but how
 >strong are they? If you point one to the clouds, could you get
 >to see a red dot or something reflected on them?

I have one of those laser pens and they will shine on clouds on
good clear skies. Apart from that I couldn't say about them
accounting for some red light sightings.

<Huge snip>
--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:13:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:08:59 -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: Tue, 02 Nov 99 10:16:25 PST

 >>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 06:22:01 -0500
 >>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, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST

Hi Jerry,

You wrote:

 >>I didn't realize you consider yourself a psychosocial ufologist.
 >>I thought I was making a distinction between psychosociological
 >>rhetoric -- of the sort in which Magonia traffics -- and the
 >>neoskeptical approach you employ.  I'm sorry I didn't make
 >>myself clearer.  I have clearly acknowledged the investigation
 >>you've done in previous postings, not to mention the next issue
 >>of IUR.  It is safe to say, however, that you will never permit
 >>a UFO to rear its ugly head in any investigation you conduct;
 >>one way or other, persuasively or unpersuasively, the case will
 >>be "solved," because that's your ideological bias, and, as
 >>you've made clear repeatedly, it's a strong one indeed.

The more we probe, the more we discover Jerry! Whilst I can't,
and wouldn't, say that any case I investigate will always be
resolved either immediately or in time I find your
reasoning most puzzling. There is no reason whatsoever why
_all_ UFO cases, no matter who they are investigated by,
are not resolvable, sooner or later.

Seems to me you are actively _wanting_ a residue of cases to
remain unexplained, because as long as the 'mystery' surrounding
UFOs continues so will the circus we call ufology and its
attached benefits to the self-styled ring masters.

 >>The evidence on which the nonufological case for ETI rests is
 >>inferential and reasonable, and most scientists outside astro-
 >>or exobiology deem it perfectly legitimate, since a lot of
 >>science deals with things that aren't proved to be true but for
 >>various reasons are considered possible or likely enough to
 >>merit inquiry with a decent chance for payoff.  My point was
 >>simply that no direct evidence outside ufology exists.  In the
 >>SETI context, of course, direct evidence would be a signal of
 >>indisputably ETI origin.

We almost agree Jerry. The difference being that no evidence for
ETI exists _within_ ufology.

 >>Incidentally, here's a prediction: If SETI continues without
 >>success, at some point some of its scientists, probably not of
 >>the current generation but almost certainly the next, will urge
 >>a reexamination of the UFO phenomenon for evidence of ET
 >>visitation.

Maybe. But equally 'some' scientists will still argue against ET
vistitation based on the lack of evidence available.

 >>As for your statement that "all the evidence which has been
 >>resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin," this is
 >>historically false and even ludicrous.  Not even the Condon
 >>Committee, with all the ill will in the world, could
 >>substantiate that bizarre allegation.

Hang on! Does this mean that some evidence, which has been
resolved has a non-mundane UFO origin? This is what you
seem to be saying Jerry. We're all ears. What is this resolved
evidence which is not of mundane origin?

 >>I guess you've lost me there.  If you're interested in reading
 >>me actual scientific work on the connection between the ETI
 >>search and the UFO phenomenon, you could read Edward Ashpole's
 >>book and also Michael D. Swords's illuminating essays on the
 >>subject.  My point remains: the ETH, right or wrong, is a
 >>perfectly respectable scientific approach to the UFO phenomenon.
 >>You have yet to demonstrate otherwise.

OK let's re-frame it. The ETH may be a respectable, scientific
approach to the UFO phenomenon, albeit one driven by belief and
culture rather than evidence. But as yet it has proved futile and
non-productive.

I wrote

 >No, it's not at all unreasonable to wonder if ETs have not found
 >their way here. Wondering about an the existence of unproven
 >entities has been a feature of religions for millenia. To date
 >it has come to nothing other than a lot of bickering other than
 >'my evidence is better than yours'. Ufology is no different!

and you replied

 >>What a load of nonsense.  Again, you make my point: your own
 >>illiteracy in the scientific ETI literature relegates you to the
 >>spouting of absurd cliches, in which the notion of intelligent
 >>life in the cosmos becomes no more than a religious illusion, on
 >>no more evidence than your own fervent belief.

No Jerry - even the scientists are working from a position of belief
and hope here. Just because life exists on earth, and just because
forms of life _may_ exist elsewhere _does not mean_ that any
ointelligence has ever arisen, least of all an intelligence which
disports itself in the fashion (fashions many if you read the literature)
which our putative ET brethren are alleged to do. Just wishful,
religious thinking I'm afraid. Show me your evidence to the
contrary please Jerry.

 >>I'd say you're
 >>better at rhetoric than at science, but I'm not so sure you're
 >>all that good at rhetoric, either.

Number 5 in the series just ticked off there folks.

I wrote

 >Your contention that Clarke et al are 'obsessed' is a bit off
 >the mark Jerry. The ETH obsession is held by the majority of
 >active ufologists (certainly in the UK) and is the over-riding
 >explanation and focus of the majority of  media discussions of
 >UFOs. It is also the fuel which drives the UFO book and magazine
 >publishing industry (all sincere I'm sure!).

and you replied

 >>Yes, it's true that naive and often sensationalistic stuff about
 >>ETs colors treatments of UFOs in popular culture.  So what?
 >>UFO Updates is a forum for persons who participate in the subject
 >>on a deeper level.

Often that is the case Jerry. Equally often we have to go back to
ufological basics and engage in this type of debate.

I wrote

 >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.

and you replied

 >>Stop speaking in cliches, Andy, and stop setting up strawmen.
 >>Can you neoskeptics do no better?  If anyone who has ever said
 >>that unsolved UFOs _must_ be of ET origin, it is not I, so drop
 >>it, okay?  I simply stated that the hypothesis that some
 >>unsolved UFOs may turn out to be of ET origin is defensible.

I simply can't go with this Jerry - your belief in ET or lack of
it notwithstanding. How on earth can the belief in something we
do not know exists be even a possible explanation for something
we can't even identify? I know you've had problems understanding
my sentences before (hey, I'm from Yorkshire, we've only just
forsaken woad and Odin), so please roll the previous one round
on your mind a bit.

I wrote

 >Please define 'classic' and 'best' with reference to UFO cases.

and you replied

 >>There's a whole list of classic cases in my encyclopedia.
 >>That's why they're there.  Go look at the table of contents if
 >>you can't figure out what might constitute a "classic" case.
 >>Since you seem confused, let me clarify it for you: I'm not
 >>talking about classic IFO cases (there are, of course, such; the
 >>Mantell incident is one such). I am talking classic UFO cases.

That's not good enough. I'm afraid just by being in your
excellent book and designated as such doesn't make a case
'classic'. Your woeful lack of knowledge of the UK UFO scene and
what constitutes classic cases here is obvious. And again I
would ask -  are you really saying that 'the best UFO cases tend
to stay unsolved over time' or that UFO cases become  'best
cases' by dint of them being unsolved over a period of time
Jerry? Is a case only judged as 'classic' after a period of
time, when it has remained unsolved?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 15:51:40 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 18:30:32 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 10:52:51 PST

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@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: Thu, 28 Oct 99 17:38:29 PDT

Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >Hilarious.  Take it up with Swords, guy. I'm forwarding your
 >message to him.  Knowing him and knowing you, I have no idea who
 >knows the relevant science better.  Sorry, but it isn't you.

I meant, of course, to say "I have an idea," not "I have no
idea." Swords's interest in science is deep and his knowledge
formidable. He's one of the brightest people I've met in this
field, and in my observation those who unwise enought to take
him on in debate tend to lose.  I do hope he chooses to respond
to Brookesmith's posting.  Unfortunately, he is not on e-mail.
I've sent him, by regular post, a copy of the posting.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 16:29:27 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 18:52:51 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:22:25 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:12:56 -0500
 >>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Jenny,

 >>I think what actually annoys you and others about UFOIN is the
 >>fact that UK sceptics have come together in a cohesive grouping
 >>and at last are actively resisting the pseudo-scientific
 >>nonsense passed off as ufology.

In light of repeated statements like this from Roberts and
Clarke, why do you still want us to think UFOIN is not a
skeptical/debunking group?  Like others on this list, I am at a
loss to understand your defense of it.  Considering the
hard-line skeptical party-line positions we've heard from your
colleagues, is there any reason we should not wonder not if but
when UFOIN seeks CSICOP affiliation?  Your colleagues certainly
give no indication that they share your moderate positions.
UFOIN looks like just another debunking group, with rhetoric to
match.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:18:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 18:55:46 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:41 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:35:19 +0000
 >>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: Mon, 01 Nov 99 17:38:18 PST

 >Dear Mrs Bruni,

 >>I also strongly object to the group's comments about our
 >>American and French colleagues. I assure you Jerry, that they do
 >>not speak for all Brits. The last hilarious piece about the
 >>French not liking us very much and upset over the "beef" war, is
 >>a point. What on earth has this to do with anything being
 >>discussed on this list?

 >Georgina Bruni

 >Thank you for your comment on the "beef war" ! Yes, better laugh
 >about it than cry.


Hi,

Evidently Georgina's sense of humour by pass was a total
success, if she failed to see any irony in my beef war comment
and regarded it as some sort of insult . Has she read ANY
British newspaper for the past two weeks? Has she read any of
the real insults on these lists that a mild quip has to be
perceived as an international incident. At least Mr Bourdais has
the good sense to see this for what it was .

But it was interesting, wasnt it, that by raising this as if it
was the only substance of this whole argument Ms Bruni made sure
she was not troubled by having to actually discuss the many
facts at hand about my clearly documented help to Thouanel . Hey
but since when have facts ever mattered much in UFOlogy?

The tactic of evasion is a useful way to avoid having to argue
things that are indefensible . When you see an evasion overload
happening the reason is usually pretty obvious.

Being French, I want to assure all British
 >people That I have only good feelings for them, as well as
 >Americans by the way.

As indeed do I. I have even been to France to lecture and France
is the country beyond the UK to which I send the largest number
of copies of my magazine Northern UFO News. Entente cordiale
restored, n'est pas?

 >Now this is also my answer to Ms Jenny Randles. I just tried to
 >answer on a copy of her very long message of November 1, but my
 >machine blocked and I don't know why.

Possibly it had the intelligence chips to figure out it was
fighting a losing battle and was trying to type   mea culpa
whilst you were typing something else.


 >She challenges me to
 >answer, so I comply, but as briefly as possible.

 >The main point, the bottom line of this dispute with Ms Randles
 >remains the same to me:

 >She questioned the Cometa, just a few days after the publication
 >of their report, on her new witnesses for the Lakenheath case.
 >But she knew that they could not have a documented file on these
 >military pilots because they were not available, under the UK
 >official secrets act.

So you are telling us that everything in the Cometa report comes
from an official government file akin to an MoD official secrets
act file? That all references to Roswell, for instance, in there
are official and not from reading the UFO literature and
interpretation? That has to be what you are saying if your
argument is that Cometa were perfectly justified to publish an
incorrect version of what took place over Lakenheath in l956
because it came from an 'official source' (which as far as I can
see means a book ) - whereas the version I sent to Mr Thounal
was worthless because it only came direct from the RAF crew who
were actually involved in the sighting?

If so this is an astonishing admission. Better than an apology.

So my data was worthless because I have no official secrets act
document to offer Cometa - when very obviously they have no such
documentation either for the version that they themselves DO
publish. If it is an accurate reflection of what you are saying
it comes down to this.

Cometa publish facts about a case I know to be wrong. I offer
freely to help set these facts straight. I do so but cannot
provide official secrets act files to back me up (only first
hand testimony from the actual witnesses). Cometa are right not
to be interested, retain the false data they have and not only
say to me - thank you but go way its not good enough - they are
also justified to attack me in public for having the terrible
audacity to try to help out.

Because, believe me, Mr Bourdais thats exactly what you ARE
saying.

 >So, I repeat, for the last time because it's becoming very
 >tiresome, that this questioning was a pretty bad move,
 >especially since it was made in the midst of violent attacks by
 >Pierre Lagrange in the french press, and Perry Petrakis on the
 >internet.

Tiresome, yes, that ungrateful people dont have the decency to
own up that they got it wrong. But its easier, isnt it, to twist
the facts and convince this list that I am being nasty to you
when in truth you blatantly mislead them all that I declined to
help when (as I have proven) I had clearly done precisely that.

If it was a 'bad move' to gently say to this list (and you know
thats all I did - no hysteria - noattacks) that the facts over
one Cometa case might be wrong. If it was a 'bad move' to then
go out of my way to try to provide the true facts in a spirit of
cooperation. I own up. I was wicked.

But seriously, if thats your position what are you saying about
this Cometa report ? To me it sounds like - Cometa is right. You
must not make any comment about it if you disagree. If you have
inconevient things like witness testimony that contradicts
Cometa doctrine then you and all your witnesses must be rebuked
because Cometa has to be right.

Thats hardly a glowing advert for this report.

And to think all I tried to do was help a French journalist. I
thought that was being a good citizen. Next time I will remember
and tell the reporter to take a long walk off a short pier and
no doubt get praised to high heaven for being so unhelpful. The
world has gone mad. Well some of it has.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 4

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 17:44:50 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 18:57:49 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:13:38 -0500
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFOUpdates <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, 02 Nov 99 10:16:25 PST

 >>>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 06:22:01 -0500
 >>>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, 01 Nov 99 10:14:11 PST


Andy,


 >The more we probe, the more we discover Jerry! Whilst I can't,
 >and wouldn't, say that any case I investigate will always be
 >resolved either immediately or in time I find your
 >reasoning most puzzling. There is no reason whatsoever why
 >_all_ UFO cases, no matter who they are investigated by,
 >are not resolvable, sooner or later.

An unfalsifiable hypothesis if I ever heard one.  No matter how
much investigation into a case, however elusive a conventional
explanation, you can always say that it really is solvable.  With
your mindset, why even bother to investigate?  Hear a case and
just say, there _must_ be a mundane explanation, so why bother
to lift a finger?  That may be something, but it isn't science.

 >Seems to me you are actively _wanting_ a residue of cases to
 >remain unexplained, because as long as the 'mystery' surrounding
 >UFOs continues so will the circus we call ufology and its
 >attached benefits to the self-styled ring masters.

Ah, when logic and reason fail you, you always bring in the ad
hominem, don't you?

 >>>The evidence on which the nonufological case for ETI rests is
 >>>inferential and reasonable, and most scientists outside astro-
 >>>or exobiology deem it perfectly legitimate, since a lot of
 >>>science deals with things that aren't proved to be true but for
 >>>various reasons are considered possible or likely enough to
 >>>merit inquiry with a decent chance for payoff.  My point was
 >>>simply that no direct evidence outside ufology exists.  In the
 >>>SETI context, of course, direct evidence would be a signal of
 >>>indisputably ETI origin.

 >We almost agree Jerry. The difference being that no evidence for

 >ETI exists _within_ ufology.

How do you know?  The ETH, right or wrong, is one reasonable
reading of the UFO evidence.  Sometimes I suspect that in
retrospect, future historians of science will look back at our
time's pathological resistance to the phenomenonn and wonder why
we weren't able to figure out as long ago as, say, the
Nash-Fortenberry case that something extraordinary was going on.

 >>>Incidentally, here's a prediction: If SETI continues without
 >>>success, at some point some of its scientists, probably not of
 >>>the current generation but almost certainly the next, will urge
 >>>a reexamination of the UFO phenomenon for evidence of ET
 >>>visitation.

 >Maybe. But equally 'some' scientists will still argue against ET
 >vistitation based on the lack of evidence available.

I'm not much impressed with the depth of ufological knowledge
exhibited by anti-UFO scientists.  I recently read a soon-to-be-
published SETI book which happened to contain a chapter on UFOs.
It consisted essentially of two interviews with Phil Klass and
Paul Kurtz, plus the author's IFO sighting.  You can call this
something, but you can't call it science.  All too typical, sad
to say.

 >>>As for your statement that "all the evidence which has been
 >>>resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin," this is
 >>>historically false and even ludicrous.  Not even the Condon
 >>>Committee, with all the ill will in the world, could
 >>>substantiate that bizarre allegation.

 >Hang on! Does this mean that some evidence, which has been
 >resolved has a non-mundane UFO origin? This is what you
 >seem to be saying Jerry. We're all ears. What is this resolved
 >evidence which is not of mundane origin?

Read the UFO literature, guy, if it's not too much trouble.  The
answer's there.  You can wave your hands all you want, but the
mystery and the puzzling cases aren't going to go away. Where is
James McDonald, now that we need him more than ever?

 >>>I guess you've lost me there.  If you're interested in reading
 >>>me actual scientific work on the connection between the ETI
 >>>search and the UFO phenomenon, you could read Edward Ashpole's
 >>>book and also Michael D. Swords's illuminating essays on the
 >>>subject.  My point remains: the ETH, right or wrong, is a
 >>>perfectly respectable scientific approach to the UFO phenomenon.
 >>>You have yet to demonstrate otherwise.

 >OK let's re-frame it. The ETH may be a respectable, scientific
 >approach to the UFO phenomenon, albeit one driven by belief and
 >culture rather than evidence. But as yet it has proved futile and
 >non-productive.

Words, words, words, nothing more.  Well, something more: I see
you waving your hands wildly.  I'm not impressed, I'm afraid.

 >I wrote

 >>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.

 >and you replied

 >>>Stop speaking in cliches, Andy, and stop setting up strawmen.
 >>>Can you neoskeptics do no better?  If anyone who has ever said
 >>>that unsolved UFOs _must_ be of ET origin, it is not I, so drop
 >>>it, okay?  I simply stated that the hypothesis that some
 >>>unsolved UFOs may turn out to be of ET origin is defensible.

 >I simply can't go with this Jerry - your belief in ET or lack of
 >it notwithstanding. How on earth can the belief in something we
 >do not know exists be even a possible explanation for something
 >we can't even identify? I know you've had problems understanding
 >my sentences before (hey, I'm from Yorkshire, we've only just
 >forsaken woad and Odin), so please roll the previous one round
 >on your mind a bit.

Take that argument to the SETI crowd.  You're up against some
formidable opposition, way beyond mere ufologists.  I suggest
you take your complaints about "belief" in ET to the Planetary
Society.  All I ask is that I get to watch you getting chewed
up.

 >>>There's a whole list of classic cases in my encyclopedia.
 >>>That's why they're there.  Go look at the table of contents if
 >>>you can't figure out what might constitute a "classic" case.
 >>>Since you seem confused, let me clarify it for you: I'm not
 >>>talking about classic IFO cases (there are, of course, such; the
 >>>Mantell incident is one such). I am talking classic UFO cases.

 >That's not good enough. I'm afraid just by being in your
 >excellent book and designated as such doesn't make a case
 >'classic'. Your woeful lack of knowledge of the UK UFO scene and
 >what constitutes classic cases here is obvious. And again I
 >would ask -  are you really saying that 'the best UFO cases tend
 >to stay unsolved over time' or that UFO cases become  'best
 >cases' by dint of them being unsolved over a period of time
 >Jerry? Is a case only judged as 'classic' after a period of
 >time, when it has remained unsolved?

Hilarious, this litany (we also heard it from Dave Clarke)
about my "woeful lack of knowledge of the UK UFO scene."
In fact, I know a lot more about it than most American ufologists
and have a number of friends and associates there. I've been
interacting with British ufologists since the 1960s.  I was writing
for FSR as early as 1965 and corresponding with Bowen, then
with the Magonia crowd, with which I was then in intellectual
sympathy.  I've known Jenny Randles since the early '80s.  And so
on.  I have read a fair amount of British UFO literature, as my library
will attest.

What strikes me is the arrogance here: you equate being
unconvinced by your (and other Brit skeptics') arguments with my
being ignorant of them.  You've got it exactly wrong.   It's
precisely because I know about them that I am so unpersuaded by
them.  After this current round with you and Dave, I must say I
am less convinced than ever.  You guys are always going on about
the influence of "culture" upon "beliefs."  Apparently you
exclude yourself from those influences, while their effect on
you two looks blindingly apparent to me and, I suspect, to many
other listfolk.  No one in the larger culture will ever accuse
you guys of being heretics. Clarke even boasts about the
approval he has attained within the academic culture of the UK.
Any skeptic would happily pat you on the head, and no newspaper
will ever write a story ridiculing your very safe, unthreatening
analysis of the UFO phenomenon.

Tell me what in your view are the classic cases, then, Andy.
Enlighten us as to which cases you personally regard as the most
important, the most puzzling, and the most potentially
important.  I look forward to it.  If you think any such exist,
of course.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 4 Nov 1999 17:10:54 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 07:43:54 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:21:22 -0000
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:33:40 -0500
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Well Jenny, let me be the first, and I hope not the only, person
to post my regrets at your leaving this weird "scene." I read of
your frustrations both on this list and on the UFOR elist. News
of that other person with my name bashing your good name has
filled me with much angst as has news of your frustrations with
certain updates listers.

How people can't see or understand your straight-forwardness
about your position is beyond me - some kind of strange
linguistic gap perhaps; tho I suspect it has more to do with
belief systems.

I had hoped to see you in a continuing dialogue with some of the
better posters to this and the other list. I particularly wanted
to ask you if you still held some of your views on the
validity/relevance of Sheldrake's morphic field concepts as you
expressed them in your books Beyond Explanation and Mind
Monsters.

But alas, I suspect you will stand fast to your last UpDates
post which bid the bunkum farewell. Oh well, I will watch with
much anticipation the developments at you and your colleagues
new endeavor at UFOIN.

Perhaps someday you will return to these waters if they ever
become less mucked up by the type of interchanges which led you
to depart.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:12:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 07:51:05 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 10:52:51 PST

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >Hilarious.  Take it up with Swords, guy. I'm forwarding your
 >message to him.  Knowing him and knowing you, I have no
[did you mean "an"
here?] idea who
 >knows the relevant science better.  Sorry, but it isn't you.

<snip>

Peter, Jerry, List,

"Knowing" the relevant science better is only part of the issue.
For example, if you assume that both sides of the global warming
argument know the same science equally well, that still does
nothing for the layman trying to determine who's _really_ right.
What scientists do is interpret data and evidence and argue
their case therefrom.

And so it pretty much is with extraterrestrial life. Even if we
assume that Swords knows the relevant science better than
Brookesmith, that doesn't necessarily render Swords's
interpretation of same absolutely correct and irrefutable. It
remains one interpretation among several.

These sorts of arguments go on today within almost every field
of science, from plant taxonomy (new discoveries this week!) to
cosmology (ditto!).

As devout evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould are constantly in the
position of reminding us (laymen and peers alike) that,
dadgummit, when we say _random_, we mean random, not
half-random, not two-thirds random, but random, really,
_really_, random.

If Swords wants to argue against true randomness (and the role
chance cosmic cataclysms play in determining what species
survive and thrive and which don't), he's perfectly free to. But
if Swords knows the relevant science better than a Brookesmith,
what's to stop a critic from saying that a Gould or a Dawkins
knows the same relevant science better than a Swords?

And nothing against the latter, btw, who I know and like.

To beat a dead horse, who knows the abduction phenomenon (and
relevant science) better -- Hopkins, Jacobs or Mack? One's an
artist, another a historian, and the third a bona fide
psychiatrist. Most outsiders would probably assume that Mack's
view of the phenomenon is more correct because he arguably knows
the relevant science better if only by default, neither Hopkins
nor Jacobs being a scientist. Yet I doubt you support Mack's
view on abductions over that of Jacobs or Hopkins. And there's
always the interpretation of Leo Sprinkle -- another bona fide
Ph.D.

Why is that? Presumably because you believe (or think -- hey,
I'm easy going) that their assessment of the situation is better
than his and Sprinkle's -- in which case supposed superior
knowledge of the relevant science ain't necessarily got nothin'
to do with it.

Anyway, I hope Swords does respond. Keep us posted.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                                Re: 'Lasers'

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 19:05:09 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 07:59:01 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Lasers'


 >Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 02:02:17 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: 'Lasers'

 >The ball of light just "grew" right on top of me, and then
 >shrunk, very smoothly and noisless. I know this will sound
 >weird, but I was out looking at the sky because I felt the
 >urgent need to go out and do so, knowing that something
 >interesting was about to happen. I even woke up from bed to go
 >out. I like to remember that as a nova, or some similar cosmic
 >phenomenon, but I have no clue what it was.

 >I have two other stories, but they get even stranger and I don't
 >want to get the ussual flames. I just want to know if pen lasers
 >are strong enough to hit the clouds...

Hi Eduardo.

Now that you aroused my curiousity, please tell me more about
your other stories.

There may be explanations for the stories you have already
shared with us. Can you tell me a few things first, such as how
large the ball of light "grew" over you and the country(ies)
where these observations took place?

Thanks.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:23:58 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:02:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


Regarding:

 >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!

Dave wrote:

 >>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>

 >>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.


Dave,

An important realisation re those 'radiation' readings is that
the 'levels' were not only minuscule, comparative readings taken
elsewhere at the time produced little variance and further
proved this aspect was of no significance whatsoever.

It seems no-one had previously spotted that the proof was
actually contained in Lt. Col. Halt's microcassette recording of
his 'investigation'.

As I explained earlier this year:

I believe this issue can be finally laid to rest by analysing
what was recorded on Col. Halt's microcassette. Using the
hand-held recorder, he documented his team's investigation of
the area where some believed 'ground indentations' had been
found in the forest [subsequent to a recent 'UFO' report].

Extracting all of the readings, the location [L] is first given,
followed by the Geiger counter measurement [M]:

[L] "approaching the area within about 25, 30 feet"

[M] "just minor clicks"


[L] at the 'impressions'

[M] "about third, fourth mark"


[L] "second pod indentation"

[M] "this one's dead"


[L] "the third one"

[M] "some residual - a little pulse"


[L] "center of the area"

[M] "best deflection of the needle I've seen yet"
"we're getting rad at half a millirem"
"up towards seven...just jumped up towards seven tenths"
"seven units, let's call it, on the point five scale"


[L] "getting in close to one pod"

[M] "up to two, three units deflection"
"still not going above three or four units"
"picking up more, though - more frequent"


[L] "on the tree...from on the side facing the suspected landing
site"

[M] "four clicks max"


[L] the other side of the tree, facing away from the 'landing
site'

[M] "there's no clicks whatsoever"
"...maybe one or two..."


[L] "some type of abrasion or something in the ground" [in the
'center' area]

[M] "we get a high radioactive reading... about, er... deflection
of, er, two to three, maybe four, depending on the point of it"


[L] "heading about 110, 120 degrees from site out through to the
clearing now"

[M] "still getting a reading on the meter, about two clicks"
"needle's jumped, three to four clicks, getting stronger"


[L] "just crossed a creek"

[M] "getting three good clicks on the meter"


[L] "in the center of the [farmer's] field"

[M] "negative readings"


[L] "at the far side of the second farmer's field"

[M] "picking up slight readings, four or five clicks now, on the
meter"


Was the far side of the farmer's field therefore much more
'radioactive' than the centre?

According to the levels being 'detected', it must have been.

At 'five clicks', the field was also more 'radioactive' there
than the 'indentations' and more so even than the trees where
Nick Pope believes the 'trace evidence' peaked, the highest
reading for both being confirmed on tape as 'four clicks'.

His 'hot spot' in the centre of the 'indentations' produced "up
towards seven" clicks, however, the farmer's field registered
"four or five", a difference of, say, 'up to two' clicks, a
minute variance between readings which were already so small as
to be inconsequential.

I hope this finally dissuades Nick's persistence that the clicks
on Sgt. Monroe Neville's Geiger counter were remotely
significant, or as Nick once wrote, "the most tangible proof
that something extraordinary happened there".

Otherwise, he is challenged to offer the requisite explanation
why a farmer's field in rural England was only marginally less
'radioactive' than the purported nearby landing site of our
extraterrestrial visitors.
[End]


Of course, Halt and his team were using a Geiger counter whilst
they investigated later to be acknowledged 'spooked' fears that
a previously reported 'UFO' had, for some reason, 'come back'!

They had no idea that the original 'UFO scare' witnesses had,
pursued Orfordness lighthouse's beacon for, incredibly, a stated
_two_miles_, through Rendlesham forest in the darkness before
recognising their faux pas - at least so far as that particular
'UFO'.

Halt apparently wasn't aware of anything other than a previously
claimed 'UFO' sighting because he didn't interview the original
'UFO witnesses' until several days later.


As we have intrinsically identical 'radiation levels' from
fields of cattle dung, it's perhaps sardonic testimony to the
_indisputable_fact_ that this previously cited 'important
physical evidence' of an alien landing is the proverbial load of
bullsh..!


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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

               UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:07:36 -0500
Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:13:38 -0500
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFOUpdates <updates@globalserve.net>

 ><snip>

 >>>The evidence on which the nonufological case for ETI rests is
 >>>inferential and reasonable, and most scientists outside astro-
 >>>or exobiology deem it perfectly legitimate, since a lot of
 >>>science deals with things that aren't proved to be true but for
 >>>various reasons are considered possible or likely enough to
 >>>merit inquiry with a decent chance for payoff.  My point was
 >>>simply that no direct evidence outside ufology exists.  In the
 >>>SETI context, of course, direct evidence would be a signal of
 >>>indisputably ETI origin.

 >We almost agree Jerry. The difference being that no evidence for
 >ETI exists _within_ ufology.


You know, I begin to think UpDates needs a FAQ.  How many times
have I seen this statement made, in one guise or another, and
and then rebutted on this list?

Folks like Mark Cashman and others have responded to such remarks
time and again with good solid answers (hundreds of ground traces
hundreds of sightings by qualified pilots, etc, etc.), and yet the
remark still returns and returns, like weeds in the spring.

We need a FAQ.  And this should be item #1, with a good solid
answer in response (Perhaps Mark would do the honors one last
time?) so that folks who know better can just point at it
instead of wasting endless time and energy repeating answers.
Maybe some kind soul would volunteer to post the FAQ here and
thus to The UFO UpDates Archive at Ufomind.com, so its always
around as a reference.

The FAQ should contain only statements that could be answered
factually (not opinions).  I think the above example qualifies.

Abbreviated UpDates FAQ Example:

: #1 Is there evidence? Yes.
:
: #2 What evidence?
:    - ground traces [include summary & web page refs]
:    - electromagnetic effects [include summary & web page refs]
:    - qualified pilot sightings [include summary & web page refs]
:    - etc.
:
: #3 Is there proof?  No.
:
: [etc etc.]


Just my 2 cents from out in the weeds ...

-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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:45:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:09:36 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 10:52:51 PST


 >I have no idea who knows the relevant science better.
 >Sorry, but it isn't you.

Is this an example of tolerating (heaven forfend we should lapse
into saying promulgating) ambiguity?

But, um, er, how, if you do not know, then *do* you know it is
not I who has the superior knowledge? Or is this what passes for
humor in the universe of the ambiguously tolerant? Enquiring
minds, I fear, may not want to know.

 >The caricature you make of Swords does you no credit,
 >but it is, alas, characteristic of your approach.

Mmmmm. I quoted the man's own words. This habit is, as far as is
practicable, characteristic of my approach, both as journalist
and as awkward living human who persists in existing. What is
sauce for Bill English is sauce for Prof Swords, is it not? And
if Swords's own words damn him, somehow *I* am the caricaturist,
already?

What is characteristic of *your* approach, to the intense
amusement of us groundlings, is that you let sail past the point
on the top of your head++ this crux: that John Rimmer remarked
on Swords's anti-Darwinian tendency, and I addressed your rash
denial of that with Swords's own sadly deathless prose which, to
the amazement of all and sundry and perhaps the embarrassment of
your good self, happens to confirm John's summary.

You promote Swords endlessly here and elsewhere as if he were
the last word in scientific wisdom on ETI and the ETH. Why then
don't you defend him? Can you defend him? How much do you really
know about science, Jerry?

Answers on a gnat's posterior to:

Persimmon D. Muskyfragrance
Purveyor of Hilarities
Disrespector of Conventions

++ I take a certain pleasure in deplying this phrase, as it is a
rare instance of a real funny from Jerome, and he coined it
while accusing Ed Stewart of making ad-hominem attacks (on
someone or the other, but probably the tropical case of amour
propre known as J. Clark). Ergo it cannot possibly be in itself
ad hominem. The rewrite man/sub-editor in Jerome will no doubt
relish the subtlety of my use of the hyphen in this note.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:10:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:21:24 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 15:51:40 PST


 >Patient and gentle listfolk:

Like cunnilingus, pointing out the obvious is dark and lonely
work, but someone has to do it. Jerry, could you please refrain
from this patronising apostrophe? Few on this list are either
patient or gentle. You among the least of all, IMO. Lay off.

 >[Michael Swords is] one of the brightest people I've met
 >in this field

This may tell us all something about the field, and more than
what it tells us about Prof Swords.

 >in my observation those who unwise enought [sic] to take
 >him on in debate tend to lose.

Guffaw. Keep observing, folks. Keep them eyes peeled.

best wishes
Playpen D. Molestation
Cuddly Bear








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:45:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:27:00 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:55:29 +0100 (MET)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

 >Thank your for your studied contribution to this debate. I have
 >to correct you here on the uniqueness of the European growth
 >spurt in technology and science, however.

Thankyou for the appreciative note & tone.

 >Centuries ago similar periods of fast technological progress
 >have happened in places. In Sumeria (present day Iraq, thousands
 >of years BC), (roughly 400 - 300 BC), China (roughly between 0
 >and 500 AD) and the Arab world (preceding the European
 >Renaissance).

True, but. The Sumerian leap was technological in kind and
possibly due to the invention of writing. However, no scientific
(sub)culture, in the sense that Bacon, Lavoisier or even Spratt
would recognize the term, arose in Sumerian society. As I
understand it, Chinese politics prevented the development of a
similar culture. I confess I don't know why Arab discoveries in
mathematics, astronomy and (al)chemistry came to a dead end or
fell on stony ground. The fact remains that it was only in
Europe that a 'truly' scientific culture arose. I'm not the
first to suspect that Christianity and the Reformation had
something to do with that, and it was surely an accident of fate
that  independence of thought, political tolerance, a very
subtle and peculiar class system, huge material resources, and
scholarly knowledge happened to combine in one place, namely
Britain, to produce the symbiosis between practicality and
science that we call the Industrial Revolution.\

Extract almost any related aspect of British society (a product
of history) and geology from circa 1640 CE on, and you will not
have that revolution. We take it for granted now but, seen
against the sum of human history what we enjoy (more or less)
now is an anomaly. Teilhard de Chardin saw this as proof of
God's intervention in, and care for, human affairs. I see it as
the product of chance, and as such unpredictable. To presume
that such an accident of fate has happened elsewhere in the
Universe - and consequent upon still more chancy repetitions of
biological events (ie some kind of parallel to human evolution)
- strikes me as a loser's bet.

Randomness, as many a study has shown, is not an intuitively
easy concept to grasp or absorb. I may win millions on the
British national lottery, of course. But no prior result is a
guide to tonight's result. Twice a week, the odds of my losing
are 13 million to one ON. There are billions upon billions of
orders of magnitude of chance events more than that that went
into producing you and me, let alone the human race as such. So,
as in choosing lottery numbers, our existence here is no guide
to the likelihood out there, let alone the presence right here,
of ETs.

ETI, per se? Sure, possible. Likely? I'm not so sure, although
I'm aware of cluster effects and the like in statistics. So,
regarding the ETH and UFOs, I think it's more reasonable than
not to take the null hypothesis as one's starting point. I know
you (Henny) feel otherwise about some UFO events, e.g. the
events in Belgium circa 1990, about which we have done some
skirmishing here in the past. But my objections to your case are
rooted in quite wide-ranging opposing conclusions
about/interpretations of the fundamental nature of the Universe.

Old cracked record: I don't really mind if UFOs are ET or not.
Pragmatic reality will show whether ETs, should they even be
around us, represent a threat or not. Meanwhile, pending proof of
their presence, they remain an abstraction. And meanwhile too the
most interesting thing about UFOs & 'aliens' to me is how people
have responded to reports & experiences of their *presumed*
presence. Hence I drifted into the PSH camp, a loose collation of
failed roues [e acute accent there], liminal souls and successful
drunks in various stages of middle-aged decay or rebirth, whose
one saving grace to a man or woman for having become entranced by
the labyrinth of ufology is their sense of humor. Some people get
quite cross about this last bit.

best wishes
Polymath D. Mousegnaw
Failed Tragedian







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:21:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 09:39:48 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:13:38 -0500
 >From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFOUpdates <updates@globalserve.net>>

 >There is no reason whatsoever why
 >_all_ UFO cases, no matter who they are investigated by,
 >are not resolvable, sooner or later.

Fascinating! How, Andy, can you prove this statement? Can you
even claim that it's a scientific proposition? How could it be
falsified?

I'd say you're stating an article of faith.

 >
 >Seems to me you are actively _wanting_ a residue of cases to
 >remain unexplained, because as long as the 'mystery'
surrounding
 >UFOs continues so will the circus we call ufology and its
 >attached benefits to the self-styled ring masters.

Jerry could just as well say that you actively want all cases to
be solved. How does either statement -- yours, or the one I'm
imagining him making -- contribute to reasoned debate?

 >>>As for your statement that "all the evidence which has been
 >>>resolved so far has had a mundane, IFO, origin," this is
 >>>historically false and even ludicrous.  Not even the Condon
 >>>Committee, with all the ill will in the world, could
 >>>substantiate that bizarre allegation.

 >Hang on! Does this mean that some evidence, which has been
 >resolved has a non-mundane UFO origin? This is what you
 >seem to be saying Jerry. We're all ears. What is this resolved
 >evidence which is not of mundane origin?

Jerry's statement only means that some cases haven't been
resolved. No mundane explanation has been found for them.

 >OK let's re-frame it. The ETH may be a respectable, scientific
 >approach to the UFO phenomenon, albeit one driven by belief and
 >culture rather than evidence. But as yet it has proved futile and
 >non-productive.

Why, I wonder, are other UFO hypotheses not equally driven by
belief and culture? Belief and culture play a large part in all
thinking.

But of course what you're apparently saying here is that your
views are purely objective, driven only by evidence, while the
ETH is driven only by belief and culture, and not at all by
evidence.

May I urge you to be a little more modest? Just debate the
evidence. Don't resort to ad hominen attacks on those you
disagree with -- which is what you're doing when you question
Jerry's motives, telling him why he thinks what he thinks.

I could play your game, and tell you that you're terrified of
the ETH. (In my view, we have cultural and belief-oriented
problems with the notion that aliens are visiting, problems that
lead to all kinds of irrationality, both from believers and
skeptics. See

http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo/Contents/Who_s_Afraid_of_UFOs_/who_s_afraid_of_ufo
s_.htm

But why should I accuse you of that? What good would it do? How
would it contribute to reasonable debate?

 >No Jerry - even the scientists are working from a position of belief
 >and hope here. Just because life exists on earth, and just because
 >forms of life _may_ exist elsewhere _does not mean_ that any
 >ointelligence has ever arisen, least of all an intelligence which
 >disports itself in the fashion (fashions many if you read the
 >literature) which our putative ET brethren are alleged to do. Just
 >wishful, religious thinking I'm afraid. Show me your evidence to the
 >contrary please Jerry.

Sounds like an argument you ought to be having with Frank Drake,
Jill Tarter, or other SETI scientists. Wishful, religious
thinkers, all of them!

 >How on earth can the belief in something we
 >do not know exists be even a possible explanation for something
 >we can't even identify? I know you've had problems understanding
 >my sentences before (hey, I'm from Yorkshire, we've only just
 >forsaken woad and Odin), so please roll the previous one round
 >on your mind a bit.

The problem isn't that you're from Yorkshire, or that Jerry
doesn't take you seriously. The problem is that you don't write
clearly enough to hold your own in a serious discussion.

What could your sentence possibly mean? "How on earth can the
belief in something we do not know exists be even a possible
explanation for something
we can't even identify?"

It's obvious, to start with, that things "we do not know exist"
are routinely offered as explanations of scientific problems. The
orbits of Uranus and Neptune (to give a classic example) turned
out not to be what anyone expected. Astronomers therefore
postulated a then-unknown planet, whose existence -- if it could
be proved -- might explain those orbits. They didn't have to
prove that the planet existed before forming this theory.
Similarly, ufologists don't have to prove that aliens exist
before they theorize that some UFOs might be alien craft.

But the problems with your sentence go deeper than that. "How on
earth can the belief in something we do not know exists be even a
possible explanation for something we can't even identify?"
Essentially, Andy, this is just rhetoric. You've been seduced by
the sound and fury of the parallel construction "something we do
not know exists...something we can't even identify." That's all
your sentence is about -- the juxtaposition of those two phrases.
Because if we look at the literal sense of the words, what you've
written has very nearly no meaning at all.

Let me try to render it as a series of simple steps, from
premises to conclusion, with everything stated in very simple
English. I think it would come out something like this:
"Scientists don't know whether aliens exist. Ufologists don't
know what UFOs are. Therefore aliens can't be offered as an
explanation for UFOs."

But that's complete nonsense. The two premises have nothing to do
with each other, and nothing to do with the conclusion. You might
as well write, "Cats chase mice. Edison invented the phonograph.
Therefore cats can't make phonograph records."

The ETH, on the other hand, can easily be stated in basic
English. "People report seeing unidentified aircraft. If these
reports are correct, then these aircraft must come from
somewhere. They don't resemble any aircraft known on earth.
Therefore we can theorize that they come from someplace other
than earth. Scientists have theorized that intelligent beings
live on other planets. Perhaps, then, these unidentified
aircraft come from other planets, piloted by the intelligent
beings that live there."

This is a completely unremarkable series of reasoned steps. It
doesn't prove that UFOs are alien. It simply offers a
hypothesis. The reasoning might, in the end, not correspond to
reality. The reports, for instance, might not prove to be
correct, in which case the hypothesis is unnecessary. Or we
might learn (as Tim Matthews already insists) that the unknown
aircraft really do come from earth. Again the ETH wouldn't be
necessary. Finally, science might definitively prove that there
aren't any aliens. Then the hypothesis would clearly be wrong.

I think, Andy, that you object to the ETH because you think the
first of these circumstances applies -- you think that the
reports of unknown craft aren't correct. If that's what you
think, then of course you reject the ETH. Who could blame you?
But to think that the ETH is somehow inherently unreasonable --
that just won't wash. To say Jerry has fallen prey to some kind
of wishful religious thinking -- that won't wash, either. Your
real dispute with him is over the purported UFO evidence, or in
other words about whether there really are any UFO reports that
don't have earthly explanations. So you should be arguing with
him about the details of that (citing specific details of
specific cases). You shouldn't waste our time by stating your
belief as if it were an unchallenged fact. And you shouldn't
insult him by questioning his motives for holding his own view.

If I'm wrong, restate your sentence as a series of reasoned,
logical steps, as I tried to do, so we can see what you think it
means.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                             'Into The Unknown'?

From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 23:02:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 09:46:12 -0500
Subject: 'Into The Unknown'?


Request for Information

Subject: Into the Unknown
Source:  Discovery Channel
Date:      4 Nov 1999

Hello everyone,

Tonite I was watching 'Into The Unknown'and they had a segment
on UFOs and were interviewing Don Ecker.

They presented a section about a ham radio operater intercepting
a shuttle transmission and played the transmission - Quote:
"Houston, we still have the alien spacecraft under observation".
They named the astronaut.

Did anyone else see this? Who was the astronaut? Has anyone
heard of this before? Is this old news and I have been in a
vacum?


Dan
UFO Folklore !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

Dan's Magic in Michigan !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/magician

WetSet Diving Vacations !
http://www.wetset.com

Czars Nightclub !
http://www.czars.com

Dantronix !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/testwave.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:59:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:08:24 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


D.C. wrote:

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:47 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 ><Snip>

 >>At the end of the day, it is in Georgina's interest to
 >>perpetuate a mystery from this case - if there was no
 >>mystery, there is no book contract, no lucrative lecture
 >>tour, TV appearances, fame, money, etc.

Hi  All,

Just to congratulate you, David, on another excellent article
for Quest International, this time in the 'Unopened Files'.

I think the picture of yourself was to it's usual high standard
and I am always happy to see you grace the pages of Quest
International despite what some of your colleagues may feel
about the Magazine & Lectures that Quest have on the go.

Also seeming that Jenny & Andy have ignored my last post here is
the question again.

Please will you post, to UpDates, a list of good UFO cases, you
are now referring to as 'IFOs' for all 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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:07:12
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:13:26 -0500
Subject: Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In


Source: 'alt.alien.visitors'.

An English translation follows the Rumanian text.

I have spell-checked the English one.

Stig

***

From: AK&G <ursu@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: UFO in Romania
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 16:51:29 GMT


Quote from the Rumanian press:

OZN LA PITESTI!

Obiectul nu a fost detectat de radare; MApN a solicitat o copie
a casetei pentru identificarea discului zburator

Vineri dimineata, la ora 5.00, un tinar din Pitesti a observat
pe cer un obiect luminos ciudat. Alexandru Stroe se afla in
bucataria apartamentului sau si, cind a vrut sa inchida
fereastra, a vazut pe cerul instelat un disc care raspindea o
lumina puternica.

Privind atent, a observat ca obiectul statea nemiscat pe
directia sud-est, la un unghi de aproximativ 45 de grade. "Mi-a
atras atentia imediat pentru ca nu mai vazusem asa ceva. Arata
ca o stea, dar mult mai mare. Lumina foarte puternic si a stat
nemiscat mai mult de o ora", ne-a declarat Stroe. Avind in casa
o camera video performanta, el a reusit sa filmeze discul
luminos cu un teleobiectiv.

Pe caseta video se vede ca obiectul zburator este rotund, iar pe
suprafata din centrul lui se pot observa niste elemente care se
misca neregulat. Obiectul seamana cu o antena parabolica uriasa
- ar putea fi un satelit, dar este inexplicabil faptul ca lumina
foarte puternic.

Ministerul Apararii Nationale, prin Biroul de presa, ne-a
comunicat ca aviatia nu a avut nici un fel de misiune vineri
dimineata, cind a fost filmat obiectul zburator.

Nici radarele romanesti nu au detectat corpul strain. MApN a
solicitat o copie a casetei, urmind ca specialistii armatei sa
studieze ciudatul obiect filmat.

DANIEL

The object was not detected by the radars; Rumanian DoD asked
for a copy of the videocassette for further investigation in a
attempt to identify the provenience of the object.

Last Friday morning at 5.00 AM a young guy from Pitesti noticed
on the morning sky a shiny, strange object. Alexandru Stroe was
in it's apartment's kitchen when, willing to shut off the open
window, saw, profiled neatly on the still full of stars morning
sky a disk-shaped object that was spreading around an unusually
strong light. Intrigued, he watched attentively the object that
was floating into the air, standing still at south-est, under an
angle of 45 degrees "My attention was kept right away, because
I'd never seen anything alike. It was like a star, but much
larger though. It was radiating a very strong, strange light,
and stayed still for more than an hour" - declared the young
man. Having on site a performance video cam, he succeeded to
catch on film the shiny disk using tele-lenses. On the video
footage it can be seen that the object is round and on it's
central area there were some erratic moving elements. In all,
the object was looking alike a giant satellite dish - first he
thought it might be a satellite for good but soon decided it
couldn't fit under that category because of the very strong
emitted light and the fact it was immobile.

The Rumanian DoD (MApN) through it's Press Dept. declared that
the Army of the Air and the Civil Aviation had no plane in that
area Friday morning, at the time the flying object was recorded.
None of the Rumanian radar stations were able to detect the
strange, unidentified object. DoD asked the owner of the filmed
footage for a copy of the cassette to submit it to the military
specialists in order to study and try to retrieve more
information about the object.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 07:29:25 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:22:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:45:56 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 11:45:48 -0500
 >Subject: Gravity Waves Control


 >>From: Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:01:08 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 07:09:35 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >>>From: Moderator UFO UpDates (Our Errol)
 >>>Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:43:40 -0500
 >>>Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:43:40 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control

Dear Errol,

Your hunt for the old story was first class! That is research.


Eduardo Gomez said that the last sentence surprised me.

 >After more than a decade of reading for the first time the book
 >"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan, I bought the (sadly condensed) current
 >edition to read it again, and in Chapter XII, page 246, he
 >writes:

 >"There may be other methods of communication that have
 >substantial merit:

 >...optical or infrared lasers; pulsed neutrinos; modulated
 >gravity waves..."

Scott R. Caput said:

 >>This is just an idle observation, so bear with me.

 >>Do any of you out there recall the story (America's Most
 >>Wanted/Unsolved Mysteries) of the bass player (I cannot recall
 >>his name from Iron Butterfly and his mysterious disappearance?


Errol posted this:

 >>>07-09-95 (22:06)
 >>>  To: ALL
 >>>From: Rick Trentham
 >>>Subj: FTL Radio?
 >>>Conf: F-UFO

 >>>Kramer, who with Ron Bushy, was in the rock group 'Iron
 >>>Butterfly', is considered to be a computer genius, and has a
 >>>backgound working in aerospace and defense projects, including
 >>>work on the guidance system for the MX missile.

 >>>It was speculated that his disappearance might be related to a
 >>>project he and his father had worked on for the past thirty
 >>>years.

 >>>According to comments made by his family and business partner,
 >>>the project he was trying to patent involved "mega-mathematics"
 >>>concerning transmitting electronic data through computer systems
 >>>AT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEEDS, AND BY RADIO SIGNALS TO OTHER
 >>>PLANETS.

 >>>According to the response given by Kramer's family to Phil's
 >>>question about it taking eight minutes for light to travel from
 >>>the sun to the earth, Kramer's development would make it
 >>>possible for electronic signals to cover the same distance "in
 >>>less than a second," and would permit communication "with other
 >>>planets, if there's anyone out there." It was stated that this
 >>>technique would affect all current and emerging technologies,
 >>>and since foul play has not been ruled out in Kramer's
 >>>disappearance, it is suspected that it may have something to do
 >>>with his project and its potential impact on other firms.

 >>>If true, this project brings to mind the April first 'New
 >>>Scientist' report about possible FTL data transmissions.  If
 >>>Kramer has developed an FTL radio, or at least laid solid
 >>>theoretical groundwork for one, it might tend to explain why the
 >>>SETI Project has come up dry so far, as well as his potential
 >>>disappearance, if you postulate alien contact, government cover
 >>>up, etc.

 >>>Don Allen, Kurt Lochner, & others on the echo might wish to
 >>>check into this report to determine if the project really does
 >>>involve FTL technology, or if the statements made were the
 >>>result of nontechnical persons attempting an explanation for
 >>>some other method of speeding up eletronic data transmissions.

 >>>Sincerely,
 >>>Rick Trentham


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia


EBK Researchers,


With great respect to the late Phillip Kramer, the Iron
Butterfly bass player and his fall from grace or should that be
his fall off a cliff. Errols post [Wed, 03 Nov 1999] was most
interesting, article by Rick Trentham 07-09-95.

The original post From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com> [Sun,
31 Oct 1999] & Scott Caput <scaput@shadow.net> [Tue, 02 Nov
1999] should not end simply with Phillip Kramer death. Have
another good look at the above report extractions!

So, with an eye on the fact that I may turn you into a "deep
sleep zombie" due to boredom, I felt that Eduardo Gomez, Scott
R. Caput & Errol post needed an annex.

Life is strange, and with time, old information may become
important information! UFO Time problems are always important to
all UFO researchers. The question you have now computed, is
'what has gravity waves got to do with UFO Time?'

Well nothing directly, well not at this time [joke].

It's to do with a hunt; a hunt for ripples & twists to space and
time. Corkscrew affects that twists light crossing the heavens.
It may tell us that space may not be uniform and that the speed
of light in a vacuum may not always precisely be the same.

All important to researchers, as we look for other possible
avenue of exploration for answers to time travel and that long
connection with UFO and ET visitations... and so on. Got it, I
hope you have. Lets look on.

Now, let me also point out that at present we have never seen a
gravity wave, felt one, measured one and although the
mathematics at our PRA office tells us that they must exist the
whole idea is still a dream, but a dream that we believe will
become a true. This is Nobel Prize stuff, so if you're into it,
mind your research data the ugly scientist lives in this world.

It is this spectrum of gravitational waves, awaiting discovery
that could be used as a powerful new probe of the universe
ripples & twist.

THE QUEST

Most of what we know about the world at large we know through
sight and sound. Our exquisitely sensitive ears allow us to hear
vibrations almost as small as an atom, while our eyes can detect
much less than a millionth of a billionth of a Watt of light
power from a faint star on a moonless night. But we are deaf to
the universe.

Albert Einstein proved 80 years ago that vibrations could indeed
travel through space. They are called "gravity waves", carry
prodigious amounts of energy, travel at the speed of light and
are almost unstoppable.

Detectable through the measurement of infinitesimal vibrations
may let us listen to them.

And that quest is world wide, and you will find the projects
surprisingly advanced.

Our papers on the subject are just amazing and cover many
fields. WARNING if you don't want to be bored then skip this
paragraph - example -> Einstein, MATHEMATICAL RELATIVITY,
CLASSICAL GRAVITATION, Numerical Relativity, Entropy, Quantum
gravity, Quantum Open Systems, Quaternionic quantum field
theory, Space-time phenomenology, Null quasi-spherical gauge,
Dirac symmetry, Killing-Yano tensors, Signature-changing
space-times, Scalar Field Theory, Curved Space, Definition of
Momentum, Riemann Normal Coordinates, Smooth Lattices.

...and so on... oh boy??

THE INSTRUMENTS

Two major types of technology exists that explore the limits of
ultra sensitive measurement:

[1]. Resonant-mass gravitational wave detectors instrumented
with ultra-sensitive displacement sensors:

[2]. Free-mass gravitational wave detectors monitored with large
base line Michelson laser interferometers.

* Best sensitivity is 8 x 10-18 m/sqrt(Hz).


NOW THE UFO/ET CONNECTION?

Well, the UFO/ET connection is a little abstract at present, but
let me tell you a most interesting bit of mathematics and
investigation that may help make your research a little more
exciting.

It was at the Sixth Monash Relativity Conference, held on April
11-12, 1997 at the Department of Mathematics in Monash
University (Clayton), were we heard about the technical issues
involved in gravitational wave detection but also about the
mathematical issues involved in determination of gravitational
wave signatures through the modelling the phenomena.

Other approach facilitates the use of fast Fourier transforms
and spectral representations, and the advantages of spectral
techniques, which have long been exploited in meteorology.

But it was the subject of a paper in the April 21 issue of
Physical Review Letters [Ralston and Nodland - Phys Rev Lett 78
(1997) 3043] that took my attention.

THE PAPER AS A BRIEF

This work may be one of the most fundamental findings about the
universe in recent years. Physicists have dubbed the effect the
"corkscrew effect" for the way it twists light crossing the
heavens. The big news is that perhaps not all space is equal,
for as far back as we can peer in time.

The shocking thing about the papers results is that there seems
to be an absolute axis, a kind of cosmological north star that
orients the universe. We don't really know yet what this axis
represents.

This axis may define a direction of space that somehow
determines how light travels through the universe. In effect,
Ralston and Nodland have discovered a direction in space that is
out of the ordinary or different from all other directions. The
idea that any direction of space is in any way "special" has
long been taboo among astrophysicists.

This work defies the notion that there is no 'up' or 'down' in
space.

 >From Earth, the axis of this orientation runs toward the
constellation Sextans, roughly in the direction of Leo and
Gemini. The other end of the axis points toward the
constellations Aquila and Equuleus.

The team made the finding by studying the polarization
(orientation of electric fields) of radio waves. Light rotates
like a corkscrew as the light travels through space.

The effect is crudely analogous to that of a crystal that twists
light depending on the direction light is travelling through the
crystal.

Astronomers have long known about a somewhat similar effect
called the Faraday effect, which is caused by magnetic fields
between galaxies.

Though the cause of the corkscrew effect remains unknown, in
their paper the team constructs a mathematical theory that
explains the observations. The data indicates that light
actually travels through space at two slightly different speeds.

Whatever the cause, the work could have widespread implications.
Scientists have long theorized that the Big Bang was completely
symmetric. Perhaps it was not a perfect Big Bang, but a Big Bang
with a twist to space and time. Such a twist would be seen today
as a ripple of non-uniformity, perhaps as the axis (an "axis of
anisotropy") represents.

Much more speculatively, the work may provide some of the first
experimental evidence for physicists who have theorized the
existence of other universes. If our universe was asymmetric at
creation, and symmetry in the cosmos is maintained as many
physicists believe, it raises the possibility of the
simultaneous creation of another universe with an opposite
twist.

The work also seems to run counter to the notions that all space
is uniform and that the speed of light in a vacuum is always
precisely the same, key assumptions of the theory of special
relativity.


THE WORLD RESEARCH EFFORT

As I said its a world effort:

LIGO     - US project            : 4 km, 2 detectors.
VIRGO    - French-Italian project: 3 km.
GEO 600  - British-German project: 600 m.
TAMA 300 - Japanese project      : 300 m.
LISA     - NASA Space project    : 5 million km.

But the best hope is with NASA and its LISA project. LISA is one
great bit of work. Go to the web sit and take a look.

http://lisa.jpl.nasa.gov/about.html

The Oz work is just as great but a little terra-nulla, doh! A Simpson fan.

AUSTRALIAN INTERNATIONAL GRAVITATIONAL
RESEARCH CENTRE [AIGRC]

The University of Western Australia, Department of Physics in
partnership with Australian Consortium for Interferometric
Gravitational Astronomy [ACIGA], is establishing the Australian
International Gravitational Observatory [AIGO].

[ IMAGE AIGOsite99.jpg 93K - Aerial view of the AIGO facility ]

GROUP RESEARCH

The AIGRC is a member of ACIGA, which includes The University of
Western Australia, The Australian National University, The
University of Adelaide, CSIRO Lindfield and Monash University.

LOCATION

AIGO is located on the Wallingup Plain, 85km north of Perth. South West of
GINGIN 31:20S 115:54E.

OPEN DATE

Construction was completed in October 1999 and the installation
of equipment and vacuum pipes should be completed by February
2000. Opening is scheduled for 10 March 2000.


This post has been a bit "long winded" but Phillip Kramer, the
Iron Butterfly bass player may have been onto a interesting idea
before it all went bad and he drove off that space-warped cliff.

Or was he driven off?


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
--End-------------------------------------------------->








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:39:26 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:28:28 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: 4 Nov 1999 17:10:54 -0600
 >From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:21:22 -0000
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:33:40 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Well Jenny, let me be the first, and I hope not the only, person
 >to post my regrets at your leaving this weird "scene." I read of
 >your frustrations both on this list and on the UFOR elist. News
 >of that other person with my name bashing your good name has
 >filled me with much angst as has news of your frustrations with
 >certain updates listers.

 >How people can't see or understand your straight-forwardness
 >about your position is beyond me - some kind of strange
 >linguistic gap perhaps; tho I suspect it has more to do with
 >belief systems.

 >Perhaps someday you will return to these waters if they ever
 >become less mucked up by the type of interchanges which led you
 >to depart.

 >SMiles
 >http://www.elfis.net


Hi,

Just let me briefly thank you for these kind words and say this.
I will, I hope, continue to receive UpDates. I will certainly
follow the debates. Nor will I rule out chipping in if
circumstances suggest I can add to a specific discussion -
although I am taking a time out.

Indeed, I have just sent a long reply on UFOIN to a private
posting Jerry Clark made to me (advising he can copy to this
list if he wishes) Basically Jerry was asking how on earth I can
still support this gang of debunkers - a view, he tells, many on
UpDates share.

Much as I respect and admire Jerry (and I truly do - just as I
stand by CUFOS) this illustrates the problem. I find myself not
doing ufology any more but spending most of the day composing
replies to around 100 e mail messages a day - quite a few of
them making allegations that range from the misguided to the
absurd. I dont mind doing that with people whom I know to be
ufologists of merit and distinction and to whom I want to
explain myself. I dont mind doing that in fact to anyone who is
sincerely interested in UFOs (as I suspect most of the UpDates
list to be) and so deserve my time and respect.  But there are
only 24 hours in any day.

What I do mind doing  - at the expense of any real work (as it
has come to be)  - when it is for what are frankly some people
who attach themselves to internet lists like limpets clinging to
the Titanic - determined to make their presence felt whatever
the consequences.

As such I have found that for weeks now I have done little
except reply to posts advising I am a debunker, or a secret
government agent, or a cheat, or a liar, or (most amusing of
all) a money grabbing power hungry maniac. I cannot help people
thinking this. Its their perogative. My natural tendancy is to
respond and offer I hope reasoned argument in return as to why
this is not so - but back come the dogs of war (for a war I am
sure some of them perceive this to be). The result? A week has
gone by, I have done no work, and I have spent hours writing a
never ending stream of rejoinders to the latest in a long line
of people who have taken every chance to attack me since I
joined the Net this summer.

More to the point I am sure that my attempts to reply get
deleted as often as they are read by people quickly bored by the
dispute - meaning that (as I suspect these attackers know) many
merely assume where there is smoke there is fire. So that if
someone accuses me of debunkery, trickery, egomania, secret
government ties and even vile personal deviance that is bringing
ufology into disrepute (and believe me on a UK list people have
even gone that far) - then after a few salvos many must not know
what to believe and some of the mud will surely stick. Someone
doesnt get attacked all the time unless there is something there
deserving of criticism is sure to be a perception some will
reasonably have.

As a consequence, what does one do? I am afraid my answer can
only be stop wasting my time writing defences of my position and
let people believe what they choose to believe. I know that I am
attempting to find answers to these perplexing mysteries that
confound us both objectively and honestly. I know I dont have
any truck with debunkers or government agencies and am not out
to destroy ufology or anything so silly and melodramatic (quite
the contrary I believe in it so much I want to see our work
vindicated). Nor do I do what I do to make money or to curry
fame. In the end one can only be true to oneself and let critics
believe what they must.

Therefore, it makes sense to take a step back, hoping that if I
am not around on the lists every day people will set their
Cruise Missile guidance systems onto some other target. Meantime
I can actually get on with doing the investigation, research and
writing that I want to do, that I feel at home with and which in
the long run will be the only effective answer to the naysayers.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 15:20:01 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:45:02 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:23:58 -0000

 >Regarding:

 >>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!

 >Dave,

 >An important realisation re those 'radiation' readings is that
 >the 'levels' were not only minuscule, comparative readings taken
 >elsewhere at the time produced little variance and further
 >proved this aspect was of no significance whatsoever.

 >It seems no-one had previously spotted that the proof was
 >actually contained in Lt. Col. Halt's microcassette recording of
 >his 'investigation'.


Hi,

What you say is true, James, but what is untrue is the idea that
ufology has always argued the radiation to be of high level and
signficant. What you mean is that Nick Pope argues this. Not the
same thing.

I have long indicated to the contrary (see From out of the Blue
for example 8 years ago). What I did  - in fact - as I report
there - was to take the results to a plant biologist, Dr Michele
Clare. That was back in l984. From this I quickly learned that
the scattered radiation readings were of minimal significance -
at best a couple of times normal background count. This has
akways sat uneasily with the claims to the contrary.

Another factor was the build up effect of accumulated pine
needles which became more clear in the l980's after studies of
the aftermath of Chernobyl fallout but which Dr Clare warned me
about 15 years ago.

Moreover, the actions of Halt and his team clearly indicate they
were not wary of serious radiation dangers despite the readings
they were taking. They stayed out there for hours unprotected.
Plus, of course, as radiation decays exponentially and these
readings were taken 48 hours after the incident if the levels
were really high at that point then the levels confronted by the
witnesses who went right up to and touched the UFO when it was
supposedly spewing out this radiation should have been enough to
make them ill. There has never been a claim that it did.

Consequently the idea that the radiation recorded was of any
dramatic levels has, so far as I am concerned, been on pretty
doubtful ground for 15 years and I have always said so.

Your comments and the findings of Ian Ridpath last year when
pursuing the specialist consulted by Nick Pope do add well to
that overall conclusion.

Of course, Rendlesham does not stand or fall on radiation
readings. But it is proper that this red herring be seen for
what it is.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                          Filer's Files #44 -- 1999

From: Majorstar@aol.com
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 21:24:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 21:24:09 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #44 -- 1999

        ::
:
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:33:07 EST
Subject: Filer's Files #44 -- 1999
:
:
:
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
:
:


Filer's Files #44 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
November 4, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.

This weeks Filer's Files sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

PRESIDENT CLINTON COMMENTS ON SPACE ALIENS?

WASHINGTON (AP) On October 28, 1999, "Stop and think about what we're able to
do today," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas. "Today we're
proving we can fund government without raising Social Security and without
raising taxes." Clinton stood ready to veto the measure because of the damage
he said would be caused by the bill's 0.97 percent across-the-board cut that
failed to provide money to help communities hire thousands of elementary
school teachers.  Clinton told educators visiting Washington. "If we were
being attacked by space aliens we wouldn't be playing these kinds of games." "
These kinds of games are only possible because the economy is strong and the
American people are self-confident ...."  Editors Note: Clinton may have
attempted to give a message about aliens similar to those Reagan gave in
three speeches.  His comment seems odd, and may indicate he has been thinking
about the subject.  The Internet is full of rumors about meteorites going to
splash into the Atlantic Ocean this weekend causing gigantic tidal waves.  My
data indicates this is very unlikely.

HALLOWEEN CRASH OF EGYPTAIR JET, NEW DEVILS TRIANGLE

NANTUCKET -- On October 31, 1999, Halloween night EgyptAir Flight 990 went
down 45 miles south of Nantucket in the Atlantic Ocean.  Flight 990 had
landed at Edward's Air Force Base in California picking up some thirty
Egyptian Air Force personnel.  It flew to Kennedy Airport where it refueled
and dropped off at least one passenger.  The National Transportation Safety
Board says that the Boeing 767 was airborne for thirty minutes cruising at
33,000 feet when it suddenly descended to 16,300 feet in forty seconds.  It
then climbed 8,000 feet higher before going into a final fall from 24,000
feet.  It flew straight with a ground speed of about 690 mph (600 knots).
The radar indicated the craft broke apart before hitting the ocean.  No
distress calls were heard.  None of the 217 passengers and crew survived the
crash.  Foreign newspapers are suggesting that a terrorist act caused the
aircraft to crash.  These strange maneuvers indicates a sudden emergency
caused the initial dive.  Flight 990 may have attempted to avoid a midair
collision or had an explosive decompression.  Black boxes from the aircraft
are expected to be recovered to provide further evidence.  There have been
several reports of missing aircraft and boats in the general area off the
Massachusetts coast. There was John F. Kennedy's Jr., during the summer,
there is at least one other plane and occupant missing last heard from in
southern MA.  Two people were missing from boats in area between where
Kennedy's plane went down and Martha's Vineyard.  This area is rapidly
becoming the world's most dangerous area and new Devil's Triangle.

NEW JERSEY CYLINDER

COOKSTOWN � On October 26, 1999, a cylinder shaped object was seen moving
very slow flashing red and green lights.  Other aircraft were moving along
their normal flight routes at 10:00 PM.  The witness looked at the cylinder
with a spotting scope and I saw a metallic form without wings zig zagging in
the sky.  I know the difference between normal aircraft and this type of
craft.  I have seen this thing a few times when I was out deer hunting.  What
is the big secret about these things?  Why can't the government admit it?
Thanks to Peter Davenport, UFO Reporting Center, http://www.UFOcenter.com

WARETOWN ABDUCTIONS -- My name is Jeanne and I live in Waretown, near the
Atlantic Ocean.  In 1975, my friend and I saw an orange shaped football
hovering nearby making a humming sound.  We all ran.  Since then, I have had
high pitch sound in both my ears.  My next experience was in June of 1999,
when my whole family was sitting on the back porch around 9:30 PM and the sky
was jet black without stars.  There was one lonely cloud with lights inside.
Something kept flying out of the cloud and going back in. This thing would go
up and hover, down and hover.  It looked as if it was searching for something
but it kept hiding in the clouds.  We had our own air show.  Twice in
September of this year, I saw three hovering UFOs.  Two were small and one
was quite large.  I kept repeating, Jesus is my savior, and the three ships
turned into one.  Ever since my 1975 sighting, I started getting migraine
headaches and weird dreams.  The dream that sticks out in my mind is (way
before Terminator movies came out) was when I was lying in my bed and I
remember floating up and through this spaceship.  It seemed to be made of
liquid metal.  Exactly like the cop on Terminator!  I never remembered that
until I saw that movie.  My health keeps getting worse. I was in my 20's,
when I had three miscarriages; the first one hurt like labor and I was three
months pregnant, the other two were both in my fourth month.  Neither of them
hurt.  I went to see my Doctor and he said, "This can't be!"  I also feel as
if I have a child somewhere and can't find him/her.  Anyway I have more to
tell, but I wanted to report this years sightings. Jeanne

MARYLAND TRIANGULAR CRAFT PHOTOGRAPHED

BALTIMORE � Bill Bean has sent some fine photos of the UFOs.  He says, "I
would say in the majority of my photos, I did see the craft.  I have better
photos, that I'll be sending you.  Most of the triangular craft have a
reddish-orange light underneath.  It flashes and my latest video footage
shows, some type of antenna, looking thing on the top.  Thanks to Bill Bean.
Editor's Note: This weekend Bill Bean, Wendelle Stevens and Tom Benson
donated photographs for the Air Victory Museum's UFO display in Medford, NJ.
If you desire to participate in this UFO display please contact me at
Majorstar@aol.com.  See Filer's Files after November 6, for the photos.

FLORIDA FOOTBALL UFO

DAYTONA BEACH -- NUFORC reports that on October 22, 1999, a witness was
driving west on Interstate 4 when he and his passenger saw a flying metallic
object.  It kept changing shapes at 2:10 PM.  I thought at first was a cloud.
  Then I noticed a football shaped object in a metallic color catching the sun
shining on it.  It moved forward and stopped and then stood itself on end and
changed into a spear shape.  It flew off quickly changing to a pin head and
disappeared.  Thanks to Peter Davenport, NUFORC http://www.UFOcenter.com

INDIANA SIGHTING OF HUMANOIDS IN WOODS

PEPPERTOWN -- On September 27, 1999, a hunter walked three miles into the
woods and smelled burned ozone and heard something strange like a low
electrical hum 6:30 PM.  The witness said, "I walked down the hill into
valley and saw three suited humanoid figures around a deer carcass about 150
yards away."  Behind the beings was a round metallic object that I watched
for ten minutes.  It was sharply defined with a 12 foot radius and ten feet
high.  After about 15 minutes a being came out of the stainless steel like
craft and pointed in my direction.  The beings all started moving toward me
so I fired four or five shots into the air and ran up hill.  I heard a
strange sound about 90 seconds later, that may have been the craft leaving.
It was almost dark by then.  I went back next morning but there was nothing
there and I am not crazy.  Thanks to PUFORI at http://www.pufori.org/
reports@pufori.org.  Editor's Note: Several recent reports indicate the
beings are taking wild game.  Ozone is a blue gaseous powerful oxidizing form
of oxygen derived from an electrical discharge.

ILLINOIS SIGHTING OF HUGE DISKS

LOMBARD � Peter Davenport reports two similar sightings on October 26, 1999.
The witness saw a disk shaped UFO at 7:10 PM.  She stated, "It was so huge it
took my breath away!"  At first I thought it was the moon until I opened my
sun roof and saw the moon above me.  I followed the craft and saw that it had
a flashing light in the middle and the rest of it was just glowing with
light.  It was moving very slowly.  It rather looked like the planet Saturn.
Other people saw it as well, and planes in the sky were turning around.  It
appeared they were trying to avoid it.  My ears started to ring.  I don't
know if that has anything to do with it but just thought I would mention it.
CHICAGO � Three hours later also on October 26, 1999, another witness was
driving north on Harlem Avenue and saw a huge object at 10:15 PM.  There were
very bright lights around the bottom and a large bright light at the top.
The object was moving very slowly across my vantage point.  I could see the
object on the top of the trees.  It was about two or three miles away.  The
lights were as bright as the shopping center lights.  A row of lights was at
the bottom and one or maybe more at the top.  I pulled over to the side of
the road to put on a better pair of glasses and fish my camera out of my
purse.  When I looked back up, it was gone.  I am an artist and I would be
willing to draw a picture of what I saw. I have a Masters in Writing. I
consider my self to be level-headed.  Frankly, I don't know what I saw. But I
know this...it was not a plane or helicopter it was just too big.  I have
lived near O'Hare Airport for the past 20 years.  I know planes.  I'll never
forget it!  Thanks to Peter Davenport, UFO Reporting Center,
http://www.UFOcenter.com

UTAH

CORRINE -- October 25, 1999, 12:18 A bright white disk-shaped object flew in
view.  The disk-shaped object had a bulbous protrusion on top and below it.
As I looked outside from my bedroom window, the sun was directly above the
roof overhang.  From the West came the very bright object that moved quicker
than a bird to the east.  It clearly was not a bird nor a plane as it moved
up and down as it moved east. It disappeared going in an upward arch. Thanks
to the National UFO Reporting Center Report http://www.UFOcenter.com.
Editor's Note: Several people report seeing a Halloween Philadelphia News
channel television report showing three disk shaped UFOs in the mountains
near Salt Lake City.  Does anyone know more about these videos?

JAPAN

YAMANASHI -- Jeroen Wierda reports that a 28 year old, Point Pleasant, NJ
female was visiting Japan on October 24, 1999.  The witness stated, "I was
taking photographs of Mt. Fuji for thirty minutes with 100-300 Macro lens.
The view that had a powerful effect on me.  What I didn't notice until I had
my photos developed were what appears to be eleven clear visible photos of
bizarre lights trailing through the sky.  Some points appear to hover at the
top of Mt. Fuji.  I am a portrait/freelance photographer.  I have tried over
and over to find a rational explanation for these unusual photos.  They left
magenta trails of light through the sky with circles of blue and green.
There are powerful beams of light sharply outlined.  Two UFOs appear in many
of the photos usually separate, but once side by side.  They made no sound.
In one photo the object is in the shape of an octagon with distinct corners.
There appears to be a powerful light source that emits a strange
magenta/green energy.  I didn't notice the UFO's at the time, and only saw
them when I got film back. Thanks to:  jeroen@wierda.com PUFORI,
http://www.pufori.org/

TIBET UFO WITH THOUSANDS OF BRIGHT LIGHTS

LHASA -- PUFORI report on August 18, 1999, a tourist was states, "I was
driving in a taxi to the airport about 2 1/2 hours away from Lhasa.  My
driver pointed out an object in the sky and said, 'UFO!'  It was about 4:00
AM and the UFO moved toward us I never saw anything like it before.  It
reminded me of a Las Vegas sign all lit up with thousands of bright bulbs.
My taxi driver indicated he had seen five so far.  He also pointed to
something alongside the road to show us where a UFO had landed, but it was
too dark and I missed it.  I watched the object with blinking bulbs and
didn't recognize it from anything I had ever seen.  The craft was oval shaped
with, bright lights like a Las Vegas sign, many bulbs lit up, around the
edges with tentacles of red lights.  At times we were underneath as it
hovered overhead for about 40 minutes.  The moon was bright and there were
many stars but the UFO was brighter.  Thanks to:  Jeroen Wierda of PUFORI,
http://www.pufori.org/

CHILD ABUSE AND ABDUCTIONS

Former Police Chief, Fred R. Saluga writes, "I have been conducting research
on UFO's and law enforcement for about five months now and have found
something very interesting."  I have sent out numerous e-mails and also
regular mail on this research and received many interesting replies on the
alien abduction question.  Many people state they do not discuss abductions
and possible bruises or marks with anyone for fear of law enforcement coming
to their home on a domestic violence complaint.  This is also true with
children, as they state that they would not even let their child attend
school because they would be visited by the local Child Abuse Agency.  Then
they would have to explain the marks and when they could not, they would be
charged with child abuse and have their children taken away. I would also
appreciate any information on the government experimenting on children with
or without the knowledge of their parents, that could be considered to be
child abuse?  I find these replies very interesting and would appreciate your
response on the above if this ever happened to you.  Thanks to Fred Saluga,
FSaluga@aol.com

IMAX NASA FILM SHOWS SR-74, ICE CRYSTALS OR UFOs?

Clark McClelland writes, "I just viewed you Filer's Research Institute entry
concerning the Aurora.  Very good data.  In 1992, I was told by a VIP from
the KSC where to look in the early AM hours to view the Space Shuttle as it
would be crossing above Orlando, Florida.  The information also included that
I would also see the SR 74 as it trailed the Shuttle.  I watched and was
surprised to actually view both ships as I was told.  Keep up the great work.
Thanks to: Clark McClelland  http://www.stargate-chronicles.com
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 the Mir.
James Oberg writes these objects are simply ice crystals as claimed by NASA.
The blinking light is caused by the spinning reflections of the sun off the
crystals.  Those who have seen the film insist these are not ice crystals,
but some unknown type of space ships.  Susan Creden the Director of the
Florida UFO Research & Study Group sent me a copy of the film for review that
appears to show the same scene as in the IMAX theaters.  There are various
objects in the sky that are unidentified.  Some appear to have lights that
blink off and on.  Some appear to fly behind the MIR that is 600 to a
thousand feet away.  It is doubtful that ice crystals would be visible due
their small size if they actually are fly behind the MIR.  If they actually
are moving in front of the MIR they could be crystals.  Analysis of the film
continues.

PHIL KLASS QUESTIONS ROSWELL CRASH

Aviation writer Phil Klass questions last weeks Wendy Connors' claim that
Col. Howard McCoy (who headed the intelligence center at Wright Field in
1947) sent Alfred Loedding, or somebody else, to Roswell to investigate the
"crashed-saucer" incident.  Klass states, "Her claim is flatly challenged by
a number of once 'Secret' documents.  For example: McCoy's letter of Nov. 8,
1948, to Air Force Office of Intelligence Requirements in the Pentagon
reporting the conclusion of his group's analysis of 180 UFO reports.  McCoy
wrote: "Although it is obvious that some types of flying objects have been
sighted, the exact nature of those objects cannot be established until
physical evidence, such as that which would result from a crash, has been
obtained."    Former "Secret" minutes of McCoy's remarks at the March 17,
1948, meeting of the USAF's Scientific Advisory Board (which included some of
nation's top scientists).  In discussing the USAF's plans to create an office
to investigate UFO reports, McCoy said: "I can't even tell you how much we
would give to have one of those [UFOs] crash in an area so that we could
recover whatever they are." Thanks to  Phil Klass

Wendy Connors replies: I've concentrated solely on the Air Force Study of
UFOs called Project SIGN for well over a decade.  Personally, I know more
than Mr. Klass concerning the organization of SIGN, the people involved and
how it was conducted on a day to day basis.  Phil, I know you were at Wright
Field and have talked with some of the old guard who knew you then, but I
won't embarrass you.  Besides, Mr. Klass does not know the extent of my
research because, gosh, he never was curious enough to even ask me before
coming forth with his meager argument based on bits of old information and
documentation.  He continues to use such information out of context.  For
example, Mr. Klass, did you know that Col. William R. Clingerman, a fighter
pilot during WW II, had a habit of twitching his head?  Or Col. McCoy's
secretary was considered a real eye full for the men at T-2 and her name was
Izzy Goodwin (she also liked to wear plaid skirts)?  How about Col. Miles
Goll being born in Manchuria, China to parents who were Missionaries and had
difficulty obtaining initial security clearances when he first went into the
Air Corps?  Or, the SIGN member who loved to drive through the gate (of
course sometimes he didn't bother opening it before doing so)? So, you see
Mr. Klass, you just don't know as much as you think you do about Project
SIGN.  We have all kinds of new information, documentation and interviews.
What it all boils down to Mr. Klass is that you may think you know everything
that is known about SIGN, but partner, I've got news for ya...I know the
rest.  Best you stick with your excellent aviation research and writing.
Better that you not enter into my area of expertise because, quite frankly,
in that arena I've got you way out klassed.  Thanks to Wendy Connors Project
SIGN Research Center www.projectsign.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 5

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 99 10:42:40 PST
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 21:38:23 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:10:53 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 15:51:40 PST


Patient and gentle Peter:

 >This may tell us all something about the field, and more than
 >what it tells us about Prof Swords.

In point of fact, this tells us more about you.  Swords is an
award-winning teacher and one of the most respected professors
at Western Michigan University, on whose faculty he has served
with distinction for years.  It's amusing to see Brookesmith,
whose background is in entertainment-industry "journalism,"
slagging one of his betters.   But hey, in the weird and wacky
world of UFO- and ufologist-bashing, scientific credentials
don't matter.  Actually, they're a  hindrance.

 >best wishes
 >Playpen D. Molestation

Hilarious, guy.  And tasteful, too.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:09:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:27:12 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 23:44:35 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject:  British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>Date: Mon, 01 Nov 99 10:56:00 PST
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>>>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 13:29:56 -0500
 >>>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi Jim, how's the gripple?

 >My prejudice is due to memories which go back
 >before 1945. Clearly if this were a court of law and the
 >testinmony given was say, for the crime of murder one, my
 >testimony would clearly be accepted for what it is, evidence,
 >aka, proof.  Would it not?

Partly, I have come across this analogy before. Testimony is all
well and good in a murder trial but you also need exhibit a. a
body (proof that an alien was there). And exhibit b. the murder
weapon (possibly alien spacecraft or some other un-earthly alien
device).

There may have been the odd case where someone was actually
convicted of murder without a and b but generally this does not
happen.

Bearing in mind we are talking of literally thousands of people
claiming to be abducted but offering neither a or b I wonder
what the law system would make of that.

 >And speaking to pedants is something which pleases me, because
 >it gives me the opportunity of understanding what the phrase
 >"Capa Tosta" means.  Pedantics appears to be the language spoken
 >in UK.  And the pedants there appear to specialise in lacking
 >open mindedness.

Hey! I'm as open minded as the next man, and believe me the next
man is dressed as a banana with a square hat on.

 >I admit having made this my fight.  But it is merely because
 >someone yet again, has told me what I have or have not seen, not
 >having seen it themselves.  Yet again, someone has decided on
 >the truth or what it shant be.  It shant be what your pair of
 >dimes allows it to be.

 >I make no claims about what has happened to me and thousands
 >like me. Which is the difference between the pedantic and the
 >realist.  I really don't know.  You do.

I can't speak for all but from my point of view, I (as a
sceptical believer) am trying to make the case for you, I
understand that something serious is going on and if you could
just toss the slightest bone of evidence in my general
direction...

As always Jim, a pleasure

Dave

p.s.

What is gripple? I have always been a great fan of the 'falling
down juice' but Gripple is alien to me ;)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 99 10:54:00 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:29:22 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:45:06 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 10:52:51 PST


Impatient and bombastic Peter:

 >>The caricature you make of Swords does you no credit,
 >>but it is, alas, characteristic of your approach.

 >Mmmmm. I quoted the man's own words. This habit is, as far as is
 >practicable, characteristic of my approach, both as journalist
 >and as awkward living human who persists in existing. What is
 >sauce for Bill English is sauce for Prof Swords, is it not? And
 >if Swords's own words damn him, somehow *I* am the caricaturist,
 >already?

I look forward to Swords' response.  He can defend himself
well, and I hope he chooses to do so.  He is not, however,
anti-Darwinian.  Scientists who consider themselves Darwinists,
as you may or may not be aware, hold a wide range of conflicting
views and are often at each other's throats. In fact, a book I
read and reviewed recently (two scientists on the search for
ETI) devoted a chapter or two to that very subject, with
scientists at least as well credentialed as Swords, and
sometimes more so, calling each other idiots because their
adversaries couldn't see certain "obvious" Darwinian truths. If
listfolk think that ufologists love to get in one another's
faces, you ought to see what goes on in mainstream science.

A good part of your post seems to consist of an attack on Mike,
who is a devout Roman Catholic, for daring to mention religious
faith in passing, as if he were the only scientist in the world
to hold to such. (You seemed also to have the impression that
Mike belongs to some right-wing fundamentalist church, with
creationist sympathies, the full hilarity of which
misunderstanding you would appreciate if you knew the guy.)

Not a very interesting argument on your part, I'm afraid.  But
as I say, if Mike chooses to respond, I'll post his words on the
list.  Knowing what he thinks of you, however, I suspect he may
judge you not worth his time.  But it is, of course, his
decision, and I will encourage him to reply.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:53 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:34:24 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!]

 >You know, I begin to think UpDates needs a FAQ.  How many times
 >have I seen this statement made, in one guise or another, and
 >and then rebutted on this list?

Dear Brian and list,


A FAQ could save us a lot of time. I was thinking along the
same line a few years ago and developed a FAQ, unrelated to
UpDates, which contains information about evidence.
It can still be found at www.ufoic.com/faq

This FAQ mentions evidence for ET visitation. Since then, I
concluded that the ETH cannot be proven but the data still
indicate intelligent non human activity.

Your suggestion of a FAQ reminds me of something else that can
be found in the Updates archives. Has a skeptic ever publicly
changed his mind on this list? I know of no example, but I'm too
lazy too browse through - what is it? - four years of messages.

Anyway, it would be interesting to find how many times the
skeptics have changed their minds following new information.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                             Recent NIDS Reports

From: Colm Kelleher - NIDS <nids@anv.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:11:29 -7
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:45:12 -0500
Subject: Recent NIDS Reports


NIDS is beginning a mailing list so that we can inform people of
recent updates to our web site as well as recent research
findings or other announcements.

The primary intent of the list is to inform folks about NIDS
research and announcements in a timely manner.

In keeping with NIDS policy, we will not disseminate the list to
anyone.

NIDS now has two separate teams that are capable of bringing
significant resources to bear on investigating UFO cases: We
have several ex-law enforcement investigators and we have a team
of Ph.D level scientists. We believe that this combination may
be effective in investigating UFO cases, particularly where
physical evidence is involved.

The mailing list would inform you about once per month on
research updates and will inform people about our 24 hour UFO
reporting hotline at 702-798-1700. For example, we recently
posted a report of a preliminary investigation on UFO sightings
in New Mexico.

If you are interested, please join our mailing list at:

http://www.accessnv.com/nids/mailinglist.html

And see our recent report at:

http://www.accessnv.com/nids/researchnews.html


Colm Kelleher

National Institute for Discovery Science







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                                Re: 'Lasers'

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 12:15:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:50:58 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Lasers'


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 19:05:09 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Lasers'

 >>The ball of light just "grew" right on top of me, and then
 >>shrunk, very smoothly and noisless.

 >Now that you aroused my curiousity, please tell me more about
 >your other stories.

I am reluctant to talk about these things, considering that it
looks as if the conspiracy and the cover-up programs are more
real than the UFO phenomenon itself. I don't want to add the
whole UFO thing to my list of everyday problems. But I couldn't
ask for the "laser" question without saying why (we'll I guess I
could have). My mistake was saying that I've seen other
things...

As I've said "I like to remember the event as a Nova or
something similar". Maybe I have some kind intuition for that
type of thing, because I like astronomy a lot. I would rather
talk publicly about paranormal or ESP rather than UFOs. The
latter is much more "taboo" than the former.

But my interest in the subject is stronger than my common sense,
and that's why I'm subscribed to the list, and tempted to step
beyond lurking (which was my intitial intention).

 >how
 >large the ball of light "grew" over you and the country(ies)
 >where these observations took place?

Now that I've started, might as well finish it. Of the first
answer I am not sure.

Maybe it grew up to 2 centimiters or so. The country was
Uruguay, South America.

There is a place there (a ranch) called "La Aurora" which I
believe called the attention of ufologists worldwide at some
point. I went there once to set up a tent and spend the weekend,
but the weather was terrible, so I left few hours later...The
"red light" event didn't take place there, though, but at my
home's backyard...

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                          Re: Gravity Waves Control

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 12:48:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 08:54:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control


 >From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 07:29:25 EST
 >Subject: Re: Gravity Waves Control
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >The team made the finding by studying the polarization
 >(orientation of electric fields) of radio waves. Light rotates
 >like a corkscrew as the light travels through space.

I believe that most electromagnetic waves will be found to
behave that way, because:

1. A wave must be generated by some sort of particle.

2. That particle may very well have spinning subparticles around
it, like atoms and solar systems do (does it sound like
Hermetism? ;)

3. The nucleus of that particle (analog to protons, for example)
will contain most of the mass, but the cloud created by the
"orbiting" particles (analog to electrons) will be responsible
for what you call the "corkscrew effect".

I think a photon is in itself an atom of some sort, and its
equivalent of electrons generate the spiral motion of light.
Just my opinion, I am not a scientist per se, just someone with
a little bit of imagination.

I haven't read the whole message yet, so I might send further
replies.

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 13:18:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:12:23 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!]


 >We need an FAQ.  And this should be item #1,

I add my vote to this proposal!

If enough people want it, it will happen :)

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 13:05:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:14:39 -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, 5 Nov 1999 14:39:26 -0000

 >Therefore, it makes sense to take a step back, hoping that if I
 >am not around on the lists every day people will set their
 >Cruise Missile guidance systems onto some other target. Meantime
 >I can actually get on with doing the investigation, research and
 >writing that I want to do, that I feel at home with and which in
 >the long run will be the only effective answer to the naysayers.

We should all congratulate Jenny on her common sense, and her
healthy sense of what's important.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:59:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:21:34 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Softly, Peter, softly!

You write,

 >But what we do know about our planet allows us to draw
 >two properly tentative but properly scientific conclusions.

 >First, our current knowledge of other planets and other
 >star systems tells us that the Earth - and indeed our Solar
 >System - appear to be unusual and may even be unique. Second, the
 >mechanics of Darwinian evolution tell us that the advent of
 >intelligence of the distinctive human kind on Earth cannot be
 >predicted at any point from the rise of single-celled organisms
 >early in the planet's history. Ergo, its appearance cannot be
 >taken for granted elsewhere either.

"We"? Some scientists (a minority, I suspect) would draw these
conclusions, but of course many wouldn't. So you would do better
to write, "I offer some tentative but, I believe, scientifically
justifiable conclusions." That way you don't appear to be
draping the mantle of scientific authority over what, for the
moment, are simply your own opinions.

You'd be even more advised to speak gently when you make
judgements about history.

 >Further, the specific cultural circumstances in Western Europe
 >that led to the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the rise of
 >industry, science, and technology are historically unique (we
 >discount here the achievements of Atlantis). Human history
 >itself is a chronicle of contingent and fractal events - of
 >*accidents*, which we have no reason to think (much as we might
 >like to) have been repeated elsewhere.

Your better self, I suspect, knows that you're on slippery
ground. The philosophy of history is a treacherous subject, and
has chewed up better folk than you and me. You're entitled to
your view, but can you -- with any dignity -- state it as if it
were an established fact? We're not exactly talking about the
laws of thermodynamics here. Forgive me...I'm giggling.

 >The only sane starting
 >point for ufological research is the null hypothesis - that
 >UFOs, or 'true extraordinary unknowns' or however you want to
 >define those UFOs that don't devolve into IFOs, are not
 >extra-terrestrial spaceships, whatever they are. There are
 >plenty of other mundane possibilities to promote, after all, if
 >you want to exercise your speculative imagination. And, yes, I
 >do think SETI is based on false premises (and am not without
 >professional astronomer friends who agree with me; 'science' is
 >not as monolithic as Jerome likes to suggest), and is a vast
 >waste of resources.

I gather, then, that SETI scientists also should apply your null
hypothesis. If they find an apparently intelligent signal, they
should rule out an intelligent extraterrestrial origin.

But then let's turn the cart around. If SETI scientists wouldn't
accept your null hypothesis as it would apply to them, why
should ufologists accept it? And why should ufologists get
special scorn for considering the ETH? Shouldn't you, to be
consistent, dismiss SETI scientists as excitable traitors to
common sense and reason?

And about Michael Swords...supposing, Peter, that you're right,
and that Swords is biased toward a belief in a universe created
by design. He at least is modest enough to say so, as you quoted
him, and to attempt, at least, to keep his religious views and
his scientific judgements separate.

Perhaps he doesn't succeed. But I think you're ignoring his main
point, which is that mainstream scientists are, on the whole, so
prejudiced against any belief in a designed universe that they
can't accept the possibility that evolution would (for purely
scientific reasons) proceed in similar ways on similar planets.
This isn't unreasonable for him to argue, whatever his biases.

And for all your thundering about Darwinism and randomness, the
problems of science and religion are a little more complex than
you make them out to be.

 >"Paleontologists, such as Simpson and Gould, are the ultimate
 >'grand-children' of Darwin. [You're quoting Swords here.]
 >They are the knighthood who wave the
 >victorious banners of materialist evolution in the faces of
 >their hated enemies, the world's religions. The rituals of their
 >schooling, their intellectual Rites of Passage, program them
 >with the Dogma of Random Change, so as always to be on guard
 >against hints of directed advancement, design or purpose in the
 >universe." [Michael J. Swords, 'Modern Biology and the
 >Extraterrestrial Hypothesis', MUFON Symposium Proceedings 1991,
 >page 59. Swords descends to rant here. It would be hard to
 >excavate any sentiments hostile to religion from Gould's
 >writings, although his arch-foe Richard Dawkins is an
 >inveterate, and intolerant, proselytizer of atheism, especially
 >in unsolicited letters to the press.]

 >'A thinker who has already accepted such a statement, whether
 >consciously or not, cannot even imagine that ETs would show any
 >similarity to humans,' continues Fawcett's redacted version at
 >this point.

 >So Swords's real objection, it transpires, is not to the
 >evidence, arguments, or experimental results that Darwinists
 >invoke to support their conclusions, but to Darwinism, per se.
 >And why? Because the theory has no place for a divine guiding
 >hand such as the Judaeo-Christian God's. But no science reserves
 >such a driving seat for the Almighty. Swords's complaint against
 >Darwinist biology applies equally to particle physics, organic
 >chemistry, geology, astronomy, or any other scientific
 >discipline deserving the name. Either Swords is not at heart a
 >scientist, and is driven to apologize for much ufological wisdom
 >[phrase (c) Ed Stewart] by religious requirements - in which
 >case he should be honest and admit it; or, his invocations of
 >science in support of ETI and the ETH are meaningless, because
 >they are ultimately impelled by principles that belong outside
 >science.

Not only is Gould not hostile to religion -- he's written a
book, "Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of
Life" -- in which he tries to reconcile religion with science.
But it's precisely this book, if I'm to judge from H. Allen
Orr's lively and apparently well-informed critique of it in the
Boston Review, that makes me think that things are more
complicated, Peter, than you make them out to be. (Maybe the
Boston Review has posted the critique on its website:
http://bostonreview.mit.edu.)

For one thing, Orr argues that scientists have been more open to
religion than even Gould will grant:

"[S]cientists often manufacture absurdly revisionst histories of
science itself. The reason is clear: many great scientists led
deeply religious lives. this fact obviously makes it harder to
maintain that science and religion are intrinsically and
immutably incompatible. It's also vaguely embarrassing -- an
insult to scientific vanity. The claim that science has
conquered religion [or, for our purposes, the religious notion
that the universe can't have been created by design] seems a tad
less compelling when the Great Conquerors shuffle off to church
each Sunday. So the sordid fact gets buried.

"Gould, an accomplished historian of science, is outraged by
such nonsense. Ever since John Maynard Keynes revealed that
Newton was a mystic, it's been appreciated that the history of
science and religion is a good deal richer than the cardboard
one favored by many scientists. But Gould goes further than
most, arguing that even Darwin and Huxley -- those
ur-evolutionists and bishop-baiters -- held more nuanced views
on religion than popular history allows.

"I think, though, that Gould could have picked better examples.
The fact that Darwin and Huxley were slightly soft on religion
(if it is a fact -- Gould's case is not overwhelming) might just
relfect the times. Mired in nineteenth-century pieties, any
Victorian surely found it hard to break wholly free, at least
while remaining remotely respectable. But this won't do with
modern scientists, who'd have a hard time losing job or spouse
by voicing doubts on the Trinity. Nonetheless, many of the
century's leading scientists -- including some of the brightest
stars of evolutionary biology, that most allegedly atheistic of
all sicences -- were deeply religious. Among the fathers of the
so-called modern synthesis, Theodosius Dobzhansky was a
Christian and something of an amateur theologian; Sir Ronald
Fisher was a deeply devout Anglican who, between founding modern
statistics and population genetics, penned articles for church
magazines; and J. B. S. Haldane was an unabashed mystic. While
surprising, there's one fact more surprising still -- few
evolutionists know any of this. The reason cannot be that
biologists care only about these men's science, as any
evolutionist can rattle off a dozen anecdotes about each. Rather
it seems clear that a kind of unconscious censorship goes on.
These facts are a bit too out of whack and a bit too
embarrassing. And so they get dropped. The result is that
scientists live with an absurdly pat view of the history of
science and religion -- a view which, to Gould. promotes a false
confidence in the incommensurability of the two."

Gould, however, comes up with an impossible solution to the
problem. He decides that nature (including all questions about
the origin and design of the universe) is the proper study of
science, while religion should concern itself with morals. The
problem here, as Orr points out, is that this isn't even
remotely what most people think religion is. To reconcile
religion and science, Gould has to redefine religion in a way
that won't make sense to either scientists or religiuous people.

This of course doesn't prove that Gould believes in a designed
universe, or that such an idea is or ought to be scientifically
respectable. What it does suggest, though, is that Gould is
uneasy about the question -- and with good reason, because many
scientists appear to believe in a universe created by random
chance when they're in their laboratories, and in a universe
created by design when they're in church. How they reconcile --
or choose not to reconcile -- this contradiction is their own
business, but Michael Swords is evidently not so crazy to
believe that science has a bias of its own.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

              Re: Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In

From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:33:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:25:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In

 >Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:07:12
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Rumanian Press Report: UFO Video-Recorded In Pitesti

 >>Source: 'alt.alien.visitors'.

 >>An English translation follows the Rumanian text.
 >I have spell-checked the English one.

 >Stig

 >***

 >From: AK&G <ursu@sympatico.ca>
 >Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
 >Subject: UFO in Romania
 >Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 16:51:29 GMT
 >Reply from Gavin McLeod

A fascinating object. UFO*BC has received reports with matching
description and videos. From the town of Pitesti on October 29th
at 5:00 AM local time in the south east below 45 degrees was:

VENUS, that ever popular and spectacular IFO.

Most people fail to turn off the autofocus on their camcorders.
The autofocus does not work well on small bright objects against
a flat background. The autfocus hunts and throws the image out
of focus causing blooming and blurring. Check it out, Venus is
still a spectacular sight in the morning sky.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 02:43:12 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:29:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:41 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Dear Ms Bruni,

 >The main point, the bottom line of this dispute with Ms Randles
 >remains the same to me :

I don't really want to get involved in another debate Gildas
because I am now getting very busy, but I would point out the
following.

Jenny wrote:

 >I still would have needed approval to hand over data
 >involving MoD events to military officials of a foreign country.

What information is Jenny referring to? The only drawback I
see, is if she has _ classified_ files from the MOD, which I
doubt very much.

Jenny wrote:

 >I suspect it may prove difficult in the short term to assist in
 >your request for contact with the RAF air crew. There are
 >several reasons, the principle of which is my contract to the
 >BBC.

That contract should have terminated immediately after the
original programme aired. No way would they not allow Jenny to
pass their names on, but of course she would need permission
from the witnesses themselves.

 >>As far as I know, Ms 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.

 >If you had ever asked for that I would have sought permission to
 >send it, Mr Thouanel. I would have had to clear that with the
 >broadcaster as you surely understand.

You and anyone else are free to quote from it providing you
credit the BBC, and you can even buy a copy from the BBC.

I have a copy of the tape in question and would gladly give you
a transcript of the recorded interview (they don't say they did
NOT have visual sighting, at least not on the copy I have.), but
I don't think this would go down very well with Jenny.

Anyway, maybe Jenny will answer those questions for you.

Greetings

Georgina Bruni







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 02:45:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:32:22 -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: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:18:05 -0000

 >But it was interesting, wasnt it, that by raising this as if it
 >was the only substance of this whole argument Ms Bruni made sure
 >she was not troubled by having to actually discuss the many
 >facts at hand about my clearly documented help to Thouanel . Hey
 >but since when have facts ever mattered much in UFOlogy?

 >The tactic of evasion is a useful way to avoid having to argue
 >things that are indefensible . When you see an evasion overload
 >happening the reason is usually pretty obvious.


Dear Jenny!

You know what, I wasn't trying to evade this debate for any
particular reason other than it didn't really interest me due to
the fact that your posts are so long. Read into that what you
like, but I am too busy now to get involved in another debate.

Georgina Bruni








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 99 23:14:56 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:41:28 -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, 05 Nov 99 10:42:40 PST

 >>Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:10:53 -0500
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 15:51:40 PST


Patient and gentle listfolk, including the p & g Brookesmith:

 >>This may tell us all something about the field, and more than
 >>what it tells us about Prof Swords.

 >In point of fact, this tells us more about you.  Swords is an
 >award-winning teacher and one of the most respected professors
 >at Western Michigan University, on whose faculty he has served
 >with distinction for years.  It's amusing to see Brookesmith,
 >whose background is in entertainment-industry "journalism,"
 >slagging one of his betters.

This was a cheap shot, for which I apologize to Peter B. and
everybody else who's paying attention.  PB stepped over the line
in his attack on Michael Swords, but that does not excuse me for
stepping over the line in turn. Peter, who has the distinction
(shared, as far as I can tell [speak up if you're being
slighted] only by me) of knowing who Forrest City Joe was, is a
fine writer and a smart  guy.  If his ego is as big as, if not
bigger than, his talent, hey, he's only human, and if I were
pointing fingers, they'd be pointing in both directions.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 23:42:15 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 09:45:13 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:10:53 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith, Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Thu, 04 Nov 99 15:51:40 PST

<snip>

 >Like cunnilingus, pointing out the obvious is dark and lonely
 >work, but someone has to do it. Jerry, could you please refrain
 >from this patronising apostrophe? Few on this list are either
 >patient or gentle. You among the least of all, IMO. Lay off.


Hello Duke,

Sorry to interrupt, but...

This may or may not be pertinent to the UFO debate...

I too find Jerome's "Patient and gentle listfolk" a bit
annoying, but, what about "With the compliments of the Duke of
Mendoza" ?

What compliments?

Who's the Duke?

Who's Mendoza?

Who are you?

Who am I?

 >Playpen D. Molestation
 >Cuddly Bear


Laughing all the way.

Cheers,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                           Woods Request and MJ12

From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:29:55 +1300 (NZDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 10:24:57 -0500
Subject: Woods Request and MJ12


Greetings List

I note the request from Ryan Wood requesting Email addresses etc
and as he is one of those seeming to push the MJ12 subject I
would respectfully request that he take the following analysis
into consideration

I also have my own notes on "Operation/Project Majic" which I
will post in my next message

Regards

Murray

-----

Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 14:20:15 +1200
To: murrayb@win.co.nz
Subject: majic.htm


A Comparison of the Pre-War Cryptanalysis of Japanese Ciphers to
the Spurious "Majestic 12"

by Paul B. Thompson Nebula Editor pscpol@aol.com

In December 1984, a package was received at the home of Jaime
Shandera, a Los Angeles TV producer and writer. It contained a
roll of unprocessed 35 mm film, which when printed, proved to
contain photographs of allegedly secret government documents
that described the recovery of a crashed extraterrestrial craft
from the New Mexico desert in 1947. Specifically, the documents
were (purportedly) a memo from President Truman to Secretary of
Defense Forrestal, authorizing him to begin "Operation Majestic
12;" a seven page memo to President-elect Eisenhower, apprising
him of the state of Majestic 12's operations in studying (and
covering up) the New Mexico crash; and a memo from Robert
Cutler, an assistant to President Eisenhower, to Air Force Chief
of Staff Nathan Twining.

For various reasons (see related article), most people have
concluded these documents are total fakes. Their provenance is
unknown, there are serious errors in their preparation and
structure, and their claims are often at odds with known
historical facts. The UFO field is replete with hoaxes, from
contactee yarns of the 1950s, to the absurd "alien autopsy" film
of just a few years ago.

The Majestic 12 affair is more ambitious than most. The
hoaxer(s) deliberately play with real characters, from
presidents, to generals, to well-known scientists, embroiling
them in a spurious conspiracy to cover up the "truth" of a UFO
crash. Since the release of the Majestic 12 story ten years ago,
the phantom cabal of military men and scientists has become a
staple of UFO lore, even figuring in the TV series "Dark Skies"
as the secret group that runs the whole United States from
behind the scenes. Like so many pieces of phony UFO lore, the
Majestic 12 will probably never go away.

A more relevant question might be: Where did it come from? There
are leading candidates for the dubious honor of having created
the bogus documents. It's not my purpose here to point fingers
of blame; if readers are curious and research the available
literature, they will recognize who the suspects are. My purpose
here is to suggest what non-UFO influences inspired the hoaxers
to create the mysterious Majestic 12.



Magic Ciphers and Majestic Forgeries

In the documents, two coded abbreviations are used in place the
full name "Majestic 12," namely "MJ12" and "Majic." Use of the
latter is particularly interesting, as it represents, I think, a
deliberate attempt to link the phony UFO cover-up group to a
real secret operation known as "Magic." Thus people who knew
something about the history of intelligence operations in the
1940s could link the two labels in their minds, and the real
Magic would lend credence to the phony Majic.

"Magic" was the cover name used for the decipherment of the
Japanese diplomatic code machine in 1940. The Japanese had
introduced an advanced new cipher machine, the Type 97, or "Bei
Gwa" ("B" Machine) in 1937 to safeguard their diplomatic
messages from foreign eyes. The lead designer of the Bei Gwa was
Captain (later Rear Admiral) Jinsaburo Ito, who departed from
the usual mechanics of rotor-operated cipher machines (like the
German Enigma) to incorporate rotary stepping switches into the
mechanism. The stepping switches introduced further
transpositions into the encipherment process of up to ten to the
fifth power (10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10). The Japanese believed the
Bei Gwa was impervious to decipherment.

Such was not the case. An American team of cryptoanalysts, led
by the brilliant William F. Friedman, began attacking the Bei
Gwa messages in 1938. Using advanced statistical methods
Friedman pioneered, the Americans soon determined the nature of
the Japanese code machine, but it took them two years to crack
the code. The breakthrough came when a young Army cryptologist,
Harry Lawrence Clark, theorized that the Japanese could not be
using rotors in their machine, and deduced that stepping
switches were the key. After that, a trial machine was lashed
together in great secrecy, and the Bei Gwa cipher was
compromised. The American cover name for the Bei Gwa cipher was
"Purple."

Rear Admiral Walter S. Anderson, head of the Office of Naval
Intelligence (ONI) in 1940, gave the cracking of "Purple" the
code name "Magic." This was a whimsical label at that time, a
reference to both the incredible brilliance of the cryptanalysts
as well as the secretive occult flavor that has clung to
cryptography since the Middle Ages. Individual Japanese
messages, once deciphered, were called "magics," with a lower
case M. People who had access to "Purple" messages were known as
"Ultras." Because of extreme sensitivity of the knowledge that
the Bei Gwa had been broken, "Magic" also became a security
classification, much higher than Top Secret. The entire
advantage gained by reading Japanese messages would be lost if
the Japanese learned the Bei Gwa was compromised.

So convinced were the Japanese of the infallibility of the B
Machine, they never abandoned it, even when evidence came their
way that the Americans had penetrated it. The story of Magic
remained a national secret for some time after the war, as did
the British-French-Polish solution of the German Enigma cipher
machine. By the 1960s books began to appear about the cracking
of "Purple": Ladislas Farago's The Broken Seal and David Kahn's
The Codebreakers both came out in 1967. In 1970 a major
semi-documentary film, Tora! Tora! Tora! was released which
dramatically depicted the operation of "Magic," the security
surrounding it, and the small group of American leaders who knew
about it.

[A few words about code names, and how the U.S. military uses
them. During World War II, the creation of code names was
systematized, and lists of approved codenames were compiled into
books for official use. Codenames were never re-used, and
sometimes an operation could be renamed if its purpose changed
or its security compromised. Thus the invasion of North Africa
was called "Torch," the Normandy operation "Overlord," etc. In
the "cameraman's statement" associated with the alien autopsy
film, it was alleged that the recovery of alien bodies in the
desert in 1947 was codenamed "Anvil," but it was soon pointed
out that "Anvil" was the first codename for the invasion of
southern France in 1944. Lo and behold, "Anvil" disappeared from
printed versions of the so-called cameraman's statement... it
would be interesting to research the archives to see if the
codename "Majestic" was allocated to any operation in World War
II.]

The hoaxer(s) who created the Majestic 12 documents knew enough
history to include prominent generals and real scientists on the
list of purported members. They also rather carefully chose 12
men who were all dead by 1984 and thus could not deny ever being
members of MJ12. The most unusual member (from the UFO buffs'
point of view) was Dr. Donald Menzel, the Harvard astronomer who
published a couple of sarcastic and superficial debunking books
about UFOs. When a little digging uncovered the "revelation"
that Menzel had done work for some intelligence bureaus during
the war and possibly after, this was hailed as proof he was a
member of MJ12, and indeed proof that MJ12 really existed. The
plain fact is, almost all scientists in the U.S. had some role
in the war and cold war that followed, either in actual research
and development or as consultants on matters in which they were
experts. Menzel's intelligence career is scarcely startling to
anyone who understands how America's national resources were
marshalled during the war.



Magic vs. "Majic": A Comparison

So how much did the MJ12 hoaxer(s) draw upon the real story of
"Magic?" Short of their confession, there's no way to
know, but the parallels make useful comparisons:


"Magic" history:                "Majic" claims:

The most secret operation          ditto
in the US, even more so
than the A-bomb project.

Access highly restricted           ditto
for security reasons.

Involved new technology and       "alien" technology,
advanced scientific analysis.     "alien" bodies

Those in the know include         ditto
high ranking military men
and top scientists.

Operation spawns new levels       "majic," "MJ12," etc.
of security classification:
magic, ultra.

Operation continued after a       MJ12 continues to study
seminal event (Pearl Harbor)      aliens even after the
with increasing importance.       New Mexico crash;
                                   MJ12 exists today.

Guarded bits of information       Photocopies sent to
released to the public years      Jaime Shandera, an
after the events by some          associate of William
of those involved                 Moore and Stanton
.                                 Friedman, well known
                                   UFO researchers who had
                                   previously published a
                                   book on the Roswell
                                   Incident.


These parallels amply demonstrate the possible inspiration by
the historic "Magic" to the false "Majic." Coupled with the lack
of provenance and the errors in the documents themselves, there
seems no reason to regard the MJ12 documents as anything but
fiction -- and failed fiction, at that.


(c) Copyright 1997 ParaScope, Inc.




Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
Voice : 64-9-6345285
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                          Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:31:33 +1300 (NZDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 10:22:54 -0500
Subject: Project/Operation "Majic"


Greetings List

Here are some note of my own on the Real "Majic"

Regards
Murray Bott

-----

Projects Majic and Ultra.
*************************
Notes written by Murray Bott
(April/May,1999)


Project Majic (or "Operation Majic").
------------------------------------
"Majic" is the name applied (by the Americans) to their
eavesdropping on anyones secret coded communications, friendly
or otherwise. "Purple Majic" decrypting the Japanese code (was
therefore the highest priority)

This was achieved with the use of a decrypting machine

Other words known around by the intelligence officers included
"ultra", "super" and "khaki"

These signals interceptions and decrypting was in force prior to the
Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour (on 7th December,1941).


"MAJIC INTERCEPTS" was a term loosely applied to the actual
decrypted messages derived from this source

"MAJIC SUMMARIES" was a term used for daily or weekly summary
(of the majic intercepted messages) shown to Military commanders


(Sources include books "The Week Before Pearl Harbour" by
A.A.Hoehling and "The Shadow of Pearl Harbour" by Martin V
Melon")

(The Motion Picture "Tora,Tora,Tora" filmed in 1970 contained a
extensive portrayal of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour as
well as the extent of the use of the intercepted messages from
"Operation Majic")


Project Ultra.
--------------

"Ultra" is the name applied (by the British) to their
eavedsdropping on the German encrypted communications.

This was set-up in 1939 at Bletchley Park with the use of a German
encrypting machine - known as "Enigma"

The whole work of decyphering was placed into the hands of M.I.6
Wireless signals, having been intercepted at various special
receiving stations, were sent by teleprinter to Bletchley Park
where they were deciphered and distributed.

As with the American "Operation Majic" the very existance of the
project (of decrypting the German messages) was rated with high
security in order that the German forces would not discover the
British had broken their codes. Information derived from these
messages included the strength and disposition of German units,
movement of units and shipping as well as communication between
the German High Command to Field Commanders etc.

The British also received prior warnings of German attacks and
were able to place their own forces accordingly.

Some suggest that this knowedge helped that Allied war effort to
the extent that it helped shorten the war by up to two years.

(Sources include books "The Ultra Secret" by F.W.Winterbotham and
"Beyond Top Secret U." by Ewen Montague)

Note 1 : F.W.Winterbotham, chief of the air department of the
Secret Intelligence Service during the war, was the man
responsible for the organisation, distibution and security of
"Ultra"

Note 2 : Ewen Montague was Commander Montague of NID.D.17Mwho
was on the naval intelligence officer and was on the "Ultra"
list handling those secret sources for the "Admiralty"

Enigma.
-------
The ancient Greek word for a puzzle and was the name give to the
cypher machine by its German Manufacturers

(Source - Book : "The Ultra Secret" page 13)

I understand that a picture of the decoding machine can be found
on Web Page:

http://www.odci.gov/cia/information/artifacts/enigma.htm

and at:

http://www.nsa.gov:8080/museum/enigma.html


Glossary from "Beyond Top Secret U" by Ewen Montague
----------------------------------------------------

ULTRA. A Name for Special Intelligence, deciphered messages and
documents concerning them, denoted by the stamp TOP SECRET U.
derived from Ultra Secret

ORANGE SUMMARY. The summary of non-operational deciphered
signals with  comments, provided to the First Lord, the First
Sea Lord and the heads of the naval operational staff at least
twice a day by Section 17M(qv).

The Television Series "Secrets of War" covers some of the little
known and secret of World War Two. One episode entitled "Ultra
Enigma" covered the history and development of the Allied Code
Breaking through the use of the use of the "Enigma" Machine.

"ENIGMA INTERCEPTS" was a term applied to the decrypted messages
derived from this source.

The web page for this series is "http://www.secretsofwar.com"


Source books and publications include.

**************************************
Book : "The Week Before Pearl Harbour"by A.A.Hoehling
Copyrighted 1963 Published by Robert Hale,London
Book : "The Shadow of Pearl Harbour"by Martin V Melosi
Copyrighted 1977 Published by Texas A&M University Press
Book : "The Ultra Secret"by F.W.Winterbotham
Copyrighted 1974 Published by Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London
Book : "Beyond Top Secret U"by Ewen Montague
Copyrighted 1977 Published by Peter Davis Ltd, London

Additional Sources currently under review.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Book : "The Codebreakers" (Abridged edition) by David Kahn
Copyrighted 1968 Published Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London.
Book : "GCHQ The Secret Wireless War, 1900-86" by Nigel West
Copyrighted 1986 Published George Weidenfeld Ltd, London.
Book : "Alan Turing - The Enigma" by Andrew Hodges
        Copyrighted 1983 Published Simon & Schuster, New York.


A sideline
**********

During the course of warfare sometimes it becomes expediant to
conduct some deception or act of false information to fool the
enemy of one's intentions or simply give a false impression of
ones strength (or weaknesses)

One such Project (entitled "Project Mincemeat") was the creation
of a completely false identity along with a very real Dead Body
whose purpose to deceive the Germans of "Invasion " plans

The real invasion was to be against Sicily as an entry to Italy.

The plan was to convince the Germans that the invasion was to be
elsewhere around the Mediterranean so that they would disperse
their forces away from Sicily

They achieved this with the help of a dead body, a completely
false identity (Major Martin, Royal Marines) some false identity
papers as well as personal papers (including theatre tickets,
and love letter with photo,sof fiancee', bill for engagement
ring etc -all of which were false)

He carried with him letters from General Sir Archibald Nye to
General Sir Harold Alexander, and another letter from Louis
Mountbatten to Admiral of the Fleet Sir A B Cunningham. Both
letters were actually signed by the real respective "sender" but
were completely false, the Mountbatten letteralso being given a
false, but plauseable, reference number.

The body plus false papers were dropped off the coast of Spain
(near known German agents - later found and copies of papers
sent to Germany)

The Ruse worked completely saving many thousands of Allied
soldiers lives. "Major Martin" was given a full burial with
military honours by the Spanish Authorities (The real identity
of the dead body remains secret)

The account of this was given in the book "The Man Who Never
Was" by Ewen Montague.(copyrighted 1953, published by Evan
Brothers Ltd, London)

He was a member of the Naval Intelligence Division and is also
author of the book "Beyond Top Secret U".



Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
Voice : 64-9-6345285
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #324

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 07:41:37 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 10:37:32 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #324


Apology to MW #324 (For November 6, 1999)

UFO's are history. They're non-admission's misery . . . as *airships*
span the mists of time -- that I would paint with words in rhyme. Our
dissonance, transparent -- plain, confounds the issue that remains . . .
that we are NOT alone at last, in present time OR in the past! Written
down, but then ignored, it didn't *square*, and was deplored. Folk from
space might do to US what *we* had done -- we're scared, nonplussed! The
*plans* of some would be derailed if we but copped to where we've
failed. We have closed our misled minds to what has filled our ancient
eyes -- visions of a cosmic texture far beyond mere droll conjecture.
What follows is the record (written!) -- words THEY used as they were
smitten
with a terror they beheld
. . . without its like or parallel.

Matthew writes, as we begin, of stars like torches (bright and dim) that
move around the sky with purpose. He wrote it down. It made him nervous.
"The air was clear, serene, and shining." Lights within it coasted --
blinding! He described in words he knew -- what flew that day was
strange and new. A few years later, about 1250, Matthew writes again --
it's gifted. A ship appears, "well shaped" he wrote, in color that would
catch the throat.
It floated in the night time sky;
the monks all saw -- it CAUGHT their eye.

William writes at century's end, a "discus" thrown by giant men would
fly across his abbey's spire, flashing silver -- fear inspired. "Utmost
terror" was described, "flat and round" it ruled the sky. Honest William
-- just like us, but buried back in timeless dust?
Did he see what some have seen,
beyond the need or call for dreams?

Robert writes, as time goes on, of "fire pillars" flying 'round --
"livid color" painting clouds -- the *pillar* lofting . . . grand and
proud . . . crimson flames would issue forth, and flashing beams like
"swords," it coursed. It crossed the heavens "slow and grave", and North
it flew like skies were paved!
Now, what would soar at speeds like that?
He swore it truth -- and that was that!

"In fourteen hundred and ninety-two Columbus sails" his "ocean blue".
We're not told that he's a skunk; if greed was beer than he was drunk.
If avarice was not his suit than Jesus NEVER told the truth. But he was
seeing pulsing lights -- "at great distance", "glimmering," bright!
They'd vanish and then reappear -- "move up and down"; it WAS quite
queer. Another witness, Pedro, deems they'd fly in "sudden passing
gleams."
This from the deck of the Santa Maria,
which lands in a bit just to cap the idea!

1528 comes 'round: a fight in Utrecht most profound -- a meeting with
continued fate as we wade time and list strange dates. A golden "X"
invades the sky, and overhead it coasts on by. The battle stops to watch
it go; some take it as a "sign", but no -- it travels past without a
care to humans fighting . . . on . . . down there. In 1554 in France, at
night without a moon to dance, "emitting [some] great noise it seems." A
"sky-born lance" that flew was seen. It flopped around from side to
side; it cast out flames in truth they cried. From East to West --
traversing stars,
a meteor (?), or men from Mars?

Evelyn was writing, see (?), (in sixteen hundred and forty-three) that
Englishmen were NOT immune from "sightings" we cannot impugn.  "[I'll]
not forget," he writes in awe, "[what men perceived and women saw] -- a
"shining cloud was in the air," and like a sword it hovered there. "[It
pointed North for all to see, and brighter than the moon would be]".
It floated there, two hours long,
then vanished as he wrote its song.

An English *Fellow* walked his park in idle contemplation, hark --
middle 18th century, a time when most would scar their knees . . . Some
*construction* cleared his roof and rose in to the sky, aloof. Lofting
over trees so grandly, north by east above his lowlands. In view, for
but a half a mile -- he saw its "framework" all the while, and watched
it burn a bright light flame that bent the way a "curl" is named. The
thing was big, four fingers long; he gaped in awe; it flew along.
It burned a bit like blown on charcoal,
then disappeared within the dark-fall.

In the *States* about this time, the Natives told us cosmic rhymes --
about a *star folk* coming down and landing on the Earth! Profound! Not
like men, they glowed with light and married into what they might. They
found the earthly women fair, and mixed their blood with them -- it's
there. They'd machines that they would use to move from up above, foot
loose.
Who's to say what happened where.
Don't write it off as myth! Beware!

It's time to stop with more to tell. We'll save it for another spell.
But don't pretend you KNOW the truth. Don't trust the "man" to fix this
*roof*. The lights we see were always seen. This isn't legends, myths,
or dreams. We just choose to look away from what our record has to say.
They've been here, we're not alone; it just may BE this ain't our home.
. .
. . . That we're mere tenants, at the whim,
of those that came here -- way back when!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

There's nothing real to debunk <g> but our aggregate lack of
consciousness, and well tended cognitive dissonance. This is despite any
rabid misdirection at my use of a language that is the just another box
of paint to me, communicates what is meant to be communicated, and does
it at a 99.9 degree of efficiency and efficacy. The emphasis and
intensity of a misdirecting obsessive coterie regarding said use says
more about that coterie than me. I'll make the occasional error. Get
over it. Besides -- it's not really what we're talking about is it? This
gets hard to remember in a heady (but empty) atmosphere of crossed t's
and dotted i's.

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 6 November>**
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
X-Mozilla-Status: 0009ar 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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:39:48 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 10:28:43 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:22:22 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Morning Georgina, Dave


Upon noticing these points mentioned I have a few questions.

 >>I don't debunk anything - I investigate and report what I find.
 >>Perhaps you would like to consult the BUFORA archives, and you will
 >>find evidence of my thorough investigations, dating back to 1981,
 >>several hundred of them in fact.

 >Several hundred? That sounds like a lifetimes work. I don't know
 >any investigator who could claim to have done a thorough
 >investigation on so many cases. Considering you are in you early
 >30s, that's some going.

 >>So you are on very dodgy ground if you are trying to suggest I
 >>don't investigate - I have an archive filled with tapes, notebooks
 >>and case reports dating back 20 years to prove it.

 >One's you have thorougly investigated? Congratulations.

Dave, if you have been investigating UFO's for twenty years and
you are roughly the same age as me could you please answer these
questions.

1) How old was you when you joined BUFORA?

2) How long did it take you to become an accredited BUFORA
    investigator?

3) If you have investigated "Hundreds" of sightings, how long do
    you spend investigating each case?

4) How does one consult the BUFORA archives?

Many thanks

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 07:36:37 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 11:53:46 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 13:18:08 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!]

 >>We need an FAQ.  And this should be item #1,

 >I add my vote to this proposal!

 >If enough people want it, it will happen :)

Please add my vote also, Brian is right.

The devil is in the details however!

*  Who is going to host the FAQ pages?

*  Who will edit them - not some MJ-12 type I would hope?

*  Which referee will recommend which argumentor to which page?

All other things being unequal, I suppose the free market
philosophy or "open outcry" (sadly) remains the most efficient
method of debate or whatever.

Even more sadly, the usual filters - college degrees,
stinko titles of nobility etc. - actually ruin the debate!

Imagine a group of Ph.Ds - names omitted - who:

a)  Signal our space brothers with flashlights
b)  Hide their flashlights from space aliens
c)  Ignore the UFO topic entirely

and contrast them with non-Phuds who

a)  Cannot spell properly - en anglais ou francaise
b)  Don't know North from Left
c)  Order Chop Suey in a Hong Kong restaurant..


I don't see much real difference.


The only real improvement is the Internet, which speeds our
often ridiculous arguments!

I'm still amazed at the speed with which I can call somebody
from New Zealand an idiot. Not you, not you! I was referring to
some other idiot.

Please do not take this as any sort of anti-rational or
anti-intellectual argument. The more bright people willing to
take a look at UFO matters, the better.

However: I have some e-mails from a 'Phud' claiming that the
space aliens not only put little gimmicks in your toes, but they
also are the cause or AIDS and other maladies, perhaps as a
means of promoting their own evil designs.

My most evil design is to get yet another Dutch beer from the
fridge, and think this all over.

If I run out of Dutch, there's some Spaten from Germany. It is
amazing the excesses I will go to given a few extra dollars!

Very 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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 10:10:57 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 11:58:49 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:09:08 +0000
 >From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 23:44:35 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Hi Jim, how's the gripple?

 >>My prejudice is due to memories which go back
 >>before 1945. Clearly if this were a court of law and the
 >>testinmony given was say, for the crime of murder one, my
 >>testimony would clearly be accepted for what it is, evidence,
 >>aka, proof.  Would it not?

 >Partly, I have come across this analogy before. Testimony is all
 >well and good in a murder trial but you also need exhibit a. a
 >body (proof that an alien was there). And exhibit b. the murder
 >weapon (possibly alien spacecraft or some other un-earthly alien
 >device).

 >There may have been the odd case where someone was actually
 >convicted of murder without a and b but generally this does not
 >happen.

 >Bearing in mind we are talking of literally thousands of people
 >claiming to be abducted but offering neither a or b I wonder
 >what the law system would make of that.

 >>And speaking to pedants is something which pleases me, because
 >>it gives me the opportunity of understanding what the phrase
 >>"Capa Tosta" means.  Pedantics appears to be the language spoken
 >>in UK.  And the pedants there appear to specialise in lacking
 >>open mindedness.

 >Hey! I'm as open minded as the next man, and believe me the next
 >man is dressed as a banana with a square hat on.

 >>I admit having made this my fight.  But it is merely because
 >>someone yet again, has told me what I have or have not seen, not
 >>having seen it themselves.  Yet again, someone has decided on
 >>the truth or what it shant be.  It shant be what your pair of
 >>dimes allows it to be.

 >>I make no claims about what has happened to me and thousands
 >>like me. Which is the difference between the pedantic and the
 >>realist.  I really don't know.  You do.

 >I can't speak for all but from my point of view, I (as a
 >sceptical believer) am trying to make the case for you, I
 >understand that something serious is going on and if you could
 >just toss the slightest bone of evidence in my general
 >direction...

 >As always Jim, a pleasure

 >Dave

 >p.s.

 >What is gripple? I have always been a great fan of the 'falling
 >down juice' but Gripple is alien to me ;)


Proof takes many forms and Gripple is the strongest proof we can
make it.  What is Gripple?  What is GRIPPLE?  I can take
skeptics, I can take unbelievers, I can even take Dylan haters,
but someone who has no knowledge of Gripple?  Cripes, my Gripple
trucks with the dingling bells visit every city and town on the
planet.  Like the ice cream truck of old, except for us grown
ups.

You seem to have ignored unexplained marks, which I have. Not to
mention the similarity of memories of people who have not been
exposed to the phenom, or the memories (when they exist) of how
the marks got there.  Not to mention missing time, which I can
prove.  Not to mention corroberation during at least one
experience, which I can also prove.

I have a friend I'd not seen or heard from in 30 years.  Met him
on the internet thru a search engine. By the time we were thru
with a dozen or so e-mails, we knew we had shared a unique and
strange experience many years ago, and had different memories of
the event, but when compared, it was the exact same time and
place, just different "screen memories".  Go figure.  Cripes,
man, if that ain't proof, I just don't know what the hell is.

I could go on, but it wouldn't matter to most who've made up
their minds.

My point in that post was to demonstrate that even the
experiencer can and often does have more of an "open mind" on
this issue than the skeptic.  And gosh dammit, Dave, that ticks
me off no end.  Somebody writes a book and immediately, claims
"The Truth About ...."

Horse Hockey!

I cannot prove anything about my experiences.  But that many
coincidences brings a level of verite' which cannot be ignored.
Yet it is.

Something is definitely wrong with me lately, nothing is funny
any more.  Maybe it's that time of the... uh, maybe it's male
menop... uh, maybe it's just me.  Just call me the Alta Kaka
from Hartsdale (soon to be much, much further north), away from
skeptics and other bad guys.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 13:09:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 20:18:01 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:53 +0100 (MET)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!]

 >Your suggestion of a FAQ reminds me of something else that can
 >be found in the Updates archives. Has a skeptic ever publicly
 >changed his mind on this list? I know of no example, but I'm too
 >lazy too browse through - what is it? - four years of messages.

How often does anybody change his or her mind, publicly, on this
list? Or admit a mistake?

It's all too rare.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 14:26:27 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 20:21:31 -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: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:18:05 -0000


To Jenny Randles and the List,

I must say I am impressed by your pugnacity, and your ability to
turn around a very clear, simple, argument, to go into a sort of
mental labyrinth. I know some other practitionners of that
tactic, prominently Pierre Lagrange in France and his book "La
rumeur de Roswell", which aims at convincing the readers that
there are no UFOs without ever saying it black on white.
(ironically, the publisher put the words in his mouth, on the
cover of the book).

What is the simple argument? I just need to repeat my last
message:

You questioned the Cometa, just a few days after the publication
of their report, on your new witnesses for the Lakenheath case.
But you knew that they could not have a documented file on these
military pilots because it was not available, under the UK
official secrets act. You said it very clearly, buried in your
long message of Nobember 2 :

 >They would have had a long wait in the UK with our official
 >secrets act and no no available official reports on Lakenheath!

BTW, if your pilot testimonies were restricted under the
"official secrets act", did you obtain a kind of exemption to
reach them ?

Now, have the Cometa relied only on official documents? Of
course not. But they obviously did their best to rely on them,
and on direct testimonies for the french cases.

For the Lakenheath case, yes, there were "good" documents: the
Condon study, the McDonald study, the Blue Book file (which had
disappeared at the time of Condon, and resurfaced later if I
remember well). But don't ask me how they worked exactly: I was
not, and I am not a member of that group.


Very sincerely,
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 >
   Nov > Nov 6

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 19:41:39 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 20:26:28 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 02:43:12 +0000
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:41 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

Hi,

Yes, I am breaking my rule, but only because Ms Bruni
requires me to answer and I wish to play fair.

 >Jenny wrote:

 >>I still would have needed approval to hand over data
 >>involving MoD events to military officials of a foreign country.

 >What information is Jenny referring to? The only drawback I
 >see, is if she has _ classified_ files from the MOD, which I
 >doubt very much.

Is it really so odd that I take seriously the handing over of
information regarding RAF activities? I did not say I would not
do it, only that it was not a decision I could take without
approval of others (ie the RAF air crew themselves). Surely that
seems reasonable without seeking to make an issue out of it?

This is how responsible investigators behave and how our code of
practice decrees we should protect witnesses. I try to follow
its guidelines and put witness interest first and I am surprised
if I am required to justify a surely proper belief that this is
appropriate.

 >Jenny wrote:

 >>I suspect it may prove difficult in the short term to assist in
 >>your request for contact with the RAF air crew. There are
 >>several reasons, the principle of which is my contract to the
 >>BBC.

 >That contract should have terminated immediately after the
 >original programme aired. No way would they not allow Jenny to
 >pass their names on, but of course she would need permission
 >from the witnesses themselves.

You are unaware of my arrangement with the BBC.  My programme
was co funded and sold on to other UK channels who are still
screening it under contract (one doing so in fact this very
week). So the situation was not clear cut as you suppose.

As I told Mr Thouanel this was a short term restriction (whilst
I sorted things out) not a long term refusal to help. I made
that abundantly clear, and have told the list this repeatedly
all week - as you would know if you had read the debate (which
you admit not to doing) .

Why do some folk seem to need to find deception behind a
perfectly reasonable situation? If I had been asked to clarify
what I meant by Mr Thouanel I would gladly have done so. But as
he did not ask for any elaboration then how could I know he was
not happy with what I had offered to supply to him regarding the
air crews testimony?

But I have clarified most of this already in the messages Ms
Bruni says are too long to bother with. As usual, its a case of
damned if you do and damned if you dont. Which is why in future
I wont.

 >You and anyone else are free to quote from it providing you
 >credit the BBC, and you can even buy a copy from the BBC.

I am quite happy to allow people to quote from my interviews -
even ill mannered critics -  but you must not mislead people
that they need just credit the BBC as their only requirement
because copyright in the interview material is mine.

 >I have a copy of the tape in question and would gladly give you
 >a transcript of the recorded interview (they don't say they did
 >NOT have visual sighting, at least not on the copy I have.), but
 >I don't think this would go down very well with Jenny.

You think I might be upset by your handing over to a man who has
mislead this list about my actions a tape of my hard won
interviews whilst implying he doesnt even need to credit me for
use of my work?

What on earth makes you think that?

But let me make clear that so long as fair credit is given any
of you are perfectly welcome to refer to - or quote from - my
interviews. I dont have the least problem with that and never
have had.

However, Ms Bruni, if you intend to send a transcript of my work
to anyone or  if you plan to  publish my work anywhere yourself
, then I do insist that you not just credit the BBC .  Thats a
legal courtesy we would expect of each other - although I trust
most of us habitually give credit to the UFOlogist whose work we
use.

Forgive me if thats not what you implied here, but its how it
read to me. That you had a transcript of my interview
(presumably transcribed for a reason) and that it only needed to
thank the BBC in order for someone to use it.  That is simply
not correct.

I had to give the BBC clearance to use part of my programme in a
debunking attack on ufology by sceptic Dr Richard Wiseman.  That
decision to let Channel 4 air an extract was mine.

I worked very hard on this documentary and whilst I have no
problem with ufology using the data I procured this has to
follow the normal rules of copyright  and courtesy . As a writer
you have to know that is how we do things. As a ufologist it
should be a matter of mutual respect .

I dont think I have ever denied an opportunity for anyone to
quote my work and have never requested a fee to do so from a
member of the UFO community. It is surely not unfair to require
proper credit in return?

I might take this idea to its logical conclusion and argue, for
instance, that it is okay to reprint a chapter out of your
forthcoming Rendlesham book, forgetting to mention your name
because you merely researched and wrote it?  Of course I cannot
argue that and  - needless to say -  never would , but it
follows if anyone invests credit for my considerable research
into the BBC.

As for the witnesses not referring to any lack of a visual
sighting on TV what are you implying? I have stated this forms
part of their testimony. Are you doubting my word?

The fact is that I spent eight months travelling the UK filming
that documentary. I did the research, much of the camera work,
and all the interviews. I then wrote and studio recorded all of
the script.

I have dozens of hours of film - most of which was never
transmitted. I own all the original tapes. This is another
problem in the provision of full data on this case because there
is a huge amount of transcription work to do. Going off a few
moments on TV would not give anyone the full picture. Only a
report based on the entire interviews will suffice.

Thats why I promised to produce all the data for ufology in my
forthcoming report and I freely offered to send a copy of this
to Mr Thouanel out of what was a foolish sense of friendship and
cooperation .

Why was that not good enough for him, nor Mr Bourdais, or indeed
for anyone?

The programme itself is not primarily about the Lakenheath case.
Inevitably therefore much of importance got left out. But the
air crew clearly did deny any visual sighting as I report in the
account sent to Mr Thouanel on the day after he first e mailed
me in July.

So please do not suggest to the contrary.

If any of you still wonder why I am fed up of the internet - I
trust the above requirement to explain myself yet again will
assist in that regard.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:59:11 -0500

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >Perhaps he [Swords] doesn't succeed. But I think you're
 >ignoring his main point, which is that mainstream scientists
 >are, on the whole, so prejudiced against any belief in a
 >designed universe that they can't accept the possibility that
 >evolution would (for purely scientific reasons) proceed in
 >similar ways on similar planets. This isn't unreasonable for
 >him to argue, whatever his biases.

<snip>

Greg, Thread

The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument. At heart, it
goes something like this: There are 100 billion stars in our
galaxy and 100 billion galaxies in the universe, therefore, even
if only a small percentage of all the available planets in the
universe exhibit conditions necessary for the development of
life, one is still left with an arguably Large Number because
one began with such a Very Large Number to begin with, ergo,
life, i.e., evolution, has theoretically gained a foothold
wherever possible, and a good deal of those footholds no doubt
eventually result in intelligent life. The famous Drake Equation
is this argument in numbers.

The most extreme opposite of this view possible is that mankind
is unqiue in the universe, which strikes most of us as highly
arrogant, not to mention a rather inefficient use of all that
random matter and energy. After all, why go to that much trouble
just to favor one little obscure mudball?

The "theology" of the cosmos and creation becomes more
troublling with almost every new color picture we get from the
Hubble Telescope. Yesterday, or the day before, the NY Times
published a picture of two galaxies colliding, the cosmic
equivalent of a head-on collision between two galactic
18-wheelers on the Interstate Highway. If sentient beings are
fairly common, I'd hate to add up the number of same perishing
at this very moment because they had the misfortunate to evolve
in a bad neighborhood. Colliding galaxies don't say much for the
Creator's foresight or organization skills, either, unless one
wants to argue that they're somehow necessary to the greater
scheme of things.

In short, the universe is a very dangerous place in which to try
to raise a family.

Discoveries are now pouring in on a regular basis that are
forcing a sharp reassessment of the way that we look at our own
planet and solar system.

The traditional view is that each sun has a "comfort zone" of
possible habitation. Too close to the sun and you wind up like
Mercury, too far from the sun and you end up like poor Pluto. In
our own case, only one out of nine orbiting planets (if you
count Pluto as a planet) safely inhabits the sun's comfort zone.
So what, says the Very Large Number argument. If only 10 or 15 %
of all planets in the universe fall with the solar comfort zone,
we're still left with a Large Number indeed.

True, but there's more. Take a moon, for example, not just any
moon, but our Moon specifically, which may have played an
indispensable role in the evolution of intelligent life on
Earth. For one thing, it appears to be rather oddly suited to
us, both in size, location, and content, or its specific
gravity. To shorten a growing post, the result of the Moon's
being just the size it is where it is means that our oceans have
the tides they do. And the tidelands probably played a crucial
role in the eventual evolution of lifeforms capable of surviving
on land. Water organisms stranded on land by low tides either
evolve to stay outside their normal medium for longer and longer
periods of time -- or they don't. Even if life were capable of
developing high intelligence in a watery medium alone, that
wouldn't translate to space travel, if for no other reason than
it's damnably difficult to build a fire underwater. No fire, no
smelting of metals.

But according to the Very Large Number theory, moons, even
seemingly "perfect" ones, must be relatively easy to come by,
too, like all the other ingredients necessary for intelligent
life. Maybe, maybe not. In fact, the growing evidence is that
our own Moon resulted not from accretion of the stuff that forms
planets and moons in any solar system, but as a consequence of a
contingent collision between the Earth and another large body,
knocking what became the Moon out the early Earth.

Note that both bodies -- proto-Earth and the object it collided
with -- would have had to impact at just the right speed and
angle to produce the resulting "just right" Moon as we know (and
love) it. But the Very Large Number argument says that this,
too, must happen relatively frequently.

Apart from a Moon, it appears that the collision also resulted
in our planet's angle of spin, which, in turn, is just right
enough to produce our four seasons, the regular, annual cycling
(for most of the planet) between extremes of heat and cold.
Think of it as a weather tide and the importance of seasons for
the evolution of intelligent life becomes more pronounced. In
the same way that water-medium lifeforms had to contend with the
absence of water, landbased lifeforms would soon enough find
themselves having to evolve to survive extremes of heat and
cold. To jump ahead a few million years and grossly simplify, if
you're a primate, it would behoove you to learn how to sew
clothes out of animal skins, not to mention knowing when to put
plant seeds in the ground.

Another complicating factor is that it may not be enough just to
be a planet that formed within a particular sun's comfort zone.
As we've already seen, you need a moon (for tides) and an angle
of rotation to the sun that results in seasons. For example,
Jupiter could conceivably occupy the slot in our own star's
comfort zone that we do, and it wouldn't have a snowball's
chance in hell of supporting intelligent life. Bad air, worse
weather, and crushing gravity, to name but a few objections. You
might manage to string a few microbes together, but developing
intelligence and the ability to build a spacheship on the
"surface" of a huge gas giant like Jupiter would remain an
impossibly daunting task.

So just finding yourself in the comfort zones still isn't a
guarantee. You've still got to be the right size planet in the
bargain, you got to have your air and water mojos working -- and
apparently you need to be made of the right stuff. That is, it
appears that you also need an iron core, not necessarily a
standard-planet item if we look around us at the other planets
(and moons) in our own solar system. How did we get ours while
other planets didn't? That's a good question, and if I knew I'd
tell you.

All I know is that a molten iron core comes in handy because it
acts like an energy bank where energy can be stored and released
slowly over time. Where do the external deposits come from? From
collisions with asteroids like the one that probably led to the
extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago (and possibly
"permitted" the dominance of mammals -- leading to us).

And here's where the gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn come in
handy, at least in our case. Positioned as they are on the outer
boundaries of our solar system, they act like sentinels, their
massive gravity sinks sweeping up all sorts of incoming debris
that might have otherwise completely extinguished the evolution
of intelligent life on this planet as we know it. Remember
Jupiter sucking up those comets a couple of years ago? Thanks,
Jupiter!

More interestingly, the sentinels can't be perfect. Scoop up all
incoming artillery and the Earth's iron core can't meet its
energy budget -- nor suffer the sort of local cosmic cataclysms
that favored mammal over reptile.

I've got to cut this short or Errol (and the wife) are going to
kill me. The point is, it's easy to imagine an Earth to which
none of the above happened: a rocky planet, with or without
water, that never gave birth to a moon, never had tides in its
oceans, never underwent seasonal change, didn't have its own
internal energy bank (so that its oceans didn't freeze over),
and -- arguably -- never played host to the evolution of an
intelligent lifeform capable of constructing space shuttles and
leaving its atmosphere.

In short, the Earth has a _history_ over billions of years,
consisting of a series of highly contingent events that maybe
not even Very Large Numbers may be able to adequately account
for.

Very Large Numbers don't necessarily guarantee a place for life
to gain a foothold on any particular planet  in any particular
comfort zone in any particular solar system, nor do they assure
any particular outcome. (Combining amino acids into chains of
self-replicating RNA, for example, doesn't seem to be a snap.)
If evolution is truly random and dependent on a chain of
contingent events, there is no end teleology. What there is a
Very Large Number of, then, are evolutionary false starts and
dead ends, maybe endless examples of same. Who ultimately knows?

Finally (!), the charge that some of us can't (or won't) accept
a universe teeming with flying saucers from other solar systems
because it would somehow make us uncomfortable to confront such
an implication is getting to be a rather tired canard, if not
dead horse. As a teenager steeped in science fiction (and
Charles Fort) I started out believing that intelligent life was
a universal given. I grew up thinking that way, which is why I
got into ufology in the first place.

But the old table is still set, too, if anyone wants to sit down
at it. Are most ufologists secretly, subconsciously afraid that
we really are alone? I admit it would be the waste of a
perfectly good universe were that to turn out to be the case,
although there are the troubling observations above. On the
other hand, apart from their really neat Space Corvettes (or is
it Porsches?) and the ability to beam people through bedroom
walls (plus those mysterious, seemingly useless "implants") --
experiences not yet granted me and thee -- the Grays haven't
impressed me as all that much more highly evolved -- or
accidental -- than we are.

Maybe, beyond the usual e-mail oneupmanship, of course, we ought
to stop analyzing the motives of the various parties involved --
and stick to sheer speculation?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 21:58:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:45:37 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >There is no such thing as "the UFO phenomena."  I think you mean
 >"phenomenon."

A pedant writes:

"The UFO phenomena" is a perfectly grammatical construction, as
in the sentence "Type II reports, close encounters and
abductions are just some of the UFO phenomena that Jerome Clarke
has written about in his many excellent books and papers."

Just thought I'd mention 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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 23:27:20 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:49:29 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject:  British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>These unknowns could be natural phenomena currently on the
 >>fringes of accepted science,as equally as they could offer
 >>evidence of ET.

 >It would be an interesting natural phenomenon that took on the
 >appearance, as UFOs do in many of the most puzzling cases, the
 >appearance of craft with windows, metallic structure,
 >aerodynamic design, and occupants.  If you're holding out hope
 >for "natural phenomena currently on the fringes of accepted
 >science," you're the one who's proposing the more extraordinary
 >hypothesis.  I've never heard of anything in nature that took on
 >the appearance of a technological construct.

Jerry, this seems to me a pretty clear statement that you think
- I'm very hesitant now to say "belive" - that some unexplained
UFO reports have been caused by the presence of an
extraterrestrial technology. Something I don't think you've ever
come out and said in so many words before, no matter how
strongly you have defended others who have made such claims.

I quite agree with you that phenomena which have windows,
metallic structure, aerodynamic design and occupants are
unlikely to be currently undescribed natural phenomena. Indeed
if such accounts did actually represent an objective description
of an actual object, I would have to agree with you. But of
course you're smarter than that, and you know as well as I do
that such accounts are seldom as straightforward as your
paragraph above makes them seem.

Yes, there are quite unambiguous descriptions of "technological
constructs" in the UFO literature - Adamski's for instance. But
we can't count that one can we? Because Adamski was... well,
Adamski. So we have to go with some of the less spectacular CEII
and R/V cases. Certainly some of these are very puzzling and so
far have seemed immune to sceptical explanation. But do they
represent actual ET craft? That's a conclusion you've always
shied away from in the past, prefering to talk about "actually
objective existing" phenomena, or some such formulation.

But now you seem to have come out with an unambiguous statement
that some UFO reports represent accurate descriptions of
"technological constructs" with "windows, metallic structure,
aerodynamic design and occupants". We can be pretty sure that
they're not "natural phenomena currently on the fringes of
accepted science" because you've just told us. So that really
only leaves extraterrestrial spacecraft doesn't it?

So Jerry Clark believes some UFOs are extraterrestrial
spacecraft. Right?

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                      'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 98 19:14:30 PST
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 07:01:52 -0500
Subject: 'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments


I've just finished 'Cosmic Crashes - The Incredible Story Of The
UFOs That Fell To Earth' by Nicholas Redfern (Simon & Schuster,
1999, 328 pages).

As someone who has researched similar tales in Australia (see
"The Ultimate Secret - Fact or Fiction: The Australian
Connection" at Http://www.project1947.com/forum/index.htm) the
thing that stood out the most for me was that while Nick has
produced a readable and entertaining book, that should do well,
it falls short on the critical point of whether it constitutes
proof of the extraordinary claim of crashed UFOs. Ultimately
while there are some intriguing stories, the proof is lacking.
Nick Redfern appears to approach his stories a little
differently to me. Instead of being guided by the quality of the
evidence, we have here the overall impression that Nick is
completely convinced of the fact that UFOs are crashing to earth
all over the place and among others the British government is
covering it all up. If such was the case, i.e.,. a rather
extraordinary claim, then the evidence presented should also be
extraordinary. It isn't. It is intriguing, and perhaps
encourages us to look further, but never-the less we should keep
the nature of the evidence for such claims in proper context.
While fascinating, the evidence is short of absolute.

Likewise with my own Australian data, however I've approached
such stories on the basis that while interesting they should be
seen for what they are - intriguing stories, deserving of
investigation, but we should present them warts and all, not in
the best possible light with their dubious details either
stripped bare or not presented at all.

For example we have the statement on page 165 of Redfern's book
that we are about to read an extract from "a classified UFO
document made available to the investigator and nuclear
physicist Stanton T. Friedman", but instead to the informed
reader all we get is an extract from the notorious and
unverified MJ-12 papers. At that stage in the book that are not
described as MJ12 documents. This is disappointing for the
uniformed reader and depressing for the informed and critical
reader. Why not show the reader the true nature of the source
material - i.e.. an unverified & dubious document of which most
serious researchers accept as a hoax document. Such colourful
sources as Bill Cooper and John Lear are used without comment.
While impressive for the uniformed reader it is depressing to see
such stuff resurface.

Nick Redfern makes much of Jenny Randles intriguing "solider's
story" and the apparent use of the term EBE (page 204). Only one
problem if you consult Jenny's book "From out of the Blue"
(1991), she reports that the source did not use the term "EBE"
etc, rather it was "BEFABS"!

Nick Redfern makes much of a 1963 Australian story from a 1972
newspaper report (!) referring to a "sphere crash" near Broken
Hill. Likewise he refers to Tim Good's Alien Liaison" (or "Alien
Contact" US edition) story of a similar sphere examined at
Woomera.

I won't get into detail here unless asked but the 1963 story and
perhaps the earlier Tim Good story refer to recoveries of
probable prosaic space re-entries. The 1963 case - generally
known as the Boulia Ball - is definitely of US origin, unless
the use of US plug threads on these balls is being copied by
aliens - I doubt it. In fact I came across an Australian Defence
file from 1965 that carries a copy of the paper "Re-entry of
Space Vehicle Fragments", Journal of Spacecraft, Vol.2, No.5,
Sept Oct 1965, pgs. 660-63, by Peter Twist of The Weapons
Research Establishment, Salisbury, South Australia. The paper
identifies the Boulia ball of 1963, the subject of Nick
Redfern's interest in 1999, as most likely of US origin. If
anyone looks at the 1963 photos of the Boulia Ball, one would
have to wonder why there was ever any mystery at all. It was
clearly from Earth and not a "Cosmic crash" candidate.

My point here is that there are people like myself that are only
too happy to assist researchers like Tim Good, Nick Redfern etc,
in their research, but we would insist on presenting the full
facts.

At the Project 1947 web site, my article address Australian
"cosmic crash" tales, but I caution "Such stories deserve
careful attention, if only to put them to rest. If only one
turns out to be substantial then we have a very extraordinary
situation. I should caution none of them constitute proof of
anything."

In a hardcopy version published in the Australian magazine
"Ufologist" (UFO crash/retrieval stories - the Australian
experience" July/Sept 1997) and at their web site:

http://www.powerup.com.au/~ufologist

I have listed 21 such stories and detail a few.

I hope that this posting sheds some clarifying light on the
reality or non-reality of such tales,

Regards,
Bill Chalker
7/11/99







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                                    UFOIN

From: Dave Baker <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 10:02:01 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 07:05:59 -0500
Subject: UFOIN


Hi Jerry, list

I've been following the recent  debate on UFO UpDates between
your good self and Jenny Randles, David Clarke and John Rimmer.

Jenny also sent a private e-mail to UFOIN members...and I'm one
of them. I was invited to join as I know Dave Clarke very well,
Andy pretty well and Jenny a little. All of them have been very
helpful to YUFOS and myself personally, so I thought I would
chip in my two penneth-worth in support of what Jenny had to
say. Especially as it seems that all and sundry- including some
people who should know better- are attacking not only the
principles and integrity of  UFOIN as well as some of it's
members personally.

I have already sent a copy of this post to Jerry privately, as I
had no intentions of sparking off my own little debate. But then
I decided to post this one, slightly extended, to you all. What
the hell...

Although I am by no stretch of the imagination a 'big name' in
ufology, with only a handful of cases under my belt, I like to
think I know my stuff in regard to UFO lore, history,
investigation and it's various denizens, both good and bad. Many
sceptics such as Dave and Tim Matthews and others always state
that they started off as fervent ETH supporters, but drifted
away from it when no real evidence surfaced to support that
belief. Well, I am pretty much the same.

I became interested in UFOs when I was eleven or twelve years
old, and more or less absorbed everything that I read or saw on
TV, like a sponge. After a year or so, I started to doubt a
little; Adamski and other contactees, Erich Von Daniken's bunk ,
the Bermuda Triangle...that kind of stuff.

But I was still fascinated by things like Socorro, Hopkinsville,
the French landings, Levelland, Valentich,  Father Gill, Betty
and Barney, and more.

And I still am. Although there are a host of cases that I no
longer regard as even interesting, let alone unexplained, I
still believe there is a lot of things out there that we cannot
explain. Yet. In a sense, it's the very fact that so much *can*
be explained conventionally, that makes those few that *can't*
into real diamonds in the dust...

Sure, I am certain that some of these 'still unexplained' cases
may well be explained in a 'down to earth' manner one day, as we
understand more about our own planet. Things such as sprites and
earth-lights, and although I am by no means a PSH-er, our own
minds. Or even, as with Andy Roberts excellent re-investigation
of the Berwyn Mountains case, poor or insufficient initial
investigation of 'classic' cases.

But basically, I try not to reject outright any theory, and like
to keep the door open to any hypothesis, including the ETH.

Have I any unexplained cases in my minuscule files? Yes, one or
two.

But it is a big jump to say that just because something cannot,
at the moment be explained, it must be an alien spaceship, as
some do...

However,  as I cannot explain them, the ETH is as viable a
hypothesis as any. But just as that...a hypothesis, an idea, a
possibility.

I'm not convinced, for instance, that "there are twelve alien
races visiting earth". as Omar Fowler *tells*  audiences in his
lectures.(How does he know?)

But I don't completely reject the tiniest possibility that even
one race *might* be...no-one has ever proved to me that the ETH
is completely unreasonable. Some of the arguments against the
ETH seem to be as much a religion as that of the True
Believers...

Now I know that Dave and Andy and John and some of the others
will probably laugh condescendingly and shake their heads with
an "Aaaw! He'll learn!" expression, and who knows? Maybe I will.

But at the moment, I prefer to keep my mind slightly open...

Cheers,

Dave, Yorkshire UFO Society

Yorkshire UFO Society, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 08:15:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


<snipped great overview for dissmissal of large number theory>

On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
Bonobo chimp, the dolphin, and lastly we homosaps argue for a
more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
understand. Our hubris is unjustified, on reflection; Aristotle
got us started down a prim rose path. Big numbers count -- if it
CAN happen it will happen. What remains is the lack of quality
support for an investigation of biblical proportion. CNN
knuckles under to the convenient interests of a corporate
monster, killing its investigation into the deaths of millions
of Americans. What else hides under that greasy tarp.

 >Maybe, beyond the usual e-mail oneupmanship, of course, we ought
 >to stop analyzing the motives of the various parties involved --
 >and stick to sheer speculation?

Ya' think? <g>.

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 6 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 14:58:26 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 10:41:53 -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: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 19:41:39 -0000

Jenny, your post requires an answer from me:

 >Is it really so odd that I take seriously the handing over of
 >information regarding RAF activities? I did not say I would not
 >do it, only that it was not a decision I could take without
 >approval of others (ie the RAF air crew themselves). Surely that
 >seems reasonable without seeking to make an issue out of it?

This was a question I suggested was posed to you due to the fact
that in a previous post you mentioned that permission would be
needed regarding the MOD and the Official Secrets Act. I was
merely pointing out that you would not be privy to that kind of
information. If you had read my post to Gildas correctly you
would have noticed that I pointed out that permission _would_
have been necessary from the witnesses themselves.

 >You are unaware of my arrangement with the BBC.  My programme
 >was co funded and sold on to other UK channels who are still
 >screening it under contract (one doing so in fact this very
 >week). So the situation was not clear cut as you suppose.

Am I to understand that it was a "Video Diary" you did. In that
case I would imagine it would not be difficult to obtain
permission. According to a BBC spokesperson, once the programme
is aired - people can quote from it as long as credits are
given.

 >As I told Mr Thouanel this was a short term restriction (whilst
 >I sorted things out) not a long term refusal to help. I made
 >that abundantly clear, and have told the list this repeatedly
 >all week - as you would know if you had read the debate (which
 >you admit not to doing) .

Would not a phone call have been suffice to the BBC or a quick
note? I did not admit to not reading it Jenny, just that it was
too long and I did not want to get into a debate on such lengthy
posts - but here I am!

 >I am quite happy to allow people to quote from my interviews -
 >even ill mannered critics -  but you must not mislead people
 >that they need just credit the BBC as their only requirement
 >because copyright in the interview material is mine.

In that case, why have you made such a big thing about needing
permission from the BBC?

 >You think I might be upset by your handing over to a man who has
 >mislead this list about my actions a tape of my hard won
 >interviews whilst implying he doesnt even need to credit me for
 >use of my work?

It stands to reason that he would credit you Jenny. We were
discussing the BBC at the time.

 >But let me make clear that so long as fair credit is given any
 >of you are perfectly welcome to refer to - or quote from - my
 >interviews. I dont have the least problem with that and never
 >have had.

 >However, Ms Bruni, if you intend to send a transcript of my work
 >to anyone or  if you plan to  publish my work anywhere yourself,
 >then I do insist that you not just credit the BBC .  Thats a
 >legal courtesy we would expect of each other - although I trust
 >most of us habitually give credit to the UFOlogist whose work we
 >use.

I always credit everybody. No one can accuse me of not doing so.

 >Forgive me if thats not what you implied here, but its how it
 >read to me. That you had a transcript of my interview
 >(presumably transcribed for a reason) and that it only needed to
 >thank the BBC in order for someone to use it.  That is simply
 >not correct.

You are going off the track again Jenny. I did not say I had a
transcript of your interview. Please re-read what I wrote.

(I have a copy of the tape in question and would gladly give you
a transcript of the recorded interview (they don't say they did
NOT have visual sighting, at least not on the copy I have.), but
I don't think this would go down very well with Jenny.)

Does that imply I have a transcript already prepared?

 >I worked very hard on this documentary and whilst I have no
 >problem with ufology using the data I procured this has to
 >follow the normal rules of copyright  and courtesy . As a writer
 >you have to know that is how we do things. As a ufologist it
 >should be a matter of mutual respect .

I am not a ufologist BTW, and I abide by copyright and courtesy
rules.

 >I dont think I have ever denied an opportunity for anyone to
 >quote my work and have never requested a fee to do so from a
 >member of the UFO community. It is surely not unfair to require
 >proper credit in return?

No one is suggesting you not be credited. It is so obvious that
one would credit the person doing the interview. We were
discussing your own remarks that the BBC needed to give their
permission.

 >I might take this idea to its logical conclusion and argue, for
 >instance, that it is okay to reprint a chapter out of your
 >forthcoming Rendlesham book, forgetting to mention your name
 >because you merely researched and wrote it?  Of course I cannot
 >argue that and  - needless to say -  never would , but it
 >follows if anyone invests credit for my considerable research
 >into the BBC.

My articles on general ufology are all over the place,
especially on the web. I have never copyrighted them, people are
free to use them providing I am credited. That is common respect
and no one has done otherwise. With regards to my book and
people using that material, it is a matter for my publishers to
deal with. I would call it more of an investigation, not just
research BTW.

 >As for the witnesses not referring to any lack of a visual
 >sighting on TV what are you implying? I have stated this forms
 >part of their testimony. Are you doubting my word?

I am only pointing out that on the BBC tape which I have, which
appears to be the whole programme: the RAF chaps do not
specifically say they did not have a visual sighting, at least
not in the segment where you are interviewing them. Please
correct me if I am wrong but I can't find it. When you asked
them if they had tried to close in on the object, they explained
that that would have been impossible because it was stationary,
they further explained that it would have been impossible to
have intercepted a stationary object whilst they were travelling
at 350 mph. When you asked them if they tried to fly around it,
they told you that they overshot it, passed it, flew down and
then apparently turned around as they vectored onto it again
before it disappeared....

Now maybe they did not have a visual sighting, but they claim
the object was stationary at this stage, and they were unable to
intercept it - they say "again" which means this particular
chase was taking place during what has become to be known as the
second sighting.It seems the official report makes no mention of
the pilots having any visual contact in the second sighting,
only the first, were they did not see an object - just a bright
white light. Considering at least one of the pilots was up there
for a total of 55 minutes, travelling at 350 mph, (according to
your witness) it seems there must be more to the incident. It
will be interesting to hear what they said about the first
sighting.

 >The fact is that I spent eight months travelling the UK filming
 >that documentary. I did the research, much of the camera work,
 >and all the interviews. I then wrote and studio recorded all of
 >the script.
 >I have dozens of hours of film - most of which was never
 >transmitted. I own all the original tapes.

So if you own all the original tapes etc, why have you given all
the excuses, ie; MOD, Official Secrets Act, BBC... for not
offering the information to the French. If you are intending to
publish it in a book or make a new TV documentary I can see your
reasons. But now you have completely turned around and say _
you_ own the material.

 >This is another problem in the provision of full data on this case because
 >there is a huge amount of transcription work to do. Going off a few
 >moments on TV would not give anyone the full picture. Only a
 >report based on the entire interviews will suffice.

That is fair and I respect your thinking on that, but I was just
wondering why you did not use the segment on the documentary
where you claim the witness testimonies are different than the
original report. Surely that would have been an interesting
piece.

You state:

 > I did the research, much of the camera work, and all the interviews. I
then >wrote and studio recorded all of the script.

Considering you were involved in the latter and based  your conclusions on
the witness testimonies as being entirely different than the official
report - I would have thought it imperative that you edit that important piece
of information into the programme.

 >Thats why I promised to produce all the data for ufology in my
 >forthcoming report and I freely offered to send a copy of this
 >to Mr Thouanel out of what was a foolish sense of friendship and
 >cooperation .

 >Why was that not good enough for him, nor Mr Bourdais, or indeed
 >for anyone?

I don't know Jenny, but you can be difficult. The problem is
that when people question you about your work, you automatically
go on the defense. Is no one allowed to question you? Everyone
else gets questioned and are usually quite willing to respond in
a civil way.

 >The programme itself is not primarily about the Lakenheath case.
 >Inevitably therefore much of importance got left out. But the
 >air crew clearly did deny any visual sighting as I report in the
 >account sent to Mr Thouanel on the day after he first e mailed
 >me in July.

This denial does not appear in the programme, at least I can't
find it. Can you confirm, at least for the record, the actual
words they said which refers to that denial.

 >So please do not suggest to the contrary.

I am not, but would like to know what they said which points to
an actual denial. That's all.

Georgina Bruni








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 13:59:22 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 10:43:58 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:48:56 -0400
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Morning Dave

Sorry about the delay in answering this message but I have been
in Scotland installing a PC network.

 >>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.

Sounds fair enough.


 >>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).

Some would say that the pretty convincing evidence that you seek
is already there but that it is hotly contested because some
people wont accept what it represents. Not that I am suggesting
that you are one of those people.


 >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.

I understand your point, I just disagree with it.


 >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.

You sound a little touchy here Dave, did I strike a nerve?

 >>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.

I must say that I did not "fall for" Erich's _tales_. They
seemed to far fetched for this persons teenage years, even with
reading copious amounts of Sci-Fi books.


 >Really - some people have a lot of catching up to do.

Catch up to where? Your point of view? UFOIN's point of view? In
that case please count me out of the running.


 >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.

Is this one of the things that has lead you to your conclusion
of non ET explanation for UFO's? Is this why you was researching
folklore?

 >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.

Damn! You have the evidence of aliens disguising themselves as
fairies and you still are anti ET? Dave, come on man, where are
you at? <G>


 >>>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.

I'm glad we agree on something.

 >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.

Because of the old chestnut, it _proves_ life out there and some
people just don't want to accept that?


 >>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.

That is only sensible and you have my full support at this point. <g>


 >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.

Trouble is, it don't pay well. Some of us do it for love.


 >>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?

Nope.

 >>>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.

My proposition is

 >>You have practically stated that your opinion is  a closed mind
 >>to the ETH, so does this not prejudice your investigation?

Because you said

 >ETs are just one tiny, remote possibility,

That is all I am saying, no more, no less.

 >Dave Clarke

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                  The Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia Project

From: John Hayes <ufoinfo@ukgateway.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 14:22:09 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 11:42:46 -0500
Subject: The Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia Project


News from: The Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia Project

Ronald Story

6th November 1999

Ronald Story, compiler/editor of The Encyclopedia of UFOs-the
first book of its kind, published by Doubleday in 1980-has just
signed a publishing contract with New American Library of the
Penguin Putnam Group to produce a new comprehensive and
up-to-date Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters.


The new book is intended to be the definitive reference guide,
detailing alleged human contact and fascination with
extraterrestrials. Story's ground-breaking Encyclopedia of UFOs,
which had over 100 contributing experts, was praised by
reviewers as "�a peerless reference book�" "�a magnificent
achievement�" and "�the essential UFO reference work." The new
sourcebook will contain several hundred entries, arranged in
A-to-Z format, written by today's leading ET and UFO researchers
from around the world.

Story's new Web Site (http://www.RonaldStory.com) is designed to
keep readers up-to-date on the latest developments. The
forthcoming Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters promises
to be a gold mine of insights and information for those who
realize we are not only moving into a global, but also an
extraterrestrial age.

Whether or not you believe those who have claimed contact with
aliens, they may be coming soon-to a backyard near you!

Once again, Story's UFO-ET Encyclopedia Project will become an
international clearinghouse of information on UFOs and
extraterrestrial studies. For consulting, lectures, or
interviews contact Ron Story at:

P.O. Box 2453
Pinellas Park
FL 33780
USA

E-mail: ronldstory@aol.com
Phone: (727) 394-9190

As an author, Ronald Story is represented by:

Writers House LLC,
21 West 26th Street,
New York, NY 10010
Phone: (212) 685-2400

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



John Hayes

ufoinfo@ukgateway.net
webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives for UFO Roundup, UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: 'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 11:25:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 11:43:16 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments


 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >Subject: 'Cosmic Crashes' - Some Comments
 >Date: Sat, 07 Nov 98 19:14:30 PST


Re: Bill Chalker's comments on Nick Redfern's 'Cosmic Crashes'.

I'm certainly no Redfern apologist, having in depth knowledge
of at least one case in his book, and disagree with both his
beliefs and conclusions but Nick isn't on e-mail and can't reply.

Therefore below is an excerpt from a letter Nick has submitted
to Magonia magazine in reponse to a review of his book. It
probably won't satisfy Redfern's critics but in lieu of direct
comment from Nick this seems to offer at least some response to
Bill's criticisms.

---

  26 October 1999

  As readers of the book will quickly become aware, it's written
  in a very different style to my previous books. Wheras Covert
  Agenda and FBI Files were essentially straightforward looks at
  the officially released files of the MOD and FBI (with my
  thoughts added), Cosmic Crashes is written in the first person
  and is an account of what happened when, for approximately a
  couple of years, I immersed myself in the bizarre world of
  crashed UFO accounts within the UK.

  Andy, I think, is one of the few who seems to realise what I
  was trying to do. I was not trying to write 'about' crahsed
  UFOs in the UK as such. I was trying to get across what
  happened to one UFO author (i.e. me) when they immersed
  themselves in the aforementioned bizarre world, the people they
  met and the experiences which they had. Nowt more....

---

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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

              'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Woods & Ledger

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:09:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:09:28 -0500
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Woods & Ledger

Our first guest tonight works in the newsroom of a local Toronto
TV station which has been described by Frank Magazine as 'global
village idiots'. Mike Woods has some very definite views on
UFOs, the phenomena surrounding them, those in power and those
who research. Mike cracks us up regularly - that's why we invite
him back every month


   --------------------
  /// Don Ledger
---------------------

Our second guest tonight is a pilot, a civil servant and has
been researching UFO phenomena since 1992. He's the author of
'Maritime UFO Files - Personal accounts taken from actual
military and RCMP documents.'

Joining us from Bedford Nova Scotia is Don Ledger...


Join Mike Woods, Don Ledger, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

               Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 09:26:49 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:12:19 -0500
Subject: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310

November 7, 1999


Upcoming Fields of Dreams and Ron Russell Crop Circle Lectures
in Vancouver

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


The Millennium Forum Lecture Series

FIELDS OF DREAMS 1999

Presented by Circles Phenomenon Research Canada and
The Millennium Project

A Visual Presentation on the Continuing Crop Circle Enigma

*Special Reports on the 1999 Canadian Crop Circles*


The enigmatic circles, symbols and pictograms which have been
found in crop fields in England and worldwide since at least the
early 1970s continued to be reported in many countries in 1999,
including England, Germany, the Czech Republic, Holland, Austria,
Italy, Peru, Israel, Latvia, Australia, the USA and Canada. Some of
the largest and most intricate and beautiful formations ever appeared
in the fields of southern England this year, which continues to be the
central focus of major activity, with over 150 formations reported in
total this past summer. Many more across Europe and North America.
In Canada, at least 19 formations were found, some of which were the
largest and most impressive ever seen in this country, and the majority
of which were able to be extensively documented by CPR-Canada
coordinators and field workers. Many physical anomalies were also
again found within some Canadian formations this year, which are now
being studied by biophysicist Dr. W. C. Levengood and the BLT
Research Team, as well as other associated unexplained anomalies and
phenomena.

Paul Anderson, director of Circles Phenomenon Research
Canada and founder of The Millennium Project, will be presenting the
latest news and reports on the 1999 crop circles, highlighted with
slides and video, with special reports on the Canadian formations.
CPR-Canada, an affiliate of CPR International, has been investigating
and documenting this phenomenon since 1995. A question and answer
session will follow the presentation.


Monday, November 29, 1999
7:30 PM
Barclay Manor House
1447 Barclay Street, Vancouver, BC
(affiliated with the West End Community Centre)

FREE ADMISSION

Call 257.8333 to Pre-Register
(please book ahead as seating is limited)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

Barclay Manor House
604.257.8349

CPR-Canada / TMP
604.731.8522
mailto:psa@direct.ca

CPR-Canada Web
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310

TMP Web
http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


Fields of Dreams, an ongoing series of presenations by CPR-Canada,
is also part of The Millennium Forum Lecture Series and The Millennium
Forum, a public education project of TMP. Contact CPR-Canada / TMP
for more information on upcoming lectures or presentations for your
group or event.

_____________________________


RON RUSSELL CROP CIRCLE LECTURE

Presented by Pacific Research

Crop circle researcher Ron Russell will be presenting a talk and slide
show at the Pacific Space Centre in Vancouver, with updates on all of
the 1999 formations in England this year. Ron is an artist, photographer
and representative of the Centre for Crop Circle Studies, Midwest
Research and CSETI. Sure to be a wonderful presentation!

Saturday, December 4, 1999
7:30 PM
Pacific Space Centre Auditorium
1100 Chestnut Street, Vancouver
Free Parking

Tickets: $15.00 (including tax), available at Banyen Books & Sound
or at the door. Advance tickets or reservations recommended.

_____________________________


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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                     Official Italian 'MJ-12' Documents?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 12:42:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:17:54 -0500
Subject: Official Italian 'MJ-12' Documents?


 >On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Ryan Wood wrote:

 >Dear Mr. Balaskas,

 >Wow want a find. Naturally, doing the forensic tests is
 >important, but it is difficult to do anything more than paper.
 >However, if you have known authentic exemplars of ink or
 >classified stamping to compare with then you will be way ahead.
 >Need to look at all the basics, language, people, format...etc.

 >Are they classified? Where did Massimo get them from?

 >Good Luck..
 >Ryan Wood

Greetings UFO UpDates list members.

Earlier this month Massimo Ferrante, director of a ufology group
in Italy send me copies of some official looking documents
which, I was, told refer to a 1933 UFO crash retrieval during
the Fascist Regime in Italy. I have already shared the
information which I got from Mr. Ferrante with other
researchers, including Dr. Ryan Wood, who could possibly shed
more light on these amazing documents.

Since I do not have my own Web site to share these documents
with all UFO researchers, Tony Craddock of CSETI was kind enough
to post the e-mail I sent to him, including the actual documents
sent to me by Mr. Ferrante, on CSETI's "List of Possible UFO/ET
Craft Crashes and Retrievals". Not having these actual documents
in my possession, I cannot help Mr. Ferrante directly other than
to pass on the comments from archivists and historians in Canada
who are very familiar with other official Italian documents from
the pre-WWII era.

Your comments and suggestions would be much appreciated and will
be forwarded on to Mr. Ferrante in Italy.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 12:56:37 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:43:33 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:59:11 -0500

 ><snip>

 >>Perhaps he [Swords] doesn't succeed. But I think you're
 >>ignoring his main point, which is that mainstream scientists
 >>are, on the whole, so prejudiced against any belief in a
 >>designed universe that they can't accept the possibility that
 >>evolution would (for purely scientific reasons) proceed in
 >>similar ways on similar planets. This isn't unreasonable for
 >>him to argue, whatever his biases.

 ><snip>

 >Greg, Thread

 >The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
 >universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument. At heart, it
 >goes something like this: There are 100 billion stars in our
 >galaxy and 100 billion galaxies in the universe, therefore, even
 >if only a small percentage of all the available planets in the
 >universe exhibit conditions necessary for the development of
 >life, one is still left with an arguably Large Number because
 >one began with such a Very Large Number to begin with, ergo,
 >life, i.e., evolution, has theoretically gained a foothold
 >wherever possible, and a good deal of those footholds no doubt
 >eventually result in intelligent life. The famous Drake Equation
 >is this argument in numbers.

 >The most extreme opposite of this view possible is that mankind
 >is unqiue in the universe, which strikes most of us as highly
 >arrogant, not to mention a rather inefficient use of all that
 >random matter and energy. After all, why go to that much trouble
 >just to favor one little obscure mudball?

 >The "theology" of the cosmos and creation becomes more
 >troublling with almost every new color picture we get from the
 >Hubble Telescope. Yesterday, or the day before, the NY Times
 >published a picture of two galaxies colliding, the cosmic
 >equivalent of a head-on collision between two galactic
 >18-wheelers on the Interstate Highway. If sentient beings are
 >fairly common, I'd hate to add up the number of same perishing
 >at this very moment because they had the misfortunate to evolve
 >in a bad neighborhood. Colliding galaxies don't say much for the
 >Creator's foresight or organization skills, either, unless one
 >wants to argue that they're somehow necessary to the greater
 >scheme of things.

 >In short, the universe is a very dangerous place in which to try
 >to raise a family.

 >Snipped respectfully

Actually, collisions such as these take place quite often in the
Universe.  The result of these collisions is usually another
oddly shaped galaxy some billions of years later. However damage
control is minimal, as the actuall number of collisions are few,
infrequent and very far between.  This is largely as a result of
the distances between stars in most galaxies.

Actually, the most dangerous place to live, if indeed there
is any life there, is the center of any galaxy, except, perhaps
the round, ball-shaped spherical galaxies, which centers appear
to be just as dense as as the rest of it but not nearly as dense
as skeptics are dense.

There is the theory that the Milky Way and it's assorted
flotsome of nearby smaller gallaxies is the result of such
a close encounter. (i.e., the Megallenic clouds)

Ergo, the phrase, "Oh, the Humanity!" need not apply. Just
a heads up in case you are sitting up all night gulping
Gripple worrying about Jupiter lying with Mars or something.

 >But the old table is still set, too, if anyone wants to sit down
 >at it. Are most ufologists secretly, subconsciously afraid that
 >we really are alone? I admit it would be the waste of a
 >perfectly good universe were that to turn out to be the case,
 >although there are the troubling observations above. On the
 >other hand, apart from their really neat Space Corvettes (or is
 >it Porsches?) and the ability to beam people through bedroom
 >walls (plus those mysterious, seemingly useless "implants") --
 >experiences not yet granted me and thee -- the Grays haven't
 >impressed me as all that much more highly evolved -- or
 >accidental -- than we are.


Ferrari's pal.  Mostly driven by Michael Schumacher.  Wouldn't it
be a gas (no pun intended) if Michael AND Rolph drove for Team
Ferrari at the same time?

 >Maybe, beyond the usual e-mail oneupmanship, of course, we ought
 >to stop analyzing the motives of the various parties involved --
 >and stick to sheer speculation?

 >Dennis Stacy

Actually Dennis, this was not a bad monograph.  Maybe a little
on the lengthy side, but I actually enjoyed the read.
Seriously. Very unusual.

This may be due to the fact that the other night, when I was
called out during a local emergency, to do my duty as an AP, we
arrested a dude who was very drunk and even more disorderly.
Cuffed and sprawled on the ground in front of the police station
in a small Westchester County town, he was wrestling with us.
We got him up and led him inside.  However I remained on the
ground in a slightly bent position, in which position I remained
whilst they (my best friend and his fellow cops) attempted to
discern the reason for my disability.  "Whassa matta, did he
shoot you? knife you? What?"  "It's my back, I can't move!"  At
which point everyone started laughing their respective
reproductive organs off.  Some friends.

Actually it was good that I was bent over, as I was able to
easily slip inside my cruiser and go to my doctor immediately,
lights, siren and pain.  The knotted ball in the left side of my
lower back no longer bothers me, between the methocarbamol and
percoset, not to mention Gripple, I feel fine.  No, really!

Which is why I am so very happy to tell you how much I enjoyed
your treatise but of course, do not agree with you at all.

First, your premise for the entire article is that estinkin
comfort zone.  Comfort for whom?  Us?  You may have forgotten to
remember that "we" may not be the only type of life in the
universe.  If I am not mistaken, Tomothy Good wrote a book I
started recently, but due to searing pain, left for better days,
in which some opined that life exists in the high country of
Venus.

Now whilst I am not necessarily agreeing with the guy what made
this interesting revelation, it points to a fact.  Life can be
beautiful in Venus or even Big Jupe!  Why the hell not?  Who
knows what form(s) life may have taken.

Some believe that one of the reasons for this abduction phenom
is that the entities involved, are adjusting their as well as
our, life forms, such that we may exist as the best of both here
on earth. Perhaps their joint was involved in a galactic
collision or something, eh?

As for that last crack about going through walls.... listen to
this one Den, not only did I go through a wall or two in my
time, not only did I glide ten or twelve feet at a step, but I
actually floated through the casement windows at 4031 Wickham
Avenue when I was a kid.  Of course, at the time, I was less,
uh, wide, than I am now.  Even so, I did not fit through a pane,
I had to get pushed through the actual steel casements.  And I
do recall very well, the one time I saw a flash of light, blue,
it's always blue, and was being beamed up by some dirt bag
equivelent of Scottie as a Gray, while observing that the house
next door was on fire.  I wondered if my neighbors were going to
die because I and "them" were the only ones who knew that a fire
was burning in that basement.  I was in tears as I was being
beamed up.

On awaking, I forgot the incident entirely and was surprised to
learn that there was a fire next door, and that the family got
out, and was staying with us downstairs.  I remembered
everything when mom told me after our company left for a hotel,
how odd it was that I did not wake up, as the buring house faced
one of my bedroom windows.

In conclusion, I shall yet again conclude with a Dylan quote.

"I haven't even got the strength to take another shot, and my
best friend, my doctor, doesn't even know, what is is I got."

Best personal regards, although this may be the last time, as I
was given only a few days of percoset, I have an addictive
personality, you see.  Part of the abduction set.  The complete
set includes phobias, getting really ticked at skeptics and in
some cases, not being able to look at certain insects.

Have you ever sent us a photo with your CV?

Love and kisses,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                            Arnold�s UFO-Film?

From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 13:10:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:45:33 -0500
Subject: Arnold�s UFO-Film?


Hi List,

Now again I has read the "Proceedings of the First International
UFO Congress" in Chicago (1977). On the symposium has Kenneth
Arnold reported that he has taken few films about UFOs.

Does anyone know more about these films and has anyone any idea
in which video-documentary or TV-broadcast was shown material
from Arnold�s stock?

Greetings

Werner Walter, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 7

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 18:51:18 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
 >universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument. At heart, it
 >goes something like this: There are 100 billion stars in our
 >galaxy and 100 billion galaxies in the universe, therefore, even
 >if only a small percentage of all the available planets in the
 >universe exhibit conditions necessary for the development of
 >life, one is still left with an arguably Large Number because
 >one began with such a Very Large Number to begin with, ergo,
 >life, i.e., evolution, has theoretically gained a foothold
 >wherever possible, and a good deal of those footholds no doubt
 >eventually result in intelligent life. The famous Drake Equation
 >is this argument in numbers.

 >The "theology" of the cosmos and creation becomes more
 >troublling with almost every new color picture we get from the
 >Hubble Telescope. Yesterday, or the day before, the NY Times
 >published a picture of two galaxies colliding, the cosmic
 >equivalent of a head-on collision between two galactic
 >18-wheelers on the Interstate Highway. If sentient beings are
 >fairly common, I'd hate to add up the number of same perishing
 >at this very moment because they had the misfortunate to evolve
 >in a bad neighborhood.

This is a very bad metaphor and misleading.  Such "collisions"
are relatively rare, and a "collision" of two galaxies is not
the same as a collision of two solid objects. It's more like the
very slow "collision" of two swarms of bees, more of a mixing or
intersection.  What effects this has on the star populations is
still being worked out.  But stars aren't slamming into one
another by the billions.  The point is, such "collisions" do not
extinguish all life in the two galaxies and may have very little
effect.

If I remember correctly, it is believed that the intersection of
gas clouds would hasten star formation, which would favor the
formation of more life over the long run.  On the other hand,
you would probably get more supernovae, which are capable of
extinguishing life in their immediate neighborhood for tens of
light years.

If life on Earth has dodged a cosmic bullet, it would have to be
a nearby supernova which would have stopped the evolution of
life in its tracks.  The radiation would have sterilized Earth,
even stripped it of its atmosphere and oceans were the supernova
close enough.

 >Colliding galaxies don't say much for the
 >Creator's foresight or organization skills, either, unless one
 >wants to argue that they're somehow necessary to the greater
 >scheme of things.

It's very possible that such collisions might actually hasten
star formation and thus lead to life.  It can also lead to the
merging of two galaxies and the formation of a larger galaxy.
But why read any sort of purpose into this?  It just cosmic
billiard balls.

 >In short, the universe is a very dangerous place in which to try
 >to raise a family.

Yes, there is always that supernova thug lurking around the
corner.

 >Discoveries are now pouring in on a regular basis that are
 >forcing a sharp reassessment of the way that we look at our own
 >planet and solar system.

 >The traditional view is that each sun has a "comfort zone" of
 >possible habitation. Too close to the sun and you wind up like
 >Mercury, too far from the sun and you end up like poor Pluto. In
 >our own case, only one out of nine orbiting planets (if you
 >count Pluto as a planet) safely inhabits the sun's comfort zone.
 >So what, says the Very Large Number argument. If only 10 or 15 %
 >of all planets in the universe fall with the solar comfort zone,
 >we're still left with a Large Number indeed.

OK, agreed.

 >True, but there's more. Take a moon, for example, not just any
 >moon, but our Moon specifically, which may have played an
 >indispensable role in the evolution of intelligent life on Earth.

We're now on very speculative ground, but interesting
speculation nonetheless.

 >For one thing, it appears to be rather oddly suited to
 >us, both in size, location, and content, or its specific
 >gravity. To shorten a growing post, the result of the Moon's
 >being just the size it is where it is means that our oceans have
 >the tides they do. And the tidelands probably played a crucial
 >role in the eventual evolution of lifeforms capable of surviving
 >on land. Water organisms stranded on land by low tides either
 >evolve to stay outside their normal medium for longer and longer
 >periods of time -- or they don't.

The tides are a lot more complicated than the moon simply
tugging on the oceans.  The sun also tugs, though with about
half the effect.  Just as important is the mutual rotation of
the earth and moon about a common center of gravity.  This
causes a centrifugal force bulge in the oceans opposite the
position of the moon, the reason we have two high tides a day
instead of one.

In brief, Earth st ill would have had tides without the moon,
because of the pull of the sun, but they would have been only
about 1/3 that of present-day tides, and there would have been
only one cycle of tides per day instead of two.  There also
would be less variation in the tides.  The moon causes higher
tides and more variation.

But it gets even more complicated than that.  The moon used to
be much closer to the Earth than it is now (it is been receding
slowly from the beginning because of tidal friction, which also
slows down the rotation of the Earth).  The tides early in
Earth's history were enormous, perhaps hundreds of feet
variation a day.  This hardly seems conducive to the formation
of stable tidal life forms.  So did the moon hasten the
formation of tidal life forms on Earth or delay it?  See how
tricky this speculative business becomes?

A billion years or so ago, the tides were only slightly higher
than now, which would not overly stress tidal life forms and
allow them to take hold.  It is about this time that evolution
really began to pick up steam on planet Earth and more complex
multicellular lifeforms began to evolve.  A half billion years
later (give or take) the land was beginning to be invaded.

 >Even if life were capable of
 >developing high intelligence in a watery medium alone, that
 >wouldn't translate to space travel, if for no other reason than
 >it's damnably difficult to build a fire underwater. No fire, no
 >smelting of metals.

Agreed, but I had some very frustrating debates over on Usenet
with people who tried to argue that technological civilizations
could evolve underwater.  Bahhh!

 >But according to the Very Large Number theory, moons, even
 >seemingly "perfect" ones, must be relatively easy to come by,
 >too, like all the other ingredients necessary for intelligent
 >life. Maybe, maybe not. In fact, the growing evidence is that
 >our own Moon resulted not from accretion of the stuff that forms
 >planets and moons in any solar system, but as a consequence of a
 >contingent collision between the Earth and another large body,
 >knocking what became the Moon out the early Earth.

 >Note that both bodies -- proto-Earth and the object it collided
 >with -- would have had to impact at just the right speed and
 >angle to produce the resulting "just right" Moon as we know (and
 >love) it.

There is nothing inherently "just right" about the moon nor is
it known whether it is essential to the evolution of complex
life forms.   For all we know, maybe the collision delayed the
development of the first life forms, or the high tides created
by a close, large moon delayed the invasion of the land by life.

 >But the Very Large Number argument says that this,
 >too, must happen relatively frequently.

Indeed.  Photos from our space probes to Jupiter and Saturn show
that collisions of large bodies were quite frequent in the
formation of the solar system.  One of the smaller moons of
Saturn (if I recall correctly) was seemingly split in half and
came back to together again.  Another has an enormous impact
crater from a collison which nearly broke it apart.  The
collision of some other protoplanet with the Earth which let to
the formation of the moon, and probably a larger earth with a
larger nickle-iron core, was not unique even in our own solar
system.  It may have been unusual in being a grazing collision,
rather than one more nearly head-on.

 >Apart from a Moon, it appears that the collision also resulted
 >in our planet's angle of spin,

Probably had some effect on the tilt of the Earth's axis, though
it's hard to say how much.

 > which, in turn, is just right
 >enough to produce our four seasons, the regular, annual cycling
 >(for most of the planet) between extremes of heat and cold.
 >Think of it as a weather tide and the importance of seasons for
the evolution of intelligent life becomes more pronounced. In
the same way that water-medium lifeforms had to contend with the
absence of water, landbased lifeforms would soon enough find
themselves having to evolve to survive extremes of heat and
cold. To jump ahead a few million years and grossly simplify, if
you're a primate, it would behoove you to learn how to sew
clothes out of animal skins, not to mention knowing when to put
plant seeds in the ground.

Mars has almost exactly the same tilt to its spin axis and has
seasonal variations similar to Earth.  So apparently Earth could
have a similar tilt axis with or without the moon.  There has
been seem recent computer modeling to suggest that the moon acts
to stablize the Earth's tilt axis, whereas Mars' axis of tilt
probably wanders slowly with time.

Now is this good or bad for the evolution of more complex life?
On the one hand, one could argue that such slow variation is
good because it slowly stresses the lifeforms and forces them to
adapt or die.  In this scenario, the moon may have retarded
evolution on Earth by keeping our seasons too stable.  On the
other hand, maybe such stability is good.  Maybe you want fairly
stable environments and don't want to overly stress your life
forms.

Again, see how complicated this business becomes?  Did the moon
speed up evolution on Earth or slow it down?  It's hard to say.

I also want to point out that there isn't a tilt axis that is
necesarily "just right."  Less tilt simply means less seasonal
variation in temperatures, much like experienced by the tropics,
which are riot with life forms.  More tilt would result in
harsher seasonal variations, much like the more northern
latitudes, which have fewer life forms.  Would such greater
seasonal variation hasten evolution or slow it down, or not make
much difference because there would still be latitudes on such
planets which were still "just right" for evolution?  Nobody
really knows the answers to such questions.

And one final point about the moon's effect on Earth.  As
mentioned above, tidal drag is causing the moon to recede from
Earth (lessening the tides), but also causing the Earth's
rotation rate to slow down.  Four billion years ago, the Earth's
day is believed to have been only about 10 hours long.  One
effect would be to decrease daily temperature variations.  Is
this good or bad for evolution?   Another effect would be to
create much more violent weather conditions, high winds, e.g.
That might not have much effect on oceanic life, but might not
be so good for the evolution of land life forms.  But who knows?

This is a very complicated business, and those who argue that
the moon was essential for the evolution of intelligent life on
Earth on just whistling in the wind right now.  Maybe they are
right and maybe they aren't.  I see plausible arguments both
ways.

All of these hypotheses of the effect of the moon are evolution
are presently unfalsifiable.  According to the likes of Peter
Brookesmith, that makes them "unscientific" and therefore not
even worthy of consideration.  That is sheer nonsense and shows
a complete lack of understanding as to how science really
operates.    Unfalsifiable hypotheses, or speculation if you
will, are often the starting point for very fruitful scientific
investigations.

 >Another complicating factor is that it may not be enough just to
 >be a planet that formed within a particular sun's comfort zone.
 >As we've already seen, you need a moon (for tides) and an angle
 >of rotation to the sun that results in seasons.

Again, Earth would have tides even without the moon, but the
size and variation would not be as great.  Extreme tides early
in the Earth's history could conceivably have even retarded
evolution.  All the planets have tilts of varying degrees. The
present-day tilts of the Earth and Mars are nearly identical,
suggesting that Earth's tilt is hardly unusual.  Earth's tilt
may not even be optimal for evolutionary progress.  Other tilts
cause less or greater seasonal variations than experienced by
Earth, and could conceivably prod evolution on at a greater
pace, all depending on one's assumptions.

 >For example,
 >Jupiter could conceivably occupy the slot in our own star's
 >comfort zone that we do, and it wouldn't have a snowball's
 >chance in hell of supporting intelligent life. Bad air, worse
 >weather, and crushing gravity, to name but a few objections. You
 >might manage to string a few microbes together, but developing
 >intelligence and the ability to build a spacheship on the
 >"surface" of a huge gas giant like Jupiter would remain an
 >impossibly daunting task.

 >So just finding yourself in the comfort zones still isn't a
 >guarantee. You've still got to be the right size planet in the bargain,

Yes, both of these factors definitely help.  However, there is
probably a fair amount of room for slop in the planet's size and
distance from the star. A little tinkering with the atmosphere's
chemistry and distance from it's star (plus the parent star's
luminosity) can produce different comfort zones with varying
planetary sizes that may still give conditions very similar to
those on Earth.  There isn't one unique size or distance that is
"just right."

 >you got to have your air and water mojos working -- and
 >apparently you need to be made of the right stuff. That is, it
 >appears that you also need an iron core, not necessarily a
 >standard-planet item if we look around us at the other planets
 >(and moons) in our own solar system. How did we get ours while
 >other planets didn't? That's a good question, and if I knew I'd tell you.

I don't think that is an accurate statement, but I honestly
don't know enough about planetary science to presently dispute
it with any accuracy.  As far as I know, all the rocky planets
have nickle-iron cores of varying degrees, though I think
Earth's is unusually large (perhaps because of the hypothesized
collision which also resulted in the moon).  Earth has a very
active geology compared to say Mars or Mercury, but Venus is
also believed to be very active, with an interior molten state.
This is partly a function of the comparative sizes of Earth and
Venus compared to smaller planets like Mercury and Mars (or the
moon).  They are bigger and retain heat better, the heat being
generated by radioactive decay of elements in the interior.

The  active geology and nickle-ron core gives Earth a
comparatively strong magnetic field compared to nearby rocky
planets, which is important in deflecting cosmic radiation.
However, Earth also undergoes magnetic field reversals every few
million years, during which the Earth's field is drastically
reduced, subjecting everything to increased radiation.  Yet life
on Earth, including our ancient ancestors, has easily managed to
survive these many field reversals, and perhaps the increased
radiation levels lead to increased mutation rates which
ultimately hasten evolution.

Like I said before, this speculative business about what pushes
evolution along and what doesn't is very tricky.

 >All I know is that a molten iron core comes in handy because it
 >acts like an energy bank where energy can be stored and released
 >slowly over time.

The earth's interior heat is generated by the decay of
radioactive elements, which also creates the molten iron core.
I don't know where you get this iron core acting as an "energy
bank" of some sort.  The internal molten state has a lot to do
with Earth's active geology, which probably is important for
continued evolution, and also generates the Earth's magnetic
field, in a poorly understood way, which provides us with the
some protection from cosmic radiation, whose ultimate importance
to evolution is debatable.

 >Where do the external deposits come from? From
 >collisions with asteroids like the one that probably led to the
 >extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago (and possibly
 >"permitted" the dominance of mammals -- leading to us).

Or possibly the dinosaurs were already evolving to intelligent
lifeforms as some scientists have speculated ("dinosaur man").
If that were the case, then the asteroid collision might have
slowed down the development of intelligent life on Earth.

It's all so complicated.

Earth not only collided with dense rocky stuff, but also with a
lot of icy comets.  The comets are now believed to be important
sources of water and organic compounds.  Earth's oceans are
believed to have been formed from them complete with primitive
organic alphabet soup.

But contrary to they way you are depicting it here, Earth was
hardly singled out.  All protoplanets were bombarded this way.
Mars and Venus, e.g., are also now believed by many planetary
scientists to have had oceans in their early days, but later
lost them.  Venus was too hot, and Mars was too small to hold on
to them.

 >And here's where the gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn come in
 >handy, at least in our case. Positioned as they are on the outer
 >boundaries of our solar system, they act like sentinels, their
 >massive gravity sinks sweeping up all sorts of incoming debris
 >that might have otherwise completely extinguished the evolution
 >of intelligent life on this planet as we know it. Remember
 >Jupiter sucking up those comets a couple of years ago? Thanks, Jupiter!

Yeah, we owe you one!  Let's have lunch.

 >More interestingly, the sentinels can't be perfect. Scoop up all
 >incoming artillery and the Earth's iron core can't meet its
 >energy budget -- nor suffer the sort of local cosmic cataclysms
 >that favored mammal over reptile.

Again you demonstrate your mammalian bias (mammalianism?) and disrespect
towards reptiles (reptilianism?).  Dinosaurs (which aren't reptiles)
ultimately may have made a perfectly respectable technological civilization.

 >I've got to cut this short or Errol (and the wife) are going to
 >kill me. The point is, it's easy to imagine an Earth to which
 >none of the above happened: a rocky planet, with or without water,

The question now seems to be not where planets like Earth got
their water, but how did they hang on to it?  It's probably
partly a function of the being large enough to hold on to it
with gravitation, and temperate enough that it doesn't boil off
into space, as apparently happened on Venus.

 >that never gave birth to a moon, never had tides in its oceans,

Uhhh, but we would have had tides nonetheless, just smaller
tides with less variation.  And maybe the very large tides Earth
had initially were detrimental to evolution.

 >never underwent seasonal change,

Another strawman.  Seasons are hardly unique to Earth, even in
our own solar system, Mars being a splendid example.  Earth's
seasonal variations might not be optimal for evolution.  And
whether seasonal variations are even essential to evolution of
higher lifeforms is unknown.

 >didn't have its own internal energy bank (so that its oceans
 >didn't freeze  over),
 >and -- arguably -- never played host to the evolution of an
 >intelligent lifeform capable of constructing space shuttles and
 >leaving its atmosphere.

 >In short, the Earth has a _history_ over billions of years,
 >consisting of a series of highly contingent events that maybe
 >not even Very Large Numbers may be able to adequately account for.

For all anybody knows right now, these same "highly contingent
events," which you argue were essential for the evolution of
intelligent life here, may actually have slowed the evolution of
intelligent life.  Maybe Earth, instead of being a shining
example of how evolution works, is really one of galaxy's
klutzes and slow kids.  We made it in spite of ourselves.

 >Very Large Numbers don't necessarily guarantee a place for life
 >to gain a foothold on any particular planet  in any particular
 >comfort zone in any particular solar system, nor do they assure
 >any particular outcome. (Combining amino acids into chains of
 >self-replicating RNA, for example, doesn't seem to be a snap.)
 >If evolution is truly random and dependent on a chain of
 >contingent events, there is no end teleology. What there is a
 >Very Large Number of, then, are evolutionary false starts and
 >dead ends, maybe endless examples of same. Who ultimately knows?

Exactly.  But many of your arguments about critical factors are
highly speculative and oversimplified.  Ultimately nobody knows
the degree to which each of these factors is important or even
essential.  The galaxy could be teeming with intelligent life,
or it could be extremely rare.

 >But the old table is still set, too, if anyone wants to sit down
 >at it. Are most ufologists secretly, subconsciously afraid that
 >we really are alone?

Speaking for myself, being alone means that if we destroy our
planet through our stupidity and greed that would be the end of
intelligent life in the universe.  That would indeed be a damn
shame.

Thank you for some interesting speculation.

David Rudiak









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 8

                 [SO] Preview: The Face on Mars Processed...

From: Steve Wingate <stevew@magiclink.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:09:24 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 08:39:17 -0500
Subject: [SO] Preview: The Face on Mars Processed...


This is an image of the Face on Mars, processed with Maximum Entropy
Deconvolution. This image was processed directly from the raw MGS
image, sp122003. The processing steps were:  FFT filter with bandcut filter
manually selected to remove periodic noise (ENVI), destripe (IDL), apply
Maximum Entropy Deconvolution, using a Gaussian point spread function
with a radius of 0.85, and linear stretch (MaxIm DL), and destripe (IDL).

The resulting image reveals the Face with detail never seen before. The
sharper and lower noise image suggests that the Face may actually consist
of a honeycomb structure which has partially collapsed. This may be some
type of previously inhabited artificial structure.

Remember the words of Dan Goldin, NASA director, when reversed on Art
Bell's radio program: "It's a weapon!"

http://www.anomalous-images.com/mgs/Face_MaxEnt_slw.jpg

Steve

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Wingate

California Director
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL

Anomalous Images and UFO Files
http://www.anomalous-images.com

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

     GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU!
Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator fills in
forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in free coupons!
   <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/gator4 ">Click Here</a>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
****************************
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(A Non-Profit Organization)

Skywatch International Inc. and this list service are not responsible
for content or authenticity of posts. Skywatch International, Inc.
endorses no political candidate for office due to the organization's
status as a non-profit corporation.

"What could be stranger than the truth?"

To POST a message to this list, sent it to:
    Skyopen@onelist.com

To SUBSCRIBE, send a blank message to:
    Skyopen-subscribe@onelist.com

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank message to:
    Skyopen-unsubscribe@onelist.com

Please visit the Skywatch International Inc. Website At:
http://www.skywatch-international.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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 17:51:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:19:15 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 13:09:59 -0500

 >>Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:53 +0100 (MET)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:38:00 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: UFO UpDates FAQ? [was: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!]

 >>Your suggestion of a FAQ reminds me of something else that can
 >>be found in the Updates archives. Has a skeptic ever publicly
 >>changed his mind on this list? I know of no example, but I'm too
 >>lazy too browse through - what is it? - four years of messages.

 >How often does anybody change his or her mind, publicly, on this
 >list? Or admit a mistake?

 >It's all too rare.

 >Greg Sandow

I have publicly stated a number of times (but not on this list)
that I was wrong about the Marshall to Truman via Humelsine memo
in TOP SECRET/MAJIC. It is definitely an emulation of a real
memo from Marshall to Truman about General Albert C. Wedemeyer
rather than about General Nathan F. Twining. The signature  etc
are all real and apparently scanned or xeroxed from the real
memo in "Wedemeyer Reports" a book with several other Tim Cooper
"MJ-12 Document" originals also retyped with slight changes and
handwritten parts scanned or Xeroxed. I am still, of course,
convinced that The Eisenhower Briefing Document, the Truman
Forrestal Memo, and the Cutler Twining memo are genuine.

With regard to the objection to the CUTLER TWINING memo having a
"wrong" security marking of TOP SECRET RESTRICTED , It should be
noted that the GAO report of their activities seeking Roswell
information noted on page 80 that in some TOP SECRET files they
had found several instances of the use of this classification
even though they had been earlier told it wasn't in use at that
time (1954). Those critics making that argument should admit
their error.

A number of UK researchers have claimed that there is no
evidence to support the notion of alien abductions of
earthlings. They need to go to their dictionaries. Testimonial
evidence from sworn witnesses is indeed EVIDENCE, very much
appreciated by judges and attorneys.  Check it out and then
admit you are wrong.

A number of UK researchers have claimed that UFO stories  merely
represent exposure to pop culture. So how come there weren't a
load of sightings of vehicles such as those described in the
very popular  Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon comic strips? In fact
the sequence is in reverse. the sightings were of  saucer shapes
before the pop culture switched to track the real reports. There
are of course reports from primitive cultures NOT exposed to
Western popculture. Let us admit our errors.

Dennis did a nice piece on laws of large numbers and the false
SETI arguments. But he is answering the wrong question. Do we
know how many civilizations there are, or how long each has
existed, or where they have colonized and when? No, we don't.
Does this mean we have no visitors and there is nobody out
there? Of course not. It means we are ignorant. Our ancestors
didn't know about virus and bacteria, but they still got sick.
The EVIDENCE from all over the planet indicates there are
manufactured craft containing unusual beings being seen, and
performing maneuvers that every military force would like to
have  duplicated 50 years ago, but could not.They are therefore
manufactured somewhere else and, by definition, of ET origin.
That does not mean we know where they originate, how they
operate, what their motivations are , or why they don't behave
in certain ways or why governments are so secretive.We don't
need this information, much as we would like to have it, to
decide they are of ET origin. Let us admit errors, guys and
gals.

It has been claimed that since most sightings have conventional
explanations then there is a good chance all do. More false
reasoning. There are 6 large scale studies around in which every
effort was made to try to eliminate the UNKNOWNS. None were
successful. Fifty + years of failures clearly suggest that the
chance that all do is vanishingly small as opposed to very
likely.It is certainly true that MOST people aren't 7' tall,
that MOST chemicals don't cure any disease, that MOST people
don't have AIDS, that MOST gold ore is dross. It certainly does
NOT follow that no people are 7 feet tall,that no chemicals cure
disease, that NO person has AIDS or that there is no gold.Let us
admit errors gentlemen.

Furthermore, it has been falsely claimed that the ETH is a very
remote possibility. Based on what? We have no data on how many
other civilizations there are, where they are, how often they
visit other solar systems. It may well be that for every nascent
interstellar civilization, hordes of visiting aliens descend to
get training in quarantining primitive societies such as ours.
There isn't the slightest basis for a judgment about the
possibility, in the absence of travel data.Let us admit errors
oh ye lords and ladies .

Stanton Friedman   fsphys@brunnet.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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:50:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:19:53 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:22:22 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:47 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

Hi Georgina,

 >Several hundred? That sounds like a lifetimes work. I don't know
 >any investigator who could claim to have done a thorough
 >investigation on so many cases. Considering you are in you early
 >30s, that's some going.

Well shows how little you know about me. In one year - 1988
alone - I personally investigated more than one hundred UFO
reports, these were published in three volumes by the IUN in
1989. The original enormous file of sighting reports - including
tapes, photos and wotnot - disappeared into the BUFORA black
hole where it presumably still exists.

During my five years on the news desk of large regional evening
paper I received on average three reports every month and did my
best to check everything interesting with airports, weather
stations and the MOD.

So yes, I do work very hard for serious ufology at the same time
as holding down a very demanding full time job.

But do I get any thanks for it? Not likely!

 >Here we go! Just because I point out that there were such cases
 >reported, you insult me personally.

and

 >You are going into personal attack mode again David. It does not
 >become you and only proves what I have been saying all along.

and

 >Insults again. Typical nasty tactics which do nothing for your
 >own credibility.

and

 >Your obnoxious attitude only proves once again that you are
 >insulting the work of investigators that you know nothing about
 >and yet you expect people to read your reports (hundreds of
 >them) and take your word for it.

These comments emanate from the same person who posted the
following statement in reply to a debate which did not involve
Georgina Bruni, and in which I had made no reference to her or
her book:

 >>You are acting like a typical sceptic, taking one or two
 >>fragments of a case you have not investigated and debunking it.
 >>It is comments like yours David, based on one sided views, that
 >>are so destructive. How many more cases are "your gang"
 >>intending to debunk without  _really_ investigating them?

Insulting? Nasty? Hypocritical?

Yes all of them fit, and it's simply a case of if you can't take
it then don't dish it out in the first place.

I have no quarrel with Georgina Bruni, and am looking forward to
reading her book (until recently I believed Rendlesham was
possibly the best evidence for unknown/ET UFOs).

But it will be interesting to see how Georgina copes when her
material comes to the attention of the hardened skeptics who
inhabit some of the science desks of newspapers and other
interested journals, such as the charming and genteel Ian
Ridpath.

Compared to real skeptics, I'm just a pussycat really!


All the best,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                 Housekeeping - Globalserve Suffers 'Nother

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:28:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:28:28 -0500
Subject: Housekeeping - Globalserve Suffers 'Nother





My blood-pressure will almost be back to normal by the
time you read this. Those of you who have been with
the List since its inception will realise that all
servers have to go down hill before they claw their
way back - the nails are bleeding.....

Sorry about the delay in getting mail to you.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:52:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:53:19 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:59:35 +0000
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Roy,

 >Just to congratulate you, David, on another excellent article
 >for Quest International, this time in the 'Unopened Files'.

Thanks Roy, glad you enjoyed it. It's always nice to hear from
those who appreciate well written, well researched material.

 >I think the picture of yourself was to it's usual high standard
 >and I am always happy to see you grace the pages of Quest
 >International despite what some of your colleagues may feel
 >about the Magazine & Lectures that Quest have on the go.

I admire Quest International for their astute business sense,
whatever I feel about the quality of the subject matter. They
have made a packet out of providing what the masses want. All
the best to them, and what's good enough for the goose is good
enough for the gander!

If they want to raise the quality of their material above the
usual fayre of animal mutes and alien retrievals, then I'm happy
to provide chapter and verse.

Graham has entertained Andy and myself at his headquarters
recently, and we had a jolly good afternoon remeniscing on the
old days.

As for the picture, not a pretty sight I know - but what do
expect after all those years wandering around in underground
bases?


All the best,


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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 22:43:32 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:54:41 -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>

Hi Dave

Just some quick comments to your post to:


 >>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>


 >>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,

Everyone here on this list, and world-wide is entitled to their
own opinion.

 >and that opinion is a well-informed one

I take it that you are talking about your opinion? I wonder how
you quantify the statement "_is_ a well informed one"? Who tells
you that you are well informed? Your PhD, I don't think so, many
people here are eminently more qualified than PhD's and their
opinion is still their opinion, nothing more nothing less.

 >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.

That is one rather bold statement Dave. What about if time shows
you are clearly wrong, and ET live and breathe amongst us? Would
you put your hand up and say "sorry folks I was wrong"? And
_after_ this statement that you are right!


--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 22:44:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:51:32 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Good morrow to you, Dukem's

I did wonder how long it would be before you enlightened us with
your infinite wisdom and clarity of thought water boy. I always
enjoy reading your studied answers, usually with the thought
that sometimes it must take you a considerable amount of time to
write these thoughtful, digressive, anecdotal replies.

But I digress, are you a follower of threads?

 >Still, this
 >thread has been one of the few worth reading in months.

 >Best wishes
 >Peregrine, Duke of Mendoza
 >Occam's Water Boy

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





 >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:07:32 -0500
 >From: Peter Brookesmith - Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Good morrow to you, Dukem's

I did wonder how long it would be before you enlightened us with
your infinite wisdom and clarity of thought water boy. I always
enjoy reading your studied answers, usually with the thought
that sometimes it must take you a considerable amount of time to
write these thoughtful, digressive, anecdotal replies.

But I digress, are you a follower of threads?

 >Still, this
 >thread has been one of the few worth reading in months.

 >Best wishes
 >Peregrine, Duke of Mendoza
 >Occam's Water Boy

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:53:32 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 ><snipped great overview for dissmissal of large number theory>

 >On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
nets?

 >and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >understand.

Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.


--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                        Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 19:08:14 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:56:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"


 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:31:33 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Project/Operation "Majic"

 >Greetings List

 >Here are some note of my own on the Real "Majic"

 >Regards
 >Murray Bott

 >-----

 >Projects Majic and Ultra.
 >*************************
 >Notes written by Murray Bott
 >(April/May,1999)

 >Project Majic (or "Operation Majic").
 >------------------------------------

 >"Majic" is the name applied (by the Americans) to their
 >eavesdropping on anyones secret coded communications, friendly
 >or otherwise. "Purple Majic" decrypting the Japanese code (was
 >therefore the highest priority)

I also recall the "Majestic" code word was also used as part of
the never needed Operation Olympic or Olympis, where the US was
going to invade Japan in November of 1945.  All the plans were
under one codeword, which I can't recall at the moment, then
various sub plans were assigned names/codewords.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:41:01 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:58:31 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?



 >Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:53 +0100 (MET)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >A FAQ could save us a lot of time. I was thinking along the
 >same line a few years ago and developed a FAQ, unrelated to
 >UpDates, which contains information about evidence.
 >It can still be found at www.ufoic.com/faq


Sorry folks, the above link has expired. But the FAQ can be
found at:

http://www.visitations.com/ufofiles/faq/



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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 20:20:14 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:02:09 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
 >>universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument. At heart, it
 >>goes something like this: There are 100 billion stars in our
 >>galaxy and 100 billion galaxies in the universe, therefore, even
 >>if only a small percentage of all the available planets in the
 >>universe exhibit conditions necessary for the development of
 >>life, one is still left with an arguably Large Number because
 >>one began with such a Very Large Number to begin with, ergo,
 >>life, i.e., evolution, has theoretically gained a foothold
 >>wherever possible, and a good deal of those footholds no doubt
 >>eventually result in intelligent life. The famous Drake Equation
 >>is this argument in numbers.

 >>The "theology" of the cosmos and creation becomes more
 >>troublling with almost every new color picture we get from the
 >>Hubble Telescope. Yesterday, or the day before, the NY Times
 >>published a picture of two galaxies colliding, the cosmic
 >>equivalent of a head-on collision between two galactic
 >>18-wheelers on the Interstate Highway. If sentient beings are
 >>fairly common, I'd hate to add up the number of same perishing
 >>at this very moment because they had the misfortunate to evolve
 >>in a bad neighborhood.

 >This is a very bad metaphor and misleading.  Such "collisions"
 >are relatively rare, and a "collision" of two galaxies is not
 >the same as a collision of two solid objects. It's more like the
 >very slow "collision" of two swarms of bees, more of a mixing or
 >intersection.  What effects this has on the star populations is
 >still being worked out.  But stars aren't slamming into one
 >another by the billions.  The point is, such "collisions" do not
 >extinguish all life in the two galaxies and may have very little
 >effect.

<snip>

 >There is nothing inherently "just right" about the moon nor is
 >it known whether it is essential to the evolution of complex
 >life forms.   For all we know, maybe the collision delayed the
 >development of the first life forms, or the high tides created
 >by a close, large moon delayed the invasion of the land by life.

 >>But the Very Large Number argument says that this,
 >>too, must happen relatively frequently.


 >Thank you for some interesting speculation.

 >David Rudiak

Good post David, if I may call you that.  However in another
post some time back, I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, that
the moon _was_ perfect in every way.  You may not recall my
dissertation on the subject, however I mentioned and actually
proved a number of things about our moon which, for your
edification, I shall repeat here.

First, the moon _is_ in the seventh house.  Very similar to the
seventh nerve, which Dennis usually gets on.  However as I
speculated earlier, the percoset is making me quite the mellow
perceived abductee.  I am so very happy to actually not get
ticked at Dennis or refer to him as "The Menace."  I even
apologize for having done so in the past ol' buddy bud.

Second, the moon _is_ a hollow space ship driven by a two
stroke, three cylinder SAAB engine circa 1963.  A SAAB 96 I
believe.  Which is why all that smoke and stuff is occasionally
visible there.

Third, according to one of our presidential candidates who shall
remain nameless but just quit the Republican Party, God created
everything according to the bible about, oh, five or so thousand
years ago.  And if God created _everything_ then, by God,
everything is perfect.  Including the moon.  Cogito, ergo....
Zoom, I think.  No, that was some car book. Forget what I just
said.

Last but not least, in order to demonstrate that God Himself is
perfect, He decided to make something _imperfectly_!  Just to
prove that nobody is perfect.  Which is perfect.

Cogito, ergo, Dennis.

Dennis, I really do not know why you put up with me, however
having just taken another dose of pain killers, I want you to
know how very much I love you, man.  And one other thingy, I
_WILL_ respect me in the morning.

J. Jaime Gesundt, the prefect gentle 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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 21:00:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:05:50 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


<Giant snip>

 >Thank you for some interesting speculation.

 >David Rudiak


And thank you for your own comments and the friendly manner in
which they were presented.

You misinterpreted one point, however, or perhaps I didn't make
myself clear. The Earth wasn't "singled out" for anything. It's
simply that when you look back at it's history you get a series
of highly contingent events resulting in life as we presently
know it. My point was that maybe this same planetary history has
been repeated millions of times in the universe (the Very Large
Number theory) -- or perhaps it hasn't.

It's also very easy to respond to each point (moon, tides, angle
of rotation resulting in seasons, interior molten core, giant
gas sentinels, and so on) one at a time, but, again, this
overlooks the point that I was making: that the Earth represents
a confluence of each and  _all_ of the above. There's a huge
difference when they're taken collectively.

I agree with you that much of it is speculative; but it's also
speculation to assume that the history of the Earth has been
repeated or replicated millions of times throughout the
universe.

I also think you're wrong to downplay the presence of a large
metal core relative to planet size, but I won't bore the list
with details. If you're interested in more information about
same, e-mail me your snail mail address offline and I'll send
you some additional information.

The question of dinosaurian vs. mammalian evolution is indeed an
interesting one. Here's one way of looking at it. We know that
it took our own mammalian ancestors some 65 million years to
evolve into homo sapiens. For how many millions of years were
dinosaurs the predominant planetary lifeform?

For that matter, aren't birds assumed to be the dinosaurs'
direct descendants? I admit that we've got an African Gray
parrot who is pretty smart, but he isn't nearly as smart as you
or I are. Hell, he can't even do e-mail. On top of that, he
still thinks Microsoft isn't a monopoly.

So who's to say? Best evidence is that the dinosaurs had the
place to themselves for a hundred million  years or more and
never quite made that final leap to intelligence -- and neither
have their surviving descendants. For whatever reasons, the
mammals did. Along with the help of an entirely contingent
Extratraterrestrial Visitor some 65 million years ago, an ETV,
incidentally, just relevant in size to the Earth so that it
didn't demolish the entire enterprise but only decimated the
dinosaurs. (Remember those gas giants, scooping up the
incoming?)

And good thing it splashed down when it did. What if it had
impacted only 3 or 4 million years ago? Maybe no homo erectus,
eh?

But maybe this stuff goes on a million times a day, or even
every hour, the universe being as big as it is.

Or maybe it doesn't.

Which was my point.

To refrain it once more: the Earth as we know it (including its
current occupants) can be viewed as the end result or product of
a series of accidental, contingent, non-related events randomly
dispersed (or effectuated) over time that just happened to
result in what they did -- rather than as a rule, guideline, or
model for how evolution "should" be conducted throughout the
universe at large.

Is it possible that we truly are alone?

Yes, it is.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 20:20:30 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:11:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
 >>universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument.

Please forgive some very large snips  here.

To avoid repercussions, I use the name .
- "Harry Latch."   ( a pseudonym. )


 >Collision of some other protoplanet with the Earth

<Yadda yada!>


 >On the one hand, one could

<Yaddy Yaddah!>


 >And one final point ...

That's the oldest trick on Earth.  ( -anon -LH   I ,mean  HL )


 >>For example,
 >>Jupiter could conceivably occupy the slot in our own star's
 >>comfort zone that we do, and it wouldn't have a snowball's
 >>chance in hell of supporting intelligent life.   Bad air, worse
 >>weather, and crushing gravity, to name but a few objections. You
 >>might manage to string a few microbes together, but developing
 >>intelligence and the ability to build a spacheship on the
 >>"surface" of a huge gas giant like Jupiter would remain an
 >>impossibly daunting task.

Oh! good heavens! My dead assed daddy (a biology type) could
have had a field day a drop of water from my plaster ceiling!

Jillions of years of evolution guaranteed that a few microbes
would survive. Do I expect Earth microbes top survive on
Jupiter? No. Do I expect Jupiterians to enjoy a nice crisp
salade francaise?   Well,  No.

Do I expect California lettuce on  Mars?  : NO.

Do I expect life elsewhere?  Yes.


What I DO expect, is for  life forms, any and all, to fight for
their very lives, to make a living in whatever hellish environment
might  encounter.

Consider the alternatives. Do you honestly believe that no life
would have risen onto these fertile lands without Earth's Moon?

That's like arguing there would be no pick-pockets in Cairo if the
Mosque were rotated 12 degrees clockwise.

No deep offense intended;  but the unrelenting demands of
microbes, dogs, cats, mice, even ex-Catholics like myself demand
a better account of the persistence, and even the likelihood of
life, throughout this part of the visible universe.

In places where the basic needs of carbon-based lives are poorly
met, (socialist countries generally speaking) there is always
some crook, some trick.

Can "mother nature" be so much less accommodating?
Let us go back to Charles Darwin's "warm little pond".

Here's two molecules, according to the theories of Chemical
Evolution ( which preceded biological evolution  )

One says to the other: "Hey, soldier, you new in town?"

The 'soldier' says "Yeah babe, but the prevailing highly basic
chemistry of this here planet precludes further polymerization."

There is an old dictum in Physics: "If it can happen, it will."

I want to add: " If it can happen, she already done did it. "

- - - - - - - - -   <== Phony chapter break

Arguments to the effect that western civilization, ( most
especially the Queen Kissing variety) was necessary for the
arrival of a nice technical and polite society;  are somehow
hard to swallow here.

Clearly, something analogous would have happened elsewhere and
elsewhen. The worst despots and tin-hatted dictators on Earth
could not possibly ignore the obvious efficiencies  that obtain.

Not for long. Sooner or later, in pursuit of a better club, or a
stainless steel wheel, some fool would have invented a wheel,
then a water wheel, then maybe even some sort of Oldsmobile.

Nobody on this list needs my word that life will show up in
unlikely places. Life forms, once established,  are extremely
adaptable.

An argument that "life" is unique to Earth smacks of fear and
religion.

Intelligent life is another matter of  course.

I save that for some other beer-driven screed.


Best wishes

<burp!>








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                             Re: Project Pounce

From: Michael McHugh <mcmchugh99@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 23:21:35 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:32:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Project Pounce


I came across something in the writings of Captain Edward
Ruppelt, and I'm wondering if anyone has any information about
it.

Ruppelt mentions a Col. Methaney, head of the 34th Air Defense
Division at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico Mexico, who
had a plan to use F-94C fighters to "chase" UFOs.  Methaney
believed UFOs were "real--i.e. interplanetary--mainly because
his pilots had made so many visual-radar sightings.  In 1952,
one of them even fired on a UFO, which sped away rapidly.

According to Ruppelt, the Western Air Defense HQ and Air Defense
Command HQ rejected Methaney's plan, because there were not
enough planes available.  (This was during the Korean War, ca
1952-53.)

Is this the same Project POUNCE, mentioned very briefly in the
Robertson Panel Report in January 1953? Is there any record of
it or of Col. Methaney in the National Archives or at Kirtland?
Ruppelt says that Methaney later became a general.  Where did he
go? Did he continue his interest in UFOs?  Did the Air Force
ever activate POUNCE or anything like it after the Korean War?

Michael McHugh










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                      Australian DoD UFO File Location

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 04:11:03 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:34:29 -0500
Subject: Australian DoD UFO File Location


From: John Auchettl <praufo@aol.com>

              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,


Have you read an Oz or Overseas book citing Australian Defence
Files and wondered how they got the DoD files, well; the
following data may just help not just Oz researchers but
overseas members.

The "Help file" below, lists the current Public UFO Files,
researchers can look at and their locations.

However, there are other departments [Army], sections & locations
not open to the public UFO researcher & the general public - due
to SOP. These files are also interesting - but no reason to
de-classify [?] or release, have been cited as yet.

You should also note HOW [why] the information is transported
to a location that makes it very hard for the majority of
Australians (Victoria [Vic] + New South Wales [NSW]) to access
the reading rooms.

Remember there may be some costs incurred, reading room
procedures and restrictions placed on you to have a look.

PRA gets a number of requests for copies of Defence Files.
Although we have a full selection of the files and other
materials (DoD), please note we are unable to help you.

So if your looking for that Australian file listed in one
of our Australian books then follow the list below.


Regards

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

NB: There is other file Codes in our database, will list
when we can.


Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
Australian & Asia UFO
1961-1999 - 38 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE





                      THE FILE TIME LINE
  #  Loc  1950      1960      1970      1980      1990
-----------|---------|---------|---------|---------|
[1]  WA                64|------------------|83
[2]  QLD        57|------------|70
[3]  ACT    53|-|55
[4]  ACT                  67|------------------|86
[5]  WA                  66|-----|72
-----------|---------|---------|---------|---------|


                        THE FILES
[1]---------------------------------------------------->

Observations       = General by outside authorities
                      (including UFO)
                      [Commonwealth Bureau of
                      Meteorology]
                      1964 to 1983 PP956/145/38
Title              = General by outside authorities
                      (including UFO)
                      [Commonwealth
                      Bureau of Meteorology]
                      1964 to 1983 PP956/145/38
Series Number      = PP956/1
Item Number        = 45/38
Date Range         = 1964 to 1983
Access Status      = NONE
Location           = West Australia

PERTH <-------------------^

Location: 384 Berwick Street,
           East Victoria Park, WA 6101
Tel:      (08) 9470 7500
Fax:      (08) 9470 2787
Email:    refwa@naa.gov.au
Post:     PO Box 1144,
           East Victoria Park, WA, 6981.

Hours of Opening - For reading rooms

  * Weekdays  9.00am - 4.30pm
  * Saturdays Not available

[2]---------------------------------------------------->

Observations       = Reports on UFO
                      [unidentified flying objects]
                      1957 to 1970 J63/255/40/AIR PART 1
Title              = Reports on UFO
                      [unidentified flying objects]
Series Number      = J63/25
Item Number        = 5/40/AIR PART 1
Date Range         = 1957 to 1970
Access Status      = OPEN WITH EXCEPTION
Location           = Queensland

BRISBANE <---------------^

Location: 996 Wynnum Road,
           Cannon Hill, QLD, 4170.
Tel:      (07) 3249 4202
Fax:      (07) 3399 6589
Email:    refqld@naa.gov.au
Post:     PO Box 552,
           Cannon Hill, QLD, 4170.

Hours of Opening - For reading rooms

  * Weekdays  9.00am - 4.30pm
  * Saturdays 9.00am - 4.30pm ++

    Reference services are limited during the
    lunch hour (12.30 - 1.30pm).

    ++ During 1999 the Reading Room will be
       open on 5 June; 21 August; 16 October;
       and 11 December.

Extended Hours:

  * Will remain open until 5.30pm on
    weekdays by prior arrangement.

[3]---------------------------------------------------->

Observations       = [Intelligence - General]
                      - Reports on flying saucers [UFO's]
                        and other aerial objects
                      - October 1953 - April 1955
                        [2.5cms]
                      - 1953 to 1955 A705/1114/1/197
Title              = [Intelligence - General]
                      - Reports on flying saucers [UFO's]
                        and other aerial objects
                      - October 1953 - April 1955
                        [2.5cms]
Series Number      = A705/1
Item Number        = 114/1/197
Date Range         = 1953 to 1955
Access Status      = OPEN
Location           = Australian Capital Territory

CANBERRA <-----------------------^

Location: Queen Victoria Terrace,
           Parkes, ACT, 2600
Tel:      (02) 6212 3900
Fax:      (02) 6212 3999
Email:    refact@naa.gov.au
Post:     PO Box 7425,
           Canberra Mail, Centre, ACT, 2610

Hours of Opening - For reading rooms:

  * Weekdays  9.00am - 4.30pm
  * Saturdays 9.00am - 4.30pm

Extended Hours:

  * Open until 9.00pm each Tuesday.
    Items for evening use must be
    ordered by 6.30pm.

[4]---------------------------------------------------->

Observations       = [RAAF Headquarters Support Command,
                      Victoria Barracks Victoria]
                      UFO's [Unidentified Flying Object]
                      prediction agencies
                      [UAS, Unusual Aerial Sightings]
                      1967 to 1986 A9755/12
Title              = RAAF Headquarters Support Command,
                      Victoria Barracks Victoria]
                      UFO's [Unidentified Flying Object]
                      prediction agencies
                      [UAS, Unusual Aerial Sightings]
Series Number      = A9755/1
Item Number        = 2
Date Range         = 1967 to 1986
Access Status      = NONE
Location           = Australian Capital Territory

CANBERRA <-----------------------^

Location: Queen Victoria Terrace,
           Parkes, ACT, 2600
Tel:      (02) 6212 3900
Fax:      (02) 6212 3999
Email:    refact@naa.gov.au
Post:     PO Box 7425,
           Canberra Mail, Centre, ACT, 2610

Hours of Opening - For reading rooms:

  * Weekdays  9.00am - 4.30pm
  * Saturdays 9.00am - 4.30pm

Extended Hours:

  * Open until 9.00pm each Tuesday.
    Items for evening use must be
    ordered by 6.30pm.

[5]---------------------------------------------------->

Observations       = [Western Australian Squadron
                      Air Training Corps]
                      Investigation of
                      unidentified flying objects[UFO]
                      1966 to 1972 PP959/15/3/AIR
Title              = [Western Australian Squadron
                      Air Training Corps]
                      Investigation of
                      unidentified flying objects[UFO]
Series Number      = PP959/1
Item Number        = 5/3/AIR
Date Range         = 1966 to 1972
Access Status      = NONE
Location           = West Australia

PERTH <--------------------^

Location: 384 Berwick Street,
           East Victoria Park, WA 6101
Tel:      (08) 9470 7500
Fax:      (08) 9470 2787
Email:    refwa@naa.gov.au
Post:     PO Box 1144,
           East Victoria Park, WA, 6981.

Hours of Opening - For reading rooms

  * Weekdays  9.00am - 4.30pm
  * Saturdays Not available


Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                     Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell?

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:11:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:37:00 -0500
Subject: Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell?


While going through some sites listed at Google's Uncle Sam
search on UFO, and reading the Roswell Report at:

http://www.af.mil/lib/roswell/

I came to a picture with this description:

"Alderson Laboratories anthropomorphic dummies of the type
dropped from balloons."

I looked up anthropomorphic and found this:

http://www.androidworld.com/prod06.htm

"1986-1989 - Manny (USA)

Manny was a full scale anthropomorphic manikin developed at
Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratories in Richand,
Washington.

It took 12 researchers 3 years and $2 million to develop this
robot. Manny has 42 degrees of freedom and was delivered to the
US Army's Dugway Proving Ground in Utah in 1989." (There are two
pics)

I don't believe there were anthropomorphic projects going on in
1947 or am I wrong?  Anthropoporphic involves robotics doesn't
it?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 9

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 14:48:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:46:39 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:39:48 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Sean, hope you had a good holiday in Scotland.

 >Dave, if you have been investigating UFO's for twenty years and
 >you are roughly the same age as me could you please answer these
 >questions.

No problem Sean, I always like to help if I can.

I'm not exaggerating when I say I have been investigating UFOs
for 20 years; it has been a standing joke with Jenny, Andy and
other colleagues for years that I have been involved with the
subject since being "in the crib". In fact I've been fascinated
by the subject since watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind
as a 10 or 11 year old. Ever since that point I've read
everything on the subject I could lay my hands on. The first
case I "investigated" properly would have been somewhere in the
era 1980-1981 when I was around 14 years old, and if my memory
serves me right (Jenny may remember better than me) it was a
sighting by two nurses at Doncaster Royal Infirmary of a
spinning disc-shaped object which hovered in the night sky. I
interviewed both women, visited the site several times, checked
with airports and weather stations and astronomical data in an
effort to identify what they had seen. Not bad for a spotty
schoolboy!

 >1) How old was you when you joined BUFORA?

Good question - I would say about 15 or 16. By that time I had
investigated a good number of cases, appeared several times in
my local papers, and was at that time an ET believer through and
through . Reports and articles on my work can be found during
this era both in Northern UFO News and the old Yorkshire UFO
Society magazine. By 1985 I had even produced my own
self-published book, with colleague Granville Oldroyd,
documenting a great number of "earthlight" and spook light
phenomena which we had researched; long out of print!

 >2) How long did it take you to become an accredited BUFORA
     investigator?

Probably a couple of years and after the submission of at least
three or four case reports. Jenny (who at that time was BUFORA's
Director of Investigations)  may remember more precisely
than I do, but I do remember BUFORA being impressed by the
ability of a teenager to investigate and research cases in the
way I did back then. Since then I've had an education, and spent
ten years (from 1990 to present) researching tradition and belief
for the National Centre for English Cultural Tradition at Sheffield
University, which has brought me into contact with many dozens
of ordinary people who have claimed to have supernatural
experiences of one form or another - be they ghosts, fairies,
aliens or demons, which believe me has a profound effect upon
how you interpret the UFO data.

 >3) If you have investigated "Hundreds" of sightings, how long do
 >    you spend investigating each case?

How long is a piece of string?
The amount of time I spend on each case is decided by its merits;
no one with limited time and resources is going to spend lengthy
periods of time probing vague "lights in the sky" and sightings
which happened twenty or thirty years ago; but these form the
majority of cases that come my way. But then there are a number
of other more interesting "high strangeness" cases which I am
still investigating in some cases 15 years after they were first
reported to me.
As I have posted elsewhere,while working on the newsdesk
of a large evening paper for five years I routinely received at
least two or three reports per month from the police and the public
which I did my best to check out given limited time and resources.
So it is perfectly correct of me to say  I have investigated
"hundreds" of cases; for instance during the period 1987-1988
in South Yorkshire and Derbyshire alone I investigated
more than one hundred separate incidents alone.
By that time I was a university student beginning my folklore
fieldwork, and was able to visit as many witnesses as I could,
tape-recording them and obtaining written narratives.
These were collated into a three volume special investigation
report published by the IUN in 1989, and the original case files
went to BUFORA, never to be seen again!
But I do retain a copy of the IUN report, which you are welcome
to peruse at your leisure if you wish to contact me privately.

 >4) How does one consult the BUFORA archives?

Ha-ha!  Now there's a mystery of labyrinthine proportions, far
more puzzling than UFOs themselves...in actual fact, only last
year I asked BUFORA's then Director of Investigations (Gloria
Dixon) if she could locate my original report on my UFO
investigations from 1987-88, which I naturally wanted back; but
despite all her best efforts it appears to have disappeared into
the maw; along with a great many other case reports, I should
think.

However Sean, if you are genuinely interested in my work over
the years and you can travel the short distance to Sheffield,
you are welcome to go through my archive at your leisure,
examine my work and question me at length. But since I've done
my best to answer all your questions, I think it's about time I
asked you some which will be useful for my ongoing research into
what makes UFOlogists tick:

1. How long have you been actively involved in ufology and of
the cases you have investigated, how many have you regarded as
being of exotic origin? (by exotic, I mean unexplainable).

2. What UFO related magazines and newsletters do you subscribe
to, and what newspapers/magazines of non-UFO related matter do
you regularly read?

3. Which books and personalities do you feel have influenced
your views about UFOs the most?

4. You state elsewhere that there is plentiful evidence for UFOs
of ET/exotic origin "out there" if you know where to look for
it. What cases/specific evidence are you referring to, and why
those in particular?

5. What is your attitude towards other phenomena of a paranormal
or supernatural nature. For example, would you describe yourself
as a "believer" in ghosts and spirits, ESP, the Loch Ness
Monster, reincarnation, etc?

I hope I have been of help to you, and I look forward to
receiving your replies to my questions.

Thanks very much...

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                            NSA UFO Declassifieds

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 22:46:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:23:29 -0500
Subject: NSA UFO Declassifieds


http://www.nsa.gov:8080/docs/efoia/released/ufo.html

You may have already discovered this through Google.com search
engine, Uncle Sam searcher (search on UFO).

If you want to save any of these pdfs, minimize Acrobat, open
Temp folder in Windows folder and find doc with same name as
pdf, copy file and save it somewhere else.

One I found was the Tehran report from 1976 by pilots.
Interesting read. (url at top of message)

There are many others.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                         Further Re: Cosmic Crashes?

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 98 20:59:02 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:24:55 -0500
Subject: Further Re: Cosmic Crashes?


Further to my previous message I realised that the link to the
Ufologist article I wrote is a little indirect. Those who want
to see the list of Australian "retrieval" claims should try:

http://www.powerup.com.au/~ufologist/Bill_Chalker.html

There is also a link to my book "The Oz Files - the Australian
UFO Story" at that link. Those interested, I have a limited
number of copies.  Details from yours truly.

Regards, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 20:09:17 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:31:49 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 14:58:26 +0000
 >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, 6 Nov 1999 19:41:39 -0000


Hello,

I will answer this message to make clear that I am not running
away. I will not answer further questions on this issue. It is
pointless. So this is my final comment. If anyone launches back
on this list with further assaults please do not construe my
silence as inability to reply. It is instead unwillingmess to
force upon this list yet more of this nonsense. Just please
remember who it is that is making accusations. All I am trying
to do is honestly defend myself but there has to be an end put
somewhere or we'll be talking this through to the next
millennium.

 >In a previous post you mentioned that permission would be
 >needed regarding the MOD and the Official Secrets Act.

I have said that I have testimony from RAF officers who all
signed the Official Secrets Act. As a consequence any
responsible investigator is more limited than if the witnesses
are not in such a situation.  From many previous dealings with
RAF witnesses they have often been wary because of the act. It
means you learn to take more care about revealing details of
their operational service records - which is what I was being
asked to do to a foreign journalist whom I did not know who was
admittedly working with a team of foreign military officers. In
response to Mr Thouanel I simply said I would need to get
permission before acting (from the witnesses, naturally).

Does anybody else on this list have the problem Ms Bruni has
with what to mean seems a perfectly responsible step for an
investigator to take? After all, I never once declined to help -
just said that I would need to check first.  To me this is a
matter of course, made more complex by the Official Secrets Act,
not an action that should lead anyone to be grilled under
spotlights as if some sinister motive lurks.


 >Am I to understand that (your programme) was a "Video Diary"
 >you did. In that case I would imagine it would not be difficult
 >to obtain permission. According to a BBC spokesperson, once the
 >programme is aired - people can quote from it as long as credits
 >are given.

No, it was not a video diary. It was a specifically contracted
documentary made by the same department at the BBC who make
Video Diaries but not as a video diary - it was a documentary co
funded with a US channel.

 >>I am quite happy to allow people to quote from my interviews -
 >>even ill mannered critics -  but you must not mislead people
 >>that they need just credit the BBC as their only requirement
 >>because copyright in the interview material is mine.

 >In that case, why have you made such a big thing about needing
 >permission from the BBC?


Do I really have to say this yet again? - I was not clear on the
copyright of the programme itself as different from the
interview content. This was because of the fact that the
programme has been sold on to other channels and even this week
is still being screened. I needed to clarify the meaning of
this.

I said I would and I quickly did. I promised a copy to Mr
Thouanel of a report that will include ALL the interview
material . I promised to send him a copy as soon as it was
ready. I have said all of this repeatedly and in my postings to
him right away last July.

Does anyone else on this list not feel that I am being hounded
here over something I have never made a fuss about - as alleged
- but instead went out of my way to try to help Mr Thouanel and
have gone out of my way since to explain to this list. I sent
the reporter IMMEDIATELY (within 24 hours) my best avialable
report on the pilot testimony . I offered to send him the
complete report as soon as I could. I was never asked by him for
the video itself and I have repeatedly stated (how many more
times do I need to do so?) that if I had been asked I would have
had no hestitation in sending the video to him.

What on earth is the problem here? Why is this not clear? I dont
see how much more exact I can be. I  just dont understand the
need to bring it up over and over as both you and Mr Bourdais
have done.

 >It stands to reason that he would credit you Jenny. We were
 >discussing the BBC at the time.

Does it stand to reason? If common sense and clear language dont
get through to Mr Bourdais (and for a week they haven't) then I
am not really sure how anyone can be certain of anything. The
fact is, you offered him a copy of the material and told him to
use it and in return to simply cite the BBC. I think it was more
than possible someone being told that - especially someone not
familiar with UK copyright - would assume it was the only credit
required.

 >So if you own all the original tapes etc, why have you given all
 >the excuses, ie; MOD, Official Secrets Act, BBC... for not
 >offering the information to the French.

How many times do I have to go through this? I have never made
'excuses' - as you unsubtly put it.  I sent Mr Thouanel a copy
of the pilots story at my expense. I promised him a copy of the
full report on the case that I was following up in various ways
even as we communicated - again at my expense - and promised he
would get that as soon as possible; although this would
inevitably not happen overnight. Especially as time I could
spend doing this job gets wasted answering endless inane
questions as here. I then spent a month of further friendly
contact answering questions that Mr Thouanel posed.

Please someone help me out here? Just how does all this
translate into my offering up excuses, stalling, refusing to
help or whatever. Am I going mad or has someone reinvented the
meaning of words without telling me?

If you are intending to
 >publish it in a book or make a new TV documentary I can see your
 >reasons. But now you have completely turned around and say _
 >you_ own the material.


I have NEVER for one second suggested I am holding onto material
for a book or TV show - but I trust the list now notice that
such an act (which I would actually deplore as putting personal
gain ahead of the interests of ufology) appears to be
acceptable! Nor have I completely turned around. This is
incredible.  I have to keep repeating this (and then no doubt
get told I am writing long messages - a length forced by an
apparent unwillingness to hear what I am saying).

So - once more - when I offered to send Thouanel a full report
as soon as I could I had to make checks with various people
whilst compiling that report. This included the BBC to clarify
copyright - which (as I have said several times) I did. So now I
am clear and I told you what the position is. I had not
clarified it before because it had not mattered to me whose
copyright it all was. It only mattered now to fulfill this
promise regarding a full report. Compiling that report also
required the need to transcribe hours of tape (not five minutes
as shown on TV) and the ongoing enquiries that I am still making
into the case as I again told Mr Thouanel . All told this was -
precisely as I told Mr Thouanel - something I could not thus
provide in the short term because the steps needed would take
time but I would provide the results to him as soon as it was
possible.

For goodness sake, people. Why is making such a fair promise
subject to criticism? All I see here is an attempt to genuinely
help. This whole thing is absurd.

I have also repeatedly made clear that NONE of this is being
done for money. Of course, I could run off and try to sell a
book or TV show and make money out of this case. Given the
twisted ethics of ufology I'd probably be praised as wonderful
if I did just that. But dumb stupid idiot that I am I decided -
as I have twice told this list - to spend a few months doing all
this work for nothing, compiling the report, paying to print it
via UFOIN and offereing it FREE onto the internet (as is stated
UFOIN policy). In that way giving a record of this case as a
priority to the UFO Community  - not a publisher or TV show for
a few backhanders. That this is apparently leading to such a
reaction is both unbelievable and a sad indictment of the
morality of ufology and it seems this list.

I find it absolutely incredible that rather than be respected
for doing such a thing (not that I expect respect - I just dont
expect abuse) I am mauled on this list as if such an act is
little short of a felony.

Next time I will be very tempted to stuff ufology and try to
make some much needed money from a big case by going straight to
the media for whatever they will offer me. I might as well.
Seems to me ufology doesnt deserve the consideration I have
tried to give to it - as this list is demonstrating.

I note  - Ms Bruni - that you have more than once told us you
cannot answer questions about Rendlesham, or stories you drop
onto the net (such as your claim that UFOlogists in Britain have
been caught out in some practice that upset a journalist ) or
even give us the title of your book because you are not allowed
by your publisher.   All of this hardly strikes an image of
thoughtful concern for ufology above and beyond commercial
enterprise. So - when I try to put ufology ahead of
commercialism and receive in return an assault - forgive me for
finding this a trifle bizarre.

 >I was just
 >wondering why you did not use the segment on the documentary
 >where you claim the witness testimonies are different than the
 >original report. Surely that would have been an interesting
 >piece.

As you have to know my documentary is not about this case, or
pilot sightings. It is about the documentation on UFOs that the
MoD do or do not possess. This case was used merely to show that
behind one minor reference in the PRO files lurks an interesting
story for which no official records are said to exist. As such
the programme's relatively short coverage of this case focused
on that angle not differences between accounts then and now.


 >I don't know Jenny, but you can be difficult. The problem is
 >that when people question you about your work, you automatically
 >go on the defense. Is no one allowed to question you? Everyone
 >else gets questioned and are usually quite willing to respond in
 >a civil way.

I can be difficult. Does your dictionary have the word hypocrite
inside? And I havent replied in a civil way? I think I have
tried to be very patient and at what time have I responded in a
non civil way? Please elaborate. Also where have I not answered
questions as openly as possible?. In fact it is the very
answering of these - again, and again, and again - that must be
boring this list rigid - especially as I answered them all
pretty much in my very first reply days and days ago and that
really should have been that.

If anyone is being difficult, surely its you for insisting on
probing for something that just isnt there.  In fact rather like
you did over Rendlesham when for your book you asked me no
questions at all about my views on the case, or the evidence, or
theories of explanation, or anything I'd gladly have discussed
with you. Instead your questions were about things like
documents you suggested (quite spuriously) that I had witheld
from others when - as I had to prove to you at length - I had
done exactly the opposite.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                        Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 17:51:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:35:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"


 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:31:33 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Project/Operation "Majic"

 >Greetings List

 >Here are some note of my own on the Real "Majic"

 >Regards
 >Murray Bott

 >-----

 >Projects Majic and Ultra.
 >*************************
 >Notes written by Murray Bott
 >(April/May,1999)

 >Project Majic (or "Operation Majic").
 >------------------------------------
 >"Majic" is the name applied (by the Americans) to their
 >eavesdropping on anyones secret coded communications, friendly
 >or otherwise. "Purple Majic" decrypting the Japanese code (was
 >therefore the highest priority)

 >This was achieved with the use of a decrypting machine

 >Other words known around by the intelligence officers included
 >"ultra", "super" and "khaki"

 >These signals interceptions and decrypting was in force prior to the
 >Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour (on 7th December,1941).


This is just flat out wrong. It  was MAGIC not Majic. Ronald
Lewin has an excellent book "The American MAGIC"

 >"MAJIC INTERCEPTS" was a term loosely applied to the actual
 >decrypted messages derived from this source

Sorry it was MAGIC not Majic

 >"MAJIC SUMMARIES" was a term used for daily or weekly summary
 >(of the majic intercepted messages) shown to Military commanders

Wrong again. MAGIC not Majic.

 >(Sources include books "The Week Before Pearl Harbour" by
 >A.A.Hoehling and "The Shadow of Pearl Harbour" by Martin V
 >Melon")

 >(The Motion Picture "Tora,Tora,Tora" filmed in 1970 contained a
 >extensive portrayal of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour as
 >well as the extent of the use of the intercepted messages from
 >"Operation Majic")

Nope , it was Operation MAGIC not MAJIC.

There is some good info, but MAGIC was not MAJIC.

It was Operation Majestic 12... A little learning is a dangerous
things somebody once said.

Stanton 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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                         Re: Woods Request and MJ12

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 18:28:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:40:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Woods Request and MJ12


 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:29:55 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Woods Request and MJ12

 >Greetings List

 >I note the request from Ryan Wood requesting Email addresses etc
 >and as he is one of those seeming to push the MJ12 subject I
 >would respectfully request that he take the following analysis
 >into consideration

 >I also have my own notes on "Operation/Project Majic" which I
 >will post in my next message

 >Regards

 >Murray

 >-----

 >Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 14:20:15 +1200
 >To: murrayb@win.co.nz
 >Subject: majic.htm


 >A Comparison of the Pre-War Cryptanalysis of Japanese Ciphers to
 >the Spurious "Majestic 12"

 >by Paul B. Thompson Nebula Editor pscpol@aol.com

 >In December 1984, a package was received at the home of Jaime
 >Shandera, a Los Angeles TV producer and writer. It contained a
 >roll of unprocessed 35 mm film, which when printed, proved to
 >contain photographs of allegedly secret government documents
 >that described the recovery of a crashed extraterrestrial craft
 >from the New Mexico desert in 1947. Specifically, the documents
 >were (purportedly) a memo from President Truman to Secretary of
 >Defense Forrestal, authorizing him to begin "Operation Majestic
 >12;" a seven page memo to President-elect Eisenhower, apprising
 >him of the state of Majestic 12's operations in studying (and
 >covering up) the New Mexico crash; and a memo from Robert
 >Cutler, an assistant to President Eisenhower, to Air Force Chief
 >of Staff Nathan Twining.

 >For various reasons (see related article), most people have
 >concluded these documents are total fakes. Their provenance is
 >unknown, there are serious errors in their preparation and
 >structure, and their claims are often at odds with known
 >historical facts. The UFO field is replete with hoaxes, from
 >contactee yarns of the 1950s, to the absurd "alien autopsy" film
 >of just a few years ago.

How superficial and inaccurate. The Cutler Twining memo for
example, was found at the National Archives NOT on the roll of
film received by Shandera. Sounds like proclamations rather than
evidence... At least He might have referred to my book TOP
SECRET/MAJIC and my Final Report on Operation Majestic
12(108pages) and several other papers that deal with the details
and the facts as opposed to proclamations.

<snip>

 >The hoaxer(s) who created the Majestic 12 documents knew enough
 >history to include prominent generals and real scientists on the
 >list of purported members. They also rather carefully chose 12
 >men who were all dead by 1984 and thus could not deny ever being
 >members of MJ12.

The last survivor died in September 1984 with an obit in the NY
Times (J.Hunsaker). The box in which the CT memo was found was
first handled 2 weeks later.Hunsaker had been the last survivor
for about 2 years. Surely one can imagine that the film  sender
was waiting for him to die so that he wouldn't be bothered. The
group had 6 civilians and six military guys.. 2 army, 2 navy, 2
air force. . There is a great deal more. Claiming fraud is easy.
demonstrating it and refuting my detailed investigation is
considerably more difficult.. little details such as the
discovery by the GAO investigators that the security marking on
the Cutler Twining memo TOP SECRET RESTRICTED, contrary to
pronouncements by the NSC and various "researchers", had been in
use at the time . That the type dface used matches precisely
that on other memos from the NSC despite Philip Klass's claims
to the contrary. He paid me $1000. for proving that.

 >The most unusual member (from the UFO buffs'
 >point of view) was Dr. Donald Menzel, the Harvard astronomer who
 >published a couple of sarcastic and superficial debunking books
 >about UFOs. When a little digging uncovered the "revelation"
 >that Menzel had done work for some intelligence bureaus during
 >the war and possibly after, this was hailed as proof he was a
 >member of MJ12, and indeed proof that MJ12 really existed. The
 >plain fact is, almost all scientists in the U.S. had some role
 >in the war and cold war that followed, either in actual research
 >and development or as consultants on matters in which they were
 >experts. Menzel's intelligence career is scarcely startling to
 >anyone who understands how America's national resources were
 >marshalled during the war.


How superficial can one get!. Menzel authored or co authored 3
books about UFOs not 2 . None of the many background papers
about him mentioned his close association with the NSA, nor his
being a world class cryptographer, nor his associations with
Vannevar Bush, the CIA and dozens of other companies doing
classified work AFTER the war. I had to get written permission
from 3 different people to get access to his files at Harvard.
Of course I published  a detailed article in IUR and gave more
details in my book.

 >Magic vs. "Majic": A Comparison

 >So how much did the MJ12 hoaxer(s) draw upon the real story of
 >"Magic?" Short of their confession, there's no way to
 >know, but the parallels make useful comparisons:

 >
 >"Magic" history:                "Majic" claims:

 >The most secret operation          ditto
 >in the US, even more so
 >than the A-bomb project.

 >Access highly restricted           ditto
 >for security reasons.

 >Involved new technology and       "alien" technology,
 >advanced scientific analysis.     "alien" bodies

 >Those in the know include         ditto
 >high ranking military men
 >and top scientists.

 >Operation spawns new levels       "majic," "MJ12," etc.
 >of security classification:
 >magic, ultra.

 >Operation continued after a       MJ12 continues to study
 >seminal event (Pearl Harbor)      aliens even after the
 >with increasing importance.       New Mexico crash;
 >                                   MJ12 exists today.

MJ-12 wasn't set up until after the NM crash.  so continues is
wrong. Begins would be better for MJ-12

 >Guarded bits of information       Photocopies sent to
 >released to the public years      Jaime Shandera, an
 >after the events by some          associate of William
 >of those involved                 Moore and Stanton
 >.                                 Friedman, well known
 >                                   UFO researchers who had
 >                                   previously published a
 >                                   book on the Roswell
 >                                   Incident.

Authors of the book were Moore and Charles Berlitz.

 >These parallels amply demonstrate the possible inspiration by
 >the historic "Magic" to the false "Majic." Coupled with the lack
 >of provenance and the errors in the documents themselves, there
 >seems no reason to regard the MJ12 documents as anything but
 >fiction -- and failed fiction, at that.

So where are all these errors??

 >(c) Copyright 1997 ParaScope, Inc.

 >Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
 >Voice : 64-9-6345285
 >Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand


This analysis doesn't cut the mustard and is superficial . TSM
is 272 pages long. Final Report on Op. Majestic 12 is 108 pages.
Other papers total more than 100 papers. Provenance?? We still
don't know who deep throat was, but that doesn't mean Woodward
and Bernstein were all wet.

Stanton 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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                         Re: Paul Ferrughelli & NSRC

From: Stephen Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: 8 Nov 1999 16:49:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:46:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Paul Ferrughelli & NSRC


Hello listers,

I recently obtained several of the National Sighting Yearbooks
produced by Paul Ferrughelli. The most recent one I have is the
1993 yearbook.

The contact data in the book is:

National Sighting Research Center
- c/o Paul Ferrughelli
60 Allen Drive
Wayne, NJ 07470


I have completed several internet searches for both he and his
org but have had little luck. This may be the correct current
info however, I suspect he may not be publishing anymore.

Anyone have any more info?

Perhaps the most interesting thing in the 1993 yearbook is the
final concluding statement:

"Finally, this years edition of the NSRC Yearbook
has provided enough data to support the need to
change the methods in analyzing UFO sighting
data. We now know that CE reports and Nocturnal
Light reports are NOT related, and need to unravel
the data even further to expose possible clues
into the workings of a complex phenomena."

Thanks in advance for any help.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                          'Manises' UFO Case Solved

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 01:38:54 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:49:19 -0500
Subject: 'Manises' UFO Case Solved


The following press release was to be included in the imminent,
November 'Voyager' newsletter, however that has been delayed due
to the 'UK Online' web server being temporarily taken off-line
following hardware problems.

As I don't wish the news release to be affected, it's being
separately highlighted now and I'm grateful to Luis R Gonzalez
for bringing this important story to our attention:

ANOMALY FOUNDATION, Apartado 5041, 39080 Santander, Spain
Web site address: www.anomalia.org
Press Officer (Mr. Ricardo Campo) e-mail: rcampo@datalogic.es

PRESS RELEASE

20 YEARS OF MYSTERY ARE OVER
THE ANOMALY FOUNDATION SOLVES THE 'MANISES' UFO CASE

On the 20th anniversary of the most infamous Spanish UFO
sighting, the Spanish "Anomaly Foundation" (www.anomalia.org)
has presented to the press a detailed report written by engineer
Mr. Juan A. Fernandez Peris from Valencia, which definitely
closes this emblematic aerial UFO incident, which occurred on
11/11/79 over the Mediterranean Sea. After a scientific and
painstaking investigation of almost two decades, the 'Manises
UFO' case has been solved.

On November 11th, 1979, a flight of the now defunct TAE air
company with 109 people on board made an emergency landing in
the Manises airport (Valencia) forced by the risk of a collision
with two weird red lights that were seen from the cockpit.
According to the statements by pilots, the lights were first
observed at 23:05, but then the lights appeared to come near the
aircraft the crew became very nervous. Barcelona's air transit
control centre denied that there was any other aircraft in the
area, so pilot Francisco-Javier Lerdo de Tejada decided to abort
the flight and make an emergency landing in Manises, where he
arrived at 23:45. Consulted the military radar, it did not
confirm any anomalous traffic nearby.

Ground observers based on the airport reported a number of
strange-looking lights. Witnesses included the flight
controllers and airport staff personnel. Because of that, one
hour later, at 00:40 of November 12th, a Spanish Air Force
Mirage aircraft was scrambled from Los Llanos Air Force Base to
find out what was going on. The combat jet pilot observed
various unknown lights that he pursued with his aircraft over an
extended period of time. Although he was unable to reach the
lights, some electromagnetic disturbing effects on radio
communications and weapon systems manifested during the flight.

The Spanish Anomaly Foundation granted its "Ricardo Caruncho"
research prize to Mr. Fernandez Peris for his 200-page analysis
report on the circumstances surrounding this incident.
Investigation resolved that the original lights observed from
the civil airplane were prompted by flare-ups raised from two
combustion towers located in the major oil refinery of
Escombreras, near Cartagena, Spain. The direction of lights as
well as their apparent angular size matched exactly with the
luminous flashes emitted from the chemical industry complex.
Their brightness and special features produced an optical
mistake, but the main culprit was a strong temperature inversion
developed that night, one with an exceptional visibility. All
factors together contributed decisively to the sighting
distortion.

As far a the pilot was concerned, he had some important family
problems underway which unleashed an anxiety attack facing the
remote lights which he considered to be anomalous in nature. As
Barcelona's air transit control centre did not offer any
solution, the pilot took an obviously disproportionate decision,
deviating the flight off-route (it was scheduled Mallorca-Canary
islands) and landing in the Manises airport.

It is a noteworthy fact that during those days the Spanish media
was overflowed with UFO reports and the atmosphere was quite
favourable to believing that extraterrestrial crafts were flying
our skies. This sociological ambient took a weight on the pilot's
reaction as well, no doubt.

The tight situation lived at the airport during the air UFO
encounter, with much radio exchange with the pilot, moved the
staff personnel to start looking for any strange light in the
sky. Afterwards those were identified as stars and planets, but
not at that precise time.

On the other hand, the Mirage aircraft manned by captain F.
Camera returned to its base at 02:07, after and unsuccessful
pursuit of several non-defined luminous stimuli, which had not
any relationship with the lights seen from the TAE airliner. The
most amazing part of the incident, the EM interference suffered
by the military jet when flying over Valencia city, these were
caused by the electronic countermeasures adopted by US Navy
helicopter's carrier "Iwo-Jima", a US Sixth Fleet's ship sailing
near the Columbretes islands. The US Navy ship was at the
highest alert due to Iran's hostages' crisis developed at the
time.

In summary, an extraordinary and unusual mixture of chance
circumstances lead to an exaggeration and distortion of events,
otherwise trivial.

The Anomaly Foundation (Apartado 5041, Santander, Spain) has
established a fund to publish the ultimate book on this UFO
classic case. Both donations and queries are welcome.
[End]


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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                       Triangular Satellite Formations

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 23:44:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:54:10 -0500
Subject: Triangular Satellite Formations


I thought this may be of interest to some of you. This was
published in the Nov./Dec. issue of Skynews magazine.

On three consecutive nights during the Starfest star party in
1996, a formation of 3 unblinking starlight objects in a
flattened triangular configuration was seen cruising across the
star fields by dozens of observers. Veteren stargazers at the
meeting had never seen anything like it. A little research
following Starfest revealed that although the satellite trio was
not well known to astronomers, amateur satellite watchers had
been following it for years.

In fact, there are three sets of three satellites travelling in
formation - all part of the U.S. Navy's space-borne electronic
intelligence system, code named Parcae. Before the code name
became known, nominilitary satellite specialists called the
satellites NOSS, for Naval Ocean Surveillance System. The U.S.
Navy does not officially acknowledge the existence of NOSS, and
until the 1996 Starfest sightings, most astronomers had never
seen or heard of them.

Each group of 3 NOSS satellites flies at an altitude of 1,100
kilometres in a formation about 100 kilometres across. The
satellites track the position, speed and direction of all
military ships at sea. They do this by detecting the
communication, navigation and weapons-control signals that are
emitted almost continuously by naval ships. By measuring the
time difference of signal receipt, three satellites in a group
can pinpoint the ships much better than one satellite could.

According to Toronto satellite expert Ted Molczan, the NOSS
satellites are normally magnitude 4 or 5. The angle of sunlight
reflecting off the satellites must be exceptionally favourable
for the trio to catch the notice of the casual stargazer.

This was written by the editor of SkyNews -

Terence Dickinson
Canadian Magazine of Astronomy & Stargazing


regards,
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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

              Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:48:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:57:00 -0500
Subject: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California

Hello List Members,

I'd like to make a request here for any information readers here
may have on two sightings that occurred in the places mentioned
in the subject of this letter.  The Juarez/El Paso sighting that
the witness reports to me occurred on November 7, 1996, and the
Monterey Bay sighting occurred on April 11, 1996.  I have
sketches of the craft that was sighted during these encounters
and I'd like to see if there is any correlating reports.  You're
help, or nudge in the right direction would be greatly
appreciated.  The witness, which is the same in both of these
cases states that there were "hundreds" of witnesses to the
Juarez sighting.  Hence my curiosity about these sightings.

Thank You,
Todd Lemire - MUFON FI Trainee
Garden City, Michigan
EFax 305-422-8075







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                                 Chupacabras

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 13:15:00 -0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:11:29 -0500
Subject: Chupacabras


Chickens Killed by Chupacabras?

In Sorocaba, state of So Paulo, 30 chickens that merchant
Larcio Longo kept locked in a chicken coop, in Parque So
Bento, were killed last Friday.

The canvas of the aviary was untouched and none of the chickens
had been devoured by the predator.

The Chickens showed holes in it's body and had no blood,
according the merchant. The eggs in the nest were not touched.

"What happened here is a mystery", said Larcio, attributing the
attack to the Chupacabras.

This was the second attack in the neighborhood this year. Four
months ago, according Larcio, chicken's neighborhood were
killed in the same circumstances.

Ten days ago, two attacks happened in Cesrio Lange, that killed
8 goats and 2 sheep, were attributed to Chupacabras.

Veterinarian Rodrigo Teixeira, from the Sorocaba Minucipal
Zoo, said that these attacks could be done by domestic dogs.
Beyond man, only dogs kill without the need of food.

According Ricardo a wild animal in an aviary with 30 Chickens
never killed all at once, ending it's source of food.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 99 10:19:37 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:19:20 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!



 >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 21:58:28 +0000
 >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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST


John,

 >>There is no such thing as "the UFO phenomena."  I think you mean
 >>"phenomenon."


 >A pedant writes:

 >"The UFO phenomena" is a perfectly grammatical construction, as
 >in the sentence "Type II reports, close encounters and
 >abductions are just some of the UFO phenomena that Jerome Clarke
 >[sic]  has written about in his many excellent books and papers."

And you're an editor?  In fact, you confuse "UFO phenomena" --
plural -- with "the UFO phenomenon" -- singular.  Get a grip,
guy. There's no such thing as "the UFO phenomena," even less so
when it's followed, as it was in David Clarke's sentence, with a
singular verb.

The only way you can use "the UFO phenomena" grammatically in a
sentence is this way:  "The UFO phenomena that interest me most
are CE2s."  Or you could say "UFO phenomena are various and have
been widely reported over the past five decades." But when if
you are talking about something collective, as Clarke was, it's
"the UFO phenomenon."  Back to Editing 101, John.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 99 10:23:26 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:21:08 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 23:27:20 +0000
 >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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >>>Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 14:00:43 -0500
 >>>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject:  British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>


John,

 >I quite agree with you that phenomena which have windows,
 >metallic structure, aerodynamic design and occupants are
 >unlikely to be currently undescribed natural phenomena. Indeed
 >if such accounts did actually represent an objective description
 >of an actual object, I would have to agree with you. But of
 >course you're smarter than that, and you know as well as I do
 >that such accounts are seldom as straightforward as your
 >paragraph above makes them seem.

 >Yes, there are quite unambiguous descriptions of "technological
 >constructs" in the UFO literature - Adamski's for instance. But
 >we can't count that one can we? Because Adamski was... well,
 >Adamski. So we have to go with some of the less spectacular CEII
 >and R/V cases. Certainly some of these are very puzzling and so
 >far have seemed immune to sceptical explanation. But do they
 >represent actual ET craft? That's a conclusion you've always
 >shied away from in the past, prefering to talk about "actually
 >objective existing" phenomena, or some such formulation.

Any explanation that seeks to turn UFOs into identifified
phenomena has to take into account their structured appearance
in a good number of the best cases, including close encounters.
That's all I was saying.  Vague "natural" explanations don't do
that.  All they do is to suggest that some people don't want to
be troubled to reflect on some of the more disturbing
implications of UFO sightings, including the possibility that
UFOs will turn out to be somebody else's spacecraft.

I have no idea why you are bringing Adamski into the discussion.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                 Collaboration Request By An Italian Editor

From: Adriano Forgione <aforgi@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 19:19:57 CET
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:32:43 -0500
Subject: Collaboration Request By An Italian Editor


Dear Researchers

I�m Adriano Forgione, an italian  researcher and editor  of a
new magazine called 'Hera'. This monthly magazine (66 pages,
full color) will be concernig Atlantis, Ancient Mysteries,
Ancient civilizations, mythology, PaleoSeti, and so on.

The first issue will be on newstands between December and
January.

Hera wants to analize all aspects of the hidden history of the
Planet Earth. It is a highly professional work with national and
international researchers.

I�m asking you if you could be my correspondent about this
matters. I will pay for every contribution or article.

Another question: Do you have some e-mail address or postal
address of researchers that can write for the magazine or send
us news?.

All my best
Adriano Forgione

You can write to my e-mail address:
aforgi@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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:51:39 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:48:29 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 17:51:21 -0400

<snip>

 >I am still, of course,
 >convinced that The Eisenhower Briefing Document, the Truman
 >Forrestal Memo, and the Cutler Twining memo are genuine.

For damming evidence to the contrary, I invite all newcomers to
run a search on this mailing list for MJ-12 around the end of
1996 forward.

 >A number of UK researchers have claimed that there is no
 >evidence to support the notion of alien abductions of
 >earthlings. They need to go to their dictionaries. Testimonial
 >evidence from sworn witnesses is indeed EVIDENCE, very much
 >appreciated by judges and attorneys.  Check it out and then
 >admit you are wrong.

People may get lynched and have gotten lynched on testimony
alone. Is "evidence" appreciated by a lynch mob also to be
considered? What are the standards for ufology? The ufological
wisdom of nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman seems to be making
an appeal for legal standards. Whose legal standards? They
change dependant as to who is in power at the time. Many a judge
and attorney were condemned at Nuremburg for exercising legal
standards that were "appreciated" by the Third Reich.
Interesting that their science also had to conform to the
standards established by the Third Reich. In their domain at the
time, standards were adopted by the powers in place as legal,
yet they were not. And science that was not science also was
adopted.

 >A number of UK researchers have claimed that UFO stories  merely
 >represent exposure to pop culture. So how come there weren't a
 >load of sightings of vehicles such as those described in the
 >very popular  Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon comic strips?

But there were! Cigar shaped craft sightings and reports were
abundant with smoke trails and all (today, cigar shaped
sightings are ufologically politically incorrect and not spoken
of). Portholes were abundant also. But you must mean flying
saucer shaped craft sightings and reports. Well, guess what?
Flying saucers were the craft of choice of the Lion Men of
Mongo, allies of Flash Gordon and enemies of Emperor Ming who
favored the cigar shaped craft. They were seen not only in the
comic strips (both sundays and weekdays) available at every
corner newstand during the 30s. They were seen in the serials
that were so popular and full lenght movies were made from them
to not only entice the evening movie goers but provide added
exhilaration to the saturday matinee crowds. After all, this was
the depression years. You asked when this invasion of flying
saucers (they were actually called spinning discs) happened in
the weekday and weekend movie screens and in the sunday and
weekdays newspaper comics? A full decade before cigar shaped
craft and flying saucers made such a "splash" in 1947. The
spinning disks of the Lion Men of Mongo had something in common
with the flying saucers of later days. They also kept crashing!

Also, flying saucers can be profusely found in the science
fiction pulp literature and artwork of the 20s/30s/40s. I am
presently ammassing hundreds of such examples for a book I am
thinking of writing - tentative working title is "Looking For
Little Green Men In All The Wrong Places". As a matter of fact,
a flying saucer can be seen in a 1912 cover of one of Hugo
Gernsback's science magazines. And in the literature, one can
find an actual abduction story by aliens in a flying saucer as
early as 1911! The Brits were first on that account. (GRIN)

 >In fact
 >the sequence is in reverse. the sightings were of  saucer shapes
 >before the pop culture switched to track the real reports.

I think nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman has spent too much
time watching Judge Judy instead of paying attention to the real
pop culture predating the ascent of ufology. I am afraid ufology
has to play second fiddle to the pop culture evidence during the
first half of the decade.

 >There
 >are of course reports from primitive cultures NOT exposed to
 >Western popculture. Let us admit our errors.

Mia culpa, Mia culpa, Mia culpa. Is one now forgiven?

 >Dennis did a nice piece on laws of large numbers and the false
 >SETI arguments. But he is answering the wrong question. Do we
 >know how many civilizations there are, or how long each has
 >existed, or where they have colonized and when? No, we don't.
 >Does this mean we have no visitors and there is nobody out
 >there? Of course not. It means we are ignorant.

Does that mean we have visitors and they are out there? Of
course not. It means we are ignorant. Nothing more and nothing
less.

 >Our ancestors
 >didn't know about virus and bacteria, but they still got sick.

We now know about virus and bacteria, but we still get sick.
What does that mean?

 >The EVIDENCE from all over the planet indicates there are
 >manufactured craft containing unusual beings being seen, and
 >performing maneuvers that every military force would like to
 >have  duplicated 50 years ago, but could not.They are therefore
 >manufactured somewhere else and, by definition, of ET origin.

Thank God for portholes! An evidential blessing in disguise. Let me
rephrase that. An EVIDENTIAL blessing in disguise.

 >That does not mean we know where they originate, how they
 >operate, what their motivations are , or why they don't behave
 >in certain ways or why governments are so secretive.We don't
 >need this information, much as we would like to have it, to
 >decide they are of ET origin. Let us admit errors, guys and
 >gals.

Mia culpa, mia culpa, mia culpa. I feel much more enlightened
now! Thank you nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman for being
yourself.

 >It has been claimed that since most sightings have conventional
 >explanations then there is a good chance all do. More false
 >reasoning. There are 6 large scale studies around in which
every >effort was made to try to eliminate the UNKNOWNS. None
were >successful.

There is no need to eliminate all unknowns. That is tantamount
to trying to prove a negative. It is a logical falacy and can't
be done. All that is needed is for et craft proponents to prove
just one. One and only one! None have been successful!

 >Fifty + years of failures clearly suggest that the
 >chance that all do is vanishingly small as opposed to very
 >likely.It is certainly true that MOST people aren't 7' tall,
 >that MOST chemicals don't cure any disease, that MOST people
 >don't have AIDS, that MOST gold ore is dross. It certainly does
 >NOT follow that no people are 7 feet tall,that no chemicals cure
 >disease, that NO person has AIDS or that there is no gold.Let us
 >admit errors gentlemen.

Okay, show us one proven et? Just one. Only one. Please. Pretty
Please?

 >Furthermore, it has been falsely claimed that the ETH is a very
 >remote possibility. Based on what? We have no data on how many
 >other civilizations there are, where they are, how often they
 >visit other solar systems. It may well be that for every
nascent >interstellar civilization, hordes of visiting aliens
descend to >get training in quarantining primitive societies
such as ours.

If we don't know anything about them, how can _may well be_ and
_what if_ arguments be invoked in support of alleged et
motivations and game plans?

 >There isn't the slightest basis for a judgment about the
 >possibility, in the absence of travel data.Let us admit errors
 >oh ye lords and ladies .

Where is AAA when you need them?

I haven't heard anyone say the possibility isn't there. The
possibility is there. Today unfortunately, there is no
compelling evidence even to suggest that we are presently
sharing time and space with et, much less hordes of et.

We thank the ufological wisdom of Stanton Friedman for making
this reply possible.

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
    Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on 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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                     Re: Triangular Satellite Formations

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 02:56:34 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:50:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Triangular Satellite Formations


 >Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 23:44:47 -0500
 >From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Triangular Satellite Formations

 >I thought this may be of interest to some of you. This was
 >published in the Nov./Dec. issue of Skynews magazine.

 >On three consecutive nights during the Starfest star party in
 >1996, a formation of 3 unblinking starlight objects in a
 >flattened triangular configuration was seen cruising across the
 >star fields by dozens of observers. Veteren stargazers at the
 >meeting had never seen anything like it. A little research
 >following Starfest revealed that although the satellite trio was
 >not well known to astronomers, amateur satellite watchers had
 >been following it for years.

 >In fact, there are three sets of three satellites travelling in
 >formation - all part of the U.S. Navy's space-borne electronic
 >intelligence system, code named Parcae. Before the code name
 >became known, nominilitary satellite specialists called the
 >satellites NOSS, for Naval Ocean Surveillance System. The U.S.
 >Navy does not officially acknowledge the existence of NOSS, and
 >until the 1996 Starfest sightings, most astronomers had never
 >seen or heard of them.

 >Each group of 3 NOSS satellites flies at an altitude of 1,100
 >kilometres in a formation about 100 kilometres across. The
 >satellites track the position, speed and direction of all
 >military ships at sea. They do this by detecting the
 >communication, navigation and weapons-control signals that are
 >emitted almost continuously by naval ships. By measuring the
 >time difference of signal receipt, three satellites in a group
 >can pinpoint the ships much better than one satellite could.

 >According to Toronto satellite expert Ted Molczan, the NOSS
 >satellites are normally magnitude 4 or 5. The angle of sunlight
 >reflecting off the satellites must be exceptionally favourable
 >for the trio to catch the notice of the casual stargazer.

 >This was written by the editor of SkyNews -

 >Terence Dickinson
 >Canadian Magazine of Astronomy & Stargazing

 >regards,
 >Jacquie

Cheeses,

Now I know what I saw flying over my home last year.  Shoot, it
wasn't a bird, a plane or even a speeding loco ... uh, motive.
Damned if it wasn't even Superman.  It was NOSS, which had
dropped down to 3000 feet for a look at the High Point Condo
pool.  Probally thought they was some Nazi of Commie subs in
there or sumpin...

Thanks, now I can sleep much better.

J. Jaime Gesundt, Esq.
We now give legal advice








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 03:33:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:57:02 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >><snipped great overview for dissmissal of large number theory>

 >>On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >>life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >>more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >>Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

 >Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
 >have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
 >that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
 >than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

 >If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
 >nets?

 >>and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >>more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >>Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >>had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >>by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >>understand.

 >Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.


Oh c'mon Mr. Rimmer. The evidence for the intelligence of these
animals is so common as to defy the need for citation. Oh -- not
as high as *yours* certainly -- but high enough. Tool using,
language possessing -- why, some apes can even learn sign
language. We don't yet really KNOW what dolphins can do. They
may not act in the indefensibly arrogant way that some of US do,
but their intelligence is very high indeed -- high enough not to
have to depend on "New Age sentimentality," for its
manifestation, at any rate. Finally -- it becomes obvious that
the expression "Evidence, please" has become the refuge of
scoundrels, misdirectors, and scalawags, and that MANY times,
the proponent of that expression is not interested in "evidence"
at all. There are clever critters all OVER this planet, sir. It
argues for their existence elsewhere.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
--
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 6 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                         Re: Woods Request and MJ12

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:19:22 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:53:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Woods Request and MJ12

 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Woods Request and MJ12
 >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 18:28:01 -0400>

 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 00:29:55 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Woods Request and MJ12

Nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman's reply to Murray Bott:

 >This analysis doesn't cut the mustard and is superficial . TSM
 >is 272 pages long. Final Report on Op. Majestic 12 is 108 pages.
 >Other papers total more than 100 papers. Provenance?? We still
 >don't know who deep throat was, but that doesn't mean Woodward
 >and Bernstein were all wet.>>Stanton Friedman

I invite readers interested in the MJ-12 saga to view, or if
appropriate to review, the following posts made to this list as
early as 1996 and reposted last time in early 1999 as often as
nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman lays claims to the
"objectivity" and "relevance" of his research into the MJ-12
documents. The evidence presented shows the irrelevance and
shodyness of Stanton Friedman's claims and the superficiality of
his book and autographed papers on MJ-12.

Included is an index of the MJ-12 literature and articles in
CUFOS IUR, MUFON Journal, Barry Greenwood's JUST CAUS (for the
most part totally ignored in Friedman's book), and UFO Magazine.
All publications considered to be relevant to mainstream
ufology:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m27-002.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m27-003.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m27-004.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m27-011.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m02-014.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m03-005.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m03-006.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m04-017.shtml

Also of interest is this main article from JUST CAUS 1987 that one will
not find mentioned in nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman's 272 page
book, yet totally devastating to the notion that the MJ-12 papers are
real. A must read that you won't find mention of in any of Stanton
Friedman's autographed papers or books.

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-023.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-024.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-025.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-026.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-027.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-028.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m07-029.shtml

The above from JUST CAUS cuts the mustard and is not
superficial. Stanton Friedman ignores it hoping someday it will
go away. It won't. It is solid research and relevant commentary.
It is the basis of the arguments that turned mainstream ufology
away from the claims of Moore/Shandera/Friedman 12 years ago.

Ed Stewart
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
    Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on 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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                   Re: Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 08:24:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:59:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell?


 >Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:11:30 -0500
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Anthropomorphic Dummies @ Roswell?

 >While going through some sites listed at Google's Uncle Sam
 >search on UFO, and reading the Roswell Report at:

 >http://www.af.mil/lib/roswell/

 >I came to a picture with this description:

 >"Alderson Laboratories anthropomorphic dummies of the type
 >dropped from balloons."

 >I looked up anthropomorphic and found this:

 >http://www.androidworld.com/prod06.htm

 >"1986-1989 - Manny (USA)

 >Manny was a full scale anthropomorphic manikin developed at
 >Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratories in Richand,
 >Washington.

 >It took 12 researchers 3 years and $2 million to develop this
 >robot. Manny has 42 degrees of freedom and was delivered to the
 >US Army's Dugway Proving Ground in Utah in 1989." (There are two
 >pics)

 >I don't believe there were anthropomorphic projects going on in
 >1947 or am I wrong?  Anthropoporphic involves robotics doesn't
 >it?

 >Sue


There is a vast difference between a robot and a dummy . The
dummies used in 1953 and later for the crash tests, ejection
seat testing etc. Had to be the same size and weight as humans
(they were 6'tall and weighed 175 pounds) and were supposed to
act as human bodies would if ejected from a plane or jumping out
of a balloon. They did not have the motion and action
capabilities of robots.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 08:04:36 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:02:39 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 12:56:37 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>The "theology" of the cosmos and creation becomes more
 >>troublling with almost every new color picture we get from the
 >>Hubble Telescope. Yesterday, or the day before, the NY Times
 >>published a picture of two galaxies colliding, the cosmic
 >>equivalent of a head-on collision between two galactic
 >>18-wheelers on the Interstate Highway. If sentient beings are
 >>fairly common, I'd hate to add up the number of same perishing
 >>at this very moment because they had the misfortunate to evolve
 >>in a bad neighborhood. Colliding galaxies don't say much for the
 >>Creator's foresight or organization skills, either, unless one
 >>wants to argue that they're somehow necessary to the greater
 >>scheme of things.

 >>In short, the universe is a very dangerous place in which to try
 >>to raise a family.

 >><snip>

 >Actually, collisions such as these take place quite often in the
 >Universe.  The result of these collisions is usually another
 >oddly shaped galaxy some billions of years later. However damage
 >control is minimal, as the actuall number of collisions are few,
 >infrequent and very far between.  This is largely as a result of
 >the distances between stars in most galaxies.


Interestingly enough, the popular NASA "Astronomy Picture of the
Day" (APOD) site has just put up an image of two colliding
galaxies on their Nov. 9 page, and echoes the same comments.
List members may want to check out the fascinating image at:

      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap991109.html

A similar collision image was posted to APOD back in 1997:

      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971022.html

Needless to say, any advanced civilizations in such systems have
front-row seats to some spectacular fireworks.  And based on
current projections, we here in the Milky Way may be treated to
the same show in a few billions of years.

Turns out our Milky Way galaxy is vectored for a grazing
collision with our slightly larger neighbor in the Local Group
of galaxies, the Andromeda galaxy (M31), and our two systems may
possibly merge eventually.  If you're curious about M31, APOD
has an image of it too, at:

      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap950724.html

As it is, our Milky Way is already colliding with a small dwarf
galaxy, as we speak.  Its called the Sagittarius Dwarf system,
and you can see it here at APOD:

      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap980216.html

So we definitely do NOT live in a quiescent, genteel universe.
Makes one wonder where to go to get some peace and quiet.

Forgive the slightly astronomical digression.

-Brian









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Marie Ivey <jmi@aretha.jax.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 07:27:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:03:52 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 17:51:21 -0400

<snip>

 >Furthermore, it has been falsely claimed that the ETH is a very
 >remote possibility. Based on what? We have no data on how many
 >other civilizations there are, where they are, how often they
 >visit other solar systems. It may well be that for every nascent
 >interstellar civilization, hordes of visiting aliens descend to
 >get training in quarantining primitive societies such as ours.
 >There isn't the slightest basis for a judgment about the
 >possibility, in the absence of travel data.Let us admit errors
 >oh ye lords and ladies .

 >Stanton Friedman   fsphys@brunnet.net

What a sensible post!!! Thanks, Stan

Marie Ivey







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:52:27 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:05:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey


 >Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:48:13 -0500
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >Hello List Members,

 >I'd like to make a request here for any information readers here
 >may have on two sightings that occurred in the places mentioned
 >in the subject of this letter.  The Juarez/El Paso sighting that
 >the witness reports to me occurred on November 7, 1996, and the
 >Monterey Bay sighting occurred on April 11, 1996.  I have
 >sketches of the craft that was sighted during these encounters
 >and I'd like to see if there is any correlating reports.  You're
 >help, or nudge in the right direction would be greatly
 >appreciated.  The witness, which is the same in both of these
 >cases states that there were "hundreds" of witnesses to the
 >Juarez sighting.  Hence my curiosity about these sightings.

Dear Todd:

Sadly, I have nothing matching the dates and places
mentioned above.

Were these sightings of structured craft?  ( i.e. some
definite shape or surface detail ),  or were they just
some lights?

Best!

- Larry Hatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                        Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 21:46:15 +1300 (NZDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:23:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"


Greetings List

 >From: "Stan Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"
 >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 17:51:49 -0400

<snip>

 >This is just flat out wrong. It  was MAGIC not Majic. Ronald
 >Lewin has an excellent book "The American MAGIC"

 >>"MAJIC INTERCEPTS" was a term loosely applied to the actual
 >>decrypted messages derived from this source

Okay so I had written my file "mis-spelt" and have amended my
file accordingly.

However all my facts are correct - you can check these out on
the publications I quoted.

As for you seeming choice to differentiate between the genuine
"MAGIC" which is the decryption of signals during World War Two
and the Claimed "Majic" (spelt with the letter "J") to be part
of MJ12 or "Majestic 12", well I am one who finds it difficult
to accept that the relavant Security Services of the U.S.A.
would name a project "Majic" (commencing mid-1947) so soon after
"Magic" (ceased 1945) due to confusion it may create. If you
pronounce them verbaly they sound quite the same.

Now if you are trying to belittle me and imply that you are "I
am holier than you" by saying

 >It was Operation Majestic 12... A little learning is a dangerous
 >things somebody once said.

Well I not going to get into any slanging match with you Stanton
- I certainly won't use this list for this purpose. If you are
not able to present 'Your' facts without trying to be so
insulting then I won't grace you with responding any further

Regards to All,

Murray Bott

Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
Voice : 64-9-6345285
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:43:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:33:40 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>The assumption that intelligent life is scattered throughout the
 >>>universe is, in essence, a Large Number argument.

Agreed.  But it also relies upon something astronomers call "The
Copernican Principle," which, in essence, states that there is
nothing particularly special about our celestial
neighborhood - that is, all places in the universe are pretty
much like all other places (a sort of cosmic Frankfurt, if you
will).

The implication of this line of reasoning is that life must be
pretty common throughout the universe.  If it's not, then you
have to start arguing about human exceptionality, and most
scientists are uncomfortable pursuing such arguments.

For my own part, I believe the laws of evolution are pretty much
immutable--we might find intelligence elsewhere, but I doubt it
will look like us.


Brian








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                   Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:52:27 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:27:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey


 >Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:48:13 -0500
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >Hello List Members,

 >I'd like to make a request here for any information readers here
 >may have on two sightings that occurred in the places mentioned
 >in the subject of this letter.  The Juarez/El Paso sighting that
 >the witness reports to me occurred on November 7, 1996, and the
 >Monterey Bay sighting occurred on April 11, 1996.  I have
 >sketches of the craft that was sighted during these encounters
 >and I'd like to see if there is any correlating reports.  You're
 >help, or nudge in the right direction would be greatly
 >appreciated.  The witness, which is the same in both of these
 >cases states that there were "hundreds" of witnesses to the
 >Juarez sighting.  Hence my curiosity about these sightings.

 >Thank You,
 >Todd Lemire - MUFON FI Trainee
 >Garden City, Michigan
 >EFax 305-422-8075

Dear Todd:

Sadly, I have nothing matching the dates and places mentioned
above.

Were these sightings of structured craft?  ( i.e. some definite
shape or surface detail ),  or were they just some lights?

Best!

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:57:01 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:35:54 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 03:33:18 -0600
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>><snipped great overview for dissmissal of large number theory>

 >>>On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >>>life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >>>more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >>>Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

 >>Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
 >>have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
 >>that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
 >>than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

 >>If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
 >>nets?

 >>>and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >>>more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >>>Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >>>had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >>>by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >>>understand.

 >>Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.

 >Oh c'mon Mr. Rimmer. The evidence for the intelligence of these
 >animals is so common as to defy the need for citation. Oh -- not
 >as high as *yours* certainly -- but high enough. Tool using,
 >language possessing -- why, some apes can even learn sign
 >language. We don't yet really KNOW what dolphins can do. They
 >may not act in the indefensibly arrogant way that some of US do,
 >but their intelligence is very high indeed -- high enough not to
 >have to depend on "New Age sentimentality," for its
 >manifestation, at any rate. Finally -- it becomes obvious that
 >the expression "Evidence, please" has become the refuge of
 >scoundrels, misdirectors, and scalawags, and that MANY times,
 >the proponent of that expression is not interested in "evidence"
 >at all. There are clever critters all OVER this planet, sir. It
 >argues for their existence elsewhere.

Dear Errol, Bruce, Lenny et Al;

This is the last straw.  How many times I gotta tell yous all
that life started when God said, "Let there be light!"  And not
only was there light, but you could see it for, like, miles.
Then, he made the fishes an all the rest of us, an it was about
five thousand years ago when all this happened an it only took
six days cause on the seventeenth he burst, into the arms of
Judas Priest, which is where he died of thirst.  It says so in
the Bible.

Man, is the only sent she ent form of life in the universe.  Got
that!  Dolphins in deed.  They aint got no sense. An if they did
have any freakin sense, they would come in outa the water an
live like regular folks instedda eatin raw fish like them
Japansees.

You got it wrong, Albert.  Aint no life out there needer.  Them
UFO's is just my Gripple or your imagination.  Anyone who
believes in them should be executed.  And dat aint all needer.
Alla them UFO o q pants is nuttin but devils.  An all a them
ghosts an goblims is the same.

Last year, I thought I saw a triangular UFO.  I went to my
doctor, J. Jaime Gesundt, I was hippyno teesed and I remembered
what it really was.  It was... uh, well, I'd rather not tell
about it here cause it had sumpin to do wit me sister and
everything.

So stop it arreddy wit dis abusive an blast feemer talk an find
a peace in church.  I aint been there for, oh, maybe thirty
years, an it's hard to break the old habits, so while I don't go
to confession no more (I got tired a tellin the same stuff over
an over an over an over again) I  still got me Bible an I read
it once a year, whether I need to or not. An it says right here
in vs one thru three on page 57, dat when God told Adam to keep
his filthy hands offa Eve, he ate the apple that's when they got
bashful and went and put on some clothes.   Hey Al, you ever
seen a dolphin wit clothes on? It's been that way ever since.

And one last thing.  It says right here on page 1894 line three,
that God gave dominion over the earth to US.  That didn't mean
the United States.  It meant us humans.  Unfortunately, we
didn't turn out so good, Al.  We screwed it up.  And now, the
bartender owes us a by back.  It's gonna be strong drink indeed,
Al.  Strong.

Some of us aint gonna be able to handle it.  Some of us are
gonna die and dome will go nuts.  Some will survive.  And if we
ever learn anything from our former mistakes, this will be the
day of our salvation as a species.  But it aint likely, Al.  We
never learn, do we?   We go on hurting, killing, destroying and
selfishly making a mockery of our very existance.  It's a wonder
that we still know how to breathe.

It's a wonder that we still can breath.

Right Reverend Doctor Billy Sol Hargus
First Church of the Gooey Death and
Discount House of Fresh Wines (Gripple
of course)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 10

                            [anomalit] BAR 199910

From: Bufo Calvin <bufocalvin@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:46:58 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:57:10 -0500
Subject: [anomalit] BAR 199910


Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin
Link to Amazon.com

October, 1999 (Vol. 2, #10)

Books mentioned in BAR can be ordered on most e-mail systems by
clicking on the hyperlink title. This will take you to the book
at Amazon.com. You can read more about it at that point and
decide if you want to order it. If you do, you add it to your
"shopping cart". Then, if you want another title mentioned here,
please click on it in this post. If you have questions, please
e-mail Bufo at BufoCalvin@aol.com.

Books in BAR now include some titles available from the UK. This
is for the convenience of my European subscribers, as well as
allowing for the listing of more titles. These books will be
indicated with a (UK) designation. Release dates will generally
reflect the U.S., except for exclusively UK titles.

I apologize for this issue being late: it�s been a very busy
time. November and December were combined into one issue last
year, and I expect to do that again this year.I think this is
the first BAR since I upgraded to Word 2000.In an attempt to
make the links clearer, this is being sent a different way.My
guess is that it will improve non-AOL subscribers, but may make
it worse for AOL.Please let me know if you have problems with
it.

I�m reading some books I expect to feature in the near future.
It is my policy not to feature a title until I have read all of
it. One of those titles is Hollow Planets (paperback) by Jan
Lamprecht...look for the review in the next couple of issues.

If you have books to recommend, please let me know. If you would
like to be named as recommending it, include that information as
well and tell me you would like to be cited.


In this issue: Featured Title, Bestsellers, As Heard On, and
Recent Additions

FEATURED TITLE:

The Great New England Sea Serpent (paperback)
The Great New England Sea Serpent (paperback) (UK)
Subtitle: An Account of Unknown Creatures Sighted by Many Respectable Persons Be
tween 1638 and the Present Day
by J.P. O�Neill
August 1999
256 pages

Sightings table (with page references), bibliography and website
directory, illustrated, some photos, NO index

Right from the beginning, people who sighted sea serpents were
ridiculed.While seeing Elvis has taken the number one spot on
the debunkers �guilt by association� hit parade, sea serpents
are still towards the top.If you want to tarnish a subject as
the product of gullible overcredulity , you can toss in, �Oh,
and I�m sure it was riding on a sea serpent� to bursts of
derisive snickering.

Why should this be so?As J.P. O�Neill ably documents in this
volume, there are plenty of sober sightings by reliable
individuals.What many of them report does not seem
unreasonable. O�Neill has made a point of reproducing the
original stories in most cases, often with little commentary.

She focuses on the reports that have come from the Gulf of
Maine, which runs essentially from Massachusetts up to Nova
Scotia. These include the ones in the area of Cape Ann and
Gloucester, which made national news, particularly in 1817.

The book is straight-forward, respectful, and not sensational.
It is, in a sense, very New England. It says that �this is what
it is� and brooks no nonsense about it.

O�Neill�s research (and that of others, whom she graciously and
properly acknowledges) goes far beyond the observations of
hardworking fisherfolk and land-dwellers. She does an excellent
job in setting the scene, and showing us the people and the
politics that were involved. As with many of the best books on
these topics, it is ultimately not about �his Snakeship�, but
about our reactions to him.

The quibble factor here is so low it�s not even worth bringing
up. Even the lack of an index is ameliorated by the sightings
table.The book is an excellent read, even for people not
generally interested in these things. For people who want to see
wild speculations or extensive analysis, it may not be enough.
However, the vast majority will enjoy this well-written
accounting of what has been called �the Great Mystery�.

BEST SELLERS (July 1 1999 through September 30 1999)

US

Cryptozoology A to Z (paperback)

by Loren Coleman

Far out-distancing all competitors, this worthy title was a very
clear winner.See my review at my page of cryptozoology items at
http://members.aol.com/Weirdware2/bwwb-cz-master.html

UK

The Encyclopedia of the Loch Ness Monster (hardback) (UK)

With UK titles only recently added, it�s nice to be able to
report our top seller from Amazon UK.

AS HEARD ON

In my last appearance on Nightsearch (Communion: A True Story
(paperback) (Whitley Strieber�s first book about his abduction
experiences�the scariest because he hadn�t come to conclusions
about what as happening); Hostage to the Devil : The Possession
and Exorcism of Five Americans by Malachi Martin (case studies
of demonic possession, including his accounting of the case on
which THE EXORCIST was based); and The Mothman Prophecies by
John A. Keel (which did much to shape our views of Men-in-Black,
among other things).

RECENT ADDITIONS:

When Time Began (paperback)
When Time Began (paperback) (UK)
By Zecharia Sitchin
October 1999

1000 for 2000: Predictions for the New Millenium (paperback)
1000 for 2000 (paperback) (UK)
by John Hogue
October 1999

The Book of Prophecy (hardback)
The Book of Prophecy (hardback) (UK)
Subtitle: Predictions and Prophets in History and Legend
By Geoffrey Ashe

One Last Time (paperback)
One Last Time (paperback) (UK)
Subtitle: A Psychic Medium Speaks to Those We Have Loved and Lost
By John Edward
This book, while not as creepy, is the closest one to THE SIXTH
SENSE that I�ve read.

The Bermuda Triangle (Innes) (paperback)
The Bermuda Triangle (Innes) (paperback) (UK)
by Brian Innes

The Cosmic Joker (hardback)
The Cosmic Joker (paperback) (UK)
by Brian Innes
Fortean phenomena, etc.

Ghosts and Haunts of the Civil War (paperback)
Ghosts and Haunts of the Civil War (paperback) (UK)
by Christopher Coleman

Maury Island UFO (paperback)
Maury Island UFO (paperback) (UK)
by Kenn Thomas

The Path of the Pole (paperback)
The Path of the Pole (paperback) (UK)
by Charles H. Hapgood
This is a classic about pole shift, recently reprinted.

The Psychic War (paperback)
The Psychic War (paperback) (UK)
R. Elmer Gruber

We Are the Nibiruans (paperback)
We Are the Nibiruans (paperback) (UK)
by Jelaila Star
Sitchin alternative cosmology.

Captured by Aliens (hardback)
Captured by Aliens (hardback) (UK)
Subtitle: The Search for Life and Truth in a Very Large Universe
by Joel Achenbach
November 1999

For a lengthy excerpt, see
http://www.salonmagazine.com/people/feature/1999/11/03/aliens/in
dex2.html.

*Prices are set by Amazon.com. Clicking on the link will take
you to their current listing and show the current price. Books
marked with UK are available from Amazon.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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

             Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 17:58:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:04:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures


 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 09:26:49 -0800
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
 >Subject: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures

 >Editor:
 >Paul Anderson

 >The enigmatic circles, symbols and pictograms which have
 >been found in crop fields in England and worldwide since...

<snip>

 >Some of the largest and most intricate and beautiful
 >formations ever appeared in the fields of southern England
 >this year, which continues to be the central focus...

Dear Friends,
  I recommend very much to watch the documentation on VHS video
  by Grant Wakefield, UK, about the "Croppies" and the
  Phenomenon. This is the best video I have ever seen and covers
  the whole spectrum of what is goinig on. It is no commercial
  video though very professionally done. Grant is a so-called
  "local" and knows the scene in and around the Barge at first
  hand.

For the first time ever on video, he presents some of the human
circlemakers who have done many of the well known intriguing
pattern of the past. I know it hurts to say farewell to some
sweet dreams.

As wrote here some times in the past: we have been in England
during the past nine years every summer, we have done our
reseach and experiments very intensively and know very well what
is going on there. On one hand, by the years, a real crop circle
business has established, on the other hand a genuine phenomenon
is still there which manifests from time to time.

The formation beside Devil's Den (Clatford) surely was one of
the best this year and those who placed it knew something about
the energies around these stones. It is one of the best examples
how humans tried to build in their formation the enrgies of the
planet, reached a high standard, but could not succeed
completely.

I know Ron Russell and estimate him very much because of his
modesty and sensitivity towards the genuine phenomenon. He was
gifted by the Higher Intelligences, who are at work around Alton
Barnes/Averbury, with amazing experiences at several occasions.
He surely is one of the very few who is legitimated to report
about this very important phenomenon.

His lecture surely is one highlight in the aftermath of this
Summer.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:07:38 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 22:51:39 -0800
 >From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 17:51:21 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>A number of UK researchers have claimed that there is no
 >>evidence to support the notion of alien abductions of
 >>earthlings. They need to go to their dictionaries. Testimonial
 >>evidence from sworn witnesses is indeed EVIDENCE, very much
 >>appreciated by judges and attorneys.  Check it out and then
 >>admit you are wrong.

 >People may get lynched and have gotten lynched on testimony
 >alone. Is "evidence" appreciated by a lynch mob also to be
 >considered? What are the standards for ufology? The ufological
 >wisdom of nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman seems to be making
 >an appeal for legal standards. Whose legal standards? They
 >change dependant as to who is in power at the time. Many a judge
 >and attorney were condemned at Nuremburg for exercising legal
 >standards that were "appreciated" by the Third Reich.
 >Interesting that their science also had to conform to the
 >standards established by the Third Reich. In their domain at the
 >time, standards were adopted by the powers in place as legal,
 >yet they were not. And science that was not science also was
 >adopted.

No doubt Stan was referring to the standard judicial framework
we are familiar with today, such as those in the U.S. and other
western democracies.

So where are these references to the Third Reich coming from?
Is Ed implying that current western judicial systems employ
lynch-mob justice and are as perverted as was the Reich?

Stan's general comment about testimonial evidence is of course,
legally, right on the mark.  Ed's retort dragging in lynch mobs
and the Third Reich is (1) irrelevant, (2) inflamatory, and (3)
offensive.

-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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                  Phoenix Police Chopper & UFO (Transcript)

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 03:38:53
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:14:34 -0500
Subject: Phoenix Police Chopper & UFO (Transcript)


Some of you will remember the preliminary report that I posted a
while ago.

Source: KFYI Radio,

http://www.accessarizona.com/partners/kfyi/more_info/ppd_ufo.html

Stig

***

The Phoenix Police Helicopter & the UFO

**

On the night of Oct. 12, 1999, this conversation, apparently
between a Phoenix Police Department helicopter pilot and another
party, was recorded from the police scanner. It appears to
describe a UFO sighting by a police helicopter pilot.

KFYI obtained a tape of this conversation -- here is the transcript:


Pilot: We saw it come over the mountain, North Mountain, right
around (unintelligible) Paradise, and it went right down the
right-hand side. I'd say it was, like, about 3000 feet,
extremely difficult to judge altitude. I made a turn up and into
it. Thought it was an aircraft or (unintelligible) with no
lights on it. It maneuvered around us, circled around us, went
straight up, straight down, east, west -- it did a variety of
things.

Second voice: That's pretty weird

Pilot: Yeah it was

Second voice: Well, given your second occupation, you should be
quite familiar with that kind of stuff, huh.

Pilot: Well, I've seen St. Elmo's Fire many, many times, you
know -- obviously this was not St. Elmo's Fire. It was really
amazing to both of us.


Phoenix police officials acknowledge that the conversation took
place, but have not commented further on the reported sighting.

We apologize for not being able to provide this in audio format
-- the tape quality was too poor to make a good digital copy.

UFO Links:

Art Bell's page
UFOReports.com
MUFON: The Mutual UFO Network
Filer's Files: MUFON newsletter
Seti-X: Help search for E.T. life
UFOcity.com
UFO conspiracy site
UFOsightings.net
Skywatch Int'l
Sightings.com
CNInews.com
UFOseek.com
UFOmind.com


KFYI is a Chancellor Media Corporation station. Copyright 1999 Cox
Interactive Media.

By using this service, you accept the terms of our Visitor Agreement.
Please read 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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                     Re: Clinton speaks of Alien Attack

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:47:09 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:16:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Clinton speaks of Alien Attack


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republicans pushed the last and biggest
spending bill of the year through the House on Thursday, the
latest step in a political dance that will lead to a veto by
President Clinton and then budget talks.

"If we were being attacked by Space Aliens we wouldn't be
playing these kinds of games," Clinton told educators visiting
Washington.

Excerpted from :

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/10/28/congress.spending.ap/index.htm
l









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:05:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:24:54 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >[a] theory that UFOs amount to no
 >more than elves and fairies?  I would love to see a falsifiable
 >version of that.

Hi, Jerry!

Actually, any such theory is quite falsifiable. Indeed, a
phenomenon which was no more than a version of elves and fairies
would seem to have very distinct characteristics, which I
believe are not present  in the UFO phenomenon.

1) Most reports will be second hand.

2) Poorly educated rural witnesses will dominate.

3) It will display aspects of naturalism (attempts to
    anthropomorphize natural events).

4) It will vary with even minor variations in geography and
    culture.

5) Stories will be told and retold within a geographic area.

6) Scientific instruments will not detect the phenomenon.

7) Events described by the witness will be vague, but the
    witness conclusions on the cause will be specific and
    detailed, beyond anything the evidence allows.

8) Specific places will be made sacred to the phenomenon or
    designated the residence of the phenomenon, and changes to
    those places will be said to disturb / anger the phenomenon.

9) Visionaries will represent the majority of first hand
    accounts.

10) Non-visionary first person accounts will typically be of
     hearing or "feeling" the presence of the phenomenon rather
     than visual observation. 11) Direct interference of the
     phenomenon to benefit or damage specific persons will be
     frequent.

It should be fairly clear that as long as we are discussing UFOs
which meet the Hynek definition, of which there are quite a
large number, that the entirety of these expected
characteristics are violated. (Note: these are derived from
Evans-Wentz "The Fairy Faith in Celtic Countries").

It is also true that there are elements of the material outside
acceptance by that definition which sometimes falls into one or
a few of these categories. For instance, much high-strangeness,
abductee, and contactee material often meets more than one of
(2) (3) (7) (8) (9) (10) and (11), and there are even some
similarities in the structure of such accounts. For instance,
the following rather atypical account...

"When I was a young man I often used to go out in the mountains
over there (pointing out of the window in their direction) to
fish for trout, or to hunt; and it was in January on a cold, dry
day while carrying my gun that I and a friend with me, as we
were walking around Ben Bulbin, saw one of the gentry for the
first time. I knew who it was, for I had heard the gentry
described ever since I could remember; and this one was dressed
in blue with a head dress adorned with what seemed to be
frills.' When he came up to us, he said to me in a sweet and
silvery voice, "The seldomer you come to this mountain the
better. A young lady here wants to take you away." Then he told
us not to fire off our guns, because the gentry dislike being
disturbed by the noise. And he seemed to be like a soldier of
the gentry on guard. As we were leaving the mountains, he told
us not to look back, and we didn't." (EW p 45)

is somwhat similar to a fairly small percentage of CE3 and CE4
accounts. Unreliable accounts such as Schmidt (11/57), Adamski,
and slightly more reliable accounts such as Wilcox (4/64) are
most similar.

On the other hand, there are a few "fairy-lore" accounts which
have some resemblance to modern UFO events. For instance, this
first hand account from Evans-Wentz (p83):


"To another of my fellow students in Oxford, a native Irishman
of County Kerry, I am indebted for the following evidence... '
Some few weeks before Christmas, 1910, at midnight on a very
dark night, I and another young man (who like myself was then
about twenty three years of age) were on horseback on our way
home from Limerick. When near Listowel, we noticed a light about
half a mile ahead. At first it seemed to be no more than a light
in some house ; but as we came nearer to it and it was passing
out of our direct line of vision we saw that it was moving up
and down, to and fro, diminishing to a spark, then expanding
into a yellow luminous flame. Before we came to Listowel we
noticed two lights, about one hundred yards to our right,
resembling the light seen first. Suddenly each of these lights
expanded into the same sort of yellow luminous flame, about six
feet high by four feet broad. In the midst of each flame we saw
a radiant being having human form. Presently the lights moved
toward one another and made contact, whereupon the two beings in
them were seen to be walking side by side. The beings' bodies
were formed of a pure dazzling radiance, white like the radiance
of the sun, and much brighter than the yellow light or aura
surrounding them. So dazzling was the radiance, like a halo,
round their heads that we could not distinguish the countenances
of the beings; we could only distinguish the general shape of
their bodies; though their heads were very clearly outlined
because this halo like radiance, which was the brightest light
about them, seemed to radiate from or rest upon the head of each
being. As we travelled on, a house intervened between us and the
lights, and we saw no more of them."


The difference between this and a classic fairy account are
obvious. We have multiple witnesses, seeing unexplainable lights
with unusual behavior that are estimated to have a specific size
and be in a specific location. Escalation of hypothesis occurs.
No communication is attempted, and the phenomenon departs. The
witnesses do not use this as an occasion to discourse on
classifications of the fairies or their culture.

Lest any of the above be taken as a suggestion that there is a
common cause for the UFO phenomenon and fairy lore, let me make
clear that as far as I can tell, the vast majority of
interesting UFO reports show none of the characteristics of the
fairy accounts (and vice versa).

Sociologically, despite opportunities for "fairy-like" belief
systems to evolve in concentration and flap areas, this does not
seem to have occurred. For instance, though the 1965 Exeter
accounts led to much concern among residents and the telling of
cases among residents, none of the other characteristics of
fairy lore evolved, nor did the descriptions of the objects
observed converge on a common model. The Gulf Breeze sightings
also did not evolve into a fairy-like belief, despite the long
duration of those sightings and the active participation of
people who wanted to see the phenomenon. Obviously, more
detailed studies of the sociological context and development of
these concentrations would be interesting, but there seems
little desire in the sociological community for such projects.

In conclusion, a "fairy" model for the UFO phenomenon as
represented by cases which pass the Hynek filter does not seem
to be justified when UFO and fairy accounts and the
characteristics of the body of such accounts are compared.
Indeed, it is disappointing that Vallee, a physical scientist
who has advocated the connection between the two types of
material, did not take a scientific approach similar to that
outlined briefly above, but instead chose to use merely
subjective case by case similarity.

I do believe there is a significant value in having reseearchers
be aware of the structure and content of various types of myth
so that they can identify and properly discount UFO material
which seems to have those characteristics.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:23:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:43:42 -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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >>Even in the early stages of the phenomenon in 1947, opinion
 >>polls show that a large percentage of Americans believed that
 >>flying saucers were something to do with the Russians or secret
 >>weapons.

 >Which was natural enough.  It's what Hynek (whom you would do
 >well to reread -- or maybe read) calls the "escalation of
 >hypotheses."  Society, just like the individual witness, went --
 >reasonably -- to what seemed the least extraordinary and most
 >familiar interpretation.  It was only after such interpretations
 >failed that society went to other approaches to explain the
 >reports.

What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:51:36 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:44:55 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 17:51:21 -0400

 >A number of UK researchers have claimed that there is no
 >evidence to support the notion of alien abductions of
 >earthlings. They need to go to their dictionaries. Testimonial
 >evidence from sworn witnesses is indeed EVIDENCE, very much
 >appreciated by judges and attorneys.  Check it out and then
 >admit you are wrong.

I agree that the vast amount of testimony is evidence of
_something_ unusual.  I'm less willing than most to attribute
this something to extraterrestrial intelligence, though the ETH
is certainly valid and seems to fit the facts as we know them
better than some others.

It rather amazes me that arch-skeptics like Carl Sagan dismiss
the abduction phenomenon to an "unusual mental state" (Sagan's
words from one of his "Parade" pieces).  What a bizarre and
research-worthy mental state!  Why the immediate need to
denigrate an unknown even if it means replacing it with an
equally portentious unknown?

--Mac Tonnies








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                        Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Alintelbot@aol.com
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:36:08 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:46:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 21:46:15 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

 >Well I not going to get into any slanging match with you Stanton
 >- I certainly won't use this list for this purpose. If you are
 >not able to present 'Your' facts without trying to be so
 >insulting then I won't grace you with responding any further

It didn't seem to me that Stanton was insulting anyone; in fact,
he commended your research.  I can certainly sympathize with his
sensitivity re. the misspelling!

On the same note, it does seem strange for the term "Majic" to
be employed so shortly after "Magic."   Maybe this was an effort
to cloud any potential paper trail, or just to confuse
"outsiders."

Hopefully time will tell.

Mac Tonnies









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                         Re: UFO Delta Night Lights?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 02:12:03 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:58:42 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Delta Night Lights?


 >Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 3:32:44 PM EST
 >From: GE Fortean
 >To: B Walden, Praufo, updates@globalserve.net
 >Subj: Re: UFO Delta Night Lights?

 >>Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 12:20:52 PM EST
 >>From: B Walden
 >>To: Praufo, updates@globalserve.net
 >Subj: UFO Delta Night Lights?

 >>>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 09:26:49 EST
 >>>From: John Auchettl <praufo@aol.com>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subj: UFO Delta Night Lights?


 >>>To all enquiring minds. A WEB PAGE image sent to us (at PRA ) by
 >>>a member of the Joint Logistic Unit - South [JLU-S] Royal
 >>>Australian Air Force [RAAF] has some interesting vision. We see
 >>>an F-117 Nighthawk refuelling from a 100th Aerial Refuelling
 >>>Wing KC-135R Stratotanker. Yet the vision could be what we call
 >>>in Oz a "Delta Night Light". Keep it in your files.

 >>>* Take a look -

 >>>http://www.af.mil/photos/Mar1999/0024f003.html

 >>After examining the full-size photo available from the given
 >>web address, I'd like to make the following observations:

 >>(1) The picture appears to have been taken at night.
 >>The greenish cast suggests the camera is a light-amplification
 >>device. This means the navigation lights that look bright in
 >>the picture may not look so bright to the unaided eye.

 >>(2) The picture is taken from above, onboard the aerial
 >>refueling tanker, looking down on the F-117. All the lights
 >>we see are on the top of the F-117, a side not normally seen
 >>by ground observers looking up.

 >>(3) The two elongated "lights" near the centerline at the
 >>rear of the craft appear to be the exhaust ports. This indicates
 >>the camera is sensitive to infrared or heat energy, not uncommon
 >>with modern electronic cameras. But those "lights" may well be
 >>virtually "invisible" to the unaided eye. And, they are on "top"
 >>of the aircraft, not visible from below (a design feature
 >>of the F-117). Some of the other lights may be brighter in
 >>infrared than visible light as well.

 >>(4) The F-117 is a relatively small airplane, much smaller
 >>than many of the "Flying Triangles" reported.

 >>(5) It is true that aerial refueling at night includes
 >>unnaturally bright lights and close formation flying, and
 >>such activities have been called in as "UFOs" before --
 >>it's easy to see why. But there is little or no similarity
 >>to numerous reports of giant flying triangles; they appear
 >>to be something completely different.

 >>As to similarity with the "Delta Night Lights," I defer to
 >>those who have seen them as to how well this particular
 >>shoe fits.

 >>Still, a great image. Thanks to the people that sent it out.

 >>B. Walden, USA

 >Aircraft navigation lites damn well better be clearly visible
 >to the unaided eye as that's what they are designed for.
 >And that means from top, bottom, fore and aft and either
 >side . . . all six viewing angles and any variations
 >thereof.  Flying around the night skies of the U.S.A.
 >where there are load and loads of commercial business and
 >private acft argues against trying to be unobserved unless you
 >are in a restricted area where you [i.e., the military
 >pilot] know there is no traffic other than other military.

EBK Researchers,

{Two outside posts to our address that may be important to the
original post - from B. Walden, USA & GE Fortean - our return.}

Absolutely right, good points. We posted the image as an
exercise of elimination and not provocation and it looks great
as well!

Some points however:

* SIZE?   - The F-117A is small granted, but what about
             the B-2? It's a monster.

                         Wingspan     Length    Height
                            ft          ft        ft
        :--> F117A      =  42.0        65.0      12.0
        :    707        = 130.0       145.0      41.0
        :--> B-2        = 172.0        69.0      17.0
             747        = 195.0       231.0      53.0?
             C-5 Galaxy = 222.9       247.1      65.1

Take a look at Jim Witmer / AP Photo of the B-2:

http://204.202.137.114/sections/world/DailyNews/iraq0129_mcwethy.html

And same view from the tanker at:

http://www.intellisys.net/users/altusboom/b225.jpg


* LIGHTS? - In a non-combat situation etc the nav lights
             in class C & D airspace & ATC Boundary Nav's
             are on, and can be seen from the ground.

* CAMERA? - Absolutely, the colour is due to the Image
             Intensifier, i.e. the green effect.

HALO EFFECTS

What caught our eye was the opaque glow - "Halo Effect" [in
simple terms] the camera produced. If you're a pilot you will
understand what I mean - when your strobe lights are on in cloud
etc. If a light is viewed through a fog or very moist atmosphere
it takes on an expanded appearance etc.

The illusion can be quite striking. For example a street
sodium-vapour lamps/light in the night fog.

A great e.g. of "Halo Effect" Fog photo look at:

http://exc.com/NFTY/Kutz/1996/pix/fog1.jpg


CONCLUSION

The dimension is important but the velocity to height ratio and
lack of sound at that level, seem to be the perplexing question
for delta sightings.

I.e. The B-2 has 4 General Electric F-118-GE-100 engines 17,300
pounds thrust each engine. That a sound pressure.

Back to Oz, well have had about six good reports to investigate.
One of our Oz delta sighting was very small in dimension
[Melton, Victoria, Police Case]. Hard to work out at present.


Good hunting.

Regards to all.


   John

John W. AUCHETTL
Director PRA Research


Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                        Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting -

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:04:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 08:04:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting -


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:52:27 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >>Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:48:13 -0500
 >>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >>Hello List Members,

 >>I'd like to make a request here for any information readers here
 >>may have on two sightings that occurred in the places mentioned
 >>in the subject of this letter.  The Juarez/El Paso sighting that
 >>the witness reports to me occurred on November 7, 1996, and the
 >>Monterey Bay sighting occurred on April 11, 1996.  I have
 >>sketches of the craft that was sighted during these encounters
 >>and I'd like to see if there is any correlating reports.  You're
 >>help, or nudge in the right direction would be greatly
 >>appreciated.  The witness, which is the same in both of these
 >>cases states that there were "hundreds" of witnesses to the
 >>Juarez sighting.  Hence my curiosity about these sightings.

 >Dear Todd:

 >Sadly, I have nothing matching the dates and places
 >mentioned above.

 >Were these sightings of structured craft?  ( i.e. some
 >definite shape or surface detail ),  or were they just
 >some lights?


Thanks for looking into that for me Larry,

Yes, they were structured craft sightings of which I have
computer sketches of, that the witness sent me.  He claims that
hundreds of people witnessed the El Paso/Juarez sighting.

I've also got another question for you concerning your software
*U*BASE (isn't it?.  I've downloaded the demo, and I'm wondering
when a person orders this software - is it updated with
sightings that have occurred up until time of shipment or
thereabouts?  Do you provide any online updates to additions that
you may make to your software after a person purchases it?

Thanks,

Todd Lemire - FI Trainee - MUFON Michigan

--

"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 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                   Are We Alone? [Was: British Ufology...]

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:38:24 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 08:09:03 -0500
Subject: Are We Alone? [Was: British Ufology...]


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 21:00:41 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:05:50 -0500
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >You misinterpreted one point, however, or perhaps I didn't make
 >myself clear. The Earth wasn't "singled out" for anything. It's
 >simply that when you look back at it's history you get a series
 >of highly contingent events resulting in life as we presently
 >know it. My point was that maybe this same planetary history has
 >been repeated millions of times in the universe (the Very Large
 >Number theory) -- or perhaps it hasn't.

And here is where your argument obviously fails.  Using Earth as
your sole example, your repeated assumption seems to be that
there is ONLY one sequence of "highly contingent events" which
can lead to intelligent life.  (Why else do you keep bringing up
the issue of how this "this SAME planetary history" might or
might not have "been repeated millions of times in the
universe?"   You also repeat this position below.)

On what exactly do you base such an extreme position?  How do
you know that there aren't billions or trillions of DIFFERENT
sequences of "highly contingent events" which can also lead to
the evolution of intelligent life on other planet?  Why must it
be exactly the same sequence as occurred on Earth, unless you
demandng that intelligent aliens be nearly exact copies of
humans in biochemistry and morphology?

Let's put it another way.  Just about EVERYTHING is a unique
sequence of highly contingent randoms events and is unlikely to
be exactly repeated elsewhere.  One such sequence led to humans.
Another random sequence led to a unique human named Dennis
Stacy.  But so what?  Having said this, you've basically said
nothing, since it is an obvious truism.  Many other sequences
could very conceivably lead to other intelligent species.  E.g.,
dolphins are another big-brained species that developed in
parallel and quite independently of humans.  There is obviously
more than one way to zig and zag to intelligence even right here
on planet Earth.

Convergent evolution is a good example of where different,
independent paths lead to similar results.  All flying animals
(insects, bats, birds, pterodactyls, etc.) have many similar
morphological characteristics, despite highly different
histories of evolution.  Or take fast predatory ocean animals.
Dolphins (originally land mammals) ended up with many of the
same morphological characteristics of fish or sharks or the
reptilian ichthyosaurs from the age of the dinosaurs.  Form
follows function.

 >It's also very easy to respond to each point (moon, tides, angle
 >of rotation resulting in seasons, interior molten core, giant
 >gas sentinels, and so on) one at a time, but, again, this
 >overlooks the point that I was making: that the Earth represents
 >a confluence of each and  _all_ of the above. There's a huge
 >difference when they're taken collectively.

So Earth had its own perhaps unique group of factors that
eventually led to us, which doesn't begin to prove that many
other unique groups of factors elsewhere won't do pretty much
the same thing.  The goal isn't to precisely reproduce humans.
It's to produce other intelligent beings.

As the saying goes, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Many of the factors you cite as critical are hardly unique to
Earth even in our own solar system.   Mars has nearly the same
angle of tilt (and also length of day as Earth) and similar
seasonal changes.  Is there only one unique tilt axis that
eventually leads to the evolution of intelligent life forms?  I
think you'll have a tough time convincing many scientists of
that.

And in our own solar system, Earth is also hardly unique in
having an interior molten core.  So does Venus probably, to cite
but one example.  Venus is also nearly identical to Earth in
size, but had the misfortune of being too close to the Sun and
lost it's spin and water.  Mars is too small and eventually
froze up.  If Venus had traded places with Mars, we might very
well have a sister planet with life of its own.  There is still
serious consideration of Mars independently developing microbial
life early in its history, and even seeding Earth with its own
life forms.  And this is just one solar system we're talking
about.

Earth would have had tides with or without the Moon.  The huge
tides created by the Moon early in Earth's history conceivably
had a very detrimental effect on evolution.  So very
conceivably, planets elsewhere without moons or with smaller
moons would have evolved complex land-based life forms more
quickly.

 >I agree with you that much of it is speculative; but it's also
 >speculation to assume that the history of the Earth has been
 >repeated or replicated millions of times throughout the
 >universe.

And here it is, once again, the absurd assumption that one MUST
replicate the history of the Earth in order to get intelligent
life forms.  How do you know there is only one unique way to
evolve intelligent life?

 >I also think you're wrong to downplay the presence of a large
 >metal core relative to planet size, but I won't bore the list
 >with details. If you're interested in more information about
 >same, e-mail me your snail mail address offline and I'll send
 >you some additional information. > >The question of dinosaurian
vs. mammalian evolution is indeed an >interesting one. Here's
one way of looking at it. We know that >it took our own
mammalian ancestors some 65 million years to >evolve into homo
sapiens. For how many millions of years were >dinosaurs the
predominant planetary lifeform?

Our mammalian ancestor's didn't suddenly spring into existence
65 million years ago.  Primitive mammals co-existed with
dinosaurs for some 150 million years prior to that and were
going nowhere.  Every time they poked their head out of some
hole in the ground, some bigger dinosaur would come by and bite
it off.  The extinction of the dinosaurs simply got rid of the
competition.

 >For that matter, aren't birds assumed to be the dinosaurs'
 >direct descendants? I admit that we've got an African Gray
 >parrot who is pretty smart, but he isn't nearly as smart as you
 >or I are. Hell, he can't even do e-mail. On top of that, he
 >still thinks Microsoft isn't a monopoly.

On the other hand, I'll bet he bought shares of Microsoft a
dozen years ago and is now a lot richer than you.

 >So who's to say? Best evidence is that the dinosaurs had the
 >place to themselves for a hundred million  years or more and
 >never quite made that final leap to intelligence --

The mammals were there too, for much of that period and didn't make a final
leap to intelligence either.  So?

 >and neither have their surviving descendants.

There are certainly paleontologists who will disagree with your
statement that the dinosaurs weren't evolving to higher
intelligence.  The predator species, e.g., were slowly evolving
bigger brains and had larger brains than any of the mammals of
that period.  Would this eventually have led to an intelligent
dinosaur species tens of millions of years later ("dinosaur
man").  Maybe not, but it remains a possibility.

Or maybe the mammals would have found some niche somewhere on
Earth where they didn't face constant competition from the
dinosaurs.  From there, maybe they would have evolved to larger
and better adapted forms that could eventually compete with and
eventually displace the dinosaurs, with or without a planetary
extinction event.  There are paleontologists who will argue that
was already happening.  The dinosaurs were already on their way
out.

The extinction of the dinosaurs from some asteroid collision may
not have been a necessary contingent event needed for the
evolution of intelligence on Earth.  Please prove otherwise.

 >For whatever reasons, the
 >mammals did. Along with the help of an entirely contingent
 >Extratraterrestrial Visitor some 65 million years ago, an ETV,
 >incidentally, just relevant in size to the Earth so that it
 >didn't demolish the entire enterprise but only decimated the
 >dinosaurs. (Remember those gas giants, scooping up the
 >incoming?)

Gas giants are common -- real common.  We have four in our solar system
alone.  The recently detected planets in other star systems are also almost
entirely gas giants.  Yes, they are important for sweeping up debris, but
probably every solar system has at least one.  To what degree they stablize
or destablize the orbits of smaller planets in the system is a fertile field
of investigation.

 >And good thing it splashed down when it did. What if it had
 >impacted only 3 or 4 million years ago? Maybe no homo erectus,
 >eh?

So what's to say that the surviving species would not have
evolved something similar in another 65 million years?  There
are still small scavenging mammals living in holes (i.e., shrews
and rats and the like), just like there were 65 million years
ago.  If primates and humans could evolve once after such an
extinction event, why couldn't it happen again?

Again, you assume there is ONLY one way for intelligent life to
evolve, even here on Earth.

 >But maybe this stuff goes on a million times a day, or even
 >every hour, the universe being as big as it is.

Lets do some math.  Life on Earth is about a trillion days old,
and there have been a number of times that Earth has been
clobbered by some asteroid or comet during that period, probably
leading to mass extinctions.  So let's say roughly every 100
billion days (give or take a few days), Earth has suffered a
mass extinction event.  There are roughly 400 billion stars in
the Milky Way alone.  Let's say only one in a thousand has some
Earth-like planet with some sort of life, however primitive, or
roughly 400 million planets (probably somewhat conservative
estimate).  That means one of these planets is getting clobbered
about every 250 days, let's say once a year, in our galaxy
alone.  Since there are some 100 billion galaxies in the
Universe, such events would be happening thousands of times
every second.

So indeed, such events would be expected to be happening
millions of times every hour.  That's how the Law of Large
Numbers works.  On the level of the Universe, or even our
Galaxy, such mass extinction events on life-bearing planets
would be very common events.

 >Or maybe it doesn't.

Well make up your mind.  If you are going argue about what the
Law of Large Numbers might or might not have to say about this,
at least do the math and maintain some sort of consistent
position.

 >Which was my point.

Let's cut to the chase, Dennis.  List members can read between
the lines.  Your REAL point (however you try to double talk it)
is that intelligent life is unique to Earth (or at least
incredibly rare) and, therefore, UFOs cannot be alien
spacecraft.

 >To refrain it once more: the Earth as we know it (including its
 >current occupants) can be viewed as the end result or product
 >of a series of accidental, contingent, non-related events
 >randomly dispersed (or effectuated) over time that just
 >happened to result in what they did -- rather than as a rule,
 >guideline, or model for how evolution "should" be conducted
 >throughout the universe at large.

Allow me to restate this.  You are saying that Earth has it's
own history of evolution, but other planets would have their
own.  OK so far.  If Earth's history is NOT necessarily a "rule,
guideline, or model for how evolution 'should' be conducted,"
then how does your next statement logically follow?

 >Is it possible that we truly are alone? Yes, it is.

Only remotely likely if Earth's history IS necessarily a "rule,
guideline, or model for how evolution 'should' be conducted."
So it's just more Stacian double talk.

But that's not surprising because ultimately this isn't about
logical argument; it's about debunking UFOs.  We know you all
too well.

David Rudiak








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 11

                        Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:18:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 08:21:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 21:46:15 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"

 >Greetings List

 >>From: "Stan Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Project/Operation "Majic"
 >>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 17:51:49 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>This is just flat out wrong. It  was MAGIC not Majic. Ronald
 >>Lewin has an excellent book "The American MAGIC"

 >>>"MAJIC INTERCEPTS" was a term loosely applied to the actual
 >>>decrypted messages derived from this source

 >Okay so I had written my file "mis-spelt" and have amended my
 >file accordingly.

 >However all my facts are correct - you can check these out on
 >the publications I quoted.

 >As for you seeming choice to differentiate between the genuine
 >"MAGIC" which is the decryption of signals during World War Two
 >and the Claimed "Majic" (spelt with the letter "J") to be part
 >of MJ12 or "Majestic 12", well I am one who finds it difficult
 >to accept that the relavant Security Services of the U.S.A.
 >would name a project "Majic" (commencing mid-1947) so soon after
 >"Magic" (ceased 1945) due to confusion it may create. If you
 >pronounce them verbaly they sound quite the same.

 >Now if you are trying to belittle me and imply that you are "I
 >am holier than you" by saying

 >>It was Operation Majestic 12... A little learning is a dangerous
 >>things somebody once said.

 >Well I not going to get into any slanging match with you Stanton
 >- I certainly won't use this list for this purpose. If you are
 >not able to present 'Your' facts without trying to be so
 >insulting then I won't grace you with responding any further

 >Regards to All,

 >Murray Bott

 >Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
 >Voice : 64-9-6345285
 >Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand


Murray:

There was no intent of a slanging match. The tone of your
posting was that you had made a great discovery - somebody just
picked up on MAJIC decryption.

My point is that wasn't the case.

Most security services would have known nothing about MAJIC.
Code words themselves are very often classified.

As you point out anybody hearing of MAJIC (only
people with clearances but not necessarily 'Need To Know') would
have thought of the decryption MAGIC stuff. Great cover.

I did make several other comments in my postings about yours.
Apparently ignored.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 05:42:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age



G'day EBK,

While watching this thread develop, I felt I should send you
this article by Paul Davies which appeared in the local press
last weekend. It should of course be remembered that Davies was
also the winner of the 1995 Templeton prize for Progress in
Religon. It is actually quite a long article, and I could'nt
find it in the archives at www.theage.com.au, so I've snipped a
large part from the beginning as I don't have time right at the
minute to type the whole lot. Essentially the first part of the
article is a brief discussion of the belief in ET through
Democritus, Kepler, Galilieo, Kant, Bentley etc. and I pick up
around the time where he starts discussing contemporary
perspectives.



"WHY WE STILL BELIEVE IN ALIENS, REGARDLESS OF THE FACTS" by
Paul Davies. Published in the Melbourne Age 5/11/99 (extract)

...Probes sent to the Red Planet failed to find Lowells canals,
or any sign of life. There is a chance that Mars once harboured
microbes, but little green men are definitely off the agenda.

If there are alien beings, then we have to look much further
afield, to other star systems many light years away. Some
astronomers are busy scanning the skies with radio telescopes in
the hope of stumbling across a signal from a distant
technological community. So far they have not met with success,
but with 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone, perhaps that is
no surprise.

The abscence of any observational evidence for ET leaves us with
only theory to go on. Unfortunately, scientists have scant idea
how life originated. It may have been a freak molecular
accident, unique to Earth. On the other hand, life may arise
more or less automatically under favourable conditions.

But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

These negative findings have not prevented people from
describing personal encounters with extraterrestrials. Accounts
of UFOs, abductions by grey-skinned, big-eyed aliens and
telepathic messages from faraway planets are common.

The tales usually have strong religous or mystical overtones,
which is not so strange--the religously inspired have long
reported awesome beings from the sky. The prophet Ezekiel, for
instance, alledgedly witnessed four flying wheels the colour of
beryl, out of which emerged the likeness of a man. In 1952,
American hamburger vendor George Adamski met a Jesus-like figure
standing by a flying saucer in the Mojave desert; the pair
embarked on a discussion of God. The mass suicide of 39 devotees
of the Heaven's Gate religous cult in 1996 was a more sinister
example of the phenomenon.

Even in the popular media, the imagery used to depict aliens is
rich in religous iconography. In Steven Spielbergs classic
"Close Encounters of the Third Kind", the alien mother craft
gliding across the sky at the end of the film strikingly
resembles the glowing celestial city of John Bunyon's Pilgrims
Progress. Indeed, the entire storyline of the movie--a chosen
few struggling against privation and doubt to reach their cosmic
destiny--is Bunyonesque. Likewise, Star Wars tells a classic
tale of good and evil, with Luke Skywalker receiving
quasi-divine help--the force--to defeat the powers of darkness.

These icons are ancient. Belief that superior beings (gods,
angels, messiahs) might descend from the sky and save humankind
forms the basis of most religons. Much of the surging public
interest in alien beings and UFOs stems from a deep desire for
some form of celestial salvation.

At a time when conventional Christianity strikes many as remote
and irrelevant, a more space-age variant of the same theme,
however wacky, has obvious appeal.

Clearly, human beings have always had a strong desire for
assurance that they are not alone in an empty, friendless
universe. Though the angels of yesteryear have become the
ufonauts of today, the basic psychology is unchanged. There is
still no scientific evidence for intelligent life beyond earth,
but the will to believe there is somebody out there remains as
strong as ever.

END ARTICLE

Hope you find the perspective of an eminent scientist as
interesting (if familiar) as I do, and please feel free to post
this to the list if you choose. I could send you the first part
of the article if you liked just e-mail me as I still have the
original.

Best wishes from the land where fishermen see strange things,
Graeme








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 29

From: Joe Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:45:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 05:46:55 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 29


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 29
November 11, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

HOVERING UFO CAUGHT
ON VIDEO IN ROMANIA

      On Friday, October 29, 1999, at 5 a.m.,
Alexandru Stroe was at home at his apartment
in Pitesti, a city in Arges province in Romania
when "moving to open the window," he spotted
"a disk-shaped object that was spreading
around an extremely strong light."
      "Intrigued, he watched attentively while this
object was floating in mid-air, standing still in
the southeast (sky) under an angle of 45
degrees (above the horizon)."
      "'My attention was caught right away because
I've never seen anything like it.  It was like a star
but much larger, though.  It was radiating a very
strong, strange light and stayed still for more than
an hour.'"
      Having a videocamera in the apartment, Strue
"succeeded in capturing on film the shiny disk
with telephoto lenses.  On the video footage, it can
be seen that the object is round, and on its central
part there are some erratic moving elements.  In all,
the object looked like a great satellite dish."
      Ministerul Apararil Nationale (MAPN), the
Romanian ministry of defense, contacted Strue
the following day and requested a copy of the video.
      "MAPN, through the Biroul de Presa (Press
Bureau), denied that the Army of the Air or Civil
Aviation had a plane in that area Friday morning.
None of the Romanian radar stations were able
to detect the strange unidentified object."
      MAPN said "military specialists" will study
Strue's videotape and "try to retrieve more
information about the object."
      Pitesti is located 80 kilometers (50 miles)
northwest of Bucuresti (Bucharest), the
national capital.  (Many thanks to Stig Agermose
for forwarding the Romanian newspaper article
"OZN La Pitesti!" for October 30, 1999.)
(Editor's Note: OZN is the Romanian acronym
for UFO.  It stands for obiectul zburator
nulidentificarea, unidentified flying object.)

GIANT V-SHAPED UFO SEEN
BY FAMILY IN MOROCCO

      On August 8, 1999, a man and his two
children--Felicia, age 4, and Charles, age 8--
were walking along the sandy beach at Temara,
just south of Flap in Morocco.
      Just after 9 p.m., Felicia pointed out to
sea and yelled, "There!"
      "A large object in the form of a V and
with bright lights passed directly over us,"
the adult witness reported.  "We observed it--
Felicia, Charles and myself--for about four to
five seconds.  It flew all the way up the beach
in that length of time.  It was above our heads
at a height very difficult to evaluate, perhaps
500 meters up to 5,000 meters.  Or more!  Its
scale (size) was about 100 to 500 meters,
by my estimate, but this seems very difficult
to evaluate.  It disappeared from our field of
view very rapidly."  (Merci beaucoup a Thierry
Garnier de France OVNI pour ces nouvelles.)

MANY UFOs SIGHTED IN
WESTERN UK

      More UFO sightings were reported in
the western United Kingdom last week,
both in Wales and Lancashire (Lancs.)
      On Tuesday, October 12, 1999, at
about 1:50 p.m., a woman motorist was
driving on the road from Newcastle Emlyn
to Lampeter, Ceriedigion, Wales, about
66 miles (110 kilometers) northwest of
Cardiff, when she heard the thunder of
jet engines.
      "She was in her car driving when she
saw two RAF jets flying across the road.
Nothing strange in that.  Round here the
RAF test-fly their jets around the (Cambrian)
mountains all the time.  But just after them
came a saucer-shaped object (which she saw
at a distance), but it was going in the same
direction as the jets."  Thoroughly startled, the
driver pulled over to the side of the road.  (Many
thanks to Marc Bell for this report.)
      On Monday, November 1, 1999, two women
sighted a UFO in Garstang, Lancs.  They
described it as "one rather large and illuminous
light which split into three smaller objects.
They remained in the area for approximately six
minutes at 9:30 p.m.  They came together
and whizzed off."  (Many thanks to Edmund B.
for this report.)
      On Tuesday, November 2, 1999, eyewitness
John R. "was sitting up at home" at Mynachlog,
Llynderwen, Pembrokeshire, Wales.  It was
just after 6 p.m., and John was "sitting in my house
when I saw the object., and I had a limited field
of vision.  I only saw the object for about two
seconds.  I rushed to the back door but I could
not see anything.  It was light and the weather
was fair.  It was difficult to estimate speed, but I
thought it was travelling at between 500 and 1,000
miles per hour (800 to 1,600 kilometers per hour)
and between 1,000 and 5,000 feet (300 to 1,500
meters)."
      "My neighbour told me that evening that he had
seen a similar object.  He mentioned them to me
before I said anything about my sighting."
      Llynderwen is about 100 miles (160 kilometers)
west of Cardiff.  (Email Interview)

LARGE TRIANGULAR UFO
SPOTTED IN FRANCE

      On Friday, November 5, 1999, at 1:30 a.m.,
a large traingular UFO was sighted by up to
five witnesses in the department of Yvelines,
about 40 kilometers (30 miles) southwest of
Paris.
      The slow-moving UFO was seen by
people on the ground in the cities of Maurepas,
Pontchartrain and Elancourt.
      According to ufologist Thierry Garnier of
France OVNI, "Lights (on the UFO) included
three, one at the corner of each extremity, with
a red flashing light in the center.  The UFO moved
in a manner curiously slow--by jumps (and) by
rising and descending."  (Merci beaucoup a
Thierry Garnier de France OVNI pour ces
nouvelles.)

MYSTERY METEORS LIGHT
UP EUROPEAN SKIES

      Meteors described as "very bright" plunged
through the skies of Italy and France last week.
      On Sunday, October 32, 1999, at 6:30 p.m.,
"hundreds of people in central Sardinia," a large
island in the Mediterranean Sea east of Italy,
"in the provinces of Cagliari and Oristano saw
a meteor on Sunday.  The apparation in the sky
was a gigantic ball of fire.  It was visible for ten
seconds and was descending at a 45-degree
angle in a south-southeasterly direction."  (See
the newspaper Unione Sarda for November 1
and 2, 1999.  Grazie a Edoardo Russo e
Antonio Cuccu di Centrao Italiano di Studi
Ufologici per questo rapporto.)
      On Wednesday, October 27, 1999, at
8:15 a.m. a glowing meteor plunged into the
Atlantic Ocean offshore from the Ile de Batz,
near Brest in the department of Finisterre in
France..The meteor hit the water "100 meters
(330 feet) from a boat belonging to a local
fruit merchant.  He reported the incident to
the (French) maritime authorities."  (See the
Newspaper Ouest France for October 28, 1999.
Merci beaucoup a Thierry Larquet de la Comite
de Recherche Ufologique (CRU) pour ces
nouvelles.)
(Editor's Comment:  If these are Leonid meteors,
they are over two weeks early.  Kind of makes
you wonder what's coming in the main Leonid
meteor storm later this month.)

GLOWING ORANGE UFOs
SEEN IN QUEENSLAND

      On Saturday, October 30, 1999, at 11:30
p.m., four bright glowing UFOs were spotted
over Deception Bay, Queensland, Australia
by ground witnesses.
      One witness, a woman named Nicole,
reported, "I was about to step out of my car
when I noticed these four strange lights in
the sky.  I called my husband to get out of the
car and have a look, but before he did, the
car lost some (electrical) power, The radio
(volume) went up and down as the object
passed overhead.  I was really scared.  I
yelled at Terry to get out of the car and have
a look at the lights."
      "My neighbours must have heard me yell
at Terry because they too came out and saw
what Terry and I were looking at.  We all stood
there watching these objects."
      "The objects acted rather strangely.  One
zigzagged, then broke away from the others.
The others stayed for ten minutes, then another
broke away.  Then another one slowly vanished.
And then the last one vanished, zipping across
the bay and out to sea," eastward towards the
Pacific Ocean.
      The case is being investigated by Jan Stone
of the Australian UFO Research Network.
(Many thanks to Diane Harrison of AUFORN
for this report.)

V-SHAPED UFO SPOTTED
IN FORT WORTH, TEXAS

      On Friday, November 5, 1999, at 2:37 p.m.,
ufologist Mike Harman was "coming out of the
elevator on the 37th floor of the Burnett Plaza
building in downtown Fort Worth, Texas" when
he spied a strange "flying wing" UFO.
      "I always take a look at the sky when I get
off the elevator," Mike reported, "On each floor
where the elevator doors are there is a large
window looking west, giving me an excellent
view of the western horizon."
      "At 2:37 p.m., I glanced out the window
on the 37th floor...I only had been looking out
the window for approximately three minutes
when I spotted a perfect boomerang-shaped
object traveling at high speed.  It looked
similar to the boomerangs (UFOs) reported in
the New York/New Jersey area.  It had what
looked like wings angled back sharply with
no visible body seen.  The object was the size
of a dime held at arm's length and appeared to
be dark gray in color.  The sky was partly cloudy
with vivid blue sky showing between the sparse
cloud cover.  I spotted the object coming from
behind a cloud and again hidden by white cloud.
It was visible for only about two seconds...I was
able to clearly see the shape of the object as it
was contrasted against the deep blue sky.  It
would also be my guess that it was about three
times the size of a jumbo jet flying" at about
the same altitude.
      Fort Worth (population 447,619) is about
30 miles (48 kilometers) west of Dallas.  (Many
thanks to Mike Harman for this report.)

SQUADRON OF PULSATING
UFOs SEEN BY COUPLE IN
WASHINGTON STATE

      For the past two weeks, a couple has seen
strange nighttime aerial lights near their cabin
in Lake Stevens, Washington state (population
3,380), north of Seattle.
      The first sighting was on Thursday,
October 21, 199, between 11 p.m. and 1 a.m.
The most recent sighting was Tuesday,
November 2, 1999 during the same time period.
      The witness, Jay, and her boyfriend Raymond,
reported, "We experienced five to ten of these
objects moving around in circles, back and forth,
up and down, with pulsating lights.  They will
move fast, then slower.  It was eerie."
      "We have been looking every night for the
past couple of weeks.  I can assure you that
it's not stars.  Stars don't move like this!  We
also looked on our telescope.  Most of them had
an orange middle.  On the outside they were
green.  The light from it pulsates."
      Lake Stevens, Wash. is on Highway 92
approximately 47 miles (75 kilometers)
north-northeast of Seattle.  (Many thanks to
Morgan Clements, director of World Wide UFO
Reporting Center for this report.)

Y2K: NASA TO SEND AN
EMERGENCY MISSION TO
SAVE SPACE TELESCOPE

     "To avoid Y2K computer problems, NASA is
taking steps to make sure the shuttle Discovery
completes its mission to repair the Hubble
space telescope before the new year, even if it
means flying over the Christmas holiday, a
space agency official says."
      "Ron Dittemore, NASA's shuttle program
director, said the agency had tested and adjusted
its computers and their programs and did not
anticipate any problems when the year changes
in 2000.  But NASA does not intend to take any
chances by having a shuttle crew in orbit on
New Year's Day, he said."
      "'We've decided prudently that we're not going
to fly past the end of the year,' Dittemore said in a
telephone interview from Johnson Space Center in
Houston on Friday.  'Since we don't have to do it,
we won't do it.'"
      "Both the flight software for the shuttle, designed
to guide it from liftoff to landing, and computer
programs used by Mission Control to manage the
voyage have been tested and certified as being
Y2K compliant, Dittemore said."
      "NASA decided last spring to speed up
scheduled servicing of the Hubble because some
of the gyroscopes that stabilize the $2 billion
telescope had failed.  Three of the 12.5 ton
observatory's six gyros have failed and the loss
of one more would cause the telescope to go
into a hibernation mode for safekeeping, ending
valuable scientific observations until repairs
are made."
      "The agency decided to split the Hubble
service mission scheduled for June 2000
into two parts and make some modifications
and repairs, installing new gyroscopes, in a
nine-day mission originally set for mid-October.
The second service mission is set for May 2001."
      "Last summer, electrical wiring problems were
found in the four-shuttle fleet requiring extensive
inspection and repairs, pushing Discovery's mission
into December, officials said."
      "Shuttle managers decided this week to
replace one of the shuttle's three main engines,
a task that they say could further delay liftoff
several days past the current target date,
December 2."
      "Discovery is scheduled to be fitted with its
external fuel tank and solid-fuel booster rockets
this weekend and then moved to a launching
pad, where technicians will replace the engine.
Managers expect to set a new launch date
next week."
      "In order to speed preparations for the flight,
shuttle managers decided to use software from
a 1997 service mission to Hubble instead of
writing new programs.  This raised initial concerns
about Y2K compatibility, but Dittemore said the
software had been tested and cleared."
      "NASA normally does not fly missions that
coincide with major holidays to give its employees
time off and to avoid overtime pay.  However,
Dittemore said, the Hubble mission is so important
that the agency decided not to make the Christmas
holidays a factor in its decision to fly."  (See the
Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune for November 6, 1999,
"NASA seeks to repair Hubble early to avoid
Y2K problems," page a-6.)
(Editor's Comment:  So, all of a sudden, the
Hubble repair mission is so critical that NASA
is speeding up engine work, using off-the-shelf
guidance software and pulling out all the stops
to get Discovery into space before New Year's
Eve.  Reading between the lines, I think
somebody tested Hubble's onboard computer,
and it began spewing nonsense during the
Y2k scenario.  Maybe they're going to install
a new Y2k-compliant computer on the telescope.)

from the UFO Files...

1913: CHAUNCEY NEY
           INVENTS DISCO

      Eighty-six years ago, on November 9, 1913,
the Great Lakes were struck by a devastating
early-winter storm.
      The weekend started out harmlessly enough.
"The weather was unusually warm, about eighty
degrees as the Bunsen slogged along on glassy
seas and under a singularly-weird, copper-colored
sky."
      "The sun was out but you couldn't see it,'
recalled Capt. Arthur W. Dana, then the Bunsen's
second mate and in later years a skipper for
United States Steel.  "The sky had an odd
coppery hue that reflected on the water and
gave everything an unreal appearance."
      The storm began in Lake Superior and
swept across Sault Sainte Marie, hitting Lake
Huron with 80 and 90-mile-per-hour winds.
Seas reached incredible heights--35 to 40
feet high.
      By the time the storm blew itself out on
November 11, eight ships had foundered on
Lake Huron, including the Charles S. Price,
then the largest ship afloat on the lakes, and
the James Carruthers, the pride of the Canada
Steamship Line.
      One of the weirdest stories to emerge from
"the Big Blow of 1913" was that of Chauncey Ney.
      "Some distance up Lake Huron...was the big
bulk steamer John A. McGean with dapper,
peppery 'Dancing Chauncey' Nay in command."
      "Chauncey Ney, who loved to dance, was
probably grumbling because his coal cargo had
been loaded and he had been compelled to leave
port early Saturday morning, thus missing another
Saturday night dance."
      "If there was anything Chauncey Ney relished,
it was being in port, loading or unloading on
Friday or Saturday nights.  Then, apprised of the
location of the festivities by understanding dock
superintendents, Dancing Chauncey Ney tripped
the light fantastic until the orchestra wearily played
Good Night, Ladies."
      "In addition to its light-footed skipper who once
piloted a Detroit (Michigan) fireboat, the McGean
was somewhat unusual in that two of its
wheelsmen (helmsmen), Thomas Stone and
George Smith, were full-blooded Indians (that is,
indigenous Native American people) from the
reservation near Sarnia (Ontario) where members
of both the Ojibway and Chippewa (true name:
Anishinabe--J.T.) tribes lived."
      The McGean encountered mountainous seas
from every side as she headed south towards
Port Huron, Michigan.  Two men left the pilothouse
to fetch the captain.  But as they headed down
the companionway, they couldn't believe their eyes.
      Up ahead, at the foot of the ladder, was their
skipper, Chauncey Ney, oblivious to the groaning
steel bulkheads and the heaving deck, blithely
dancing the tango.
      Back and forth he went, arms poised as if
holding a partner, listening to inaudible music
and not missing a step.
      The men gaped at each other.  One
muttered, "Who's he dancing with?"
      Before the other could reply, Chauncey
Ney turned transparent...and disappeared.
      A short while later, the McGean broke
up and sank.
      "As the week wore on, the regiments of
lost sailors who wandered sluggishly ashore
along with broken lifeboats, cabin doors, chairs,
tables, shattered paneling and hatch covers
gerew with each passing hour."
      Coroner A.C. Hunter of Goderich, Ontario
"reported that one of the McGean's life rafts
had drifted to shore with the bodies of three
men lashed to it.  Two of them were wheelsmen
Thomas Stone and George Smith, the two
Indians from the Sarnia reservation.  The other
was watchman John Olsen."
      "Another raft from the McGean carried a
single sailor.  But the rest of the crew were
nearby, some of them high on the beach and
frozen, others still wallowing bashfully offshore,
as if reluctant to admit defeat."
      "Chauncey Ney was not among them."
       Indeed, Chauncey was never seen again.
At least not on Lake Huron.
      But on November 9, 1977, sixty-four years
later, a strange incident occurred at Studio 54,
the Number One disco in New York City's
Manhattan borough.  A short, dapper man in
an old-time ship captain's navy-blue frock coat
and cap turned up on the dance floor.  Very
affable and energetic, he danced the tango
with a few gorgeous women.
      Nobody knew what to make of it.  Some
said it was a gag.  Others thought he'd
wandered in from a costume party.  Then,
to everyone's surprise, the stranger "turned
transparent and vanished."
      Was "Dancing Chauncey" Ney the "ghost
of Studio 54?"  And, if so, where will his
time-traveling "flash dance" take him next?
      Often I've wondered where Chauncey thought
he was when he began his "last tango on Lake
Huron," with the doomed McGean breaking up
in those gargantuan seas.  And what strange
thoughts are running through his mind as he
dances his way through eternity?
      Bright lights and glitter dome.  Pounding
seas and big-band music.  A smooth deck
and Cindy Crawford in my arms.  The
Apocalypse?  Never heard of it.  (See the
book True Tales of the Great Lakes by
Dwight L. Boyer, Dodd, Mead and Co., New
York, N.Y., 1971, pages 270 through 289.)

      If you thought what happened to Chauncey
Ney was strange, just wait till next week when
UFO Roundup presents another weird tale
of "the Big Blow."  (No, Monica, this story has
nothing to do with you.)

      So join us next week for more UFO news
from around the planet, brought to you by "the
paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."  And
when you have a moment today, be sure to
remember the millions of men and women who
have proudly worn a military uniform.  It's
Veterans Day here in the USA.

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

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 item first
appeared.
*********************************************************

Webmasters:

Earn Revenue from adverts by joining Direct Leads
Full details at: http://www.directleads.com/signup/cd3492

*********************************************************

This weeks advertiser:

Big Star

 From the latest releases like "Big Daddy" to instant
classics like "Saving Private Ryan," bigstar.com, the
movie superstore, has thousands of titles on video and
DVD in hundreds of categories. This year, use bigstar.com
to take the stress out of holiday shopping.

Buy one movie, get one FREE!
*********************************************************

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, plus archives of Filer's Files.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:41:40 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >No doubt Stan was referring to the standard judicial framework
 >we are familiar with today, such as those in the U.S. and other
 >western democracies.

You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
relegated to social standards instead?

On the other hand, I am sure a strict judge would throw out of
court any et-ufological case for lack of compelling physical
evidence; i.e., no body, no crashed saucer and most important of
all no linkage of evidence to an extraterrestrial origin.

 >So where are these references to the Third Reich coming from?
 >Is Ed implying that current western judicial systems employ
 >lynch-mob justice and are as perverted as was the Reich?

Of course not. Again, you missed the point entirely. Legal
standards are flexible and change almost day to day based on the
interpretations of juries and judges and the eloquence of the
lawyers. Without using the extreme example above, which were
meant to make it easy to understand legal standards are
flexible, the law is different in our system from state to
state. That is 50 different standards that are simultaneously
employed depending where is the venue. Also, one can be found
innocent or guilty whether the legal standards in our judicial
system are employed in a criminal court or a civil court.
Decisions have little to do with the actual physical happenings
that are being judged. It is the standard of law and its
interpretation by a judge with the jury's interpretation of the
Judge's instructions that is the most critical factor in
determining the legal validity of a case, not whether the case
is compelling real or not. Is this the environment that nuclear
physicist Stanton Friedman wants to relegate ufology?

 >Stan's general comment about testimonial evidence is of course,
 >legally, right on the mark.  Ed's retort dragging in lynch mobs
 >and the Third Reich is (1) irrelevant, (2) inflamatory, and (3)
 >offensive.

You missed the point again and again. See above. My point was
relevant, non-inflamatory but meant to be offensive. What is
offensive is the concept of legal standards and opinion polls in
any context in attempting to establish validity for an alleged
physical event. It makes no difference where those legal
standards and or opinion polls emanate from. They are tools of
the social structure in power at the time and have nothing to do
with actual physical events. If et is real and sharing physical
space and time, then we need to discover compelling evidence
according to the standards of physical evidence to make that
case, not lesser standards that only serve to prop up ufological
wisdom and have no place in the real world, only in ufological
conventions where the faithful can be given some hope, as
misguided as the basis for that hope can be. Legal standards
indeed!

Ed Stewart

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
    Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on 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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 11:24:19 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:43:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:38:24 EST
 >Subject: Are We Alone? [Was: British Ufology...]
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >So it's just more Stacian double talk.

 >But that's not surprising because ultimately this isn't about
 >logical argument; it's about debunking UFOs.  We know you all
 >too well.

 >David Rudiak


And we know you too well, too, Dave. Expecting you to reply two
times in a row without getting personal was a case of hope over
experience on my part. Shoulda known better.

But I did offer to send you some reading matter at my expense if
you would e-mail me your address.

That offer still stands.

Next spring will see the publication of my Field Guide to UFOs,
co-authored with Patrick Huyghe. Avon is doing it, I think under
the Quill imprint.

If you can read it and then maintain that it debunks UFOs, I'll
send you a crisp, autographed $20 bill in token of my
appreciation of your miraculous ability to read my mind.

Or you could read my last book on the subject, UFOs 1947-1997:
Fifty Years of Flying Saucers (co-edited with Hilary Evans) and
tell me how I debunk UFOs in that book, which contains articles
by such noted "debunkers" as Jerry Clark, Ray Fowler, Michael
Swords, Kenneth Arnold, Jacques Vallee, Jenny Randles, Patrick
Huyghe, Cynthia Hind and Robert Durant, among others.

Or you could pick up a copy of The Anomalist 8 (which I co-edit
with Huyghe). Due out sometime next month, it's a special all
UFO issue.

Or you could just keep reading my mind, which is admittedly much
easier work.

In the meantime,

Have a nice day.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 10:20:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:45:26 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:43:23 -0500

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>>>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Agreed.  But it also relies upon something astronomers call "The
 >Copernican Principle," which, in essence, states that there is
 >nothing particularly special about our celestial
 >neighborhood - that is, all places in the universe are pretty
 >much like all other places (a sort of cosmic Frankfurt, if you
 >will).

Point was, the Earth is vastly different from all the other
planets in the solar system. Evolution is not some vital force
that spreads itself throughout the universe. It is something
that happens to the degree that it does when local conditions
permit it. There was no guarantee, for example, that the mammals
would have survived the asteroid impact some 65 million years
ago. Had the asteroid been large enough, it could have killed
virtually everything on the planet. Had it been bigger than the
Earth, in fact, it would have destroyed the entire planet,
ending the local experiment in evolving lifeforms then and
there.

The fact that chemistry and physics operate the same throughout
the universe has nothing to do with the meaning of history over
billions of years. The Earth and Moon are not different because
of chemisty or physics (and no one's arguing that they are),
they're different because they have different _histories_, a
concept that seems to be hard to grasp for some.

 >The implication of this line of reasoning is that life must be
 >pretty common throughout the universe.  If it's not, then you
 >have to start arguing about human exceptionality, and most
 >scientists are uncomfortable pursuing such arguments.

Every planet in our solar system has demonstrably had a uniquely
different _history_ that can be easily evidenced simply by
looking at them in their present states. No two are even
remotely alike, in other words.

History is simply the present sum of a series of countless
contingent events (over billions of years), -- any single one of
which could have turned out differently. In the Earth's case, it
could have been murdered in its cradle, or completely destroyed
65 million years ago when it collided with an asteroid. There's
nothing that said it had to have sufficient gravity to maintain
an atmosphere, or any laws imposing the current percentage of
oxygen in the atmosphere that we do have. We could have
developed an atmosphere too rich in oxygen, in which case the
first caveman striking flint together in an effort to build a
fire would have ended things ratter badly for all of us.

Everything about the Earth's present state of being, if you want
to call it that, is the culmination of a long series of utter
accidents -- according to the operation of physical, chemical
and biological actions.

Unless, of course, you want to invoke a Creator. But that's
another post.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 13:05:29 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:47:35 -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: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 20:09:17 -0000


 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 14:58:26 +0000
 >>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, 6 Nov 1999 19:41:39 -0000


Ms Randles and List,

Your new long message compels me to make again
a brief comment.

My initial critic still stands: you questioned the Cometa report
for (probably) not taking into account your new testimonies,
knowing that they could not have a documented file on them.

Now, Ms Bruni has raised a very interesting question, to which
I don't think you have given a clear answer.

She did not find in the BBC video that the pilots said they had
not seen the UFO.

You replied, in short, that we must trust you. Now you add that
it was not a relevant point to the BBC program:

 >>As you have to know my documentary is not about this case, or
 >>pilot sightings. It is about the documentation on UFOs that the
 >>MoD do or do not possess. This case was used merely to show that
 >>behind one minor reference in the PRO files lurks an interesting
 >>story for which no official records are said to exist. As such
 >>the programme's relatively short coverage of this case focused
 >>on that angle not differences between accounts then and now.


This time I am really at loss. What are we talking about? You
questioned the Cometa height days after the publication of their
report in France, for (presumably) not having cited your new
witnesses, which changed drastically the Lakenheath case. But in
your own BBC program you did not mention that!

What could be more important than pilots admitting that they had
seen nothing? BTW, is it going to be one of your cases of "UFOs
which never were" ?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 12:58:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:25:06 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:57:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

First of all, what language this person is writing in?

Second, is he serious? Looks like on of those Christian fanatics
that flood newsgroups like talk.religion.newage, and are
always out of place and topic.

 >This is the last straw.  How many times I gotta tell yous all
 >that life started when God said, "Let there be light!"  And not
 >only was there light, but you could see it for, like, miles.
 >Then, he made the fishes an all the rest of us, an it was about
 >five thousand years ago when all this happened an it only took
 >six days cause on the seventeenth he burst, into the arms of
 >Judas Priest, which is where he died of thirst.  It says so in
 >the Bible.

 >Man, is the only sent she ent form of life in the universe.  Got
 >that!  Dolphins in deed.  They aint got no sense. An if they did
 >have any freakin sense, they would come in outa the water an
 >live like regular folks instedda eatin raw fish like them
 >Japansees.


--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 13:12:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:29:58 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:24:09 -0500
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:12:33 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>As devout evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould are constantly in the
 >>position of reminding us (laymen and peers alike) that,
 >>dadgummit, when we say _random_, we mean random, not
 >>half-random, not two-thirds random, but random, really,
 >>_really_, random.

 >Actually they are constantly in the position of reminding laymen
 >that when they say evolution they mean cumulative selection of
 >natural variation.

 >------
 >Mark Cashman

Mark,

How so?

Here's a relevant quote from "Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage?
The Permanent Revolution in the Earth Sciences" by Mike Davis,
which appeared in The Anomalist 5 (p. 119):

   "The neocatastrophist response [to the notion of Darwin's thin
   wedge and the finetuning of natural selection] is scathing.
   Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge are cruel but honest when
   they insist that mass extinction really means 'evolution by
   lottery' and 'survival of the luckiest.' Extinction events
   ruthlessly reset all ecological clocks...Hence Darwin, like
   Laplace, must submit to revision by chaos and historical
   contingency."

And later on the same page, quoting Eldredge:

   "Evolutionary history...  is deeply and richly contingent.
   Gone are the last vestiges of the idea that evolution
   inevitably and inexorably replaces the old and comparatively
   inferior with superior new models. Evolution, at least on a
   grand scale, is not forever tinkering, trying to come up with
   a better mouse-trap." Evolution by catastrophe, Michael
   Rampino adds, also entails speciation through a different
   process than the classic gradualist mechanisms of geographic
   isolation and adaptive change. Catastrophe replaces the linear
   temporal creep of microevolution with non-linear bursts of
   macroevolution."

End of quote.

I stand by my above statement. Or at least half of it. I may
have been wrong about Dawkins himself, but that doesn't change
the point I was making. So if you prefer, strike Dawkins and
insert Eldredge.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                 Washington State Near Top In UFO Sightings

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 12:06:07 PST
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:35:35 -0500
Subject: Washington State Near Top In UFO Sightings


Greetings list -

From: http://www.detnews.com/1999/nation/9911/11/11110235.htm

Washington state near top in UFO sightings

It's one of the best places to see alien objects, according to
reports

By Sean L. McCarthy / Scripps Howard News Service

BREMERTON, Wash. -- James Clarkson is searching for E.T.

He investigates UFO sightings in the Bremerton, Wash., area for
the Mutual UFO Network Inc., an international volunteer
organization studying the phenomenon of unidentified flying
objects.

The husky 48-year-old retired police officer hasn't seen a UFO
yet, but about once every six months he gets a call from someone
who has.

Based on reported sightings to the National UFO Reporting
Center, one of the best places to see a flying saucer is Puget
Sound. In fact, Washington state trails only California in the
number of reported UFO sightings since December 1996 (382 and
counting).

It was in the skies near Mt. Rainier 52 years ago that a private
pilot, Kenneth Arnold, helped give birth to the term "flying
saucer" when he saw nine shiny disks skipping through the air.

About two weeks after Arnold's sighting made headlines, reports
out of Roswell, N.M., changed the way many of us think about
extraterrestrial life.

The International UFO Museum and Research Center makes its
headquarters in Roswell because that's where the first
documented UFO crash "occurred."

To put it another way, Roswell is where many believe the U.S.
government retrieved the first wreckage from an alien spacecraft
-- including alien corpses. For those of you who haven't already
run to your audio-visual library for tapes of "The X-Files" and
Art Bell to verify our accuracy on this, here's the quick recap
on Roswell:

In early July 1947, a New Mexico rancher noticed pieces of
strange metallic debris strewn along his property. His neighbors
suggested he take his find to the sheriff. The sheriff, in turn,
reported the debris to the intelligence officer at the nearby
Air Force bomber group. The military blocked off and cleared the
site.

Then a curious thing happened. First, the Air Force dispatched a
press release saying it had recovered the wreckage from a downed
disk or flying saucer. Hours later, after callers bombarded the
base from around the world, the Air Force "corrected" its
earlier release, attributing the wreckage to a weather balloon.

But the damage had been done.

As the front page of the Roswell Daily Record screamed, "RAAF
Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region."

Thus began the public's distrust of the military -- at least
when it comes to the possible existence of UFOs.

Peter Davenport, director of the National UFO Reporting Center
since 1994, believes the government knows about the presence of
UFOs and chooses not to acknowledge it. Or, as others believe,
what people think are UFOs in fact are experimental military
aircraft. In either case, the government refuses to cooperate,
Clarkson said.

"Part of the problem is they have some really good reasons to
not tell the truth," he said.

Pentagon spokeswoman Susan Hansen said the Defense Department
has no policy regarding UFOs and doesn't answer questions about
them. "No, we have people watching The X-Files instead of asking
us these questions," Hansen said.

The Air Force did investigate 12,618 UFO sightings from 1947 to
1969 in an operation called Project Blue Book. The project,
headquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, still
had not identified 701 sightings when it was terminated on Dec.
17, 1969 -- a few months after humans first landed on the moon,
our own "alien" invasion.

To report sighting

The National UFO Reporting Center accepts calls on recent
sightings through its 24-hour hotline at (206) 722-3000.
Sightings more than a week old should be reported via the
Internet at www.ufocenter.com, or by mail to: National UFO
Reporting Center, P.O. Box 45623, University Station, Seattle,
WA 98145. Reports should include an exact time, date and
location of the sighting, along with a full description.

---

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                         Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 14:11:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:38:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:04:58 -0500
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - MontereyBay/California Sighting

 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 01:52:27 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >>>Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 20:48:13 -0500
 >>>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Juarez/El Paso Sighting - Monterey Bay/California Sighting

 >>>Hello List Members,

 >>>I'd like to make a request here for any information readers here
 >>>may have on two sightings that occurred in the places mentioned
 >>>in the subject of this letter.  The Juarez/El Paso sighting that
 >>>the witness reports to me occurred on November 7, 1996, and the
 >>>Monterey Bay sighting occurred on April 11, 1996.  I have
 >>>sketches of the craft that was sighted during these encounters
 >>>and I'd like to see if there is any correlating reports.  You're
 >>>help, or nudge in the right direction would be greatly
 >>>appreciated.  The witness, which is the same in both of these
 >>>cases states that there were "hundreds" of witnesses to the
 >>>Juarez sighting.  Hence my curiosity about these sightings.


 >>Sadly, I have nothing matching the dates and places
 >>mentioned above.

 >>Were these sightings of structured craft?  ( i.e. some
 >>definite shape or surface detail ),  or were they just
 >>some lights?

 >Thanks for looking into that for me Larry,

 >Yes, they were structured craft sightings of which I have
 >computer sketches of, that the witness sent me.  He claims that
 >hundreds of people witnessed the El Paso/Juarez sighting.

 >I've also got another question for you concerning your software
 >*U*BASE (isn't it?.  I've downloaded the demo, and I'm wondering
 >when a person orders this software - is it updated with
 >sightings that have occurred up until time of shipment or
 >thereabouts?  Do you provide any online updates to additions that
 >you may make to your software after a person purchases it?


Hi Todd!

Its called the *U* UFO Database. Details are at my website:
http://www.jps.net/larryhat

Every client gets the latest copy,  so no two versions are
exactly alike .. I'm always putting in new cases and deleting
some old weak or discredited ones.

An airliner sighting near Ibiza Island (Spain) just took a
serious "strangeness" hit for example.

So far there is no way to update the data file online, but
that's a good idea! I'll have to think about it. Maybe I could
just zip the amended file, and attach it to an email or
something.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:31:03 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:38:50 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 14:48:47 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 > >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:39:48 +0000
 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 > >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 > >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Dave

 >Hi Sean, hope you had a good holiday in Scotland.

It wasn't a holiday it was work, But Dave Ledger's country is a nice
place and I got a chance to visit some relatives.

I've had to do a few snips or this email would be very long.

 > >Dave, if you have been investigating UFO's for twenty years and
 > >you are roughly the same age as me could you please answer these
 > >questions.

 >No problem Sean, I always like to help if I can.

Glad to hear it <g>.

 >I'm not exaggerating when I say I have been investigating UFOs
 >for 20 years; it has been a standing joke with Jenny, Andy and
 >other colleagues for years that I have been involved with the
 >subject since being "in the crib". In fact I've been fascinated
 >by the subject since watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind
 >as a 10 or 11 year old.

<Snip>

I wasn't quite as bad as you, but my interest in UFO's also came
about after watching Close Encounters. Check out my web-page
http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/hynek.htm
There you will also find the first ever UFO book that I read, and a
classic it is too.

 > >1) How old was you when you joined BUFORA?

 >Good question - I would say about 15 or 16. By that time I had
 >investigated a good number of cases, appeared several times in
 >my local papers, and was at that time an ET believer through and
 >through .

<snip>

 > >2) How long did it take you to become an accredited BUFORA
 >     investigator?

 >Probably a couple of years and after the submission of at least
 >three or four case reports. Jenny (who at that time was BUFORA's
 >Director of Investigations)  may remember more precisely
 >than I do, but I do remember BUFORA being impressed by the
 >ability of a teenager to investigate and research cases in the
 >way I did back then.

<snip>

I have no doubt that you have arrived at your reasons for ET being a
"minute possibility" in some ways I almost agree _but_ and its a big
but, the chances of us Homo Sapiens being the only life in the whole
universe is just too remote in my eyes. And as for travel between
stars being impossible, lets not go there again, or perhaps you could
even read my article in the last Quest magazine.

 > >3) If you have investigated "Hundreds" of sightings, how long do
 > >    you spend investigating each case?

 >How long is a piece of string?

<snip>

OK so this was a leading question <g>. You are right of course each
case has its own merits and each case dictates how much time it is
_worth_ spending on it.

 > >4) How does one consult the BUFORA archives?

 >Ha-ha!  Now there's a mystery of labyrinthine proportions, far
 >more puzzling than UFOs themselves...in actual fact, only last
 >year I asked BUFORA's then Director of Investigations (Gloria
 >Dixon) if she could locate my original report on my UFO
 >investigations from 1987-88, which I naturally wanted back; but
 >despite all her best efforts it appears to have disappeared into
 >the maw; along with a great many other case reports, I should
 >think.

 >However Sean, if you are genuinely interested in my work over
 >the years and you can travel the short distance to Sheffield,
 >you are welcome to go through my archive at your leisure,
 >examine my work and question me at length.

Well thank you for the offer of your hospitality. When I get up your
way I will try and make some time available to pop in.

 > But since I've done
 >my best to answer all your questions, I think it's about time I
 >asked you some which will be useful for my ongoing research into
 >what makes UFOlogists tick:

Sure, I would like to be as helpful as possible.

 >1. How long have you been actively involved in ufology and of
 >the cases you have investigated, how many have you regarded as
 >being of exotic origin? (by exotic, I mean unexplainable).

If you care to check my home-page out, (which has not been updated in
over a year) you will find that I cannot cite exactly when I started
into UFO research, but it must be well over ten years by now. I have
been interested in UFO's roughly as long as you but I was never
active like you. I just read many books on the subject. As for cases
investigated, no where near your cited hundreds, perhaps not even a
hundred in total. I was never a member of an active group until a
little over three years ago, so the only reports that made it to me
where by word of mouth or ones that I chased down because I read
something about a sighting in the local paper. However one thing
worth mentioning, two weeks after arguing heatedly with Paul
Devereaux, I had a case which I am positive was an "earth light".

 >2. What UFO related magazines and newsletters do you subscribe
 >to, and what newspapers/magazines of non-UFO related matter do
 >you regularly read?

I subscribe to no UFO magazines at all. I do however get the UFO
Magazine most months. As for non UFO matter, I read loads and varied
but most of what I read, I read on the internet.

 >3. Which books and personalities do you feel have influenced
 >your views about UFOs the most?

The first and most influential would have to be J Allen Hynek. I also
respect highly the work of many others, including off the top of my
head, Chris Rutkowski (Swamp gas Journal) Stan Friedman, Kevin
Randle, Bob Shell, Tim Matthews for his work on German UFO's, Bruce
Maccabe, Jenny Randles, and that's just people on this list.
As for books, hmm that's a toughie, I have not read many UFO books
cover to cover. I have a bad habit of picking through a book. The
last book that I read all the way through was Kevin Randles "Project
Blue Book Exposed", which I well recommend. The first book that I
ever read, was as I mentioned was J Allen Hynek's "The UFO
Experience".

 >4. You state elsewhere that there is plentiful evidence for UFOs
 >of ET/exotic origin "out there" if you know where to look for
 >it. What cases/specific evidence are you referring to, and why
 >those in particular?

Plentiful evidence in the way of valid UFO reports of solid objects
doing manoeuvres that conventional aircraft cannot do. Plentiful
evidence in the way of trace evidence of landing cases. ET ETC. I
would mention abductions but that really would raise an eyebrow with
you wouldn't it <g>.
Its all a matter of relativity, isn't it. _IF_ you _believe_ in UFO's
then the evidence is more plentiful than if you don't. You will find
more cases that reinforce your beliefs either way, for or against
really. Pretty much the same for God and other such. As for hard, in
your face, you can't mistake this for evidence of UFO's evidence,
then I believe that there is none in the public domain.

 >5. What is your attitude towards other phenomena of a paranormal
 >or supernatural nature. For example, would you describe yourself
 >as a "believer" in ghosts and spirits, ESP, the Loch Ness
 >Monster, reincarnation, etc?

Er not "carte blanche" no. Ghost have been _proven_ almost as well as
exotic UFO's. ESP is a scientifically researched phenomenon, and I
believe proven. Loch Ness, no way its a thing to get tourists into
Scotland, after all the most famous photo, which was printed in Peter
Brookesmith's "The Unexplained" series of magazines, has been proved
to been faked. Reincarnation? Hmm personally I doubt it, but then
that would probably be my Christian belief's deciding that one.

 >I hope I have been of help to you, and I look forward to
 >receiving your replies to my questions.

 >Thanks very much...
 >Dave Clarke

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:31:03 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:41:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 14:48:47 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:39:48 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

Hi Dave

 >Hi Sean, hope you had a good holiday in Scotland.

It wasn't a holiday it was work, But Dave Ledger's country is a
nice place and I got a chance to visit some relatives.

I've had to do a few snips or this email would be very long.

 >>Dave, if you have been investigating UFO's for twenty years and
 >>you are roughly the same age as me could you please answer these
 >>questions.

 >No problem Sean, I always like to help if I can.

Glad to hear it <g>.

 >I'm not exaggerating when I say I have been investigating UFOs
 >for 20 years; it has been a standing joke with Jenny, Andy and
 >other colleagues for years that I have been involved with the
 >subject since being "in the crib". In fact I've been fascinated
 >by the subject since watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind
 >as a 10 or 11 year old.

<Snip>

I wasn't quite as bad as you, but my interest in UFO's also came
about after watching Close Encounters. Check out my web-page
http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/hynek.htm

There you will also find the first ever UFO book that I read,
and a classic it is too.

 >>1) How old was you when you joined BUFORA?

 >Good question - I would say about 15 or 16. By that time I had
 >investigated a good number of cases, appeared several times in
 >my local papers, and was at that time an ET believer through and
 >through .

<snip>

 >>2) How long did it take you to become an accredited BUFORA
 >    investigator?

 >Probably a couple of years and after the submission of at least
 >three or four case reports. Jenny (who at that time was BUFORA's
 >Director of Investigations)  may remember more precisely
 >than I do, but I do remember BUFORA being impressed by the
 >ability of a teenager to investigate and research cases in the
 >way I did back then.

<snip>

I have no doubt that you have arrived at your reasons for ET
being a "minute possibility" in some ways I almost agree _but_
and its a big but, the chances of us Homo Sapiens being the only
life in the whole universe is just too remote in my eyes. And as
for travel between stars being impossible, lets not go there
again, or perhaps you could even read my article in the last
Quest magazine.

 >>3) If you have investigated "Hundreds" of sightings, how long do
 >>   you spend investigating each case?

 >How long is a piece of string?

<snip>

OK so this was a leading question <g>. You are right of course
each case has its own merits and each case dictates how much
time it is _worth_ spending on it.

 >>4) How does one consult the BUFORA archives?

 >Ha-ha!  Now there's a mystery of labyrinthine proportions, far
 >more puzzling than UFOs themselves...in actual fact, only last
 >year I asked BUFORA's then Director of Investigations (Gloria
 >Dixon) if she could locate my original report on my UFO
 >investigations from 1987-88, which I naturally wanted back; but
 >despite all her best efforts it appears to have disappeared into
 >the maw; along with a great many other case reports, I should
 >think.

 >However Sean, if you are genuinely interested in my work over
 >the years and you can travel the short distance to Sheffield,
 >you are welcome to go through my archive at your leisure,
 >examine my work and question me at length.

Well thank you for the offer of your hospitality. When I get up
your way I will try and make some time available to pop in.

 >But since I've done
 >my best to answer all your questions, I think it's about time I
 >asked you some which will be useful for my ongoing research into
 >what makes UFOlogists tick:

Sure, I would like to be as helpful as possible.

 >1. How long have you been actively involved in ufology and of
 >the cases you have investigated, how many have you regarded as
 >being of exotic origin? (by exotic, I mean unexplainable).

If you care to check my home-page out, (which has not been
updated in over a year) you will find that I cannot cite exactly
when I started into UFO research, but it must be well over ten
years by now. I have been interested in UFO's roughly as long as
you but I was never active like you. I just read many books on
the subject. As for cases investigated, no where near your cited
hundreds, perhaps not even a hundred in total. I was never a
member of an active group until a little over three years ago,
so the only reports that made it to me where by word of mouth or
ones that I chased down because I read something about a
sighting in the local paper. However one thing worth mentioning,
two weeks after arguing heatedly with Paul Devereaux, I had a
case which I am positive was an "earth light".

 >2. What UFO related magazines and newsletters do you subscribe
 >to, and what newspapers/magazines of non-UFO related matter do
 >you regularly read?

I subscribe to no UFO magazines at all. I do however get the UFO
Magazine most months. As for non UFO matter, I read loads and
varied but most of what I read, I read on the internet.

 >3. Which books and personalities do you feel have influenced
 >your views about UFOs the most?

The first and most influential would have to be J Allen Hynek. I
also respect highly the work of many others, including off the
top of my head, Chris Rutkowski (Swamp gas Journal) Stan
Friedman, Kevin Randle, Bob Shell, Tim Matthews for his work on
German UFOs, Bruce Maccabe, Jenny Randles, and that's just
people on this list. As for books, hmm that's a toughie, I have
not read many UFO books cover to cover. I have a bad habit of
picking through a book. The last book that I read all the way
through was Kevin Randles "Project Blue Book Exposed", which I
well recommend. The first book that I ever read, was as I
mentioned was J Allen Hynek's "The UFO Experience".

 >4. You state elsewhere that there is plentiful evidence for UFOs
 >of ET/exotic origin "out there" if you know where to look for
 >it. What cases/specific evidence are you referring to, and why
 >those in particular?

Plentiful evidence in the way of valid UFO reports of solid
objects doing manoeuvres that conventional aircraft cannot do.
Plentiful evidence in the way of trace evidence of landing
cases. ET ETC. I would mention abductions but that really would
raise an eyebrow with you wouldn't it <g>.

Its all a matter of relativity, isn't it. _IF_ you _believe_ in
UFOs then the evidence is more plentiful than if you don't. You
will find more cases that reinforce your beliefs either way, for
or against really. Pretty much the same for God and other such.
As for hard, in your face, you can't mistake this for evidence
of UFO's evidence, then I believe that there is none in the
public domain.

 >5. What is your attitude towards other phenomena of a paranormal
 >or supernatural nature. For example, would you describe yourself
 >as a "believer" in ghosts and spirits, ESP, the Loch Ness
 >Monster, reincarnation, etc?

Er not "carte blanche" no. Ghost have been _proven_ almost as
well as exotic UFO's. ESP is a scientifically researched
phenomenon, and I believe proven. Loch Ness, no way its a thing
to get tourists into Scotland, after all the most famous photo,
which was printed in Peter Brookesmith's "The Unexplained"
series of magazines, has been proved to been faked.
Reincarnation? Hmm personally I doubt it, but then that would
probably be my Christian belief's deciding that one.

 >I hope I have been of help to you, and I look forward to
 >receiving your replies to my questions.

 >Thanks very much...
 >Dave Clarke

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                        Answers about the Chupacabras

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 23:01:20 -0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:46:52 -0500
Subject: Answers about the Chupacabras


Last Friday I sent an e-mail about a supposed attack by
Chupacabras in Parque So Bento, in Sorocaba, state of Sao
Paulo.

Today I spoke by phone with Dr. Rodrigo Teixeira, veterinarian
of the Sorocaba Municipal Zoo, and he reaffirmed to me that what
killed that chickens was a wild animal. He is a veterinarian for
26 years.

Dr. Rodrigo informed that the spots found on the chicken bodies
were made by "terrestrials" animals. According him the probable
"killer" could be the saringu (a small rat), or a wild cat or
a skunk.

He said that the chickens weighed 1.5kg and had about 7 ml. of
blood (that's little blood). This blood when poured on the floor
is fast absorbed, or is sucked by the predator. Blood is very
interesting to the wild animals. It has a lot of minerals that
the animals love.

The eggs got untouchable on the nest because the only animal
that could eat them could be the skunk.

The canvas of the aviary were intacts, and he said: "You never
saw a prisioner run away of a prison? So, the animals sometimes
can be more "smart" than the "animal-man".

Dr. Rodrigo don't reject the possibility thatthe responsables
can be a domestic dog or even a man joking.

"I don't believe in Chupacabras. All the animals killed
supposedly by tha Chupacabras that a made the autopsy there's
nothing strange. I found as well hairs in the place of the
attacks and were the same of the wild dogs".

Dr. Rodrigo Teixeira can be found at: Rua Teodoro, 883, Vila
Hortncia, Sorocaba - SP. Brazil Zip Code:18021-020.

Phone number: +55-15-227-5454

That's all for now.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:08:10 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:55:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:38:24 EST
 >Subject: Are We Alone? [Was: British Ufology...]
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 21:00:41 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 23:05:50 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>You misinterpreted one point, however, or perhaps I didn't make
 >>myself clear. The Earth wasn't "singled out" for anything. It's
 >>simply that when you look back at it's history you get a series
 >>of highly contingent events resulting in life as we presently
 >>know it. My point was that maybe this same planetary history has
 >>been repeated millions of times in the universe (the Very Large
 >>Number theory) -- or perhaps it hasn't.

 >And here is where your argument obviously fails.  Using Earth as
 >your sole example, your repeated assumption seems to be that
 >there is ONLY one sequence of "highly contingent events" which
 >can lead to intelligent life.  (Why else do you keep bringing up
 >the issue of how this "this SAME planetary history" might or
 >might not have "been repeated millions of times in the
 >universe?"   You also repeat this position below.)
 >
 >On what exactly do you base such an extreme position?  How do
 >you know that there aren't billions or trillions of DIFFERENT
 >sequences of "highly contingent events" which can also lead to
 >the evolution of intelligent life on other planet?

I don't. But neither do you. My point that the universe is an
extremely dangerous place in which to raise a family or evolve
intelligent life (or debunk UFOs, as you would prefer) is a
statement about contingent events over time. Most things that
happen in the universe aren't exactly conducive to life, as a
glance at the surface of the Moon would show. Most of these
events seem user dangerous as opposed to user friendly. You seem
to be saying that increasing the number of things that can go
wrong somehow enhances your survival prospects.

 >Why must it
 >be exactly the same sequence as occurred on Earth, unless you
 >demandng that intelligent aliens be nearly exact copies of
 >humans in biochemistry and morphology?

I never said that it did. I did say that change the sequence and
timing of certain events, and maybe homo sap doesn't get to
where we are today.

 >Let's put it another way.  Just about EVERYTHING is a unique
 >sequence of highly contingent randoms events and is unlikely to
 >be exactly repeated elsewhere.  One such sequence led to humans.
 >Another random sequence led to a unique human named Dennis
 >Stacy.  But so what?  Having said this, you've basically said
 >nothing, since it is an obvious truism. Many other sequences
 >could very conceivably lead to other intelligent species.  E.g.,
 >dolphins are another big-brained species that developed in
 >parallel and quite independently of humans.  There is obviously
 >more than one way to zig and zag to intelligence even right here
 >on planet Earth.

Given the fact that the planet itself exists as it does today,
yes. Obviously life can evolve on it. You can even hypothesize a
planet entirely covered by water, in which the local equivalent
of dolphins are the predominant species. You'll have a harder
time arguing that they would ever have evolved to the stage of
space travel, however intelligent, because of what would be the
contingent limitations of their planetary environment. (It's
hard to go through an Iron Age in other words, as Michael Swords
would say, when you grow up under water.) Other earths might
have too much or too little air.

There could be millions and billions of potential Earths, just
as you say. But we have no way of knowing whether the Earth is
the predominant species of planet in the universe, a small
isolated species confined to the Milky Way, or virtually on the
verge of extinction, number one on the cosmic endangered species
list. That's why you like the Very Large Number approach. Just
wave it like a magical wand and it'll take you where you want to
go -- to a Green Acres universe literally teeming with
intelligent lifeforms. We know you too well to think otherwise,
David.

 >Convergent evolution is a good example of where different,
 >independent paths lead to similar results.  All flying animals
 >(insects, bats, birds, pterodactyls, etc.) have many similar
 >morphological characteristics, despite highly different
 >histories of evolution.  Or take fast predatory ocean animals.
 >Dolphins (originally land mammals) ended up with many of the
 >same morphological characteristics of fish or sharks or the
 >reptilian ichthyosaurs from the age of the dinosaurs.  Form
 >follows function.

So? Since you like big numbers, take this one. How many species
of all lifeforms are there on this planet, including plants,
insects, bacteria, fishes, mammals, reptiles, and so on? How
many can read a newspaper? Answer: One. Now, is one a big number
or a small number?

It's a small number within a big number, and that was my
original point in posting what I did. Very Large Numbers can be
true (I don't know and neither do you), but Very Large Numbers
of this and that (suns and planets) don't guarantee equally
large numbers of intelligent lifeforms, anymore than the huge
number of species on this planet necessarily "guarantee" an
intelligent species capable of space travel.

 >>It's also very easy to respond to each point (moon, tides, angle
 >>of rotation resulting in seasons, interior molten core, giant
 >>gas sentinels, and so on) one at a time, but, again, this
 >>overlooks the point that I was making: that the Earth represents
 >>a confluence of each and  _all_ of the above. There's a huge
 >>difference when they're taken collectively.

 >So Earth had its own perhaps unique group of factors that
 >eventually led to us, which doesn't begin to prove that many
 >other unique groups of factors elsewhere won't do pretty much
 >the same thing.  The goal isn't to precisely reproduce humans.
 >It's to produce other intelligent beings.

 >As the saying goes, there's more than one way to skin a cat.


I'm not using our planet's history to prove anything. I'm using
it as an example of how a Very Large Number argument as such may
(or may not) miss the point, may, and may not, reflect the
"universal" situation. We simply don't know, and wielding Big
Numbers doesn't necessarily in and of itself increase our
knowledge about anything, given what we're learning about the
history of our own planet and life's precarious foothold here.

You can think about these things -- or not. I don't really care.
But to suggest that I only raised them in order to debunk UFOs
is both puerile and offensive.

 >Many of the factors you cite as critical are hardly unique to
 >Earth even in our own solar system.   Mars has nearly the same
 >angle of tilt (and also length of day as Earth) and similar
 >seasonal changes.  Is there only one unique tilt axis that
 >eventually leads to the evolution of intelligent life forms?  I
 >think you'll have a tough time convincing many scientists of
 >that.

I don't know and neither do you. My point was not that a
certain, single, precise axis tilt was required for the
evolution of intelligent life on this planet. You persist in
singling out single factors, whereas I have always said that it
was a _confluence_ of contingent events over time, axis tilt
being but one, which resulted in our present situation. Or can't
you read?

 >And in our own solar system, Earth is also hardly unique in
 >having an interior molten core.  So does Venus probably, to cite
 >but one example.  Venus is also nearly identical to Earth in
 >size, but had the misfortune of being too close to the Sun and
 >lost it's spin and water.  Mars is too small and eventually
 >froze up.  If Venus had traded places with Mars, we might very
 >well have a sister planet with life of its own.  There is still
 >serious consideration of Mars independently developing microbial
 >life early in its history, and even seeding Earth with its own
 >life forms.  And this is just one solar system we're talking
 >about.

That's right, just one solar system. And those other guys, Venus
and Mars, didn't make it, did they? Why? Because they had a
history that resulted in their present status, a contingent
history. And contingency doesn't increase your chances, it
reduces them. Since you like Big Numbers, here's another one.
Let's say there's only one city block of houses on the planet,
and, ghastly as this will strike you, both you and I live there.
What are our chances of bumping into one another? Pretty big.

Now let's a look at a planet with six billion people on it,
which is a Very Large Number. Does this increase our chances of
meeting? No, contingency in and of itself actually reduces our
chances of meeting. Numbers alone, in other words, aren't enough
to increase the odds. We will of course both meet other people
during our lifetime, maybe 200 to 400 total, I don't know. But
even that's a very small number when compared to 6 billion. On
the other hand, if we had been born a hundred years apart our
chances of meeting are zero and will forever remain zero. In
other words, historical contingency always trumps big numbers,
however big you want to make them.

So start with as many trillion life-hosting planets in the
universe as you want, because you'll never have a  larger
number. That number will only grow smaller with each tick of the
clock of contingency. A billion earths here and a billion earths
there won't have the right stuff in terms of atmospheric
composition. Another billion (or so) will have been born too
close to their parent sun, another billion (or so) too distant.
Another billion will have been born to a bad ("dirty") sun,
another billion will have four moons or none, another billion
will be completely covered with water, and another billion won't
have any water at all. Another billion won't have Van Allen
radiation belts, or their equivalent, another billion will have
been born stillborn, and another billion destroyed in
cataclysmic collisions. Another billion will have been born into
a double star system, another billion to a star incapable of
supporting life. Pretty soon you're talking big numbers on both
sides of the equation. Or as a famous U.S. senator once said, "A
billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking
real money."

And speaking of planets where evolution can conceivably take
place, we still have no idea of the odds that it will take
place. For example, how many times do amino acids have to
randomly combine with one another to form self-replicating RNA?
Let's say another billion (or trillion) planets have tried, but,
for whatever reason, just haven't got it right yet. Perfect
place to live, according to the tourist brochure, we're just
waiting on those damn amino acids for some interesting lifeforms
to come along.

And, no, David, the end result wouldn't have to resemble homo
sap, something else I didn't say. In fact, given all the
contingencies involved, it probably wouldn't, with all due
respect to Mr. Swords and maybe yourself. On the other hand, if
an ET species is here in force, there's no reason to think we
would be immune to all their nasty microbes and viruses, either,
but we seem to be holding up quite well, unless AIDS is your
answer.

 >Earth would have had tides with or without the Moon.  The huge
 >tides created by the Moon early in Earth's history conceivably
 >had a very detrimental effect on evolution.  So very
 >conceivably, planets elsewhere without moons or with smaller
 >moons would have evolved complex land-based life forms more
 >quickly.

Unless they got smashed into smithereens in the meantime by a
larger planet. I told you more than once -- it's not a simple
case of tides or not, or seasonal axis or not, or iron core or
not, it's a _convergence_ of all of the above, and many more
contingent factors, over time. What about the concepts of
history and contingency don't you understand? Of course the
history of every individual planet in the universe is unique to
that planet. The question is whether planetary uniqueness
promotes the evolution of intelligent life (in whatever form) or
lessens its odds. I'm saying that historical planetary
contingency reduces the odds at every turn from previously
assumed Very Large Numbers, not that we're alone (although that
would be the most extreme extrapolation of same, but in the same
way that there is both a Weak and Strong Anthropic Principle) or
the end product of evolution -- just that the evolution of
intelligent life in the universe isn't the neat, nearly
ubiquitous "trick" that you (and others who adopt the Very Large
Number theory) seem to think it is.

But like you, we all know better. What I really set out to do
was to debunk UFOs.

 >>I agree with you that much of it is speculative; but it's also
 >>speculation to assume that the history of the Earth has been
 >>repeated or replicated millions of times throughout the
 >>universe.

 >And here it is, once again, the absurd assumption that one MUST
 >replicate the history of the Earth in order to get intelligent
 >life forms.  How do you know there is only one unique way to
 >evolve intelligent life?

I don't and I never said that I did. You're the one who's absurd
here. What I did say was that the contingent history of life on
this planet argues against the willy-nilly application of the
Very Large Number  theory as the answer to whether or not
intelligent life in the universe is a cosmic, fundamental given
(as you seem to think), or a much more rare event (as I think).
I'm not saying there's only one unique way to evolve intelligent
life; I'm saying it's a haphazardous process at best, with no
guarantee of success, and a high rate of failure due to the
contingent nature of the universe.

 >>I also think you're wrong to downplay the presence of a large
 >>metal core relative to planet size, but I won't bore the list
 >>with details. If you're interested in more information about
 >>same, e-mail me your snail mail address offline and I'll send
 >>you some additional information. >>The question of dinosaurian
 >vs. mammalian evolution is indeed an >interesting one. Here's
 >one way of looking at it. We know that >it took our own
 >mammalian ancestors some 65 million years to >evolve into homo
 >sapiens. For how many millions of years were >dinosaurs the
 >predominant planetary lifeform?

 >Our mammalian ancestor's didn't suddenly spring into existence
 >65 million years ago.  Primitive mammals co-existed with
 >dinosaurs for some 150 million years prior to that and were
 >going nowhere.  Every time they poked their head out of some
 >hole in the ground, some bigger dinosaur would come by and bite
 >it off.  The extinction of the dinosaurs simply got rid of the
 >competition.

Didn't say they did. Here's Davis on the subject (TA5, p. 119):

"Species interactions play little role in dertermining survival
in the aftermath of great bolide impacts; and the major
watersheds in the evolution of life do not work by orthodox
natural selection. (For example, the decisive 'adaptive
advantage' of mammals during the K/T catastrophe simply may have
been their concentration in circumpolar regions least affected
by the low-latitude Chicxulub impact.)"

In other words, the mammals probably weren't directly competing
with the dinosaurs for the same ecological niche -- and thus not
fearful of having their heads snapped off everytime they stuck
them outside their burrows. It's all contingency, contingency,
and more contingency, not certainty of evolution, more
certainty, and more certainty yet.

 >>For that matter, aren't birds assumed to be the dinosaurs'
 >>direct descendants? I admit that we've got an African Gray
 >>parrot who is pretty smart, but he isn't nearly as smart as you
 >>or I are. Hell, he can't even do e-mail. On top of that, he
 >>still thinks Microsoft isn't a monopoly.

 >On the other hand, I'll bet he bought shares of Microsoft a
 >dozen years ago and is now a lot richer than you.

Well, yes and no. I cashed out his Microsoft stock and all he
wanted was birdseed in return, to which I readily agreed. So I
guess we're both rich.

FWIW, I'm presently holding AAPL, NITE, MSGI, GBLX, DGIL and
LUV. On a contingent basis, of course.

 >>So who's to say? Best evidence is that the dinosaurs had the
 >>place to themselves for a hundred million  years or more and

 >The mammals were there too, for much of that period and didn't
 >make a final leap to intelligence either.  So?

They were awaiting a contingent catastrophe. Point in case of
both the mammals and dinosaurs is that the passage of time alone
doesn't seem to be much of an evolutionary "urge" toward higher
intelligence. Apparently, you need some contingent, outside
energy sources to galvanize the process or hurry it along. Think
of it as a contingently timed kick in the butt: too early and it
might not have benefited the mammals; a little later and it
might have extinguished them as well. Contingency does have its
rewards.

 >>and neither have their surviving descendants.

 >There are certainly paleontologists who will disagree with your
 >statement that the dinosaurs weren't evolving to higher
 >intelligence.  The predator species, e.g., were slowly evolving
 >bigger brains and had larger brains than any of the mammals of
 >that period.  Would this eventually have led to an intelligent
 >dinosaur species tens of millions of years later ("dinosaur
 >man").  Maybe not, but it remains a possibility.
 >

Everything remains a possibility if you don't account for those
contingent events which are always lopping huge limbs off the
tree of evolution.

 >Or maybe the mammals would have found some niche somewhere on
 >Earth where they didn't face constant competition from the
 >dinosaurs.  From there, maybe they would have evolved to larger
 >and better adapted forms that could eventually compete with and
 >eventually displace the dinosaurs, with or without a planetary
 >extinction event.  There are paleontologists who will argue that
 >was already happening.  The dinosaurs were already on their way
 >out.

 >The extinction of the dinosaurs from some asteroid collision may
 >not have been a necessary contingent event needed for the
 >evolution of intelligence on Earth.  Please prove otherwise.

Please prove that it wasn't. While you're at it, please prove
how many other Earth-sized planets exist in the universe. Prove
how many currently support intelligent lifeforms. Please prove
the existence of God. Or the non-existence. Your choice. Just
prove one or the other.

No one was ever talking about proof of anything. We were talking
about the assumptions of proof that the Very Large Number theory
makes, and arguments against those assumptions. Obviously, both
remain in the realm of theory. All I did was present the theory
against the VLN argument, which you are free to accept or
reject. In the meantime, prove the VLN theory.

 >>For whatever reasons, the
 >>mammals did. Along with the help of an entirely contingent
 >>Extratraterrestrial Visitor some 65 million years ago, an ETV,
 >>incidentally, just relevant in size to the Earth so that it
 >>didn't demolish the entire enterprise but only decimated the
 >>dinosaurs. (Remember those gas giants, scooping up the
 >>incoming?)

 >Gas giants are common -- real common.  We have four in our solar system
 >alone.  The recently detected planets in other star systems are also almost
 >entirely gas giants.  Yes, they are important for sweeping up debris, but
 >probably every solar system has at least one.  To what degree they stablize
 >or destablize the orbits of smaller planets in the system is a fertile field
 >of investigation.

I'm glad you grant me that much. On what basis do you assume that "probably
every solar system has at least one"?

 >>And good thing it splashed down when it did. What if it had
 >>impacted only 3 or 4 million years ago? Maybe no homo erectus,
 >>eh?

 >So what's to say that the surviving species would not have
 >evolved something similar in another 65 million years?  There
 >are still small scavenging mammals living in holes (i.e., shrews
 >and rats and the like), just like there were 65 million years
 >ago.  If primates and humans could evolve once after such an
 >extinction event, why couldn't it happen again?

 >Again, you assume there is ONLY one way for intelligent life to
 >evolve, even here on Earth.

No, I don't. On the other hand, you seem to think that it's a
relatively common event throughout the universe. What I said was
that, based on our growing knowledge of the history of our own
planet, and the evolution of life on same, it becomes
increasingly difficult to accept the VLN theory on the basis of
the involvement of large numbers alone.

That's still the argument you're using, and one that I reject.

 >>But maybe this stuff goes on a million times a day, or even
 >>every hour, the universe being as big as it is.

 >Lets do some math.  Life on Earth is about a trillion days old,
 >and there have been a number of times that Earth has been
 >clobbered by some asteroid or comet during that period, probably
 >leading to mass extinctions.  So let's say roughly every 100
 >billion days (give or take a few days), Earth has suffered a
 >mass extinction event.  There are roughly 400 billion stars in
 >the Milky Way alone.  Let's say only one in a thousand has some
 >Earth-like planet with some sort of life, however primitive, or
 >roughly 400 million planets (probably somewhat conservative
 >estimate).  That means one of these planets is getting clobbered
 >about every 250 days, let's say once a year, in our galaxy
 >alone.  Since there are some 100 billion galaxies in the
 >Universe, such events would be happening thousands of times
 >every second.

Well, there you go again, using that VLN argument like it proved
your case, as in "There are roughly 400 billion stars in the
Milky Way alone.  Let's say only one in a thousand has some
Earth-like planet with some sort of life, however primitive, or
roughly 400 million planets (probably somewhat conservative
estimate)."

Well, let's say, because of their contingent history, that all
400 million earthlike planets support only primitive lifeforms
at this time. What's your objection? That 400 million is a large
number? How many contingent events have occurred in the Earth's
relatively brief history? A billion? A trillion?

I guess what I'm saying is that it's easy for both sides to
sling around Very Big Numbers. You've got yours, I've got mine.
You seem more assured in assuming that they cancel each other
than I do.

 >So indeed, such events would be expected to be happening
 >millions of times every hour.  That's how the Law of Large
 >Numbers works.  On the level of the Universe, or even our
 >Galaxy, such mass extinction events on life-bearing planets
 >would be very common events.

Er, I think that's what I suggested. Now the question is, how
common and how life extinguishing, and when in the contingent
sequence do they occur?

 >>Or maybe it doesn't.

 >Well make up your mind.  If you are going argue about what the
 >Law of Large Numbers might or might not have to say about this,
 >at least do the math and maintain some sort of consistent
 >position.

Yourself. A sequence of contigent events resulting in a planet
capable of sustaining and permitting the evolution of
intelligent life is not an additive, or accretive, one, but
rather a reductive one. It's the difference between saying,
well, intelligent life would have evolved on this planet if only
we hadn't been formed just a little too damn close to our sun
(resulting in all sorts of contingent complications), as opposed
to saying, well, here we are, a nice, earth-sized planet with
water. Let's get life going and pray we don't get clobbered in
the meantime.

 >>Which was my point.

 >Let's cut to the chase, Dennis.  List members can read between
 >the lines.  Your REAL point (however you try to double talk it)
 >is that intelligent life is unique to Earth (or at least
 >incredibly rare) and, therefore, UFOs cannot be alien
 >spacecraft.

David, you devil, you! What's _your_ REAL point, however you try
to double talk it? Dispassionate observer or committed believer,
convinced that we're daily swarmed by extraterrestrial
spaceships? Lets' cut to the chase, indeed. It all began with
Roswell, right?

 >>To refrain it once more: the Earth as we know it (including its
 >>current occupants) can be viewed as the end result or product
 >>of a series of accidental, contingent, non-related events
 >>randomly dispersed (or effectuated) over time that just
 >>happened to result in what they did -- rather than as a rule,
 >>guideline, or model for how evolution "should" be conducted
 >>throughout the universe at large.

 >Allow me to restate this.  You are saying that Earth has it's
 >own history of evolution, but other planets would have their
 >own.  OK so far.  If Earth's history is NOT necessarily a "rule,
 >guideline, or model for how evolution 'should' be conducted,"
 >then how does your next statement logically follow?

How does your statement logically follow? Maybe I shouldn't have
allowed you to restate mine after all.

 >>Is it possible that we truly are alone? Yes, it is.

That was an extreme supposition, and a rhetorical one at that.
As I've noted above, there is an Anthropic Principle and
variations of same. The question remains, as does the answer.

(I''m really tired. I didn't previously mention the AP in these
posts. My point was that there are different interpretations of
as yet conclusively proven hypotheses. This would include the
VLN hypothesis. You can still accept it while being counted as
either on the extreme right or left wing on same, or squarely
somewhere in the middle, or somewhere else in the register. It's
not necessarily an either/or thing. To make your life easier,
I'm on the extreme right, Rudiak's on the extreme left.)

 >Only remotely likely if Earth's history IS necessarily a "rule,
 >guideline, or model for how evolution 'should' be conducted."
 >So it's just more Stacian double talk.

I think you've misrepresented me, but, frankly, I'm tired and
don't won't to wade back through everything at this moment. Go
back a few paragraphs, gentle reader, and read  what I said and
you'll see that I said "rather than a rule," etc., not what
Rudiak says I said.

 >But that's not surprising because ultimately this isn't about
 >logical argument; it's about debunking UFOs.  We know you all
 >too well.


Yadda, yadda. And it's also about you being smarter than anyone
else, misstating my own remarks, and having the innate ability
to read minds. In other words, typical Rudiakan doublespeak and
arrogant pomposity.

But let's give credit where it's due. In a world of universal
contingency, some things do remain consistent: no matter how you
approach or address Rudiak, he ultimately insists on being a
Royal Jerk. With which I have no fundamental argument.

This is now the third time that I've offered to send you some
printed material. What are you afraid of? That it will have my
fingerprints on it?

Big Dave. Big Bad Dave.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 12

                  Fireball Puzzles Volusia County Residents

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 18:10:48 PST
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:56:34 -0500
Subject: Fireball Puzzles Volusia County Residents


Greetings list -

From: http://www.tampabayonline.net/news/flor101t.htm

Heavenly fireball puzzles Volusia County residents

DELAND, Fla. (AP) - A blue ball of fire that streaked across the
sky above Volusia County has residents wondering whether the
sight was something out of this world.

Clint Jones, who caught a glimpse of the hurling mass over
DeLand Tuesday night, is betting on a UFO.

"I believe it's possible," Jones said from his home on the St.
Johns River. "I know they exist."

Police scanners indicated a number of residents saw the blue
ball.

At 9:16 p.m., one anonymous caller told the Volusia County
Sheriff's Office he saw a fireball pass over the intersection of
Clyde Morris and LPGA boulevards. It was headed for Ormond
Beach.

Sheriff's deputies, along with Daytona Beach police officers and
a sheriff's helicopter, searched for more than an hour. They
found nothing.

The National Weather Service in Melbourne reported no unusual
activity Tuesday night. Officials at the Federal Aviation
Administration tower in Daytona Beach and the FAA Regional
Office in Atlanta said they saw nothing out of the ordinary.

"If a pilot would have seen it, they would have reported it,"
FAA spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen said.

Roger Hoefer, curator of astronomy at the Museum of Arts and
Sciences in Daytona Beach, speculated that people may have seen
a Bolide meteor. Bolide meteors appear to be falling, when in
reality, they're simply crossing the horizon.

"This was not falling," Hoefer said. "It was still moving in its
orbital path."


Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

---

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                  Re: Pulsating UFOs Over Washington State

From: KAnder6444@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:57:57 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:05:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Pulsating UFOs Over Washington State


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:45:29 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Joe Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 29


 >SQUADRON OF PULSATING
 >UFOs SEEN BY COUPLE IN
 >WASHINGTON STATE

 >For the past two weeks, a couple has seen
 >strange nighttime aerial lights near their cabin
in Lake Stevens, Washington state (population
 >3,380), north of Seattle.
 >The first sighting was on Thursday,
 >October 21, 199, between 11 p.m. and 1 a.m.
 >The most recent sighting was Tuesday,
 >November 2, 1999 during the same time period.

I want to make a comment about this report. Lake Stevens is not
your cozy, remote, nor isolated town in Washington state. Its
part of a the ever increasing metropolitan area of Everett
Washington -- home of the Abraham Lincoln and of course where
Boeing builds their 777s.  Lake Stevens is so built up, its a
wonder you can even see the lake these days. Hewlett Packard
even has a facility there.

Just west of that area is the Whidbey Island Naval Station.
Home of an elite squadron of jets that fly off at the sniff of
potential world hot spots. They do maneuvers all the time. Granted
this might be some unusual and unexplained phenomenon but
there is also a lot of reasonable explainations for lights in the sky.

I wanted to provide the entire picture with this story since I
live here and investigate here.

Thanks
Kathleen Andersen
MUFON State Section Director
Seattle







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:08:04 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >relegated to social standards instead?

Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
following to Scientific American:

"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
common features with the hundreds of observations that appear in
the literature."

Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
talking about?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:14:17 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >relegated to social standards instead?

Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
following to Scientific American:

  "Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
  that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
  six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
  reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
  Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
  common features with the hundreds of observations that appear
  in the literature."

Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
talking about?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                          Filer's Files #45 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:27:37 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:37:44 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #45 -- 1999


Filer's Files #45 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
November 12, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
This weeks Filer's Files sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

UFO sightings continue at a high rate with numerous reports of
UFOs in Eastern US not far from fatal Flight 990 crash site.
Near misses and safety concerns turn these sightings into an
important, but grim situation.  The Dateline USA television show
poll found that more than 70 percent of those surveyed believe
there is intelligent life in the universe, perhaps even in our
Milky Way Galaxy.

TRIANGULAR UFOs SPOTTED ON HALLOWEEN NEAR FLIGHT 990

NANTUCKET -- The Shadie Pines News, of, states, "An EgyptAir
plane with 214 people on board crashed at sea early Sunday off
the island of Nantucket, Massachusetts, en route from New York
to Cairo, Egypt.  Bodies and debris were found in the water.
Several pleasure boaters off the coast of Nantucket report
seeing at least two large and silent triangular craft in the
vicinity before reports of the loss of Flight 990 from radar.
"The huge objects passed over us at an unbelievable speed,"
stated one observer. "There appeared to be a glowing light at
each corner of the object, and stars and clouds behind it
disappeared. That's how we knew it wasn't just an airplane, but
something else."  "We thought it was just a jet or something
from JFK, but we had never seen anything like this." reported a
group on a pleasure cruise on their sailboat. 'There were at
least two of them, and they were totally silent and passed over
us very quickly from east to west.' Thanks to Shadie Pines News
11/2/99 http://209.145.38.129/ shadiepines/flight & Peter
Robbins www.ufocity.com

Editor's Notes: Cruising is normally the safest part of flying,
but it appears for some unknown reason the EgyptAir 767-cruising
at 33,000 feet disengaged the autopilot.  Then eight seconds
later the aircraft inexplicably went into a controlled steep
dive down to 19,000 feet.  It's very odd that the flight crew
did not issue a distress call when leaving altitude in
controlled air space.  This infers that some kind of terrorist
action or emergency situation was to blame. Major mechanical
failure or a pressurization problem would have shown up on the
flight data recorder.  While I flew for the Air Force problems
at altitude were relatively rare.  Once while over the Atlantic
Ocean a raft suddenly escaped from an outside door and wrapped
itself around the tail.  We almost bailed out, but were able to
land safely.  On December 19, 1996, a Chinese Commercial
airliner had a collision with a UFO according to Reuters World
Service. (Filer's Files #1-97and #39-97) We can speculate that
Flight 990 attempted to avoid a midair collision and chose to
dive to avoid a collision.  The airliner's rate of descent was
unusually fast and steep, some 14,000 feet in 36 seconds before
transponder signals were lost.  A recovery from this sudden dive
may not have been possible because of the high speed and steep
angle of descent causing structural failure.  The loss of
electrical power may have been due to the loss of the jet
engine's and electrical generators as they attempted a maximum
pull out of the steep dive at high speed.  Unless the crew was
incapacitated in some way it still seems that someone in the
cockpit  would have had time to alert air traffic control of
their emergency.  Although numerous government agencies prefer
to ridicule Ufologists with negative statements, its time they
considered the possibility of an airborne collision or near
miss.  Commercial Airline Pilot Bob Durant's excellent
investigation of Swissair 747 Flight 127 'near miss' over Long
Island on August 9, 1997, is a case in point.  The case was
carried in the September 1999, issue of the MUFON Journal.
Later in these files there is a report of another 'near miss'
over London on October 22 of this year.

PRESIDENT CLINTON'S WARNINGS OF CONTACT

Charlie Quinn writes: Yes, I think that Bill Clinton is trying
to gradually sensitize the American people to the evident
reality of penetration of our air space by UFOs and the clear
and present danger that they represent.  Further confirmation of
that fact can be gleaned from the motion picture "CONTACT"
starring Jodi Foster.  In that movie, which clearly tended to
ESTABLISH alien contact with human beings, Clinton allowed
videotapes of himself to be used in the context of the movie.
While there was an official declaration that the President did
not endorse the theme of the movie, he is shown in one film clip
as saying. "Yes, this is true. It is a fact!"  Now the clip was
taken from a press conference where he was addressing other
issues, but the White House allowed use of that film clip to
reinforce and support the main theme of the movie.  This is more
than just coincidence.  Webb Hubbell , in his book, stated that
Clinton, as President, assigned him to find out as much as
possible about the existence of UFOs.  Hubbell, remains a loyal
supporter of Clinton and friend.  Is all of this just
coincidence?  I think not.  In his book, "The Day after
Roswell," Lt. Colonel Corso, stated clearly that S.D.I- the
so-called Star Wars program was developed to provide a shield of
protection, not against Russian aggression, but against the
aggression of alien cultures. (The Forward of this book was
written by Senator Strom Thurmond.)  I also believe that the
Egyptian air crash was due to a complete power failure while in
flight- a power failure that could -- I emphasize the word
"could"-- be explained by interference caused by UFOs. Thanks to
Charlie Quinn, Cquinn5630@aol.com

NEW JERSEY

WARETOWN -- Don writes, I am a regular follower of the "Filer's
Files." I live in a small bay side community in Ocean County.
It is a very small town, about 5,000 residents, so you can
probably imagine how shocked I was to read about Jeanne, in your
Filer's Files #44 last week.  There is a local group called the
Concerned Taxpayers of Waretown, that puts out a newsletter
about once a month called The Bayside News and I was wondering
if we could include this account?  Also, there seems to be many
cases like this in our area.  I read about one in the next town
south, Barnegat in your report about a year ago.  A UFO lecturer
did a presentation in the library about five years ago and he
had drawings of the grays, that were seen in Toms River, twelve
miles to our north.  Bud Hopkins also wrote about an abduction
in Berkeley Township, nine miles from here.  I would also like
to alert you to something, but I cannot have my name connected
with it since I am fairly well known in this area and the topic
of UFO's can cause big trouble in this rural area.  There is
something very strange going on with the street lights around
here.  They seem to go on and off all the time, especially
during the last 30 days.  I am wondering if Jeanne or anyone
else has seen this?  Also, Jeanne is not the only one who hears
the high pitched sounds in her ears, and she is not the only one
with weird dreams, like say a fleet of strange crafts flying
over the bay an incredible speeds.  Also, have you ever heard of
someone walking up in the morning with their eye lid cut in half
from top to bottom with very little blood and no idea how it
happened, but no damage at all to the pupil?  If I can ever be
of assistance to you please.  I really admire your work and
respect you!  Thanks to Don @bellatlantic.net.

CLIFTON -- Henri Calitri reports my mother said she saw two
bright objects moving slowly on November 1, 1999, at 6:00 PM.
She saw them above Route 46 in Clifton about 10 miles west of
New York City.  An airplane was moving  fast underneath the two
unidentified objects going in the opposite direction.  She said
they were very bright, like stars.  She was more interested in
the plane that flew underneath these lights because it showed a
fire behind it.  There was no smoke, which she thought was also
unusual.  It is also interesting to note that we both felt as if
our bodies were  particularly sore, the morning after she had
this sighting.  Thanks to Henri henri_earth@excite.com.

PRINCETON -- On November 7, 1999, a witness observed five
objects flying north at 9:40 PM.  Their flight pattern was
different than a normal flying object such as a plane or
helicopter, which was what raised a flag in my mind.  What made
me look closer at these objects originally was that the two
objects seemed to be "too close" to each other flying at roughly
the same altitude.  I continued to watch and the object on my
right seemed to "catch up" to the one on the left.  I noticed
two more sets of lights that looked just like the first.  The
second set  followed the first set off to the North.  Another
set of lights followed.  I  remember thinking how many of these
things were there?  And why don't I hear anything?  I'm not used
to seeing five strange objects in the sky.  All I saw were white
lights, one on top and two on either side slightly lower like a
little pyramid.  They seemed to blink but not on purpose.  It
looked  like the motion was causing the lights to fluctuate.
Thanks to Peter Davenport, NUFORC http://www.UFOcenter.com

NEW YORK CITY UFO SIGHTINGS

MANHATTAN -- I have been seeing some UFOs over Brooklyn and
Manhattan.  I saw an unidentified craft on November 5, 1999,
that emitted a 'white' strobe light.  The others had colored
lights, but no blinking ones.  I was driving west on Canal
Street in Manhattan when a pair, or so, of lights zoomed by fast
below the tops of the buildings heights.  'Instantly,  another
pair zoomed by fast.  Then a 'moment' later,  a strobe light
went by, fast.  All one after the other.  There were seemingly
three UFOs.  They were very close, but the shapes were not
visible at all.  There was another UFO,  on Thursday evening,
November 4th, flying low and slow heading north right over the
center of Manhattan.  There were  three white lights,  almost
linear..  but in a slight 'V' shape.  These were not any craft
that I am familiar with.  I have seen the strobe light a few
times.  The two? crafts with two? lights are new,  The craft
with three white-light is 'certainly' new. Can you identify any
of these for me.  Thanks to:  sH.kH shemlan@usa.net (Shemlan)

NORFOLK -- An entry to our Website www.filersfiles.com dated
November 7, 1999, was from Pam Grant.  She wrote: "I am not
exactly sure of the correct date, but I believe it was October
26, 1999, I went outside around 10:00 PM to feed the stray cat
and looked up into the clear sky.  I saw a bright white light
traveling east.  It was larger and brighter than a star and was
perhaps at an elevation of 60,000 ft.  I ran to the house to
grab my binoculars. As I was spotting its position and just
before I could raise the binoculars the object took off at a
high speed resembling a shooting star as it disappeared out to
the eastern sky, its light fading with its incredible speed.  If
I had not caught the slower movement prior to its take off, I
would have thought it to be a shooting star.  Thanks to Pam
Grant pjgrant@northnet.org.

GEORGIA BIRGHT ORANGE OBJECT

FORT MOUNTAIN -- The reports of UFO activity on Fort Mountain
continue.  MUFON's Tom Sheets received information from a Fort
Mountain businessman Drew K. that on October 16, 1999, Drew who
has a panoramic view of the valley observed a bright orange
round object  hovering over the valley at 10:30 PM.  He
estimated about a mile away.  He added that it gently floated a
little to the east (left to right) as  he watched it go from
being about the size of a basketball held at arm's length to
that of a baseball, and then back to basketball size.  He added
that it  was calm and clear that night, and the event lasted
about 5 seconds. The  object, which was about moon bright, then
vanished.

FLORIDA PILOT DAYLIGHT SIGHTING OF UFO

OCALA -- A corporate pilot for a Georgia  aeronautical
engineering firm witnessed a UFO on October 30, 1999, at about
11:42 AM.  He was piloting a Piper PA-34-200T at 7,000 feet
enroute to south Florida.  About 24 miles NW of Ocala, his
ground speed  read out was 140 knots, winds aloft 054 degrees at
40 knots.  He observed an unknown  aircraft at the 2 o'clock
position about a finger width at arm's length above the  horizon
appearing to be on a collision course 3 to 4  miles away.  He
called Jacksonville ARTCC.  Jacksonville replied they did not
have the target on their screen.  He viewed the craft with
Bushnell 10X25 binoculars and then turned the binoculars over to
his passenger  an aeronautical  engineer and corporate CEO.
Both stated they were puzzled with the craft's appearance.  They
seemed to be out distancing this craft even though the course
continued to converge.  It was finally last observed about two
miles aft of the right wing tip.  At this point he had to
contend with an on going airshow in  Ocala, and tried to request
clearance to turn around for a closer look.  He later phoned
flight line duty authorities in Ocala who indicated nothing like
that craft was reported or flew over  Ocala.

The craft had a Space shuttle like shape, but smaller and
shorter, dolphin  like nose (minus beak-mouth), no cockpit
windshield or windows or doors  apparent.  The top of fuselage
appeared flat, small vertical stabilizer, with tapered toward
aft end into vertical stabilizer.  The fuselage aft had bulbous
like blisters below fins like on the shuttle but not as
prominent.  It had small deltoid wings on bottom appearing to be
too small.  There were  no  propellers or other external
auxiliary appurtenances or jet like exhaust visible.  It was a
dull flat medium dark gray metallic color. It was 75  feet long,
with about a 50 foot wing span in straight level flight with no
maneuvering.  Its estimated ground speed was 120 knots.
Appearance  suggested a somewhat lifting body type, but not all
lifting body, not  all airplane, a mixture.  This witness/pilot
indicated he had 13,000 hours in the air, held a  transport
pilot license and FAA Pilot Instructor credentials.  He has
numerous other aviation certifications and credentials.  His
passenger was an aeronautical engineer.  Both were unfamiliar
with this  aircraft.  This witness agreed to meet with a Field
Investigator to further pursue  the identity of the aircraft
described above.  This case has been turned  over to MUFONGA's
Earle Blanton Jr. for further investigation.  Initial
speculation between Blanton and Sheets is that this is some form
of test aircraft or drone. Thanks to:  Tom Sheets- SD Thanks to
Tom Sheets, MUFON State Director.

DAYTONA BEACH -- NUFORC reports that on October 22, 1999, a
witness was driving west on Interstate 4 when he and his
passenger saw a flying metallic object.  It kept changing shapes
at 2:10 PM.  I thought at first was a cloud. Then I noticed a
football shaped object in a metallic color catching the sun
shining on it.  It moved forward and stopped and then stood
itself on end and changed into a spear shape.  It flew off
quickly changing to a pin head and disappeared.  Thanks to Peter
Davenport, NUFORC http://www.UFOcenter.com

TEXAS TRIANGLE SEEN BY TWO AIRLINE CREWS

Peter Davenport reports that on October 26, 1999, the crews of
two major airlines saw an anomalous object in their vicinity at
37,000 feet.  Two pilots, together with the FAA air traffic
controller that communicated with them have been interviewed.
The witnesses report the object was a very large triangular
shaped craft with extremely bright lights.  It executed a turn
to the east, moved ahead of the aircraft, and faded from the
crews' sight.  Davenport has obtained the ATC audio tape that
was made in the tower using the FOIA.  One pilot  is a former
F-16 pilot for the USAF and the other a former A-10 Warthog
pilot.  Both have indicated they will hold nothing back.
Further someone in the tower thought the situation was so
bizarre, that they turned on a tape recorder of the incident.
NUFORC was later notified.  A job well done for some
unidentified FAA hero.  Thanks to Tom Sheets and Peter Davenport
National Reporting Center. http://www.UFOcenter.com

TEXAS BOOMERANG OVER FORT WORTH -- World Wide UFO Reporting
Center reports that on November 5, 1999, a boomerang was sighted
at 2:37 PM as the witness came out of an elevator.  On each
floor where the elevator doors open, there is a large window
giving me an excellent west view.  Today at 2:37 PM I glanced
out this window on the 37th floor of the Burnett Plaza building
in downtown Fort Worth.  I spotted a perfect boomerang shaped
object traveling at a high speed.  It had narrow what looked
like wings angled back sharply with no visible body seen.  This
object was approximate the size of a dime held at arm's length
and appeared to be a dark gray in color.  The sky was partly
cloudy with vivid blue sky showing between the sparse cloud
cover.  I spotted this object moving from behind one cloud and
again hidden by another cloud. It was visible for only about two
seconds due to its rapid speed. I was able to clearly see the
shape of this object as it contrasted against the deep blue sky.
The UFO was three times the size of a commercial jumbo jet
flying just above the clouds.   Sky conditions during
observation period were: Winds South at 14 mpg with no gusts,
Cloud Ceiling 500 ft., Temperature 64, Dewpoint 60, Relative
Humidity 87%, Visibility 9 miles, and some haze present.  Thanks
to  Morgan Clements WWUFORCenter www.ufosightings.net

UNITED KINGDOM NEAR MISS WITH UFO

RIDDLE OF UFO AT HEATHROW  LONDON -- Daily Mail (UK) October
26, 1999 reports that a passenger jet's close encounter with a
mysterious, fast moving craft seconds after taking off from
Heathrow (London) had experts baffled  yesterday.  The crew of
an MD-81 reported an object 'like a bright light' passing within
20 feet of them at  3,500 feet.  Air accident investigators were
unable to shed any light (pun?) 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  (Ministry of Defence) to see if the UFO could have
been a radar-invisible  foreign spy plane or stray British test
craft. Connection http://www.contrailconnection.com

SCUNTHORPE - Chris Evers reports,  I have been contacted by an
ex RAF type living in Scunthorpe, who an experience on November
1, 1999.  He was in his back garden when he witnessed a very
unusual shape moving across the sky, very reminiscent of the
'Hull Sky Slug.  The craft was as large as a four bedroom house.
It was hovering over a farm house, near Humberside airport
(North  Lincolnshire).  The event happened from 7:50 to 8:00 PM,
and was witnessed by three separate vehicles, and their
occupants.  The driver of one of these has already spoken to me.
Details at- chrishufos@hufos1.karoo.co.uk.

FLORIDA, GEORGIA, TEXAS FAST MOVING GREEN BLUE ORBS

There are numerous reports of fast moving balls of fire reported
in various states.  They are generally green or blue.  These may
be bolides or similar meteoric like objects.  However there
seems to be some correlation between these fast moving objects,
loud explosions and UFO reports.  The newspaper stories such as
*Tampa Tribune |report Bright Very Fast Moving Ball of Fire with
Blazing Tail on November 11, 1999.

CLEARWATER, FLORIDA UFO CONFERENCE --  On November 12 to 14th at
the Clearwater Beach Hilton Resort there will be a great
conference.  Keynote speaker will be film producer and author KT
Frankovich who tells of her personal close up sightings.  Call
Vicki Lyons or Buddy Crumley  1-800-438-1801. .Jim Marrs,
Dolores Cannon, William Buhlman, David Taub, , Joe McMoneagle
and Michael Lindemann will also be there as well.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:39:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
 >there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
 >direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
 >The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
 >strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
system.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                             The Drake Equation

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:43:21 -0500
Subject: The Drake Equation


When considering probability of life in another planets, the
Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.

It seems that humans have already mastered space warping and
similar means of travel (thanks to the reverse engineering of
"borrowed" alien crafts), so maybe just another century will be
enough for us to "officially" travel to other systems or who
knows how far.

Yeah, I know, someone will say: How can you be sure that we
already have built such craft, etc.? I cannot, and probably
never will. Gravity control means supremacy, so it'll be top
secret for many years, and it'll be protected by any means
necessary. Nuclear power had the same treatment for decades, but
this is even bigger, just from the point of view of military
power.

Add to that the challenge that the existence of ETs bring to the
(obsolete?) socio-political and religious structure of our
planet, and the magnitude of the problem is self-evident.

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:02:08 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:46:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 10:20:33 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:45:26 -0500
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:43:23 -0500

 >>>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>>Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 14:32:21 -0600
 >>>>>Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:44:41 -0500
 >>>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Agreed.  But it also relies upon something astronomers call "The
 >>>Copernican Principle," which, in essence, states that there is
 >>>nothing particularly special about our celestial
 >>>neighborhood - that is, all places in the universe are pretty
 >>>much like all other places (a sort of cosmic Frankfurt, if you
 >>>will).


 >Point was, the Earth is vastly different from all the other
 >planets in the solar system.  Evolution is not some vital force
 >that spreads itself throughout the universe. It is something
 >that happens to the degree that it does when local conditions
 >permit it.

Thus it is very likely happening many, many places elsewhere in
the Universe where local conditions permit, maybe even elsewhere
in our own solar system (Mars?  Europa?)

 >There was no guarantee, for example, that the mammals
 >would have survived the asteroid impact some 65 million years
 >ago. Had the asteroid been large enough, it could have killed
 >virtually everything on the planet. Had it been bigger than the
 >Earth, in fact, it would have destroyed the entire planet,
 >ending the local experiment in evolving lifeforms then and
 >there.

OK, but what does this have to do with whether there is
intelligent life somewhere else?  All you are saying is that a
certain set of circumstances led to human kind, which is little
more than a truism.  But there could be many, many combinations
of different circumstances which could lead to intelligent life
elsewhere, or could have led to a different form of intelligent
life here on planet Earth.

 >The fact that chemistry and physics operate the same throughout
 >the universe has nothing to do with the meaning of history over
 >billions of years. The Earth and Moon are not different because
 >of chemisty or physics (and no one's arguing that they are),
 >they're different because they have different _histories_, a
 >concept that seems to be hard to grasp for some.

People don't have any trouble grasping that the Earth and Moon
are different, or that intelligent life will not evolve on
Jupiter or Venus.  What I think people are finding difficult to
grasp is your ultimate point.

  >The implication of this line of reasoning is that life must be
  >pretty common throughout the universe.  If it's not, then you
  >have to start arguing about human exceptionality, and most
  >scientists are uncomfortable pursuing such arguments.

 >Every planet in our solar system has demonstrably had a uniquely
 >different _history_ that can be easily evidenced simply by
 >looking at them in their present states. No two are even
 >remotely alike, in other words.

Your point Dennis, your point?

 >History is simply the present sum of a series of countless
 >contingent events (over billions of years), -- any single one of
 >which could have turned out differently. In the Earth's case, it
 >could have been murdered in its cradle, or completely destroyed
 >65 million years ago when it collided with an asteroid.

Yes, quite true.  But the discussion isn't about whether
histories are unique.  ALL histories are unique.  The question
is whether ONLY one history can lead to intelligent life (i.e.,
we are alone), or whether a zillion different histories could
lead to intelligent  life  (they're out there).

So your real point is ......?

 >There's nothing that said it had to have sufficient gravity to maintain
 >an atmosphere,

Once a planet gets beyond a certain size, it would be pretty hard NOT to
maintain an atmosphere.  Earth happens to be big enough to keep its
atmosphere.  That's not too surprising.  Seven out of nine of the planets
have atmospheres of one form or another, and even a few larger moons like
Titan.

I fail to see where your argument is leading.  It seems to be
that if Earth didn't have this or that condition, we wouldn't be
here tossing insults at one another.  OK, but so what?  If not
Earth, then some other planet, or some zillions of planets,
would have the proper conditions and histories.  Your argument
always seems to be that Earth could be the ONLY place that could
possibly have the proper conditions and history to produce
intelligent life.  OK, so it's true of our solar system, but
that's not much of a statistical sample, is it? It's a very BIG
Universe out there.

 >or any laws imposing the current percentage of
 >oxygen in the atmosphere that we do have.

We have free oxygen because of plant life and photosynthesis.
Free oxygen is a hallmark of life.  The level is controlled by
the plant life and fires (and probably other things like
oxygenation of rocks and decay of organic matter), and therefore
is not accidental, but a self-regulated system.  This does not
mean that it is "conscious," just that there are feedback
systems that keep keep things in a relatively narrow zone.  It's
like an air-conditioning system with a thermostat to provide
feedback, which keeps the temperature within a small range.

 >We could have developed an atmosphere too rich in oxygen, in which case the
 >first caveman striking flint together in an effort to build a
 >fire would have ended things ratter badly for all of us.

And that is one reason why the amount of oxygen doesn't become
too rich.  If it's too rich, the forest fires burn out of
control.  That consumes atmospheric oxygen and also kills off
plant life that produces oxygen.  The vast clouds of smoke
raised would also reduce sunlight all over the planet, which
would again reduce levels of photosynthesis on land and in the
water.  The net effect is to drop the level of oxygen in the
atmosphere.  The reason our atmosphere is relatively stable is
because there are negative feedback systems that maintain the
level of gasses in a fairly narrow range.

If the level of oxygen starts to drop too low, the fires have
more trouble burning.  Photosynthetic organisms can flourish
unimpeded by disastrous fires, producing more oxygen, etc.

Thus life resulted in oxygen, and life helps regulate the level
of oxygen.  That is part of the principle of "Gaia."  There are
mechanistic feedback systems that maintain our biosphere, of
which  living organisms are a part.  It's not just chance.
Exactly how they might function or how they came into being is
still being worked out and a subject of much heated debate.

 >Everything about the Earth's present state of being, if you want
 >to call it that, is the culmination of a long series of utter
 >accidents -- according to the operation of physical, chemical
 >and biological actions.

Truisms, Dennis, truisms.  Just about EVERYTHING, everywhere is
a culmination of a long series of utter accidents -- you, me,
the rock you kick on the street, my delapidated Volvo.  That's
not the point.  The question remains whether only one unique
sequence leads to intelligent life or whether a vast multitude
of sequences can get you there.  I think the former position is
unbelievably parochial.  There isn't just my delapidated Volvo.
There are delapidated Volvos everywhere, each with its own
unique history.

 >Unless, of course, you want to invoke a Creator. But that's
 >another post.

No need.  The law of large numbers and rolling the dice seems to
do pretty much the same thing.  Eventually somebody always wins
the lottery.

David Rudiak







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:15:25 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:23:54 -0500
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >>>Even in the early stages of the phenomenon in 1947, opinion
 >>>polls show that a large percentage of Americans believed that
 >>>flying saucers were something to do with the Russians or secret
 >>>weapons.

 >>Which was natural enough.  It's what Hynek (whom you would do
 >>well to reread -- or maybe read) calls the "escalation of
 >>hypotheses."  Society, just like the individual witness, went --
 >>reasonably -- to what seemed the least extraordinary and most
 >>familiar interpretation.  It was only after such interpretations
 >>failed that society went to other approaches to explain the
 >>reports.

 >What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
 >appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
 >must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
 >since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

And just how would you expect the appearance to change? Would a
Russian secret weapon necessarily look different to an
extraterrestrial craft? As witnesses would have no idea what
either looked like there is no reason why the descriptions
should change. In fact there was quite a long period when both
"explanations" overlapped.

I'd be interested to know what Mark Cashman thinks *is* the
unchanging appearance of a "true UFO".

In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
the triangles before the 1980s? Why does no-one now see classic
flying saucers with "conning towers"? Whatever happened to
Arnold's croissant- shaped objects? Was the Socorro craft an
unsuccesful prototype which was seldom seen again?

The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
science fiction.

--

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:38:29 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:17:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >G'day EBK,

 >While watching this thread develop, I felt I should send you
 >this article by Paul Davies which appeared in the local press
 >last weekend. It should of course be remembered that Davies was
 >also the winner of the 1995 Templeton prize for Progress in
 >Religon. It is actually quite a long article, and I could'nt
 >find it in the archives at www.theage.com.au, so I've snipped a
 >large part from the beginning...

<snip>

 >"WHY WE STILL BELIEVE IN ALIENS, REGARDLESS OF THE FACTS" by
 >Paul Davies. Published in the Melbourne Age 5/11/99 (extract)

 >...Probes sent to the Red Planet failed to find Lowells canals,
 >or any sign of life. There is a chance that Mars once harboured
 >microbes, but little green men are definitely off the agenda.

<snip>

 >The abscence of any observational evidence for ET leaves us with
 >only theory to go on. Unfortunately, scientists have scant idea
 >how life originated. It may have been a freak molecular
 >accident, unique to Earth. On the other hand, life may arise
 >more or less automatically under favourable conditions.

Hi everyone.

I have come to conclude that many people, including scientists
and ufologists, feel very comfortable with just maintaining our
current beliefs and thinking regarding the question "Are we alone
in this universe?".  We may all profess to be open minded and to
be striving for the answer to this important question, but in
fact we are not and don't really care to be either.

Human recorded history tells us the answer to this question but
we have now discarded all this accumulated knowledge and have
replaced it with a new religious system of beliefs, dogmas and
new doubts. Our speculations and educated opinions it seems are
more important to us in this "scientific age" rather than the
simple truths.

In our harsh criticism of each others methods and in quickly
dismissing data we do not like, we may have also actually thrown
out the answer to this important question on more than one
occasion.

For example, in 1976 the scientific discovery of life on Mars
was made.  That year on U.S.A.'s Independence Day, the Viking 1
made a soft landing on Mars.  On board was an experiment that
was designed to detect organic life that would react chemically
in much the same way as organic life on Earth would.  The result
was positive.  Unfortunately NASA which sent out Viking 1
continues to overlook this discovery even though all its initial
doubts have been addressed.  The September/October 1999 issue of
UFO Magazine (UK) has an interview with Dr. Gilbert Levin (pages
8 and 9), the frustrated NASA scientist who made the discovery
of life on Mars.  His papers can be found at the web sites
below.

http://www.biospherics.com/mars/spie/spiehtml.htm

http://www.biospherics.com/mars/spie2/spie98.htm

NASA still promotes a "Mars" meteorite which it claims may
contain microfossils (now there are two more) proving that life
once existed on Mars and even created the Astrobiology Institute
(strange if NASA didn't have good reasons to believe that life
is really out there).

Although Paul Davies is a learned man, his article is wrong when
he claims that probes to Mars failed to find ANY sign of life or
that there is an absence of observational EVIDENCE for ET.  If
there wasn't any, I for one wouldn't be wasting my time reading
all about the latest ET evidence in ufology.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:59:47 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:22:52 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 12:58:54 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:57:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >First of all, what language this person is writing in?


The language is a New Age one called the Language of Inebriants!
Just kidding!

 >Second, is he serious?

Definitely, definitely - not serious, Eduardo.  Sometimes, I
forget to remember that there are folks on the list who have not
been exposed to my humor, let alone understand it.  So in the
event you read something from that great UFO researcher, J.
Jaime Gesundt ... try hard to prepare yourself for at the very
least, a little chuckle.  It's his (uh, make that "my") way of
making fun of and laughing at the previous post and/or poster.

When you do it that way, it hurts you and the poster a lot less
than if you attacked with both barrels, as we sometimes do to
each other on this or any other list.

 >Looks like on of those Christian fanatics
 >that flood newsgroups like talk.religion.newage, and are
 >always out of place and topic.

 >>This is the last straw.  How many times I gotta tell yous all
 >>that life started when God said, "Let there be light!"  And not
 >>only was there light, but you could see it for, like, miles.
 >>Then, he made the fishes an all the rest of us, an it was about
 >>five thousand years ago when all this happened an it only took
 >>six days cause on the seventeenth he burst, into the arms of
 >>Judas Priest, which is where he died of thirst.  It says so in
 >>the Bible.

 >>Man, is the only sent she ent form of life in the universe.
Got >>that!  Dolphins in deed.  They aint got no sense. An if
they did >>have any freakin sense, they would come in outa the
water an >>live like regular folks instedda eatin raw fish like
them >>Japansees.

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt is a fictional character, said to have
begun the Canal Street (a very dirty as well as bad smelling
street in the south end of New York City, inhabited by mostly
inebriated individuals who like to wash your windshield with
rags containing the detritous of humanity which when applied to
your windscreen, immediately transfer thereto) ... anyway, I
digressed, he founded the Canal Street Ufological Society and
Discount house of freshly made Wine called Gripple.  It's a
little like Claricote, with an attitude.

Also, the problem is less the dirtier windscreen than the fact
that some of the critters left, move!

It's all satire.  Like Brobdignag and Lilliput, eh?

Now haveing said all that, may we expect a large check or
preferably cash, as a donation to our UFO project?  Write me
offline for the address.

Just kidding!

See!

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt, drunker than a quart low on claricote with
antifreeze!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:59:47 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:24:27 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 12:58:54 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:57:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >First of all, what language this person is writing in?


The language is a New Age one called the Language of Inebriants!
Just kidding!

 >Second, is he serious?

Definitely, definitely - not serious, Eduardo.  Sometimes, I
forget to remember that there are folks on the list who have not
been exposed to my humor, let alone understand it.  So in the
event you read something from that great UFO researcher, J.
Jaime Gesundt ... try hard to prepare yourself for at the very
least, a little chuckle.  It's his (uh, make that "my") way of
making fun of and laughing at the previous post and/or poster.

When you do it that way, it hurts you and the poster a lot less
than if you attacked with both barrels, as we sometimes do to
each other on this or any other list.

 >Looks like on of those Christian fanatics
 >that flood newsgroups like talk.religion.newage, and are
 >always out of place and topic.

 >>This is the last straw.  How many times I gotta tell yous all
 >>that life started when God said, "Let there be light!"  And not
 >>only was there light, but you could see it for, like, miles.
 >>Then, he made the fishes an all the rest of us, an it was about
 >>five thousand years ago when all this happened an it only took
 >>six days cause on the seventeenth he burst, into the arms of
 >>Judas Priest, which is where he died of thirst.  It says so in
 >>the Bible.

 >>Man, is the only sent she ent form of life in the universe.
Got >>that!  Dolphins in deed.  They aint got no sense. An if
they did >>have any freakin sense, they would come in outa the
water an >>live like regular folks instedda eatin raw fish like
them >>Japansees.

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt is a fictional character, said to have
begun the Canal Street (a very dirty as well as bad smelling
street in the south end of New York City, inhabited by mostly
inebriated individuals who like to wash your windshield with
rags containing the detritous of humanity which when applied to
your windscreen, immediately transfer thereto) ... anyway, I
digressed, he founded the Canal Street Ufological Society and
Discount house of freshly made Wine called Gripple.  It's a
little like Claricote, with an attitude.

Also, the problem is less the dirtier windscreen than the fact
that some of the critters left, move!

It's all satire.  Like Brobdignag and Lilliput, eh?

Now haveing said all that, may we expect a large check or
preferably cash, as a donation to our UFO project?  Write me
offline for the address.

Just kidding!

See!

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt, drunker than a quart low on claricote with
antifreeze!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 13

                      UFO News piece, WRTV Indianapolis

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 15:31:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:27:38 -0500
Subject: UFO News piece, WRTV Indianapolis


News Script
WRTV Channel 6
Indianapolis, Indiana

URL location: http://www.wrtv.com/news/1025.html

SPECIAL REPORT UFO's in Indiana
Vicki Duncan

11/12/1999

Is there something out there? Life on other planets?

"She said there's this weird dog glowing in the dark running
down the road in front of our farm."

Jerry Sievers heads a statewide organization investigating these
strange stories... UFO encounters.

"We've got tons of eyewitness reports, backed up by physical
evidence, implants, physical traces on the ground. There's so
much evidence that if we took it to court today there's no doubt
we'd win the case."

The 'evidence' comes from thousands of people from around the
world. Indiana ranks 19th in the U.S. for UFO activity.

People say one field near Vincennes may be the best place in the
state to see UFOs. Jerry, "It's called lucky point. We've had
since the '60's hundreds of UFOs in this area here. Things as
mundane as points of light in the sky to black triangles 125
feet across hovering over the power lines."

Emmett Snyder believes he saw a UFO out at Lucky Point. "While
we were sitting out here in the middle of the field a light came
on and moved in an arc. It focused on the ground and went out."
A picture supposedly taken earlier this year at Lucky Point is
said to be the only daytime photo of a UFO in Indiana.

Lucky Point is not the only spot in Indiana for UFO activity. In
1997, witnesses say they caught a UFO on video tape over Lake
Monroe, near Bloomington.

Nocturnal lights... objects in the sky... too many these things
seem strange. Probably the hardest to imagine close encounters
of the 4th kind... alien abductions. They're hard to imagine
unless you're a person who claims to have been abducted. Sandi,

"In this room it seemed like these little gray people that came
up to my waist showed me around. I go from looking at
experiments to all of the sudden on this table and the next
thing I remember is a drill. They told me they implanted a b-b
sized object in my sinus and it would be like a homing device."

There's no doubt Sandi, Jerry, and Emmett believe we are not
alone in this vast universe. To those who don't believe, all
they ask is, "Why not?"

Updated on 11/12/1999 at 1:20:07 PM.
--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:32:01 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:11:36 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>No doubt Stan was referring to the standard judicial framework
 >>we are familiar with today, such as those in the U.S. and other
 >>western democracies.

 >You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >relegated to social standards instead?

 >On the other hand, I am sure a strict judge would throw out of
 >court any et-ufological case for lack of compelling physical
 >evidence; i.e., no body, no crashed saucer and most important of
 >all no linkage of evidence to an extraterrestrial origin.

 >>So where are these references to the Third Reich coming from?
 >>Is Ed implying that current western judicial systems employ
 >>lynch-mob justice and are as perverted as was the Reich?

 >Of course not. Again, you missed the point entirely. Legal
 >standards are flexible and change almost day to day based on the
 >interpretations of juries and judges and the eloquence of the
 >lawyers. Without using the extreme example above, which were
 >meant to make it easy to understand legal standards are
 >flexible, the law is different in our system from state to
 >state. That is 50 different standards that are simultaneously
 >employed depending where is the venue. Also, one can be found
 >innocent or guilty whether the legal standards in our judicial
 >system are employed in a criminal court or a civil court.
 >Decisions have little to do with the actual physical happenings
 >that are being judged. It is the standard of law and its
 >interpretation by a judge with the jury's interpretation of the
 >Judge's instructions that is the most critical factor in
 >determining the legal validity of a case, not whether the case
 >is compelling real or not. Is this the environment that nuclear
 >physicist Stanton Friedman wants to relegate ufology?

 >>Stan's general comment about testimonial evidence is of course,
 >>legally, right on the mark.  Ed's retort dragging in lynch mobs
 >>and the Third Reich is (1) irrelevant, (2) inflamatory, and (3)
 >>offensive.

 >You missed the point again and again. See above. My point was
 >relevant, non-inflamatory but meant to be offensive. What is
 >offensive is the concept of legal standards and opinion polls in
 >any context in attempting to establish validity for an alleged
 >physical event. It makes no difference where those legal
 >standards and or opinion polls emanate from. They are tools of
 >the social structure in power at the time and have nothing to do
 >with actual physical events. If et is real and sharing physical
 >space and time, then we need to discover compelling evidence
 >according to the standards of physical evidence to make that
 >case, not lesser standards that only serve to prop up ufological
 >wisdom and have no place in the real world, only in ufological
 >conventions where the faithful can be given some hope, as
 >misguided as the basis for that hope can be. Legal standards
 >indeed!

 >Ed Stewart

Perhaps Mr. Stewart, you've missed some points as well? If
someone claims to have seen a UFO or had an experience with one
or more of it's occupants, then you must judge truth based on
what?  That's a question.  Perhaps you would care answer this
question. You appear to be a scholarly individual Ed.  Is it
Mr., Dr., Esq.?  Or just plain Mr. Ed.

There is a point to the question, not merely an attempt at
sarcastic humor.  The point is, depending on the witness, none,
little or a great deal of credibility will be attached to his or
her testimony.

President Carter may have a bit more credibility than, say,
Lonny Zamora.  J. Jaime would have very little credibility.
What about someone with a Ph.D. or other high level of
education.  Does that make a better, more credible witness?  You
decide.

Unfortunately, to most skeptics, debunkers and others of similar
leaning, it doesn't matter who the hell the witness was.  It was
still swamp gas or the planet Venus.  Or worse, it was a
pelican.

All the fancy words, all the knowledge, all the debating, all
the crappola which has been uttered here, there and elsewhere,
none of you, not even me, the great Gesundt, has the answer.
What some are attempting is to mitigate the "Guilty of being
fooled by the pelicans" reaction of the poor bastard giving
testimony. The point of witness credibility is valid.  Put just
one percent of the best witnesses with the best credentials,
education, intellect and other attributes assigning positive
levels of credibility, in a room and ask any judge how he would
vote on the testimony.

That might be an interesting problem to assign in the classroom.

Judge the testimony or the witness or both?  Perhaps judge the
overwhelming body of evidence composed of very credible people
who saw or experienced something very incredible.  This, in lieu
of immediately looking for reasons it wasn't what it was
perceived to be because (thanks Larry Hatch) it doesn't come
close to agreeing with your pair of dimes.

Frankly, this inebriant is sick and tired of all the BS.
Including my own.  Somebody out there come up with an answer.
The statement used during a poker game is, "Put up or shut up."

Somehow we seem to be doing neither.  Tsk, tsk.  Chame, chame,
chame. Does not _one_ own anything of greater value than an
opinion out there?  Or are you all just fishing.  I dream of
someone with a great deal of money developing an institute of
science whose only task is to determine the truth about the UFO
conundrum.  Unfortunately, there are more important things to do
with money ... such as make fresh wine, promote one's favorite
theory and/or belief system, or be the first on earth to place
spaceships and hotels in orbit.  I used to think that money was
the great bulls*itter.  I now believe that notariety comes
closer to that compelling decision maker.  Even if it makes you
look like the fool.  As long as it's PR, it's good.

Excuse me, but which of us is crazier than the other, given the
above choices?  The hotel in space guy or the credible witness?
The poor working stiff slob who saw something anomalous or the
guy with the reputation for making money out of nothing?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 21:06:17 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:06:57 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 13:12:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:29:58 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:24:09 -0500
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:12:33 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>As devout evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould are constantly in the
 >>position of reminding us (laymen and peers alike) that,
 >>dadgummit, when we say _random_, we mean random, not
 >>half-random, not two-thirds random, but random, really,
 >>_really_, random.

 >>Actually they are constantly in the position of reminding laymen
 >>that when they say evolution they mean cumulative selection of
 >>natural variation.

 >>------
 >>Mark Cashman

 >Mark,

 >How so?

 >Here's a relevant quote from "Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage? The
 >Permanent Revolution in the Earth Sciences" by Mike Davis, which appeared
 >in The Anomalist 5 (p. 119):

 >"The neocatastrophist response [to the notion of Darwin's thin wedge and
 >the finetuning of natural selection] is scathing. Stephen Jay Gould and
 >Niles Eldredge are cruel but honest when they insist that mass extinction
 >really means 'evolution by lottery' and 'survival of the luckiest.'

This is just semantics.  "Survival of the fittist" has always
meant "evolution by lottery" or "survival of the luckiest."
Those organisms "luckiest" to have those characteristics that
enable them to survive better in a given environment are more
likely to pass those characteristics on to their progeny.
Eventually populations with those characteristics come to
dominate.

 >Extinction events ruthlessly reset all ecological clocks...Hence Darwin,
 >like Laplace, must submit to revision by chaos and historical contingency."

Nothing has basically changed here.  Instead of generally
gradual environmental changes, extinction events represent
drastic environmental changes in a very short period of time.
Under such new enironomental conditions, some organisms will be
better adapted to survive such stress, whereas others are
stressed beyond their capacity to survive and become extinct.
It's just a very time-compressed version of the usual
gradualistic "survival of the fittest."

Given the hypothesized asteroid collision that wiped out the
dinosaurs, the lesser mammals (and birds) happened to be better
adapted to the situation.  In a time when the sunlight would be
cut off and cold descended on the planet, warm-blooded mammals
and birds covered with insulating hair and feathers were better
able to cope.  Mammals living in underground lairs were likewise
better protected from the initial rain of fire, followed by the
drastic drop in temperatures.   Being smaller than most
dinosaurs, they required much less food and could scavenge off
the decaying masses of vegetation and flesh around them, long
enough apparently until the air cleared several years later and
growth began again.

 >And later on the same page, quoting Eldredge: "Evolutionary
history...is >deeply and richly contingent. Gone are the last
vestiges of the idea that >evolution inevitably and inexorably
replaces the old and comparatively >inferior with superior new
models.

 >Evolution, at least on a grand scale, is
 >not forever tinkering, trying to come up with a better mouse-trap."

But on a small scale, that is exactly what is always happening.
What else does "natural selection" mean?  Generally, newer,
better adapted, usually (but not always) more complex models
replace the old ones slowly over time.  The big picture is that
these usually incremental changes on a small scale add up to
life as a whole slowly becoming more complex.

One possible metric of increasing complexity would be the number
of genes needed to build the most complex organisms in any given
geological epoch compared to the simplest organisms.  E.g.,
humans have several hundred times the number of genes of the
simplest bacteria.  On average, over the history of life on
Earth, this would require a doubling of the number of genes of
the most complex organisms roughly every few hundred million
years.  Since the Cambrian "explosion" of about half a billion
years ago, the pace has probably been a bit more "hectic" than
that, say every hundred million years or so.  Nonetheless, it is
still a fairly glacial pace.

 >Evolution by catastrophe, Michael Rampino adds, also entails speciation
 >through a different process than the classic gradualist mechanisms of
 >geographic isolation and adaptive change. Catastrophe replaces the linear
 >temporal creep of microevolution with non-linear bursts of macroevolution.

Extinction catastrophe's here on Earth are comparatively rare,
every one hundred to two hundred million years, give or take.
Speciation and increased complexity is certainly going on
between catastrophe's in a generally gradualist way.  It's true
that in periods of relatively constant environment, organisms
can become so well-adapted, that long periods of relative stasis
in evolution can take place (at least when looking at
macroscopic morphological changes, not necessarily biochemical
ones).  Smaller environmental stresses (changing climate, e.g.)
can act as prods to evolution and force change through
adaptation.

Catastrophes may lead to "non-linear bursts of macroevolution,"
but that is only because the "temporal creep of microevolution"
has been going on for long extended stretches between
catastrophes.  All that happens during extinction events is that
competition is removed from various environmental niches,
allowing other species to eventually move into them.  This does
not happen overnight, but can take millions of more years of
gradualistic adaptation.  Giraffes did not suddenly replace
brontosaurs as tall plant grazers the day after doomsday.

I think it's utter nonsense to claim that the slower processes
have been somehow replaced by catastrophes.  The replacement of
older extinct species by newer ones after a catastrophe does not
happen suddenly, but is an extended evolutionary process in its
own right.


 >End of quote.

 >I stand by my above statement. Or at least half of it. I may have been
 >wrong about Dawkins himself, but that doesn't change the point I was
 >making. So if you prefer, strike Dawkins and insert Eldredge.

 >Dennis Stacy
 >http//:www.anomalist.com

Despite a number of believed mass extinction events in Earth's
history, the big picture still remains that increasingly complex
organisms continued to evolve beyond each of the extinction
events.  Each extinction event thus selected among a new
population of more complex organisms than the one that preceded
it.

To put it another way, there is no evidence that any of the
extinction events made the organisms simpler, or caused the
overall biota to "de-evolve."  Rather, the surviving species of
each extinction were still more complex than the surviving
species of the previous mass extinction.  Overall complexity of
life continued to slowly "ratchet up" between extinction events.

If anything, so-called "evolution by catastrophe" merely
underscores that once the basic templates of complex life are in
place, the march to higher complexity seems relentless, not to
be undone by even repeated mass extinction events.

David Rudiak







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 03:41:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:15:24 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 12:58:54 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:57:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >First of all, what language this person is writing in?

 >Second, is he serious? Looks like on of those Christian fanatics
 >that flood newsgroups like talk.religion.newage, and are
 >always out of place and topic.

 >>This is the last straw.  How many times I gotta tell yous all
 >>that life started when God said, "Let there be light!"  And not
 >>only was there light, but you could see it for, like, miles.
 >>Then, he made the fishes an all the rest of us, an it was about
 >>five thousand years ago when all this happened an it only took
 >>six days cause on the seventeenth he burst, into the arms of
 >>Judas Priest, which is where he died of thirst.  It says so in
 >>the Bible.

 >>Man, is the only sent she ent form of life in the universe.  Got
 >>that!  Dolphins in deed.  They aint got no sense. An if they did
 >>have any freakin sense, they would come in outa the water an
 >>live like regular folks instedda eatin raw fish like them
 >>Japansees.


Dear Edoardo:

Dr. Mortello is indeed a bit hard to decipher when he is
sampling his "gripple" - a concoction I take it that is
somewhere between "Ripple" and Grappa.

It takes a few beers to catch on sometimes, but his message
above appears to be a satire of the mindset which mandates
mankind as the pinnacle of creation.

I just finished the work-week here, night shift in California.
Give me a few hours and I will be even harder to decipher!

On weekends  we seem too take turns not making any obvious
sense. I beg the list's indulgence, and can easily understand
any misunderstanding, or whatever... [burp!].

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 04:39:46 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:19:34 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >>support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >>totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >>polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >>phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >>validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >>physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >>physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >>realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >>telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >>relegated to social standards instead?

 >Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
 >existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
 >following to Scientific American:

 >"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
 >that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
 >six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
 >reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
 >Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
 >common features with the hundreds of observations that appear in
 >the literature."

 >Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
 >talking about?

 >Jerry Clark

Dear Jerry:

After a web search (wherein I attempted to cheat and find the
actual quote someplace, but failed)  I will hazard a guess.

1)  How about, Karl Jung, discussing UFOs. No?

OK, Sci. Am. has only been around for 160 years or so, so it
cannot be some French academic arguing meteorites.

Can you provide a teeny tiny clue? This is fun actually!

Regards

- 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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #325

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 06:29:16 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:21:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #325


Apology to MW #325 (For November 13, 1999)

UFOs are ink and stone to demonstrate we're not alone, and in a
record written plain, we see continued, this refrain.
Something's seen in Earthly skies that won't be seen by those
despised -- those that have the facts, they know, would open
DOORS through which we'd go; those that know a piece of truth
and put it in their vests, aloof, smirking over ill got gain
they make in mists they help maintain. We don't hear this in our
schools, but from the fringe most played for fools. None the
less -- it is the record, writ by those who are detected in a
search of ALL the data pertinent to futures fated. We'll
continue *marching* time and listing dates of cosmic rhyme. Come
along, the ride is thrilling, awe inspiring, a little chilling
-- perhaps it's also (likely) truth . . . that we could put to
gainful use.

The eighteenth century saw its end, and UFO's were seen again.
French police were vexed with sightings they could not explain
-- they're frightened. "A large red globe" is testified -- a
dozen people saw it fly. And landing in a crowd of folks, a man
steps out to talk, and SPOKE! Police Inspector Jan Lebeuf could
make no sense of it -- you know? He scratched the fleas
tormenting him and wondered. "What the hell's this, then?! The
globe *explodes*, to add confusion -- spacemen disappear . . .
illusion? We can't know what those folks saw, but plainly, they
were struck with awe.

Captain Banner captained ships. Steady, he was good with it.
Late one night there is a panic! Sailors kick a fuss and racket!
Pointing fingers, gaping eyes, across the water *something*
flies!!! A maze of circles, curving shafts, circular in form --
it's DAFT! Was it cloud or *manmade* object? What nation flew
(?) though not the subject. It came up hard against the wind,
and very nicely settled in. They saw it, plain, for a half an
hour; the captain, serious and dour -- wrote it down within his
log the like of which wakes up your dog!!  1870 was the year;
the future's quickly drawing near.

The term itself of flying "saucer" -- provided by a Texan farmer
. . . watching one, described it so. It flew above his farm,
we've known. Ten times seven years would pass before Ken Arnold
watched aghast, and looking for a plane in trouble saw them once
again -- their double. "Skipping saucers on the water," words he
*coined* were coined beforehand. "Flying Saucers (?)" -- an
invention by the press with tongue in cheek, then. Still, and
all, these men describe what they have SEEN in words denied. It
is NOT a silly dream, this written gift of what they've seen.

The Persian Gulf in 1880 (?) -- British steamships *steam* it
*greatly*! Written in the Patna's Record, Captain Avern logs his
reference. "[Glowing wheels, building sized, hovered with my
ship]" -- he writes! "[Vivid spokes of glaring light reached out
to touch his ship that night]"! The wheels spun for twenty
minutes. Mr. Manning was a witness. Mr. Brace was there to SEE
the wonder of what this could be! So it was, in legal writing,
with a captain badly frightened. So it was with loyal mates in
qualifying future fate. They wrote down what we would read to
drag our OWN conclusions free!

Photographed (?) at Zacatecas, 1883 -- prestigious!  Joe Bonilla
sighted several -- several HUNDRED, flying level! Flying fast
across the sun these glinting disks were on a run! Seen again
ANOTHER day, a run it was I'd have to say. But photographed?
It's new to me. I don't remember it, you see. If photographed
would someone share? Let's see it, please, if you would dare.

We must stop and end the show of mysteries that move and glow.
More is coming on the heels of your delighted shrieks and
squeals. Ain't it wondrous? Ain't it grand, this *kingdom* now
so near at hand? A kingdom made to suit the one who sets it up
and makes it run. And not Jehovah, Emanuel, or Gods and imps --
the usual. But YOU, believing,  testing *faith* that MAKES it
happen -- sets the pace. If you think it, then it's real. That's
truer than we know, I feel. If you wish it, it can happen? What
prevents it? YOUR distraction. We have records spanning time,
and filled with wonder, shock, and rhyme. You don't hear it, but
it's there, and won't be heard unless you care.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Do you care?

Restore John Ford!
--
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 6 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 05:34:32 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:28:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >>Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >>But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
 >>there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
 >>direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
 >>The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
 >>strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

 >Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
 >by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
 >natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
 >of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
 >potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
 >system.

 >------
 >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
 >------

Dear Mark:

I must agree with you of course.

Rather than resort to the large number argument, (astronomically
large numbers I might add!) I suggest the following Gedanken
experiment:

   Only True Gedankeners will have the means to do the following
   of course! Dem Non-Gedankenen sind too busy Gebrewing Gegood
   Gebieren!


1)  Find a nice Earthlike planet. It may be far away, but I
presume there are more than a few out there.

2)  Locate a field full of grain, grass or equivalent.

3)  Remove all the mice, or mice-like critters that live off
such resources.

4)  Repopulate the same field with two strains of the very same
critters: One being slightly more intelligent than the other,
as determined by the ability to find food.

5)  Come back in six months and see which population prospered,
and which was "marginalized" if not driven to extinction.

Now comes the fun part.

Do the same thing a jillion times in a jillion places, i.e. much
like the multi-billion year natural history of planet #3 here.

I would wager that this could eventually lead to a relatively
"intelligent" set of organisms! Failing that, my present boss at
work might show up at least.

He went to get his cat "missy" spayed. It turned out that Missy
was a Mister, and that saved him a few dollars. I think he's
still pissed-off at me for laughing, but I digress..

Try the opposite hypothesis, that stupidity and lack of
intelligence are naturally selected. I have heard of military
services and other situations where such obtains, but these are
inevitably *forced* situations; unnatural setups which would
never arise in nature.

Nobody can sensibly deny the role of chance, dumb luck. I sure
don't.

What gets forgotten is the role of the "odds".

Lets say a rock is on a steep cliff. Its going to fall down the
precipice sooner or later as the sand beneath it erodes away.

Where will it go? I assure you that a random distribution on an
X-Y scale is the VERY LEAST likely thing. A dart-toss is the
world's worst representation of the final resting place for such
rocks!

Instead, it will tend to follow the natural furrows, obeying the
laws of gravity and the "lay of the land".

By analogy, evolution (and all related) will take certain paths
which present themselves by accident. In a few cases, these
could be highly favorable to life.

In those cases, intelligent life would tend to prevail over that
which is less intelligent.

In those-those cases, whole societies might develop, email, tax
forms and all.

If any one of those societies should survive its sophomoric
(warlike) years, it should ensure its own survival by all
possible means.

Given all the above, one or more societies could easily exist in
this Galaxy. There is no need to look further away.

Given this rash speculation,  and the fact that societies could
have existed millions of years ago,  one might easily posit such
societies being thousands or millions of years in advance of ours.

Given THAT rash assumption,  one might wonder if they would
not send out probes to examine stars which looked anything like
their own. Time would be no object to a society which had
long since unraveled the biological clock. Heck, Earth scientists
are working on that now, right here.

What I cannot see is all this fuss, just to play games with some
self-appointed "contactee". Think of it. If you were in any
position to do the sorts of things I described above,  would you
waste a millisecond on (names deleted)  ???

I think not.

Here's what I would do:

1)  Gather as much scientific, practical and real information as
possible.

2)  Minimize self-exposure at all costs, for obvious reasons.

3)  Set up methods and means to monitor conditions and status of
the "Earth" and its denizens for the long term, perhaps
millenia.

4)  Try to find somebody who believes me.


Very best wishes

- Larry Hatch.

=   =  =  =  =  =


Larry Hatch's highly self-recommended website is
at:    http://www.jps.net/larryhat









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 05:52:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:33:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: The Drake Equation

 >When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.

 >It seems that humans have already mastered space warping and
 >similar means of travel (thanks to the reverse engineering of
 >"borrowed" alien crafts), so maybe just another century will be
 >enough for us to "officially" travel to other systems or who
 >knows how far.

 >Yeah, I know, someone will say: How can you be sure that we
 >already have built such craft, etc.? I cannot, and probably
 >never will. Gravity control means supremacy, so it'll be top
 >secret for many years, and it'll be protected by any means
 >necessary. Nuclear power had the same treatment for decades, but
 >this is even bigger, just from the point of view of military
 >power.

 >Add to that the challenge that the existence of ETs bring to the
 >(obsolete?) socio-political and religious structure of our
 >planet, and the magnitude of the problem is self-evident.


Dear Eduardo:

YES! This is a forgotten factor.

Earlier estimates of the likelihood of ET contact always seem to
forget this.

Once again,  an intelligent race, should it emerge, grow and
prosper (and survive its sophomore years) would spread almost
inevitably thru the cosmos!

(They might skip Whitley Strieber's place, but that's
  another matter entirely.)

In fact, one physicist,  I have lost the name now, said "Where
are they? "  To him at least, it seemed odd that there was no
contact already!

Isn't that ironic?

One fellow will argue they cannot be here because of A, B and C.
Another, will argue that they don't exist in the first place, or
we would have seen them already!

A third contingent says they creep into his mountain
cabin at night.

A fourth contingent cannot distinguish the crescent Moon from
4rth of July fireworks.

Its enough to make a California sot go get another beer.

Best wishes regardless

- Larry Hatch

PS: Years ago I was amazed to read about a man who reported the
full moon as a UFO to the police. This was in the standard
literature - Vallee or Hynek as I recall?

I just uncovered another one, almost as good! Its in an old old
issue of the APRO Bulletin, whose editors considered it a
definite "mothership".

Clearly, psychology has a strong role in any study as elusive as
UFOs. This is one of my weakest points. Donald Duck knows more
psychology than I ever will. I prefer nuts and bolts because I
know how they turn.  -LH burp!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


I've learned a lot from this thread. For one thing, I've
realized that there's an ideological -- and emotional -- bias
many people have toward believing that intelligence is the goal
of evolution. (Maybe it's a bias our culture has.) Dennis has
done us all a favor by reminding us that this is not a
scientific position -- or at least that it hasn't yet been
scientifically justified.

I'm reminded of my high school history classes, where we were
taught that American democracy was the goal of all history. It's
true that Mark Cashman gave a good scientific reason for
expecting development of some sort in evolution, given enough
time (he said that evolution allows successful traits to add up
cumulatively). But we still need to look at our intellectual,
ideological, emotional, and (as Peter Brookesmith pointed out)
our religious biases, before we draw what we think are
scientific conclusions.

But here's the second thing I've learned from this debate.
People are taking positions that are suspiciously related to
their position on UFOs. Peter, a skeptic, and Dennis -- who
gives most of his energy these days to skeptical arguments --
argue that intelligent life might be rare in the universe.
Weighing in more or less on the other side are David Rudiak,
who's often seen here supporting the Roswell alien-crash
scenario; Mark Cashman, who says the UFO evidence points to some
"objectively existing" phenomenon; and myself. I'm often seen
here arguing against abduction skeptics.

So maybe we're lining up in emotional ranks. Those of us who
favor (even a little) the idea that UFOs might be alien also
find ourselves favoring the idea that alien life might be
common. And some of us who don't think there's much evidence
that UFOs are alien also find ourselves fascinated by reasons to
believe there might not even be any alien life out there.
Coincidence?

These positions aren't necessarily linked -- SETI scientists
believe alien life is widespread but laugh at UFO reports. But
even here there's an emotional component to their beliefs. They
more or less have to believe alien life is common, since they're
spending their time, presitige, and funding to search for it.
Meanwhile, a smaller group of scientists who support space
colonization find it helpful to believe that there aren't any
other intelligent beings out there to get in our way.

None of this is big news, really. In all walks of life, almost
all of us find ourselves believing things that satisfy us
emotionally. But the obvious distribution of biases in our
current debate about life in the universe ought to teach us
something -- it should encourage all of us examine our
preconceptions about everything we think about.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:45:20 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:50:49 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Well shows how little you know about me. In one year - 1988
 >alone - I personally investigated more than one hundred UFO
 >reports,

David, my argument was simply that you claimed (in a previous
post) to have _thoroughly_ investigated hundreds of cases.

I realize you had the backing of a regional newspaper, but
investigative journalists working with national newspapers and
those employed by TV companies can spend between six months to
two years investigating _a single_ case before they publish
their findings. UFO cases are often more complex; how can you
claim to have achieved such successes in only one year?

 >During my five years on the news desk of large regional evening
 >paper I received on average three reports every month and did my
 >best to check everything interesting with airports, weather
 >stations and the MOD.

But surely that's not _thorough_ investigation! I agree it can
be termed as an investigation, but really it's just following up
reports.

 >But it will be interesting to see how Georgina copes when her
 >material comes to the attention of the hardened skeptics who
 >inhabit some of the science desks of newspapers and other
 >interested journals, such as the charming and genteel Ian
 >Ridpath.

Sceptics do not scare me David. I have had many a debate with
hardened sceptics such as John Diamond (London Times) and Wendy
Grossman (Editor of a sceptic journal). In fact a few years ago
John invited me on his radio show to argue the subject with a
bunch of hard sceptics. Unfortunately I had the flu virus at the
time or I would have gladly taken the challenge. Why, I even
publicly challenged our dear colleague Rob Irving to prove his
claims of making crop circles.

I have had numerous debates with science writer Ian Ridpath and
although we disagree on many points I have always found him to
be a perfect gentleman. As you well know, last year I was
invited to debate the subject with sceptics, including scientist
David Hughes from Sheffield University, when we appeared on a
live television show, so, I am not afraid to debate with them.

 >Compared to real skeptics, I'm just a pussycat really!

Which one of your nine lives is responsible for _thoroughly_
investigating a hundred cases in one year David? <G>

Georgina Bruni









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 01:00:07 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>You missed the point entirely. Referencing legal standards in
 >>support of a position regarding alleged physical phenomena is
 >>totally inappropriate. As is referencing the results of opinion
 >>polls in support for the validity of such alleged physical
 >>phenomena. Why is a professed nuclear physicist arguing for the
 >>validity of physical phenomena, using standards any less than
 >>physical scientific standards which belong in the realm of
 >>physical science? and not legal standards which belong in the
 >>realm of social science? Is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman
 >>telling everyone that ufology is a social science and now
 >>relegated to social standards instead?

 >Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
 >existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
 >following to Scientific American:

 >"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
 >that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
 >six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
 >reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
 >Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
 >common features with the hundreds of observations that appear in
 >the literature."

 >Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
 >talking about?

 >Jerry Clark

The scientist was John Lowke, a plasma physicist.

He is referring to ball lightning.

If this was 1799 the reference might be to stones that fall from
the sky.

I think it most strange that the previously debunked phenomenon
of ball lightning has been used recently to explain UFO
sightings.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                      Heads up! The Leonids Are Coming

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 13:03:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:18:03 -0500
Subject: Heads up! The Leonids Are Coming


Subject: Heads up! The Leonids are coming
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:00:56 -0600
From: NASA Science News <expressnews@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov>
To: express-delivery@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov

NASA Science News for November 10, 1999:

Heads Up! - The upcoming Leonids meteor shower (Nov. 17-18) is
predicted to be the biggest in decades and perhaps for the next
century. While we are safe on the ground, satellite operators
are concerned that even small impacts could short-circuit
satellites. NASA will coordinate a team that helps track changes
in the shower that could be a storm.  Full story:


http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast10nov99_1.htm


Linda Porter
Code SD23
Science Systems Department
NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center
Huntsville AL  35812

(256)544-7588
(256)544-7128 (fax)
linda.porter@msfc.nasa.gov

http://science.nasa.gov/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 12:28:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:23:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:02:08 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >People don't have any trouble grasping that the Earth and Moon
 >are different, or that intelligent life will not evolve on
 >Jupiter or Venus.  What I think people are finding difficult to
 >grasp is your ultimate point.

Personally (and this may be almost off topic) I don't believe
that all intelligent life has to be biological (that is, made of
carbon or silicon based molecules).

For example, does biological life generate bioplasma or does
bioplasma manifests eventually as biological organisms? This
aspects have not been dealt with properly in spite of all the
years passed since Kirlian's and other's discoveries.

Let me add that these sciences fall under the same category of
UFO technology, in the way thay they have the key for the
manipulation of certain forms of energy, which means power. So a
lot of disinformation, sabotage and cover up follows them
wherever they are being seriously investigated. And of course,
funds for this kind of investigation hardly comes one's way.


--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                           Re: Egyptair Flight 990

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 12:54:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:02:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Egyptair Flight 990


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:27:37 EST
 >Subject: Filer's Files #45 -- 1999
 >To: undisclosed-recipients

 >TRIANGULAR UFOs SPOTTED ON HALLOWEEN NEAR FLIGHT 990

 >NANTUCKET -- The Shadie Pines News, of, states, "An EgyptAir
 >plane with 214 people on board crashed at sea early Sunday off
 >the island of Nantucket, Massachusetts, en route from New York
 >to Cairo, Egypt.  Bodies and debris were found in the water.
 >Several pleasure boaters off the coast of Nantucket report
 >seeing at least two large and silent triangular craft in the
 >vicinity before reports of the loss of Flight 990 from radar.
 >"The huge objects passed over us at an unbelievable speed,"
 >stated one observer. "There appeared to be a glowing light at
 >each corner of the object, and stars and clouds behind it
 >disappeared. That's how we knew it wasn't just an airplane, but
 >something else."  "We thought it was just a jet or something
 >from JFK, but we had never seen anything like this." reported a
 >group on a pleasure cruise on their sailboat. 'There were at
 >least two of them, and they were totally silent and passed over
 >us very quickly from east to west.' Thanks to Shadie Pines News
 >11/2/99 http://209.145.38.129/ shadiepines/flight & Peter
 >Robbins www.ufocity.com


I've heard something about the fact that this plane landed at
Edwards Air Force Base, where some specialist in this kind of
emergencies/accidents got off the plane.

Later that person was interviewed by the press as an expert in
the subject, but there was no mention whatsoever that the guy
had been on the same plane!

Can someone provide more detailed information about this
individual, and what really happened?

This ties with the sighting of two triangular UFOs published
here in the message titled "Filer's Files #45 -- 1999"

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 13:10:52 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:05:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:02:08 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 10:20:33 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:45:26 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

<large snip>

 >Truisms, Dennis, truisms.  Just about EVERYTHING, everywhere is
 >a culmination of a long series of utter accidents -- you, me,
 >the rock you kick on the street, my delapidated Volvo.  That's
 >not the point.  The question remains whether only one unique
 >sequence leads to intelligent life or whether a vast multitude
 >of sequences can get you there.  I think the former position is
 >unbelievably parochial.  There isn't just my delapidated Volvo.
 >There are delapidated Volvos everywhere, each with its own
 >unique history.

I'll type real slow.

Of course your delapidated Volvo has a unique history (and
congratulations on your choice of car, too), but it has a shared
history as well. It went in one end of the manufacturing plant
as a bunch of raw materials and came out the other end as a
finished product. Up to that point, all  Volvos shared (more or
less) the same history. What happened inbetween the iron ore,
the silicon that went into the windows, and the chemicals that
became the seat covers is that someone _designed_ same, someone
_manufactured_ same, and someone _assembled_ same, all
non-contingent factors, btw, although it wasn't alway so with
American cars.

Now think of the universe as a giant car factory, with raw
materials going in one end, and finished product coming out the
other. The question is, how many Volvos (that is Earth-sized
planets capable of sustaining primitive life forms through their
evolution into higher lifeforms) will the plant assemble, and
how many of those will ultimately "run" or live long enough to
reach the cosmic equivalent of, say, 300,000 highway miles?

Neither of us _knows_. No one on the surface of the planet
knows. We can be pretty sure, though, that the number of
eventual lottery winners is a smaller number than the beginning
number. Drake and other astronomers have approached the problem
by the Very Large Number argument. In effect, the argument says
that start with a Very Large Number, discount a Large Number,
and you're still left with a Pretty Big Darn Big number. Talk
about your truisms!

Metaphorically, the history of your individual Volvo begins the
moment you drive it out of the relative safety of the dealer's
lot and onto the Interstate Highway. To make matters
interesting, let's say that your car came equipped with a small
aquarium in the trunk in which you're trying to raise, nurture
and evolve algae. And you run headon into an 18-wheeler (can you
say supernova, etc?) in the first few blocks. Oops! Your Volvo
just had a unique history moment, but one that will be
ultimately shared to some degree by _some_ number of other
"unique" Volvos, like the one with the coffee stain on the front
seat.

I have never said that you have to repeat the Earth's unique
history at every stage in order to produce intelligent life.
What I've said is that there are also very large numbers arrayed
against Drake's very large numbers, and no one has any way of
knowing who's right.

But to continue the metaphor. Once all the Volvos have reached
300,000 miles on their odometers or already stopped running
altogether due to their unfortunate, unique, individual
histories, we open their hoods and look inside, or their trunks,
rather. The question now is: How many of those aquariums contain
life, or more importantly, intelligent life?

Oops, here one developed a crack in the glass and is all dried
up. Oops, there carbon monoxide leaked in from the exhaust pipe
and killed everything off. Maybe another has really good algae
in it. Maybe a flying saucer flies out of one (there, are you
happy now?).

The point is, the end product is entirely dependent on a
contingent history. There is no planetary "driver" who can pull
into a gas station every few thousand miles, check the oil in
the crankcase, and, if needed, add water (or air) to the
aquarium.

So how many Volvos finished the race and won the lottery? The
number could be very large, but there is no rule that says it
has to be. Sturgeon, I think it is, lay hundreds of thousands of
eggs in the "hope" or expectation that one will survive. There
are probably any number of examples of nature beginning with
very large numbers and ending with very small ones. We simply
don't know what the planetary production and survival rates of
the universe are.

At the moment I've got an oak tree outside dropping acorns by
the bushel. I haven't had the heart to tell it that it's
surrounded by a concrete driveway, never mind a small army of
surly squirrels, and a yardman that periodically comes around
and sweeps them up.


In the abstract, each one of those acorns has the potential to
become a mighty oak (if I may wax poetic for a moment). But
potential is just that -- an abstract concept incapable of
shaping or determining events. Potential is only realized after
the fact. Chaos and contingency have a nasty way of turning
large numbers into small ones without much reflection.

In fact, I suppose, you could argue, if one were so inclined,
that the presence of so many stars (and presumably Earth-sized
planets in a favorable neighborhood) is necessary precisely
because the survival rate is so low. Think of it as an insurance
policy against contingency.

 >>Unless, of course, you want to invoke a Creator. But that's
 >>another post.

 >No need.  The law of large numbers and rolling the dice seems to
 >do pretty much the same thing.  Eventually somebody always wins
 >the lottery.

 >David Rudiak


Well, we know the planet Earth did, don't we?

By the way, Texas has a lottery. Tickets are $1 each. Send me a
thousand dollars and I'll send you a thousand tickets. Of course
if you would prefer to send me a much larger number of dollars
(the more zeros after the one, the better!), thereby increasing
your odds, that would be fine, too. I only ask 10% of anything
you win.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:14:43 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:10:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >>Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >>But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
 >>there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
 >>direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
 >>The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
 >>strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

 >Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
 >by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
 >natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
 >of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
 >potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
 >system.

Hi Mark.

If every evolutionary model leads to organisms of greater
complexity, then evolutionists have to discard these models
since the vast majority of all the different life forms living
on the Earth now (nearly 100%) seem to have just barely emerged
from the slime even after billions of years (and I am not even
considering the far greater number of life forms which
evolutionists believe once existed but didn't get much beyond
the slime stage either).

Sometimes I wonder how humans who have achieved intelligence
(the execeptional evolutionary success story?), can be so
unscientific for believing in the evolutionary religious dogmas
about their origins when evolution itself is by definition
unscientific (i.e. it is not observable, cannot be reproduced in
the lab and it's impossible to predict future evolutionary
changes).  But who am I to attack anyone's beliefs or even
groundless assumptions.

As for the question "Are we alone in the universe?", I suspect
that one reason the 1976 discovery of life on Mars was supressed
and the later facts regarding the alleged fossils found in the
Mars meteorites were downplayed, was that the scientific
evidence illuminated fatal flaws in evolutionary thinking and
strengthened the case of a universal Creator.  If life could
spontaneously emerge on other worlds and evolve to more complex
life forms, why then would Martian organisms react chemically
the same way and even look identical to Earth organisms unless
they had they exhibited the "brushstrokes" of the same Creator?
I know of many scientists who believe in evolution breathed a
deep sigh of relief when ufologists came to their rescue proving
that the very human looking "Alien Autopsy" being was a hoax.

In an attempt to salvage their cherished evolutionary beliefs,
some scientists have already gone on record showing why life on
Mars was likely seeded by life from Earth through catastrophic
explosions on our world.  Thank God we are still here.  ;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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 20:11:49 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:14:08 -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: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 20:09:17 -0000

Dear Jenny

Thank you for your reply

You appear to have a problem with my questions; but may I remind
you that the reason I joined this thread was because you
suggested I was evading the issues you presented about the
Lakenheath case. I had not thought to get involved in this
debate but as you made that assumption I decided to respond with
what I believe were some very profound questions.

Because we are dealing with a very prominent and historical
case, and the fact that you are now claiming it is less
significant than it originally was, I feel it demands some
answers from you.

First, with regard to what you wrote concerning the Official
Secrets Act being an impediment to the early release of
testimony from pilots involved in the incident, I consulted Nick
Pope, who, as you know, has worked for the Ministry of Defence
(MOD) for almost fifteen years. He confirmed that this was a
complete non - issue. As you well know, the MOD's position on
the UFO phenomenon is that it is of "no defence significance".
Given such official statements (which have been made not just to
ufologists, but to parliament) it would be impossible for the
Government to object to the release of material relating to this
case. Such an objection would show that the MOD's "no defence
significance" statements were incorrect. Surely you can see that
the MOD would never put themselves in this position? In any
case, it's disingenuous to imply there would be any problem with
releasing information about an incident that occurred 44 years
ago - especially when numerous details of this case have been in
the public domain for around 30 years.

Regarding your interview with the crew: may I request for a
second time that you post their statement where they actually
say they had no visual sighting because this is not included in
the BBC interview. You also say there was no cat and mouse
chase, but in the interview it is clear that the object flew
down "again" and disappeared when they overshot it, and there is
no mention that the object was not on their tail. Therefore,
would you mind posting this statement from them too. The reason
I ask is because you claim the interview proves the official
report was incorrect. If this is so, and in view of it being
such a prominent case, I think it is necessary to offer this
evidence.

Squadron Leader Freddy Wimbledon, who was in charge of the alert
station that night, and the person who actually scrambled the
jets,said the first aircraft locked onto the target and ALSO SAW
THE LIGHT, which swept around the back of the plane and
FOLLOWED it. In the official report there was no mention of the
crew seeing an object, just "A BRIGHT LIGHT". So it seems
Wimbledom was agreeing with the report.

However,in your revised book (1997) "The Complete Book of UFOs",
co authored with Peter Hough, you mention the BBC interview with
the crew, (February1996) where they insist that neither jet made
any visual contact and suggest that "their testimony lessens the
significance of this famous case". You also write that they
[crew] had not considered UFOs until you came along. However,
this is all very misleading because it seems they did not claim
to know what the object was, so it stands to reason it was a UFO
(unidentified flying object). In answer to your questions,asking
if they were aware that other ground radar systems were involved
and did they know about the_ visual sightings_ from _below_ and
that a USAF transport aircraft  actually was looking down on
this thing from 5,000 feet and could see a yellow glow beneath
it. They said they did not know until you had just told them.
There is a vast difference here.

The fact that they did not know what the ground were
experiencing is not unusual. But where do the crew actually say
they personally had no visual sighting of the LIGHT or that they
were not followed by the UFO or that they did not know it was a
UFO? None of these questions or answers appear to be included in
the BBC interview. Again, I ask you why were they not included
if you find them so important that you are now questioning the
significance of this very important case? Indeed, I think we do
need to know exactly what the crew had to say about all of this.

 >If anyone is being difficult, surely its you for insisting on
 >probing for something that just isnt there.  In fact rather like
 >you did over Rendlesham when for your book you asked me no
 >questions at all about my views on the case, or the evidence, or
 >theories of explanation, or anything I'd gladly have discussed
 >with you. Instead your questions were about things like
 >documents you suggested (quite spuriously) that I had witheld
 >from others when - as I had to prove to you at length - I had
 >done exactly the opposite.

I cannot believe you are still going on about that episode. The
truth of the matter is, that no way did I accuse you of
withholding documents, but was merely _asking_ you questions -
the same as I am doing now. It seems you have a problem
answering questions Jenny and read into them what you want to
believe.

Several months ago I sent you a PRIVATE e-mail with eight
questions, which you claimed were based on gossip. You refused
to answer my questions, but posted _selected_ pieces publicly on
UFO UPDATES. This was, in my opinion a breach of confidence. I
asked you to post a message retracting what you wrote, or at
least to explain that the information you posted was incorrect,
inasmuch as I did not base my questions on gossip but on your
own published works and through interviews with your co-authors.

What you wrote suggested we had done some kind of deal that if I
don't write gossip about you, you would help with my questions.
I sent an update explaining there was no deal. How could there
be?  I had no intention of writing about you or the gossip that
you implied my questions were based on. I explained that my work
was about the case - not about Jenny Randles.

When you finally decided to answer my questions, you sent an
e-mail of almost a thousand words, when all I wanted was
straightforward answers to the eight factual questions, not your
life story.

However, that was not the end of it. You recently posted to your
colleague Tim Matthews list, again bringing up the accusations
that my questioning was more or less based on gossip. This is
simply not true!

 >you asked me no questions at all about my views on the case, or
 >the evidence, or theories of explanation

Why would I ask your opinion? Were you a witness? Were you
involved? Were you on the base at the time? Were you in the
military? Were you with any agency or government department? No!
This is a book about the witnesses and the experts - not about
ufologists. Besides, I've read your latest views and theories
and no offense meant, but I have to disagree with you entirely.

Georgina Bruni








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Bill Jacobs <billjaco@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:23:01 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:37:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >>Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >>But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
 >>there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
 >>direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
 >>The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
 >>strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

 >Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
 >by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
 >natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
 >of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
 >potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
 >system.

Mark,

Have to butt in here. Every evolutionary model? Leads only (I
added) to organisms of greater complexity? Over whose time, the
assessor or the assessed?

If mankind finds a way to exist without the limitations of our
own physical bodies are we (in your thinking) evolving to a
greater complexity or would we have developed an alternate
(perhaps more simplified) direction?

Bill J


------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 14:43:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:21:31 -0500
Subject: Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here

posted on the forteana list


Thursday November 11, 5:20 am Eastern Time
Company Press Release
SOURCE: Dateline:USA

Americans Think Intelligent Alien Life Coming Here, Poll
Shows

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 11 /PRNewswire/ -- Is there intelligent life
on other worlds? Does it resemble the tentacled uglies of
Independence Day' 'Star Wars'... or, maybe, the nine-foot tall,
gas-breathing Psychlos of L. Ron Hubbard's 'Battlefield Earth'?
And if extraterrestrials decide to visit Earth, will they come
as friend or foe?

A nationwide poll of nearly 1,500 people -- including a number
of leading astronomers and astrophysicists -- conducted by the
syndicated cable television show Dateline:USA found that more
than 70 percent of those surveyed believe there is intelligent
life in the universe, perhaps even in our own Milky Way Galaxy.

Opinion was evenly divided on whether they would be hostile or
lovable if they came here, but nearly 80 percent were convinced
that alien technology would be more advanced than ours: it would
have to be to enable them to cross millions of light years of
space.

Sixty-five percent of the Dateline: USA respondents felt that
we'd be conquered or annihilated if an alien race invaded Earth,
while 26 percent were sure we would ultimately defeat the
invaders, no matter how technologically superior. Ten percent
had no opinion or felt they "wouldn't be around" to find out how
such a confrontation turned out.

Producers of the cable television show said the national survey
was inspired by a number of current developments: the continuing
success of the billion dollar 'Star Wars' empire, the production
of international alien invasion bestseller 'Battlefield Earth'
into a major motion picture -- starring John Travolta as the
alien villain -- and the launch of the Mars Polar Lander.

Dr. Yoji Kondo, astrophysicist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight
Center, told Dateline:USA that we "can't assume that the
thinking processes of another intelligent species on another
planet, revolving around an alien sun in another galaxy, would
be sure they'd even think it worthwhile to attack and plunder a
planet like Earth."

Astronomer, physicist and "Star Wars" author Kevin J. Anderson
contended that despite the views of many exobiologists "who is
to say that totally alien forms of life -- not based on our
carbon-cycle -- cannot be born in a sea of magnetic fields on
the surface of a star, or that civilizations of carbon-based
life similar to ours could not develop under oceans, flying high
in clouds, or burrowing underground?"

Virtually all the respondents to the survey agreed that alien
beings from other worlds will not 'look like us'. Opinions on
extraterrestrial shapes and sizes ran the gamut of tear or pear
shaped creatures and furred, taloned giants to winged lizards.

Adding the generally accepted footnote, Dr. Gregory Benford,
physics professor at UC Irvine, told the survey, "There are
certainly not just aliens, but intelligent aliens."

SOURCE: Dateline:USA









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:07:49 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:40:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >>Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >>But even if life obligingly pops up on other earth-like planets,
 >>there is no known law that compels it to develop in the
 >>direction of intelligence. Evolution is ruled by blind chance.
 >>The popular notion that life emerges from the slime and then
 >>strives for advancement has no scientific basis.

 >Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
 >by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
 >natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
 >of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
 >potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
 >system.

 >Mark Cashman

Mark,

Are you calling Paul Davies a liar?

Just joking!

But for those on the list who may not know who he is, Davies is
presently Professor of Natural Philosophy at the University of
Adelaide, South Australia, and the author of more than 20 books,
including About Time, Are We Alone? and The Last Three Minutes,
several of them bestsellers. He won the 1995 Templeton Prize for
Progress in Religion.

That said, a couple of quick comments. In his article in The
Anomalist 5 referenced earlier, Mike Davis summarized Darwinian
evolution under a table called "Earth as a Closed System (Old
Axiomatic Framework)." Newton's Guarantee and Lyell's Principle
are also summarized, but let's concentrate on the summary of
Darwin as follows:

a) Biological evolution follows Lyell's gradualistic pace of environmental
evolution. "Nature never progresses by leaps."
b) Extinction and speciation, as a result, are uniformitarian in scale and
rate. Natural selection fine-tunes adaptation.
c) Evolution, therefore, has a subtle, progressive logic.

This seems to be saying pretty much what you're saying above.

The picture changes dramatically, however, when the Earth is viewed as an
open system, resulting in Davis's New Axiomatic Framework. In this table
the section on some of the latest thinking about evolution is found under
the heading, "Vernadsky's Legacy (Gaia dances with Shiva)," where we find
the following:

a) The biosphere is adapted, via the evolution of biological
    cooperation, to chaotic crises of its planetary environment.
    Nature usually proceeds by leaps.

b) Mass-extinction events are non-Darwinian factories of natural
    selection. At its extremes, evolution is a punctuated
    equilibrium between autonomous dynamics of environmental and
    genetic change.

c) Natural history, like planetary history, is characterized by
    its irreversible and unpredictable contingency.

Put politely: Shit happens and on a grand scale.

Lyell and Darwin subsumed the Earth as a sort of peaceful
paradise (or closed system) in which life (and evolution) simply
went about its merry way, resulting in ever higher and complex
lifeforms.

Increasingly, that appears not to be the case.

New evidence is suggesting that not only does evolution not take
place in an Earthly vacuum, but that external inputs (in the
form of the occasional, largescale disaster) act as necessary
impetuses for reaching the next level -- provided, of course,
that you aren't killed in the process.

This is what is meant when Davies, Davis, Gould and others speak
of blind chance and contingency. You can't guarantee when and to
what degree the external influences are going to arrive, or
enter into the overall, local equation.

In fact, I find an interesting parallel here with the story of
Adam and Eve. Would life evolve in a perfect paradise of
constant temperature and no stress, etc., or would you need to
have your butt kicked into a changing world in order to grow?
Metaphorically speaking, of course.

Anyway, I don't know what models of evolution you're looking at,
but you might try some of the newer ones.

Or maybe even an older one...

Here's what Charles Fort had to say
about Darwinism, circa 1919, in The Book of the Damned:


The fittest survive.

What is meant by the fittest?

Not the strongest; not the cleverest --

Weakness and stupidity everywhere survive.

There is no way of determining fitness except in that a thing
does survive.

"Fitness," then, is only another name for "survival".

Darwinism: That survivors survive.



Fort, ever the crusty curmudgeon!

But at least he recognized the role contingency, or blind
chance, plays in evolution.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 21:41:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:35:57 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:43:21 -0500

 >Subject: The Drake Equation

 >When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.
 >It seems that humans have already mastered space warping and
 >similar means of travel (thanks to the reverse engineering of
 >"borrowed" alien crafts), so maybe just another century will be
 >enough for us to "officially" travel to other systems or whoknows how far.
 >Yeah, I know, someone will say: How can you be sure that we
 >already have built such craft, etc.? I cannot, and probably
 >never will. Gravity control means supremacy, so it'll be top
 >secret for many years, and it'll be protected by any means
 >necessary. Nuclear power had the same treatment for decades, but
 >this is even bigger, just from the point of view of militarypower.
 >Add to that the challenge that the existence of ETs bring to the
 >(obsolete?) socio-political and religious structure of our
 >planet, and the magnitude of the problem is self-evident.

 >EDUARDO GOMEZ



Eduardo & List:

May be  it's also important to recall that _traces of water_ --
for the first time in history -- was found quite recently on an
E.T. object, i.e., on a meteorite (as mentioned on this List
during summer/autumn; sorry, I don't know when).

This trace of water should contribute to an increased belief in,
and increased probability for, life-forms on other planets in
the universe.

For those calculating the probable no. of intelligent life-forms
on other planets using the Drake equation, it is now important
to modify a relevant Drake factor in the eq., which should
include the information on this new discovery.

Further, according to Sagan (Scientific American; Oct. 1994),
human beings, as every other organism on Earth, are based on
liquid water and organic molecules. A modest search strategy --
looking for necessary if not sufficient criteria -- might then
begin by looking for liquid water and organic molecules. No
other chemical element comes close to carbon in the variety and
intricacy of the compounds it can form; liquid water provides a
superb, stable medium in which organic molecules can dissolve
and interact, and organic molecules are surprisingly common in
the universe. For the moment, carbon- and water-based life-forms
are the only kinds we know or can even imagine.

Thus, both traces of E.T. _water and organic molecules_ are now
found!

Maybe we should now revise our probability of being alone in the
universe, and _increase_ this probability by some amount?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 19:51:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:44:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:38:29 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >>From: Graeme Best <graemebest@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:33:47 EST

 >>Paul Davies article in Melbourne Age

 >>G'day EBK,

 >>While watching this thread develop, I felt I should send you
 >>this article by Paul Davies which appeared in the local press
 >>last weekend. It should of course be remembered that Davies was
 >>also the winner of the 1995 Templeton prize for Progress in
 >>Religon. It is actually quite a long article, and I could'nt
 >>find it in the archives at www.theage.com.au, so I've snipped a
 >>large part from the beginning...
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 >>"WHY WE STILL BELIEVE IN ALIENS, REGARDLESS OF THE FACTS" by
 >>Paul Davies. Published in the Melbourne Age 5/11/99 (extract)
 >
 >>...Probes sent to the Red Planet failed to find Lowells canals,
 >>or any sign of life. There is a chance that Mars once harboured
 >>microbes, but little green men are definitely off the agenda.
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 >>The abscence of any observational evidence for ET leaves us with
 >>only theory to go on. Unfortunately, scientists have scant idea
 >>how life originated. It may have been a freak molecular
 >>accident, unique to Earth. On the other hand, life may arise
 >>more or less automatically under favourable conditions.
 >
 >Hi everyone.
 >
 >I have come to conclude that many people, including scientists
 >and ufologists, feel very comfortable with just maintaining our
 >current beliefs and thinking regarding the question "Are we alone
 >in this universe?".  We may all profess to be open minded and to
 >be striving for the answer to this important question, but in
 >fact we are not and don't really care to be either.
 >
 >Human recorded history tells us the answer to this question but
 >we have now discarded all this accumulated knowledge and have
 >replaced it with a new religious system of beliefs, dogmas and
 >new doubts. Our speculations and educated opinions it seems are
 >more important to us in this "scientific age" rather than the
 >simple truths.
 >
 >In our harsh criticism of each others methods and in quickly
 >dismissing data we do not like, we may have also actually thrown
 >out the answer to this important question on more than one
 >occasion.
 >
 >For example, in 1976 the scientific discovery of life on Mars
 >was made.  That year on U.S.A.'s Independence Day, the Viking 1
 >made a soft landing on Mars.  On board was an experiment that
 >was designed to detect organic life that would react chemically
 >in much the same way as organic life on Earth would.  The result
 >was positive.  Unfortunately NASA which sent out Viking 1
 >continues to overlook this discovery even though all its initial
 >doubts have been addressed.  The September/October 1999 issue of
 >UFO Magazine (UK) has an interview with Dr. Gilbert Levin (pages
 >8 and 9), the frustrated NASA scientist who made the discovery
 >of life on Mars.  His papers can be found at the web sites
 >below.
 >
 >http://www.biospherics.com/mars/spie/spiehtml.htm
 >
 >http://www.biospherics.com/mars/spie2/spie98.htm
 >
 >NASA still promotes a "Mars" meteorite which it claims may
 >contain microfossils (now there are two more) proving that life
 >once existed on Mars and even created the Astrobiology Institute
 >(strange if NASA didn't have good reasons to believe that life
 >is really out there).
 >
 >Although Paul Davies is a learned man, his article is wrong when
 >he claims that probes to Mars failed to find ANY sign of life or
 >that there is an absence of observational EVIDENCE for ET.  If
 >there wasn't any, I for one wouldn't be wasting my time reading
 >all about the latest ET evidence in ufology.

 >Nick Balaskas

In August, 1998, I gave lectures in 11 different Australian
cities.

I ran across numerous articles by and about Paul Davies and some
of his books in the bookstores. It was quite obvious that
despite his having strong opinions about ET life and UFOs, he
certainly knew nothing about either.

Of course that should be no surprise.

Look at the writings of Carl Sagan, Frank Drake, Jill Tartar..
always knocking alien visitation and UFOs despite total
ignorance about them, and making strange claims indeed about
SETI..

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 >
   Nov > Nov 14

                       Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun

From: ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:01:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:01:41 -0500
Subject: Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun




Michel Deschamps is a dedicated researcher in Northern Ontario,
Canada.

Getting publicity for his UFO reporting facility is difficult -
consequently he spreads snail-mail far and wide in his bid for
witness feedback.

Toronto, yesterday, took a double-hit of UFO coverage in the
press -  the Toronto Star article and the following 'Letter of
The Day' in the Letters To The Editor section of The Toronto
Sun - on page 15...

ebk

-----

Dear readers,

Every Canadian recognizes November 11th as "Remembrance Day", a
day set aside to remember those who fought and died in past
wars, giving up their lives for freedom.  For those of us who
are involved in UFO research, this date has special significance
in the annals of the unexplained.  This year, November 11th will
mark the 25th anniversary of the "CFS Falconbridge UFO
Incident".

On the morning of November 11, 1975, four unidentified targets
were picked up on radar by military personnel at the Canadian
Forces Station Falconbridge and witnessed by several observers,
including OPP and Regional Police officers.  Some folks reported
that they were followed down the highway by one of these
objects.  Authorities offered two explanations for the
sightings: the now infamous Venus/Jupiter explanation.  Then, in
1979, changed the verdict from planets to ice crystals in the
clouds that somehow reflected sunlight and created images in the
sky.  But when viewed in the light of the evidence and the
testimony of the witnesses, the explanations simply don't stand
up.

This event is known throughout the world, having been mentioned
in numerous books; it is considered to be one of the best
radar/visual UFO cases on record.  But it is not the only one.
I've heard many reports where a local resident would call the
radar base to report unusual lights in the sky and in turn, were
told by base personnel that the objects were already being
tracked on radar for the past half-hour!  The witnesses would
then be told that they would be contacted at a later date by
someone at the base; no one ever got in touch with these
witnesses again.

Today, the abandoned buildings that make up the radar
installation stand as a silent reminder of the military activity
that took place there on a daily basis, and more specifically,
of the historical event of November 11th, 1975.

On another note, 1999 has been a bumper crop year for UFO
sightings, with 34 individual reports made by highly credible
people; some of these folks were absolutely skeptical of UFOs
until their encounter.  In a few weeks, a new year will begin.
And I am positive that UFO activity in the Sudbury area and
elsewhere will once again pick up.  My best advice to you all:
Watch the skies!

If you or anyone you know has any information about this or any
other cases, please contact me by dialing (705) 670-2759 or
e-mailing me at: ufoman@ican.net.  Confidentiality is assured.


Cordially,

Michel M. Deschamps
MUFON Provincial Section Director for Sudbury, Ontario &
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:44 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 07:57:38 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


Hello, list,

 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: The Drake Equation

 >When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.

This is a great point, and appears to be "overlooked" by
hardcore SETI theorists because colonization implies
interstellar travel... and of course we all know that aliens
wouldn't dare actually travel, because radio is cheaper!

This is an especially detestable bit of terrestrial chauvinism,
but it's become part and parcel of the SETI paradigm.

The Drake Equation also doesn't recognize the possibility that
_some_ ET civilizations, after reaching technological maturity,
become solipsistic pleasure fanatics for which exploration/
communication become exotic, or event repellent, prospects. I
can imagine many "hopeful" civilizations lapsing into a sort of
techno-decadence...actually, I suppose this can be tossed under
Drake's "self destruction" variable, in a pinch.

The Drake Equation also fails to foresee self-replicating
machine ecologies and other various consequences of extremely
advanced AI, which is seems space-faring civilizations would
almost certainly have, in one form or another.  Possibly more
about this later...

Mac Tonnies






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>From: Jsmortell@aol.com
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 02:43:57 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:18:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500


 >I've learned a lot from this thread. For one thing, I've
 >realized that there's an ideological -- and emotional -- bias
 >many people have toward believing that intelligence is the goal
 >of evolution. (Maybe it's a bias our culture has.) Dennis has
 >done us all a favor by reminding us that this is not a
 >scientific position -- or at least that it hasn't yet been
 >scientifically justified.

 >I'm reminded of my high school history classes, where we were
 >taught that American democracy was the goal of all history. It's
 >true that Mark Cashman gave a good scientific reason for
 >expecting development of some sort in evolution, given enough
 >time (he said that evolution allows successful traits to add up
 >cumulatively). But we still need to look at our intellectual,
 >ideological, emotional, and (as Peter Brookesmith pointed out)
 >our religious biases, before we draw what we think are
 >scientific conclusions.

 >But here's the second thing I've learned from this debate.
 >People are taking positions that are suspiciously related to
 >their position on UFOs. Peter, a skeptic, and Dennis -- who
 >gives most of his energy these days to skeptical arguments --
 >argue that intelligent life might be rare in the universe.
 >Weighing in more or less on the other side are David Rudiak,
 >who's often seen here supporting the Roswell alien-crash
 >scenario; Mark Cashman, who says the UFO evidence points to some
 >"objectively existing" phenomenon; and myself. I'm often seen
 >here arguing against abduction skeptics.

 >So maybe we're lining up in emotional ranks. Those of us who
 >favor (even a little) the idea that UFOs might be alien also
 >find ourselves favoring the idea that alien life might be
 >common. And some of us who don't think there's much evidence
 >that UFOs are alien also find ourselves fascinated by reasons to
 >believe there might not even be any alien life out there.
 >Coincidence?

 >These positions aren't necessarily linked -- SETI scientists
 >believe alien life is widespread but laugh at UFO reports. But
 >even here there's an emotional component to their beliefs. They
 >more or less have to believe alien life is common, since they're
 >spending their time, presitige, and funding to search for it.
 >Meanwhile, a smaller group of scientists who support space
 >colonization find it helpful to believe that there aren't any
 >other intelligent beings out there to get in our way.

 >None of this is big news, really. In all walks of life, almost
 >all of us find ourselves believing things that satisfy us
 >emotionally. But the obvious distribution of biases in our
 >current debate about life in the universe ought to teach us
 >something -- it should encourage all of us examine our
 >preconceptions about everything we think about.
 >Greg Sandow

Reproduction has choreographed the Dance of Life.  Not emotion,
ideology or Dennis. At least this is so on this planet. We seem
to have invented something called pair bonding.

Part of the illogic involved in the subject of life elsewhere,
is that we view it in a biased manner.  With our hormones.  In
the minds of many if not most on this planet, this is the only
way life must succeed; two arms, forward looking eyes, binocular
vision and hearing, opposing thumbs and on and on ad nauseum.
We are the only species on this planet which form pair bonds and
then fail at them more than 50% of the time.  We screw up
everything we touch, even with our minds.

Men are bags of sperm.  Women are depositories for the contents.

Perhaps there is more to evoloution than meets the reproductive
organs.  Perhaps life has evolved differently on other worlds.
Planet of the apes, in a manner of speaking.  We humans fail to
recognize this pair of dimes, let alone spend it on intellect.
We cannot think of life different from our form, fit and
function.  How then may we conceive of life elsewhere?

By the by, does anyone know how pelicans do it?

Jim,

God's answer to a really bad joke.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 01:04:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:14:15 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

<snip>

 >In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
 >the triangles before the 1980s? Why does no-one now see classic
 >flying saucers with "conning towers"? Whatever happened to
 >Arnold's croissant- shaped objects? Was the Socorro craft an
 >unsuccesful prototype which was seldom seen again?

 >The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >science fiction.
 >--
 >John Rimmer
 >Magonia Magazine
 >www.magonia.demon.co.uk

John,

Unfortunately your assertions are just that and unfortunately
those assertions are not substantiated by your knowledge of the
literature.

There are references to triangular shaped UFOs in the
literature before the 1980s.

The following are appropriate page references to one of the
fundamental books in the UFO literature you may wish to
familiarize yourself with, Edward J. Ruppelt's, 'The Report On
Unidentified Flying Objects'.

The index references provided below are abstracted from my
Comprehensive Index of Edward J. Ruppelt's, 'The Report On
Unidentified Flying Objects'.

The page numbers provided here are for the Doubleday and Company
1956 edition.

------------
abstracted from:

Comprehensive Index for the
THE REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS
Gary Alevy
(C) Copyright 1999


Unidentified Flying Object (UFO)
   description of UFOs
        appearance      3, 17, 19, 20, 21, 25, 36, 40, 43, 46,
                        56, 71, 75, 78, 80, 84, 85, 92, 95, 112,
                        120, 121, 130, 146, 151, 153, 179, 187,
                        196, 202, 204, 236, 237

   uncommon types
        cigar shaped    150, 194
        delta wing      11
        flying wing     96, 97, 103, 104, 108, 109
        pear shaped     97, 102
        spherical       12, 113, 144, 160, 169, 175, 195, 196, 202
        splitting into three pieces     189
        splitting into two triangles    227
        triangle shaped 227

-----------
Cheers,

Gary Alevy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:33:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:23:19 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
 >>appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
 >>must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
 >>since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

 >And just how would you expect the appearance to change? Would a
 >Russian secret weapon necessarily look different to an
 >extraterrestrial craft? As witnesses would have no idea what
 >either looked like there is no reason why the descriptions
 >should change. In fact there was quite a long period when both
 >"explanations" overlapped.

I think it is reasonable to assume that the populace would think
that "Russian secret weapons" or even "American secret weapons"
would look like aircraft. Advanced aircraft, maybe with highly
swept wings, but aircraft, not wingless disks, spheres, and
cylinders.

I would expect that the switch to belief that UFOs were
extraterrestrial would convert the most common descriptions to
non-aircraft-like geometries which would fit the most common
current model of what "alien spacecraft" would look like. I
don't believe people thought alien spacecraft and secret weapons
would look similar.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

 >I'd be interested to know what Mark Cashman thinks *is* the
 >unchanging appearance of a "true UFO".

 >In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
 >the triangles before the 1980s? Why does no-one now see classic
 >flying saucers with "conning towers"? Whatever happened to
 >Arnold's croissant- shaped objects? Was the Socorro craft an
 >unsuccesful prototype which was seldom seen again?

In fact, they are not constantly changing. The UFO geometries
shown in the 1964 UFO Evidence are evident in reports from 1947
and from 1997.

Triangles of one sort or another appear in pre 1980s reports and
are one of the classifications in the 1964 UFO Evidence. That
they are more common now than in the past is not something yet
empirically verified, but even if that were the case, it is not
any sort of "proof" of the non-existence of UFOs.

UFOs with "towers" do appear in a number of reports from 1949
through 1967 and possibly into the 1970s. That geometry has
always been among the least common. The most common geometry,
the domed disk, continues to be frequently reported. In
addition, the tower, unless displaying a luminosity of its own,
would probably be invisible in night sightings.

Arnold, in case you didn't bother to look at the sketches in the
Blue Book report, depicted lenticular disks. As for large wing
shaped objects, they have been reported at least since 1951 and
continuing through the 1990s. Many of these could be interpreted
as having a "croissant" shape.

The Socorro geometry (an ellipse) has been reported probably
only secondary in frequency to the domed disk. There are many
reports of noisy near ground behavior, and blue luminosity as
well.

Please familiarize yourself with more than the popular accounts
- read the case literature before making statistical
pronouncements.

BTW, even if UFO shapes kept changing, it would not be evidence
of their mythological nature. Aside from dealing with multiple
witness cases, the ground traces, the radar detection, the
medical evidence, etc., proof of the mythological nature of the
UFO, would require showing it tracking cultural depictions of
the concept to which UFOs are attached. A test such as that
which I mentioned (UFO geometries reflecting the common concept
of the explanation accepted at the time) would seem to be to be
a basic discriminator of the hypothesis. Are you saying it is
not? Is that because it does not support your hypothesis?

 >The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >science fiction.

As I have pointed out before, statistically, the vast majority
of pre-1950s spaceship depictions were either streamlined cigars
with fins, cones with wings, or, for the really advanced stuff,
submarine shaped objects with giant rivets and rows of ship-like
portholes. Also, there are no reports of Flash Gordon like
objects, despite the popularity of that serial.

Where are these in the reports of the time? Also, where is the
evidence that UFO reporters were science fiction readers or fans
of SF serials?

Finally, keep in mind that cultural context goes both ways, and
after 1947, most people in the US had a pretty good idea of what
UFOs looked like. Also keep in mind that Jerry Clark and others
have shown that a large number of the 1897 airship wave reports,
especially those with human occupants, seem to have been
journalistic hoaxes.

Let's remember that scientific explanations, including
sociological explanations, require one to follow the scientific
model:

1) Observations to be explained.
2) Hypothesis to explain them.
3) Discriminators to determine the truth or falsity of the
    hypothesis.
4) Observations/experiments to detect the discriminators.
5) Peer review of the results and attempts to duplicate.

If you are interested in any sort of acceptance for your views,
you will need to follow these guidelines.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:58:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:25:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500

 >But here's the second thing I've learned from this debate.
 >People are taking positions that are suspiciously related to
 >their position on UFOs. Peter, a skeptic, and Dennis -- who
 >gives most of his energy these days to skeptical arguments --
 >argue that intelligent life might be rare in the universe.
 >Weighing in more or less on the other side are David Rudiak,
 >who's often seen here supporting the Roswell alien-crash
 >scenario; Mark Cashman, who says the UFO evidence points to some
 >"objectively existing" phenomenon; and myself. I'm often seen
 >here arguing against abduction skeptics.

Hi, Greg!

It's simply that people prefer to have integrated philosophies
over non-integrated ones. Those who are skeptical of UFOs may
have come to that by being skeptical of the presence of life in
the universe. Those who accept UFOs may have come to that by
being accepting of the potential for intelligent life in the
universe. Or vice versa. Or both, as their views changed based
on what they perceived to be evidence.

I don't think it's productive to ascribe positions to bias,
though completely ignoring evidence one way or the other is
certainly evidence of some sort of bias. Even bias can be
productive, however, if the biased believe they need to prove
the truth of their bias with scientific work.

In the long run, the best way for either side to convince the
other is to confront the evidence with studies done using the
scientific method. So far, as weak as the pro OEH side is in
this, it seems to have done more even with the demographic and
sociological side, and in understanding the consequences of the
extensive testing of the MHH which has been undertaken by the AF
and the Condon Committee. But I remain interested to see actual
statistical and demographic studies by skeptics to prove their
contentions of cultural tracking and the mythological nature of
UFO belief. Even if they fail to prove that UFOs are
mythological, their conclusions will remain interesting in
showing things that are relevant to understanding potential
sources of contamination in the report database.

The same is true for the ET life debate, as relevant or
irrelevant as it may be to the nature of UFOs (which I believe
hinges on the physical and multiple witness evidence rather than
on unprovable speculations about the distribution of life in the
universe). Nevertheless, one thing is clear when discussing
evolution, as has been mentioned elsewhere - there is no case of
which I am aware, and certainly no general trend, and based on
evolutionary theory could not be, leading one to suggest that
evolution leads to a static level of complexity or a generally
reduced level of complexity in evolved life. That being said,
while there is no teleological element to evolution, the nature
of the mechanism in operation, which is based on
physico-chemical laws likely to be in operation at all locations
of the universe, is such that gradually increasing complexity,
especially in the management and processing of percptual data,
will be the norm. Such would seem to lead to intelligence at
some point.

Personally, the idea that UFOs represent extraterrestrial life
give me the willies. The political consequences alone of
discovering clandestine visitors are so large, so complex, and
potentially so dangerous, that such a result can hardly be
wished for. Science fiction is replete with examples that
suggest the difficulty of verifying the intent of a non-human
species with a technlogy in advance of ours prior to a point at
which it is too late. Is this something I am looking forward to,
or have an emotional bias toward? No, indeed.

But I do think the truth is more important than my 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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:10:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:26:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:14:43 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >If every evolutionary model leads to organisms of greater
 >complexity, then evolutionists have to discard these models
 >since the vast majority of all the different life forms living
 >on the Earth now (nearly 100%) seem to have just barely emerged
 >from the slime even after billions of years (and I am not even
 >considering the far greater number of life forms which
 >evolutionists believe once existed but didn't get much beyond
 >the slime stage either).

Actually, most modern microorganisms are significantly more
advanced than their ancestors. Though there are relic organisms
existing in some environments, they typically coexist with
similar but more complex organisms.

The evolution of the mitochondrion alone (generally thought to
be initially a symbiosis of the procaryotic bacterium with the
ancestor of the eucaryotic cell), suggests that there has been
progression in the complexity of even the "simple"
microorganism.

 >Sometimes I wonder how humans who have achieved intelligence
 >(the execeptional evolutionary success story?), can be so
 >unscientific for believing in the evolutionary religious dogmas
 >about their origins when evolution itself is by definition
 >unscientific (i.e. it is not observable, cannot be reproduced in
 >the lab and it's impossible to predict future evolutionary
 >changes).  But who am I to attack anyone's beliefs or even
 >groundless assumptions.

I suggest you read Darwin, Simpson, and Dawkins for discussions
of the scientific validation of evolution. Evolution is hardly
unscientific, though, like UFOs, it is not something which can
be observed directly under experimental conditions.

 >As for the question "Are we alone in the universe?", I suspect
 >that one reason the 1976 discovery of life on Mars was supressed
 >and the later facts regarding the alleged fossils found in the
 >Mars meteorites were downplayed, was that the scientific
 >evidence illuminated fatal flaws in evolutionary thinking and
 >strengthened the case of a universal Creator.

Actuallty, there was no suppression, there was just
disagreement. Work on Martian soil chemistry to determine if
such active chemistries could explain the Viking results has
suggested that it can.

As for the "fossils", the issue is still being played out in the
journals. Nevertheless, those who attribute the "fossils" to
natural minerals have made an interesting and moderately
compelling case so far.

I have seen no evidence that the findings were affected by the
religious beliefs (whatever they are) of the various
investigators. Any of them would be pleased to claim the Nobel
prize which would be attendant on the confirmed detection of
extraterrestrial life of any sort.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:15:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:28:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:23:01 -0800
 >From: Bill Jacobs <billjaco@ix.netcom.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >Have to butt in here. Every evolutionary model? Leads only (I
 >added) to organisms of greater complexity? Over whose time, the
 >assessor or the assessed?

I am not sure what this means. Time is time.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, I am not aware of anything which
suggests a general trend toward anything other than increased
complexity in organisms evolved later than simpler organisms.

However, not all simple organisms die out, either.

 >If mankind finds a way to exist without the limitations of our
 >own physical bodies are we (in your thinking) evolving to a
 >greater complexity or would we have developed an alternate
 >(perhaps more simplified) direction?

Given that I see no reason to believe that non-physical
organisms can exist (after all, the nature of physicality is
to constrain, control, and insulate energetic processes in
the organism, such as metabolism, which is necessary to
avoid disspation), if such an organism did exist, I would
expect it to be highly differentiated. A less-differentiated,
less-complex version of "me" would not be me, but would
be a squirrel or an ameoba.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:23:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:29:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:07:49 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:17:01 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Neither does the above author's notion that evolution is ruled
 >>by "blind chance". Evolution is the cumulative selection of
 >>natural variation. Every evolutionary model leads to organisms
 >>of greater complexity over time. This strongly suggests the
 >>potential for the evolution of intellignce in any evolutionary
 >>system.

 >a) Biological evolution follows Lyell's gradualistic pace of environmental
 >evolution. "Nature never progresses by leaps."
 >b) Extinction and speciation, as a result, are uniformitarian in scale and
 >rate. Natural selection fine-tunes adaptation.
 >c) Evolution, therefore, has a subtle, progressive logic.

 >This seems to be saying pretty much what you're saying above.

No, it isn't. I said that evolution is not random chance jumping
through the organismic design space (the strawman set up by
creationists to represent evolution) but that whether evolution
is gradualist, punctuationist, or some combination of the two,
what is essential about evolution in general is that it is a
cumulative selection of natural variations (i.e. mutations).
That is, simply, that one set of selected mutations is built
upon by the next set. The original mutations do not vanish in an
evolved generation, they are added to or themselves changed.

Personally, however, I find Dawkins position (which does not
support punctuated equilibrium or catastrophist positions) the
most compelling. I am sure there is a role for catastrophe or
even variations in mutation rate, but I think the evidence for
the gradual and continuous nature of evolutionary processes in
general remains more compelling.

------
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                                UFO Scotland?

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:22:10 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:31:20 -0500
Subject: UFO Scotland?


It seems Dave Ledger's web site no longer exists.

Dave (or anyone) - is the site coming back on-line, maybe at a
new URL?


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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:15:12 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:29:54 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:43:21 -0500
 >Subject: The Drake Equation

 >When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation

Dear Eduardo and List:

Yes, but the Drake Equation is an attempt to put numbers to the
problem, not just raw speculation.  Many things have changed
since the original Drake Equation was proposed.  Frank Drake,
himself, outlined some of these in an interesting article or
interview, I forget which, in the Atlantic Monthly a couple
years ago.

For instance, the role of a single, large Moon, and the role of
contintental drift, only speculation in the 50's but now
accepted as an ongoing process.  Lots of things change, and
these can be added, or subtracted, as time goes on.

What new evidence is there that interstellar travel could be
available, which was not in the original Drake Equation, and can
you put numbers on this possibility?

Back to you ---

Clear skies,
Bob Young








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

               CPR-Canada News: Formation at Lowville, Ontario

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:49:20 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:32:58 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Formation at Lowville, Ontario


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310

November 14, 1999


Crop Circle Formation at Lowville, Ontario

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


Preliminary Report - November 14

Still another crop circle formation, the 20th reported this year
in Canada, has been found near Lowville, Ontario. Reported by
Rob McConnell of the X-Zone radio show and researcher Patrick
Cross.

First discovered October 22, the formation consists of a
"teardrop" shape and other "diamond" shapes, in 8' tall corn.

Patrick reports that he and fellow researchers who went into the
formation on the ground, experienced various equipment
anomalies, such as camera failure inside the formation, EMF
(electromagnetic frequency) emissions and odd compass movements
(three compasses moved the same amount at the same time) as well
as an unusual "humming" sound which seemed to emanate from
nowhere in particular, just "all around" (reminiscent of the
Tennessee, USA formation from earlier this year). Also a white
cobweb-like material found under some of the flattened stalks.
This case, while the formation itself is different, is very
similar to the more random appearing pattern found at Lowville
last year (found October 17), also in tall corn plants. The
formation was also investigated by the local RCMP (police) who
reportedly collected samples for testing at a nearby lab (we are
in the process of getting more information on this and what
their findings are, if any). Not known yet at this point if
formation is still there, or if additional sampling can be done
for the BLT Research Team (Dr. W. C. Levengood).

More details when available.

_____________________________


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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:33:38 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:53:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:16 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >But here's the second thing I've learned from this debate.
 >People are taking positions that are suspiciously related to
 >their position on UFOs. Peter, a skeptic, and Dennis -- who
 >gives most of his energy these days to skeptical arguments --
 >argue that intelligent life might be rare in the universe.
 >Weighing in more or less on the other side are David Rudiak,
 >who's often seen here supporting the Roswell alien-crash
 >scenario;

Maybe this didn't come across clearly in my posts, but put me on
the side of those who think intelligent life might be
comparatively rare, surely not a conclusive endpoint to
biological evolution.  But one must be careful with what is
meant by "comparatively rare."  Comparatively rare could mean
that only one in a million stellar systems evolved intelligent
life.  But there are so many stars in our galaxy, that still
would amount to several hundred thousand stellar systems where
intelligent life has evolved. If only one in a billion develops
intelligent life, that is still several hundred places that have
developed intelligent life.

Thus despite long odds, there could still be a sizable number of
other galactic civilizations.  That would be especially true if
even one or two of them are very old and expansionist, having
gone off and populated many millions of other stellar systems
other than their own.

When I do my own version of the Drake equation, I get something
like this.  Roughly 5% of all stars are similar to the sun,
being long-lived and hot enough to sustain evolution for at
least four or five billion years, sufficient time for
intelligence to evolve, judging by our own experience.  Solar
systems, from recent discoveries, seem to be very common.  I
would guess at least half of those Earth-like suns will have
solar systems of one kind or another, and maybe 1% to 10% of
these will have suitable environments in which primitive life
could gain a foothold.

It is extremely impressive how quickly primitive bacterial life
arose on Earth under very hostile conditions.  Oceans filled
with organic material are now believed to be part of the package
in the accretion of rocky protoplanets in solar systems, the
result of massive bombardment of these protoplanets by cometary
material.  Thus planets like Mars and Venus early in their
histories are now suspected of also having oceans of water with
the same organic material as Earth.

If it turns out other places in our solar system also developed
simple life, such as Mars or Europa, then this would virtually
clinch the argument that bacterial lifeforms will almost
inevitably arise in the formation of a very sizeable fraction of
all stellar systems.

That being said, it is still a very large leap from bacteria to
trilobites.  If Mars ever had bacterial life, evolution was
pretty much stopped dead when Mars froze up and dried up about a
billion years after it was formed.  Venus overheated and lost
its oceans.

Earth was of the right size and distance from the sun to
maintain its atmosphere and oceans, a situation, however, that
should be very common in other solar systems.  The major
stumbling block in the development of complex lifeforms seemed
to be developing the basic prototypes of eucharyotic cells, the
nucleated cells that make up all higher lifeforms here on Earth.
That took about another 3 billion years, which has also much
impressed me.  While bacteria might be almost a sure thing in
many environments, something along the lines of the eucharyotic
building block does not seem to be.  I could see that on many
temporate planets very much like Earth, that life would stay
forever simple and bacterial.

But once the building block was there, the march to higher and
more complex lifeforms here on Earth has been comparatively
quick and relentless.  Trilobites to humans has all happened in
only about a half billion years, or little more than 10% of the
Earth's history.

If I were to put what I think are conservative numbers on this,
maybe 1% of Earthlike planets make the jump from bacteria to
trilobites, and another 1% of these make the jump from
trilobytes to intelligent life.  All in all that is very roughly
1 in 10 million stellar systems that would evolve intelligent
life -- long odds -- but still several tens of thousands of such
places in the galaxy.

These odds are comparable to those of winning the lottery.  I no
more believe that bacterial life inevitably leads to intelligent
life than I believe that everybody who buys a lottery ticket
wins the lottery.

I think my numbers are probably safely on the conservative side,
yet they still point to a lot of intelligent life out there.
Most SETI scientitists come up with similar numbers, despite
their general antipathy to the subject of UFOs.  Belief or
nonbelief in UFOs has little to do with this.  A rather rabid
UFO debunker like Carl Sagan still felt from running his own
numbers that complex life and intelligent life was probably
abundant out there.

My bones to pick with the likes of Stacy and Brookesmith are
their generally simplistic, illogical, and often inaccurate and
unscientific arguments along the lines that the only way to
evolve intelligent life is the way it happened on Earth.  Not
only is Earth supposedly unique, they have even argued that our
solar system is somehow unique.  These arguments are rubbish at
present, since there is no statistical data base of knowledge
from which to draw.  They are rehashing little more than the
highly conservative speculation of others and trying to dress it
up as scientific orthodoxy.  In doing so, they are revealing
their own philosophical biases, or "religious beliefs" if you
will.

David Rudiak







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

             UFO Shapes & Balloons [was: Re: British Ufology...

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:31:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:27:37 -0500
Subject: UFO Shapes & Balloons [was: Re: British Ufology...


 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
 >the triangles before the 1980s?

 >The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >science fiction.

This is just my opinion. I believe triangular UFOs are all human
prototypes, and their shape might serve multiple purposes:

1. To make it look more or less like a plane.

2. To allow for standard flight mechanisms to be activated in
case something goes wrong with the main (gravitational, etc.)
propulsion and maneuvering systems.

3. To enhance its stealth capabilities (remember the sharp
angles of the relatively new stealth black fighter).

The early banana/boomerang shaped UFOs might have been also
prototypes which have been discarded, so we don't see them
around anymore.

In the web page Today@Nasa, Nov. 12 issue, the following news
were published:

 >A DIFFERENT ROUTE TO HIGH ALTITUDE RESEARCH

 >NASA is developing Ultra Long Duration Balloon technology to
 >provide scientists an effective way to conduct high-altitude
 >research without the expense of a rocket launch. Recently a
 >pumpkin-shaped balloon half the size of a football field flew as
 >a precursor to the full-sized vehicle that will be 10 times
 >larger in volume. The balloons will stay aloft at altitudes of
 >up to 115,000 feet (35 kilometers) for as long as 100 days while
 >carrying more than a ton of astronomy, remote sensing, and other
 >types of scientific instruments. They will fly 15 miles higher
 >than typical passenger airplanes, above 99 percent of the
 >Earth's atmosphere.

My suspicious mind immediately thinks that this also serves a
dual purpose.

1. The sincere scientific reasons given in the article.

2. A new argument to debunk future sightings in sensitive areas
of the US.

3. To reduce the attention paid to those sightings by making
people become familiar with big, roung shapes floating in the
air. So many sightings will go unreported, 'cause people will
immediately think, "Oh, another weather baloon". Things haven't
changed much since Roswell, have they? I call that "lack of
creativity".

Do not be surprised if they just put balloons out there with no
instruments whatsoever, and make sure all the news announce the
presence of the baloons.

Oh, Lord. Where did the innocent trust that I once had in my
youth? Beam me up, anyone!

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                   Astrobiology [was: Re: Are we Alone? ]

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:56:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:43:43 -0500
Subject: Astrobiology [was: Re: Are we Alone? ]


 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:38:29 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >For example, in 1976 the scientific discovery of life on Mars
 >was made.  That year on U.S.A.'s Independence Day, the Viking 1
 >made a soft landing on Mars.  On board was an experiment that
 >was designed to detect organic life that would react chemically
 >in much the same way as organic life on Earth would.  The result
 >was positive.  Unfortunately NASA which sent out Viking 1
 >continues to overlook this discovery even though all its initial
 >doubts have been addressed.  The September/October 1999 issue of
 >UFO Magazine (UK) has an interview with Dr. Gilbert Levin (pages
 >8 and 9), the frustrated NASA scientist who made the discovery
 >of life on Mars.  His papers can be found at the web sites
 >below.

Not to mention the scheduled experiment designed by Wolf
Vishniac, which didn't make it into Viking because of a sudden
"budget cut" (3 out of 4 biological experiments were sent to
Mars). Vishniac, though dissapointed, decided to test his
experiment (the Wolf Trap) in Antartica, but he vanished only a
month after. Makes you go... hmmmm...

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                 UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' [Was: Re: British

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:17:40 -0500
Subject: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons' [Was: Re: British


 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 00:23:54 -0500
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >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: Thu, 04 Nov 99 13:44:32 PST

 >>>Even in the early stages of the phenomenon in 1947, opinion
 >>>polls show that a large percentage of Americans believed that
 >>>flying saucers were something to do with the Russians or secret
 >>>weapons.

 >>Which was natural enough.  It's what Hynek (whom you would do
 >>well to reread -- or maybe read) calls the "escalation of
 >>hypotheses."  Society, just like the individual witness, went --
 >>reasonably -- to what seemed the least extraordinary and most
 >>familiar interpretation.  It was only after such interpretations
 >>failed that society went to other approaches to explain the
 >>reports.

 >What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
 >appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
 >must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
 >since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

And just how would you expect the appearance to change? Would a
Russian secret weapon necessarily look different to an
extraterrestrial craft? As witnesses would have no idea what
either looked like there is no reason why the descriptions
should change. In fact there was quite a long period when both
"explanations" overlapped.

I'd be interested to know what Mark Cashman thinks *is* the
unchanging appearance of a "true UFO".

In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
the triangles before the 1980s? Why does no-one now see classic
flying saucers with "conning towers"? Whatever happened to
Arnold's croissant- shaped objects? Was the Socorro craft an
unsuccesful prototype which was seldom seen again?

The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
science fiction.


--

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:55:06 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:34:56 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >I have had numerous debates with science writer Ian Ridpath and
 >although we disagree on many points I have always found him to
 >be a perfect gentleman. As you well know, last year I was
 >invited to debate the subject with sceptics, including scientist
 >David Hughes from Sheffield University, when we appeared on a
 >live television show, so, I am not afraid to debate with them.

And we wiped the floor with you then - you even had to resort to
deliberately misinforming the viewers about the Pope situation -
and we'll wipe the floor with you again. [Tim-type "Nyah, nyah,
nyah, nyah-nyah" removed - Perhaps this one needs to go to
_your_ List Tim?--ebk]

I hope the pay is good......

Love and kisses,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

              Re: Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 15:51:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:54:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 14:43:46 -0600
 >Subject: Poll - Americans Think Alien Life Coming Here
 >From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>

 >posted on the forteana list

 >Thursday November 11, 5:20 am Eastern Time
 >Company Press Release
 >SOURCE: Dateline:USA

 >Americans Think Intelligent Alien Life Coming Here, Poll
 >Shows

<snip>

 >Producers of the cable television show said the national survey
 >was inspired by a number of current developments: the continuing
 >success of the billion dollar 'Star Wars' empire, the production
 >of international alien invasion bestseller 'Battlefield Earth'
 >into a major motion picture -- starring John Travolta as the
 >alien villain -- and the launch of the Mars Polar Lander.

 >Dr. Yoji Kondo, astrophysicist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight
 >Center, told Dateline:USA that we "can't assume that the
 >thinking processes of another intelligent species on another
 >planet, revolving around an alien sun in another galaxy, would
 >be sure they'd even think it worthwhile to attack and plunder a
 >planet like Earth."

 >Astronomer, physicist and "Star Wars" author Kevin J. Anderson
 >contended that despite the views of many exobiologists "who is
 >to say that totally alien forms of life -- not based on our
 >carbon-cycle -- cannot be born in a sea of magnetic fields on
 >the surface of a star, or that civilizations of carbon-based
 >life similar to ours could not develop under oceans, flying high
 >in clouds, or burrowing underground?"

 >Virtually all the respondents to the survey agreed that alien
 >beings from other worlds will not 'look like us'. Opinions on
 >extraterrestrial shapes and sizes ran the gamut of tear or pear
 >shaped creatures and furred, taloned giants to winged lizards.

 >Adding the generally accepted footnote, Dr. Gregory Benford,
 >physics professor at UC Irvine, told the survey, "There are
 >certainly not just aliens, but intelligent aliens."

 >SOURCE: Dateline:USA

Lord save us from the astronomers who hardly qualify as experts
on Earthling behavior no less that of aliens.

Note the crazy notion of either hostile or lovable and that they
can't look like us.

Even worse is the totally ludicrous comment about crossing
millions of light years! The Milky Way is only 80,000 light
years across.

Within 54 light years there are 1000 stars of which 46 are
similar to the sun and likely to have planets though some are
a billion years older than the sun.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                Exagerated Demise Reports, McCoy, GT & Hobbes

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 15:06:44 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:02:07 -0500
Subject: Exagerated Demise Reports, McCoy, GT & Hobbes


Last night, a friend thought he'd lost a friend.  This
afternoon, I found out his friend lived.  So without further
adieu, let me tell you why this post.

See, I have been working on a book which describes my life as a
possible abductee (I really don't know what the hell has
happened to me except that something has, happened that is),
anyway, the writing is a catharsis as you know, and memories
flood back into the brain as one writes it.  I don't know if
this is better than hippy noses, but it's sure a lot harder,
cause aint nobody there to say, "There, there, little boy, it's
just the memory and not the real thing ...  so just relax,
there, there."

My back has been bothering me greatly, so I decided earlier to
knock off the writing and go get some sack time.  I fell asleep
and had a very vivid dream.  It was really a dream because as
usual, I realized I was having one.  It's something I have
almost always learned.  Way in the back of my head somewhere
there is this knowledge that this is "just a dream," so hang
tough until it's over or you wake up.  This aint one a them
"real" dreams.  Relax and try to change the subject of the
dream, like maybe me doin the nasty with Pia Zadora. Woof!

But this time that knowledge, while still there, was forgotten
in the intensity of the dream.  See, I was back in the house
where I grew up, in the Bronx, when the Bronx was the country
and life was so wonderful and pure.  I was hearing music.  It
was the next door neighbor's house, where a band (one of those
young high school type bands) was playing at some sort of
ceremony.  Must've been someone graduating.  I remember (in the
dream) that it was raining outside, but in spite of this,
everyone was stoically watching and listening to the boys play,
and brother, was it lousy music).  And I was curious and wanted
a better look, so I ran upstairs to get into my old bedroom, the
bedroom which I loved the most, it was in the corner of the
house and it was small and cozy.  And it offered a better view
of the proceedings.

But when I got to the top of the stairs, there was nothing
there, no furniture, no nothing.  And no room either.  Just a
landing, a bleak and empty landing at the top of the stairs,
without carpeting even.  So I just stood there and began sobbing
with a loss so great I cannot describe it.  I then realized that
I wasn't really there, and neither was that wonderful and cozy
brick home in the Northeast Bronx, at least not the way it used
to be.

So I cried, in my dream.  And woke up doing the same and scaring
the shit outa my wife. I kept saying, "I'm not there anymore.
I'm not there anymore," and proceeded to sob like a lost child.
And I was indeed, a lost child.  I was five and I wasn't in my
house, my house was gone.

Then the thought popped into my head, "My gosh, who's gonna take
care of my house now that we are not in it?" And started sobbing
even harder.

What prompted this mail, is that before I had this dream, which
thankfully my poor brain segued into, I was dreaming about those
eyes so similar to cats' eyes.  Usually that kind of dream leads
to terror and learning something else about what happened to me.
But this time, the knowledge that this was gonna be a buster of
a dream, one of those which brings back terrible memories, came
to my rescue.

Well, not really, what came to my rescue was that Hobbes, GT's
cat, had died.  That thought popped inside my head and I said to
myself, "Hey, you Gripple-addled maroon, the reason you are
thinking of that mantis face with the lizard eyes is that GT's
cat passed on yesterday.  So dream about sumthin else, will ya!"

So I did, my old house in the Bronx, which I just finished
writing a background chapter on.  And look what happened.

This has been happening ever since I started writing about my
experiences.  Woof! I gotta be honest, if, unlike GT McCoy, if I
don't find a little happiness after all this catharsis, I am
gonna be one ticked off little puppy, uh, kitten, whatever.

GT, it's all Hobbes' fault.  Don't give the little bastard any
catnip today and tell him why!  Tell him first, not to scare the
hell out of mommy and daddy McCoy and second, have his eyes stay
the hell outa my dreams.

Jim Mortellaro

PS: GT, I am having a double Gripple Dripple con gas in celebration
        of Hobbes' return as the prodigal sire of Mr. and Mrs. Hobbes,
        ne' McCoy and fam...







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                 Russian Booster Controversy Really Heats Up

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 15:38:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:05:10 -0500
Subject: Russian Booster Controversy Really Heats Up


Thanks to Ron Schaffner who passed along notice of the following
article

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

COPIED FROM THE OREGONIIAN on line - Sept. 24, 1999
Friday, September 24, 1999

Big debate falls from the skies

A strange light seen over Oregon is classified as space junk,
but UFO trackers believe otherwise

By Beth Quinn, Correspondent, The Oregonian

GRANTS PASS -- To white-water rafter Margaret Bradford, the
strange light blazing in the heavens high above the Rogue River
wilderness made for memorable stargazing.

"There was a bright light in the sky that looked like an airline
light coming at you. It got brighter and brighter and brighter
and then just faded out," she said.

To North American Aerospace Defense Command inside Cheyenne
Mountain Air Station in Colorado Springs, Colo., the bright
light was strictly routine. U.S. Space Command tracked it as No.
25,761 in the catalog of the man-made objects orbiting the
planet, the auxiliary motor of a Russian SL-12 rocket booster
re-entering the Earth's atmosphere at 17,000 mph.

But to Peter Davenport of Seattle's National UFO Reporting
Center and Nevada radio talk-show host Art Bell, what fell to
Earth over Southern Oregon at 9:30 p.m. Sept. 1 was big news and
evidence of a government cover-up.

"Something's going on out there -- something big," Bell told the
9 million listeners who tuned in to "Coast to Coast AM" that
night, urging eyewitnesses to fax or e-mail their descriptions
of the sighting.

"I'm particularly intrigued by this allegation or assertion that
military jets were going out of the Portland area apparently
headed south," Davenport said as he played outtakes of messages
from unidentified callers to his UFO hot line. "It's going to be
very difficult to force this one into the space junk box."

Three weeks later, Bell and Davenport continue to push a UFO
explanation of the Sept. 1 incident on late-night radio,
generating phone calls, faxes and e-mails to Air Force bases
across the country.

But officials at the 142nd Fighter Wing at Portland
International Airport and the North American Aerospace Defense
Command inside Cheyenne Mountain are sticking to their stories.

"We didn't scramble on a UFO," says Mona Spenst Jordan of the
Oregon Air National Guard.

"People are watching the skies," says Petty Officer Andy Karalis
of NORAD. "They see what they want to see. They see what they
want to believe."

In Davenport's three appearances on "Coast to Coast" so far this
month, he and Bell have focused their suspicions on two aspects
of the Sept. 1 incident: the fact that F-15 fighters were in the
skies over Oregon that night and the fact that in the first week
of September four separate sightings of strange lights in the
skies over the United States and Australia were attributed by
NORAD to Russian rocket debris.

"They're lying to us," Davenport told The Oregonian. "My
impression at this time, based on the evidence available to me,
is that we're not getting an accurate story from either NORAD or
the Air National Guard."

As evidence, Davenport points to 23 sighting reports from
Northern California and Oregon left on his Web site about the
Sept. 1 light that describe from one to seven objects glowing
white, orange or red, often with a flaming tail. In addition, he
refers to -- and plays cuts from -- another 16 sighting reports
from Northern California and Oregon left on his telephone hot
line. Several of the recorded reports include claims of multiple
objects maneuvering in formation or changing direction.

But military officials have their own evidence of what went on
that night.

For the 142nd Fighter Wing, the evidence includes a September
flying schedule laid out months in advance that shows six F-15
Eagles set for an 8:30 p.m. training flight of fighter maneuvers
over the Pacific and aerial refueling over the coast between
Lincoln City and Astoria. Jordan says four single and one pair
of fighter jets took off from Portland between 8:28 p.m. and
8:40 p.m. and landed as two singles and two pairs between 9:06
p.m. and 9:30 p.m.

"It's the same night that people saw something in the sky, and
they put two and two together," Jordan says. "However, I know
for a fact that our jets were flying night training missions and
that we were not scrambled on anything or anybody that we
couldn't identify."

Although two of the fighter wing's 18 F-15 fighters remain on
continuous alert -- 24 hours a day, 365 days a year -- ready to
intercept any unknown aircraft entering U.S. airspace from the
Canadian border to Northern California, Jordan says the 142nd
has never scrambled to intercept a UFO.

"If we have ever been scrambled, we have always identified every
single object," she says.

At NORAD headquarters in Colorado, officials make no such claim.

Karalis, who handles thousands of e-mail queries each year about
unusual lights in the sky, often determines the object was a
meteor or other natural phenomenon.

"We only track man-made objects," he says.

On Sept. 1, NORAD was tracking the auxiliary motor of a Russian
Proton rocket that was launched Feb. 28 from the Baikonur space
center in Kazakhstan to boost the Raduga 1 satellite into orbit.
The Russian boosters came down within days, but the motor --
"about the size of a propane tank that you have for your gas
grill," Karalis says -- was scheduled to splash down in the
Pacific south of Alaska at 0420 Zulu -- Greenwich Mean Time --
on Sept. 2.

It missed.

Instead, Space Catalogue No. 25,761 stayed aloft for another 10
minutes, traveling as far south as Oregon before re-entering the
Earth's atmosphere at 9:30 p.m. Pacific time on Sept. 1, which
is 0430 Sept. 2 in the military's Zulu time.

That same day, another bit of Russian space junk let loose
during a space walk from the Mir space station streaked across
the skies above Sydney, Australia. And on Sept. 7, two more
Russian rockets were the explanation NORAD provided for the
unusual lights seen at 5:05 a.m. near Tampa, Fla.

"If we're to believe the Australian government and Cheyenne
Mountain, there have been four major Russian booster re-entries
in the past five days," Davenport told Bell that night.

Believe it, says Harvard University astrophysicist Jonathan
McDowell, whose Web site claims to detail every satellite launch
ever made or attempted, all man-made objects now orbiting Earth
and the current position of all known satellites in
geostationary orbit.

"It used to be that they'd launch one every three days," he
says. "They would always leave quite a big booster rocket in low
orbit that would re-enter after a few days."

Although these days the Russians launch only about 30 satellites
a year, their launch style still brings a periodic rain of
debris.

"They tend to come in spurts. They kind of get their team up
there to the launch site and launch a few off," McDowell says.

According to NORAD, Russia launched three satellites on Aug. 18,
two on Aug. 26 and four on Sept. 6, all with boosters that
re-entered Earth's atmosphere in the following days.

But the Russians aren't the only ones leaving orbiting junk
above the Earth. Rocket debris from the United States, India and
the European Space Agency has re-entered the atmosphere in the
past month, including bits of rockets that exploded in 1972 and
1994, a U.S. booster launched in 1993 and a U.S. Navy navigation
satellite launched in 1964.

And the blazing rain of space debris will get heavier -- and
maybe a whole lot scarier -- in the months to come.

For one thing, the sun is reaching the maximum of its 11-year
solar cycle, increasing the solar winds, which in turn push
against Earth's atmosphere and make the atmosphere more dense
and increase the friction against objects traveling through it.
Atmospheric friction is what slows satellites and, ultimately,
brings them down.

"Every 11 years, everything falls out of the sky from that
altitude," McDowell says.

The biggest piece of space junk still up there is the
now-abandoned 100-ton Mir space station, which the Russians hope
to bring down over the Pacific Ocean in a controlled re-entry.

On late-night radio, Art Bell is already speculating about the
problems Mir's re-entry might cause.

And in Grants Pass, white-water enthusiast Bradford is still
marveling about the strange blaze of light in the wilderness
sky.

"We saw a satellite, shooting stars and something we couldn't
identify," she says. "It was pretty awesome."

http://www.oregonlive.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/99/09/st092402.html
--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 02:26:40 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:16:00 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:32:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >Somehow we seem to be doing neither.  Tsk, tsk.  Chame, chame,
 >chame. Does not _one_ own anything of greater value than an
 >opinion out there?  Or are you all just fishing.  I dream of
 >someone with a great deal of money developing an institute of
 >science whose only task is to determine the truth about the UFO
 >conundrum.

<snipped rest>


Dear Jim,


Both Laurence Rockefeller and Jim Bigelow have devoted part of
their money to research into Ufology. Scorn befell them.
That's Ufology.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                 Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re:

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:59:53 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:16:43 -0500
Subject: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re:


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 21:06:17 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 13:12:33 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:29:58 -0500
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Here's a relevant quote from "Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage? The
 >>Permanent Revolution in the Earth Sciences" by Mike Davis, which appeared
 >>in The Anomalist 5 (p. 119):

 >>"The neocatastrophist response [to the notion of Darwin's thin wedge and
 >>the finetuning of natural selection] is scathing. Stephen Jay Gould and
 >>Niles Eldredge are cruel but honest when they insist that mass extinction
 >>really means 'evolution by lottery' and 'survival of the luckiest.'

 >This is just semantics.  "Survival of the fittist" has always
 >meant "evolution by lottery" or "survival of the luckiest."
 >Those organisms "luckiest" to have those characteristics that
 >enable them to survive better in a given environment are more
 >likely to pass those characteristics on to their progeny.
 >Eventually populations with those characteristics come to
 >dominate.

No, it's not just semantics. It's a short quote taken out of a
larger context, which is Davis's article, which I've now offered
to send you a copy of four times.

The reason why you think it's semantics is because the "two" of
you, so to speak, aren't talking about the same thing, something
I've been trying to convey, without much success, short of
keying in the entire article and all 149 footnotes. You're
looking through a microscope, whereas Davis is looking at the
larger, emerging picture in which it is the Earth itself that
has won the lottery, and illuminates several new contingent
factors for asserting that this would appear to be the case. A
rough analogy might be to think of it as the discussion of the
evolution of an entire planet. What he does is bump the Gaia
argument up another notch or two, applying it not only to the
solar system as a whole, but to several other, more distant, but
equally contingent and contributing factors. You can agree with
Davis or not -- but I don't see how you can read the article as
a whole and dismiss it as semantics. It's quite a brilliant
piece of exposition, with much food for thought about many
subjects. And that's now the fifth time I've offered you a copy
of same.

 >>Extinction events ruthlessly reset all ecological clocks...Hence Darwin,
 >>like Laplace, must submit to revision by chaos and historical contingency."

 >Nothing has basically changed here.  Instead of generally
 >gradual environmental changes, extinction events represent
 >drastic environmental changes in a very short period of time.
 >Under such new enironomental conditions, some organisms will be
 >better adapted to survive such stress, whereas others are
 >stressed beyond their capacity to survive and become extinct.
 >It's just a very time-compressed version of the usual
 >gradualistic "survival of the fittest."


No, it's not. You're looking through your microscope again and
arguing after the event. The point Davis and others are making
is that mass extinction events are chaotic and contingent in
their individual manifestation (but perhaps locally cyclical
overall). Does anyone here know what is meant by contingent? It
means totally random and accidental, R & A in terms of the
nature, size, and timing of the event.

Take the impact event 65 million years ago. You (or any of us)
can only hypothesize anything about what happened because we won
a cosmic lottery -- a collision event just big enough to wipe
out the dinosaurs and clear the way for mammals, ie, us. How
evolution actually works is only part of the picture. If the
object that collided with us had been much larger, say, by a
factor of two, three, or four, we wouldn't be having this
conversation.

Moreover, there is nothing inherently mammalian that was better
(or worse) adapted to a chance, cataclysmic environmental change
that could have had any number of parameters other than the
exact ones it did, including "timing," a concept which you seem
to have a hard time grasping. Here's how Davis puts it:

"Species interactions play little in determining survival in the
aftermath of great bolide impacts; and the major watersheds in
the evolution of life do not work by orthodox natural selection.
(For example, the decisive 'adaptive advantage' of mammals
during the K/T catastrophe simply may have been their
concentration in circumpolar regions least affected by the
low-latitude Chicxulub impact.)"

In other words, the survival and subsequent predominance of
mammals was more a matter of contingency than anything having to
do with evolutionary forces. Similarly, the reason why thousands
of people weren't incinerated by the Tgunska (sp?) event in this
century, or, rather why millions survived it, had nothing to do
with genes, but everything to do with contingency. Fortunately,
whatever it was came down in the relatively uninhabited Russian
tundra. It could just as easily, or contingently, crashed into
Manhattan or Tokyo Bay. And it could just as easily
(contingently) been much larger than it was.

 >Given the hypothesized asteroid collision that wiped out the
 >dinosaurs, the lesser mammals (and birds) happened to be better
 >adapted to the situation.  In a time when the sunlight would be
 >cut off and cold descended on the planet, warm-blooded mammals
 >and birds covered with insulating hair and feathers were better
 >able to cope.  Mammals living in underground lairs were likewise
 >better protected from the initial rain of fire, followed by the
 >drastic drop in temperatures.   Being smaller than most
 >dinosaurs, they required much less food and could scavenge off
 >the decaying masses of vegetation and flesh around them, long
 >enough apparently until the air cleared several years later and
 >growth began again.

Gee, Dave, it's almost like you were there. How could the birds
and mammals be "better adapted" [sic] to a situation that hadn't
happened yet? For that matter, given that both birds and mammals
survived, why aren't birds as evolutionarily evolved today as we
are? After all, they've had the same amount of time to work at
it.

And how "convenient" (ie, contingent) that the dinosaurs were as
large as they were when the K/T bolide impacted so that the
birds and mammals could feast on the carcasses thereof "until
the air cleared several years later and growth began again."
(Now, at least, we know where vultures are coming from.) And how
convenient (ie, contingent), that the birds and mammals had
already evolved to the state that they had when the K/T impact
occurred!

<snip>

 >>Evolution by catastrophe, Michael Rampino adds, also entails speciation
 >>through a different process than the classic gradualist mechanisms of
 >>geographic isolation and adaptive change. Catastrophe replaces the linear
 >>temporal creep of microevolution with non-linear bursts of macroevolution.

 >Extinction catastrophe's here on Earth are comparatively rare,
 >every one hundred to two hundred million years, give or take.

And how old is the Earth? About 4 billion years old. How many
potential extinction events does that represent?

 >Speciation and increased complexity is certainly going on
 >between catastrophe's in a generally gradualist way.  It's true
 >that in periods of relatively constant environment, organisms
 >can become so well-adapted, that long periods of relative stasis
 >in evolution can take place (at least when looking at
 >macroscopic morphological changes, not necessarily biochemical
 >ones).  Smaller environmental stresses (changing climate, e.g.)
 >can act as prods to evolution and force change through
 >adaptation.
 >

But it's not adaptation. It's contingent survival based on
contingent circumstances. What is there about the concept of
contingency that you don't understand? Survival of a particular
species and its subsequent evolution into an intelligent
lifeform is _not_ a given. You're talking about a contingent
collision that some species of life just happened to survive on
this planet because it occurred when and where it did. Nothing
in the process of microevolution could have affected,
determined, or ameliorated the extent of the totally contingent
event itself. The latter could have been large enough to
extinguish all life on the planet. It could have been large
enough to destroy the entire planet. It could have been a grain
of sand that plopped harmlessly into the ocean. It was a totally
contingent event (I can't type any slower, but I can use caps if
you prefer), and but one among many (resulting in Earth's
cumulative history to date) that leaves us where we are today.

Why is this so hard for anyone to understand? Evolution didn't
make the planet it happened on, it certainly had no control over
its history (in terms of external events), and it isn't in and
of itself a guaranteed success story. An elephant is a more
complex organism than a bacterium, true, but there is no
evolutionary law that necessarily dictates that complexity
results in an intelligent lifeform capable of space travel.
Without addressing the issue of why bacteria, after billions of
years, steadfastly remain bacteria.

 >Catastrophes may lead to "non-linear bursts of macroevolution,"
 >but that is only because the "temporal creep of microevolution"
 >has been going on for long extended stretches between
 >catastrophes.  All that happens during extinction events is that
 >competition is removed from various environmental niches,
 >allowing other species to eventually move into them.  This does
 >not happen overnight, but can take millions of more years of
 >gradualistic adaptation.  Giraffes did not suddenly replace
 >brontosaurs as tall plant grazers the day after doomsday.

We're happy and comforted to hear from the expert on everything
that "all that happens during extinction events is that
competition is removed from various environmental niches,
allowing other species to eventually move into them." For a
minute there, I thought extinction events might refer to the
potential extinction of birds and mammals, too (not to mention,
possibly, all environmental niches), in which case, no doubt,
worms would have evolved into intelligent lifeforms in the wake
of the K/T catastrophe, given enough time.

"All" that happens during extinction events, indeed! As if you
were there.

 >I think it's utter nonsense to claim that the slower processes
 >have been somehow replaced by catastrophes.  The replacement of
 >older extinct species by newer ones after a catastrophe does not
 >happen suddenly, but is an extended evolutionary process in its
 >own right.

Who, frankly, cares what you think is utter nonsense or not,
especially when you've persistently missed the point to begin
with, and consistently misconstrued it in the bargain? I don't
remember ever suggesting "that the slower processes have been
somehow replaced by catastrophes." Or that "the replacement of
older extinct species by newer ones after a catastrophe" is
somehow sudden.

What you don't understand is that there is no process of  slow
evolution that leads inexorably to intelligent life: cosmic
catastrophes aren't "needed" to replace anything; they're simply
outside, contingent events that ultimately resulted in life as
we know it. I don't remember ever saying anything about whether
species replacement following a contingent catastrophe was
sudden or not, but what if I did?

 >Despite a number of believed mass extinction events in Earth's
 >history, the big picture still remains that increasingly complex
 >organisms continued to evolve beyond each of the extinction
 >events.  Each extinction event thus selected among a new
 >population of more complex organisms than the one that preceded
 >it.

You don't have a clue as to what the big picture is. Extinction
events don't "select," dammit, they happen contingently. How
many times do I have to say it? They don't "select" to destroy
the dinosuars and permit the birds and mammals to survive
because of any "adaptive" tendencies or anything else. They
simply _happen_, as does everything else that follows.

 >To put it another way, there is no evidence that any of the
 >extinction events made the organisms simpler, or caused the
 >overall biota to "de-evolve."  Rather, the surviving species of
 >each extinction were still more complex than the surviving
 >species of the previous mass extinction.  Overall complexity of
 >life continued to slowly "ratchet up" between extinction events.

No one has ever even remotely suggested that mass-extinction
events caused the overall biota to "de-evolve," you
superannuated dolt. What has been suggested, among other
complexities (read the article or don't) is that you either
survive or you don't. Local evolution ain't got nothing to do
with it, except after the fact.

 >If anything, so-called "evolution by catastrophe" merely
 >underscores that once the basic templates of complex life are in
 >place, the march to higher complexity seems relentless, not to
 >be undone by even repeated mass extinction events.


Yadda, yadda. Like you were there and contingency had nothing to
do with it. And as if we all routinely and automatically
survived those periodically troublesome mass extinction events
as if they were no more than a glancing blow to the nose. Sure,
we may have been bloodied a few times, but, hey, intelligent
life will triumph in the end, trust me! Evolution is (glacially)
at work. And what works here will work trillions of times
throughout the universe, or at least millions of times.

We don't need no stinking contingency! In fact, we don't even
know what contingency means. So there!

And speaking of your much-vaunted, relentless "march to higher
complexity" that can't "be undone," I've now offered to send you
a copy of the Davis article something like five or six times.
What, exactly, are you so terrified about in refusing same?

If you prefer, give your address to Greg Sandow and I'll mail it
to him and he can pass it along.

In the meantime, the only cowardly purveyor of semantics around
here is you.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                         UFO*BC Website Update 11-99

From: UFO*BC <david_pengilly@dccnet.com>
Date: 14 Nov 1999 21:45:27 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:18:05 -0500
Subject: UFO*BC Website Update 11-99

We have recently updated our website - http://ufobc.org
The following items are linked from our Homepage, under
"What's New"

1) Coming Events
  - Crop Circle Lecture by Ron Russell on December 4, 1999!
  - The best crop circle season ever! Don't miss it!
  - http://ufobc.org/events.htm

2) "Strange Lights Seen From Burnaby"
  - Snaps taken from a very interesting video!
  - http://ufobc.org/kiavideo.htm

3) "Contrail Controversy Comes to BC" by Paul Anderson
  - http://www.ufobc/contrails.htm

4) "Puppets on a String" by David Powell
  - http://ufobc.org/puppets.htm

5) "All Buckled Up" by Graham Conway
  - another strange experience, with physical evidence!
  - http://ufobc.org/buckled.htm

6) "22+ Witnesses Observe a UFO Larger than a Football Stadium"
  - Another superb report by Martin Jasek, from the Yukon!
  - http://ufobc.org/yukon/22index.htm

7) "Giscome, BC Sighting" reported by Richard Wilford
  - 1977 - a new addition to our Historical Section!
  - http://ufobc.org/giscome.htm

8) Recently Reported Sightings
  - 30 new sighting reports!
  - http://ufobc.org/recent.htm

***********************************************************

If you do not want to receive these updates, please reply
with your e-mail address and I will gladly remove your name
from the list. Thank you.

Dave Pengilly
dave@ufobc.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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 01:44:13 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:37:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:07:49 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:40:48 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

<snip>

 >In his article in The
 >Anomalist 5 referenced earlier, Mike Davis summarized Darwinian
 >evolution under a table called "Earth as a Closed System (Old
 >Axiomatic Framework)."

<snip>

 >The picture changes dramatically, however, when the Earth is
 >viewed as an open system, resulting in Davis's New Axiomatic
 >Framework.

Dennis, Mark, Anyone:

The most important imput into the Earth's "open system" is the
energy received from the Sun, which may cause such recurrent
events as Ice Ages; major climatic events, such as El Nino, etc.
Another outside energy input into the system are Cosmis Rays,
which are believed to play an important part in DNA mutation.

Comets, asteroids and a lot of other stuff flouting around in
the Solar System are also important inputs.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                  Astronomers Prove Extrasolar Planets Real

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:38:38
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:41:10 -0500
Subject: Astronomers Prove Extrasolar Planets Real


Source: Press release from Tennessee State University,

http://schwab.tsuniv.edu/t8/hd209458/pressrelease.html

Stig

***

Astronomers see shadow of planet cross distant star, proving that
extrasolar planets are real

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Nashville, Tenn., and Berkeley, Calif. - Astronomers have
witnessed for the first time a distant planet passing in front
of its star, providing direct and independent confirmation of
the existence of extrasolar planets that to date have been
inferred only from the wobble of their star.

"This is the first independent confirmation of a planet
discovered through changes in a star's radial velocity and
demonstrates that our indirect evidence for planets really is
due to planets," said Geoffrey Marcy, a professor of astronomy
at the University of California, Berkeley.

Marcy and his colleagues, Paul Butler of the Department of
Terrestrial Magnetism at the Carnegie Institution of Washington
in Washington, D.C., and Steve Vogt of UC Santa Cruz and Lick
Observatory, first detected a wobble in the star called HD
209458 on Nov. 5. Ascribing the wobble to a nearby planet, they
were able to estimate its orbit and approximate mass.

As with all new planets they detect, the team immediately
brought it to the attention of collaborator Greg Henry, an
astronomer at the Tennessee State University Center of
Excellence in Information Systems in Nashville. He conducts
research with several automatic telescopes at Fairborn
Observatory, a non-profit research foundation located in the
Patagonia Mountains of southern Arizona.

Henry turned one of his automated telescope on the star at the
time Marcy and Butler predicted the planet would cross the face
of the star if the planet's orbital plane were lucky enough to
carry it between Earth and the star. Until now, none of the 18
other extrasolar planets Marcy and Butler have discovered has
had its orbital plane oriented edge-on to Earth so that the
planet could be seen to transit the star, nor have any of the
other planets discovered by other researchers.

However, on Nov. 7, Henry observed a 1.7 percent dip in the
star's brightness. Because the planet orbits its star once every
3.523 days, he plans to repeat his observations on Sunday, Nov.
14.

"This planetary transit occurred at exactly the time predicted
from Marcy's observations, confirming absolutely the presence of
a companion," Henry said. "The amount of dimming of the star's
light during the transit also gives us the first-ever measure of
the size and density of an extrasolar planet. We've essentially
seen the shadow of the planet and used it to measure the
planet's size."

The star HD 209458 is 47 parsecs (153 light years or 1.4 million
billion kilometers or 859,000 billion miles) away in the
constellation of Pegasus, and is about the same age, color and
size as our own Sun. It is very near the star, 51 Pegasi, around
which the first extrasolar planet was discovered in 1995.

With the orbital plane of the planet known, the astronomers for
the first time could determine precisely the mass of the planet
and, from the size of the planet measured during transit, its
density.

Interestingly, while the planet's mass is only 63 percent of
Jupiter's mass, its radius is 60 percent bigger than that of
Jupiter. This fits with theories that predict a bloated planet
when, as here, the planet is very close to the star.

The density, about 0.2 grams per cubic centimeter, means it is a
gas giant like Jupiter. However, such gas giants could not have
formed at the distance this planet is from its star.

"This supports the theory that extrasolar planets very near
their star did not form where they are, but formed farther out
and migrated inward," Henry said.

Various groups around the world have been searching for planets
by looking for dimming of stars, or as Marcy says, "staring at
the sky and seeing if any star blinks." To date, none of these
searches has turned up a new planet.

"With this one, everything hangs together," Marcy said. "This is
what we've been waiting for."

The research was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the National Science Foundation, Sun
Microsystems and the Richard Lounsbery Foundation.


### Geoff Marcy can be reached at gmarcy@etoile.berkeley.edu or
(510) 642-1952

Greg Henry is at henry@schwab.tsuniv.edu or (615) 963-7017;

Paul Butler is at paul@dtm.ciw.edu or (202) 686-4370 x4401;

and Steve Vogt is at vogt@ucolick.org


--Bob Sanders, Senior Science Writer
--News Office, Public Affairs
--University of California
--2120 Oxford St. #4204
--Berkeley, CA 94720-4204
--PHONE: (510) 643-6998
--FAX: (510) 642-7289
--email: rls@pa.urel.berkeley.edu

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/index.html







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                NSW - Oz: Seven Fishermen & Video Of Sighting

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:55:54
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:44:05 -0500
Subject: NSW - Oz: Seven Fishermen & Video Of Sighting


Source: AFP via 'alt.ufo.reports' November 8.

Stig

***

From: frugar <frugar@yahqoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: Coffs Harbour NSW Australia Sighting
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 14:30:02 +1100

On Sun, 07 Nov 1999 11:53:44 GMT, Anth <aaridzon@bigpond.net.au>
wrote:

 >Has anyone heard of a sighting caught on video
 >near Coffs Harbour NSW, Australia this weekend?

Yeah this is what Clari reported.. I live in Coffs Harbour so
its very close.

SYDNEY, Nov 7 (AFP) - Seven professional fishermen said Sunday
they had video footage showing a possible UFO sighting off the
coast of northern New South Wales.

Tony Bell, 33, and six colleagues claim to have seen a strange
dome-shaped object when they were about six nautical miles off
the NSW coast near Coffs Harbour, north of Sydney.

"This thing just appeared. It was about 100 to 150 feet up in
the sky," he said, adding the object had a bright orange, shiny
appearance and seemed to keep coming closer to the two boats the
group were using.

"It would move closer, then move south of us, then move closer
again."

Bell asked one of the other fishermen to grab the video and
start filming.

"It was a flying ship for sure," he said. "You can see clearly
from the video that it was some sort of machine."

The fisherman have sent the video to the Melbourne-based,
privately-run National Space Centre.

Operations director Ross Dowe said he was waiting to examine the
footage, adding "it is definitely worth looking at".

"Looking at star charts, there is absolutely nothing that could
account for any light refraction of any planet or star activity
at all," Dowe said.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Time For A Cease Fire?

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:51:19 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:45:35 -0500
Subject: Time For A Cease Fire?

Hi,

Just a note to explain why you will not be getting a response
from me to the silly carping this list tolerates with disturbing
frequency. I explained a week ago that I will not be drawn into
endlessly repeating facts because certain people seem not to be
interested in believing my replies. Someone had to draw a line
somewhere. I did so in an effort to save everyone from getting
thoroughly fed up.

Clearly Ms Bruni did not heed that stated intention and has days
later fired back with many questions (most of which I have
already replied to as anyone will realise who re-reads the
debate).

I said in my last message - and remind now - that my decision
not to drag this pettiness out is in no way an indication I
could not refute all the nonsense this list seems to foster.  I
could - easily and at length. But will not, in deference to you
all - especially as when I do reply at length I get accused
(twice in recent weeks) of saying too much. As I cannot win
whatever I do then I will say nothing and see if that shuts
people up.

I am afraid I have far more important things to do than join in
these silly internet wars. If it pleases some out there to get
the 'last word' I will let them have their hollow 'victory' .

As I have said repeatedly a full UFOIN report on Lakenheath 1956
with ALL interview transcripts - not just the few minutes used
on TV in a very specific context - will appear soon when all the
work is completed. That ought to satisfy most well mannered
people and has done so in all other places than on this rather
tetchy list. If you want to seek out non existent conspiracies
and deceit instead of having good grace and patience then good
luck to you, but forgive me for having better things to do.

I have tried for the past weeks, openly and honestly, to help
you out with detailed replies to the questions posed. That was
not good enough for some people and I am sorry. But it is
obvious that no reply will ever be good enough to satisy the
preconceptions of some so it would be pointless trying to repeat
the actual facts - especially when it seems some people want me
to give them lies instead. Sorry - but I cannot tell you things
that are not true just to make someone happy. And if the truth I
have already provided in response isnt good enough, thats your
problem not mine.

So - the fact that I have chosen to stay out of any further
squabbles can be interpreted however you like. But I trust that
those of you with sense will see it for what it really means. I
intend to get on with more important things and not become
distracted into repeating what I have responded to (I think
fully and fairly) more than once already .

Perhaps you might also ponder how these things will surely drive
others who get as fed up as I have done right off the internet.
This kind of hounding after I properly responded to earlier
questions is a perfect advertisement for not joining such forums
on the net.

I am always happy to offer help and comment.  But telling the
facts on one issue five times in two weeks has to be pointless
in any reasonable view.

It is easy to be goaded, harder to walk away. I choose to walk
away. If you agree with the person who told this list that such
a course means I have a problem with questions, thats your
perogative. But I dont think my record on any site (check the
archives) substantiates such a ludicrous claim. The only
questions I have problems with are the sort that presuppose
deceit and dishonesty where non exists - which, frankly, do not
deserve the respect of getting endless replies when one would
suffice most people.

I trust that some of you will understand this is a conscious
decision to not beat you into submission or argue my corner
forever and a day and instead to leave you all to decide the
issue for yourselves. I have stated my case. You believe me or
not. As I hope you can see such a conscious act of calling it a
day is rather different from running away without being able to
offer further reply.

Best wishes,

Jenny Randles

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:32:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:48:21 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:44 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Hello, list,

 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation

 >>When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >>Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >>not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >>civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >>could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >>in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >>previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.

 >This is a great point, and appears to be "overlooked" by
 >hardcore SETI theorists because colonization implies
 >interstellar travel... and of course we all know that aliens
 >wouldn't dare actually travel, because radio is cheaper!

 >This is an especially detestable bit of terrestrial chauvinism,
 >but it's become part and parcel of the SETI paradigm.

 >The Drake Equation also doesn't recognize the possibility that
 >_some_ ET civilizations, after reaching technological maturity,
 >become solipsistic pleasure fanatics for which exploration/
 >communication become exotic, or event repellent, prospects. I
 >can imagine many "hopeful" civilizations lapsing into a sort of
 >techno-decadence...actually, I suppose this can be tossed under
 >Drake's "self destruction" variable, in a pinch.

 >The Drake Equation also fails to foresee self-replicating
 >machine ecologies and other various consequences of extremely
 >advanced AI, which is seems space-faring civilizations would
 >almost certainly have, in one form or another.  Possibly more
 >about this later...

 >Mac Tonnies

All of this speculation might make sense if it weren't so
blatantly human in nature. The nature of humans to explore
(which is really a desire to seek out new sources of food and
other resources) may well be a "human" trait not shared by other
forms of life.  "Technological maturity", "communication", and
"artificial intelligence (AI) are all "human" terms and are used
here as such.  Is there some universal reason to assume that
these are all traits common to life?

The Drake Equation was an exercise, which included numerous
speculative variables.  As we look back at it we can see other
speculative variables that may not have been taken into account,
but how does one determine that one set of speculative concepts
is better than another?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                     Re: Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 11:32:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:51:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Michel Deschamps in Toronto Sun


 >From: ebk - UFO UpDates - Toronto


 >Michel Deschamps is a dedicated researcher in Northern Ontario,
 >Canada.

 >Getting publicity for his UFO reporting facility is difficult -
 >consequently he spreads snail-mail far and wide in his bid for
 >witness feedback.

 >Toronto, yesterday, took a double-hit of UFO coverage in the
 >press - the Toronto Star article and the following 'Letter of
 >The Day'

 >ebk

-----

 >Dear readers,

 >Every Canadian recognizes November 11th as "Remembrance Day", a
 >day set aside to remember those who fought and died in past
 >wars, giving up their lives for freedom. For those of us who
 >are involved in UFO research, this date has special significance
 >in the annals of the unexplained. This year, November 11th will
 >mark the 25th anniversary of the "CFS Falconbridge UFO
 >Incident".


Congratulations to Michel.

This event was one of several involving Startegic Air Command
bases in the northern USA and the CFS in late April and early
November.

The knowledge of these events probably would not have come abou
had it not been for a leak of info to the National
Investigations Committee on Airial Phenomena (NICAP) in the USA
that occurred in October, 1976. The information leaker provided
a document recounting an event at Loring AFB in northeastern
Maine and also a document about the Sept. 1976 Iranian jet case.

The investigation of the Loring AFB event led to the discovery
of similar events at other air bases. This is all presented in
"CLEAR INTENT" by Larry Fawcett and Barry Greenwood. I believe I
have read that this book has been reissued under another title.
Perhaps athe listfolk can supply that information.

On another less related note, Nov 11, 1987 is noted for a
monster early winter snowstorm in Washington, DC and as the day
of the first sightings in Gulf Breeze, Florida (Walters and 7
others), which initiated the so called "Gulf Breeze Sightings.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:33:20 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:54:10 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:44 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation

 >>When considering probability of life in another planets,

<snip, snip, and snip>

Does anyone on this list know what a probability is and what it
represents?

If an occurrance is said to be 100% sure of happening, it has a
probability of one. Any less and the probability is expressed in
between 0 and .99. What does that mean?

In terms of the Drake equation, any  variables introduced in the
Drake variation that we are unable to attach a reliable whole
number figure to, such as the number of stars in our galaxy, are
expressed in terms of percentages or fractions of that whole
number (the only one in the Drake equation), i.e:

        percentage of stars with planets percentage of those
        planets capable of developing life fraction of those
        planets that have developed life proportion of those
        planets that have developed intelligent life fraction of
        those civilizations capable of communicating with other
        civilizations and finally, what is called the L factor: the
        window of opportunity for communication stated as another
        fraction the life of the civilization/life of the star
        system

All of the above are expressed in individual probabilities. When
combined together, those probabilities are multiplied with each
other. The result is that the total end result becomes smaller
and smaller with each succedding introduction of another and
another variable factor into the equation. The answer, which in
all cases is nothing but a wild ass guess, doesn't ever get
larger. It becomes smaller and smaller.

It is ludicrous for exponents of ufological wisdom that don't
seem to understand how probabilities work to keep bashing the
Drake equation because it didn't take this and that in
consideration. It is only a WAG in the first place and a
reflection more of what we don't know and what we need to find
out, and not something set in stone. SETI scientists are the
first to understand that. But, ufologists and et believers love
to continue making a public display of their ignorance of
probabilities and what the Drake equation is all about. If
anyone wishes to introduce whatever factors they consider to be
of significance, there is no one stopping you. Do it! Compute
the end result with only the factors in the Drake equation, and
then add your factor in. The Drake result will always be higher
because the only whole number in the entire equation is the
number of stars in the galaxy and the introduction of another
variable factor will always be between 0 and .99 which will
further decrease the end result.

Instead of this continuous bashing of the Drake equation and
SETI, proponents of ufological wisdom could bring less
embarassment to themselves by taking the time to enroll in a
course in introductory probability and statistics instead of a
public display of their ignorance.

Ed Stewart

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
    Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
---------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on 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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:48:26 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:56:22 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:44 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Hello, list,

 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation

 >>When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >>Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >>not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >>civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >>could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >>in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >>previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation.

 >This is a great point, and appears to be "overlooked" by
 >hardcore SETI theorists because colonization implies
 >interstellar travel... and of course we all know that aliens
 >wouldn't dare actually travel, because radio is cheaper!

Mac,

Actually, the "we are alone" folk have used this theme since
around 1979 to argue that it would only take ETs some 5 or 10
million years to colonize the entire galaxy. And since we don't
not seem to be colonized by them, or vanquished by them, this
must mean that ETs more advanced than us don't exist. Their
assumption, of course, is that ETs would colonize and exploit
everything they came across, without possessing any scruples or
strategy for leaving a developing planet more or less alone so
that its life forms could evolve on its own in full diversity.

This view probably guilt upon Fermi's paradox -- If we don't see
any ETs around, they must not exist. Of course, whenever UFO
aliens were observed, it was the reliability of the witness that
was assumed not to exist!

Then the SETI types, led by Carl Sagan, tried to counter this
argument, in the early 1980s, by assuming that the 5 to
10-million year galaxy-colonization time was far too short. They
assumed that each colonizing spacecraft crew, after finding a
suitable planet to colonize, would pause there for a period of
100,000 years, on the average, before deciding to continue their
explorations and colonize another stellar system. Previously,
this settlement-pause period had been assumed to be around 1000
years. By extending this time by a factor of 100, Sagan & Newman
could make the galaxy colonization time so long (half a billion
years or so) that the stars within the galaxy would have
circulated and mixed around sufficiently, in their orbits around
the galactic center, that large fractions of them would
continually be overlooked and go uncolonized. So they assumed
that we were among the overlooked stellar systems. Thus SETI
could rationally continue its search for radio signals from
afar.

I think the extreme shakiness of these various assumptions
should be apparent to all of us.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:58:43 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST

 >>>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


Gavin,

 >I think it most strange that the previously debunked phenomenon
 >of ball lightning has been used recently to explain UFO
 >sightings.

Precisely.  And maybe one day, after the UFO phenomenon, like
ball lightning, is assumed to be real, it will be used to
explain away some emerging, even stranger phenomenon of nature
or the universe. Science -- or at least human nature -- marches
on.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:29:51 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:02:41 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 04:39:46 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 99 10:46:14 PST

 >>>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:01:06 -0800
 >>>From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0600 (CST)
 >>>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


Hi, Larry,

 >>Asked why he believed in a controversial phenomenon whose
 >>existence many have disputed, a prominent scientist said the
 >>following to Scientific American:

 >>"Though ... I have never seen the phenomenon personally, I feel
 >>that there is no question that [it] exists.  I have talked to
 >>six eyewitnesses of the phenomena and think there is no
 >>reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of their observations.
 >>Furthermore, the reports are all remarkably similar and have
 >>common features with the hundreds of observations that appear in
 >>the literature."

 >>Anybody care to guess who the scientist was and what he was
 >>talking about?

 >After a web search (wherein I attempted to cheat and find the
 >actual quote someplace, but failed)  I will hazard a guess.

 >1)  How about, Karl Jung, discussing UFOs. No?

No.  Carl Jung based his acceptance of the ETH on, among other
things, the failings of debunking counterarguments such as those
Menzel propounded.

 >OK, Sci. Am. has only been around for 160 years or so, so it
 >cannot be some French academic arguing meteorites.

 >Can you provide a teeny tiny clue? This is fun actually!

Thanks for your interest.  I'm going to quote myself here on
this subject, since I used the quote in one of my books:

"Hard scientific data about ball lightning are rare -- a major
reason for some scientists' continuing doubts about the
phenomenon's existence.  Even [physicist James Dale] Berry, a
major proponent, acknowledges, "The unbiased examination of ball
lightning reports leads one to conclude that a great percentage
of the reports are highly questionable and could be interpreted
in several ways."  (Again, these words echo those that have been
said of UFO reports.)  Of the many photographs alleged to be of
ball lightning, Barry believes that only three "are not
obviously erroneous or highly suspect."

In fact, though ball lightning is now generally (albeit not
universally) assumed to be real, the evidence for its reality is
soft.  Australian plasma physicist John Lowke, a world-class
authority on the phenomenon, bases his belief in it these
considerations:

[See quote above.]

Anyone expressing the same sentiments to defend a belief in UFOs
would be instantly challenged with a litany of objections,
beginning with the well-worn debunking arguments that eyewitness
("anecdotal") testimony cannot be trusted.  But these remarks,
made in the conservative 'Scientific American', raised not so
much as an eyebrow.

[End of quoted material]

My point is simply that ufology's problems are not unique to
ufology, whatever some would have you believe.  Anybody who
thinks that ufologists' thoughts about the nature of evidence
and the strength of their case are by definition wrong, or even
contemptible, is simply showing how provincial he or she is.

For an illuminating account of how various what is loosely
called the "scientific method" is in reality and practice, as
opposed to how it is in popular (mis)understanding, see Henry H.
Bauer's _Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific
Method_ (University of Illinois Press, 1992).  Besides showing
you how science really works, the book should give thoughtful
readers renewed confidence that science is sufficiently flexible
to deal even with something as complex and confounding as the
UFO phenomenon.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:59:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:10:58 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:50:49 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Well shows how little you know about me. In one year - 1988
 >>alone - I personally investigated more than one hundred UFO
 >>reports,

Hi Georgina...

 >David, my argument was simply that you claimed (in a previous
 >post) to have _thoroughly_ investigated hundreds of cases.
 >I realize you had the backing of a regional newspaper, but
 >investigative journalists working with national newspapers and
 >those employed by TV companies can spend between six months to
 >two years investigating _a single_ case before they publish
 >their findings. UFO cases are often more complex; how can you
 >claim to have achieved such successes in only one year?

And my argument remains that I have thoroughly investigated many
cases, and not all of them in the space of one year (that was
just an example).

As to your interpretation of "thoroughly", well that's another
matter. One would not expect to spend three years investigating
a light in the sky which, given a good enough head-start, can be
resolved with a series of phone calls.

For instance, in one recent case I received a call via the
newsdesk from a family who had seen what they described as a
large triangular shaped UFO with coloured lights which
"followed" their car as they returned home to Rotherham near the
M1 junction. Within four hours I had interviewed the family,
checked with Manchester Airport's radar, spoken to the RAF Press
Desk at Whitehall, checked with Leeds/Bradford and East Midlands
airports and established that the sighting occurred at precisely
the same time as a KLM airliner was descending to land at
Sheffield's new airport - directly above the route of the family
concerned. That was clearly what they saw. By the following
morning I had collected all the data together, written a story
which made pg 3 of the following evening's paper and contacted
the family concerned with the explanation (they were quite happy
to accept they saw an aircraft, by the way).

Now that is just a typical example of what I call a "thorough"
investigation; it's bread and butter ufology, the sort I cut my
teeth on but which may seem dull or unsexy to those who prefer
alien autopsies and crash retrievals. These are also precisely
the sort of cases which make one realise the kind of gross
misidentifications which lie at the heart of this subject - and
should act as a warning not to accept *any* witness testimony at
face value alone.

Perhaps Georgina might have spent three years investigating this
case - but is it really necessary to reach a resolution? Often
the simplest explanations fit the best - viz the lighthouse at
Rendlesham.

And more to the point, having had the chance to check the files
of a number of UFO organisations over the years, and having
reviewed the MOD's half-hearted attempts at "investigation"
which are embarrassingly evident from the contents of the Public
Record Office files - I think I do a better job than many who
claim to "investigate UFOs.".

How many UFO investigators keep detailed shorthand records and
tape/transcripts of interviews with witnesses? How many
investigators aim to visit witnesses and the location of the
sighting with 24 hours, as I have managed on a number of
occasions in the past two years?

Not many I should think, so I believe my interpretation of
thoroughness will stand the test.

In fact, Georgina's buddy Nick Pope, in a recent letter,
described my exhaustive 20,000 word report on the Howden Moor
incident thusly: "...I'm very impressed with the work you...have
done in putting together this comprehensive and balanced report,
which is just the sort of proper investigation that's normally
conspicuous by its absence in ufology."

In other high strangeness cases, for instance the phenomena
reported from the Longdendale Valley area of Derbyshire, I have
spent 15 years tracing and interviewing witnesses and am still
gathering information from a host of disparate sources from
meteorologists to geological surveyers.

So I can appreciate Georgina's position on the Rendlesham case,
which I can imagine must have taken considerable time and energy
to research, and still longer to trace witnesses around the
globe.

My point is that there are many researchers out there who are
working equally hard on a host of cases, and who might not
necessarily describe themselves as ufologists (I have found
using that term a liability when dealing with witnesses). That
kind of experience certainly entitles them to comment on the
work of other researchers, as I have done where necessary.

I would see it as a compliment for Georgina or any one else to
offer comments or helpful lines of inquiry on any case I have
investigated, and am more than happy to co-operate with any
serious researcher who is dedicated to searching out truth.

If Georgina's book on Rendlesham is a honest attempt at finding
that truth, then it will receive nothing but praise from me. And
that's a promise!

 >Sceptics do not scare me David. I have had many a debate with
 >hardened sceptics such as John Diamond (London Times) and Wendy
 >Grossman (Editor of a sceptic journal). In fact a few years ago
 >John invited me on his radio show to argue the subject with a
 >bunch of hard sceptics. Unfortunately I had the flu virus at the
 >time or I would have gladly taken the challenge. Why, I even
 >publicly challenged our dear colleague Rob Irving to prove his
 >claims of making crop circles.
 >I have had numerous debates with science writer Ian Ridpath and
 >although we disagree on many points I have always found him to
 >be a perfect gentleman.

I'm sure everyone gets along wonderfully in the green room when
the wine is flowing and no one has to do anything other than
provide a soundbite. I've appeared on these kind of shows, and
few of them provide the chance for any real debate above the
tired "skeptics and believers" formula.

Most 'real' skeptics may well be polite to your face Georgina,
but their true feelings towards UFOs and the believer brigade
may be far less charitable.

That's the reason most scientists are desperate to avoid having
their reputations tarnished by association with the UFO subject,
and who can blame them. That damage has been done not by the
likes of me, but by those who promote the kind of
pseudo-scientific nonsense which one regularly sees associated
with UFOs on the Internet in particular.

If that were not the case then why has UFOIN received a string
of inquiries from scientists who want to work with us but under
no circumstances want to be seen to be doing so publically?

So if my views come over as "destructive" or "objectionable"
then so be it, but sometimes its necessary to be very blunt, and
as Jeremy Clarkson (a fellow Rotherham lad) said in the Sunday
Times last week, "sometimes its not possible to say anything
without upsetting somebody."

I may be blunt and in your face with my views, but at least I
say what I mean and do not  run away and sulk if you give as
good back in return. It's part of my upbringing in the Grim
Northcountry; you either like it or don't, but no offence is
meant. At the end of the day you might find some of your
charming skeptical friends less of the gentlemen you think they
are  when they rip your book apart in print.

As for Ian Ridpath, he feels the whole Rendlesham saga is a load
of old hogwash, and recently told me privately that that whole
UFO subject should be given a complete rest for 50 years.

Now even I wouldn't go that far!

I'm even prepared to let your book convince me that the case
does deserve a second look. Howzat for being open minded?

 >>Compared to real skeptics, I'm just a pussycat really!

 >>Which one of your nine lives is responsible for _thoroughly_
 >>investigating a hundred cases in one year David? <G>

What a purrr-fect response. That'll give me paws for thought
(yawn!).


All the best,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                           AIC Website Back Online

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 14:42:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:17:22 -0500
Subject: AIC Website Back Online


Hello All,

For the last couple of months I have been redoing/redesigning
the AIC (Abduction Information Center) Website. (Formerly known
as, the Intruders Foundation Abduction Information Center) The
new AIC site is "officially" open to the general public and may
currently be viewed at:

http://www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm

The site has been vastly improved in terms of content and the
download time for the individual pages. Please let us know what
you think of our new Web offering. You can e-mail your reviews/
comments directly to me at:

jvif@spacelab.net

New articles, graphics, and features are being added to the Web
site daily, so be sure to check back with us regularly. I look
forward to making some new acquaintances and renewing a few old
ones.

Enjoy,

John Velez, Webmaster A.I.C.

________________________________________________
                         AIC - Abduction Information Center -
                        www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm
                                    jvif@spacelab.net
"Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

               How On Earth Do You Lure Little Green Tourists?

From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 12:33:24 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 20:16:29 -0500
Subject: How On Earth Do You Lure Little Green Tourists?


Monday, November 15, 1999 Published at 16:49 GMT

BBC:  How on earth do you lure little green tourists?

Expecting visitors? Better do some dusting, comb your hair, mow
the launchpad.

A former mining town in the north-east of England is taking the
brave step of pitching for visitors from Mars.

Bedlington in Northumberland, whose residents some people class
as Geordies, is branching out to advertise itself to the red
planet thanks to Nasa.

Traders - including mechanics Tyred and Exhausted, burger shop
Best Byte and funeral directors AJ Gascoigne & Son - are
expected to get together to offer the aliens special deals.

The town's chamber of trade organised the move by replying to a
Nasa advert for material to be included on the Mars 2001 Lander
expedition.

Chairman Malcolm Robinson said: "We'll offer any alien visitors
a range of discounts, with pensioner rates for haircuts, and
discounts on food and clothing.

"They won't get a warmer welcome anywhere in England."

Local trader Margaret Millen was in little doubt that, if the
message is picked up on Mars, Bedlington would get a good
reaction.

"It's a lovely little town, very friendly. It's really a country
town, even though it's only 12 miles from Newcastle and fairly
close to the industry," she said.

One notable chapter from the town's history was the production
of iron rails by Michael Longridge. A friend of George
Stevenson, the rails were used for the world's first passenger
railway.

Although the town is treating the Nasa venture light-heartedly,
it is not a publicity shy place.

The chamber of trade's website directs potential customers to
local businesses, and makes the most of a worldwide -
particularly US - interest in Bedlington Terriers.

The site's webmaster writes: "Bedlington.co.uk was rather trying
to minimise this, but there is simply no getting away from the
fact that Bedlington is famous for its 'World Class' breed of
dogs. If you search the Internet it is almost as if that is all
it's famous for. Not so!"

The news of the Nasa CD comes 25 years after the first
deliberate radio message sent from Earth to the stars. In 1974,
a three-minute message about the human race was sent from the
Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico.

Although the message has been travelling for a quarter of a
century, it's still only one-thousandth of its way to its target
stars, 147 trillion miles away.

In 1973, Nasa sent a plaque on its Pioneer 10 craft with simple
greetings from humans, showing male and female form, and where
earth is in relation to the Sun.

It is still waiting for an answer.

************

Some notes on the local dialect:

Aa divvin'knaa - I don't know.

Abacka beyont - Far away (The back of beyond) "He lives abacka
beyont."

Aa-warned ye think yorsel' clivver?  - "I suppose you think
yourself clever?

Heyem - Home.  "They hed sic a heyem-comin' as nivver was."

"Oilin his wig." - Slang expression for he is "drinking
heavily."

 From 'The New Geordie Dictionary'


"Dere, is, a, howse, in Noooo Or-leah-uns"
      - The Animals - a Geordie Band --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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                          Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:57:32 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:13:07 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons



 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:31:03 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: UFO Shapes & Balloons [was: Re: British Ufology... ]

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
 >>the triangles before the 1980s?

 >>The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >>previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >>science fiction.

 >This is just my opinion. I believe triangular UFOs are all human
 >prototypes, and their shape might serve multiple purposes:

How do you address the fact that the goobers in gooberment have
been developing a marked propensity toward the practice of
flying their human prototypes in plain sight of highly populated
areas?

 >1. To make it look more or less like a plane.

I can't see that argument.  Have you ever witnessed a triangular
UFO flying at less than 3500 feet at less than 50 mph (that's
miles per hour, not kiometers per fortnight), not making a sound
and in the general vicinity of a thousand plus feet wide?  It
doesn't look anything like a plane.  Really.

 >2. To allow for standard flight mechanisms to be activated in
 >case something goes wrong with the main (gravitational, etc.)
 >propulsion and maneuvering systems.

I am sorry, but how do you get from non standard flight to
standard flight mechanisms from triangles?  Do they fly better
than saucer shapes?

 >3. To enhance its stealth capabilities (remember the sharp
 >angles of the relatively new stealth black fighter).

If it's stealth they are enhancing, they've failed. Too many of
us citizens are seeing the damned things.

 >The early banana/boomerang shaped UFOs might have been also
 >prototypes which have been discarded, so we don't see them
 >around anymore.

I don't know, Eduardo, there appear to be so many prototypes
flying around that they just cannot be prototypes in the sense
you mean. By now they must be production prototypes.

Or am I misunderstanding and you are joshing, right?  I knew it!
I just knew it.  You sly little devil.  Tee hee.

 >In the web page Today@Nasa, Nov. 12 issue, the following news
 >were published:

 >>A DIFFERENT ROUTE TO HIGH ALTITUDE RESEARCH

 >>NASA is developing Ultra Long Duration Balloon technology to
 >>provide scientists an effective way to conduct high-altitude
 >>research without the expense of a rocket launch. Recently a
 >>pumpkin-shaped balloon half the size of a football field flew as
 >>a precursor to the full-sized vehicle that will be 10 times
 >>larger in volume. The balloons will stay aloft at altitudes of
 >>up to 115,000 feet (35 kilometers) for as long as 100 days while
 >>carrying more than a ton of astronomy, remote sensing, and other
 >>types of scientific instruments. They will fly 15 miles higher
 >>than typical passenger airplanes, above 99 percent of the
 >>Earth's atmosphere.

 >My suspicious mind immediately thinks that this also serves a
 >dual purpose.

 >1. The sincere scientific reasons given in the article.

I don't understand this.

 >2. A new argument to debunk future sightings in sensitive areas
 >of the US.

Personally, belief in the word of NASA is tantamount to
believing in Santa Claus or the tooth fairey, the latter of
which by the way, is now leaving hundred dollar bills under my
pillow every time I have a root canal. Generous little wench
that, eh?

 >3. To reduce the attention paid to those sightings by making
 >people become familiar with big, roung shapes floating in the
 >air. So many sightings will go unreported, 'cause people will
 >immediately think, "Oh, another weather baloon". Things haven't
 >changed much since Roswell, have they? I call that "lack of
 >creativity".

You are quite correct here, Eduardo.  Not much has changed since
Roswell.  I do agree as well with your, "lack or creativity"
theory.

However I have another theory which may form an appropriate
addendum to yours.  I call it, "MLC" theory.  That stands for
the Three Stooges first names', not "Multi Layer Capacitor."  No
one knows this except me, and I was told the story by someone
high up in the present adminstration's mismanagement group, but
Moe knew Metric, Larry knew English and Curly knew neither.  So
they never made it to Mars either.

Coincidence or Conspiracy.  You decide.

 >Do not be surprised if they just put balloons out there with no
 >instruments whatsoever, and make sure all the news announce the
 >presence of the baloons.

 >Oh, Lord. Where did the innocent trust that I once had in my
 >youth? Beam me up, anyone!

"Scottie,"  Eduardo ... "Beam me up, Scottie!"  And
unfortunately, it cannot be done.  It is against every precept
and forcept known to present physics.  Just like space travel.
Not possible to exceed the speed of light.  I thought you knew
that.

But it _is_ possible to exceed the speed of dark. Which is where
we are now.  In the dark.  We are treated like mushrooms here in
this world, by our goobers in gooberland.  They keep us in the
dark and feed us scheiss. (That's German for doodoo).

J. Jaime Gesundt, Founder of the thousand points of dark and
"Kinder and Gentler" system of governance.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                     Minister To Open Britain's X-Files

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ukufonw@freenetname.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:18:16 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:19:04 -0500
Subject: Minister To Open Britain's X-Files


Hi everyone,

Here's a report from yesterday's UK - News Of The World
newspaper.

Best wishes

Dave

---===^===---

Source: News Of The World - newspaper UK
Publish Date: Sunday 14th November 1999

Watch this space for truth about aliens

Minister to open Britain's X-Files

EXCLUSIVE By Ian Kirby

The truth about whether aliens have ever visited Britain is to be
revealed at last.

Top secret government X-Files on thousands of 'space-ship'
riddles will be opened up to public gaze by Defence Minister
Peter Kilfoyle.

They will include photos and details of every UFO investigation
in the past 30 years. Every year, around 300 alien sightings are
reported.

Plans by military experts for action in the event of an alien
invasion of London will also be unveiled.

The files, stored in a nuclear bomb-proof bunker deep below White
Hall, should be released in three months.

The move, part of a government drive to end unnecessary secrecy,
is sure to send UFO spotters into a frenzy. They will hope to
learn about:

A MASSIVE craft spotted flying in zig-zags off Britain's North
Sea coast last year. The 900ft UFO shot off at 17,000mph when
pursued by two fighter jets. CLAIMS that seven UFOs have crashed
in Britain since World War II. SIGHTINGS of a triangular three-
legged space-ship in Rendlesham Forest, Suffolk in 1980.

Hover

US airman from two nearby bases claim the object rose hovering
out of the trees, then blasted into space at an incredible
speed. RAF investigators cordoned off the area, but their
findings are still a closely-guarded secret.

Some details of UFO sightings in the Fifties and Sixties have
already been made public under the Thirty- Year Rule applied to
sensitive documents.

Among them in the famous 1962 incident in which 16-year-old Anne
Heston was sworn to secrecy after she reported seeing a
star-like object shooting out red and green flames above her
home in Taunton, Somerset.

Ten years earlier, RAF Flight Lieutenant John Kilburn saw a
shining object in the sky above a West Yorks air base. When jets
were scrambled to investigate, the UFO took off at an incredible
speed. But the facts about most later mysteries are still locked
away.

They include the truth about claims by former defence chief Lord
Hill-Norton that RAF Feltwell in Suffolk uses its space-age
radar, built by the US Air Force, to track UFOs.

He quizzed ministers about the base, but never got a
satisfactory answer. Several sightings in 1990 of a bright light
above the Thames in London could also be explained.

The pledge to open up our X-Files follows similar moves in
America.

The Yanks recently released a report of the notorious Roswell
incident in 1947, in which alien corpses were allegedly seen at a
secret New Mexico air base.

They explained the "bodies" were dummies from a secret weather
balloon, but UFO theorists still believe there is a cover-up.

Crank

Britain's files were prepared by the MoD's hush-hush Aircraft
Secretariat, set up to investigate UFOs. Amazingly its one-time
boss Nick Pope believes HE was abducted by aliens while driving
in Florida.

He kept mum while in his job for fear of being labelled a crank.

But after leaving the secret unit, he wrote a series of best
sellers about alien incidents.

He said: "My experiences convinced me that UFOs are a real and
threatening phenomenon. We are not alone.

"Since 1959, the MoD has heard of 9,000 UFO sightings, though
that's probably only the tip of the iceberg."

Defence Minister Mr Kilfoyle has told colleagues that, after a
careful review of the files, he is "not convinced" about the
existence of aliens.

But MoD staff say he wants people to be able to make up their
own minds.

A source said: "These files are of huge public interest. They
paint a fascinating picture of how UFO reports were
investigated-and what would happen if aliens ever did land in
Britain."

--------------------------
United Kingdom UFO Network
ufo@ukufonw.co.uk
www.ukufonw.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 >
   Nov > Nov 15

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:51:04 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:26:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:33:38 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<huge snip, well worth reading if you missed it>

 >My bones to pick with the likes of Stacy and Brookesmith are
 >their generally simplistic, illogical, and often inaccurate and
 >unscientific arguments along the lines that the only way to
 >evolve intelligent life is the way it happened on Earth.  Not
 >only is Earth supposedly unique, they have even argued that our
 >solar system is somehow unique.  These arguments are rubbish at
 >present, since there is no statistical data base of knowledge
 >from which to draw.  They are rehashing little more than the
 >highly conservative speculation of others and trying to dress it
 >up as scientific orthodoxy.  In doing so, they are revealing
 >their own philosophical biases, or "religious beliefs" if you
 >will.

 >David Rudiak


David,

I agree with most of what you said above, the snipped part.

My bones to pick with the likes of a Rudiak are when words are
put in my mouth that I never said, such as that "the only way to
evolve intelligent life is the way it happened on Earth," to use
your words.

This now makes the sixth time that I've offered to send you a
copy of the Davis article. My, how your curiousity for other
points of view must burn!

If you'd been trying to send me something positive regarding
Roswell and I persistently refused it, do you think you would
let me or this List forget it?

Furthermore, me and Brookesmith aren't doing anything in concert
that I'm aware of.

Why won't you read the Davis article and comment on it directly?

With your intellect, you ought to be able to shred its insights
(assuming there are any, of course) to tatters in a moment,
embarrassing me even more, and presumably Brookesmith in the
bargain.

And wouldn't that be fun?

It would even give you another opportunity to explain why the
likes of Gould and Eldredge are involved in empty semantics and
you aren't. Or why you're a better expert in their field than
they are.

But you knew that.

This is now my seventh offer to send you a copy of the Davis
article -- and counting.

C'mon, Dave! Thirty minutes of your time and you can crow for
all eternity!

Lotteries don't get any better than this.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:56:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:42:00 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation



 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:15:12 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:43:21 -0500
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation

 >>When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >>Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >>not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >>civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >>could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >>in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >>previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation

 >Dear Eduardo and List:

 >Yes, but the Drake Equation is an attempt to put numbers to the
 >problem, not just raw speculation.  Many things have changed
 >since the original Drake Equation was proposed.  Frank Drake,
 >himself, outlined some of these in an interesting article or
 >interview, I forget which, in the Atlantic Monthly a couple
 >years ago.

 >For instance, the role of a single, large Moon, and the role of
 >contintental drift, only speculation in the 50's but now
 >accepted as an ongoing process.  Lots of things change, and
 >these can be added, or subtracted, as time goes on.

 >What new evidence is there that interstellar travel could be
 >available, which was not in the original Drake Equation, and can
 >you put numbers on this possibility?

 >Back to you ---

 >Clear skies,
 >Bob Young



In my 1999 MUFON Paper 'Star Travel? YES!' I deal with a great
deal of info re possible interstellar travel schemes that has
been totally ignored by such supposed heavyweight academics as
Dr. Lawrence Maxwell Krauss (Author of the "Physics of Star
Trek" and Frank Drake and Carl Sagan and Jill Tartar who all
seem to be completely ignorant of the successful operation of
jet engines on nuclear power in the 1950s, the operation on the
ground of nuclear ramjets and nuclear rocket engines in the
l960s, designs of advanced nuclear fusions concepts in the
l960s.

The biggest fission nuclear rocket was less than 7' in diameter
and had a power level of 4,400 megawatts. A proper fusion system
using D-He3 would eject charged particles having 10,000,000
times as much energy per particle as in a chemical rocket.

The SETI Cultists know nothing about advanced propulsion systems
or about UFOs... which doesn't stop them from prattling on about
both and also about something else about which they know
nothing... the probable behavior of aliens.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                    Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:54:54 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:51:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage


From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:59:53 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:16:43 -0500
Subject: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re:


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 21:06:17 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >And speaking of your much-vaunted, relentless "march to higher
 >complexity" that can't "be undone," I've now offered to send you
 >a copy of the Davis article something like five or six times.
 >What, exactly, are you so terrified about in refusing same?

Sure Dennis, send it on.  What makes you think I'm terrified to
read it?  You're repeated posturing and breast-beating about
this is beginning to look pretty silly.

(BTW, isn't this the same Paul Davis that Nightline had on as
some sort of "UFO expert" about 4 years ago, in which he made
the remark that he had a "feeling in his bones" that we were the
only intelligent life in not just the galaxy, but the whole damn
Universe?)

Just because the man has a PhD doesn't mean his opinions aren't
heavily influenced by his own transparent "religious beliefs."
People like Davis who take such obviously extreme positions seem
like the heirs to the Catholic hierarchy that nearly burned
Galileo at the stake for proposing we might not be the center of
the Universe.

My personal position on the evolution of intelligence is
detailed in another post.  As I stated there, my guesstimates of
the odds of any given stellar system evolving intelligent life
are comparable to the odds of winning the lottery.  I no more
think intelligent life is the inevitable evolutionary endpoint
of simple bacterial lifeforms than I believe that every person
who owns a lottery ticket wins the lottery.

And the reason I have LONG believed that is because of some of
those precious contingent conditions you've been ranting about
that are likely necessary to move from bacterial to intelligent
life.  (Believe it or not, I have taken a lot of courses in
biology, genetics, and molecular biology in my lifetime, and am
pretty familiar with current thinking on the evolution of life
on Earth.)

E.g., it took two-thirds of Earth's history to evolve the
eucharyotic cell, the basic and necessary building block of all
complex life forms on planet Earth.  That appears to be a major
stumbling block in our history on the road to complex life, and
probably a major obstacle elsewhere as well.  It is by no means
a given that even Earth-like planets with bacterial life will
necessarily make this big evolutionary jump.

Nonetheless, there are so many stars out there, that even with
long odds on the evolution of intelligent life in any given star
system, there could still be many thousands of civilizations out
there in our galaxy alone.  My position is no different than
most SETI scientists, who would doubtlessly bristle at your
repeated accusations that they have no comprehension of what
"contingency" means in the evolution of life.  These are the
same guys who also regularly trash the idea that we might
actually be visited by one of those civilizations, yet have no
problem with the idea that such civilizations might be abundant.

Just because Paul Davis argues one point of view doesn't make it
so.  The man is on the extremely conservative fringe of present
scientific thinking concerning the evolution of life elsewhere
in the Universe.

David Rudiak








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:22:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:43:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:33:38 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Maybe this didn't come across clearly in my posts, but put me on
 >the side of those who think intelligent life might be
 >comparatively rare, surely not a conclusive endpoint to
 >biological evolution.  But one must be careful with what is
 >meant by "comparatively rare."  Comparatively rare could mean
 >that only one in a million stellar systems evolved intelligent
 >life.  But there are so many stars in our galaxy, that still
 >would amount to several hundred thousand stellar systems where
 >intelligent life has evolved. If only one in a billion develops
 >intelligent life, that is still several hundred places that have
 >developed intelligent life.

<snip>

I loved your previous post on intelligence and evolution.
Convergent evolution almost guarantees a humanoid appearance by
a space faring, technologically advanced race, IMO.  Bipedal
locomotion frees the hands for tools, elevates the brain and
eyes for safety and perspective, and is a direct result of
bilateral symmetry.

But something about this discussion bothers me.

I think we also need to refine our definition "intelligence".
Since this is a UFO discussion and UFO implies technology, then
what we are discussing is really technologically advanced
intelligent life (TAIF).  And it makes sense to only discuss
TAIF since that is our defacto method of measuring intelligence.

However, I suspect that intelligence might take many routes.
Few would deny the intelligence of a dolphin; and, they have
probably been intelligent longer than the hairless monkey.

Some theories in post quantum physics indicate a direct
connection between the mind and reality.  Technological tools
might not be necessary to explore the universe.

Regards,
Terry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

             Astrobiologists Flying High To Study Leonid Meteors

From: NASA Ames Research Center <jbluck@mail.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:13:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:08:12 -0500
Subject: Astrobiologists Flying High To Study Leonid Meteors


Nov. 15, 1999
Kathleen Burton
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
(Phone: 650/604-1731, 650/604-9000)  kburton@mail.arc.nasa.gov

Laura Lewis
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
(Phone:  650/604-2162, 650/604-9000)  llewis@mail.arc.nasa.gov

RELEASE:  99-71

NOTE TO EDITORS/NEWS DIRECTORS: You are invited to observe video
footage of the Leonid meteors from the mission on Wednesday,
Nov. 17, from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. (PT) in the main auditorium,
N-201, at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.  To gain
entry, show press credentials and photo ID at the Visitor
Badging Office, located at the Main Gate, Moffett Federal
Airfield.

ASTROBIOLOGISTS FLYING HIGH TO STUDY LEONID METEORS

To gain a better understanding of the way life may have evolved
on Earth, a team of scientists has begun a multinational
airborne mission to study the Leonid meteors.

The Astrobiology mission began when two U.S. Air Force planes,
the ARIA and the FISTA, lifted off from Edwards Air Force Base,
Edwards, CA, on Nov. 13 at 11:15 a.m. (PT) enroute to Royal Air
Force Mildenhall Airbase in the United Kingdom.  During the
mission, an international cadre of scientists will point their
instruments towards the sky to study the Leonid meteors from the
unique vantage-point of the aircraft.

"The planes provide a perfect platform for viewing the meteors,"
said Peter Jenniskens, chief scientist for the Leonids mission.
"They lift us above the weather to ensure a fantastic view.  By
flying over 35,000 feet in the air, we are above most of the
atmospheric water vapor, and our instruments get the best data
possible."

The Leonid meteor showers occur each November when the Earth
passes through the debris shed from periodic comet
55P/Temple-Tuttle.  The meteors, named the Leonids because they
appear to stream from the constellation Leo, are about the size
of a grain of sand.  Studying comets and meteors, which are made
from ice and dust that existed when the universe was formed, may
help scientists develop a better understanding of how life began
on Earth.


-more-

-2-

"Comets and meteors are fascinating to study because they are a
frozen record from the time when the universe formed," explained
astrobiologist Dr. Scott Sandford of NASA's Ames Research
Center, Moffett Field, CA.  "Due to geological activity, all of
Earth's materials have been reformed several times over, and we
must study comets, meteors and meteorites to get an early view
of our universe."

Most years, observers with ideal viewing conditions can see 10
to 20 meteors per hour during the Leonid showers.  Every 33
years when the parent comet Temple-Tuttle passes particularly
close to the Earth, as it did in 1998, meteor storms with
hundreds or thousands of meteors per hour are possible.  In
1998, following Temple-Tuttle's pass by Earth, counts of 250
meteors per hour were recorded.  Predictive models have
indicated that, in 1999, it may be possible to see 200 to 5000
meteors per hour around the longitudes of Europe and the Middle
East.  The 1999 Leonid Multi-instrument Airborne Campaign (MAC),
a mission jointly funded by NASA and the United States Air
Force, has been designed to fly over these longitudes for three
consecutive observation nights, Nov. 16-18.

Both aircraft being used for the mission have been specially
outfitted with a variety of instruments, including spectrometers
and cameras, to study the meteors.  The FISTA, an NKC-135
aircraft, has been modified with 20 upward-facing viewing ports.
The ARIA, an EC-18 airplane, has telemetry equipment that will
allow researchers to send images and near real time data
regarding comet flux, or counts, to the ground.

Research objectives for the mission involve taking many
measurements that have never been done in airborne astronomy,
including real-time meteor counts, spectroscopy (mid-infrared,
near-infrared, ultraviolet and visible) and stereoscopic viewing
of meteors using intensified high-definition television cameras.
The stereoscopic view, obtained when instruments on both
aircraft image a meteor, will provide the first-ever
three-dimensional model of meteor trajectories.

About half of the scientists on the current mission participated
in the 1998 Leonid MAC mission that flew over Japan.  That
highly successful mission is credited with observing more than
3,200 meteors, obtaining the first differential spectrometry
data from meteors as they burned through the sky, and obtaining
the first stereoscopic images of a persistent meteor train.

After departing Edwards Air Force Base Nov. 13, the planes flew
to Mildenhall Airbase in the United Kingdom.  During the
night-time crossing of the Atlantic Ocean, scientists tested and
calibrated their instruments and completed initial observations,
including taking measurements of the Aurora Borealis.



-more-

-3-

The mission will begin Nov. 16 when the planes depart England
and fly the scientists overnight to Tel Aviv.  The following
night, Nov. 17, during the expected peak of the storm, the
scientists will fly from Tel Aviv to Lajes Air Base in the
Azores.  The final night, Nov. 18, the planes will fly from the
Azores to Patrick Air Force Base in Florida.

The peak of the storm is expected to occur at 0200 (UT) Nov. 18
(9:00 p.m. ET, Nov. 17) over Europe and the Middle East.  While
the best viewing of the storm will be in these locations, it may
be possible to see the Leonid meteors in the United States,
particularly in the predawn hours of November 17 and 18.

For current information about the Leonid MAC Astrobiology
mission, visit: http://leonid.arc.nasa.gov/

-end-

To receive Ames press releases via email, send an email with the
word "subscribe" in subject line to:
ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov To unsubscribe, send an
email with "unsubscribe" in subject line.  Also, the NASA Ames
Public Affairs Home Page at URL, http://ccf.arc.nasa.gov/dx
includes press releases and JPEG images in AP Leaf Desk format
minus embedded captions.




----
John Bluck
Information Systems Liaison (Public Affairs)
NASA Ames Office of External Affairs
(voice 650-604-5026) (fax 650-604-3953)
Mail stop 204-12, email: jbluck@mail.arc.nasa.gov
Moffett Field, CA, USA 94035-1000
----








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Bill Jacobs <billjaco@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 21:49:55 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:12:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are we Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:15:52 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:23:01 -0800
 >>From: Bill Jacobs <billjaco@ix.netcom.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Are we Alone?

 >>Have to butt in here. Every evolutionary model? Leads only (I
 >>added) to organisms of greater complexity? Over whose time, the
 >>assessor or the assessed?

 >I am not sure what this means. Time is time.

Mark,

No it is not, and that in my opinion is one of the primary
reasons this List cannot figure out the solution. Of course time
is time ): for time is so easy to define... tick tock tick tock,
rotate once, rotate twice, push-pull, push-pull, flip-flop,
flip-flop.

But gosh what if the evolutionary little critter's tic toc tic
toc is faster than mine ("yeh me!" says the macho Thing), or
slower.  Ahhh says the starfish below "it's my birthday, I made
it back to this very spot!" " Look at all those starfish" says
the captain, we must slow down and see how they feed and
multiply, but my goodness how they have learned to jump about,
like fleas or flies almost.

At what point will they allow us surface dwellers to turn our
tools skyward for real? Why does the fictional Ed see ships
while others do not? Why does emulsion respond to a ship when
the photographer or observer saw nothing? Has anyone correlated
shapes and patterns to emulsion or silicon chemistry?  And Mark,
can you please define extraterrestrial for me!?

So anyway I think we have to learn to admit to ourselves that we
are pretty limited - maybe this is the merging of science and
religion?

A pretty good poet mentioned watching the skies.  He is right
but I think we should do it so we have a fighting chance to see
what's there. The coupling of optics and high speed techniques -
developed, built and disseminated to interested list members
willing to volunteer time searching for rapidly or erratically
moving or transient objects (Sponsors are you out there?).  Of
course the images would need to be analyzed.. Could definitely
use a good C+ Programmer on a quest.

There is so much we cannot see, hear, touch, smell, taste, damn
that's only 5 senses anyway, and they are all so filtered so we
don't hurt ourselves. There are many relatively inexpensive
combination detection systems that could be easily designed and
built for those that would look.

Bill 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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are we Alone?

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:01:18 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:19:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Are we Alone?


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 01:44:13 EST
 >Subject: Are we Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >The most important imput into the Earth's "open system" is the
 >energy received from the Sun, which may cause such recurrent
 >events as Ice Ages; major climatic events, such as El Nino, etc.
 >Another outside energy input into the system are Cosmis Rays,
 >which are believed to play an important part in DNA mutation.


Thanks everyone for the informed discussion/debate of how
evolution occurred on this planet. Bob touches on one influence
_cosmic radiation_ that I think could play an even greater role
in genetic mutation than is often considered.

As many of you know, geologists have been studying the record of
the waxing and waning of the Earth's magnetic field
(paleolithography). Over many millions of years, the magnetic
north and south poles have migrated, and sometimes reversed
their positions.

Not only did the poles migrate and shift, but the shifts were
often associated with significant drops in the field's
intensity.

I wonder how the "temporary" absence of a strong magnetosphere
affected the rate of DNA mutations in Earth's creatures.

This is one of my favorite evolutionary riddles. Would anyone
care to offer an educated opinion as to what effect a minimal
magnetic field might have had?

Pat McCartney

[Patrick, please note how your posts end up looking and make
  future originals match this one --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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                        Housekeeping - Posting Rules

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:22:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:22:05 -0500
Subject: Housekeeping - Posting Rules

Each message is highlighted, copied, pasted, re-formatted and
posted to the List by the moderator/operator - functions that are
similar to those of people in print who edit and lay-out 'Letters
To The  Editor'. Creating easy to read 'style', uniform layouts,
catching most of the typos, avoiding most nastiness, off-topic
messages and spam are the objectives.

A subscription does not automatically mean a message you send
for posting will appear on the List, particularly if the
submission does not conform to the formatting requirements.

UpDates is a free service - you pay nothing. In return, if you
choose to post to the List, you are asked to abide by the
following:


Posting Rules


  1.    Do _not_ use the 'formatted text' features of your e-mail
program. No colours, no fancy fonts, no italics or bolding, no
fancy quoting designs or html styling. Plain ASCII is what
UpDates uses. Messages that are not plain text will not be
posted.

  2.    Line-length

Please make your lines no more than 65 characters long

--------------------This line is 65 characters-------------------

Longer lines are wrapped by various pieces of software along the Net
and leave awkward
and eye-jarring line lengths.


  3.    Attribution

When responding to a message from the List, _always_ include the
four line 'header' from the body of that message at the start
of _your_ message - eg.:

 >Date: 13 Feb 99 00:00:01 EST
 >From: Genghis@mukluk.com <Bobb Grunge>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Grays are Grey Area

Again - it's at the beginning of the 'body' of the message you
are responding to and below the UpDates headers.


  4.    Quoting

_Always_ quote from the message to which you are responding.

Quotes should come _before_ you key your response.

Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
first character. It should look like this:

 >Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
 >first character. It should look like this:

No spaces before or after the '>'

Please remove the '>' from blank lines.

Keep quoted material from previous messages to a minimum:  Just
quote enough text to let people know what you are referring to.

Messages that do not conform to the required quoting protocol or
contain excessive quoting will not be posted to UpDates.

Most modern E-Mail software will allow the user to click a
'Reply' button and automatically open a new window, with the
message being responded to inserted with universal quote-mark
(>) at the beginning of each line.

When 'Reply' is clicked, some E-Mail software will insert a line
which reads:

'On 13 Feb 99 at 00:00:01 EST, UFO UpDates [or 'you'] wrote: '

If your program does this, please remove it - UFO UpDates did
not _write_ the message - it merely passed it to the List.


  5.    Don't send 'personal' responses to the list that should
be sent directly to the original author.  Send a message to the
list only if it contains new information that you want
_everyone_ to see.

Messages that contain what the Moderator considers to be
personal attacks or 'flames' will not be posted to the List.


  6.    URLs (Web Site addresses)  _must_ include 'http://' and
be on one line. The Archive software will make the URL a
'click-able' link to that address in your archived message.

  7.    To un-subscribe, send a _new_ message with 'Un-subscribe'
as 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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                        Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 03:33:39 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:28:15 -0500
Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'


Regarding:

 >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

John wrote:

 >I'd be interested to know what Mark Cashman thinks *is* the
 >unchanging appearance of a "true UFO".

 >In fact, UFO descriptions are constantly changing. Where were
 >the triangles before the 1980s?


John,

I have on file a 'relatively' [always debatable!] significant
number of 'triangular' UFO reports from the 1970s (many of which
I lament are still unpublished) and there are also accounts
which pre-date this.

These are unquestionably a small percentage of overall reported
'shapes', however, that a number of 'triangles' do exist is
testimony.

If you were to ask, 'Where were the triangles before the
1960s?', then I would be struggling, yet could still cite the
following from 'Project Blue Book' cases which were, so far as I
know, unsolved:

July 13, 1950: Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. 5 p.m.
Witnesses: two skilled Arsenal employees including Mr. Washburn.
One object, shaped like a bowtie, and like polished aluminum.
Flew straight and level, then one triangle rotated 1/4 turn in
the opposite direction and returned to its original position. The
object then made a right-angle turn and accelerated away after at
least 30 seconds.

[Note: this is the earliest comparable report I'm aware of and
interestingly contains a description of the object rotating.
Does that mean it 'hovered' whilst doing so?]

Sept. 14, 1952: North Atlantic, between Ireland and Iceland.
Witnesses: military persons  from  several countries aboard
ships in the NATO 'Operation Mainbrace' exercise. Among the
sightings: one blue-green triangle was observed flying 1,500
m.p.h; three objects in a triangular formation gave off white
light exhaust at 1,500 m.p.h.

June 24, 1953: Simiutak, Greenland, 11:30 a.m.
Witness: weather observer A/2c R.A. Hill. One red triangle
hovered and rotated for 15 seconds, then climbed for 5 minutes.

[Note: Well, this one apparently hovered and rotated! Here we
have a 1953 account with those distinctive characteristics from
more recent years].

Also, from the Magonia database:

Mar. 1959,  Kolobreg (Poland). On the Polish coast, not far from
Kolobreg, soldiers saw the sea become turbulent as a triangular
object, 4 m in size, emerged, circled the barracks, and flew
away at high speed. [End]


All of these are unfortunately 'stories' and if only we could
interview the witnesses ourselves. Possibly there's no real
substance to them at all.

Yes, there are few such contemporary early records, although I
wonder what people in that intrinsic 'flying saucer' period would
make of a 'UFO' which was triangular-shaped.

I see that the above accounts all originate from sources where it
might be judged dutiful to inform about _any_ 'UFO'.

Were there never any similar reports from the public?

In the climate where a 'flying saucer' sighting was itself liable
to media ridicule, could a triangular-shaped flying saucer report
be considered so bizarre that you probably _were_ seeing
things, or this was feared to be a vulnerable conclusion?

Maybe not - surely there were many reports of 'weird' UFOs in
that timeframe.


Perhaps also worth highlighting is the following, which I
recently posted on the 'UFO Research List' (UFORL):

I have come across the following article which could be the
first ever 'flying triangle' newspaper report. It  mentions the
central red light which is a distinctive feature of so many
later accounts.

Not much else to go on I'm afraid and apparently no structured
object was actually seen. Pity.

Worth noting though:

'Newcastle Evening Chronicle'

MYSTERY FLYING TRIANGLE IS SPOTTED OVER NORTH

REPORTS of a mysterious flying object sighted over Tyneside last
night have been sent to the Air Ministry in London for
investigation.

The object, described as "a triangular formation of lights with
a red light in the centre," were seen by people in Consett,
South Shields, Fawdon and Fenham, Newcastle.

A spokesman at R.A.F. Station Acklington  said today that he had
received reports on the phenomenon from at least two sources and
these had been passed on to the Air Ministry.

"I have no further information about this," he said "and even if
I had we are not allowed to release information".

Mr J. Leslie Otley, secretary of the Tyneside Unidentified
Flying Objects Society, said his wife and two neighbours saw the
lights between 9.15 and 9.40 last night circling over Deanham
Gardens, Fenham.


_BALL_OF_LIGHTS_

"A friend of mine, Mr A. Miller, telephoned to say he saw them
too, over Consett at 8.30 p.m.," said Mr Otley.

I reported the sighting to Acklington, who told me they had
received a similar report from a man in South Shields. In the
early hours of today I received a phone call from the Fighter
Command Headquarters at R.A.F. Stanmore, asking me for further
information."

Mrs Otley said she first saw a single light in the sky, but
later this was followed by "a triangular formation of lights
with a red light in the centre."

After 20 minutes, the formation moved off northwards, she said.

[End of article]


Assuming the lights were in fact attached to an object, its
characteristics were presumably sufficiently unusual for it to
have generated more than one 'UFO' report and from different
locations.

I wonder why 'Fighter Command' were apparently so interested. By
default, it was likely to have been an aircraft and surely they
wouldn't normally follow up on a 'UFO' report anyway?

Do our knowledgeable UK subscribers have any thoughts on this
and info on what exactly ''Fighter Command/RAF Stanmore' was
then concerned with?

This article was published on September 9th, 1960, which dates
said incident as the night of September 8th, 1960 and now the
earliest 'flying triangle with a central red light' case I'm
aware of.
[End]


As you may appreciate, the knowledgeable military aviation
subscribers to UFORL [a main intention of UFORL being to
encompass the interface between 'UFOs' and military
aviation/black projects] explained (reproduced with permission):

RAF Stanmore Park (to give its correct name) was the home to the
Headquarters of No 11 Group of Strike Command and was
responsible for Air Defence. It closed at the end 1998 and its
operations were transferred to RAF Bentley Priory.
[John Burtenshaw]


Fighter Command was tasked with the interception of aircraft
intruding into UK airspace. Until 1968 the RAF was  split into
various "Commands" i.e. Bomber, Fighter, Support, Coastal, etc

In 1968 Bomber Command and Fighter Command were merged into
Strike Command.

Fighter Command was what scuppered Goering's plans for
destroying the RAF in 1940 and its HQ was at RAF Stanmore Park
(in Middlesex, I think). In the period up to 1968 Fighter
Command was tasked with guarding the UK's airspace from the
Soviet threat, so they would be interested in a possible
intrusion into UK airspace. Then they would decide whether it
had, ahemmm...any defence significance.

Fighter Command also controlled the Bloodhound II SAMs on the
east coast of the UK and may have been a bit jumpy that
something had appeared in that area undetected. This was also
the era of the Tripwire, so that jumpiness can be understood.
Don't you know there was a Cold War on? [Chris Gibson]


In answer to your question, John, those claimed 'triangle'
sightings before the 1980s can be found.

We certainly have many detailed and ostensibly enigmatic cases
from the 1970s in particular, some of which were importantly
documented at the time, for example the 1975 newspaper article:

'Triangular-Shaped Saucer Shakes Up Five North Carolina Counties'

[...]

Those who reported the eerie sightings concurred that it was
triangular in shape and that it was adorned with almost festive,
brightly-glowing lights.  Repeatedly over the four days from
April 3 to April 6, it was seen hovering silently close to the
ground ... or flying low.

[...]

"I saw the object hovering about 50 feet over the town's water
tank," said officer Phil Stanton, one of the policemen who
received calls from citizens who were, if not frightened,
certainly very impressed at what many thought was a drop-in from
extragalactic beings.

"It seemed to be triangular or vee-shaped. I could make out
reddish lights on one side of it and green or blue lights along
the other. I thought it was about the size of a Cadillac. The
strange thing was that there was no sound at all. It appeared to
have a solid hull and one big spotlight."

[...]

Over in St. Pauls, security guard John McPherson and officer Tom
Hagens chased the triangular mystery in a patrol ear. Their
first glimpse of it came with a red flash "like an explosion,"
behind some trees way back in the boondocks. The strange craft
was moving low and slow across an isolated country road and the
officers saw their duty.

"We took off after it, but lost it. Then we stopped the car and
just waited," reported McPherson. And then, as though playing an
interplanetary game of tag, "There it was again ... it seemed to
be triangular, maybe vee-shaped, with blue lights all around the
edges  and a big pulsating ball of red light in the center.
There were two big beams like searchlights. The next thing I
knew, it took off at terrific speed--without a sound.

[...]

There were more reports. A police chief, Gary Moore, of White
Lakes, N.C., said he spotted a similar triangular UFO with a
pulsating red light just about at dawn on Saturday, April 5. But
the visit to Lumberton was nearing an end. One more cop, State
Trooper Marshall McGee, was to make a sighting in the early
hours of Sunday, April 6. He saw something in the sky between
Lumberton and St. Pauls and his description was substantially
the same as those submitted by many others. [End]


I can provide many other examples if required, including a
thorough recollection, relating to a 1974 observation of two
'triangular aircraft' from someone who was later employed with
Lockheed and statedly remains puzzled.

It may all have a mundane explanation of course and by default
assuredly has, however, I keep asking the question what that is
and 2, 3 or maybe 4 years later, still don't have an answer or,
peculiarly, anything which seems to come close to one.

I'm now reasonably well informed on the possibilities and
understand what these numerous reports of low-altitude,
hovering, *silent* [this is a fundamental aspect], triangular
objects are not - I remain open to what they actually might be,
even if seemingly pretty 'low-tech' for 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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                       [lunascan] Village On The Moon?

From: Francis Ridge <slk@evansville.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 20:21:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:34:30 -0500
Subject: [lunascan] Village On The Moon?


Mike Bara's page by that name:

http://www.lunaranomalies.com/avillage.htm

---

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.


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


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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:19:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:37:02 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:44 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >The Drake Equation also doesn't recognize the possibility that
 >_some_ ET civilizations, after reaching technological maturity,
 >become solipsistic pleasure fanatics for which exploration/
 >communication become exotic, or event repellent, prospects.

Specially if they have been exposed to our TV and Radio
emissions :@

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:22:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:00:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:33:38 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Maybe this didn't come across clearly in my posts, but put me on
 >the side of those who think intelligent life might be
 >comparatively rare, surely not a conclusive endpoint to
 >biological evolution.  But one must be careful with what is
 >meant by "comparatively rare."  Comparatively rare could mean
 >that only one in a million stellar systems evolved intelligent
 >life.  But there are so many stars in our galaxy, that still
 >would amount to several hundred thousand stellar systems where
 >intelligent life has evolved. If only one in a billion develops
 >intelligent life, that is still several hundred places that have
 >developed intelligent life.

<snip>

I loved your previous post on intelligence and evolution.
Convergent evolution almost guarantees a humanoid appearance by a
space faring, technologically advanced race, IMO.  Bipedal
locomotion frees the hands for tools, elevates the brain and eyes
for safety and perspective, and is a direct result of bilateral
symmetry.

But something about this discussion bothers me.

I think we also need to refine our definition "intelligence".
Since this is a UFO discussion and UFO implies technology, then
what we are discussing is really technologically advanced
intelligent life (TAIF).  And it makes sense to only discuss
TAIF since that is our defacto method of measuring intelligence.

However, I suspect that intelligence might take many routes.
Few would deny the intelligence of a dolphin; and, they have
probably been intelligent longer than the hairless monkey.

Some theories in post quantum physics indicate a direct
connection between the mind and reality.  Technological tools
might not be necessary to explore the universe.

Regards,

Terry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                          Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:37:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:47:10 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:57:32 EST
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>This is just my opinion. I believe triangular UFOs are all human
 >>prototypes, and their shape might serve multiple purposes:

 >How do you address the fact that the goobers in gooberment have
 >been developing a marked propensity toward the practice of
 >flying their human prototypes in plain sight of highly populated
 >areas?

There are prototypes and prototypes. Some are secret, other
top-secret, and some utlra-secret, I suppose. Maybe american,
british, french, canadian, etc. UFOs are seen just because they
screw up and end up o top of a big building on a populated area.
It is said that gravity based machines are not easy to maneuver,
and if they create small worm holes, they could suddenly and
accidentally appear in the other side of the world.

 >>1. To make it look more or less like a plane.

 >I can't see that argument.  Have you ever witnessed a triangular
 >UFO flying at less than 3500 feet at less than 50 mph (that's
 >miles per hour, not kiometers per fortnight), not making a sound
 >and in the general vicinity of a thousand plus feet wide?  It
 >doesn't look anything like a plane.  Really.

Some people will buy that that was plane, though. It's easier to
debunk than a disk, or sphere.

 >>2. To allow for standard flight mechanisms to be activated in
 >>case something goes wrong with the main (gravitational, etc.)
 >>propulsion and maneuvering systems.

 >I am sorry, but how do you get from non standard flight to
 >standard flight mechanisms from triangles?  Do they fly better
 >than saucer shapes?

Two of the corners of the triangles may act as wings if needed.
Nobody has seen one of these black triangular UFOs close enough
to see whether they have "alternative" wings ot not.

 >>3. To enhance its stealth capabilities (remember the sharp
 >>angles of the relatively new stealth black fighter).

 >If it's stealth they are enhancing, they've failed. Too many of
 >us citizens are seeing the damned things.

I mean mostly invisibility to radar. They don't care much about
average observers, who can be easily dealt with. But radar
operator are a different story.

 >I don't know, Eduardo, there appear to be so many prototypes
 >flying around that they just cannot be prototypes in the sense
 >you mean. By now they must be production prototypes.

Probably. Maybe the US has come far beyonf prototypes, but
surely other nations are still in the experimetal stage, and the
screw up very often.

 >Or am I misunderstanding and you are joshing, right?  I knew it!
 >I just knew it.  You sly little devil.  Tee hee.

I'm not joking. That's what I believe. But I don't want to
convince anyone of anything. For that you need solid proof. But
if I had solid proof of any of this, my life would automatically
be in great danger, so I wouldn't push the issue either way.

 >>>NASA is developing Ultra Long Duration Balloon technology to
 >>>provide scientists an effective way to conduct high-altitude
 >>>research

 >>My suspicious mind immediately thinks that this also serves a
 >>dual purpose.

 >>1. The sincere scientific reasons given in the article.

 >I don't understand this.

I mean, that the ballons are really for weather monitoring,
without any of the "agendas" that followed in my post.

 >Personally, belief in the word of NASA is tantamount to
 >believing in Santa Claus

So you mean thay are all fat and have white beards? :))

 >or the tooth fairey, the latter of
 >which by the way, is now leaving hundred dollar bills under my
 >pillow every time I have a root canal.

At least you don't have to pay for the dentist. Or are you one?

 >>3. To reduce the attention paid to those sightings by making
 >>people become familiar with big, roung shapes floating in the
 >>air. So many sightings will go unreported, 'cause people will
 >>immediately think, "Oh, another weather baloon". Things haven't
 >>changed much since Roswell, have they? I call that "lack of
 >>creativity".

 >You are quite correct here, Eduardo.  Not much has changed since
 >Roswell.  I do agree as well with your, "lack or creativity"
 >theory.

 >Moe knew Metric, Larry knew English and Curly knew neither.  So
 >they never made it to Mars either.

 >Coincidence or Conspiracy.  You decide.

I go for the conspiracy theory :)

 >>Oh, Lord. Where did the innocent trust that I once had in my
 >>youth? Beam me up, anyone!

 >"Scottie,"  Eduardo ... "Beam me up, Scottie!"

I know. I should have said, anyone who's not from the
federation, which after all represents the future of the
american empire.

 >unfortunately, it cannot be done.  It is against every precept
 >and forcept known to present physics.

It may be possible in the future to scan something at an atomic
level, to desintegrate it and then reconstruct it. It's not such
a crazy idea after all.

 >But it _is_ possible to exceed the speed of dark. Which is where
 >we are now.  In the dark.  We are treated like mushrooms here in
 >this world, by our goobers in gooberland.  They keep us in the
 >dark and feed us scheiss. (That's German for doodoo).

That's why I want to be beamed up. This planet is too
depressing, and the choices are few: You can only become either
a slave or a lab rat. Oh, I think I forgot "mushroom" ;)

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:41:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:48:17 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:32:38 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >The Drake Equation was an exercise, which included numerous
 >speculative variables.  As we look back at it we can see other
 >speculative variables that may not have been taken into account,
 >but how does one determine that one set of speculative concepts
 >is better than another?

Like the assertion that travel beyond the speed of light is
impossible, maybe ? ;)

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:55:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:51:23 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:33:20 -0800
 >From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >It is ludicrous for exponents of ufological wisdom that don't
 >seem to understand how probabilities work to keep bashing the
 >Drake equation because it didn't take this and that in
 >consideration.

<snip>

 >Instead of this continuous bashing of the Drake equation and
 >SETI, proponents of ufological wisdom could bring less
 >embarassment to themselves by taking the time to enroll in a
 >course in introductory probability and statistics instead of a
 >public display of their ignorance.

1. I posted the original subject, and had no intention of
bashing the Drake Equation. I think is great that someone came
up with it at all. And I also realize that changing the figures
a little one could end up with a number 1 (us).

2. What SETI is doing, and if they have agendas, I just don't
know.

3. For me there's a great difference between knowledge and
wisdom. Mastering the laws of probability I call knowledge. Not
taking sides on debates related to knowledge is an expression of
wisdom.



--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 02:11:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:52:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:23:39 EST
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >My point. I am so desperately sorry. I seem to have forgotten my
 >point.  This is happening more and more often these days, ever
 >since I started wearing these new tin foil implant repelling and
 >CIA deflecting space cadet hats.

Excuse me, this time you forgot to tell me whether that was a
joke or not. I had my sampled sound of a laughing crowd ready to
be triggered, but I wasn't sure... :)

--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                      Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 22:32:04 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:58:00 -0500
Subject: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea


Source: PNG Post Courier Web site

[Please include Urls in future --ebk]

11/11/99, 12/11/99, 15/11/99

New Britain, Papua New Guinea stirred up by huge object on
Tursday, Nov. 4 1999


Thousands in the New Britain region, the Gazelle Peninsula, the
remote Bainingo ranges, the Duke of York Islands, the Baining
area, Vavu Beach, North coast of Rabual, and Pilapila community
have apparently witnessed a a large slow moving object described
variously as a craft "which had huge lumps on the sides with
light flickering aound it" (people of the remote Bainingo
ranges), apparently about 200 metres long, 50 metres wide & "lit
up like a city in the sky", moving slowly across the sky "making
a quite puffing noise" - an airship perhaps?

But other descriptions challenge that possibility.People living
on the insland in the Duke of York group closest to New Ireland
province reported seeing a huge craft hovering just metres above
the sea off St. Georges Channel, and travelling very slowly.
They also reported other smaller craft with bright lights
circling the larger one "in a playful manner".

John Berenti, & family of Namatanai, New Ireland, saw "ahuge
craft appear just above the top of the mango trees" he estimated
200 metres to 300 metres long & 50 metres wide.  Others tried to
chase the object.

Raymond Theodore a Ploice officer at about 8.30 pm, on Vuvu
Beach, North Rabaul coast, saw "a huge craft travelling just
metres above the seas... we saw it travel over Waton Island.  It
had very bright lights at the back as it moved along."

Alex Jame & 4 other boys returning from Pilapila Community
School about 7 pm and others saw bright lights approaching.  As
the UFO approached, Alex claimed "the street lights dimmed like
when the batteries in a torch are flat." He thought it was
noiseless, oblong in shape, bright lights around the edges, with
a top like a pyramid with som lights around it.  All white
lights.  The boys said it took 30 minutes to pass them.  Alex
said when the object hovered over them the place around them
light up & they could see people near them as if it was
daylight.  It eventually disappeared over the moutains near
Vuvu.

Another local, John Mcleod, manager of the Malangan Beach
resort, New Ireland province, said he watched it and thought it
was a satellite re-entery.  He seems to be describing something
else entirely.

If it was an airship or blimp it was a spectacular one??

-----

Thanks also to Paul Cropper.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 05:39:45 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:58:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

Honored List motes,

A poor man's survey at my site overwhelmingly says no, and goes on to
say that the very idea is ludicrous. The Aristotelian concept is
minamalized, as is the general ufological denial. People, in the
aggregate think they are being lied to by their churches, their news
anchors, and their elected officials. Further, they think that murky
conspiracy is alive and well and likely in Suffolk county. Amazing what
can be inferred by a poor man's survey. <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 13 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Crop Circle Music

From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:11:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:02:03 -0500
Subject: Crop Circle Music


This guy is great! Give a listen...

Pat

-----

From: Stvsmith@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 11:47 PM
To: pmason@ee.net
Subject: Crop Circle Music


Hi I have a new CD release on MP3.com called CROP CIRCLE MUSIC.
Here is the link www.mp3.com/stephensmith It is a relaxing
ambient space music, ideal for meditation.

This music is totally generated from crop circle images using
scales derived from  the geometry of certain crop circle
formations.

There are _no_ human musicians on this recording.

This work is based on the theories of Prof. Gerald Hawkins who
first discovered the diatonic/musical relationships in certain
crop formations.

Please check it out and leave me a message saying what you
think.

Stephen J Smith

P.S. Wholesale inquiries welcome







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:11:15 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:15:12 EST
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:29:54 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:36:02 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:43:21 -0500
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation

 >>When considering probability of life in another planets, the
 >>Drake Equation is a good starting point, but there's one element
 >>not included in it, which is the possibility that advanced
 >>civilizations (let's say, only 500 years more advanced than us)
 >>could be capable of colonizing many inhabited planets and moons
 >>in other star systems. In time, that could easily triple any
 >>previous figures resulting from applying the Drake Equation

 >What new evidence is there that interstellar travel could be
 >available, which was not in the original Drake Equation, and can
 >you put numbers on this possibility?

1) Michael Alcubierre's theoretical work demonstrating that a
"warp drive" would indeed permit FTL travel without violating
general relativity (but nobody knows how to do it.)

2) Kip Thorne's theoretical work showing how wormholes might be
kept open instead of pinching off, creating shortcuts to other
parts of space (but nobody knows how to do it).

3) Ongoing work in labs around the world to find a practical way
to extract "vacuum energy," utilizing the Casimir effect (which
would provide an unlimited energy source and get around the
energy barrier to interstellar travel of having to bring all
your energy with you or have it provided on the outside by a
massive engineering infrastructure).

4) NASA's Origins project, designed to map solar systems within
100 light years of Earth and find Earth-like solar systems and
planets. (Not really about achieving interstellar travel, but
about finding interesting places to go once you did. Solves the
silly question, "How could they possibly find us in all that
space?")

5) NASA director Dan Goldin's proposal to launch a small
interstellar probe within the next 40 years, powered by powerful
space-based lasers aimed at a large sail attached to the probe.

6) Other NASA ongoing studies in alternate propulsion and energy
for the purpose of interstellar travel. This includes a recent
NASA proposal to "stoke" fusion propulsion systems with small
quantities of antimatter. (Fusion is currently our
best-understood energy source that could power interstellar
travel, if we knew how to do it.)

7) The developing field of nanotechnology, which theoretically
might eventually manufacture superstrong materials that could
make some of these crazy proposals possible.

8) The rapidly advancing fields of robotics and computer
science, which in the not-to-distant future might lead to
self-reproducing armies of robots that could cheaply manufacture
the vast engineering infrastructure out in space that might be
needed to make some interstellar propulsion schemes practical.
Intelligent robotic probes also would likely be at the vanguard
of any interstellar exploration, before committing humans.

9) The likely ability in the not-to-distance future to greatly
extend the human lifespan, making long voyages between the stars
more feasable.

Well, that's all I can think of at the moment. There is no
guarantee that any of our interstellar propulsion schemes will
ever come to fruition. I can think of all sorts of engineering,
political, social, and economic obstacles. But NASA is currently
committing some brainpower on it, which they wouldn't do unless
they thought there was at least an outside chance that it was
possible. A lot has changed in 40 years and interstellar travel
is no longer considered to be the sole purview of dreamers and
crazy people. It's become more mainstream.

Incidentally, relativity theory never has said that
slower-than-light interstellar travel was impossible, as some
debunker's claim. It says that brute force propulsion schemes
require a lot of energy if you are to achieve some decent
fractional velocity of light. So the real question has always
been is there some practical way to accomplish this, since the
engineering scope would necessarily be massive? Future
space-based robotics could be the key, since they could cheaply
mine the solar system and build the necessary infrastructure.

E.g., comets are made mostly of water. About 1 water molecule in
10,000 contains deuterium, or heavy hydrogen, which could be
used as fuel for fusion reactors. One Hale-Bopp sized comet
contains over a cubic-mile of deuterium fusion fuel, enough to
power at least a 100 interstellar voyages. It would take an army
of robots to take these comets apart and extract the deuterium
fuel, but in principle, off in the hazy future, it could be
done. The energy restrictions imposed by physics aren't the real
problem. It's how to extract existing energy sources in a
practical way.

Can anybody put numbers on how likely we are to succeed at any
of these schemes? I can't, and nobody else can either. FTL
schemes are highly speculative at present. STL schemes are
theoretically possible, but massive in scope. Even if the
engineering problems could be solved, there still might be
insurmountable economic and political ones. (The Republican-led
Congress, e.g., threatens to cut off funding for the modest
Origins Project to map nearby solar systems, while proposing tax
cuts for the Rockefellers.)

But somewhere out in our galaxy, it seems very possible that at
least one ancient civilization put all the pieces together and
left their home worlds behind. These could be self-contained,
long-lived, nomadic space races (or maybe their robotic
descendents). Maybe they never achieved any exotic warp drive
technologies, but had to settle for clumsy STL travel. Still
they could move slowly from stellar system to stellar system,
colonizing them, and gradually expanding in range and numbers.
If they doubled their colonies only once every 100,000 years,
each colony in turn expanding out to another nearby stellar
system, it would take them only a few million years to
eventually get to every star in the galaxy. That would be the
power of exponential growth.

In such a scenario, visitation at some point in our history
would be very likely. This was the basis of Fermi's conjecture.
He felt that such a scenario was almost inevitable if there were
advanced civilizations out there. Future technologies probably
knew almost no limits in Fermi's view. But Fermi thought there
was no evidence that we had ever been visited. Hence the famous
question, "Where are they," and the proposal that maybe we were
alone.

In any case, interstellar travel and galactic colonization by
older, more advanced space races, would indeed seriously change
any estimates made by the Drake equation of the number of
civilizations out there. With colonization, they could
conceivably number in the millions or billions.

David Rudiak









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:08:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:15:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


I've been following this fascinating thread for the last few
days. I have to say that the standard of debate is excellent -
as good as anything I've read anywhere else.

At the risk of repeating some points, I'd like to add my own
.02. The following is adapted from a couple of posts I
made some time ago to the seti group.

One problem with the Drake Equation is that it does not take
into account the psychosocial aspects of the development of a
technological society (as distinct from intelligence). From the
one example we know, I would guess that an important impetus to
the development of technology is the relative maladaption of the
organism to its environment (humans, even from the earliest
hominid ancestors, seem to have adapted their environment to
themselves through technology (clothes, fire, tools, etc.)
rather than adapting to it biologically. This element (the
survival of the maladapted) seems critical to the development of
technological intelligence

More importantly, this technological bias must then
_institutionalised_ (by philosophy or religion), before the
benefits of technology per se become a major ideological goal
for such a civilization (for example, Greek Science vs. The Dark
Ages; certain Judaeo-Christian models where the earth is seen to
be be something to be subjugated, vs. more contemplative Eastern
Ideologies).

I can imagine many worlds where intelligent life has evolved in
harmony with its environment (much as dolphins and
whales have here), and where the need for technology
has not arisen.

To elaborate: I would argue that most cultures seem to reach a
level of appropriate technology and then cease further
adaptation. That is, if the technology satisfies most
subsistence needs, many cultures stagnate--especially those
blessed with mild climates and fertile soils.

In some cases, such cultures may stimulate scientific inquiry
(ancient Greece, for example). But more often, development may
take a more mystical route, where the culture elaborates an
increasingly philosophically complex universe, usually at the
expense of technological advancement (for example, the Pacific
Islands of pre-Western contact).

On earth, Western civilization is characterized by a desire to
subjugate the environment. Its notions of progress and its
desire to dominate other cultures arise in large part from
certain interpretations of Judaeo-Christian philosophy. The
imperative used to be a desire to know the mind of God through
understanding his works. Such desire led directly to the
Enlightenment, and the eventual triumph of scientific
methodology as the privileged method for understanding the
world.

However, what gave this its irresistable power was the melding
of the evolution of knowledge and technology with the spiritual
imperatives of the Western interpretation of Judaeo-Christian
beliefs. This led to the desire to 'enlighten' the world. In
contact with the Pacific Islanders, Missionaries spent a great
deal of time convincing the inhabitants to be dissatisfied with
their almost idyllic existance. In this sense, the concept of
Original Sin may have been as powerful a force on technological
development as anything else.

The Church, as much as the state, therefore drove this process--
appealing both to sprituality as well as to rationality: much
early development in Astronomy, for example, came from the
desire of the Church to calculate the date of Easter. Would we
have had Copernicus or Kepler (or even Von Braun or Sagan)
without such an imperative?

In other words, is the catalysing spark that moves civilization
from appropriate technology to an aggressive, questing
technology, a much more rare thing than we might imagine? Or is
it an inevitability of evolutionary pressure?

I believe the former, but I hope for the latter.

Brian








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                           Re: Egyptair Flight 990

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:14:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:19:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Egyptair Flight 990


 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 12:54:05 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Egyptair Flight 990

 >I've heard something about the fact that this plane landed at
 >Edwards Air Force Base, where some specialist in this kind of
 >emergencies/accidents got off the plane.

Nope. The plane landed at Newark (code EWR)...

A reporter erroneously thought that EWR was Edwards Air Force
Base, and the story hit the wires.

The error was later corrected, but the conspiracy folks seem to
have been unable to let it go.

For the record, Edwards is EDW.

Brian









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:14:34 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:24:04 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 02:26:40 +0100 (MET)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 00:32:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Somehow we seem to be doing neither. Tsk, tsk. Chame, chame,
 >>chame. Does not _one_ own anything of greater value than an
 >>opinion out there? Or are you all just fishing. I dream of
 >>someone with a great deal of money developing an institute of
 >>science whose only task is to determine the truth about the UFO
 >>conundrum.

 ><snipped rest>

 >Dear Jim,

 >Both Laurence Rockefeller and Jim Bigelow have devoted part of
 >their money to research into Ufology. Scorn befell them.
 >That's Ufology.

 >Groeten,
 >Henny

Dear Henny, Kanappy, Listers (both Mr. and Mrs., not to mention
Ms's) and Al;

I drink Mr. Bigelow's teas, travel Mr. Rockefeller's properties
(in Westchester County) and eat Mr. Fromage's cheeses. I even
drink Gesundt's "Freshly Made's."

On the serious side, it is my personal opinion that those (with
the possible exception is Rockeffeler) with money are, to at
least some extent, a tad on the eccentric side to begin with.
Perhaps this is how they obtained their wealth. Eccentricity
often arrives on the same frequency as some silly fossify, or is
it just me seeing through the shadow of the green eyed monster?

Bigelow wants a hotel in space. Firmage has grandiose belief
systems and Gesundt is merely inebriated most of the time. They
are not with the rest of us. They are so different from the rest
of us, that when it comes to their avocations, we do not take
them seriously. Of course, that problem is mostly ours.

Genius is right there within one sigma of total, blithering,
butt scratching insanity. And somehow, when a man, any man,
takes on this subject and bears his or her soul, it (his or her
soul) becomes the mooned butt, nekked as the day that poor
bastard was born. It's like going around in public with your
pants down around your ankles.

Everyone points, giggles and says something like, "Oh, look!
It's that rich nutcase what believes in flying saucers!" Or, if
you are just a regular Joe, they point and giggle yet again,
"Ooo, lookit! It's that regular Joe what think's he's been
abducted by space aliens from the planet Mongo! Santa Maria!"

And the religious ones make the sign of the whatever to ward off
the mala loikya whilst those on the other side of the pond
harumpf off in a huff and a puff. "Hi tea is a toke and a cup!"

Sad world aint it? Which is why I drink Gripple La Feet from
Canal Street. Where the grapes are sweet and the elite meet.
"Archie's Taven, where the elite meet. Dis is Charlie speakin,
Archie aint here."

Thanks for the memories Henny. And please, take my wife.

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt's favorite go fer,
Docca Morty, abductee, pants down
around his legs and everybody pointing.
"Oooo, lookit, did you ever see one that
small?"

Groeten,
Jimmy





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                         Re: Sour Grapes and Science

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:28:46 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:41:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Sour Grapes and Science


Forgive this intrusion, but I just now saw something I would
share with you. It may be a reason mainstream science abhors the
thought of flying saucers, the abduction experience, and other
goofy stuff.

I was watching a Public Television (I am so sorry, I do admit to
viewing same... not unlike our brothers and sisters across the
pond and the BBC - Oy).

Anyway, I was watching a program on which a "scientist" of some
renown, was extrapolating and expounding on the question of life
elsewhere, God, the Universe and Everything.  He freely admitted
that the only thing he accepted, as a physicist, (Stanton
Friedman excepted, of course) was a scientific explanation for
something or other.

His point was that if science could not explain it, then for
science, it did not exist.

Your honors, I rest my case.  Not to worry, it's not heavy.  I
am in the process of making it a lot lighter as we speak.  It is
a case of Gripple and sour grapes.  They go together well and
miraculously lose weight with time.  Some kind of entropy
thingy.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                    Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:11:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:46:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:54:54 EST
 >Subject: Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:59:53 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:16:43 -0500
 >Subject: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re:

<snip>

 >(BTW, isn't this the same Paul Davis that Nightline had on as
 >some sort of "UFO expert" about 4 years ago, in which he made
 >the remark that he had a "feeling in his bones" that we were the
 >only intelligent life in not just the galaxy, but the whole damn
 >Universe?)

I think you've got two people confused here. Paul Davies is a
professor of natural science now in Australia who has written a
lot of popular science books. Someone on this list recently
posted a brief reference to a newspaper article of his. It's
quite possible that he was on Nightline. Mike Davis, who wrote
"Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage?" lives in Pasadena. His most
recent book was something like Anatomy of Fear (missing
subtitle),  which was a ruminative history of Los Angeles, with
a lot thrown in about why people build places like that where
they do. He could be full of it, for all I know, but the guy can
write.

 >Just because the man has a PhD doesn't mean his opinions aren't
 >heavily influenced by his own transparent "religious beliefs."
 >People like Davis who take such obviously extreme positions seem
 >like the heirs to the Catholic hierarchy that nearly burned
 >Galileo at the stake for proposing we might not be the center of
 >the Universe.

Actually, Davis was a Marxist, last time I looked.

 >My personal position on the evolution of intelligence is
 >detailed in another post.  As I stated there, my guesstimates of
 >the odds of any given stellar system evolving intelligent life
 >are comparable to the odds of winning the lottery.  I no more
 >think intelligent life is the inevitable evolutionary endpoint
 >of simple bacterial lifeforms than I believe that every person
 >who owns a lottery ticket wins the lottery.

Then we're in agreement.

 >And the reason I have LONG believed that is because of some of
 >those precious contingent conditions you've been ranting about
 >that are likely necessary to move from bacterial to intelligent
 >life.  (Believe it or not, I have taken a lot of courses in
 >biology, genetics, and molecular biology in my lifetime, and am
 >pretty familiar with current thinking on the evolution of life
 >on Earth.)

Then you should find the Davis piece interesting, if not
stimulating, whether you agree with anything he has to say or
not, or only maybe a tenth of it.

 >E.g., it took two-thirds of Earth's history to evolve the
 >eucharyotic cell, the basic and necessary building block of all
 >complex life forms on planet Earth.  That appears to be a major
 >stumbling block in our history on the road to complex life, and
 >probably a major obstacle elsewhere as well.  It is by no means
 >a given that even Earth-like planets with bacterial life will
 >necessarily make this big evolutionary jump.


In agreement, again.

 >Just because Paul Davis argues one point of view doesn't make it
 >so.  The man is on the extremely conservative fringe of present
 >scientific thinking concerning the evolution of life elsewhere
 >in the Universe.

 >David Rudiak

It's Mike Davis, and I never said it did.

BTW, according to the NY Times, scientists today confirmed the
existence of the first extrasolar planet among the 25 or so
suspected candidates based on star wobble. It's 153 light years
distant and orbits its sun in 3.523 days, possibly resulting in
a surface temperature of 3000 degrees F. Its radius is 60 per
cent greater than that of Jupiter, although its mass is only 63
per cent of Jupiter's. It was detected by its shadow falling
across the face of its star.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:23:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:50:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:22:22 -0500
 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >Technological tools
 >might not be necessary to explore the universe.

Many in Tibet, India, China and Egypt would most certainly agree
with you ;)


--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:55:05 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:52:28 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST

 >>From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800

 >>I think it most strange that the previously debunked phenomenon
 >>of ball lightning has been used recently to explain UFO
 >>sightings.

 >Precisely.  And maybe one day, after the UFO phenomenon, like
 >ball lightning, is assumed to be real, it will be used to
 >explain away some emerging, even stranger phenomenon of nature
 >or the universe. Science -- or at least human nature -- marches
 >on.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry, this comment really puzzles me. You seem to again be
implying that there is some actual phenomenon called "a UFO"
which has an existence in and of itself, and is not simply a
misinterpretation of some other phenomena or a psychological
construct.

If at some future point UFOs are "assumed to be real" then it
can only be because they have been identified as something. Now
everything that you and Mark Cashman have been writing leads me
to suggest that you expect this something to be a physically
real constructed object. And if this is so, then that
constructed object has characteristics which suggest that it has
not been constructed by current terrestrial technology.

Therefore UFOs are extraterrestrial craft. Now lots of people
think this is the case and, despite the controversial nature of
the evidence, it's an intellectually respectable argument. But
is it your argument?

I'm only asking because I want to know.

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 16

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:09:22 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:55:27 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:33:29 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
 >>>appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
 >>>must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
 >>>since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

 >>And just how would you expect the appearance to change? Would a
 >>Russian secret weapon necessarily look different to an
 >>extraterrestrial craft? As witnesses would have no idea what
 >>either looked like there is no reason why the descriptions
 >>should change. In fact there was quite a long period when both
 >>"explanations" overlapped.

 >I think it is reasonable to assume that the populace would think
 >that "Russian secret weapons" or even "American secret weapons"
 >would look like aircraft. Advanced aircraft, maybe with highly
 >swept wings, but aircraft, not wingless disks, spheres, and
 >cylinders.

Perhaps, but it's just as likely, especially after the evidence
of the German V2 weapons at the end of the war, that a wingless
rocket or cigar-shape would seem likely for both possible
extraterrestrial craft and potential secret weapons. This
certainly seems to have been an influence on the first UFO
"wave", the Scandinavian Ghost Rockets. > >I would expect that
the switch to belief that UFOs were >extraterrestrial would
convert the most common descriptions to >non-aircraft-like
geometries which would fit the most common >current model of
what "alien spacecraft" would look like. I >don't believe people
thought alien spacecraft and secret weapons >would look similar.

 >>Do you have evidence to the contrary?

See above. But as I said previously, there was no sudden switch from
belief in secret weapons to believe in alien spcecraft. Both ideas
existed side by side as an explanation for UFO reports for many years -
and to an extent still do.
 >
 >
 >Triangles of one sort or another appear in pre 1980s reports and
 >are one of the classifications in the 1964 UFO Evidence. That
 >they are more common now than in the past is not something yet
 >empirically verified, but even if that were the case, it is not
 >any sort of "proof" of the non-existence of UFOs.
 >
 >UFOs with "towers" do appear in a number of reports from 1949
 >through 1967 and possibly into the 1970s. That geometry has
 >always been among the least common. The most common geometry,
 >the domed disk, continues to be frequently reported. In
 >addition, the tower, unless displaying a luminosity of its own,
 >would probably be invisible in night sightings.
 >
 >Arnold, in case you didn't bother to look at the sketches in the
 >Blue Book report, depicted lenticular disks. As for large wing
 >shaped objects, they have been reported at least since 1951 and
 >continuing through the 1990s. Many of these could be interpreted
 >as having a "croissant" shape.

Yes, certainly any particular shape of UFO can be found in
reports from any era, and individual cases of trianglular UFOs,
as James Easton notes elsewhere, can be found as early as the
nineteen-fifties. But these were isolated instances and do not
have the quantity or consistency of 1980-90 reports. The
lenticular and domed discs are the most commonly reported
shapes, as these are the shapes that are most likely to be
created from misperceptions or atmospheric distortions of stars,
satellites or conventional aircraft.

 >The Socorro geometry (an ellipse) has been reported probably
 >only secondary in frequency to the domed disk. There are many
 >reports of noisy near ground behavior, and blue luminosity as
 >well.

An ellipse, per se, is simply a rather forshortened lenticular
disc, and the same considerations apply. There are rather fewer
reports, certainly in the past ten years, of tripod-equipped,
ovoid objects, with markings, spouting flames.

 >Please familiarize yourself with more than the popular accounts
 >- read the case literature before making statistical
 >pronouncements.

 >BTW, even if UFO shapes kept changing, it would not be evidence
 >of their mythological nature. Aside from dealing with multiple
 >witness cases,

Very few. In most cases the report comes from one or two people.
Other witnesses tend not to be available for interview.

 >the ground traces,

Ambiguous, but I await with interest the full report on Delphos

 >the radar detection,

Mostly old cases unfortunatly, but nonetheless interesting

 >the
 >medical evidence,

Again, ambiguous, but interesting. Hardly proof in itself, and cases
with medical elements tend not be be associated with any of the above.
But they're certainly evidence that *something* happened

 >etc., proof of the mythological nature of the
 >UFO, would require showing it tracking cultural depictions of
 >the concept to which UFOs are attached. A test such as that
 >which I mentioned (UFO geometries reflecting the common concept
 >of the explanation accepted at the time) would seem to be to be
 >a basic discriminator of the hypothesis. Are you saying it is
 >not? Is that because it does not support your hypothesis?

It is likely that the concept to which UFOs were first attached
(if we conveniently write off 1897 and 1909 as Cashman and Clark
do) was originally terrestrial secret weapons. The shaped
reported in the pre- 1950 era generally conforms to this:
wingless rockets, cigar-shapes, flying discs - shapes which were
perhaps one step beyond the actual technology. Flying discs as a
possible technological development was certainly being discussed
at the period. As belief began to change to the ETH there was no
sudden switch-over to more exotic types.

However, once the ETH becomes established as the main popular
explanation for the phenomenon, "cultural tracking" becomes more
problematical. The reports become part of the phenomenon which
is being culturally tracked.

 >>The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >>previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >>science fiction.

 >As I have pointed out before, statistically, the vast majority
 >of pre-1950s spaceship depictions were either streamlined cigars
 >with fins, cones with wings, or, for the really advanced stuff,
 >submarine shaped objects with giant rivets and rows of ship-like
 >portholes. Also, there are no reports of Flash Gordon like
 >objects, despite the popularity of that serial.

But streamlined cigars were very much a feature of 40s and 50s
reports. I'm not sure what you mean by cones with wings. A
glance through a couple of encyclopaedias of SF doesn't reveal
anything like that, but maybe I'm visualising it wrongly.
"Submarine shaped" - isn't that a lenticular disc seen side on,
or even just a good old cigar-shaped UFO??

 >Where are these in the reports of the time? Also, where is the
 >evidence that UFO reporters were science fiction readers or fans
 >of SF serials?

This comment simply shows how little you understand the
psychosocial hypotheses. Popular depictions, by the very fact
that they are popular, are familiar even to people who do not
take a particular interest in them. I have almost zero interest
in contemporary pop music yet I cannot avoid being familar with
the names, appearance and sounds of groups such as Blur, Oasis
or the Spice Girls.

 >Finally, keep in mind that cultural context goes both ways, and
 >after 1947, most people in the US had a pretty good idea of what
 >UFOs looked like.

Exactly th point I make above

 >Also keep in mind that Jerry Clark and others
 >have shown that a large number of the 1897 airship wave reports,
 >especially those with human occupants, seem to have been
 >journalistic hoaxes.

Maybe, but they still formed part of the cultural background
which influenced how people saw other events.


--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                   Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:30:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:06:33 -0500
Subject: Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings


As of the assembling of this note, newsrooms all across this
area are being flooded with calls of concern regarding an
unusual aerial spectacle seen in the Northern
Kentucky/Cincinnati vicinity.

One witness to the incident, a resident of Cincinnati, informed
this reporter that shortly after 7:00 p.m. while traveling
northbound on Interstate 75 from the Florence, Kentucky entrance
ramp, that he and his wife observed two "rows of lights"
traveling in formation. This formation, he informed, was "way
too wide to be any airplane."

He suspected this to be an Air Force formation of jets that had
flown low over the Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky region.

The duration of the sighting was between 30 to 45-seconds.

A group of lights on the "left portion" detached and 'moved
away' from the larger formation, the witness informed. All the
lights disappeared together, into the distance.

In response to this credible report of a large object or group
of objects sighted in the Florence, Kentucky vicinity, a call
was placed to the newsroom of 700 WLW radio [Cincinnati. The
receptionist informed that hundreds of people had seen this
spectacle, and within the last few minutes, it had been
explained as a "meteor."

The explanation, he informed, came from the airport [whose
control tower, according to the motorist, would have had a
clear, full view of the oddity] and also from "scientists,"
whose names were not at his disposal.

The oddity was seen from Indianaopolis, Indiana to Paducah,
Kentucky.

We'll try to stay alert for any further information on this
strange situation and keep you posted when able.

KENNY YOUNG
8:24 p.m. November 16, 1999
--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

               More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:43:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:07:26 -0500
Subject: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

The newsroom of WLWT Channel 5 [NBC] was contacted, and the
employee in the news department informed that their station has
been flooded with calls regarding the unusual sighting in the
skies around 7 p.m.

"We don't have a good explanation for what happened," he said.
"At first, we thought it was part of the meteor shower, but then
we talked to a University of Cincinnati astronomer who told us
that he doesn't think this was a meteor. He thinks it was part
of an old satellite which has dropped out of orbit."

When asked how this information is being received in the
newsroom, he said: "People all over the tri-state have called."

"Some callers informed that part of the object broke off from
the main formation, and it looked like this was some kind of
debris." [Note: this is consistant with earlier eyewitness
interview]

The employee at the newsroom informed that people all across the
Greater Cincinnati area have been calling 9-1-1 stations in each
of their respective communities.

"The response to this is really sensational," he said. "We're
going to run this news story at 11, in the first block."

Filed:
Nov. 16, 1999
8:40 p.m.
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

             Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 21:47:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:10:20 -0500
Subject: Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

Paul wrote:

 >It could still be a bolide, but in any case, it should make
 >for a good video and pictures.  I hope someone got it.

Paul:

In the last half-hour I have been listening to News Radio 700
WLW, and this sighting is all they are talking about. On the
Bill Cunningham program, his guest is Bill Boshears, host of
Sci-Zone radio program. Boshears also saw the oddity, and
described a 'flash' before the object appeared. He said the
sighting was "spooky."

WKRC Channel 12 [CBS] Meteorologist Tim Hedrick was interviewed
extensively on the 9:30 p.m. newscast, and recounted his
sighting of what he initially presumed to be a 'burning
aircraft.' He also told of a greenish glow in the sky.

They are taking many phone calls, and they are liberally
entertaining the theory that this sighting was caused by a UFO.

Needless to say, it's really exciting around here right now.

KY
--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                   Video Shot In Indiana - To Be Televised

From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 21:56:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:13:17 -0500
Subject: Video Shot In Indiana - To Be Televised


Meteorologist Tim Hedrick was again interviewed live on 700 WLW
radio, and informed that his sighting took place at 7:03 or 7:04
p.m.

The "object," as he described, was traveling from west to east,
and looked like some sort of aircraft, like a semi-truck with
'green flames' shooting out of it.

John Venture of the observatory informed this was not part of
the Leonids.

Tim Hedrick informed that a Lafayette, Indiana television
station has videotape of this, and his station, WKRC Channel 12
[CBS] in Cincinnati, will try to gain this video from Lafayette
for use on their 11:00 p.m. newscast tonight. They hope to get
the signal via satellite.

9:55 p.m.
November 16, 1999
--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 21:27:07 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:07:42 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:59:27 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Good Evening Dave

I couldn't help myself but I have to make a few comments to some
of your comments to Georgina

 >By the following
 >morning I had collected all the data together, written a story
 >which made pg 3 of the following evening's paper and contacted
 >the family concerned with the explanation (they were quite happy
 >to accept they saw an aircraft, by the way).

It might surprise you to know Dave that I have "solved" more
cases than I called unexplained, by some seventy percent. But,
whenever I "explained" a UFO to a witness they was nearly all
pleased and happy to have the case solved. So I can fully
believe this family being happy about mis-indentifying a simple
plane, after it does happen quite a bit. However the reason as
to why they are happy is a funny one. Could they be happy that
they then don't have to think about life "out there" when a case
is identified? Food for thought? Or just plain paranoia?

 >Perhaps Georgina might have spent three years investigating this
 >case - but is it really necessary to reach a resolution? Often
 >the simplest explanations fit the best - viz the lighthouse at
 >Rendlesham.

Quick dig, <g>. What if the simplest answer might be a genuine
alien visitation? Sometimes, just sometimes, this might be the
simplest explanation?

 >In fact, Georgina's buddy Nick Pope, in a recent letter,
 >described my exhaustive 20,000 word report on the Howden Moor
 >incident thusly: "...I'm very impressed with the work you...have
 >done in putting together this comprehensive and balanced report,
 >which is just the sort of proper investigation that's normally
 >conspicuous by its absence in ufology."

I have to agree with Nick here. I can't say that I agree with
everything that you wrote but it was good work Dave.

 >All the best,

Always.

 >Dave Clarke.

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                     Sighting Report OZ File 10.11. 1999

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:43:18 +1100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:09:22 -0500
Subject: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11. 1999

The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia

http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new

UFO Sighting Report

FOLLOWUP Mike Farrell UFOR NSW 1800 Call in Code: 00377
06.11.1999

Date: 10.11.99
Day: Thursday
Time Reported:  6.00pm
Location: Coffs Harbour NSW
Reportee: Mr Taylor
Report given to nearest rep: Mike Farrell
Tel: 02 6

Viewed from Sawtell (south of Coffs Harbour) N.S.W.
Tuesday 20th. July 1999. 9.50pm.

Mr. Dare Taylor and his wife were driving home on the Pacific
Highway, when they noticed two orange/yellow lights approaching
them at what appeared to be fairly low altitude and heading S.W.

When almost directly overhead, they noticed that they were
slowly 'pulsing'. Suddenly, the two objects changed direction
sharply towards the east. When they turned, their slow speed
dramatically increased, as 'they quickly gained altitude to a
great height, faster than a jet', stated Mr. Taylor. As they
were speeding off, they appeared to fade on-and-off or 'pulse'
even faster.

Second Report from Mr. Taylor.

N.W. Tasmania around 1958-60

He witnessed a 'huge orange Moon sized object loosing altitude
as if to almost land in farming country'. He said this sighting
was reported in local Newspapers at the time, so must have been
witnessed by others.


Thank You Mike Farrell for this Report

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                    Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:43:28 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:12:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:54:54 EST
 >Subject: Re: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:59:53 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 17:16:43 -0500
 >Subject: Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage [Was: Re:

<snip>

 >Sure Dennis, send it on.  What makes you think I'm terrified to
 >read it?  You're repeated posturing and breast-beating about
 >this is beginning to look pretty silly.


Dave,

Sorry, but I don't think it looks any sillier than your refusal,
neglect, or whatever, to accept a copy the first time I offered
you one, which would have been the end of it. You could just as
easily have said, "Sure, send me one" from the start, so don't
take the high ground and accuse me of breast-beating.

I offered you a copy several times and only now got a positive
response. Thanks, I'll send you one.

That said, I don't feel I have the right to distribute Davis's
article electronically. In the bargain, the only copy I do have
is buried in an immense Quark file for The Anomalist 5. What I
would much prefer is to send you a hard copy of the relevant
issue, for which I need a snail mail address.

And in which case you win the lottery. Not only do you get the
Davis article, but also one on the RAND Corp. and UFOs, along
with four other interesting articles, the better to acquaint you
with my editorial approach, which you presume to know "all too
well" as "Stacian doublespeak," or whatever you referred to it
as. It's a bit more complicated than that, actually, but never
mind.

Anyway, send me an address and I'll send you one. In the
meantime, here's an excerpt from roughly the middle of the Davis
article. Comment if you want, but don't address it out of
context as if it were all the article said. Footnotes are in
brackets. And, yes, before you ask, Davis is one of those
ignoramuses writing and expostulating today without the benefit
of the pervasive and convincing evidence of the existence of
UFOs so daily prevalent and abundant on this List. Makes you
want to kick him and his likes upside the head, don't it?

Any longer and Davis would probably sue me. As it is, ebk won't
be happy with me, either.

The Davis excerpt follows:

This was no more than business as usual.  Since 1959 when the
USSR's Luna 3 documented the absence of maria on the Moon's
farside, surprise has been the standard ration of planetary
reconnaissance.  Indeed the geological survey of the solar
system has revealed new realities as completely unexpected as
those discovered by cold war oceanography during the 1950s.  As
one team of researchers pointed out, �the sense of novelty would
probably not have been greater if we had explored a different
solar system.�[71] In essence, theory has been unable to predict
planetary composition or dynamics in advance of exploration.
The solar system is distinguished by the conspicuous absence of
�normal planets.�  Each instead is an eccentric individual with
its own unique chemical and tectonic identity.  Moreover, the
same rule applies to miniature as well as major worlds, since
�every satellite has turned out to differ in some significant
feature from its neighbor.�  Singularity, in other words, seems
to have a fractal distribution across scales.[79]

The distinguished Australian cosmochemist Stuart Ross Taylor has
drawn important epistemological conclusions from this planetary
exceptionalism. �The complexity of the solar system,� he argues,
�is not in accord with theories that start from some simple
initial condition.� In his view, planetary diversity confounds
the classical Kant-Laplacean project of discovering �some
uniform principles, analogous to the Periodic Table or Darwinian
evolution, from which one might construct clones of our solar
system.�  In particular he disputes elegant, �top-down� theories
of the system's origin like the �equilibrium condensation
model,� so popular in the 1970s, with its postulates of a
chemically zoned nebula and an orderly process of planetary
accretion. [80]

In contrast, Taylor views accretion as inherently messy and
event-driven. Instead of a �grand unified theory,� he proposes a
�bottom-up� narrative in which planetary formation is the
outcome of a kind of deterministic chaos. �If large impacts of
planetesimals are a characteristic feature of the final stages
of planetary accretion, then the details of the individual
impacts become to some extent free parameters.�[81] Even in its
most general features, then, the present solar system cannot be
theoretically �deduced� from the equations of the state of the
original solar nebula.  Singular impact events, unpredictable in
any Laplacean model, have produced some of the characteristic
anomalies itemized in Table 5.

Taylor's solar system, in a word, is radically historical  which
is to say, chaotic  and impact cratering is its existential
moment.  Classical celestial mechanics, of course, allowed no
role for collisions, or for intrinsically unpredictable or
irreversible outcomes.  Taylor's conception of the solar system
as bricolage, however, prescribes innumerable possible
evolutionary paths out of the same initial conditions.  The
major planetary features �are the result of events that might
readily have taken a different turn.�[82] Although �other
planetary systems doubtless exist,� the duplication of the
singular sequence that has produced the present solar system is
as likely as �finding an elephant on Mars.� [83]

This is a view broadly shared by other planetary scientists,
who, in recent years, have given more precise definition to the
external preconditions for the existence of the Earth's
biosphere.[84] There seem to be four paramount contingencies.
First of all, computer modelling indicates that a climate
conducive to life on Earth depends upon the extraordinarily
narrow orbital parameters that define a �continuously habitable
zone� (CHZ) where water can exist in a liquid state.  This is
sometimes called the �Goldilocks problem,� since Venus is too
hot, Mars too cold and only the Earth �just right� for
life.�[85]

If the Earth's orbit were only 5 per cent smaller than it
actually is, during the early stages of Earth's history there
would have been a �runaway greenhouse effect� [like Venus], and
temperatures would have gone up until the oceans boiled away
entirely!... [on the other hand] if the Earth-Sun distance were
as little as 1 per cent larger, there would have been runaway
glaciation on Earth about 2 billion years ago.  The Earth's
oceans would have frozen over entirely, and would have remained
so ever since, with a mean global temperature less than -50
degrees F [like Mars].[86]

(Even if Mars, as some exobiologists speculate, has preserved a
�stealth biosphere� of primitive anaerobic bacteria in the
interstices of its Archean-aged crust, its engine of evolution,
for all intents and purposes, is turned off.)[87]

Secondly, Jupiter plays an essential role as the Earth's big
brother and protector.  Its vast mass prevents most Sun-bound
comets from penetrating the inner solar system.  Without this
Jovian shield, it has been estimated that the Earth would have
experienced a flux of comet-sized impactors a thousand times
larger than actually recorded during geological time. K/T-sized
catastrophes, in other words, would have taken place at
100,000-year rather 100-million-year intervals.  If the Earth's
surface were not actually sterilized by such a bombardment, it
is hard to imagine the survival of taxa beyond the most
primitive levels of evolution. (Nils Holm and Eva Andersson
suggest deepsea hydrothermal systems as the only possible
refuges from heavy bombardment.)[88]

This suggests, as a minimum precondition, that only planetary
systems that contain both terrestrial planets and gas giants are
capable of sustaining complex life forms.[89] Thirdly, the
gravitational shield of the giant planets, while highly
efficient, must occasionally fail to protect the Earth.  One of
the central paradoxes of planetary science  the so-called
�temperature-volatiles conundrum�  is that the temperatures for
the existence of liquid water only exist in the inner solar
system, while the key building blocks of life, including water
itself, occur primarily beyond the asteroid belt.  Indeed, the
Earth �probably formed almost entirely devoid of the biogenic
elements.�  Thus some modulated frequency of cometary impacts
has been necessary to convey oceans of water, as well as carbon
and nitrogen, from the volatile-rich regions of the solar system
to Earth.  The evolution of the biosphere, in other words, has
been dependent upon a subtle cometary trade surplus in imported
volatiles that stops short of the impact magnitudes that would
erode the atmosphere or vaporize the oceans.[90]

Fourthly, the Earth's unique and massive satellite, the Moon,
plays a crucial role in stabilizing the obliquity of the Earth's
rotational axis.  Locked into spin-orbit resonance with the
Earth  that is, the lunar day is equivalent to the lunar month
the Moon with its high angular momentum keeps the Earth tilted
within one degree (plus or minus) of 24.4 degrees relative to
its plane of revolution.  Obliquity, of course, is what creates
the terrestrial seasonality so important to the evolution and
diversity of life.  Mars, in contrast, has a wildly oscillating
tilt and chaotic seasonality, while Venus, rotating slowly
backward, has virtually no seasonality at all.  It may be
impossible for a �Gaian-type� biosphere, with its complex
network of self-regulating biogeochemical cycles, to evolve
under such conditions, regardless of the presence of water or
not.[91]

[And so merrily on and before.]

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                   Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:43:31 +1100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:14:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999

The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new

FOLLOWUP Mike Farrell UFOR NSW 1800 Callin Code: 00376
10.11.1999

Date: 10.11.99
Day: Thursday
Time Reported: 11.05am
Location: Coffs Harbour NSW
Reportee: Sheryl R
Report given to nearest rep: Mike Farrell
Tel: 02 6

Mc Auley's Headland overlooking Diggers Beach Coffs Harbour.
N.S.W. Saturday 29th. May 1999 between 12.10 - 12.30am.

Mrs Cheryl  was closing the bedroom window when she noticed an
orange light appear over the headland on the beach front. While
she was watching, a second, then a third similar orange light
appeared. This triangle formation slowly moved south towards
Coffs Harbour and remained parallel to the coast until out of
sight. Constant altitude and slow steady speed while maintaining
the same formation had her puzzled, especially since there was
no sound.

A couple of minutes later, another triangle formation of three
orange lights came over the headland. and headed in the same
direction as the first three.

Than just before 12.30am, another four orange lights appeared
from the same area over the headland. The fourth light lagged
behind the others.

 From her high viewing position, she says that they were
definitely not launched from the beach or headland, they
originated out to sea some distance from land.

Next morning, she rang the Police and Radio station who both had
not received any other calls about the objects, and did not wish
to pursue the event.

Mrs. R  then contacted the local Advocate newspaper and convoyed
her sighting to the journalist. No media report was forth
coming.

Two weeks later, the Campbell town (Sydney) Television News
story was aired showing a formation of similar orange objects
caught on video by a local resident.

Mrs. R  commented, after reading about the recent six fishermen
videoing an orange object off Coffs Harbour, that quote; 'It may
be fishermen letting them off from trawlers out to sea, and took
video of them as a joke'. end quote.


Thankyou MIke Farrell for this report

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                     Sighting Report OZ File 20.10.1999

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:43:45 +1100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:15:57 -0500
Subject: Sighting Report OZ File 20.10.1999

The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
  - http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new

FOLLOWUP Tony Cook VUFORS 1800 Callin Code: 00293  20.10.1999

Date: Tuesday 31.8.99 22:30
Location: Reservoir, Victoria
Source: Phillip M

Mr. Phillip M 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
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~vufors

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                   Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999

From: Robert Frola <ufologist@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:43:58 +1100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:17:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999

The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia -
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new

FOLLOWUP Mike Farrell UFOR NSW 1800 Callin Code: 00378
10.11.1999

Sighting Report OZ File 10.11.1999

Date: 10.11.99
Day: Thursday
Time Reported: 8.45pm
Location: Coffs Harbour NSW
Reportee: Darren F
Report given to nearest rep: Mike Farrell
Tel: 02 6

Milestone (15 minutes drive south of Sawtell)  South of Coffs
Harbour. N.S.W. Mr. Darryl F was fishing with two friends when
they noticed two bright yellowish white lights in the distance
to the south and over the sea just off the coast. Their
immediate thoughts were that there were two aircraft flying
side-by-side pacing each other. The two lights were at first
identical in size, colour and brightness, and appeared to be
approaching their position. No noise was heard at this stage.

After about five minutes, one of the lights suddenly dimmed to
almost go out, while the second one remained bright and began to
turn towards the west (inland). This light was then identified
as a commercial aircraft approaching Coffs Harbour airport and
making a landing approach. Sound from the aircraft now heard.

Mr. F said that he thought 'that the plane was being paced by a
UFO, and that the pilot had seen the object beside him and
turned the aircraft as if to have a better look at the object'.

Comment:
It is highly probable that what Mr. F saw, was the twin landing
lights on the commercial aircraft. One landing light on each
wing. As the aircraft turned to make its landing approach, the
far side landing light was obscured by the nose of the aircraft,
therefore dimming.


Thankyou Mike Farrell  for this report

Regards Diane Harrison
Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                          A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Bruce Lanier Wright <magnus@io.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:49:53 -0600 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 16:54:37 -0500
Subject: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


I thought the listmembers might be interested to know that an
original piece of artwork by Donald "MJ-12" Menzel is currently
on sale at ebay.

Yes, that Donald Menzel. I had read that he liked to doodle
Martians in his spare hours; this one was originally published
in a small publication by Hugo Gernsback, the founder of pulp
SF, in 1964.  It is, um, innocent.

I am not the seller or acquainted with him or her, by the way,
but report this strictly for its historical interest. See

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=198684537

Bruce W.
Fortean Times and points west







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:29:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 16:59:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:08:43 -0500

 >I've been following this fascinating thread for the last few
 >days. I have to say that the standard of debate is excellent -
 >as good as anything I've read anywhere else.

 >At the risk of repeating some points, I'd like to add my own
 >.02. The following is adapted from a couple of posts I
 >made some time ago to the seti group.

 >One problem with the Drake Equation is that it does not take
 >into account the psychosocial aspects of the development of a
 >technological society (as distinct from intelligence). From the
 >one example we know, I would guess that an important impetus to
 >the development of technology is the relative maladaption of the
 >organism to its environment (humans, even from the earliest
 >hominid ancestors, seem to have adapted their environment to
 >themselves through technology (clothes, fire, tools, etc.)
 >rather than adapting to it biologically. This element (the
 >survival of the maladapted) seems critical to the development of
 >technological intelligence
 >
 >More importantly, this technological bias must then
 >_institutionalised_ (by philosophy or religion), before the
 >benefits of technology per se become a major ideological goal
 >for such a civilization (for example, Greek Science vs. The Dark
 >Ages; certain Judaeo-Christian models where the earth is seen to
 >be be something to be subjugated, vs. more contemplative Eastern
 >Ideologies).

 >I can imagine many worlds where intelligent life has evolved in
 >harmony with its environment (much as dolphins and
 >whales have here), and where the need for technology
 >has not arisen.

 >To elaborate: I would argue that most cultures seem to reach a
 >level of appropriate technology and then cease further
 >adaptation. That is, if the technology satisfies most
 >subsistence needs, many cultures stagnate--especially those
 >blessed with mild climates and fertile soils.

 >In some cases, such cultures may stimulate scientific inquiry
 >(ancient Greece, for example). But more often, development may
 >take a more mystical route, where the culture elaborates an
 >increasingly philosophically complex universe, usually at the
 >expense of technological advancement (for example, the Pacific
 >Islands of pre-Western contact).

 >On earth, Western civilization is characterized by a desire to
 >subjugate the environment. Its notions of progress and its
 >desire to dominate other cultures arise in large part from
 >certain interpretations of Judaeo-Christian philosophy. The
 >imperative used to be a desire to know the mind of God through
 >understanding his works. Such desire led directly to the
 >Enlightenment, and the eventual triumph of scientific
 >methodology as the privileged method for understanding the
 >world.

 >However, what gave this its irresistable power was the melding
 >of the evolution of knowledge and technology with the spiritual
 >imperatives of the Western interpretation of Judaeo-Christian
 >beliefs. This led to the desire to 'enlighten' the world. In
 >contact with the Pacific Islanders, Missionaries spent a great
 >deal of time convincing the inhabitants to be dissatisfied with
 >their almost idyllic existance. In this sense, the concept of
 >Original Sin may have been as powerful a force on technological
 >development as anything else.

 >The Church, as much as the state, therefore drove this process--
 >appealing both to sprituality as well as to rationality: much
 >early development in Astronomy, for example, came from the
 >desire of the Church to calculate the date of Easter. Would we
 >have had Copernicus or Kepler (or even Von Braun or Sagan)
 >without such an imperative?

 >In other words, is the catalysing spark that moves civilization
 >from appropriate technology to an aggressive, questing
 >technology, a much more rare thing than we might imagine? Or is
 >it an inevitability of evolutionary pressure?

 >I believe the former, but I hope for the latter.

 >Brian

I think the urge towards interstellar travel would have been
greatly pushed if you had another sun-like star nearby.

Zeta l and Zeta 2 Reticuli are less than a light year apart.

Planets around one could be directly observed from planets
around the other...

Considering that they are about 1 billion years older than the
sun and only 37 light years from here,  I suspect that they
began the exploration of our neighborhood a long time ago..

This is one of the many reasons for being excited by Marjorie
Fish's 3D star maps stimulated by the drawing made by Betty Hill
as described in detail with a list of sun-like local stars in
the 32 page full-color booklet 'The Zeta Reticuli Incident' by
Terence Dickinson.

Available from

UFORI
POB 958,
Houlton, ME
04730-0958

for only $5. and including a 4 page update.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:35:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:01:09 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Incidentally, relativity theory never has said that
 >slower-than-light interstellar travel was impossible, as some
 >debunker's claim.

Talk about your truisms! Relativity has always insinuated that
any form of interstellar travel would necessarily be subluminal
by definition, unless you wanted to become a photon in the
process.

But let's talk about interstellar travel at 99% the speed of
light. How you gonna turn? And what happens when you run headon
into a grain of dust at such speeds, never mind a rock the size
of your fist? And how you gonna apply the brakes, anyway? A
pretty picture not, I think.

<snip>

 >In any case, interstellar travel and galactic colonization by
 >older, more advanced space races, would indeed seriously change
 >any estimates made by the Drake equation of the number of
 >civilizations out there. With colonization, they could
 >conceivably number in the millions or billions.

 >David Rudiak


Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
materialized could equally well number in the millions and
billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 18:24:08 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:04:20 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:55:05 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST

 >>>From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800



John:

 >Jerry, this comment really puzzles me. You seem to again be
 >implying that there is some actual phenomenon called "a UFO"
 >which has an existence in and of itself, and is not simply a
 >misinterpretation of some other phenomena or a psychological
 >construct.

A "misinterpretation of some other phenomena [sic] or a
psychological construct" is an IFO, not a UFO.

For purposes of clarity, I should have said that when the
phenomenon, currently unknown or controversial, behind what were
called UFOs is established with some approximate degree of
certainty, it may be used inappropriately to explain some new
unknown, emerging manifestation.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 23:17:45 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:09:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


Hi everyone.

Fred Hoyle, astronomer and mathematician once calculated the
probability of forming a single cell of only 400
enzymes/proteins (about 5 times less than that for a typical
bacteria) as being 1 in 10^40,000 (or 10 followed by 40,000
zeros).

William Dembski in his 1998 paper titled "The Design Inference:
Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities" came up with the
smallest probability for something to have happened once
anywhere in our universe.  Dembski got this by estimating the
number of atomic particles in the universe (Np = 10^80), the
number of events between atomic particles each second (Nc =
10^45), the number of seconds since the beginning of the
universe times a billion or so for good measure (Ns = 10^25) and
multipling them all together to get Np * Nc * Ns = 10^150 (or 10
followed by 150 zeros).

If Hoyle's and Dembski's probabilities are mathematically and
scientifically sound, then it is obvious that even a single
simple cell coming into existence through chance alone would be
impossible.

Iif we were forced to come up with a biological equivalent of
the "Big Bang" where the first self reproducing cell just pops
into existence out of nothing at the start of the universe and
we ignored some facts such as the Second Law of Thermodynamics
and assumed there were no frequent catastrophic events such as
meteor impacts or gamma ray bursts, etc. our evolution from
simple cell to human would be not be possible in the 15 billion
years or so we had to get the job done.

If we did not get here through chance alone, then the only other
option is that we were created by some supreme intelligence for
a purpose.  What are the odds for this?  Simply the inverse of
the probability that we were created through chance alone.  If
we were Hoyle's simple cell, that would mean the probabbility
that a supreme intelligence created us would be 10^40,000 to
one.  And you thought we weren't special...  So too would E.T.s,
assuming they exist.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                          Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:05:47 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:08:49 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:37:48 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:57:32 EST
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shapes & Balloons
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>This is just my opinion. I believe triangular UFOs are all human
 >>>prototypes, and their shape might serve multiple purposes:

 >>How do you address the fact that the goobers in gooberment have
 >>been developing a marked propensity toward the practice of
 >>flying their human prototypes in plain sight of highly populated
 >>areas?

 >There are prototypes and prototypes. Some are secret, other
 >top-secret, and some utlra-secret, I suppose. Maybe american,
 >british, french, canadian, etc. UFOs are seen just because they
 >screw up and end up o top of a big building on a populated area.
 >It is said that gravity based machines are not easy to maneuver,
 >and if they create small worm holes, they could suddenly and
 >accidentally appear in the other side of the world.

 >>>1. To make it look more or less like a plane.

 >>I can't see that argument.  Have you ever witnessed a triangular
 >>UFO flying at less than 3500 feet at less than 50 mph (that's
 >>miles per hour, not kiometers per fortnight), not making a sound
 >>and in the general vicinity of a thousand plus feet wide?  It
 >>doesn't look anything like a plane.  Really.

Truth be know, this is exactly what I witnessed in September
of last year, over my home in Westchester County.  See Jeff
Rense archives for NY Triangle or Dr. Kanappy's archives.  And
it could not fly by itself or glide.  Certainly not conventional.

This was not the first time I've seen one since then.  Do I know
what they are where they are from?  Not a clue. But nothing in
my physics books or aerospace/military experience comes
close.  I've seen everything (almost) that can fly in or out in
space or the atmosphere.  I was so impressed I was shaking.
Like a dummy, I called the airport.  They laughed at me.

I called the FAA.  They laughed at me.

I called the... ah, forget it.  My mommy didn't laugh!  But she
wanted to!

It could have been one of ours.  But Eduardo, I just cannot
believe it was.  Not after 35 years of watching miracles and
yawning during the event.

 >Some people will buy that that was plane, though. It's easier to
 >debunk than a disk, or sphere.

 >>>2. To allow for standard flight mechanisms to be activated in
 >>>case something goes wrong with the main (gravitational, etc.)
 >>>propulsion and maneuvering systems.

 >>I am sorry, but how do you get from non standard flight to
 >>standard flight mechanisms from triangles?  Do they fly better
 >>than saucer shapes?

 >Two of the corners of the triangles may act as wings if needed.
 >Nobody has seen one of these black triangular UFOs close enough
 >to see whether they have "alternative" wings ot not.

 >>>3. To enhance its stealth capabilities (remember the sharp
 >>>angles of the relatively new stealth black fighter).

 >>If it's stealth they are enhancing, they've failed. Too many of
 >>us citizens are seeing the damned things.

 >I mean mostly invisibility to radar. They don't care much about
 >average observers, who can be easily dealt with. But radar
 >operator are a different story.

 >>I don't know, Eduardo, there appear to be so many prototypes
 >>flying around that they just cannot be prototypes in the sense
 >>you mean. By now they must be production prototypes.

 >Probably. Maybe the US has come far beyonf prototypes, but
 >surely other nations are still in the experimetal stage, and the
 >screw up very often.

Me personally, I don't believe it. However I believe in the possibility.
And there is where I differ from those with all the answers.  I have
very few.

 >>Or am I misunderstanding and you are joshing, right?  I knew it!
 >>I just knew it.  You sly little devil.  Tee hee.

 >I'm not joking. That's what I believe. But I don't want to
 >convince anyone of anything. For that you need solid proof. But
 >if I had solid proof of any of this, my life would automatically
 >be in great danger, so I wouldn't push the issue either way.

Saying you were kidding was my way of being funny.  Next time
you come to NY, allow me to give you a free lesson on Gesundt's
humor, how to interpret it.  I teach the course at my Freshly
Made Wine works on Canal Street.  I'll even let you stomp some
of my sour grapes.  But you must not shower for three months
before the stomping.  It adds flavor and aroma to brew and helps
it age rapidly.

 >>>>NASA is developing Ultra Long Duration Balloon technology to
 >>>>provide scientists an effective way to conduct high-altitude
 >>>>research

 >>>My suspicious mind immediately thinks that this also serves a
 >>>dual purpose.

 >>>1. The sincere scientific reasons given in the article.

 >>I don't understand this.

 >I mean, that the ballons are really for weather monitoring,
 >without any of the "agendas" that followed in my post.

 >>Personally, belief in the word of NASA is tantamount to
 >>believing in Santa Claus

 >So you mean thay are all fat and have white beards? :))

Uh, you just described me.  But don't let it bother you. I used
to look like Julio Iglesias.

 >>or the tooth fairey, the latter of
 >>which by the way, is now leaving hundred dollar bills under my
 >>pillow every time I have a root canal.

 >At least you don't have to pay for the dentist. Or are you one?

Dentists have the highest rate of suicide among all professions.
However, if I were a dentist or MD, I would now be sailing my
Egg Harbor to Concun for the holidays.  Uh, my row boat just
sank and my goldfish died.

Actually, I am a retired marketing genius.  No, really! Having
specialized in turnaround and startup.  Mostly hi tech.  This,
after years with NASA GSFC's many contractors.

 >>>3. To reduce the attention paid to those sightings by making
 >>>people become familiar with big, roung shapes floating in the
 >>>air. So many sightings will go unreported, 'cause people will
 >>>immediately think, "Oh, another weather baloon". Things haven't
 >>>changed much since Roswell, have they? I call that "lack of
 >>>creativity".

 >>You are quite correct here, Eduardo.  Not much has changed since
 >>Roswell.  I do agree as well with your, "lack or creativity"
 >>theory.

 >>Moe knew Metric, Larry knew English and Curly knew neither.  So
 >>they never made it to Mars either.

 >>Coincidence or Conspiracy.  You decide.

 >I go for the conspiracy theory :)

 >>>Oh, Lord. Where did the innocent trust that I once had in my
 >>>youth? Beam me up, anyone!

 >>"Scottie,"  Eduardo ... "Beam me up, Scottie!"

 >I know. I should have said, anyone who's not from the
 >federation, which after all represents the future of the
 >american empire.

 >>unfortunately, it cannot be done.  It is against every precept
 >>and forcept known to present physics.

Cheeses, I was kidding again.  Hello?  Personally, I believe
that eventually it will be possible for us.  In point of fact, I
believe that it is being done now, as we speak.  But not by us.
By a society or race of beings that have not only been there,
done that, but have been HERE and done just that.  In fact, I am
so certain of it that I hope to describe how it was done to me
in the mid forties.  I was about 2 or 3 at the time.  And never
even heard of Scottie or Captain Video, let alone Kirk.

God willing and the comet don't hit, my book will.  In Y2K.  My
luck the publisher will have lost his computer and my address in
the ensuing mess.

 >It may be possible in the future to scan something at an atomic
 >level, to desintegrate it and then reconstruct it. It's not such
 >a crazy idea after all.

 >>But it _is_ possible to exceed the speed of dark. Which is where
 >>we are now.  In the dark.  We are treated like mushrooms here in
 >>this world, by our goobers in gooberland.  They keep us in the
 >>dark and feed us scheiss. (That's German for doodoo).

 >That's why I want to be beamed up. This planet is too
 >depressing, and the choices are few: You can only become either
 >a slave or a lab rat. Oh, I think I forgot "mushroom" ;)

Eduardo, you just gotta take me less seriously.  To quote a
friend, Baseball ben berry berry good to me!

Thanks, Bill.  That was even better than Larry Hatch's pair of
dimes!"

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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:48:31 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:13:29 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


Dear List:

Regarding the excellent postings on the Drake Equation I add
this.

The Drake as commonly employed has implicit in it the concept
that the universe began in time. By introducing the concept of
infinite age, the Drake calculates to infinite probability.

If new Suns and solar systems are generated forever in time,
then the number of total stars becomes infinite. And as any
numbers times infinity is infinity, the Drake calculates to
infinity.

If life can travel to new star systems via debris, comets, space
ships, etc; and if it has an infinite amount of time to do so,
then the Drake also calculates to infinity.

Assume the universe is finite in age, and that Relativity very
much limits (but allows) the spread of life throughout the
universe. As currently believed. The result is a definite
probability of limited ET intelligent life being here. I suggest
that is why we have the present situation.

The Drake demonstrates mathematically there is probability of
life elsewhere. For those who need such demonstration.

Regarding what may happen when a form of intelligent life
capable of interstellar flight encounters intelligent life that
isn't, see:

http://www.Drpduke.com>.

http://www.Alienscalpel.com/duke.htm>.

Regards, Phil Duke Ph.D.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                             ET Counter Program

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:15:01 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:26:03 -0500
Subject: ET Counter Program


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:22:22 -0500
 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:33:38 EST
 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia


EBK Researchers,


I have been reading the present set of post on Drake, SETI and
ET, most interesting. However, some of the arguments have been a
little tenuous. Never-the-less, I felt that some of EBK
Researchers would like to use a "PROGRAM" that we have been
using for DEFASE Projects in good old Australia.

It's from Germany and the programmer is S. Fleischmann. He has
done a wonderful bit of work and I think you will find it a
useful tool for your research files.

With this program, Fleischmann lets you adjust 14 variables to
fit your own specifications and assumptions.

HOW TO CHANGE THE ET COUNT

To change the many variables do the following;

   - Run the program by keying the [ET Face]
   - View the menu [Edit] [Load] [Save] [Quit]
   - Key [Edit]
   - View the menu [<Previous] [Next] [OK] [Help]
   - Then key <back using the [<Previous] key
   - You have 4 windows to view
   - Change the data, as you want?

Fleischmann uses a standard algorithm that takes in the
important variables, applying F.D.Drake "Green Bank Formula".

It's a great program, its fun; it gives you an idea of how
complex the problem is and you can play "GOD" by changing
the setting to reflect your version of the ET situation.

PROGRAM DATA

   Name:   E.T. Counter
   Ver:    0.9
   By:     Stefan Fleischmann
   With:   Help File
   Run:    No installation required
   For:    Windows 95/98/NT
   (c):    Freeware.


Name = [ETCounter.Zip] 34,324 bytes.

- When open 6 files 70,145 bytes.

Go to Stefan's web site and get it.

<sf@muenster.de>

http://www.sf-soft.de/

FINAL OBSERVATION

In the end the SETI hunters have some major problems, most are
like SAGAN (was) a "Fence Sitters". They know the statistics,
they know about the "Paradox of Knowledge" but cannot utter that
horrible word ET Visit!

The most interesting comments on the Updates posts were from
the thread - Subject: Re: Are We Alone? on 16th Nov.

Terry Blanton said <commengr@bellsouth.net> 14 Nov post:

 >>the side of those who think intelligent life might be
 >>comparatively rare, surely not a conclusive endpoint to
 >>biological evolution. But one must be careful with what is
 >>meant by "comparatively rare."

And David Rudiak said <DRudiak@aol.com> 15 Nov post:

 >However, I suspect that intelligence might take many routes.
 >Few would deny the intelligence of a dolphin; and, they have
 >probably been intelligent longer than the hairless monkey.

 >Some theories in post quantum physics indicate a direct
 >connection between the mind and reality. Technological tools
 >might not be necessary to explore the universe.

Great thoughts.

Most SETI hunters are total ignorant about the UFO subject.
Drake was. But you must also remember Drake wanted to open
the debate and never pushed his formula as proof - its a
speculative examination.

Drake is a little out of date, and I have at least three
better formula to referenc. But to argue the case for
"We are not alone", then Drake Formula is not that bad.

We need to look at advanced propulsion systems, more research
into the nature of space but in the end "Time" will be the
key, change time from a constants to a variables and "Bingo",
then ET is right here with us.

Can I leave you with this wonderful thought?

         To see the World in a Grain of Sand
         And a Heaven in a Wild Flower
         Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
         And Eternity in an hour.

                       WILLIAM BLAKE
                       "Auguries of Innocence"

Its right there, right there in you hand!

Enjoy.

Regards

   John

JOHN W. AUCHETTL
Director PRA

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

                    Re: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 02:55:46 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:11:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea


 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >Subject: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 22:32:04 PST

 >Source: PNG Post Courier Web site

 >[Please include Urls in future --ebk]

 >11/11/99, 12/11/99, 15/11/99

 >New Britain, Papua New Guinea stirred up by huge object on
 >Tursday, Nov. 4 1999

 >Thousands in the New Britain region, the Gazelle Peninsula, the
 >remote Bainingo ranges, the Duke of York Islands, the Baining
 >area, Vavu Beach, North coast of Rabual, and Pilapila community
 >have apparently witnessed a a large slow moving object described
 >variously as a craft "which had huge lumps on the sides with
 >light flickering aound it" (people of the remote Bainingo
 >ranges), apparently about 200 metres long, 50 metres wide & "lit
 >up like a city in the sky", moving slowly across the sky "making
 >a quite puffing noise" - an airship perhaps?

 >But other descriptions challenge that possibility.People living
 >on the insland in the Duke of York group closest to New Ireland
 >province reported seeing a huge craft hovering just metres above
 >the sea off St. Georges Channel, and travelling very slowly.
 >They also reported other smaller craft with bright lights
 >circling the larger one "in a playful manner".

 >John Berenti, & family of Namatanai, New Ireland, saw "ahuge
 >craft appear just above the top of the mango trees" he estimated
 >200 metres to 300 metres long & 50 metres wide.  Others tried to
 >chase the object.

 >Raymond Theodore a Ploice officer at about 8.30 pm, on Vuvu
 >Beach, North Rabaul coast, saw "a huge craft travelling just
 >metres above the seas... we saw it travel over Waton Island.  It
 >had very bright lights at the back as it moved along."

 >Alex Jame & 4 other boys returning from Pilapila Community
 >School about 7 pm and others saw bright lights approaching.  As
 >the UFO approached, Alex claimed "the street lights dimmed like
 >when the batteries in a torch are flat." He thought it was
 >noiseless, oblong in shape, bright lights around the edges, with
 >a top like a pyramid with som lights around it.  All white
 >lights.  The boys said it took 30 minutes to pass them.  Alex
 >said when the object hovered over them the place around them
 >light up & they could see people near them as if it was
 >daylight.  It eventually disappeared over the moutains near
 >Vuvu.

 >Another local, John Mcleod, manager of the Malangan Beach
 >resort, New Ireland province, said he watched it and thought it
 >was a satellite re-entery.  He seems to be describing something
 >else entirely.

 >If it was an airship or blimp it was a spectacular one??

 >-----

 >Thanks also to Paul Cropper.

Dear Paul and Bill:

I find it interesting that just 12 days later,  a 7.0  magnitude
earthquake struck the very same region.

7.0 is on the "surface intensity" scale, often preferred for
larger quakes. The into just came off the newswire, and on an
earthquake site that I monitor.

According to the map on that site,  the quake struck at 0327 hrs
GMT, at roughly 137E - 6S; on the SW coast of New Britain
Island, PNG .. between Saurent and Waku villages there.

An ABC newswire puts it on the NW coast, possibly in error.

Has there been any further word or identification of the
" mystery blimp " with all the lights?


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 >
   Nov > Nov 17

             Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

From: Diane Lovett <rambld@gateway.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:54:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:15:23 -0500
Subject: Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:43:14 -0500
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
 >Subject: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings
 >To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>

 >WKRC Channel 12 [CBS] Meteorologist Tim Hedrick was interviewed
 >extensively on the 9:30 p.m. newscast, and recounted his
 >sighting of what he initially presumed to be a 'burning
 >aircraft.' He also told of a greenish glow in the sky.

 >They are taking many phone calls, and they are liberally
 >entertaining the theory that this sighting was caused by a UFO.

 >Needless to say, it's really exciting around here right now.

 >KY
 >--
 >UFO Research
 >http://home.fuse.net/ufo/


Kenny,

I had a look this morning at the TV stations websites, and WKRC
is explaining it as part of the Leonids or possibly an unrelated
meteor.

http://www.wkrc.com/story_202957.html

WLWT only has a link to NASA's Leonids pages, also saying it was
the Leonids or an unrelated meteor.

http://www.spacescience.com/newhome/headlines/ast17nov99_1.htm

The timing of this sighting is just so close to the beginning of
the Leonids, that it no doubt will remain the official
explanation no matter what witnesses describe.

Diane Lovett










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

               Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night

From: Stan Gordon <paufo@westol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 11:30:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:19:10 -0500
Subject: Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night


Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night
from Stan Gordon

PA UFO Hotline: 724-838-7768
Website: http://www.westol.com/~paufo

I began receiving reports last night indicating that at
approximately 7:05 P.M. (11/16/99),  a formation of luminous
objects were observed over Pennsylvania. I received sighting
reports from Butler county, north of Pittsburgh as well as
Indiana county in southwest Pennsylvania. I also talked with the
Altoona FAA Flight service station, who had received a number of
aircraft sighting reports from various locations including Erie.
One observation by two men in Butler County indicated that they
watched as the objects passed overhead moving from west to east.
They described observing 10 to 12 round objects, each with a
luminous trail, in perfect single formation, one behind the
other.

These round lights all appeared uniform in size and color. They
were described as mostly orange, with some blue and white
colors. The trails were the same color. They estimated that they
observed the formation pass across the sky in 4 to 7 seconds. No
sound was apparent. One witness stated that the lights were very
bright, and that when he first saw them approaching, he thought
"it was a row of airplanes" until he had a better view.

FYI I checked in with Peter Davenport at the National UFO
Reporting Center. Peter was being deluged with UFO reports from
about 9 states at that time. It is likely that there will be
much controversy as to the origin of these objects, due to the
time frame of the current Leonid meteor shower. I am awaiting
word from the U.S. Space Command to determine if they can
confirm any re-entry of space debris during this time frame.
This current sighting brings back memories of another widely
observed event which occurred on March 3, 1968 when multiple
witnesses over a large geographic area (including Pennsylvania)
reported a formation of fiery objects. This sighting was later
identified as burning material associated with the re-entry of
Zond 4, a Soviet satellite.

Until all of the information can be gathered on these widespread
sightings, it is to early to make a determination as to the
origin of the objects observed on the evening of November 16,
1999. If anyone has any other sighting reports from Pennsylvania
concerning this incident, please forward to me.

Stan Gordon









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 17

             Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:58:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:20:26 -0500
Subject: Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 21:47:51 -0500
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@FUSE.NET>
 >Subject: Re: More On Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati Sightings
 >To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

 >Paul wrote:

 >>It could still be a bolide, but in any case, it should make
 >>for a good video and pictures.  I hope someone got it.

 >Paul:

 >In the last half-hour I have been listening to News Radio 700
 >WLW, and this sighting is all they are talking about.

<snip>

I'm listening now 12:57 pm EST via the web at:

http://www.700wlw.com/broadcast.html

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 13:38:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:25:51 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


At 03:48 PM 11/16/1999 -0500, you wrote:
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:41:09 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:32:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>The Drake Equation was an exercise, which included numerous
 >>speculative variables.  As we look back at it we can see other
 >>speculative variables that may not have been taken into account,
 >>but how does one determine that one set of speculative concepts
 >>is better than another?

 >Like the assertion that travel beyond the speed of light is
 >impossible, maybe ? ;)

I guess it's good to keep in mind that a theory is sometimes
little more than an educated guess.  Conclusions based on those
theories can be accepted as fact, yet proven wrong as our
knowledge increases.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Marty Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:14:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:29:10 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:41:09 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:32:38 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>The Drake Equation was an exercise, which included numerous
 >>speculative variables.  As we look back at it we can see other
 >>speculative variables that may not have been taken into account,
 >>but how does one determine that one set of speculative concepts
 >>is better than another?

 >Like the assertion that travel beyond the speed of light is
 >impossible, maybe ? ;)

Howdy Eduardo and All!

No one here has yet mentioned that travelling faster than the
speed of light may not be necessary for interstellar travel. It
may be possible to "bend space" using enormous gravitational
forces, so that you are able to "leap" from one point to another
when space snaps back to its original shape, sort of like an
elastic band. I understand that this is theoretically possible.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:07:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:31:37 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:14:34 EST
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >On the serious side, it is my personal opinion that those (with
 >the possible exception is Rockeffeler) with money are, to at
 >least some extent, a tad on the eccentric side to begin with.
 >Perhaps this is how they obtained their wealth. Eccentricity
 >often arrives on the same frequency as some silly fossify, or is
 >it just me seeing through the shadow of the green eyed monster?

Eccentricity, vision, conviction and passion are all good
qualities that characterize many of the wealthiest individuals.
The problems is when the above are merged with treason,
sabotage, deceit, and murder. And most politicians or big CEOs
with initial good intentions cannot be where they are if they
don't make a lot of compromises and look the other way when
their fellows of the corporate, political, legislative,
religious and military mobs do their dirty deeds.

I can also see beyond the body and shadow of the one eyed beast,
but it's still there, blocking the way to freedom, happiness and
enlightenment at all levels. Who cares about the cheese, if one
is just like rat eating it (that is, if one is not eating
-literally- rat poison instead)? Who cares about the advance of
space programs, when they fake failures in the probes built
thanks to tax payers?

The best things in this world were not made by man, anyway.
--
_______________________
EDUARDO GOMEZ
http://www.atmanet.com
http://www.innerlab.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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: ed gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:48:56 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:35:25 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >7) The developing field of nanotechnology, which theoretically
 >might eventually manufacture superstrong materials that could
 >make some of these crazy proposals possible.


David,

I strongly agree; the nanotechnology revolution has the chance
of making us godlike. There may be no limits to what we will
eventually be able to create, bundance for all. What form of
social organization would humans choose if that were the case?
I�m betting on anarchy and egalitarianism.

The success of egalitarian societies (hunter/gatherer), depended
on abundance and cooperation which allowed equal access to both
the basic necessities of life and individual status.  Our
current system, which I call State society, limits not only
access to positions of prestige but to the basic resources
needed to sustain life as well. This results in the
stratification we see all around us in our civilized, highly
technological and competive world.

The political dilemma that has confronted humans since State
society (about seven thousand years ago) is as follows: Can a
society be designed that allows equal access to all basic
resources and to all positions of status? Can egalitarian
reciprocity, sharing, and cooperation be reintroduced as the
basis for social organization? This is the stuff of revolutions.
Remember Hughy Long's slogan? Everyman a king but no one with a
crown.

The nature of Rank society provides some insight. Ranking
evolved in situations of abundance and modified egalitarianism
when an agricultural base and domestication practices were
adopted.(about ten thousand years ago) In Rank societies there
remained no limit on the access a person had to the basic
resources on which life depended. The main difference between
the two systems is that in Rank society the positions of
prestige are partially limited.

Rank was earned through some form of personal endeavor or
through contributions made to the over-all well being of the
community. Individuals did not attain high rank without being
deserving of the honor. There seems to be a natural tendency for
some humans to contribute more than others. Those who do so are
usually rewarded in some fashion by those who benefit. The
vestiges of this behavior are still evident today.

In Rank societies, increased individual status did not mean an
increase in personal power. The symbols of rank had no economic
value nor could they be traded for commodities. They were only
indications of, and rewards for, individual accomplishments.
Rank bestowed no rights of coercion. Highly ranked individuals
were listened to because, in most cases, these were wise folks,
and listening to them was generally beneficial.

Rank societies can be complex. The oldest known farming village
is Catal Huyuk on the banks of the Carsamba river in modern
Turkey. Established 9000 years ago, it was prosperous,
sophisticated and well-organized, with impressive craftsmanship
and an extensive trade network. While rank played a part in this
culture, communal burials indicate that the basic egalitarian
nature of society was intact.

As slash and burn agriculture and Rank societies expanded, world
populations soon increased dramatically; though for several
thousand years humans were able to make do. Eventually, soil
depletion, overpopulation and other environmental factors led to
shortages in basic necessities. Once there were more people than
food, the ensuing competition disrupted previous reciprocal
arrangements. Stratification, slavery and the State soon became
the new paradigm and has been so ever since.

The contemporary expression of egalitarianism is anarchy.
Anarchism postulates that humans are essentially benign
creatures, but are corrupted by authority and coercion. We are
social animals, fulfilled through voluntarily helping one
another and our community. Organized religion, education,
politics, and economic life distort our natural egalitarian
tendencies. The prevailing institutions of private property and
the State advance our exploitation.

Anarchy means merely the absence of any form of political
authority, but in a modern context, anarchy always implies
confusion, political disorder, lack of control, and terrorism.
The mere mention of anarchy sends chills down the spines of
property owners and other law-abiding citizens. The common
belief is that the anarchist life, based on egalitarian
principles, is a fantasy, and that humans are basically a
violent and disorganized bunch of rascals, who could never
survive without centralized control.

Anarchists disagree with this image. They believe in the basic
goodness of humankind. While there�s nothing precluding
organization or even leaders in this arrangement, leadership
carries no authority in our modern sense of this word. Expertise
is the only criterion, and when this expertise is no longer
needed, the role of leadership is turned over to others with
other types of needed expertise. Coercion is counterproductive
to these goals. All humans are rooted in this wisdom. We see it
clearly operating in smooth functioning volunteer organizations.

The hunter-gathering way of life and its concomitant egalitarian
philosophy evolved through a time of relative abundance. Equal
access to life�s necessities allowed for mellow interactions and
serene dispositions. Recreating this environment is the
subconscious drive underlying most social revolution. We are
bound to rediscover that reciprocal agreements create an
atmosphere of equality and social cohesion. It�s under these
circumstances that individuals contribute their best skills to
the common good. Perfecting this behavior will eventually lead
to general abundance and egalitarian living, and our antisocial,
competitive, warlike culture, a symptom of frustrated
possibility, will become a historical curiosity from a sorrowful
era.

ed







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:44:58 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:55:06 -0000

 >>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


To Georgina Bruni and the List,

I want to thank you publicly for you excellent interventions
in the debate with Jenny Randles. Which leaves at least one
big question unanswered regarding Lakenheath:

What did the pilots say?

Did they say, "yes" or not, and in what terms? That they did not
see the UFO (or mysterious ball of light)?

Secondly, I am shocked by the rudeness of Tim Matthews' post.

Although not really surprised, after other recent messages in which
Mr Matthews claimed vehemently, if I remember well, that all UFO
sightings, including the waves of the forties, were secret craft.
(Probably derived from the excellent Nazi UFOs!)

Clearly one of the most preposterous claims in the whole history
of ufology.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Best regards,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                        Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 18:56:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:47:38 -0500
Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:49:53 -0600 (EST)
 >From: Bruce Lanier Wright <magnus@io.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

 >I thought the listmembers might be interested to know that an
 >original piece of artwork by Donald "MJ-12" Menzel is currently
 >on sale at ebay.

 >Yes, that Donald Menzel. I had read that he liked to doodle
 >Martians in his spare hours; this one was originally published
 >in a small publication by Hugo Gernsback, the founder of pulp
 >SF, in 1964.  It is, um, innocent.

<snip>

Menzel made many of those. His wife even gave me one when I
visited her place in 1986 (No, I don't know where it is).

One old friend of his wrote me after seeing my IUR article about
the Double Life of DHM, that now he understood the doodles.

Menzel also wrote science fiction. Besides being a world class
cryptographer, and possessor of very high level security
clearances with the NSA and CIA, and 30 other companies.

A remarkable man.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:30:18 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:18:13 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:35:46 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>Incidentally, relativity theory never has said that
 >>slower-than-light interstellar travel was impossible, as some
 >>debunker's claim.

 >Talk about your truisms! Relativity has always insinuated that
 >any form of interstellar travel would necessarily be subluminal
 >by definition, unless you wanted to become a photon in the
 >process.

Subliminal?  You mean inadequate to produce a sensation or a
perception?  Huh?

Are we discussing the same thing here?   Dave was talking
about space travel.  What's sex got to do with it?

 >But let's talk about interstellar travel at 99% the speed of
 >light. How you gonna turn? And what happens when you run headon
 >into a grain of dust at such speeds, never mind a rock the size
 >of your fist? And how you gonna apply the brakes, anyway? A
 >pretty picture not, I think.

Dennis, Dennis, Dennis.  Have you no imagination?  First, to
turn one must signal with the proper navigation lights or stick
your hand out the window and tell the helmsman which way!

As for detritous, place full power to the shields.  And speaking
of detritous, may I suggest just dumping it overboard?  Like we
do right here on earth with our garbage.

 ><snip>

 >>In any case, interstellar travel and galactic colonization by
 >>older, more advanced space races, would indeed seriously change
 >>any estimates made by the Drake equation of the number of
 >>civilizations out there. With colonization, they could
 >>conceivably number in the millions or billions.

 >>David Rudiak

 >Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
 >materialized could equally well number in the millions and
 >billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.

 >Dennis Stacy

Very large numbers work only when one's opinion matches the size
of one's ego and one's ego is wearing blinders.  Are you
suggesting that it is not possible maintain one's regular
Adams', Eves' and family jewels without turning them all into
protons and thus, causing only subliminal sex?

If so, then I am extremely dissapointed in you. For if everyone
thought similarly, Chris would still be trying to raise the cash
for his trip on the Nina.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:11:35 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:24:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500

<snip>

 >None of this is big news, really. In all walks of life, almost
 >all of us find ourselves believing things that satisfy us
 >emotionally. But the obvious distribution of biases in our
 >current debate about life in the universe ought to teach us
 >something -- it should encourage all of us examine our
 >preconceptions about everything we think about.

 >Greg Sandow


Greg,

I had a really neat, nice reply to this post -- and I'll be
damned if Windows didn't eat it, alive and wiggling.

Maybe we got out current computer software from the Roswell
crash, after all.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:41:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:27:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:58:11 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Personally, the idea that UFOs represent extraterrestrial life
 >give me the willies. The political consequences alone of
 >discovering clandestine visitors are so large, so complex, and
 >potentially so dangerous, that such a result can hardly be
 >wished for. Science fiction is replete with examples that
 >suggest the difficulty of verifying the intent of a non-human
 >species with a technlogy in advance of ours prior to a point at
 >which it is too late. Is this something I am looking forward to,
 >or have an emotional bias toward? No, indeed.

 >But I do think the truth is more important than my comfort.


Hi Mark

Think on this for a moment....suppose we are the only
intelligent life in the universe and in that vast, open,
uncharted territory....we are ALONE! That to me is far more
terrifying than having aliens visiting us at this moment in
time. Even if they had hostile intentions, the fact that if they
are here, at least proves there could possibly be life elewhere
in the universe, and those entities may be very benvolent.

If we were the only ones (I find that hard to believe) then we
have a responsibility to explore the universe and "seed" it with
intelligent life.

It is quite possible that we are an incredibly special form of
life. If that is true, then why do we always assume alien life
will be more advanced than us? Possibly technologically because
most suns are much older than ours, but emotionally, and
spiritually I believe we have much to offer those who come to
call.

I don't think that the human species will ever stop looking for
life in our universe as the thought of being totally alone is
far too terrifying.

Jacquie

--
"The truth is within ourselves"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                                     Re:

From: Matt DeBow <md@ufochronicles.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:39:31 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:43:35 -0500
Subject: Re:


LECTURE/PRESENTATION:
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 21st  2pm in Berkeley
Ian Christopher (Crop Circles �99)

Location:  2018 Allston Way, Berkeley
one block from Downtown Berkeley BART.
tix/info: 510-644-1600 or 925-945-5500.
$13 advance - $15 at door

Ian Christopher, a researcher with Mariposa-Pacific Research
Institute, will present the crop circles of 1999, taken by
renowned videographer Peter Sorenson. This spectacular array of
beautifully designed anomalous circle formations, will be
presented to you on video from the air and the ground. The
formations are images and three dimensional geometric shapes;
the intense patterns appear as they come up out of the landscape
with depth. Ian will also give us some profound insight as to
why the media will not publish these images.

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 19th - 7pm
� Dr. Norman Bergrum (UFOs around Saturn)
� Carol Cilliers  (Astrologer, Healer, Clairvoyant)

December Event: $10 in advance / $12 at door

Dr. Norman Bergrun is the founder of the California Society of
Professional Engineers Education Foundation.  He has authored
two books:  Tomorrow's Technology Today and  Ringmakers of
Saturn.  Bergrun worked for NACA, (National Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics) the predecessor of Ames Research Center, for
twelve years as a research scientist.  He worked for Lockheed
Missile and Space Company (now Lockheed Martin) for an
additional thirteen years.  In 1971 he founded Bergrun
Engineering and Research. Dr. Bergurm was the inventor of
deicing technology still used on aircraft today. Dr. Bergrun has
uncovered that the Apollo mission discovered more than they
expected on their exploration of space and the moon. He claims
that there are Electromagnetic Vehicles (EMVs) operating in and
around Saturn.  Dr. Bergrun will also reveal photographs taken
from NASA's Voyager space
probes of Saturn that show luminous objects.

Carol Cilliers is an exceptional astrologer, clairvoyant healer
andteacher. Wondering what's in the stars for you in the next
century? Carol will be presenting a special Millennium
astrological forecast for our audience. She is a contributing
astrologist for Psychic Reader Newspaper, and has directed
several clairvoyant training institutes in California. Carol can
be heard on KEST radio 1450AM every other Friday morning from 10
to 10 am. She also delivers a daily astrological guide and Lunar
Views, aired weekdays every hour between 7am and 12 noon. Carol
is also a teacher of meditation, healing, clairvoyance and
astrology.

$2 discount for OPUS, BPI, UFO Chronicles members and
affiliates.

Sponsored by UFO Chronicles and Psychic Reader Newspaper.
Host & Sponsor info.
http://www.UFOChronicles.com
http://www.BerkeleyPsychic.com

If you�re interested in any of the following:
Matt DeBow�s Book, UFO CHRONICLES
Being a featured speaker please e-mail us your (bio and topics)
A subscription to the Psychic Reader Newspaper (monthly) Send us
e-mails addresses of people you think would be interested in our
events

md@ufochronicles.com

  Thank You








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                            Re: Crop Circle Music

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:54:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:37:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Music


 >From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Crop Circle Music
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:11:09 -0500

 >This guy is great! Give a listen...

 >Pat

 >-----

 >From: Stvsmith@aol.com
 >Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 11:47 PM
 >To: pmason@ee.net
 >Subject: Crop Circle Music

 >Hi I have a new CD release on MP3.com called CROP CIRCLE MUSIC.
 >Here is the link www.mp3.com/stephensmith It is a relaxing
 >ambient space music, ideal for meditation.

 >This music is totally generated from crop circle images using
 >scales derived from  the geometry of certain crop circle
 >formations.

 >There are _no_ human musicians on this recording.

 >This work is based on the theories of Prof. Gerald Hawkins who
 >first discovered the diatonic/musical relationships in certain
 >crop formations.

 >Please check it out and leave me a message saying what you
 >think.

 >Stephen J Smith

 >P.S. Wholesale inquiries welcome


This music is absolutely incredible!

Jacquie
--
"The truth is within ourselves"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                        Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 00:34:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:57:48 -0500
Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:49:53 -0600 (EST)
 >From: Bruce Lanier Wright <magnus@io.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

 >I thought the listmembers might be interested to know that an
 >original piece of artwork by Donald "MJ-12" Menzel is currently
 >on sale at ebay.

 >Yes, that Donald Menzel. I had read that he liked to doodle
 >Martians in his spare hours; this one was originally published
 >in a small publication by Hugo Gernsback, the founder of pulp
 >SF, in 1964.  It is, um, innocent.

 >I am not the seller or acquainted with him or her, by the way,
 >but report this strictly for its historical interest. See

 >http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=198684537

 >Bruce W.
 >Fortean Times and points west


Dear Bruce:

Thanks for the tip. I took a look, and yes "innocent" is a good
word. Menzel apparently saw an intelligent "insectoid" for his
sci fi Martian; at least that's how it strikes me.

The tiny plant between insect and astronaut looks wholly
insufficient to feed the insect however.

Not bad for a Menzel-monster nonetheless!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

             Re: Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 00:57:35 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:59:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 11:30:17 -0500
 >From: Stan Gordon <paufo@westol.com>
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night

 >Luminous Formation Over Pennsylvania Last Night
 >from Stan Gordon

 >PA UFO Hotline: 724-838-7768
 >Website: http://www.westol.com/~paufo

 >I began receiving reports last night indicating that at
 >approximately 7:05 P.M. (11/16/99),  a formation of luminous
 >objects were observed over Pennsylvania. I received sighting
 >reports from Butler county, north of Pittsburgh as well as
 >Indiana county in southwest Pennsylvania. I also talked with the
 >Altoona FAA Flight service station, who had received a number of
 >aircraft sighting reports from various locations including Erie.
 >One observation by two men in Butler County indicated that they
 >watched as the objects passed overhead moving from west to east.
 >They described observing 10 to 12 round objects, each with a
 >luminous trail, in perfect single formation, one behind the
 >other.

 >These round lights all appeared uniform in size and color. They
 >were described as mostly orange, with some blue and white
 >colors. The trails were the same color. They estimated that they
 >observed the formation pass across the sky in 4 to 7 seconds. No
 >sound was apparent. One witness stated that the lights were very
 >bright, and that when he first saw them approaching, he thought
 >"it was a row of airplanes" until he had a better view.

 >FYI I checked in with Peter Davenport at the National UFO
 >Reporting Center. Peter was being deluged with UFO reports from
 >about 9 states at that time. It is likely that there will be
 >much controversy as to the origin of these objects, due to the
 >time frame of the current Leonid meteor shower. I am awaiting
 >word from the U.S. Space Command to determine if they can
 >confirm any re-entry of space debris during this time frame.
 >This current sighting brings back memories of another widely
 >observed event which occurred on March 3, 1968 when multiple
 >witnesses over a large geographic area (including Pennsylvania)
 >reported a formation of fiery objects. This sighting was later
 >identified as burning material associated with the re-entry of
 >Zond 4, a Soviet satellite.

 >Until all of the information can be gathered on these widespread
 >sightings, it is to early to make a determination as to the
 >origin of the objects observed on the evening of November 16,
 >1999. If anyone has any other sighting reports from Pennsylvania
 >concerning this incident, please forward to me.

 >Stan Gordon

Hi Stan!

I just got a report here about a fireball going over Sanilac
County in Michigan, "chased by military jets", on the very same
evening.

This was from a visitor to my website,  one with an AOL email
address if you catch my drift.  At least he could spell.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                        Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 01:55:54 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:05:34 -0500
Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'


James Easton wrote:

 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 03:33:39 -0000

 >>If you were to ask, 'Where were the triangles before the
 >>1960s?', then I would be struggling, yet could still cite the
 >>following from 'Project Blue Book' cases which were, so far as I
 >>know, unsolved:


Hi All,

Here is another report from the 60's case of Omar Fowler of PRA,
forwarded by Author Nick Redfern.


Air 2/17527                        35392

REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT

At 2125hrs on the 28th March 1965, nine or ten triangular objects,
making a low humming noise passed over Skaeby, Richmond, Yorkshire.

The FT's were estimated to be 100 ft long, triangular in shape,
with rounded corners and an orange illumination below. They were
flying in  a triangular formation.

Need more FT info ? Why not check out the Project FT web-site
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tspurrier/tri_test.htm

Or E-mail Victor J Kean (Director) who has over 7,000 FT
sightings reports (Aug 1942 - to the present day)
100545@compuserve.com

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                            Re: Crop Circle Music

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 01:56:21 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:10:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Music


Patricia wrote:

 >>From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Crop Circle Music
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 08:11:09 -0500

 >>This guy is great! Give a listen...

 >>Pat

 >-----

 >>From: Stvsmith@aol.com
 >>Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 11:47 PM
 >>To: pmason@ee.net
 >>Subject: Crop Circle Music

 >>Hi I have a new CD release on MP3.com called CROP CIRCLE MUSIC.

 >>This music is totally generated from crop circle images using
 >>scales derived from  the geometry of certain crop circle
 >>formations.

 >>There are _no_ human musicians on this recording.

 >>This work is based on the theories of Prof. Gerald Hawkins who
 >>first discovered the diatonic/musical relationships in certain
 >>crop formations.

 >>Please check it out and leave me a message saying what you
 >>think.

 >>Stephen J Smith


Hi All,

Does anyone have an E-mail address for Prof. Gerald Hawkins?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                  Pamela Stonebrooke's Reptilian Encounters

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 15:13:55 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:13:03 -0500
Subject: Pamela Stonebrooke's Reptilian Encounters


Source: Los Angeles Weekly,

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/99/52/reverb-alfvegren.shtml

Stig

***

November 19 - 25, 1999 .

  Are You . . . Experienced?

by Skylaire Alfvegren

*

Perched upon folding chairs in a convention hall in Mesquite,
Nevada, a blister of a town located 75 miles north of Las Vegas,
an army of truth seekers - ponytailed dolphin-communicators,
walking conspiracy-theory encyclopedias in fatigues, cyberdelic
technophiles, and skittish-looking women in natural fibers - has
gathered for one of the country�s largest UFO conferences. Pen
and paper in hand, they are transfixed by the statuesque
platinum blond who has taken the stage before them. Her
rhinestone-encrusted lizard lapel pin dances under the spotlight
as she tells of a personal journey of extraterrestrial contact,
humanity�s reptilian origins and the transcendental power of
music.

Pamela Stonebrooke is a professional jazz singer who happens to
be in touch with higher beings. Her resonant contralto has been
described as a more aggressive Billie Holiday, chased with
Shirley Bassey, and has a language unto itself. Inspired by
Holiday (whose birthday she shares), Stonebrooke assembled her
first rock band at 16, and put herself through Kent State by
singing six nights a week at Salem Topless Lounge in Akron,
Ohio. After a sojourn through the cabarets of New York,
Stonebrooke moved to Southern California in 1975. Soon after,
she was invited to open the Playboy Club in Roppongi, Japan,
which led to performances with the country�s top jazz musicians
for the next eight years.

Returning from Japan to Los Angeles, Stonebrooke carved a
reputation for herself within the local jazz circuit. Not yet
cognizant of her otherworldly visitors, she subconsciously
expressed the experiences in her music, performing as Lilith in
Exile (her dark, one-woman project named for Adam�s heretical
seductress) and as one half of Incubus, an atmospheric,
jazz-inflected beat-box hybrid named for reptilian supernatural
beings that materialize in the night to seduce humans.

"Reptilians are not a politically correct species in the UFO
community," she says. Their visits are often marked by sexual
liaisons and telepathic communication with humans. Many UFO
researchers believe that the reptilians, while both sinister and
calculating, are the ancient guardians of humankind,
interdimensional beings - deified by the cultures of Babylonia,
Sumeria, India, Japan and Central America - that genetically
manipulated man in prehistory and have been making return visits
ever since.

A practiced astral traveler, Stonebrooke had no interest in
extraterrestrials until an unprovoked physical journey deposited
her in the hull of a metallic spacecraft six years ago. Since
then, she has had numerous encounters with reptilian beings, who
she believes are preparing her for an apocalyptic planetary
unheaval: "I think we�re close to having a global near-death
experience - whether it�s brought about by Y2K, solar flares,
nuclear warfare, polar shifts or suitcase bombs, something has
to wake us up."

To watch Stonebrooke perform is to feel instantly evolved. Clad
in salmon silk, she packed the Cinegrill for a recent concert,
backed by bassist Tom Warrington, pianist Rich Eames and drummer
Dick Weller, trolling out smoky renditions of Cole Porter�s
"I�ve Got You Under My Skin," Van Morrison�s "Moondance," a
number of originals, and improvising on Miles Davis� "All
Blues." "Roger [Leir, local podiatrist-cum-UFO researcher] got
five phone calls from people in the audience who had experiences
that night," she says.

The favorite entertainer of the late Gene Roddenberry,
Stonebrooke has only given a handful of performances recently,
some coinciding with such UFO-related events as the 50th
anniversary of the space-saucer crash at Roswell. Much of her
time has been devoted to writing Experiencer: A Jazz Singer�s
True Account of Extraterrestrial Contact, an entertaining
personal account of her reptilian encounters.

"When I first woke up to these experiences, I had a real hard
time for about a year and a half," she says. She retreated from
music and focused on unraveling the nature of her
extraterrestrial adventures. Her revelation that this planet
could be "one big, terraformed experiment" led to Experiencer, a
"contact-inspired" album of atmospheric, textured jazz,
sprinkled with Third World percussives, groovy synthesizers,
flourishes of electric guitar and seductive horns. Like a Sade
with sass, Stonebrooke wraps her stellar pipes around wordy,
worldly lyrics of rain forests, romance and otherworldly
visitors.

Billing herself as "The Intergalactic Diva," Stonebrooke sees
her music and forthcoming book as tools for enlightenment: "I�ve
come to realize I�m on this planet to make peace on some level,
whether it be between humans and extraterrestrials, or [between]
contactees and those who ridicule us. I write songs about E.T.s
because I and countless others know that extraterrestrial
contact is real, and that the discovery of this worldwide
phenomena is the most profound revelation in human history."

Anyone with E.T. experiences to share is welcome to contact Ms.
Stonebrooke. To order her CD/cassette Experiencer or her
out-of-body and UFO lecture audiocassettes, contact Pamela
Stonebrooke, P.O. Box
1552, L.A., CA 90078-1552.

E-mail:

galactic_diva@telis.org

  Web site:

http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/reps.htm

*

Copyright � 1999, Los Angeles Weekly, Inc. All rights reserved.
P.O. Box 4315, Los Angeles, CA 90078-9810




November 19 - 25, 1999 .            Are You . . . Experienced?

by Skylaire Alfvegren



Perched upon folding chairs in a convention hall in Mesquite, Nevada,
a blister of a town located 75 miles north of Las Vegas, an army of
truth seekers � ponytailed dolphin-communicators, walking
conspiracy-theory encyclopedias in fatigues, cyberdelic technophiles,
and skittish-looking women in natural fibers � has gathered for one of
the country�s largest UFO conferences. Pen and paper in hand, they are
transfixed by the statuesque platinum blond who has taken the stage
before them. Her rhinestone-encrusted lizard lapel pin dances under
the spotlight as she tells of a personal journey of extraterrestrial
contact, humanity�s reptilian origins and the transcendental power of
music.


Pamela Stonebrooke is a professional jazz singer who happens to be in
touch with higher beings. Her resonant contralto has been described as
a more aggressive Billie Holiday, chased with Shirley Bassey, and has
a language unto itself. Inspired by Holiday (whose birthday she
shares), Stonebrooke assembled her first rock band at 16, and put
herself through Kent State by singing six nights a week at Salem
Topless Lounge in Akron, Ohio. After a sojourn through the cabarets of
New York, Stonebrooke moved to Southern California in 1975. Soon
after, she was invited to open the Playboy Club in Roppongi, Japan,
which led to performances with the country�s top jazz musicians for
the next eight years.


Returning from Japan to Los Angeles, Stonebrooke carved a reputation
for herself within the local jazz circuit. Not yet cognizant of her
otherworldly visitors, she subconsciously expressed the experiences in
her music, performing as Lilith in Exile (her dark, one-woman project
named for Adam�s heretical seductress) and as one half of Incubus, an
atmospheric, jazz-inflected beat-box hybrid named for reptilian
supernatural beings that materialize in the night to seduce humans.


"Reptilians are not a politically correct species in the UFO
community," she says. Their visits are often marked by sexual liaisons
and telepathic communication with humans. Many UFO researchers believe
that the reptilians, while both sinister and calculating, are the
ancient guardians of humankind, interdimensional beings � deified by
the cultures of Babylonia, Sumeria, India, Japan and Central America �
that genetically manipulated man in prehistory and have been making
return visits ever since.


A practiced astral traveler, Stonebrooke had no interest in
extraterrestrials until an unprovoked physical journey deposited her
in the hull of a metallic spacecraft six years ago. Since then, she
has had numerous encounters with reptilian beings, who she believes
are preparing her for an apocalyptic planetary unheaval: "I think
we�re close to having a global near-death experience � whether it�s
brought about by Y2K, solar flares, nuclear warfare, polar shifts or
suitcase bombs, something has to wake us up."


To watch Stonebrooke perform is to feel instantly evolved. Clad in
salmon silk, she packed the Cinegrill for a recent concert, backed by
bassist Tom Warrington, pianist Rich Eames and drummer Dick Weller,
trolling out smoky renditions of Cole Porter�s "I�ve Got You Under My
Skin," Van Morrison�s "Moondance," a number of originals, and
improvising on Miles Davis� "All Blues." "Roger [Leir, local
podiatrist�cum�UFO researcher] got five phone calls from people in the
audience who had experiences that night," she says.


The favorite entertainer of the late Gene Roddenberry, Stonebrooke has
only given a handful of performances recently, some coinciding with
such UFO-related events as the 50th anniversary of the space-saucer
crash at Roswell. Much of her time has been devoted to writing
Experiencer: A Jazz Singer�s True Account of Extraterrestrial Contact,
an entertaining personal account of her reptilian encounters.


"When I first woke up to these experiences, I had a real hard time for
about a year and a half," she says. She retreated from music and
focused on unraveling the nature of her extraterrestrial adventures.
Her revelation that this planet could be "one big, terraformed
experiment" led to Experiencer, a "contact-inspired" album of
atmospheric, textured jazz, sprinkled with Third World percussives,
groovy synthesizers, flourishes of electric guitar and seductive
horns. Like a Sade with sass, Stonebrooke wraps her stellar pipes
around wordy, worldly lyrics of rain forests, romance and otherworldly
visitors.


Billing herself as "The Intergalactic Diva," Stonebrooke sees her
music and forthcoming book as tools for enlightenment: "I�ve come to
realize I�m on this planet to make peace on some level, whether it be
between humans and extraterrestrials, or [between] contactees and
those who ridicule us. I write songs about E.T.s because I and
countless others know that extraterrestrial contact is real, and that
the discovery of this worldwide phenomena is the most profound
revelation in human history."


Anyone with E.T. experiences to share is welcome to contact Ms.
Stonebrooke. To order her CD/cassette Experiencer or her out-of-body
and UFO lecture audiocassettes, contact Pamela Stonebrooke, P.O. Box
1552, L.A., CA 90078-1552. E-mail: galactic_diva@telis.org. Web site:
http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/reps.htm



previous columns:
          11/05/98 I'm Your Fan          11/05/98 Child of the Night
11/05/98 Have You Ever Been Teen?          11/05/98 Corridos
Prohibidos

- - - -

Copyright � 1999, Los Angeles Weekly, Inc. All rights reserved.
P.O. Box 4315, Los Angeles, CA 90078-9810







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                      Papua New Guinea 'UFO' Satellite?

From: Dr Ron Barnett <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:13:37 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:16:19 -0500
Subject: Papua New Guinea 'UFO' Satellite?


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 22:32:04 PST
 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea


 >[Please include Urls in future --ebk]

 >11/11/99, 12/11/99, 15/11/99

 >New Britain, Papua New Guinea stirred up by huge object on
 >Tursday, Nov. 4 1999

<snip>

 >Thanks also to Paul Cropper

              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,

The Full report from The Post-Courier, Papua New Guinea, News
Friday, November 12, 1999.

"UFO" IN ENB A SATELLITE, SAYS RESIDENT

THE so-called UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) seen in the
East New Britain province last Thursday has been described
as an old satellite falling out of orbit by a resort manager
in nearby New Ireland Pro-vince.

John Mcleod, manager of the Malangan Beach Resort, said he
watched the object from his motel with resort staff and gave
this description: "It was relatively high in the sky,
travelling from the north north to south south east direction.

"I thought it was a meteorite in the first place but it looked
more like a satellite falling out of orbit," he said. "I don�t
think it was a UFO."

He said the object looked like it was bouncing off the sky
and was burning red hot.

Mr Mcleod said he thinks the object was diving into the
atmosphere, finally diving into the ocean in the south east,
probably 100km from the Malangan resort in Kavieng town.

He said it was certainly a spectacular sight and the first of
its kind he had seen.-

The object was seen flying across the Gazelle Peninsula and the
Bain-ing ranges last Thurs-day night by many people in the area.

http://www.postcourier.com.pg/19991112/frhome.htm


Best Regards


DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                     Papua New Guinea UFO Like Star Wars

From: Dr Ron Barnett <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:15:50 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:21:14 -0500
Subject: Papua New Guinea UFO Like Star Wars


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 22:32:04 PST
 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea


 >[Please include Urls in future --ebk]

 >11/11/99, 12/11/99, 15/11/99

 >New Britain, Papua New Guinea stirred up by huge object on
 >Tursday, Nov. 4 1999

<snip>

 >Thanks also to Paul Cropper


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia


EBK Researchers,

The Full report from The Post-Courier, Papua New Guinea, News
Monday, November 15, 1999.


UFO "WAS LIKE STAR WARS"

"I thought about the Star Wars movies after seeing the
Unidentified Flying Object," said eyewitness Alex James.

Alex said that the incident happened about 7pm last Thursday.

He said he and four other boys had gone to Pilapila Community
School for rugby practice and were returning to their village
when they saw the object. Alex said the incident happened at a
time when mothers and children were returning from bathing,
while others were sitting around having their meals.

He said he and his four friends were talking about the day�s
activities when they saw bright lights approaching.

Alex said people who were near their houses ran inside and
locked the doors, while others on the road or near the beach
just stood where they were. He said as the UFO approached, the
streetlights dimmed like when the batteries in a torch are flat.

Alex said it approached without a sound.

He said it hovered above the tall coconut trees and was oblong
in shape. Alex said as it passed over, he and his four friends
were left speechless, as they were all shocked.

He said: "Pastaim mi tingim God papa, na nupela millennium na
bihain mi tingim ol movie olsem Star Wars, Star Trek na Babylon
Five."

Alex described the bottom of the UFO as oblong shaped with
bright lights around the edges, while the top was like a pyramid
with some lights around it.

He explained that there were no colored lights, just bright
white lights. Alex said he and his friends did not see anything
move in the UFO and stressed that it did not make a sound.

He said the object was huge and took almost 30 minutes to pass
over them. Alex said this was because one of them who had a
watch on checked the time after the object passed over them.

He said when it hovered over them, the place around them lit up
and they could see people near them as if it was daylight.

Alex said they watched the object until it disappeared over the
mountains near Vuvu.

The incident has been the talk of the province.

http://www.postcourier.com.pg/19991115/mohome.htm


Best Regards


DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                      Thousands Watch UFO Over ENB Sky

From: Dr Ron Barnett <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:11:29 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:27:36 -0500
Subject: Thousands Watch UFO Over ENB Sky


 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 22:32:04 PST
 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Huge Object Over Papua New Guinea


 >[Please include Urls in future --ebk]

 >11/11/99, 12/11/99, 15/11/99

 >New Britain, Papua New Guinea stirred up by huge object on
 >Tursday, Nov. 4 1999

<snip>

 >Thanks also to Paul Cropper


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,

Source: The Post-Courier, Papua New Guinea, News
Thursday, November 11, 1999.

http://www.postcourier.com.pg/19991111/thhome.htm



THOUSANDS WATCH UFO OVER ENB SKY

It was about 200 metres long, 50 metres wide and was lit up like
a city in the sky.

It moved very slowly across the sky, making a quiet puffing
noise. This is the description of what thousands of people on
the Gazelle Peninsula of East New Britain saw in the sky over
the weekend.

The people of the remote Bainingo ranges were cut off from
television and anything else that is modern, possibly had the
best description. They say a craft, which had huge lumps on the
sides with light flickering around it.

Some Bainingos said the object was lit up all around like a red
hot stone in an oven pit.

But what they saw was exactly what others on the Gazelle
Peninsula witnessed on the same night, Thursday, November 4.

The people who saw the flying craft concluded that they were
witnessing a spacecraft from another planet.

On other parts of the province, similar sightings were made,
although their descriptions were slightly different. Over on
Duke of York Islands those living on the island closest to New
Ireland Province reported seeing a huge craft hovering just
metres above the seas off St George Channel, and travelling at
very slow speed.

They claimed they saw other smaller craft with bright lights
circulating the bigger craft in a playful manner.

They claimed they watched the craft until it disappeared over
the high mountains in New Ireland.

At Rangulit village, Baining area, on the same night,
naturalised citizen John Berenti of Namatanai in New Ireland,
and his family were sitting on the verandahs of their home when,
all of a sudden, a huge craft appeared just above the top of the
mango trees.

"It was so big, about 200 to 300 metres long, and 50 metres
wide."

"It was moving very, very slowly across the sky and was lit up
like a shooting star and it had two very bright lights at the
rail."

"We honestly did not know what it was, but it certainly wasn�t
an aircraft," Mr Berenti said.

"It was travelling too low and far too slow."

"It did not make any sound, just a quite puffing sound as it
glided gracefully over the tree tops," he said.

Mr Berenti said his entire family saw the craft.

He said the people who lived there, who saw the craft lit
hand-hold fires and chased after the craft, wanting to see where
it would go.

Mr Berenti said he had never seen anything like it and he was
troubled by it.

"It was not anything that can be associated by this planet. He
recalled that the bright glow around the craft was its magnetic
field, keep the force of gravity away."

About 50 kilometers across the sea from Lassul Baining, Police
Officer Raymond Theodore was sitting under his house along Vuvu
Beach, North Coast of Rabaul, around 8:30pm in the night when
he noticed what looked to be a huge craft travelling just
metres above the seas.

"First I thought it was a ship but then we saw it travel over
Waton Island."

"It had very bright lights at the back as it moved along, but it
made not sound," he said.

Others who saw the craft gave similar accounts.



Best Regards

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 30

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 16:15:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:29:20 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 30


The house is still standing so here's the bulletin,
but 'fingers crossed' for next week:


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 30
November 18, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

NEW CHUPACABRA
ATTACK IN BRAZIL

      On Friday, November 5, 1999, a total
of 30 chickens were found dead in a chicken
coop in the Parque Sao Bento section of
Sorocaba, Sao Paulo state, Brazil.
      "The chickens had holes in their necks
and the bodies contained no blood.  The eggs
in the nests were not touched."
      The chickens were found by their owner,
Laercio Longo, who said that the "cages of the
aviary were wheeled, and none of the chickens
had been devoured by the predator."
      "'What happened here is a mystery,'
Longo said."
      "This is the second attack in the neighborhood,'
said Longo, attributing the attack to the
Chupacabra.  Four months ago, chickens were
killed in the same manner" in Parque Sao Bento.
      However, Dr. Rodrigo Teixeira, veterinarian at
the Sorocaba Municipal Zoo, had a different
opinion.
      On Thursday, November 11, 1999, Dr. Teixeira
was interviewed by Brazilian ufologist Thiago Luiz
Ticchetti.
      "Dr. Teixeira said the 'spots' found on the
chickens' bodies were made by terrestrial animals.
According to him, the probable culprits could be
the saringue (a small rat) or a wildcat or a skunk."
      "He said chickens weigh 1.5 kilograms and
carry seven milliliters of blood.  This blood, when
poured on the floor, is quickly absorbed, or is
lapped up by the predator.  Blood is very attractive
to all wild animals.  It has lots of minerals that
the animals love."
      Sorocaba is loczted 176 kilometers (110 miles)
west of Sao Paulo, which is both the largest city in
Brazil and in all of South America.  (See the
Brazilian newspaper O Estado do Sao Paulo for
November 6, 1999, "Chupacabra ataca em Sorocaba."
Muito obrigado a Thiago Luiz Ticchetti por eso cso.)

BLUE FIREBALL DAZZLES
VIEWERS IN FLORIDA

      On Tuesday, November 9, 1999, at 9:16 p.m.,
a "blue fireball" streaked through the sky over
DeLand, Florida (population 16,491), a town on
Highway 92 about 30 miles (48 kilometers)
north of Orlando.
      "A blue ball of fire that streaked across the
sky above Volusia County has residents
wondering whether the sight was something iut
of this world."
      "Chet Jones, who caught a glimpse of the
burning mass over DeLand Tuesday night, is
betting it was a UFO."
      "'I believe it's probable,' said Jones from his
home on the St. Johnsbury River.  'I know they
exist.'"
      "At 9:16 p.m., one caller told the Volusia
County Sheriff's Office he saw a fireball pass over
in the direction of Clyde Morris and LPGA
Boulevards.  It was headed for Ormond Beach."
      "Sheriff's deputies, along with Daytona Beach
police officers and a sheriff's helicopter, searched
for over an hour.  They found nothing."
      "The National Weather Service in Melbourne
(Florida) reported no unusual activity Tuesday night.
Officials at the Federal Aviation Administration
tower in Daytona Beach and at the FAA Regional
Office in Atlanta (Georgia) said they saw nothing
out of the ordinary."
      "'If a pilot would have seen it, they would have
reported it,' FAA spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen
said."
      "Roger Hoefor, curator of astronomy at the
Museum of Arts and Sciences in Daytona Beach,
speculated that people may have seen a bolide
meteor.  Bolide meteors appear to be falling, when
in reality, they're simply crossing the horizon."
      "'This one was not falling,' Hoefor said, 'It was
still going in its orbital path.'"  (See the Miami
Herald for November 10, 1991.  Many thanks to
Errol Bruce-Knapp for this news article.)
(Editor's Comment:  Meteor or UFO?  That's a
good question.  And this wasn't the only such
case last week.  Read on.)

GLOWING FIREBALL SEEN
IN CENTRAL TEXAS

      On Monday, November 8, 1999, ufologist
Mike Harman was driving home to Granbury,
Texas, located about 25 miles (40 kilometers)
southwest of Fort Worth, when he caught a
glimpse of an unusual object in the sky.
      "I was driving home to Granbury at 10:15
or maybe 10:30 that night on Davis Road,
heading southeast.  The road is very dark and
narrow, winding and lined with 20-foot trees
(6 meters in height--J.T.)  It's hard to look at
anything except the road, lest you end up in
a ditch."
      "I caught a very quick glimpse of a ball of
fire, trailing a blazing trail.  It was off to my left,
a lot more east of my line of sight.  I could only
see it from where it came into view at the top of
my (car's) windshield until it dropped behind the
tops of the trees, maybe 10 degrees, from 45
degrees to 35 degrees above the horizon."
      "It was falling at a very fast rate.  It took less
than a second to pass into and from my line of
sight.  It was a very bright yellow, and from my
viewpoint, it appeared to be very large but a great
distance away.  It fell at an angle, from left to
right (east to west)...I don't think I've ever seen
anything move that fast."  (Many thanks to Mike
Harman for this report.)

SPEEDY FIREBALL SHOCKS
CROWD IN NORTHERN ITALY

      On Wednesday, November 10, 1999, at about
11:15 p.m., people at the I Portal shopping center
In Modena, a large city in Emilia-Romagna province,
Italy, about 250 kilometers (180 miles) north of
Rome, spotted a "large shiny luminous object"
plunging through the night sky.
      They saw "a bright luminous object that moved
with incredible velocity, following a descending
trajectory.  The object left a luminous trail with
three different colors ranging from an intense
white and yellow to a brilliant green."  (Grazie a
Alfredo Lissoni e Vittorio Manzini di Centro
Ufologico Nazionale d'Italia per questo rapporto.)
(Editor's Comments:  The amazing thing about these
sightings is, if they are indeed meteors, they are all
a week ahead of the Leonid meteor storm, which is
expected to peak tonight.)

BLINKING UFO SIGHTED IN
CHINO VALLEY, ARIZONA

      On Friday, November 5, 1999, at 11 p.m.,
the witness "was locking up the house before
heading to bed" at his home in Chino Valley,
Arizona (population 4,840), located 89 miles
(142 kilometers) northwest of Phoenix.  "The
sky was particularly clear and beautiful, and I
opened my back door to have a better look."
      "There were three bright lights on the
horizon, and I thought they were on a small
aircraft.  And they must have been about
10 miles (16 kilometers) away."
      "I thought I might be seeing an actual
aircraft headed toward Prescott airport.  These
lights were somewhat larger and flashed
rhythmically from white to reddish and back to
white again.  They also moved a little more
slowly, and I had the distinct impression that
they were searching for something."
      "Two of them stayed in the area in which
I first saw them.  One took off west across the
northern end of the Chino valley.  It may have
been as close as three to five miles away from
my house, and it crossed the valley at about the
same speed as a small aircraft.  There was no
sound of engines, and it was close enough that
I should have heard a sound if it was an aircraft.
The light itself had an onion-dome shape like
Russian churches.  I rushed to my front door
(facing east) and watched the light.  It slowly
faded into the eastern sky."  (Email Form Report)

TRIANGULAR UFO SIGHTED
NEAR LIVERPOOL

      On Monday, November 15, 1999, at 1 a.m.,
the witness reported that she had sighted
"four bright lights in a symmetric triangular
formation" over Southport, Merseyside,
Lancashire, UK.
      The lights "appeared to be around a central
light that was red.  These lights were white.
The object was observed for about two minutes
when each light went away from the center"
simultaneously "and then proceeded to disappear."
      "The object remained motionless until it split
up and (the white lights) went in different directions.
The different lights moved extremely fast."  (Email
Form Report)

UNUSUAL PLANE CRASH
REPORTED IN CHICAGO

      Another unusual plane crash took place
in Chicago on Thursday, November 11, 1999,
which may have been caused by the reputed
Lake Michigan Triangle.
      "Investigators said Friday that a sudden
and catastrophic loss of power may have
killed the two engines on a corporate plane
that crashed into Lake Michigan during
takeoff from Meigs Field on Thursday, killing
all three people on board, including an executive
for a Chicago company."
      "Officials of Hartmarx Corp. identified the
victims as Richard Roydon Roicks, 55, president
and chief operating officer of the company's
Trans-Apparel Group sportswear subsidiary,
and company pilots Marc Derickson and John
Powell.  Their bodies were found strapped inside
the wreckage of the Beech King Air 200
turboprop."
      "'It didn't seem like the aircraft had enough
power to get into the air,' said David Bowling, an
investigator with the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB).  'So obviously we'll be
looking at the engines to see if they were
producing adequate power.'"
      "Bowling added that a cockpit voice recorder
may be found in a portion of the wreckage that
has already been salvaged and could aid
investigators in determining what went wrong.
The NTSB is also requesting the maintenance
records of the aircraft from the home base in
Michigan City, Indiana, Bowling said."
      "The twin-engine plane was attempting to
depart Meigs (Field) at about 8:30 p.m., bound
for South Bend, Indiana, when witnesses said
it failed to become airborne and crashed nose-
first into the lake."
      "The salvage operation began Friday morning
as police divers assessed the condition of the
wreck."
      "Lt. Earl Zuelke, commander of the Chicago
Police Maritime Unit, said the wreckage had
appeared to be sitting 'fairly upright' submerged
in water about 20 feet (6 meters) deep."
     "The Beech King Air 200 involved in the
accident was a 1976 model, a twin-engine
turboprop with 850 horsepower engines that can
carry eight to 15 passengers, according to the
manufacturer, Raytheon Aircraft Corp. of
Wichita, Kansas."
      The Beech King Air 200 was the second
civilian aircraft during the past 18 months to
crash in Lake Michigan after taking off
from Meigs Field.
      "About 18 months ago, another privately-
owned twin-engined aircraft, a Cessna 340A,
took off from Meigs and failed to become
airborne, crashing into Lake Michigan about
200 feet from the field.  One person died in
that August 1, 1998 accident.  Although the
NTSB has yet to issue a probable cause
finding, the final report by NTSB investigators
suggests pilot error in the 1998 crash."
      For more information about strange power
losses in aircraft operating over Lake Michigan,
see the book The Great Lakes Triangle by
Jay Gourley, Fawcett Gold Medal Books,
Greenwich, Conn., 1977, "Chapter Six:
Impossible Engine Failures," pages 68 to 81.
(See the Chicago Tribune for November 12,
1999, "Loss of power hinted as cause of
Meigs crash," page 1.)

CROP CIRCLES REAPPEAR
IN LOWVILLE, ONTARIO

      On Friday, October 22, 1999, a new crop
circle formation was discovered in a field of
corn eight feet high in Lowville, Ontario.
      Lowville was the site of a "random pattern"
crop circle formation on October 17, 1998.
      The new formation consisted of a
"teardrop-shaped" circle and other "discoid"
shapes.
      "Researcher Patrick Cross reports that he
and fellow researchers who went into the
formation on the ground experienced various
equipment anomalies," including electromagnetic
frequency (EMF) emissions and weird compass
movements.  The compass needles of three of
the researchers deviated from magnetic north by
the precise same degrees while they were inside
the crop circle.
      The team also reported "a white cobweb-type
material found under some of the flattened stalks."
(Many thanks to Paul Anderson of Circles
Phenomenon Research-Canada for this report.)

BLACK HELICOPTERS SEEN
IN TEXAS AND MARYLAND

      After weeks of inactivity, black helicopters are
back in the USA news, with multiple sightings
in Texas and Maryland.
      On Friday, October 22, 1999, a male witness
spotted a large squadron of black helicopters
conducting large-scale maneuvers in the open
"brush country" of the Big Bend desert near
Marathon, Texas (population 105), a small town
on Highway 90 approximately 178 miles
(284 kilometers) south of Odessa.
      On Wednesday, November 10, 1999, at
7:30 p.m., fire sirens mysteriously sounded, and
several black helicopters flew over Havre de Grace,
Maryland (population 8,592), a town at the mouth
of the Susquehanna River approximately 45 miles
(72 kilometers) northeast of Baltimore.
      "I live in Havre de Grace, Md., near the
Aberdeen Proving Ground," the witness reported.
"About 7:30 p.m., several helicopters flew over my
apartment building and were circling low over the
(Chesapeake) bay.  I recognized one of the new
police helicopters used for searches.  It's almost
silent running and appears to be a very powerful
machine.  I think there were a mix of civilian and
military vehicles (aircraft), but I couldn't see all of
them because of the trees."
      On Thursday, November 11, 1999, several
motorists on Interstate Highway I-45 in South
Houston, Texas (population 14,207) saw a black
AH-64 Apache attack helicopter "flying very fast
at just above the rooftops, traveling south."
(Many thanks to Cliff Capers and Steve Wilson Sr.
and others for the above reports.)

Y2K: MARINES, UN TROOPS
TRAIN IN SOUTH CAROLINA

      U.S. Marine Corps units and foreign United
Nations troops from countries still unidentified held
joint training maneuvers at five locations in
downtown Columbia, South Carolina (population
98,052) last week.
      According to John Quinn and Bob Anderson
of NewsHawk, Inc., "Although virtually not a word
of this is being breathed by either national or local
news sources, Columbia, S.C. is being subject to
an Urban Warfare assault by masses of U.S.
Marines and, according to reports we've been
forwarded, UN troops."
      Live-fire MOUT (Military Operations in Urban
Terrain--J.T.) exercises were conducted in the
area between Gervais Street and Blossom Avenue.
      Columbia, located on Interstate Highway I-20
approximately 112 miles (189 kilometers) northwest
of Charleston.
      On Thursday, November 11, during the 7 p.m.
news broadcast, a local TV station advised viewers
"to stay away from five parts of downtown Columbia,
five parts in our city's Restaurant Row, as it was
being used by the Marines for urban warfare
exercises.  The late night news showed the five
parts deserted except for Marine vehicles and
transports.  Latest reports are we now have up to
several hundred Marines in the city."
      On Friday, November 12, 1999, a Columbia
resident reported, "Today I was taking my wife
and our son to the dentist and some choppers flew
over our truck.  I'm not a military person but it
looked like two dark green (UH-60) Blackhawks,
one other smaller dark chopper, some kind of
'air crane' large chopper, a big white chopper
(bigger than a Blackhawk) and a smaller white
chopper--just like the smaller dark one but white."
(Editor's Note:  United Nations helicopters are
usually painted white with the black letters UN
on the side hatch and the logo United Nations
on the tail boom.)
      According to Quinn and Anderson, conflicting
statements have been made on TV about the
duration of the exercise.  "Although the assault
was originally scheduled to last a week, it was
then extended to a month, and now, we hear, the
military troops are occupying the South Carolina
(state) capital indefinitely."
      A complete news blackout is in effect.
      Interestingly, Columbia was one of the 38
cities listed in the U.S. Navy study last spring
describing "partial" widespread failures of utilities
on January 1, 2000 as a result of the Y2K computer
problem.
      Another city on the Navy's "partial failures"
list was Kingsville, Texas, near Corpus Christi,
which was the site of Operation Last Dance,
another large-scale MOUT exercise, back in March.
(Editor's Comment:  Maybe they should put up a
billboard on Elmwood Avenue reading "Welcome
to ZOD...Zionist-Occupied Dixie...formerly known
as Columbia, South Carolina."  And do likewise
for Andrews, North Carolina, which is still being
buzzed by black helicopters.)

from the UFO Files...

1913: TOO MANY THOMPSONS

      Last week, UFO Roundup related the story of
the "Big Blow," the massive gale that struck the
Great Lakes on November 9, 1913.
      Just prior to the storm, Capt. Arthur W. Dana,
who was second mate aboard the steamer Robert
W. Bunsen that day, said the weather was very
strange.  "The sun was out, but you couldn't see it.
The sky had an odd, coppery hue that reflected on
the water and gave everything an unreal appearance."
      Eight ships were sunk on Lake Huron during
the storm.  They included the Charles S. Price,
then the largest ship afloat on the lakes, the James
Carruthers, the pride of the Canada Steamship
Line, the Isaac M. Scott, the Wexford, the Regina,
the Argus, the Hydrus and the John A. McGean,
commanded by "Dancing Chauncey" Ney.
     Strangest of all the storm's phenomena
involved 22-year-old seaman John Thompson
of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
      Thompson, a crewman aboard the James
Carruthers, missed the boat when it departed
just prior to the storm.  Then, picking up the
Toronto Globe on November 11, 1913, he read
that his dead body had washed ashore at
Goderich, Ontario, on Lake Huron's eastern
shore.
      It was true!  "A sister of young John, who
lived in Sarnia, on learning that bodies were
coming ashore from the Carruthers and believing
that her brother was aboard this vessel, sent
word to the family in Hamilton."
      John"s father "hastened to Goderich" and
reclaimed the body.  It was placed in a coffin
in the Thompson parlor, and the family made
preparations for a wake.
     Halfway through the wake, John Thompson
walked through the front door.  His father
yelled, "Johnny!"  His mother took one look
and fainted.
      After an emotional reunion, the undertaker
led John aside and asked, "Are you really
young Thompson?"
     "Of course I am," John replied, producing
his maritime papers.
     "Well, John," said the undertaker, stroking
his beard, "If you're you, then who the hell
is that!?"
      Looking toward the coffin, John got the shock
of his life.  Lying there was his exact double.
"A body which bore every resemblance to" John
himself "even to the tattooed initials J.T. and a
remembered scar."
      The corpse's uncanny resemblance had
fooled John's father at the coroner's office in
Goderich, "and at Hamilton others had also
identified it."
      "The return of the son alive was almost as
great a shock as the report of his death.  He
had left the Carruthers  and had been aboard
another vessel at the time of the storm."
      "The body which the father had claimed
was sent back to Goderich."
      So who was "Thompson 2?"  Could it have
been a clone?  But who could have successfully
cloned a young Ontario sailor back in 1913?
      Or perhaps some sort of strange gateway
opened between our world and a parallel Earth
on November 9, 1913.  "Our" John Thompson
missed the Carruthers and shipped out aboard
another vessel.  On the parallel Earth,
"Thompson 2" made it to the dock on time and
was aboard the Carruthers when she foundered.
And then his lifeless body somehow floated
into "our" Lake Huron.  A mystery, indeed.
      In any event, "our" John Thompson earned
the distinction of becoming the only man who
ever had a drink at his own funeral!  (See the
book Lake Huron by Fred Landon, Bobbs-Merrill
Co., New York, N.Y., 1944, pages 329-330.)
(Editor's Comment: Last week's story about
Chauncey Ney drew some commentary.
One reader wrote, "Chauncey Ney's last
words--"I love the night life.  I want to boogie.
Toot-toot. Beep-beep."  And another offered this
quote from German philosopher Friedrich
Neitzche, "I will believe in God only if he dances."
That was strange...even for Neitzche.)

      We'll be back next week with more UFO
and paranormal news from around the planet,
brought to you by "the paper that goes home--
UFO Roundup."  See you then.

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

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.
*********************************************************

Webmasters:

Earn Revenue from adverts by joining Direct Leads
Full details at: http://www.directleads.com/signup/cd3492

*********************************************************

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.
*********************************************************






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

              Stormy Night For Astrobiologists Studying Leonid

From: NASANEWS <nasanews@mail.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:24:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:34:56 -0500
Subject: Stormy Night For Astrobiologists Studying Leonid


release below -- Broadcasters please see tail of message for
satellite feed info.

-----
Kathleen Burton                                                 Nov. 18, 1999
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
(Phone: 650/604-1731, 650/604-9000)  kburton@mail.arc.nasa.gov

Laura Lewis
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
(Phone:  650/604-2162, 650/604-9000)  llewis@mail.arc.nasa.gov

RELEASE:  99-77
STORMY NIGHT FOR ASTROBIOLOGISTS STUDYING LEONID METEORS

Astrobiologists on a NASA mission to study the Leonid meteors
were in the right place at the right time to study a rare
natural phenomenon -- a meteor storm.

At the peak of the storm, which occurred at 02:10 GMT, Nov. 18,
the Leonid meteors were falling from the sky at a rate of 2,200
per hour.  A meteor shower is classified as a storm when the
rate exceeds 1,000 meteors per hour.

"It's getting to the point where we can't click fast enough to
keep up with the meteors!" exclaimed Dave Holman of the
California Meteor Society, one of several amateur astronomers on
the meteor-counting team.  A total of 15,251 meteors were
counted during the six-hour observation period on the overnight
flight from Israel to the Azores.

"That's a lot of meteors!" said Chris Crawford, the amateur
astronomer responsible for compiling the data collected from
each person counting the meteors.  "I've seen just about as many
meteors in one night as I've seen in over 34 years of meteor
watching."

Near real-time data on the number of meteors falling per hour
was provided to NASA and the U.S. Air Force by a team of amateur
astronomers who counted the meteors using virtual reality
goggles and laptop computers.  The meteor counting team was
aboard the ARIA, one of two aircraft provided by the United
States Air Force to support this mission.  The data was sent
from the ARIA, an EC-18 aircraft, to the ground via the TDRS
satellite system.  NASA and the Air Force are joint sponsors of
the Leonid Multi-instrument Airborne Campaign.

"I am ecstatic over how well this night went!" said Peter
Jenneskins, chief scientist for the Leonid mission.  "Our models
proved to be right on for predicting where and when the meteor
storm would take place. We gathered some fantastic images, and
the data obtained should provide valuable insight into the role
meteors may have played in the evolution of life on
Earth."

-more-

-2-

While viewing the horizon at one point during the storm,
meteors, lightning and sprites could be seen from the planes.
Sprites are lightning phenomena that rise from the ground to the
sky.  "For 10 minutes we had a view of the way the sky may have
looked on Earth over 4 million years ago," Jenneskins said.  "It
was an awesome sight."

The second observing night of the Leonid astrobiology mission
began when the ARIA and FISTA aircraft left Tel Aviv at about
23:00 GMT, Nov. 18.  The flight crew of the ARIA reported seeing
two meteors almost as soon as the wheels left the ground.  Once
the planes reached altitude, they began flying in 150 nautical
mile flying patterns from east to west over Israel and the
Mediterranean.  These orbits provided a unique opportunity for
scientists on the planes and scientists on the ground to
collaborate.  The data collected from the planes will be
combined with visual, radar and radio observation data from
Israeli scientists on the ground to form an extremely
comprehensive data set regarding the Leonid meteors.

The aircraft stopped the orbits after one hour and continued
westbound towards the Azores, flying approximately 80-100
nautical miles apart at 37,000 feet.  ARIA's path flew the
scientists off the coast of Crete and over Sicily, while FISTA's
path flew over mainland Greece and the boot of Italy.  ARIA then
flew over the top of Menorca and Majorca, crossed central Spain
by Madrid, and continued over the top of Portugal down to the
Azores. FISTA flew over Sardinia and Barcelona and out the
northwest corner of Spain, and then down to the Azores.  The
planes landed at Lajes Airbase in the Azores at approximately
07:15 GMT, Nov. 18.

While over Spain and Portugal, scientists on the aircraft
performed coordinated observations with a series of ground based
observing teams.

"The coordinated air and ground observations that were conducted
during the flight are an invaluable part of this highly
successful mission," stated Col. S. Pete Worden, of the United
States Air Force headquarters, Washington, D.C.  "Not only do we
have a phenomenal set of data from the air, but we also have
complimentary data from the ground that can be used to help us
better understand and predict meteor storms and the impact they
may have on space operations."  Col. Worden flew aboard the ARIA
aircraft from Tel Aviv to the Azores.  The Air Force operates
more than 100 satellites that could be affected by a meteor
storm.

It takes the Earth a few days to get through the debris trail
left by the periodic comet 55P/Tempel-Tuttle that produces the
Leonid meteors. Therefore, one more observation night is
scheduled during a flight from the Azores to Patrick Air Force
Base in Florida.

The scientists and crew aboard the ARIA and FISTA are not the
only people able to see the Leonid meteors from the unique
vantage-point of an airplane.  Live video from the plane is
being sent to the internet during the mission for people on the
ground to watch. For current information about the Leonid
Multi-instrument Airborne Campaign visit:

http://leonid.arc.nasa.gov/

-end-

-----


SATELLITE FEED INFO FOR THIS STORY--
Video File for Nov. 18, 1999
11:00 am  (NASA TV)
ITEM 3 - LEONIDS 1999 IMAGES FROM NOV. 17 (replay)/AMES

ITEM 4 - LEONIDS 1998 PLUS 1999 INTERVIEWS FROM NOV. 16
          AMES/MSFC (replay)

ITEM 5 - SOLVE VIDEO FILE - ARC, LARC, DFRC

ITEM 6 - MARS MISSIONS CLIP REEL (file footage)

LIVE TELEVISION EVENTS THIS WEEK:

November 19, Friday

1:00 - 2:00 pm - Space Science Update on Results from First
Galileo Flyby of Jovian Moon, Io - HQ


*****************************


ITEM 1 - POSSIBLE  NEW LEONIDS IMAGES FROM JERUSALEM
          (shot Nov. 17) - AMES

ITEM 2 - HIGH-ALTITUDE BALLOON VIDEO OF LEONIDS
          (shot Nov. 17) - MSFC

ITEM 3 - LEONIDS 1999 IMAGES FROM NOV. 17 (replay)/AMES

Contact at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC:  Donald Savage
(Phone 202/358-1547).
Contact at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA:  Kathleen
Burton (Phone 650/604-1731).

  LIVE TELEVISION EVENTS THIS WEEK:

November 19, Friday

1:00 - 2:00 pm - Space Science Update on Results from First
Galileo Flyby of Jovian Moon, Io - HQ


*****************************

ITEM 3a - 1999 LEONID B-ROLL-------------------------------TRT :42

Meteor streaks from the ARIA aircraft during the first night of
the 1999 Leonid Airborne Campaign.


ITEM 3b - INTERVIEW EXCERPTS------------------------------TRT 1:20

Jane Houston, U.S. Astronomer, Leonid Meteor Count Team

ITEM 4 - LEONIDS 1998 PLUS 1999 INTERVIEWS FROM NOV. 16
          AMES/MSFC (replay)
*****************************
TV Producers:
Please note all times, unless otherwise noted, are Eastern Time.
This heads-up announces our most current line-up of stories on
NASA's daily Video File feed. As we try to provide you the best,
most current service possible, THE LINE-UP MAY CHANGE THROUGHOUT
THE DAY.

Any CHANGES TO THE LINE-UP WILL APPEAR ON THE NASA VIDEO FILE
ADVISORY on the web at
ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/tv-advisory/nasa-tv.txt
WE UPDATE THE ADVISORY THROUGHOUT THE DAY.

The NASA Video File normally airs at noon, 3:00 p.m., 6:00 p.m.,
9:00 p.m. and midnight Eastern Time. NASA Television is available
on GE-2, transponder 9C at 85 degrees West longitude, with
vertical polarization. Frequency is on 3880.0 megahertz, with
audio on 6.8 megahertz.
For general questions about the video file call NASA Headquarters,
Washington, DC: Ray Castillo 202/358-4555 or Elvia Thompson
202/358-1696.
*****************************

  To receive Ames press releases via email, send an email with
  the word "subscribe" in subject line to:
  ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov To unsubscribe, send
  an email with "unsubscribe" in subject line. Also, the NASA
  Ames Public Affairs Home Page at URL,
  http://ccf.arc.nasa.gov/dx includes press releases and JPEG
  images in AP Leaf Desk format minus embedded captions







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:47:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:56:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


List,

For what it's worth...

There's an article in today's NY Times titled "Jupiter's
Atmosphere Raises Questions on Planet Formation."

Jupiter appears to have twice as much argon and nitrogen and
some other stuff than it "should."

 >From the article:

"There is even the bizarre possibility that Jupiter formed as
much as 10 times farther from the sun than it is now, and
somehow lumbered inward to its present position. Most scientists
dismissed that as extrememly unlikely, but said the results [of
the Jovian atmospheric probe] nevertheless posed a challenge for
theories of planetary formation."

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 >
   Nov > Nov 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 12:38:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:58:08 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Marty Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:14:37 -0500

 >Howdy Eduardo and All!

 >No one here has yet mentioned that travelling faster than the
 >speed of light may not be necessary for interstellar travel. It
 >may be possible to "bend space" using enormous gravitational
 >forces, so that you are able to "leap" from one point to another
 >when space snaps back to its original shape, sort of like an
 >elastic band. I understand that this is theoretically possible.

Actually, this was sort of what I had in mind when I mentioned
exploring the universe without technology.  I believe this was
how the Third Stage Guild Navigators were able to traverse space
with the help of the spice melange in the book "Dune", et.al.
(Didn't the spice remind you of Lebanese Hashish?)

A new movie starring that dancing fool and well-known
Scientologist, John Travolta, is in production wherein the space
invaders also fold space.  However these alien marauders, the
Psychlos, use technology in exactly the manner you described.

See:  http://www.battlefieldearth.com/

The book was actually quite good throughout its over 800 pages.
Johnny "Goodboy" Tyler goes from a near savage on the
post-apocalyptic Earth to master of the galaxy.  Hmmm, I can't
remember if there was a Psychlo named Xenu. <eg>

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:47:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:09:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


List,

For what it's worth...

There's an article in today's NY Times titled "Jupiter's
Atmosphere Raises Questions on Planet Formation."

Jupiter appears to have twice as much argon and nitrogen and
some other stuff than it "should."

 >From the article:

"There is even the bizarre possibility that Jupiter formed as
much as 10 times farther from the sun than it is now, and
somehow lumbered inward to its present position. Most scientists
dismissed that as extrememly unlikely, but said the results [of
the Jovian atmospheric probe] nevertheless posed a challenge for
theories of planetary formation."

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                       Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Matt DeBow <md@ufochronicles.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:39:31 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:10:44 -0500
Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


LECTURE/PRESENTATION:
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 21st  2pm in Berkeley
Ian Christopher (Crop Circles �99)

Location:  2018 Allston Way, Berkeley
one block from Downtown Berkeley BART.
tix/info: 510-644-1600 or 925-945-5500.
$13 advance - $15 at door

Ian Christopher, a researcher with Mariposa-Pacific Research
Institute, will present the crop circles of 1999, taken by
renowned videographer Peter Sorenson. This spectacular array of
beautifully designed anomalous circle formations, will be
presented to you on video from the air and the ground. The
formations are images and three dimensional geometric shapes;
the intense patterns appear as they come up out of the landscape
with depth. Ian will also give us some profound insight as to
why the media will not publish these images.

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 19th - 7pm
� Dr. Norman Bergrum (UFOs around Saturn)
� Carol Cilliers  (Astrologer, Healer, Clairvoyant)

December Event: $10 in advance / $12 at door

Dr. Norman Bergrun is the founder of the California Society of
Professional Engineers Education Foundation.  He has authored
two books:  Tomorrow's Technology Today and  Ringmakers of
Saturn.  Bergrun worked for NACA, (National Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics) the predecessor of Ames Research Center, for
twelve years as a research scientist.  He worked for Lockheed
Missile and Space Company (now Lockheed Martin) for an
additional thirteen years.  In 1971 he founded Bergrun
Engineering and Research. Dr. Bergurm was the inventor of
deicing technology still used on aircraft today. Dr. Bergrun has
uncovered that the Apollo mission discovered more than they
expected on their exploration of space and the moon. He claims
that there are Electromagnetic Vehicles (EMVs) operating in and
around Saturn.  Dr. Bergrun will also reveal photographs taken
from NASA's Voyager space
probes of Saturn that show luminous objects.

Carol Cilliers is an exceptional astrologer, clairvoyant healer
andteacher. Wondering what's in the stars for you in the next
century? Carol will be presenting a special Millennium
astrological forecast for our audience. She is a contributing
astrologist for Psychic Reader Newspaper, and has directed
several clairvoyant training institutes in California. Carol can
be heard on KEST radio 1450AM every other Friday morning from 10
to 10 am. She also delivers a daily astrological guide and Lunar
Views, aired weekdays every hour between 7am and 12 noon. Carol
is also a teacher of meditation, healing, clairvoyance and
astrology.

$2 discount for OPUS, BPI, UFO Chronicles members and
affiliates.

Sponsored by UFO Chronicles and Psychic Reader Newspaper.
Host & Sponsor info.
http://www.UFOChronicles.com
http://www.BerkeleyPsychic.com

If you�re interested in any of the following:
Matt DeBow�s Book, UFO CHRONICLES
Being a featured speaker please e-mail us your (bio and topics)
A subscription to the Psychic Reader Newspaper (monthly) Send us
e-mails addresses of people you think would be interested in our
events

md@ufochronicles.com

  Thank You








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 13:43:40 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:23:02 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:07:30 -0500
 >From: Eduardo Gomez <neutrox7@yahoo.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:14:34 EST
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>On the serious side, it is my personal opinion that those (with
 >>the possible exception is Rockeffeler) with money are, to at
 >>least some extent, a tad on the eccentric side to begin with.
 >>Perhaps this is how they obtained their wealth. Eccentricity
 >>often arrives on the same frequency as some silly fossify, or is
 >>it just me seeing through the shadow of the green eyed monster?

 >Eccentricity, vision, conviction and passion are all good
 >qualities that characterize many of the wealthiest individuals.
 >The problems is when the above are merged with treason,
 >sabotage, deceit, and murder. And most politicians or big CEOs
 >with initial good intentions cannot be where they are if they
 >don't make a lot of compromises and look the other way when
 >their fellows of the corporate, political, legislative,
 >religious and military mobs do their dirty deeds.

 >I can also see beyond the body and shadow of the one eyed beast,
 >but it's still there, blocking the way to freedom, happiness and
 >enlightenment at all levels. Who cares about the cheese, if one
 >is just like rat eating it (that is, if one is not eating
 >-literally- rat poison instead)? Who cares about the advance of
 >space programs, when they fake failures in the probes built
 >thanks to tax payers?

 >The best things in this world were not made by man, anyway.
 >--

Uh, OK.

Let's carry this on offlist after this one, as it may be getting
far afield from Gripple, Identified Unidentified Frying Hubcaps,
the abduction experience and Pia Zadora anatomically correct
blow up dolls.

Whilst we in North America, as a rule, are among the most free
peoples on the planet, we know full well that our leaders are
all too often our Fuhrers.  This goes for Goober Mints as well
as big business.  It doesn't take any rocket scientist to cypher
out the line of horse hockey we are being fed like pablum to a
baby.  It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out just how
much is withheld from citizens on the basis of national
insecurity and pubic relations.

I used to do business in a country south of the US which shall
remain nameless, years ago, before the big reforms took effect.
(Right).  Not just this country but others, where the right hand
was extended in friendship and the left one was extended behind
the back, palm up.

I used to think this was just "there."  But it's everywhere.
Don't drink, smoke, shoot, suck eggs or have an anomalous
experience because it places you out in the cold, where the
steel eyes of Judas Priest can pierce through the armor of your
sensibilities and change your mind about what's good for you and
what aint. Or what happened vs what really happened.  Sleep, you
are getting very sleepy, deeper, now... watch the television,
see the movie and visit our site on the Internet... deeper now
... "

"OK Dr. Gesundt, you did _NOT_ see that triangular UFO, you do
not need to shoot trap, skeet, sporting clays or carry for
protection, you need not smoke those Arturo Fuenta Candela
wrapped beauties and you must not _EVER_ dis us in goobermint.
We know what's good for you and so does your insurance company.
You may now repeat what I just told you..."

So what?  If you live in a democracy (we here in the United
States do not live in a democracy, we live in a constirutional
republic) then whether or both, you only have yourselves to
blame for allowing them to lay you down nekked with your feet
stuck up in the air and ready to be mounted.

Take charge.  It takes guts. But that's what the best thing
about man is that God gave us. Guts.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 15:22:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:26:00 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Although not really surprised, after other recent messages in which
 >Mr Matthews claimed vehemently, if I remember well, that all UFO
 >sightings, including the waves of the forties, were secret craft.
 >(Probably derived from the excellent Nazi UFOs!)

 >Clearly one of the most preposterous claims in the whole history
 >of ufology.

 >Please correct me if I am wrong.

Gildas, and list-

I certainly don't want to get into the middle of a squabble
between two groups on that side of the big pond, but I think a
point or two are worth making.

IMO, it's dangerous to draw any absolute conclusions on either
side of that debate.

Tim has been very vocal in his presentations and through his
research (which is fairly extensive) found that there are
correlations between UFO sightings and experimental craft
(theoretically) under development.  His conclusions are based on
both annecdotal and FOIA information, just like many of the
conclusions made by ufologists.  Unfortunately, neither side in
this debate can prove the other wrong.

This question has been clouded by the recent CIA report related
to the U-2 flights.  There was apparently an effort on the part
of some to promote the UFO myth as a cover for the super secret
U-2 spy plane, and while it probably wasn't as extensive as the
CIA report would have us believe, it can't be denied that some
agencies may have used UFOs as a smoke-screen to deflect more
difficult quesitons to answer.

There are also many in the ufological arena who believe that
many sightings listed as UFOs were actually experimental craft,
but the distinction is that they also believe that many
sightings were not.  Tim has acknowledged (at least to me) that
there are sightings that clearly do not fit the description of
known secret weopens in development.  Unfortunately, both sides
in this discussion often try to ignore subsets of the evidence
that don't fit their conclusions.  Since much of it is
annecdotal in nature there's no way to win the debate.

I certainly would agree that it would be absurd to believe that
_all_ UFO sightings would be explained as experimental craft, but
that's a possibility that has to be explored individually in
relation to each sighting reported.  In many cases that may (in
the end) turn out to be the case.  However, that wouldn't make
it a global answer for all sightings reported.

Just a couple of thoughts.

Steve








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: "Jenny Randles" <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 21:21:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:36:00 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:55:06 -0000

 >>>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >To Georgina Bruni and the List,

 >I want to thank you publicly for you excellent interventions
 >in the debate with Jenny Randles. Which leaves at least one
 >big question unanswered regarding Lakenheath:

 >What did the pilots say?

 >Did they say, "yes" or not, and in what terms? That they did not
 >see the UFO (or mysterious ball of light)?

 >Best regards,

 >Gildas Bourdais



Hi,


If this list needs further evidence of why I'll be avoiding
future debates, here it is. The above justifies my decision to
retrench.

Mr Bourdais still feels there is a big question as to whether
the Lakenheath crew say they saw a UFO. I have met them. I have
repeatedly (and I trust not hysterically) told everyone on this
list what the air crew say - they _did_not_see_anything_
visually.

This does not solve the case. I have never suggested that it
does. But it does effect ones appraisal of it.

I have sent my account on what the crew said to Bernard Thouanel
- the man who kicked off this saga weeks ago. I have promised a
full transcript and report on the events early in the new year
so that everyone can read the facts when the ongoing UFOIN study
is completed.

Now surely that is a reasonable response. But it has not been
accepted as such.

I must then assume Mr Bourdais cannot believe what I have
sincerely tried to explain to you all . And the rest of this
list may have similar doubts given the silence.

As such it is pointless to waste anybody's time further. Those
who care about the truth regarding this case can read the UFOIN
report and witness transcripts when ready. The rest of you can
merrily argue it out till the cows go moo and look for
conspiracy where none exists.

Sadly that wont change the facts of this case, but I dont think
that will perturb some people, unfortunately.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 21:21:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:39:54 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:55:06 -0000

 >>>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:23:39 +0000
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >To Georgina Bruni and the List,

 >I want to thank you publicly for you excellent interventions
 >in the debate with Jenny Randles. Which leaves at least one
 >big question unanswered regarding Lakenheath:

 >What did the pilots say?

 >Did they say, "yes" or not, and in what terms? That they did not
 >see the UFO (or mysterious ball of light)?

 >Best regards,

 >Gildas Bourdais



Hi,


If this list needs further evidence of why I'll be avoiding
future debates, here it is. The above justifies my decision to
retrench.

Mr Bourdais still feels there is a big question as to whether
the Lakenheath crew say they saw a UFO. I have met them. I have
repeatedly (and I trust not hysterically) told everyone on this
list what the air crew say - they _did_not_see_anything_
visually.

This does not solve the case. I have never suggested that it
does. But it does effect ones appraisal of it.

I have sent my account on what the crew said to Bernard Thouanel
- the man who kicked off this saga weeks ago. I have promised a
full transcript and report on the events early in the new year
so that everyone can read the facts when the ongoing UFOIN study
is completed.

Now surely that is a reasonable response. But it has not been
accepted as such.

I must then assume Mr Bourdais cannot believe what I have
sincerely tried to explain to you all . And the rest of this
list may have similar doubts given the silence.

As such it is pointless to waste anybody's time further. Those
who care about the truth regarding this case can read the UFOIN
report and witness transcripts when ready. The rest of you can
merrily argue it out till the cows go moo and look for
conspiracy where none exists.

Sadly that wont change the facts of this case, but I dont think
that will perturb some people, unfortunately.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                        Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:22:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:49:03 -0500
Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 18:56:48 -0400

 >Menzel also wrote science fiction. Besides being a world class
 >cryptographer, and possessor of very high level security
 >clearances with the NSA and CIA, and 30 other companies.

 >A remarkable man.

 >Stan Friedman

Stan,

Are you aware of any bibliography of Menzel's science fiction?
Did he write under a pen name?

Gary Alevy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:37:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:56:57 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:30:18 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:35:46 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >>Talk about your truisms! Relativity has always insinuated that
 >>any form of interstellar travel would necessarily be subluminal
 >>by definition, unless you wanted to become a photon in the
 >>process.

 >Subliminal?  You mean inadequate to produce a sensation or a
 >perception?  Huh?

 >Are we discussing the same thing here?   Dave was talking
 >about space travel.  What's sex got to do with it?

Sorry, Jim, maybe I should have said subluminal velocities in
regard to the speed of light, with which subliminal ain't got
nothing to do, one way or the other.

 >>But let's talk about interstellar travel at 99% the speed of
 >>light. How you gonna turn? And what happens when you run headon
 >>into a grain of dust at such speeds, never mind a rock the size
 >>of your fist? And how you gonna apply the brakes, anyway? A
 >>pretty picture not, I think.

 >Dennis, Dennis, Dennis.  Have you no imagination?  First, to
 >turn one must signal with the proper navigation lights or stick
 >your hand out the window and tell the helmsman which way!

Jim, you are so funny! Tee, hee! Yes, I have an imagination.
What I can't imagine is approaching anything remotely resembling
lightspeed and being able to dodge any object in your path which
you couldn't conceivably account for prior to collision. I think
the guy you want here is Stan the Man Friedman. He knows
everything about highspeed, interstellar travel and how to evade
troublesome detritous that might otherwise lie in your path --
and possibly substantially delay your progress. Failing
Friedman, there's always David Rudiak.

<snip>

 >>Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
 >>materialized could equally well number in the millions and
 >>billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.
 >
 >>Dennis Stacy

 >Very large numbers work only when one's opinion matches the size
 >of one's ego and one's ego is wearing blinders.  Are you
 >suggesting that it is not possible maintain one's regular
 >Adams', Eves' and family jewels without turning them all into
 >protons and thus, causing only subliminal sex?

<snip>

 >Jim Mortellaro

Whatever the hell _that_ means, Jim. All I know is that when it
comes to egos and opinions, I seem to be running a distant
second to you in both categories. Too much Gripple, perchance?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:04:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:58:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:11:35 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Greg,

 >I had a really neat, nice reply to this post -- and I'll be
 >damned if Windows didn't eat it, alive and wiggling.

 >Maybe we got out current computer software from the Roswell
 >crash, after all.

I blame Roswell for everything that happens to me. Parking
tickets, sunburn, bad concerts... even lost socks.

The full extent of the alien conspiracy has never been revealed.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                      Additions to Project 1947 Website

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 21:46:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:54:29 -0500
Subject: Additions to Project 1947 Website


Some additions to the PROJECT 1947 website that might be of
interest.

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


PROJECT 1947

http://www.project1947.com/

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

What's New

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

Site Update

Aircraft/UFO Encounter Summaries From the Research of PROJECT
1947.

Updates of some cases in Dominique Weinstein's
ACUFOE catalogue with these additions.

http://www.project1947.com/acupdt.htm

Also compiled is a collection of Notes, References and
Comments on ACUFOE and Related Matters

http://www.project1947.com/acu2.htm

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

Articles by Dr Olavo T. Fontes

Two articles from famous Brazilian researcher, Dr Olavo T.
Fontes.

Dr Fontes explores the reasons why "The Air Force Is Just As
Puzzled As We Are About The Saucers."

http://www.project1947.com/fontes1.htm

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

A review of the 1966 Brazilian UFO flap in "UFO Report From
Brazil."

http://www.project1947.com/fontes2.htm

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

Ohio State University Library UFO Collection

An alphabetical listing of UFO-related materials donated to the
Ohio State University (OSU) by William Jones is now available
here.

http://www.project1947.com/osu/index.html

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

Foo Fighter Articles

In "Foo Fighters: The Story So Far," Andy Roberts examines the
history of the "foo fighter" phenomenon.

http://www.project1947.com/foo.htm

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

WW II Document Research: "In search of "Foo-Fighters." Andy
Roberts investigates the often-quoted World War II "foo fighter"
encounter during an allied bombing raid over Schweinfurt,
Germany, in October of 1943.

http://www.project1947.com/arwwr.htm

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


"The Midland Fireball: Dow Chemical's Early Involvement with
UFOs." A fascinating article by Joel Carpenter dealing with
Dow's investigations into the remains of a "flying disc" in July
of 1947.

http://www.project1947.com/dow.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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:53:35 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:14:17 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:48:56 -0800
 >From: ed gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >>7) The developing field of nanotechnology, which theoretically
 >>might eventually manufacture superstrong materials that could
 >>make some of these crazy proposals possible.

 >David,

 >I strongly agree; the nanotechnology revolution has the chance
 >of making us godlike. There may be no limits to what we will
 >eventually be able to create, bundance for all.

I'm very glad the nanotech slant was brought up, as it
intersects the topic of several posts made to the Extropy
mailing list several months ago, both by myself and others.

Specifically, I find it quite interesting to note that many of
the features reported by UFO witnesses and "abductees" are very
much consistent with what we would expect from a functioning
nanotechnology.

Those of you who have read K. Eric Drexler's seminal "Engines of
Creation" may recall the references to spacecraft manufacture in
the not-so-distant future, when incredibly light materials with
wonderfully resilient properties (Roswell "foil"?) are
manufactured molecule by molecule in computer-controlled vats.

The results are seamless craft, minus all the rivets and
external detail we see in contemporary vehicles like the Space
Shuttle.

Those who claim to have seen the insides of UFOs almost
universally note the uniform look of everything: no seams, no
rivets. Even the light is depicted as uniform, with no
particular source. Sounds like nanotech to me.

Perhaps more interestingly, a lot of the "impossible" things
apparent aliens are seen to do can be explianed by
nanotechnology. Walking through walls and levitation are common
elements of the abduction literature, even though they tend to
sound absurd.

Interestingly, a theoretical nanotechnology called "utility
fog" could be used to accomplish these very same feats.
A visitor (to use Strieber's term) once said to a witness
"We rearrange atoms." This was in 1985, and while it proves
nothing, it's one of those compelling details that just may be
based in physical reality. (Jacques Vallee quotes an apparent
space visitor talking quantum physics in the 18th century in
his book "Dimensions.")

My attitude is that _if_ UFOs represent a physical
extraterrestrial presence on our planet, then the aliens are
most definitely using nanotechnology, in some form or another.

Mac Tonnies







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 02:18:04 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 06:49:20 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:37:33 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:30:18 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:35:46 -0600
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 ><snip>

 >>>Talk about your truisms! Relativity has always insinuated that
 >>>any form of interstellar travel would necessarily be subluminal
 >>>by definition, unless you wanted to become a photon in the
 >>>process.

 >>Subliminal? You mean inadequate to produce a sensation or a
 >>perception? Huh?

 >>Are we discussing the same thing here?  Dave was talking
 >>about space travel. What's sex got to do with it?

 >Sorry, Jim, maybe I should have said subluminal velocities in
 >regard to the speed of light, with which subliminal ain't got
 >nothing to do, one way or the other.

 >>>But let's talk about interstellar travel at 99% the speed of
 >>>light. How you gonna turn? And what happens when you run headon
 >>>into a grain of dust at such speeds, never mind a rock the size
 >>>of your fist? And how you gonna apply the brakes, anyway? A
 >>>pretty picture not, I think.

 >>Dennis, Dennis, Dennis. Have you no imagination? First, to
 >>turn one must signal with the proper navigation lights or stick
 >>your hand out the window and tell the helmsman which way!

 >Jim, you are so funny! Tee, hee! Yes, I have an imagination.
 >What I can't imagine is approaching anything remotely resembling
 >lightspeed and being able to dodge any object in your path which
 >you couldn't conceivably account for prior to collision.

Of course we cannot travel faster than lightspeed. According to
relativity that is. But we may be able to use or otherwise
control sufficient power with which to utilize some of those
other relativistic laws, the ones which allow shortening the
distance between two points in spacetime. To me, it is nearly
obvious that if Einstein was correct, there must be more than
one way to get there from here without breaking the law.

Also, modern physics is exploring the possibility that space may
consist of connections, strings, tunnels et al, which may be
able to be used to travel between two points in less time (or
different time) than would be required by traveling at or near
the speed of light.

Ergo my comment on your imagination. You seemed to be fixed on
that one relativistic little hitch in the getalong. Maybe there
is something outside of relativity? Perhaps one may travel
between dimensions, through them, in order to get to another
place in less time than an eyeblink. Aks Stan the Man.

If one allows merely that law, even if correct, to stand alone,
then we shall get nowhere fast in lieu of somewhere else
quicker.

 >I think
 >the guy you want here is Stan the Man Friedman. He knows
 >everything about highspeed, interstellar travel and how to evade
 >troublesome detritous that might otherwise lie in your path --
 >and possibly substantially delay your progress. Failing
 >Friedman, there's always David Rudiak.

 ><snip>

 >>>Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
 >>>materialized could equally well number in the millions and
 >>>billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.

 >>>Dennis Stacy

 >>Very large numbers work only when one's opinion matches the size
 >>of one's ego and one's ego is wearing blinders. Are you
 >>suggesting that it is not possible maintain one's regular
 >>Adams', Eves' and family jewels without turning them all into
 >>protons and thus, causing only subliminal sex?

 ><snip>

 >>Jim Mortellaro

 >Whatever the hell _that_ means, Jim. All I know is that when it
 >comes to egos and opinions, I seem to be running a distant
 >second to you in both categories. Too much Gripple, perchance?

Absolutely not enough, actually. Perhaps (admittedly I could be
wrong) but just perhaps, you are seeing ego and missing seeing
the most important part of me that lives, my emotions. And these
are strong when it comes to folks telling me what I saw or did
not see or experience. I was there. And even I don't know the
answer. Dennis Stacey doesn't, or Stan the Man, or Dave or
anyone I know or know of. But everyone seems to have an opinion.
OK fine. But from my perspective outside my comfy closet, the
one I resided in for so many years, the atmosphere is more
confining than it was from the inside of my closet. At least no
one was in there with me telling me I was crazy, saw pelicans,
was dreaming or that it was quite impossible to go through that
solid plaster and brick wall and/ or casement window in a blue
beam of solid light into a flying saucer.

God, even when I say it or write it, I don't believe it myself.
I try to keep my mind open. Which I don't see on this list that
often. See, as I've said so many times, I do not have the
answers. I do not know what happened to me but something did. I
have only the strength of my memories and that ego you referred
to, to keep me from sinking into the abyss which I abhor in
others ... I don't know, you do. And shoot, you weren't even
there with me when it happened.

If you are hit by a truck and someone says you bumped into a
wall, what would you say to the maroon who wasn't there at the
time but insists by your explanation, that it was definitely a
wall and trucks cannot possibly hit people. It's against the V&T
code.

Meanwhile, the phenom continues with no explanation. And we,
well, we go on exploring pelicans, Venus and methane gas instead
of what the claiment stated in the accident report.

Yes, my ego is large. But my emotions are a lot larger. They
blow like Dylan's idiot wind. But only when I perceive a closed
mind. Remember that famous line of Dylan's, "Oh how I wish that
for just one time, you could stand inside my shoes. Then you'd
know what a drag it is to see you."

It aint you babe, it's your opinions. They restrict one's
ability to expand one's imagination. They insult the memory of
people such as me. Perhaps that is not the intention. Perhaps
it is. However it is the perception. Don' tell me what you
think, tell me what you know, for sure ... and let the Stantons
of the world do the math. But do tell me you love me. I can't
live without you Dennis. Kiss me and it will make it all
better.

I'll retire to bedlam.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                        Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 03:02:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 06:51:44 -0500
Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'


 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 01:55:54 +0000
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:05:34 -0500
 >Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 03:33:39 -0000

 >>If you were to ask, 'Where were the triangles before the
 >>1960s?', then I would be struggling, yet could still cite the
 >>following from 'Project Blue Book' cases which were, so far as I
 >>know, unsolved:

 >Here is another report from the 60's case of Omar Fowler of PRA,
 >forwarded by Author Nick Redfern.

 >Air 2/17527                        35392

 >REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT

 >At 2125hrs on the 28th March 1965, nine or ten triangular objects,
 >making a low humming noise passed over Skaeby, Richmond, Yorkshire.

 >The FT's were estimated to be 100 ft long, triangular in shape,
 >with rounded corners and an orange illumination below. They were
 >flying in  a triangular formation.

 >Need more FT info ? Why not check out the Project FT web-site
 >http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tspurrier/tri_test.htm

 >Or E-mail Victor J Kean (Director) who has over 7,000 FT
 >sightings reports (Aug 1942 - to the present day)
 >100545@compuserve.com

Hi Roy

The earliest report of an FT I've heard of was on 6th September
1948 over the town of Edmonton, north London.

Allegedly a silver FT was sighted hovering above the area,
however all attempts to corroborate this information have failed
to confirm any sighting took place.

Thanks, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                        Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:27:52 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 06:54:30 -0500
Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'


 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 01:55:54 +0000
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'

 >James Easton wrote:

 >>>From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFOs As 'Secret Weapons'
 >>>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 03:33:39 -0000

 >>>If you were to ask, 'Where were the triangles before the
 >>>1960s?', then I would be struggling, yet could still cite the
 >>>following from 'Project Blue Book' cases which were, so far as I
 >>>know, unsolved:

 >Hi All,

 >Here is another report from the 60's case of Omar Fowler of PRA,
 >forwarded by Author Nick Redfern.

 >Air 2/17527                        35392

 >REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT

 >At 2125hrs on the 28th March 1965, nine or ten triangular objects,
 >making a low humming noise passed over Skaeby, Richmond, Yorkshire.

 >The FT's were estimated to be 100 ft long, triangular in shape,
 >with rounded corners and an orange illumination below. They were
 >flying in  a triangular formation.

 >Need more FT info ? Why not check out the Project FT web-site
 >http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tspurrier/tri_test.htm

 >Or E-mail Victor J Kean (Director) who has over 7,000 FT
 >sightings reports (Aug 1942 - to the present day)
 >100545@compuserve.com

 >Regards,

 >Roy..

Hello James, Roy and Victor:

I don't have the Skaeby FTs recorded here. Instead, only
95 minutes later on the same night,  I have a Grey Ovoid
sighting Southeast of Sutton Veny, Wiltshire. A man out
walking saw it pass overhead in some sort of fog.   He
said it was quite noisy, and he felt some sort of "pressure".
ref: A. Shuttlewood, The Warminster Mystery, pg. 28.

I visited England for the first time just 5 months later. I
wasn't looking for UFOs, and didn't see any.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                        Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 07:29:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 06:58:12 -0500
Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:22:44 -0500
 >From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa
 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 18:56:48 -0400

 >>Menzel also wrote science fiction. Besides being a world class
 >>cryptographer, and possessor of very high level security
 >>clearances with the NSA and CIA, and 30 other companies.

 >>A remarkable man.

 >>Stan Friedman

 >Stan,

 >Are you aware of any bibliography of Menzel's science fiction?
 >Did he write under a pen name?

 >Gary Alevy

I am not aware of a bibliography. I believe he wrote under his
own name.

The Archives at Harvard which have his personal papers may have
a list.

His UFO Correspondence is mostly at the American Philosophical
Library in Philadelphia.

The University of Denver Archives also have some of his
material.

I saw one story that somebody sent me.

Kevin Randle is very much into science fiction (I am not) so may
have more info.

Lots of interest groups.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 09:24:49 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:22:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


Dear All,

I shall take a brief moment from our imminent preparations for
the arrival of our daughter Alexandra (she'll be out Monday!) to
address some of the utter nonsense spewed out by certain people
on the question of black triangles;

1 - I note that Peter Gersten and Michael Lindemann are
attempting to ignore all the research done people like myself,
Steve Douglass, Bill Rose and David Windle re; flying triangles.

They obviously feel that the more times they repeat the mantra
about 'these must be of alien origin because they are seen over
built-up area' then people will believe them and perhaps, in
Gersten's case, pump more money into the overly alien-oriented
CAUS group.

2 - Lindemann cites Nick Pope as a credible source on FTs -
which is ridiculous and we have wiped the floor with his sales
pitch on too many occasions. He knew nothing whilst at Air Staff
and knows nothing now - except a good agent, Andrew Lownie.

3 - I notice the strange re-emergence of a story from three
years ago - and which was published in 'UFO Reality' magazine
around the same time (approx.) - about a supposed D-Notice
forbidding the reporting of FTs in the media, or some such tale.

This is rubbish. The D-Notice system is old, antiquated and
entirely irrelevant. Importantly, one can actually write or call
the governmental office that issues D-Notices and find out what
D-Notice are "in force"...or not in force as the case may be.

There has not and is not a D-Notice on FTs!!!!!

Labour MP Tam Dalyell tells a much more interesting story but
the Lindemann and Gerstens of this world seem curiously
oblivious to everything I put forward because they know that
their constituency will not accept the heretical truth from
us...

How many UK researchers are even aware that the D-Notice system
operates thus?

About one other that I can think of.

This says a great deal about the state of UFO research here and
in the US. Stories are put out, in this case one based upon a
three year old myth whose source is anonymous (!), and accepted
without argument.

4 - Given that every aviation buff knows that triangular a/c
were designed and built during WW2, why should the appearance of
a similar object over London in 1948 be evidence of aliens?

This (and this is a fatal assumption) assumes that the witness
is correct and in my four years experience of talking to
witnesses, they are nearly always mistaken.

The number of times I have personally investigated FT sightings
and an easy solution has been found (stars/planets, aircraft
lights are the favourites) beggars belief.

I's say that of 150 cases perhaps around eight seem at all credible.

5 - The story about FTs featured on the excellent Jeff Rense
homepage (www.sightings.com) is full of the usual inaccuracies
about FTs.

Last year's, when Peter Gersten was trying to take the DoD to
court and find out more about FTs he contacted me about my
helping him with his efforts. He has received numerous emails
from me on the subject and I have suggested he speaks with Steve
Douglass but it looks very much like he has simply ignored my
evidence and gone onto believe mythmakers like Ed Fouche and
others who cite anonymous source, bankrupt tales of crash
retrievals and so on.

6 - We've been here before but the tactic from the believer set
is clear;

Ignore all evidence to the contrary
Pretend that there is only one credible position
Play to the audience whenever possible.

7 - Some of these lies will be challenged by me personally at
the forthcoming LAPIS Conference in Blackpool. As well as
spreading more fumes about MJ-12 and the new batch of fakes,
George Wingfield is going to speak on FTs - a subject which he
has little or no idea about.

Last time he spoke at a Northern event on FTs he decided to
childishly rip up a copy of one of my reports on secret
terrestrial FT projects.

He'd better not try that again......

The Popes, Redferns, Fowlers and co will NEVER debate me or
anyone else on this subject BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY'LL LOSE.

All they do is hide behind their magazines and publishers secure
in the knowledge that, as Goebbels once said, if you repeat a
lie often enough people will believe it.

The truth is that the few FT sightings that are credible relate
to man-made projects. Thanks to the UFO community and their
convenient links with the mass media, the FT subject has been
presented as evidence of alien contact. This is the lie of the
Twentieth Century and will no doubt be challenged in the new
Millennium.

Although I'm well out of Ufology as such and looking into other
more sensible subjects of concern, I will not allow lies like
these to go unchallenged.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                        Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

From: Ed Stewart <ufoindex@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 07:16:11 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:22:59 -0500
Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 07:29:52 -0400

 >>Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 20:22:44 -0500
 >>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: A Rare Saucerian Curiosa

 >>Are you aware of any bibliography of Menzel's science fiction?
 >>Did he write under a pen name?

 >>Gary Alevy

 >I am not aware of a bibliography. I believe he wrote under his
 >own name.

 >The Archives at Harvard which have his personal papers may have
 >a list.

 >His UFO Correspondence is mostly at the American Philosophical
 >Library in Philadelphia.

 >The University of Denver Archives also have some of his
 >material.

Science Fiction is a mature literary form which has received the
attention of scholars now for many decades. As such, the field
of science fiction is rich in scholarship in regards to history
and criticism and there isn't much that has  been written that
isn't known and archived somewhere.

Here is what Menzel wrote in the world of science fiction pulp
magazines. (ms) miscellaneous, (nv) novellette, (ar) article,
(ss) short story. The Galaxy 9/69 issue is also filled with
Menzel's own art work. He was also listed in the masthead as a
consultant to Hugo Gernsback publications, such as _Amazing
Stories_, in astrophysics up to the mid 30s.

MENZEL, DONALD H(oward) (1901-1976)

The Temperature of Space (ms) Amazing May '35
The Other Side of Zero (nv) Science Fiction Plus Mar '53
Future Space Suits (ar) Science Fiction Plus May '53
The End of the Moon [with Frank R. Paul & Gustav Albrecht, Ph.D.]
(ar) Science Fiction Plus Aug '53
Our Atomic Sun (ar) Science Fiction Plus Oct '53
Fin's Funeral (ss) Galaxy Feb '65
Observatory on the Moon (ar) Galaxy Jun '65
Martians and Venusians (ms) Galaxy Sep '69
Who's Who on the Moon (ar) Galaxy Jan '71

Menzel also wrote a letter to the publisher published in:
Letter (Amazing Stories, July 1932)


Source of information:

Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Weird Fiction
Magazine Index: 1890-1998

by Stephen T. Miller & William G. Contento

Ed Stewart
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Stewart ufoindex@jps.net|So Man, who here seems principal alone,
There Is Something         |Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown.
    Going On!       ,>'?'<, |Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal,
Salvador Freixedo  ( O O ) |'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole.
----------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on 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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 10:59:28 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:24:03 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 15:22:55 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >ubject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

To Steven kaeser and the List,

You wrote :

 >There are also many in the ufological arena who believe that
 >many sightings listed as UFOs were actually experimental craft,
 >but the distinction is that they also believe that many
 >sightings were not.  Tim has acknowledged (at least to me) that
 >there are sightings that clearly do not fit the description of
 >known secret weopens in development.  Unfortunately, both sides
 >in this discussion often try to ignore subsets of the evidence
 >that don't fit their conclusions.  Since much of it is
 >annecdotal in nature there's no way to win the debate.

I got the wrong impression that Tim Mattews was defending the
idea that all UFO sightings could be explained as secret craft
(or any other mundane cause). Actually I also got this
impression from reading his book "UFO Revelation". I am glad to
learn that it is not the case. Perhaps he could confirm that on
the list?

On the other hand, yes of course, a lot of UFO sightings may
have been secret craft, especially in recent years with
triangle shaped crafts such as the B-2, and the still mysterious
Black Manta, Aurora, stealth blimp, etc.

What I found preposterous was the explanation of the UFO wave
of 1947 as secret planes. It was a relevant hypothesis at the
time, but not for a long time, and that's why the once top secret
"Intelligence Report" was totally withdrawn in 1949.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 18:49:57 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:29:15 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 02:18:04 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:37:33 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snipped>

 >Of course we cannot travel faster than lightspeed. According to
 >relativity that is.


Hi Jim and others,

To clear up some confusion. General Relativity says that an
object cannot go faster than light starting out from a speed
slower than light. This theory does not rule out starting with a
speed faster than light.

Futhermore, it is interesting to think about the relativity of
the Relativity Theory itself. Before Einstein came along nobody
knew there was a maximum speed of 300,000 km/s, at least when
you start with a speed lower than that. Now the Relativity
Theory stands out as one of the hallmarks of 20th century
science.

In 6 weeks time we will arrive in the 21st century. Future
scientists will find it easier to defend faster than light
travel just by pointing out that Relativity Theory is, after
all, just 20th century orthodoxy.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 18:13:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:31:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:59:27 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dear David

 >And my argument remains that I have thoroughly investigated many
 >cases, and not all of them in the space of one year (that was
 >just an example).
 >As to your interpretation of "thoroughly", well that's another
 >matter. One would not expect to spend three years investigating
 >a light in the sky which, given a good enough head-start, can be
 >resolved with a series of phone calls.

But originally you did claim to have -thoroughly_ investigated
hundreds of cases [in your short life span] including over a
hundred in one year. I was merely questioning what you yourself
had previously stated.

 >Most 'real' skeptics may well be polite to your face Georgina,
 >but their true feelings towards UFOs and the believer brigade
 >may be far less charitable.

I am aware of this, but I am not in the business of working to
suit the whims of sceptics. Having said that, I am more than
happy to hear their arguments providing it does not border on
the ridiculous.

 >That's the reason most scientists are desperate to avoid having
 >their reputations tarnished by association with the UFO subject,
 >and who can blame them. That damage has been done not by the
 >likes of me, but by those who promote the kind of
 >pseudo-scientific nonsense which one regularly sees associated
 >with UFOs on the Internet in particular.

I think you are being too hard on the ufologists here. Those
responsible for tarnishing the UFO subject are far more likely to be
the Press.

 >If that were not the case then why has UFOIN received a string
 >of inquiries from scientists who want to work with us but under
 >no circumstances want to be seen to be doing so publically?

Maybe what they mean, is that they don't want to _publicly_ be
associated with UFOIN.

 >I may be blunt and in your face with my views, but at least I
 >say what I mean and do not  run away and sulk if you give as
 >good back in return.

That's true

 >At the end of the day you might find some of your
 >charming skeptical friends less of the gentlemen you think they
 >are  when they rip your book apart in print.

When they rip it apart? Interesting! You seem to imply that the
sceptics have already made up their mind without having any
clues to work with. I suppose you are thinking it is just an
updated version of what has already been published about the
case - but you are wrong David.

 >As for Ian Ridpath, he feels the whole Rendlesham saga is a load
 >of old hogwash,

Ian was not involved in the incident and based his theories on
other peoples theories - who were also not involved. Therefore,
it is no wonder he came to that conclusion.

Georgina Bruni








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                             Roswell - Question

From: Anthony Chippendale <anthonyc@ufo-net.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 18:22:42 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:37:56 -0500
Subject: Roswell - Question


Does anyone have information or know of any that suggests that
the Roswell craft was shot down by the USAF?

Anthony.

##########################################
UFO Net
http://www.ufo-net.freeserve.co.uk
"Absence of proof is not proof of absence"

The UFO Network: http://www.ufon.org
*****
This email has been sent by Anthony
Chippendale, UFO Net Manager.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 18:13:04 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:35:33 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Time For A Cease Fire?
 >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:51:19 -0000

Dear Jenny

 >Just a note to explain why you will not be getting a response
 >from me to the silly carping this list tolerates with disturbing
 >frequency.

Considering you have been quite content to debate here for
several months, but decide to cease when questioned about your
comments on a very important case, I do tend to think you are
using this as an excuse for not answering the relevant questions
put to you. I also do not believe there was anything silly about
my questions.

 >I explained a week ago that I will not be drawn into
 >endlessly repeating facts because certain people seem not
 > to be interested in believing my replies.

It is true you have endlessly repeated yourself, but you have
still not fully explained the facts.

 >Clearly Ms Bruni did not heed that stated intention and has days
 >later fired back with many questions (most of which I have
 >already replied to as anyone will realise who re-reads the
 >debate).

No, you have not answered my factual questions

 >I said in my last message - and remind now - that my decision
 >not to drag this pettiness out is in no way an indication I
 >could not refute all the nonsense this list seems to foster.

Considering you class yourself as a reputable ufologist I am
amazed that you find my questions so petty. These questions are
surely the kind that an investigator would be expected to ask of
anyone making such claims.

 >could - easily and at length. But will not, in deference to you
 >all - especially as when I do reply at length I get accused
 >(twice in recent weeks) of saying too much

There is no need to post a lengthy reply, just a few factual
answers would suffice.

 >I am afraid I have far more important things to do than join in
 >these silly internet wars.

Someone asks you to answer some questions and you suggest it is
an Internet war?

 >As I have said repeatedly a full UFOIN report on Lakenheath 1956
 >with ALL interview transcripts - not just the few minutes used
 >on TV in a very specific context - will appear soon when all the
 >work is completed.

You did the interview almost four years ago Jenny, have written
about it in books, have debated it on the net and yet you cannot
post just a few answers here to support your claims that the
crew's testimony proves that the official report was incorrect.

 >But it is obvious that no reply will ever be good enough to satisy the
 >preconceptions of some so it would be pointless trying to repeat
 >the actual facts - especially when it seems some people want me
 >to give them lies instead.

Nonsense. I, and I am sure others on this list would be more
than content to receive honest factual answers from you. The
very idea that anyone would expect you to tell lies is
preposterous.

 >The only questions I have problems with are the sort that presuppose
 >deceit and dishonesty where non exists - which, frankly, do not
 >deserve the respect of getting endless replies when one would
 >suffice most people.

It is not a case of presupposing that you are being dishonest or
deceitful if that's what you are implying. But, the fact of the
matter is, that you yourself have made a debate here. You have
made it abundantly clear that the witnesses (crew) to the
Lakenheath incident have claimed:

  (1) they did not have a visual sighting
  (2) the target (UFO) did not tail chase either of the Venom jets
  (3) they did not even know it was a UFO they were chasing until
      you told them it was

You have made great claims that this was revealed in a BBC
interview with the crew. Yet when I pointed out that there was
no reference to any of those answers, you suddenly decide they
were omitted from the programme? Furthermore, it seems you are
suggesting my questions are silly and that I am presupposing you
are being deceitful or dishonest. Well Jenny, nice try, but it's
about time you stopped playing games by trying to turn
everything around and evading the issues. Why do you find it so
difficult to give straight answers?

My argument is that if the witnesses did genuinely make those
statements then please let's see them. Let's see what they had
to say! I am not suggesting you are lying, only that there might
be a possibly you have mistaken what they had to say. If you
disagree then please take a few minutes to just post their
statements relating to the aforementioned three questions so
that we can be absolutely sure that their answers are what you
claim they are. After all this is not some silly little case you
are referring to here. Several of the world's most foremost
investigators have researched this incident. You owe it to them
and all of ufology to set the record straight one way or
another. For or against the case. But you simply cannot go
around insulting people for merely asking you to substantiate
your claims, then make idle excuses for not offering a factual
response

You have offered all kinds of excuses, but we have now
established that there is no problem with the Official Secrets
Act or the MOD, and although you originally pointed out that
permission was needed from the BBC, you now admit that copyright
is yours so there should be no problem with the Beeb.

 >instead to leave you all to decide the issue for yourselves.

 >I have stated my case. You believe me or not.

But how can we when you have not offered this information

Just for the record, the USAFAir Intelligence Information Report
filed by Captain Edward L Holt (August 31 1956) had the
following to say about this incident.

"Pilot advised he had a bright white light in sight and would
investigate. At 13 miles west he reported loss of target and
white light. Lakenheath (radar) vectored him to a target 10
miles east of Lakenheath and pilot advised (that) target was on
his radar and was 'locking on'. Pilot then reported he had lost
target.

"Lakenheath GCA reports that as the Venom passed the target on
radar, the target began a tail chase of the friendly fighter.
Radar requested pilot acknowledge this chase. Pilot acknowledged
and stated he would try to circle and get behind target. Pilot
advised he was unable to shake the target off his tail and
requested assistance.

"One additional Venom was scrambled from RAF station. Original
pilot stated: 'Clearest target I have ever seen on radar.' "

The following conversation between the two Venom pilots was
heard by the Lakenheath watch supervisor:

Pilot 2: Did you see anything?
Pilot 1: I saw something, but I'll be dammed if I know what it was
Pilot 2: What happened?

Pilot 1: He - or it - got behind me and I did everything I could
          to get behind him and I couldn't. It's the damndest
          thing I've ever seen.

Assuming you asked the pilots questions based on the official
report, and claim they deny much of this took place, then it
seriously questions the USAF report. Surely you can see why
their testimony, which is not included in the BBC interview is
of interest.

Georgina Bruni








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 19

               'Dogon' Anthropologist Germaine Dieterlen Dies

From: Bruno Mancusi <Bruno.Mancusi@com.mcnet.ch>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 20:41:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 16:46:03 -0500
Subject: 'Dogon' Anthropologist Germaine Dieterlen Dies


French anthropologist Germaine Dieterlen, 96, died on Saturday
13 Nov 1999. Specialist in the Dogons of Mali, she was a
director of studies at the School of the high studies in
Sorbonne, founding member of the laboratory of CNRS "Systems of
thought in Black Africa" and president of the Committee of
ethnographic film. She published 'Le renard pale' (The Pale Fox)
(1965), with Marcel Griaule (1898-1956) and 'Les Dogon, notion
de personne et mythe de la creation' (Dogons, Person Concept And
Myth Of Creation).

After having lived during more than 20 years among the Dogon,
Griaule and Dieterlen revealed that these people had astonishing
knowledge on the system of Sirius, in particular the existence
of dwarf white, Sirius B, invisible with the naked eye. This
story was popularized by Robert K.G. Temple in 1976 with his
book 'The Sirius Mystery': he claimed there that the knowledge
of the Dogon came from visits by inhabitants of the system
Sirius at least 5000 years ago.

In fact, Griaule and Dieterlen were severly criticized by their
peers. According to the Belgian anthropologist W.E.A. van Beek,
who spent 7 years among the Dogon, the source of G & D was an
only one advisor, perhaps informed by a Jesuit who had remained
in the tribe before them. No Dogon apart from the circle of
friends of the advisor knew about Sirius B.

For more infos: Andre Heck, "Sirius et les Dogons", 'Orion'
(journal of the Swiss Astronomical Society) #280, June 1997, pp.
31-32. Site of the author: http://cdsweb.u-strasbg.fr/~heck/
(curiously, I did not find trace of the article there...).

Bruno








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 20

                    Laura Lee E-News - November 20, 1999

From: Laura Lee <webmaster@lauralee.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 02:14:44 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:14:03 -0500
Subject: Laura Lee E-News - November 20, 1999


LAURA LEE E-NEWS For Saturday, November 20, 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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hello - Coming up is a very special show. It's our last Saturday
Night Radio Show for a while as we take a hiatus and pursue some
exciting new projects. I have had a wonderful time hosting this
radio show for the last ten years. Ten years! I've learned so
much, and hope you have to. This shift in our focus is prompted
by persistent, ever stronger intuitive callings, accompanied by
synchronistic events showing a very clear new path. The new
projects will involve quite a lot of travel, one reason it would
be difficult for me to continue the radio show schedule, and
will include ongoing research..

Forgive me, I don't mean to be cryptic here. It's just that
announcement of the details must wait its proper time. As our
new projects come to completion sometime next year, we'd like
you to know about them, and hopefully, participate. Subscribers
to this E-News will be the first to hear.

I do find it difficult to end one expression of this journey
that I've so much enjoyed, this Saturday Night gathering of the
minds, on radio. We have scheduled some open phone time in the
last half of the show to take calls, chat about what we've all
learned, and whatever else comes up.

While The Laura Lee Show will be inaccessible for radio-only
listeners, it won't be for you online. The show continues on the
Internet, on the World Webcast Network. We've joined the WWN
lineup Monday-Friday 7-8pm Pacific/10-11pm Eastern with a
combination of new and previous, but timeless, shows. Please
join us for our first live webcasts on the evenings of November
22-24. Details are listed below.

The Laura Lee Show Enews will continue to list the upcoming
topics/guests and other special events for the weekly WWN show.
For more information, visit http://www.lauralee.com/wwn.htm

I want to thank you for your support over the years, in joining
us on this journey. Please stay in touch, drop into our
webcasts, and continue to send in your guest and
topic suggestions. Wishing you all the best --- Laura Lee
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SATURDAY UPCOMING TOPIC/GUEST LINE-UP
LIVE SHOW HOURS: 7pm-2am PST/10pm-5am EST
SHOW DATE: Saturday November 20, 1999

(7-8pm Pacific/10-11pm Eastern)
Constance Clear:
I still don't know what to make of the stories of alien
abductions. Constance Clear counsels people who believe they've
been abducted by aliens. She says that whatever has happened to
her patients, they respond to her treatment for  post-traumatic
stress syndrome. What clues in her patients' stories indicate
this phenomenon is real (happening in this 3D Reality) or
imaginary (happening only in the minds of the victim) or
happening in a dream or other realm (interdimensionally)? Is
there a common factor to the stories? What progress has been
made in the field? What new insights gained in the last decade?
What clues does she find to an alien agenda? Clear is the author
of "Reaching for Reality: Seven Incredible True Stories of Alien
Abduction."

(8-9pm Pacific/11-12pm Eastern)
Raymond Moody: Bottom Line on the Universe
Raymond Moody, one of the early researchers into the Near Death
Experience, says we have yet to reach any conclusions. While the
skeptics have yet to disprove the experience is real, what we do
have -- thousands of anecdotal stories and first hand accounts -
does not prove it. While we are waiting for the bottom line on
the universe, says Moody, we should try to have a little fun
figuring it all out. Moody's latest book is "The Last Laugh: A
New Philosophy of Near-Death Experiences, Apparitions, and the
Paranormal" More info at http://www.lauralee.com/rmoody.htm

(9-11pm Pacific/12-2am Eastern)
Robert Lawlor: Renaissance Old and Current
Are we undergoing a renaissance, a rebirth of ancient knowledge?
Robert Lawlor believes we are, and draws parallels to the last
renaissance. That one centered on the Pythagorean tradition, and
so, in a revised and expanded way, may the next. The last
Renaissance began with the importation and translation of
Pythagorean doctrines, and influenced all the innovative
thinkers of the day. Lawlor points out that Pythagorus didn't
invent this tradition. It is the culmination of easily
identifiable threads from India, china, Egypt, and tribal
shamanism. What are the basic premises of this tradition? One is
that knowledge of self and cosmos are one and the same
integrated field of knowing. Another premise is that a good
model for understanding consciousness and physics are the
symmetries of geometric form and laws of vibration contained in
the generation of music. Lawlor points out that Plato,
Aristotle, and Euclid each deviated from the Pythagorean
doctrine, and these deviations had profoundly different impacts,
especially as applied to social and political objectives. We see
today a growing interest in ancient wisdom, and sacred geometry
and sacred music. (The two are related. Music with structure,
formation of scales, and harmonies, serves as a cosmological
model) Just wondering: where will the next Renaissance take us?
More info at http://www.lauralee.com/lawlor.htm

Craig Winters: Label Genetically Engineered Foods! Brief update
from Craig Winters, founder of the Campaign to Label Genetically
Engineered Foods. Legislation to require mandatory labeling of
genetically engineered foods was introduced this week into the
House of Representatives. What foods would be affected, and what
does the legislation propose? Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich,
a vegetarian who shops in health food stores, sponsors this
legislation. To ensure your freedom of choice and help it get
passed into law, call 425-771-4049 or visit www.thecampaign.org
and print out the form letter for your state, sign and mail it
in. More info at http://www.thecampaign.org

Open Phones (11pm-2am Pacific/2-5am Eastern)
It's our last show on radio for a while, and I would love to
hear your thoughts on where we've been, and where we're going,
as we approach a turning point. Is it just me, or are you too
feeling a sense of urgency to get on with it, whatever that "it"
may be? I'm finding the intuition-based clues to my own personal
next step getting clearer and more insistent. Are you as well?
Please call in on air at 1-800-800-5287 (Outside the US or in
Seattle call 425-453-5287)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 22:
Here's what is scheduled for the next three shows:

Monday, Nov 22:
Jay Weidner
Jay's investigation into ancient knowledge looks at alchemy as
an early science of chemistry as well as a language of symbol
and coded messages. Jay will share some of those secrets.

Tuesday, Nov 23
Diana Botsford: UFO Journalist Comments on Ufology in the New
Millennium Diana keeps tabs on everyone in the field of Ufology.
As we cross the thousand year mark, she critiques the players
and inspires a new, cooperative attitude and fresh vision for
the search to that age-old question, are we alone?

* I'll be a guest on Jeff Rense Sightings show on Tuesday November 23 from
9-10pm Pacific, 12-1am Eastern. Link at www.sightings.com

Wednesday, Nov 24
Gregg Braden
Braden looks for confirmation of the ancient wisdom expressed in
ancient texts from the Middle East, Tibet, Peru, and the
American Southwest. He finds clues in diverse sources --
laboratory experiments in particle physics and remote viewing
and the power of prayer. More info at
www.lauralee.com/braden.htm

The Laura Lee Show Enews by Subscription continues with updates
on what's coming up weeknights on The Laura Lee Show now webcast
on the World Webcast Network.

For more information on weekday program - Laura Lee Online go to:
http://www.lauralee.com/wwn.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 World
Webcast Network, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 20

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 19:54:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:19:04 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:53:35 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Those of you who have read K. Eric Drexler's seminal "Engines of
 >Creation" may recall the references to spacecraft manufacture in
 >the not-so-distant future, when incredibly light materials with
 >wonderfully resilient properties (Roswell "foil"?) are
 >manufactured molecule by molecule in computer-controlled vats.

<snip>

 >My attitude is that _if_ UFOs represent a physical
 >extraterrestrial presence on our planet, then the aliens are
 >most definitely using nanotechnology, in some form or another.

<snip>

Hi Mac.

Since 1986 when Eric Drexler wrote this, high torque, variable
speed and reversible molecular motors (complete with
identifiable rotors, stators, bearings, etc.) that run on
electricity have been discovered here on Earth - within living
cells!

This unexpected finding, which points to an Intelligent
Designer, is something man is still trying to achieve.  Now even
smaller molecular motors (which a Japanese team of scientists
were going to use to make "moving toys") have been identified in
the form of the enzyme that spins to crank out ATP, the energy
source of life.  Such an ATP producing motor (which must
automatically change "gears" when carring heavier loads), was
proposed by Paul Boyer 20 years ago but fellow scientists were
skeptical that such motors really existed since "nature isn't
that smart to make these incredible motors through chance
alone".

Well, Boyer's motors were confirmed by John Walker who imaged
them.  Both Boyer and Walker shared the 1997 Nobel Prize for
Chemistry for this amazing discovery.  Since cells could not
live and reproduce (and hopefully evolve too) without these
motors, it raises the question "Who created these motors?".

While we look up to the sky for evidence of E.T. life, maybe we
should be looking for it within us too.  If UFOs can range in
size from a few centimeters to as large as a few kilometers (as
in a few reported cases), why can't some also be as small as a
few nanometers?  Could nano-UFOs have already colonized us?  ;o)

Nick Balaskas

P.S.  In a earlier posting to UFO UpDates, I took two different
probability studies and showed that even a simple cell could not
be created by Chance alone.  Since Chance or an Intelligent
Designer were the only two options, the probability for an
Intelligent Designer would simply be the inverse of the
probability that we created by Chance alone and I came up with
the result of 10^40,000 (10 followed by 40,000 zeros) to 1.
This did not mean I actually proved that God MUST exist.  With
probabilities one can say with confidence that something is
impossible (eg. the genesis of life by chance alone) but one
cannot say that something must exist (eg. God).  That said, I
think you wouldn't be wrong if you did, since we know that life
does exist in the universe (at least on planet Earth anyway).







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 20

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 20:14:49 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:21:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:04:26 -0500

 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:11:35 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >>Greg,

 >>I had a really neat, nice reply to this post -- and I'll be
 >>damned if Windows didn't eat it, alive and wiggling.

 >>Maybe we got out current computer software from the Roswell
 >>crash, after all.

 >I blame Roswell for everything that happens to me. Parking
 >tickets, sunburn, bad concerts... even lost socks.

 >The full extent of the alien conspiracy has never been revealed.

 >Greg Sandow


And bigod it never will be, if me, the CIA, FBI, NSA and MJ-12
(did I leave anyone out?) have our way!

My, as I'm sure you can imagine much more eloquent original
response, had to do with the suggestion that the Yikes! they're
here view and the Yikes! we're alone view are probably pretty
much on an emotional impact and implication par -- provided
either one could be conclusively proven.

Either event, arguably, would shake up the daily routine around
here, given that humankind really lived and behaved according to
whichever one turned out to be right. The irony is that if the
aliens are here, our options seem somewhat limited by
definition, as the aliens seem to be holding all the trump
cards. If, on the other hand, we are it, or it as makes no
actual difference (ie, there may be someone else out there
_somewhere_, but so what?), then we have no one to blame but
ourselves for the fate and future of the planet.

Pardon me, but I feel a small rant coming on, aimed not at you
personally, of course, but at the occasional insinuation (JC,
are you listening?) that someone can't accept the UFO evidence
because it threatens their world view, not to mention their
stock portfolio, thus arousing a tier of fear, subconscious or
otherwise.

The flipside of this argument, view, accusation or whatever it
is is so obvious that it shouldn't even have to be translated
into ascii. Yeah, well, the other guys are afraid because they
can't face up to the fact that we _are_ alone.

Conveniently, given the fact that neither side can prove its
case beyond a shadow of doubt, we can pretty much carry on with
life as we know it, or as best we know it.

If there is nothing you can do to avoid being abducted, neither,
it would seem, is there anything you can do (short of paying
Steven Greer money -- and I have serious reservations about
that) to increase your chances of being abducted.

Ah, if only life were simple and would remain resolutely so!
Failing that, if only Windows wouldn't crash so often.

And no Mac fan letters, please. We've got three of them in the
house, including a blueberry iBook. They crash, too. In fact, we
still can't get the wireless AirPort, whatever, to work. But I
did buy some of their stock and made out like a bandit. Hey,
life's a series of trade-offs.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 20

                          Filer's Files #46 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:18:51 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:16:48 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #46 -- 1999


Filer's Files #46 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
November 19, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
This weeks Filer's Files sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

SIGNS AND WONDERS IN OUR SKIES -� Heavy UFO sightings continue
while videotapes of UFOs, Rods, and Fireballs are becoming more
common.  Two of the best UFO videos I have seen were obtained
this week.  Fishermen in Bermuda saw a missile like object come
out of the sea.  Similar objects were seen over Missouri by
several pilots, and video taped over Baltimore and New Jersey.

EGYPTAIR MYSTERY GROWS -- PILOT SUICIDE UNLIKELY

CHARLIE QUINN writes, the pursuit of the copilot as potentially
suicidal seems to be the current focus.  An Islamic prayer
uttered by him before the systems went out is the thin thread
upon which investigators hope to construct a thesis that he
intended suicide. The pilot allegedly stated, "I put my faith in
God's hands."  If the plane's equipment failed, might that not
also explain his prayer?  He was rich; had 5 children; was
bringing auto tires home and asked his son to meet him at the
Cairo airport.  He also had 35 year's experience, first in the
Egyptian air force and then as a commercial airline pilot.
Hardly a good candidate for suicide?  Apparently, there was some
panic in the cockpit and one pilot was pulling one way and the
other was pulling the other way, causing one part of the tail
wing to point up and the other to point down.  None of this
"proves' a struggle between two pilots, one bent on salvation
and the other bent upon death!  Is it mere happenstance that
Clinton and 50 other world leaders have decided to hold an
emergency "summit conference" in Turkey?  Or am I demonstrating
paranoid ideation?  Do I believe so deeply in international
secrecy concerning the potential threat posed by UFO over
flights, that I even suspect the real purposes of this hastily
organized emergency summit meeting?  Thanks to Charlie Quinn
Cquinn5630@aol.com.

Editor's Notes: I accept the reality of UFOs because I chased
one when I was in the Air Force as directed by a London
Controller.  I saw it visually as well as on my own radar.  It
is possible Flight 990 was attempting to avoid a mid air
collision with an unidentified flying object or missile.
Meanwhile, the Egyptians are outraged at the speculation by the
US government that the crash was caused by the suicide of one of
their pilots.  Another strange aspect of this crash is what
happened to the bodies of those who died in the crash?  After
three weeks, it's seems reasonable that at least one of the 217
bodies identified as being from the crash would have been
retrieved?

PRESIDENT CLINTON COMMENTS ON SPACE ALIENS?

Filer's Files #44 correction.  Several people have commented
they didn't get President Clinton's actual statement made in
response to the Republican Congress Funding Bill on October 28,
1999.  Clinton stood ready to veto the measure because of the
damage he said would be caused by the bill's 0.97 percent
across-the-board cut that failed to provide money to help
communities hire thousands of school teachers.  Clinton told
educators visiting Washington. "If we were being attacked by
space aliens we wouldn't be playing these kinds of games."
Editors Note: Is the President thinking about UFOs?

BERMUDA MISSILE OR ROD LAUNCHED FROM OCEAN

Teri Lamb reports that on Friday afternoon, November 12, 1999,
fishermen on a boat off Bermuda were  terrified by a missile
that erupted from the sea beside them.  It shot up into the sky,
maneuvered, and then exploded.  I have this from a person I
trust who talked to the fishermen, so I believe it to be true. I
did not know until now that NASA has a tracking station or
something on Bermuda, but if the launch was an accident, we
should have heard about it. Has anyone seen anything in the
press?  Thanks to Teri Lamb TLAMBVT@aol.com and Lunascan Project
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lshomepage.html

MISSOURI PILOTS REPORT MISSILE NEAR THEIR AIRCRAFT

KANSAS CITY -- NUFORC reports that on November 11, 1999,
interesting report from the FAA Kansas City Center of two
executive jets in the vicinity of Farmington, MO, that reported
an object that "looked like a missile" pass in proximity to
their aircraft.  The incident occurred at approximately 8:00 AM.
(CST).  I have no reason to believe it is related to the alleged
Bermuda incident, but I mention it because of the apparent
similarity between the objects reported in both cases.  Peter
Davenport, Director NUFORC http://www.UFOcenter.com

LONG ISLAND NEW YORK DISC SHAPED UFO

HAUPPAUGE -- On November 5, 1999, over Long Island at 3:10 AM
the witness saw object brighter than a star.  This did not
appear to be a plane or helicopter due to the erratic maneuvers
it was making.  It stayed in the same area, approximately 10,000
feet high over the south shore of Long Island.  It had an up and
down, side to side and even a diagonal motion to it.
Periodically there were faint blue flashes emitting around it.
It was a diamond to saucer shape.  After about 15 minutes, it
slowly moved southwest until it disappeared from my view.
Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC Hotline: 206-722-3000.

NEW JERSEY EIGHT MINUTES OF UFO VIDEO

KEASBEY -- Reverend Damian Barna called to inform me he had shot
eight minutes of an extraordinary UFO video in broad daylight on
November 11, 1999, over Middlesex County only fifteen miles from
New York City.  The video tape is shows several different shaped
UFOs.  One is the standard disc shape.  The primary ones are two
cylinder or rod shaped craft.  As the cylinder moves slowly
through the sky it appears to be covered in a thin vapor.
Although it is difficult to estimate length the craft appears on
the video as at least a hundred feet long.  It sends out a thin
line forward an estimated 600 feet, or about six inches at arm's
length.  Somehow the object seems to morph or move along the
tube to the second position.  The movement is clear and distinct
and may represent some sort of cloaking device.  I have never
seen an object move in this manner.  It seems to gradually
disappear in one spot and gradually appears as the same size and
shape in another.  The tape is copyrighted and will be placed on
our web site in a week or so.  The video was taken at 4:50 PM
over Raritan Center.  This is an extraordinary tape of very
strange UFO activity.  Thanks to Reverend Barna who feels the
craft were made visible to him for important religious reasons
that may portend great changes.

MATAWAN -- On November 6, 1999, 6:03 PM an unbelievably large
Flying Triangular shaped craft with pale orange colored
non-blinking lights.  Three friends and were just settling into
the Jacuzzi when one friend noticed something and pointed
upward.  They saw a large Flying Triangular craft going overhead
at an extremely low speed.  There was no sound.  It was headed
in a southwestern direction and seemed to be flying in a vapor
like cloud.  My friend there with me is former Air Force and
said it did not follow protocol with it's lights All we could
say was "Oh my God!" I can't shake the image from my mind.
Thanks to Peter Davenport UFORC http://www.UFOcenter.com

MARYLAND UFOs BUZZ AIRPORT

BALTIMORE WASHINGTON AIRPORT-- Bill Bean sent me an
extraordinary group of photographs and video of Unidentified
Flying Objects near the airport.  Most were taken during October
from his home in Baltimore and at the Baltimore Washington
Airport.  The videos were taken by Bill and his Father-in-law.
Most of the objects were flying at high speed, and are too fast
to be seen by the untrained eye.  However, if a person starts
looking for them they do seem to become more visible.  Often
Bill just points his video camera at aircraft in the sky.  The
video shows the fast moving UFOs darting about the area.
Generally, they are comparatively close to the ground and below
the commercial aircraft.  The sizes and shapes vary but most are
rod shaped or disc shape.  Thanks to Bill Bean for his excellent
video.  Editor's Note: Although we are having computer problems
the photos will be posted on www.filersfiles.com ASAP.

NEW HAMPSHIRE LEAR JET FOUND

DORCHESTER -- (AP) Investigators on November 13, 1999, pulled a
cockpit voice recorder from the wreckage of a jet plane that
crashed three years ago in a dense forest.  Among the debris,
spread over about 150 yards, were the two seats containing the
remains of Johan Schwartz, 31, and Patrick Hayes, 30.  The two
Connecticut men had been trying to land in rain and fog at
Lebanon Airport on Christmas Eve 1996 when their plane dropped
off radar.  Their disappearance prompted the largest official
search in state history.  The plane was found 20 miles from the
airport in the foothills of Smarts Mountain on private land.
Thanks to Frank Mattioli fmattioli@kscable.com CNN.com. Editor'
Note: The crash occurred after a flurry of UFO activity in the
general area.

NORTH CAROLINA

ASHVILLE � An executive recruiter phoned to tell me he had
witnessed an object west of town on October 24, 1999.  It was
about 5:30 PM when he and is wife witnessed a hovering bright
orange halogen like light in the sky.  As their car moved along
it disappeared behind the trees.  Although it was still
daylight, the craft appeared as bright as motorcycle light at
night a hundred feet away.  They could not see a definitive
shape.  A couple weeks later, on November 12, they both saw a
silvery disc shaped object that had strange erratic movements in
the sky. A relative who works for air Pollution Control Agency
saw greenish fireball fall from the sky on November 1, 1999.

FLORIDA

PALM BEACH -- While I was driving to work at 6:15 AM, November
13, 1999, I heard Dan Bryan host of the "Morning Report"
informing from WJNO 1040 AM Radio Station in West Palm Beach,
about a UFO sighting on the beach.  His colleague-CO-host, John
Casson and several other eye witness saw a huge flying
stationary object in the East, toward the Atlantic Ocean.  The
UFO was witnessed in the early morning hours by several people.
Thanks to Rigo Muniz Rigo12 http://www.flinet.com/~muniz and
WJNO  http://www.wjno.com/

PENNSYLVANIA ROUND OBJECTS

PITTSBURGH � Stan Gordon reports numerous sighting of luminous
orange and blue white formation passing over at 7:05 PM on
November 16, 1999.  Stan says, 'I received sighting reports from
Butler County, north of Pittsburgh as well as Indiana County in
southwest Pennsylvania.  I also talked with the Altoona FAA
Flight service station, who had received a number of aircraft
sighting reports from various locations including Erie.  There
were 10 to 12 round objects, each with a luminous trail, in
perfect single formation, one behind the other.  These round
lights all appeared uniform in size and color.'  Thanks to Stan
Gordon

MICHIGAN FIREBALL TRAVELS UNUSUALLY SLOW

GRAND RAPIDS -- Paul Willison driving home on November 16, 1999,
at about 7:00 PM witnessed a spectacular fireball traverse the
sky from west to east very slowly.  I was traveling on US 131
and timed their passing for 30 seconds to travel about 70% of
the horizon.  It had a comet-like appearance, with an extremely
bright central body and a very long trailing tail.  It was
brilliant emerald green in color, fading into white.  The most
impressive thing was the very slow, almost controlled flight
that did not decrease in altitude as it disappeared going east.
Thanks to Skyopen and PaulWillison@webtv.net

WI, MI, OH, IN, IL, KY, TN, NY, WV, GA, and Washington, D.C.

November 16, 1999, Peter B. Davenport: The National UFO
Reporting Center received over 100 reports from numerous eastern
states regarding spectacular sightings in the sky.  The reports
are widely variable, ranging from single, slow-moving fireballs,
to formations of up to a dozen or more objects in seemingly
precise formation.  In addition, we have received reports from
two FAA facilities, indicating that multiple flight crews have
seen extremely bizarre objects and formations in the night sky.
To the best of our knowledge, most of the sightings occurred
between 1900 and 1910 hours. (EST), although one sighting was
reported from Georgia for approximately 90 minutes later.
Editors Note: The most likely cause for these series of reports
are comparatively slow moving Bolides or brilliant fireballs.
UFOs might use these for cover other activities.

OHIO FLYING TRIANGLE

CINCINNATI -- My daughter-in-law saw a triangular flying object
while observing the meteor shower on November 16, 1999, around
8:00 PM.  A caller to station WLW, claiming to be an Air Force
Captain, told host Bill Cunningham that he witnessed the event
from Hamilton, Ohio, and described seeing a "solid object as big
as the 'Titanic,' with a triangular formation that had a
distinct structure." The triangular structure appeared to be
"breaking apart," the caller said. Thanks to NLowe81849.

FIRE IN WHITEHOUSE, TENNESSEE

WHITEHOUSE -- Another possibly related event happened at 9:15
PM.  A trucker driving north on Route 24 reported on 700 WLW
[Cincinnati] that a large meteor fragment impacted near
Whitehouse, Tennessee. A very large fire is currently burning,
and an attempt is being made to contain the blaze.  It was said
that a hole 30-yards across could be seen burning from I-65 .
The Fire Station confirmed the fire in a field that may have
caused by a fireball - Thanks to Kenny Young UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/ --

OKLAHOMA DISC

YUKON -- S. Ritter reports that on November 14, 1999, my husband
walked outside at 6:20 PM, and looked south towards the moon,
and noticed that it looked larger than last nights moon, then he
looked east to view Jupiter, when he noticed overhead, a bright
light moving north.  He watched for at least a minute, then he
called me to see it also.  Then it had moved east.  The bright
appearance changed to a more yellowish color that was like a
ghostly glowing aura around it.  We observed the disc for 2 to 3
minutes, then it disappeared.  There were no red or green
navigational lights on this strange craft that made no sound at
all.  It was about the size of Jupiter.  Thank to S.Ritter

COLORADO

CANNON CITY -- Christopher O'Brien reports a woman evidently was
able to capture several aerial anomalies on video as they
hovered over the Penrose, CO area.  Video is 20 minutes long and
a tripod was used during filming.  Interestingly in one segment,
"the two objects for 8 or 9 frames appear to have a connecting
beam between them."  One object has the appearance "of a
children's top with spokes" extending out from the object.

SANGRE DE CRISTO MOUNTAINS � On November 15, 1999, at 4:15 PM
the witness states, "I observed the same or similar silent,
wingless white plane as reported November 14.  It was headed
south up the San Luis Valley at normal speed.  Plane appeared to
be at 17,000 feet; directly above the Sangres.  Before and after
sighting of this object, commercial traffic higher up and
further away were plainly heard; this craft was completely
silent.  Under 50 X power binoculars, I was unable to discern
any wings, but the vertical stabilizer fin was apparent--even
with unaided vision.  The tail extended further up the topside
of the fuselage toward the front of the craft than a normal
Boeing commercial jet.  Thanks to tmv@amigo.net (Christopher
O'Brien) http://home.amigo.net/tmv)

CANADA AIRLINE PILOTS SPOT OBJECT

ONTARIO -- F. Camire age: 44 an Airline Pilot on November 16,
1999, sighted a UFO 50 nautical miles east of Simcoe, Ontario.
The UFO was sighted at 7:10 PM in or near an air route.
Luftansa Flight 470 and two other aircraft reported the sighting
to Toronto Air Traffic Control Center.  Their aircraft was about
5 miles to the right of us at 35,000 feet also going westbound
as they reported seeing the lights to the left at roughly their
altitude. While we still had the lights in sight, we also
reported the sighting after another aircraft in the area did the
same, but we did not note its flight number.  ATC responded that
there was nothing special on their radar.  It was a very
spectacular sight and something that we had never experienced
before.  We were speculating at the time that it might be a
satellite or space debris coming crashing down in the
atmosphere. The UFO was sighted for 20 seconds.  Thanks to Ben
and the British UFORC

MEXICO GREEN FLYING TRIANGLE

MONTERREY � On November 14, 1999, a green Flying Triangle was
spotted over downtown Monterrey at 6:30 PM.  Manuel Hernandez
age 35 of Monterrey claims to have witnessed a UFO.  He has been
watching the night sky for several weeks and spotted four UFOs.
The biggest had a triangle form and also has bright green
lights.  The location of this UFO was near the Saddle Hill.  The
other UFOs had a saucer shape with flashing red and blue lights.
Thanks to World Wide UFO Reporting Center
http://www.ufosightings.net.

HOVERING UFO SEEN BY HUNDREDS IN SICILY

ADRANO -- On October 23, 1999, around noontime, a luminous
hovering UFO was sighted above the summit of Mount Etna
performing small maneuvers, for ten minutes.  The oval-shaped
UFO was seen by hundreds of people in the city of Adrano,
southwest of the volcano.  The UFO was described as "a white
circular object with a dark central mass that appeared scorched.
The object changed its position vertically, horizontally and
frontally and also its shape."  "In Adrano, a movie house owner
and a TV newsman videotaped the object for several minutes and
described it as a disco volante.  (Italian for flying
saucer--J.T.)" (Italian newspapers La Sicilia 10/24/99, &Il
Messagero for 10/25/99.  Centro Italiano di Studi Ufologici,
Thanks to: UFO Roundup Vol#4, #28 11/4/99 Joe Trainor Editor.

NEW GUINEA, THOUSANDS REPORT UFO OVER EAST NEW BRITAIN

PORT MORESBY -- Papua New Guinea (Post-Courier) reports seeing a
UFO about 660 feet long, 165 feet wide that was lit up like a
city in the sky.  It moved very slowly across the sky, making a
quiet puffing noise according to thousands of people on the
Gazelle Peninsula of East New Britain.  The people of the remote
Bainingo ranges, say the craft had huge lumps on the sides with
light flickering around it.  Some Bainingos said the object was
lit up all around like a red-hot stone in an oven pit.  They saw
exactly what others on the Gazelle Peninsula witnessed on
November 4, 1999.  They felt they were witnessing a spacecraft
from another planet.  Over on Duke of York Islands they saw a
huge craft hovering just meters above the seas off St. George
Channel.  They claimed they saw other smaller crafts with bright
lights circulating the bigger craft in a playful manner.  At
Rangulit village John Berenti and his family saw a huge craft.
"It was so big, about 200 meters by 300 meters wide.  "It was
moving very, very slowly across the sky and was lit up like a
shooting star and it had two very bright lights at the tail.
"We honestly did not know what it was, but it certainly was not
an aircraft," Mr. Berenti said.  "It was traveling too slow, far
too slow.  It made a quite puffing sound as it glided gracefully
over the tree tops," he said.  People lit handheld fires and
chased after the craft.  He considered that the bright glow
around the craft was its magnetic field, keeping the force of
gravity away."  Police Officer Ray Theodore at Vuvu Beach
noticed a huge craft traveling just meters above the seas.
"First, I thought it was a ship but then we saw it travel over
Waton Island."  "It had very bright lights at the back," he
said.  Thanks to: Pacific Islands Report, 11/11/99, The
Post-Courier Newspaper (Papua New Guinea) University of Hawaii
at Manoa.

The UFOnetwork E-mail public service news and commentary service
has resumed, sending out 4 to 7 E-mails per week.  Claude from
UFOnetwork can be counted on to support his alien friends and
provide some interesting reading. Visit
http://www.ufonetwork.com/ for more information.

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.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 20

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 21:47:39 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 09:31:23 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 02:18:04 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Absolutely not enough, actually. Perhaps (admittedly I could be
 >wrong) but just perhaps, you are seeing ego and missing seeing
 >the most important part of me that lives, my emotions. And these
 >are strong when it comes to folks telling me what I saw or did
 >not see or experience. I was there. And even I don't know the
 >answer. Dennis Stacey doesn't, or Stan the Man, or Dave or
 >anyone I know or know of. But everyone seems to have an opinion.
 >OK fine. But from my perspective outside my comfy closet, the
 >one I resided in for so many years, the atmosphere is more
 >confining than it was from the inside of my closet. At least no
 >one was in there with me telling me I was crazy, saw pelicans,
 >was dreaming or that it was quite impossible to go through that
 >solid plaster and brick wall and/ or casement window in a blue
 >beam of solid light into a flying saucer.

 >God, even when I say it or write it, I don't believe it myself.
 >I try to keep my mind open. Which I don't see on this list that
 >often. See, as I've said so many times, I do not have the
 >answers. I do not know what happened to me but something did. I
 >have only the strength of my memories and that ego you referred
 >to, to keep me from sinking into the abyss which I abhor in
 >others ... I don't know, you do. And shoot, you weren't even
 >there with me when it happened.


Jim,

Get a Gripple! I don't think I've ever said or insinuated
anywhere that I _knew_ what happened to you. In the absence of
not having had the experience you did, the only thing I can have
about it is an opinion.

And having an opinion is not the equivalent of having an open
mind or not. For example: When someone says they were beamed
through a brick wall into a flying saucer,  I can have both an
opinion (well, it's never happened to me and, yes, it sounds
absurd on the surface) and an open mind about it (really? what
happened next?)

And what if I or anyone else does have an opinion? Is it going
to change anything about the nature of reality? Of course not.
What's you opinion of AAPL as a buy or sell at $92 a share? Will
your opinion affect the share price? Sure, for the moment, but
it won't _establish_  or determine it for any length of time.

Opinions are the order of the day. On the other hand, having an
open mind about when to buy or sell AAPL won't necessarily
direct you to the "right" decision, either.

As an example, my better half has now opionated that it's time
for me to hit the sack. I don't know if she's right or wrong,
but to bed it is. (While retaining an open mind.)

Dennis

PS: And only trade Dylan lyric quotes with me at your own risk.
Otherwise I'll be of the opinion that gravity has failed and
negativity won't pull you through. Unless, of course, you're
down on Rue Morgue Avenue.

But that's only my own open-minded opinion.

Maybe you'd prefer this one:

I started out on burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff. My
friends said they'd stick behind me when the going got rough But
the joke was on me there was no one there to bluff I'm goin'
back to New York City, I do believe I've had enough

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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 03:50:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:18:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 09:24:49 EST
 >Subject: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net<

 >4 - Given that every aviation buff knows that triangular a/c
 >were designed and built during WW2, why should the appearance of
 >a similar object over London in 1948 be evidence of aliens?

If this is in response to the alleged sighting I posted here on
updates can you please quote where I said this was evidence of
aliens, in fact can you find any reference from me that FTs are
of an alien origin?

 >The number of times I have personally investigated FT sightings
 >and an easy solution has been found (stars/planets, aircraft
 >lights are the favourites) beggars belief.

Given the amount of sightings of FTs hovering over nuclear power
stations on the east coast, do you believe these are stars,
planes, or aircraft? If you do believe these are aircraft what
purpose do you think they have hovering 100-200 feet above a
nuclear power station?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                      25 Years After Arecibo Signal...

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 10:02:05 GMT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:42:45 -0500
Subject: 25 Years After Arecibo Signal...


Source: MSNBC,

http://www.msnbc.com/news/335961.asp?cp1=1

Stig

***

Old and new messages for E.T.

25 years after Arecibo signal, entrepreneurs get on the beam

By Alan Boyle
MSNBC

Nov. 17 - It�s been 25 years since humanity first sent a signal
intended for civilizations beyond our solar system. That message
has traveled only a thousandth of the way toward its intended
target, but other efforts are afoot to transmit signals - and
this time they�re toll calls.

(Image:

The Arecibo message: The row at top denotes numbers 1 through
10. The red block stands for the atomic numbers of hydrogen,
carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus. The green symbols stand
for the genetic codes of DNA. The blue and white pattern
provides more information about the human genetic makeup. The
red figure is surrounded by patterns denoting how big and
numerous humans are. The yellow patterns represent the solar
system, and the purple pattern stands for the Arecibo
telescope.)

THE FIRST SIGNAL was sent from the 1,000-foot (305-meter)
Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico on Nov. 16, 1974, during a
ceremony celebrating an upgrade of the radio telescope.

"This was a strictly symbolic action," said Cornell University
astronomer Donald Campbell, who was a research associate at
Arecibo when the 169-second-long transmission was made. "Clearly
that wasn�t going to communicate with anybody. It was just to
demonstrate that it was possible to do such a thing."

The message, developed by Frank Drake and other pioneers in the
search for extraterrestrial intelligence, could be reconstituted
into a 23-by-73-bit pictogram portraying mathematical symbols, a
crude DNA double helix, a stick figure and the Arecibo antenna
itself.

The assembly sensed the history behind the event, said Harold
Craft, who was then director of the Arecibo Observatory and now
serves as Cornell�s vice president for services and facilities.

"We translated the radio-frequency message into a warbling audio
tone that was broadcast over speakers at the ceremony," Craft
said. "When it started, much of the audience spontaneously got
up and walked out of the tent and gazed up at the telescope."


QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SIGNAL

The signal was sent out toward M13, a globular cluster
comprising some 300,000 stars about 21,000 light years from
Earth. Astronomers figured the focused 50,000-watt signal would
be strong enough to be picked up by an Arecibo-size antenna
somewhere in that cluster, but ironically, the normal rotation
of the galaxy means that M13 will have moved out of the way by
the time the signal gets that far.

At the time, some observers wondered whether it was wise to send
out such a signal, Campbell recalled. Some thought it was
presumptuous to transmit a message to aliens without the backing
of a worldwide authority like the United Nations, and some
worried that the signal might even attract unwelcome
extraterrestrial interest.

But Campbell and other astronomers point out that Earth has been
leaking radio signals into space for more than 50 years - and
that at least some of those transmissions are strong enough to
alert nearby star systems to our presence.

"I see no reason whatsoever for not communicating out," Campbell
said. "It would be a wonderful thing to communicate with other
civilizations if such things exist. I personally am not the
least worried about the consequences."

The Arecibo Observatory, which is managed by the Cornell-based
National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, still figures
prominently in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or
SETI.

Readings from Arecibo are gathered by Project Serendip and
distributed among more than 1.4 million users of the   SETI@home
program for analysis, in hopes that the signature of alien
intelligence will someday be found.

The SETI Institute is currently preparing for a round of
targeted observations at Arecibo beginning Nov. 22 as part of
its Project Phoenix - following up on two-week sessions in
September 1998 and March 1999. Hurricane Lenny�s passage forced
a one-day shutdown of the telescope facility, but the Project
Phoenix researchers said Wednesday that they were back in
business.


LONG-DISTANCE CHARGES

Other researchers and entrepreneurs are broadcasting their own
messages toward distant stars - some of them on a paying basis.

Two ventures have sprung up outside the SETI mainstream: Between
May and July, the 230-foot (70-meter) Evpatoriya radio telescope
on Ukraine�s Crimean Peninsula aimed a series of 150,000-watt,
4-hour-long transmissions at four sunlike stars considered
capable of possessing planets. All four stars are within 70
light-years of Earth.This "page" of the Encounter 2001
transmission was inspired by a famous plaque included on the
Pioneer spacecraft of the 1970s. The symbols at right are part
of an "alphabet" designed to be deciphered by alien
civilizations.

The transmission included a rebroadcast of the original Arecibo
message, plus a new coded message that was about 220 times as
long. Then about 50,000 brief messages from paying customers
were sent as straight ASCII text. The toll charge ranged from
$9.95 to $69.95, depending on the particular package purchased
from Encounter 2001, the Houston-based company that put the deal
together.

Two more transmissions are scheduled from Evpatoriya in 2000 and
2001. In an e-mail message, Russian researcher Alexander Zaitsev
contended that Evpatoriya, rather than Arecibo, should be
credited with the first cosmic call. He said the antenna was
used on Nov. 19, 1962, to send Morse code for the words "Mir,"
"Lenin" and "SSSR" (the Russian acronym for the Soviet Union)
toward Venus.

Meanwhile, back in the United States, a California-based venture
called Bentspace is transmitting uncoded text messages straight
up into the sky via a 9-foot antenna dish with less than a watt
of power.

Bentspace has drawn criticism from SETI pioneers such as Drake,
who is now president of the SETI Institute. He told one
interviewer that the signal had "about the same power as a
garage door opener."

Greg Snow, a former real-estate developer who is one of the
partners in the Bentspace venture, acknowledged that the
transmissions had to be weak to satisfy FCC regulations. But he
said Drake�s criticism was "a little bit unfair." He contended
that the signal could be detected beyond Earth�s atmosphere, and
cited tests in which a receiver 40 miles away could pick up the
2.4-gigahertz signal.

"You can�t open your garage door from 40 miles away," Snow said.


When Bentspace started transmissions in August, customers were
charged $10.95 for each message. But Snow said the venture has
revised its business model to rely more on advertising revenue.
Straight-up transmissions will be sent from the 9-foot antenna
for free, and the venture is negotiating with the Evpatoriya
facility in Ukraine to send out higher-powered messages for no
more than $10 each, Snow said.

He estimated that Bentspace has sent out about 10,000 messages so far.

SCIENTIFIC SILENCE

Why aren�t scientists addressing more messages to E.T.? Well,
many researchers raise the same sorts of objections that
followed the first Arecibo broadcast. SETI scientists also point
out that humans are "the new kids on the block" when it comes to
signal transmission, and thus should spend some time listening
before speaking out.

Realistically, scientists assume that if the chances of picking
up an alien signal are slim, the chances of sending an
intentional signal and receiving a reply to that particular
message are even slimmer. Cornell�s Campbell said the long
turnaround time could play a role as well.

"It may be related to the fact that people�s horizons are
limited by their own lifetimes, and therefore finding a signal
may be more attractive than sending a signal out and waiting
hundreds of years for a response," he said.

But putting aside the questions about Bentspace in particular,
Snow wondered why the cosmic conversation had to be one-sided.

"If they�re spending millions of dollars per year listening,
shouldn�t someone be sending something out? ... Just on
principle it seems like we should have a beacon."

**












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                         Fireball Over Midwest Stuns

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 11:30:27 GMT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:47:42 -0500
Subject: Fireball Over Midwest Stuns


Source: The Columbus Dispatch,

http://www.dispatch.com/pan/localarchive/firebnws.html

Stig

***

Fireball stuns stargazers, 'average' folk

Celestial attention-getter

Wednesday, November 17, 1999

By Roger Alford
Dispatch Staff Reporter

The telephone switchboard at Port Columbus was swamped last
night with callers who mistook what might have been a meteor for
a flaming aircraft.

"The average person won't see very many this large in a
lifetime," said Bob Hollinshead, operations coordinator for the
airport.

"We naturally get calls from people who think it may be an
aircraft breaking apart in the sky."

The fireball streaked across the sky from west to east about 7
p.m., alarming stargazers as far away as Kentucky who were
awaiting the arrival of the Leonid meteor shower.

The fireball blazed for 20 seconds before disappearing over the
horizon.

"It was gorgeous," said Tom Burns, director of the Perkins
Observatory in Delaware, Ohio.

"It could have been some piece of satellite or some second stage
of a rocket that had been in orbit, but most likely a meteor."

North Side residents Samiel Guess and Tiffany Baker had just
placed an order at the Kentucky Fried Chicken at Cleveland and
Oakland Park avenues when the fireball streaked by.

"It was long -- it was really long. That's how we knew it wasn't
an airplane," Guess said.

"It was moving pretty fast and then it disappeared," Baker
said.

"I was afraid to report it at first. I was afraid the FBI would
come to try to shut me up," she said with a laugh.

Local astronomers offered various opinions on exactly what
streaked across the sky.

Gerald Newsom, an Ohio State University astronomy professor,
said he believes the fireball was either a piece of an asteroid
or a satellite re-entering the atmosphere.

"Something like that will happen on Earth every few days, but
it's a big Earth," Newsom said.

"To have it happen over the place where you are is pretty
unusual."

Newsom said the sight was not a part of the Leonid meteor
shower. He said the Leonids are very small and weren't expected
to be visible in Ohio until about midnight.

At 7 p.m. -- when the fireball took to the sky -- the meteors
were on the other side of the Earth, he said.

Columbus police radio dispatchers said they received about 50
calls from residents immediately following the sighting.

"The general consensus was that it was a downed airplane or UFOs
in the area," said Bonnie Moore, a dispatcher.

"People have such rich imaginations."

Kim Coplin, a physics professor at Denison University in
Granville had just walked into Swasey Observatory on the Licking
County campus for a tour with her introductory physics students.

"I just walked in and looked up and saw it, and I'm embarrassed
to say I don't what it was," she said.

"It was moving from west to east. It just looked like a
firework. It was kind of white in the middle and orangish around
the outside, and it seemed to break up as it streaked across the
sky."

The object had broken into three or four sections when Russell
Pitts of Galloway saw it.

"The front one was real big, and it had others behind it and
they were moving in a line," he said.

"We didn't know what it was. All of a sudden we see this thing
in the sky."

Sandra Yorka, an astronomy professor at Denison, said the
fireball was a bolide, a large chunk of meteor material.

"It was rather interesting," she said. "It left quite a
trail."

**

Dispatch staff members Alan Miller and  Dean Narciso contributed
to this story.

**

Copyright � 1999, The Columbus Dispatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 13:46:51 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:55:29 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:28:42 EST
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >To Georgina Bruni and the List,

 >I want to thank you publicly for you excellent interventions
 >in the debate with Jenny Randles. Which leaves at least one
 >big question unanswered regarding Lakenheath:

 >What did the pilots say?

Let's hope Jenny stops beating about the bush and decides to
answer that important question

 >Secondly, I am shocked by the rudeness of Tim Matthews' post.

The assumption that he (Tim) wiped the floor with me is a
nonsense. The remark about Nick Pope is equally so. Yes, he can
be extremely rude at times which is such a pity.

Regards
Georgina









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #326

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 08:26:01 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:57:03 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #326


Apology to MW #326 (For November 20, 1999)

Looking at the sky I see a living map of history. Sky born
objects are the past -- God's "tape delay" we see at last.
Nothing IS as it appears; what comforted is now most queer.
Suspect motives cloud that air, and we don't see what's flying
there. Saucers hiding 'neath the skirts of that which causes
greatest hurt, as we must stagger in the dark to suit the ones
who profit -- hark! You and me, we're in cahoots; we fan the
murk to sift some truth, and we will read what gets no press, is
ridiculed -- but I digress. I'm asking questions that annoy, and
make some mad who would destroy the freedoms that we ought to
have -- such freedom as the thoughts THEY'D had. Thought's
beyond the pale of science, thoughts with depth (perhaps
reliance) -- for thoughts as these may point the way for humbled
science used *new* ways.

What is lost or cast away when one denies what one *could* say
-- things not said and kept from view to disrespect first me,
then you. What if you won't answer questions, innuendoes, and
suggestions that you're shallow, without face... plodding,
facile -- bereft of taste. What if you're the psychopath --
cloying, sticky... smirking wrath... not conceding all your
points, and misdirecting those enjoined. I worry that it might
be me, what I've described -- distastefully. I know it's, then,
my every word could TURN and STRIKE like raptor birds. I hope
you're right. You hope I'm wrong -- that we CAN wear our
heaven's crown... that we in fact DO crown creation, and are NOT
it's infestation . . .

We aren't looking for the truth. We're distracted and misled --
confused. And not because we'd choose it so, but more because
it's *good* to *know*. Know our knowing has a price -- that some
of us would pay lives; sullen resource, without recourse --
freed as we begin to *know*. Those depending on our essence --
off the tit, then, they would go.

As a means to their own ends? That luxury is ended, friend, as
saucers fill our timeless skies and we rise up to meet their
*eyes*. Then we make our own sweet deals, and lead ourselves,
yes (!), never kneel. Not to God, or churlish Devils,
institutions, hammers, shovels -- not to men we don't elect, or
lawyers, doctors ... evil sects. Not to preachers, cops, or
pushers, pimps nor pros, or psychic butchers. Released from
bondage; free at last; free to think! They're off your back!

It's not the "New Age sentiment" that clouds my point of view --
"New Ages" (?) -- our reactions to the misdirecting few? People
see hypocrisy in what has gone before, and look for other
passage-ways -- for other paths and doors. People sense illogic
in the paradigms produced, and then work out sane and logically
where they're presently abused. People question culture as the
politics of hatred, and try to find their centers as they sense
it's getting later.

Consider Mr. Oberg as he smirks up gilded sleeves. That he
writes dismissive missives is the symptom of disease. That he
takes the time (at all!), is speaking volumes for the case that
*anomaly* is happening, real, and is right up in your face. It
is, frankly, eighty people in a hundred DO believe that the
answers to our questions are, then, stuffed up *O'berg's*
sleeves, so he's *employed* to mollify and put that fire out...
to muddy up the water, well, for ALL we've *known* about. He
argues an obtuseness and an airy tongue in cheek that is all
infused with looseness that is hard to NOT believe. A mix of
what is plausible. A dash of what makes sense. A smidgen of the
natural, and the well worn *second rinse*. And all around his
sideshow are the leaping pulsing lights, or words that scream
from history, and the folks you trust at night.

The truth is not forthcoming for the reasons we have named.
Conspiracy's alive and well in shadows some maintain, and we
are, frankly, tired of them pissing on our leg, but condoling
that it's raining -- these are questions that get begged! It's
said that *they're* protecting us from a strangeness we perceive
-- that we should let that dog just sleep, and lie unbothered...
NOT believe. But I believe it's JUST that stuff that we should
talk about. And I think that we can profit from what we can find
to do without. I think what's efficacious are the wages if we're
brave. I think we're better off that way, and their way is
depraved. I think we're taking easy roads that butter up the
few, and that most would be left hanging with the *bill* as it
comes due.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

A lesson of history. ... Don't think so? Heh. We better raise ours
eyes and see saucers, bunky, if we have to UT them there ourselves!

Restore John Ford!

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 20 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 09:54:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:08:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:41:05 -0500
 >From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >>Subject: Re: Are We Alone?
 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:58:11 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Personally, the idea that UFOs represent extraterrestrial life
 >>give me the willies. The political consequences alone of
 >>discovering clandestine visitors are so large, so complex, and
 >>potentially so dangerous, that such a result can hardly be
 >>wished for. Science fiction is replete with examples that
 >>suggest the difficulty of verifying the intent of a non-human
 >>species with a technlogy in advance of ours prior to a point at
 >>which it is too late. Is this something I am looking forward to,
 >>or have an emotional bias toward? No, indeed.

 >>But I do think the truth is more important than my comfort.

 >Hi Mark

 >Think on this for a moment....suppose we are the only
 >intelligent life in the universe and in that vast, open,
 >uncharted territory....we are ALONE! That to me is far more
 >terrifying than having aliens visiting us at this moment in
 >time. Even if they had hostile intentions, the fact that if they
 >are here, at least proves there could possibly be life elewhere
 >in the universe, and those entities may be very benvolent.

Jacquie, In your opinion what makes you think these entities
would be benevolent?  In my opinion, the only thing we have to
go on in baseing a decision on their purpose is hypnosis.  I'm
not an abductee, but if I were, I don't think being abducted
between the hours of 1:00am and 4:00am in the am, and taken
against my own free will very benevolent regardless of any
"spiritual" implications of the abduction scenario.

 >If we were the only ones (I find that hard to believe) then we
 >have a responsibility to explore the universe and "seed" it
 >with intelligent life.

Why do you feel we are responsible for "seeding" the rest of the
universe?  What purpose would it serve, in your opinion?

 >It is quite possible that we are an incredibly special form of
 >life. If that is true, then why do we always assume alien life
 >will be more advanced than us? Possibly technologically because
 >most suns are much older than ours, but emotionally, and
 >spiritually I believe we have much to offer those who come to
 >call.

Above, it seems that you assume the alien entities would have
the same emotional and spiritual needs as humans?  Am I correct?
If so then you would also assume they would originate from our
"creator" persay also?

 >I don't think that the human species will ever stop looking for
 >life in our universe as the thought of being totally alone is
 >far too terrifying.

Just a few thoughts Jacquie.  It was good to see a thread such
as this here that didn't involve some type or argument or
debate.

Todd 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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:01:00 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:17:27 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 19:54:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:19:04 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >In a earlier posting to UFO UpDates, I took two different
 >probability studies and showed that even a simple cell could not
 >be created by Chance alone.  Since Chance or an Intelligent
 >Designer were the only two options, the probability for an
 >Intelligent Designer would simply be the inverse of the
 >probability that we created by Chance alone...


Dear Nick and Everyone:

This is like saying that probability shows that I couldn't exist
by chance, or to take a simpler case, the last 10,000 years of
human history since the last Ice Age couldn't have happened by
chance, or that intelligent life in the Univers couldn't happen.
But, we are here.

The important calculation would have been can a single useful
molecule either be formed or not formed in a cell.  This single
molecule may cause a tiny chemical reaction which, for example,
might move nutrients from one part of a cell to another. Could
this happen, and could the probability of a molecure causing or
not causing such a movement be calculated. Of course.  Could
innumerable small, tiny changes in half an Eon create, one at a
time, some sort of organism?

Your argument for a creator by working backwords, from what is
now, begs the question.  What is it about Darwinian Natural
Selection that makes it possible to create what is observed in
life?  It is _not_ it's random nature, because Evolution is _not
random_.  That's the whole point, which you have missed. You've
calculated the wrong thing, Nick.

Jeez...

Go read a book which explains how Evolution works. Try Richard
Dawkins' book The Blind Watchmaker - Why the evidence of
evolution reveals a universe without design.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                Issue 103 - Pt1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ukufonw@FREENETNAME.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 18:23:57 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:21:21 -0500
Subject: Issue 103 - Pt1 - United Kingdom UFO Network

          ______ _______ ______
  ------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
   U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                      18th November 1999
       /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K   Part 1 of 3 - Issue 103
  --- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------


  The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
  subscribers in 58 countries.


  This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
  ufo@ukufonw.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted
  to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g.
  Repost {103} part 1, part 2 etc.


  e-mail us: ufo@ukufonw.co.uk
  fax us: (44) 0870 0883592
  web site: www.ukufonw.co.uk


  In this issue:


  Editorial
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  More waffle from the Ed!


  Sky / Eclipse Watch 1999
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  Nessus' write-up on events in Cornwall during August


  United Kingdom News
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  [UK 1] Scandal of nerve gas tests
  [UK 2] Apollo veteran calls for new vision
  [UK 3] Truly mind-blowing material
  [UK 4] Defence Projects 2.8bn pounds over budget
  [UK 5] ET and the eclipse
  [UK 6] Moon walker dies in bike crash
  [UK 7] Webcam nets Nessie?
  [UK 8] Apollo veteran calls for new vision
  [UK 9] British spacecraft to look for alien life
  [UK 10] ET look-a-likes land in London
  [UK 11] Woodhenge discovered near Stonehenge


  World News
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  [W 1] Clergy highlight a Christian view of Roswells alien craze  [W 2]
  Doomsday cult under guard  [W 3] The battle over Roswell alien turf [W
  4] Peggy Bryant was out for a walk when she noticed... [W 5] Ontario
  town worried about U.S. military flights


  Letters Page
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  Readers mail


  Meandering thoughts
  =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


  Do Governments talk to each other


  ---=3D=3D=3D---


  Editorial
  ---------


  Well hello once again!  It's Lloydy here this time, to pass on a few
  of my own thoughts and ramblings before launching you into this latest
  issue of the uk.ufo.nw e-zine.  Hope you've all been well out there
  and missed me while I've taken a back seat for the past while!  Well,
  either way, you're stuck with me for the next few paragraphs :-)


  A little while ago, the news was full of the story of the latest
  shuttle launch being aborted with just six seconds to go before blast
  off.  SIX SECONDS!  Can you imagine that?  Can you imagine the
  adrenaline pumping around that cockpit as the launch controller counts
  down past ten, nine, eight...  Then someone cuts in with 'Launch
  aborted' or whatever phrase those techie type people use to break that
  kind of news to the brave souls sat way up there in the sky, just
  waiting for that huge explosion that is yet another Shuttle launch.
  Wow man, that must be some kind of downer!


  But let's face it, it's all been seen many times before.  The guy
  counts down to zero, there's a huge roar, a ball of fire and another
  seven brave hearts are hurled out of our atmosphere and into that dark
  bit that lies between us and the other lumps of rock and collections
  of gases that are our Solar System.  Pretty routine really - NOT!


  Another interesting news item was the thirtieth anniversary of that
  'small' piece of space travel history - Apollo 11 and her crew heading
  out into the dark stuff to plant the first human footsteps on the
  Moon. On 16 July 1969, Neil Armstrong, Edwin E 'Buzz' Aldrin and of
  course, command module pilot Michael Collins, headed for the Moon.
  Four days later, at 4:17:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, the lunar module
  Eagle touched down in the Sea of Tranquility with the historic report:
   "Houston, Tranquility Base here.  The Eagle has landed.".  Just under
  seven hours later, at 10:56 PM that day, Neil Armstrong made his
  historic statement "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for
  mankind".   He's also rumoured to have muttered "Good luck Mr Gorsky",
  but that's another story :-)


  Stories are now abundant in UFO folklore as to what these brave people
  and their illustrious colleagues have seen during their many space
  flights, moon walks or even space walks.  Stories of Armstrong seeing
  alien spacecraft lined up on the Moon, unusual comments made by
  numerous astronauts during routine space flights, some of them
  admitting to believing that we are not alone, even intriguing video
  footage from a couple of shuttle flights.  Who knows what the truth
  is, maybe most of us will never know, but maybe, just maybe, one
  day...


  Anyhow, back to the point of this waffle!  Someone mentioned to me the
  other day, how magnificent an achievement it was, getting those brave
  people to the Moon - and back! - with the kind of technology they had
  available to them in those days, and the thought occurred to me, I bet
  the people working on the Apollo project thought exactly the same of
  Orville and Wilbur Wright, how fantastic a feat of engineering to get
  that first powered aeroplane off the ground in 1903.  No computers to
  help with the design, no electronic flight control systems to help
  keep the thing stable, none of the hi-tec luxuries of the 1960s!


  Can you imagine what people are going to be saying about our efforts
  in space travel in thirty, twenty even ten years time?  Mankind always
  seems to think it has the ultimate in technology at his fingertips,
  then just a few miles down the road, things improve once more, then
  once again, and again.  Now try to imagine what things are like in the
  real world, the world of black budgets, the things that 'they' don't
  tell us about.  Makes ya think, don't it... ;-)


  Skywatch / Eclipse


  Yet another headline grabber since the last issue was the total solar
  eclipse, the path of which passed over the southern most tip of
  Cornwall at 11:11 on the 24th August.  The uk.ufo.nw team were there,
  out in force with our eclipse viewers, cameras and videos.  Well, the
  videos and the cameras were quite useful!  See the report written by
  Nessus later in this issue to see how we filled our time waiting for
  things to go dark...


  It was a terrible shame that the weather was against us.  We camped
  out on Raine & Crow's front lawn, and they informed us that the
  weather in Cornwall for weeks had been perfect.  In fact, the day
  before and the day after, the weather was superb (in fact, that actual
  evening was pretty good too!).  But it wasn't to be, the clouds rolled
  in and prevented us from even glimpsing a nibbled sun. I'll tell you
  something though, even without actually being able to see the sun, it
  was the most eerie, spooky and downright strange experience!  The trip
  itself went off very well, as usual for uk.ufo.nw expeditions, and it
  was great to meet up with some of the gang that usually only get
  together electronically.  We also met up with a few new faces, one of
  which being Ian, Raine's extremely interesting and fascinating
  brother.  Ian is a Shiatsu practitioner, and I for one benefited from
  his kindness, skill and abilities.  Cheers Ian, the neck's been much
  better since!


  Check out Nessus' report later in this issue for the gory details!


  As you will see at the top of this issue uk.ufo.nw now has a new
  e-mail address, web site url and fax number. Please use these
  addresses for all future correspondence etc.


  Last but not least view the end credits of the e-zine for information
  on joining in our weekly irc (internet relay chats) meetings just by
  simply going along to our new web site. It couldn't be easier.


  On with the show!


  Eclipsing Spectacle
  -------------------


  A few days spent in Cornwall to watch the eclipse.


  Day one greeting the travellers.


  After a day getting sunburnt on the beach, an evening with old IRC
  friends was next on the agenda. When Mel and I went around to Crow and
  Raine's place to meet all the other intrepid travellers around three
  thirty, only Lloydy was awake. Dave_UFO and his friend Jon were fast
  asleep, apparently six hours sleep the night before the long drive
  down was not enough.  Lloydy and I swapped pleasantries loud enough to
  wake the other two "gently". As Crow and Raine were not present at
  that moment I asked Lloydy where they where. He told me that they
  where picking up Jeroen from Penzance train station as he had made an
  almost last minute decision to come over to the UK and join the
  UK-UFO-Network for our skywatch and eclipse watch, or should that be
  the other way round? They turned up shortly after. When everyone was
  gathered and Jeroen's blow-up mattress was inflated by three of us we
  descended on the local chippie. This was the first British meal of
  sorts that Jeroen was to have in the UK. Then the annual meeting of
  the UK-UFO-Network moved on to its usual gathering place, a pub. Many
  a pleasant pint, and one that tasted like water (ask Lloydy) was drunk
  in a alehouse in central Camborne. I don't know about the others but
  it certainly didn't seem like a year since we had all last met. Oh
  just so that I don't forget, Espe joined us whilst we were at the pub.



  Day two in preparation to see the eclipse.


  We had a late arrival today. When Mel and I went to Crow and Raine's
  place in the early evening to discuss the plans for the morrow with
  all the other eclipse hunters, young Matthew Williams had driven down
  from the land of stone circles and mysticism, Wiltshire. The evening
  was spent discussing certain aspects of recent cinema releases, most
  especially The Phantom Menace. All joined in and we dissected the film
  thoroughly. Raine's brother, Ian, turned up with a pack of Fosters and
  the chatting got going with earnest now that we where lubricated with
  the amber nectar. Various other topics of conversation wafted in and
  out of discussion and I don't think there was anyone who didn't add
  something to the whole menagerie of the evening. Ian also treated us
  to a pleasant period of music on his didgerydoo. A few of us tried to
  blow a note or two afterwards but could not manage more than a vain
  huff and puff with only Jon producing anything like what Ian could
  produce. Ian then gave us a final relaxing tune. As the time was
  drawing late we made a decision to leave very early in the morning to
  beat the mad rush, but boy were there a few comments about leaving at
  four ruddy a.m.


  Day three, the day of the eclipse.


  A phone call from Crow at four twenty started the day off. Mel and I
  made our way back to Crows place to meet with all the other eclipse
  hunters and then we all made our way to Gwithian beach. Beyond the few
  that had camped there overnight we where the first of the general
  public to venture out in readiness for the looming eclipse. It was a
  fair few hours before we saw anyone else, so I believed we had beat
  the mad rush by a generous margin. Around eight o'clock I declared
  that I would barbecue breakfast for all and sundry. Damn and blast, it
  took nearly half an hour to get the ruddy thing going. When it was
  going food was fast flowing and all ate their fill, including the two
  dogs that had all the scraps. I think it was the first time Lloydy and
  a few others had tried barbecued eggs! When the feeding time was over
  the serious art of people watching began as others started arriving in
  their droves. The cloud cover was bad, and it was a fair guess that
  seeing the actual eclipse would be difficult. It began to rain
  heavily. Now I don't know about you but it seems almost guaranteed
  that when you do a skywatch, it rains. Well this was no exception, and
  boy did it rain. It was good that we could see it coming, and my
  thanks to Jon and Lloydy for helping me get all my gear back to my car
  before the deluge began. As luck would have it, the stuff that Noah
  hated, stopped before the actual eclipse happened. At eleven the skies
  got suddenly very dark, the birds went quiet and you could see
  hundreds of camera flashes going off in St Ives, which was five miles
  across the bay. The two minutes of the eclipse seemed more like twenty
  seconds. The sight of the sun's corona is awe- inspiring and truly
  breath taking. It is also an emotional time for some people. Dogs
  barked and babies cried and even I was struck for words. Then, as if
  by magic, the sun reappeared. Everyone stood around making awe struck
  sounds like oohs and ahs etc. Seriously though you had to be there to
  fully appreciate the spectacle. Jon and Lloydy commented on how it
  seemed to take a few minutes to get dark, but only a matter of seconds
  before it became fully light again. The common consensus of opinion
  was that when it was going dark peoples eyes had the chance to get
  adjusted to the gradually diminishing light but when it came light it
  was almost like someone switching on a light. Another thing we all
  noticed was the moon's shadow chasing across the ocean at two thousand
  miles an hour. We all made our way back to our cars and straight down
  to the pub to talk about what we had just seen, or not just seen
  according to who saw what.


  But the day was not over yet. A drive down to Penzance because Mel
  wanted a McDonalds, and we thought that we would have a look at St
  Michaels Mount whilst we where down that way. Well, the traffic! It
  seemed like half of the visitors to Cornwall where already making
  their collective ways back home. After queuing in the golden M we had
  a slow, very slow drive up to St Michaels Mount, but we decided to
  give up actually walking the causeway as it was crowded and there was
  nowhere to park. So it was back to the cottage for an afternoon siesta
  to refresh ourselves in readiness for the evenings activities.


  As we where preparing to make our return to the group Crow rang to
  enquire what we were up to. After a quick exchange it appeared that
  munchies back at a certain excellent drinking establishment was in
  order. Mel and I turned up just a few minutes after the others had
  arrived. The gang were at the bar getting the first round in! When
  liquid lubrication was in hand, literally, we had the difficult task
  of finding somewhere for us all to sit. There were now only eight of
  us as both Espe and Matthew Williams had made an early start to sit in
  the long traffic queues. In the end we decided al-fresco would be a
  good idea. There is nothing quite like sitting down and having a great
  meal with beer and good friends. This was no exception. Mind you we
  did have a quick moan because they short ordered us a bowl of chips.
  The main topic of conversation was of course the day's major
  astronomical event. After a good amount of chat and feeding we made
  our collective way back to Crows place because Raine's brother Ian
  said he would do a meditation session for us all. Ian it turned out
  was a Shiatsu and Reiki master, well known in his chosen field. We all
  made ourselves comfortable in Dave's huge tent and Ian began.
  According to Ian the session lasted forty minutes but it felt like
  just ten. The time didn't fly by like it did with the eclipse but
  somehow just didn't seem to pass at all. This has to be experienced to
  be understood.


  After this almost unexpected pleasure we discussed our varying
  experiences, I don't think that there was one of us who did not at the
  very least feel rested afterwards. We all thanked Ian for his generous
  efforts and expertise for this most enjoyable experience. After that
  it was time for the actual skywatch to begin.


  I think it was Ian's wife Angela who saw the first celestial object,
  which I'm afraid turned out to be nothing more than a satellite. After
  that we all took it in turns to spot the next satellite. Also, the
  Persied's where in full bloom, if you could use that expression to
  describe the following meteor shower. Lloydy got most miffed because
  he kept "missing" seeing the meteor's and when he did eventually catch
  one it was probably the best one of the evening. This falling star
  covered at least half the visible sky and left a multicoloured trail
  that lasted for at least a whole second. Now that might not seem long
  to some of you, but any of you sky watchers will know that most
  falling stars last for fractions of a second. Around twelve thirty,
  which you probably think is well early to call it quits for a
  skywatch, but bear in mind we where all up and at it from four thirty
  in the morning, we started to make our ways to our collective beds.


  Day four, the departures.


  Mel and I enjoyed a nice lie in till eight thirty the next day, and
  boy did we need it. After a cooked breakfast we made our way to the
  campsite where Dave an co were, which just happened to be Crow an'
  Raine's place. We got there just as Raine was dashing off to get bacon
  rolls for breakfast for the hardy campers. Dave, Lloydy and Jon where
  all up and ready for action whilst Jeroen was still trying to wake up.
  After morning coffee, which I made, the slightly mammoth task of
  taking Dave's huge tent down was started. Now Dave has had this tent
  for a few years and knows what he is doing, we did not. However, with
  four people it was not much of a problem. And, lo and behold, just as
  we where dismantling the last quarter of the tent Raine turned up with
  the bacon rolls, now how's that for timing! When the tent was taken to
  pieces and put in Dave's car we started our usual gassing. Crow
  treated us to his photo album from his house restoration. When Crow
  brought his house it was like a tip. It probably would not have been
  amiss in Beirut. But with the help of Ian and some friends he has
  restored the place to a veritable palace. I'm afraid after that is was
  the departing pleasantries, like mentioning where next years
  UK-UFO-Network skywatch would be. Where ever it is we look forward to
  seeing the gang there in 2000.


  United Kingdom News
  -------------------


  [UK 1]******


  Source: Guardian Newspaper
  Publish Date: Friday 3rd September 1999


  Scandal of nerve gas tests


  Rob Evans


  British military scientists exposed more than 3,100 human "guinea
  pigs" to potent nerve gases in top-secret chemical warfare tests
  spanning four decades, according to new figures obtained by the
  Guardian.


  The figures show for the first time the substantial scale of the nerve
  gas experiments which were carried out on human subjects by the poison
  gas establishment at Porton Down, Wiltshire. Porton's total is three
  times the number of the US, which has also admitted conducting human
  trials with nerve gases. The most recent tests were carried out 10
  years ago, but officials have not ruled out conducting further tests
  in the future.


  Police last month launched the first criminal investigation into the
  death of 20-year-old airman Ronald Maddison during nerve gas
  experiments in 1953.


  Detectives are also inquiring into allegations that military personnel
  were tricked into taking part in chemical warfare experiments at
  Porton Down.


  An annual breakdown of the number of human subjects tested with nerve
  gases, kept secret for many years, shows that Mr Maddison died at the
  peak of Porton's nerve gas experiments. In the 12 months leading up to
  his death, 531 men had been exposed to nerve gas. The total had been
  steadily rising during the previous three years, from 159, to 234, to
  384.


  With a large pool of human subjects at their disposal, Porton
  scientists were able to conduct a panoply of tests with a variety of
  objectives.


  Mr Maddison was one of 396 men in a particularly large experiment in
  which Porton scientists sought to estimate how much nerve gas would
  kill a man through layers of clothing or on the bare skin.


  The deadly nerve gases were originally developed as weapons by the
  Nazis. Britain and its allies only discovered the extraordinarily
  powerful new poison gas as the Nazis were being over-run at the end of
  the second world war. Within two weeks of finding the new weapon,
  Porton scientists had tested it on humans, in April 1945.


  The bulk of Porton's experiments were done in the early years of the
  Cold War, when Porton scientists worked rapidly to crack the secrets
  of how the new weapons harmed the human body. In the first 15 years
  after the second world war, Porton used 2,644 men in nerve gas
  experiments, at a time when Britain was actively preparing to
  manufacture massive quantities of nerve gas to counter the Soviet
  chemical arsenal.


  Many human "guinea pigs" had liquid nerve gas dripped onto their skin,
  while others breathed in the gas. The doses administered varied, but
  Porton insists that all the amounts of gas in the trials were
  "medically safe". Sarin was the main nerve gas used in the
  experiments, although some trials involved two other nerve gases,
  tabun and soman.


  From the 1960s, the nerve gas tests slowed down. Between 1966 and
  1989, 545 human "guinea pigs" were subjected to the gas.


  Porton officials say that this was the last time humans were tested
  with nerve gas. However, they do not rule out the possibility of
  administering nerve gas to human subjects in the future. At a cost of
  =A33.5m, a new gas chamber was built and opened in 1996, with a
  projected life of at least 20 years.


  The annual breakdown of tests has been collated from figures
  disclosed to Ken Livingstone MP and declassified documents in
  the Public Record Office.


  Mr Livingstone said: "This is a massive scandal. We need a full public
  inquiry to get all the facts. The service personnel who were exposed
  should get all the medical care and compensation which they deserve."


  The US government banned all chemical warfare experiments on humans in
  1975 after press revelations triggered a public outcry. Until that
  year, 1,159 military personnel had been exposed by the American
  military to nerve gas during the Cold War.


  Canada is the only other country which has admitted conducting nerve
  gas tests on humans, saying that a "small number" of experiments ended
  in 1968.


  It is likely that other countries, such as the former Soviet Union,
  Iraq, and France, which have had considerable poison gas programmes
  over the years, have tested humans with nerve gas, but details are
  unconfirmed and sketchy.


  -[continued in part 2]-






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                Issue 103 - Pt2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ukufonw@FREENETNAME.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 18:23:57 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:21:43 -0500
Subject: Issue 103 - Pt2 - United Kingdom UFO Network

          ______ _______ ______
  ------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
   U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                      18th November 1999
       /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K   Part 2 of 3 - Issue 103
  --- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------


  The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
  subscribers in 58 countries.


  This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
  ufo@ukufonw.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted
  to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g.
  Repost {103} part 1, part 2 etc.


  e-mail us: ufo@ukufonw.co.uk
  fax us: (44) 0870 0883592
  web site: www.ukufonw.co.uk


  [UK 2]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Tuesday 11th May 1999


  Apollo veteran calls for new vision


  Space hero Buzz Aldrin has attacked the modern world for losing the
  vision and excitement that inspired the Moon landings.


  Speaking in London, he said the generation that witnessed the Apollo
  missions and thrilled to space travel was now afflicted by apathy and
  had retreated into "risk-free societies".


  Aldrin, the second astronaut to set foot on the Moon, made his remarks
  at a conference on space tourism. He said it saddened him that the
  enthusiasm for exploring new worlds had waned.


  The 69-year-old Apollo veteran said he hoped the situation could be
  reversed. "I believe that a whole species must have the humility to
  nurture the Earth and the pride to go to Mars," he said.


  Dreams of humanity


  Aldrin, who followed Neil Armstrong on to the Moon in July 1969, is
  now involved in Starcraft Enterprises, which seeks to promote space
  tourism.


  He said: "I believe that accepting the challenges of space exploration
  will lead to the most prolonged period of socio-economic health the
  world has seen."


  Recalling his historic Apollo XI mission, he added: "For mankind, it
  was a giant leap. We were privileged to represent the hopes and dreams
  of humanity.


  "It was not the rocks we brought back, or what we said - it was the
  impact on the lives of millions of people around the world who
  witnessed it that made the difference."


  Shares in space


  Aldrin believes space tourism will rekindle the passion of the 60s and
  early 70s, allowing ordinary citizens the chance to follow in the
  footsteps of the Apollo pioneers.


  Although the cost of sending civilians into orbit would be expensive,
  Aldrin said his sharespace project would widen the opportunities open
  to people by operating a lottery.


  "A person could purchase a share in the future of space and that share
  would entitle the individual to enter a draw from which a pool of
  people would be selected to fly in space."


  Aldrin looked forward to the next generation of space rockets which he
  said would carry between 80 and 100 people, making space flights
  economically viable.


  Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin logged over 288 hours in space.


  [UK 3]******


  Source: UFO Magazine (UK) web site
  www.ufomag.co.uk
  Publish Date: 9th September 1999


  Truly mind-blowing material


  Apologies that our web site has not been up-dated for a while. I've
  recently just returned from a fact-finding mission to North America
  and returned with material that is truly mind-blowing. It is too early
  to publicly release details at this time, suffice to say that we now
  have the proof that every UFO researcher and enthusiast has been
  craving for.


  We expect to make a formal announcement at this September's
  18th Leeds International UFO Conference, during which time those
  present will see some of the new evidence for themselves. We expect
  this to have as significant an impact on the worldwide UFO community
  as the infamous alien 'autopsy' footage. The difference being, there
  is no doubt as to the origin of this new material. Carefully assembled
  over 3 years, this material comprises of hundreds of video tapes, the
  source and content of which will send shockwaves around the world.


  The Leeds Conference is unquestionably going to result in some
  extraordinary revelations. One of our British-based speakers says he
  is going to reveal the identity of a man who he believes is part
  responsible for manufacturing some of the Majestic 12 documents, while
  another, Paris-based Alain Boudier, will announce "two or three" world
  exclusives during his lecture on the new French UFO Defence Study
  report. (Alain is standing in for Tony Dodd, who unfortunately cannot
  attend due to illness).


  ukufonw says: We have not heard the result of this 'truly mind blowing
  material'. We would be pleased to hear from any reader who attended
  the Leeds conference or who has further information.


  [UK 4]******


  Source: BBC Ceefax
  Publish Date: Wednesday 30th June 1999


  Defence Projects 2.8bn pounds over budget


  National Audit Officer Chief Sir John Bourn is to tell Parliament
  today that the UK's top 25 defence equipment projects will be 2.8bn
  pounds over budget.


  And they will enter service an average of just over three and a half
  years behind schedule.


  The figures exclude the huge Eurofighter project.


  Ministry of Defence projects surveyed in the 1998 NAO report are
  expected to cost a total of 38bn pounds. 16 out of 25 are forecast to
  be over budget.


  [UK 5]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Friday 23rd  July 1999


  ET and the eclipse


  In 1954, eclipse watchers aboard a BOAC stratocruiser, en route from
  the US to Britain, got more than they bargained for when they spied
  UFOs through the portholes. The sighting was reported upon landing in
  London and the captain interviewed by a reporter from the BBC.


  Captain James Howard told how he, along with his entire crew and some
  of the passengers, watched the phenomena for a total of 18 minutes.


  He described several small objects, which disappeared and reappeared
  at will, and one large one, which was able to change its shape,
  although "it was always black in silhouette and there was a clear edge
  to it".


  Eventually, this object disappeared as well.


  When pressed about the reality of what he had witnessed, Captain
  Howard remained firm:


  "There is no question that this was not an illusion...and that it was
  being intelligently handled".


  Mexican wave


  More recently during the eclipse of 1991, video photographers all over
  Mexico found that, while attempting to catch the cosmic event on film,
  they had caught something else they could not explain.


  In the days following the eclipse, a wave of videos were sent in to
  the main TV station, showing what appeared to be UFOs in the sky.


  Indeed, these sightings are now claimed to be among the best examples
  of UFOs caught on film.


  [UK 6]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Friday 9 July 1999


  Moon walker dies in bike crash


  Charles Conrad, the third man to walk on the moon, has been killed in
  a motorcycle accident. Mr Conrad, also known as Pete, was commander of
  the Apollo 12 mission in 1969. Along with fellow astronaut Alan Bean,
  he spent seven hours and 45 minutes on the lunar surface collecting
  samples and retrieving parts of an unmanned craft which had landed two
  years earlier.


  He died in hospital on Thursday after crashing on a turn while riding
  with friends.


  The aeronautical engineer, who lived in Huntington Beach near Los
  Angeles, was selected by Nasa as an astronaut in 1962.


  He was the pilot of the Gemini 5 mission in 1965 which set an
  endurance record in orbiting the earth.


  A year later, he commanded Gemini 11, which docked with another craft
  and featured space walks by another pilot.


  Mr Conrad, who joined the US Navy as a pilot after graduating from
  Princeton University, also took part in the first manned Skylab
  mission in 1973.


  During this flight, he established a personal endurance record for
  time in space, with 1,179 hours and 38 minutes.


  After retiring from Nasa and the navy, Conrad worked as chief
  operating officer of American Television and Communications Corp in
  Denver and later for McDonnell Douglas Corporation, the aviation
  manufacturer.


  In 1995, he formed his own company called Universal Space Lines and
  several sister companies with the goal of commercialising space.


  [UK 7]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Friday 11th June 1999


  By Internet Correspondent Chris Nuttall


  Webcam nets Nessie?


  Has Nessie been netted at last, caught in the World Wide Web? People
  come from all over the world to Scotland to try to spot the Loch Ness
  Monster, but a Texas couple have now reported a sighting from the
  comfort of their own home. Nora and Mike Jones from Galveston, Texas,
  were watching Loch Ness over the Internet, courtesy of a Web camera
  set up by Scotland Online, when they saw a dark shape on the water.
  They say it could be the legendary monster.


  They captured the image, one of two sightings they claim, using the
  Webcam.


  'Hump like a whale'


  "We saw a head and neck appear in front of the castle and it was
  travelling fairly fast, with a v- shaped wake behind it. We watched
  till she swam off screen," Nora told Scotland Online about the first
  sighting on 5 June.


  "Then on 7 June we followed a wave from the hedges near the coastguard
  station all the way out to the end of the cove. A large white hump
  surfaced like a whale. I saw what I saw with my own two eyes and it is
  real."


  The Website says this fits in with previous sightings occurring during
  the longer days of June. The monster may be confused by the length of
  daylight and emerges in the evening when it can still be spotted.


  Scotland Online would like to think it has a world first.


  "We have a expert in our office who comes from Drumnadrochit, on the
  shores of the loch. He says no one would moor their boat that far out,
  so it looks like humps.


  "Most sightings do look that way but Nora Jones is certainly
  convinced," Alan Matheson, Scotland Online Editor, told the BBC.


  The Web camera automatically pans across the loch taking a picture
  every second and zooming in at certain points. Visitors to the Website
  can capture a particular image and save it on their own computers.


  The site also lets you send a Loch Ness Monster e-mail postcard, buy a
  book on the legend and study the X-files-like Ness Files. But the
  camera is the most popular feature with visitors from as far afield as
  the US, Australia and the Far East.


  Mr Matheson said: "One of Scotland's finest castles, Urquhart castle,
  is there if people get a bit bored looking for Nessie. There's endless
  amounts of boat traffic. I don't know if locals are just trying to get
  themselves on camera or not, but there seems to be a lot of activity
  there."


  "We've only been up and live for about 10 days and we're really
  pleased with the response so far."


  [UK 8]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Tuesday 11th May 1999


  Apollo veteran calls for new vision


  Space hero Buzz Aldrin has attacked the modern world for losing the
  vision and excitement that inspired the Moon landings.  Speaking in
  London, he said the generation that witnessed the Apollo missions and
  thrilled to space travel was now afflicted by apathy and had retreated
  into "risk-free societies".


  Aldrin, the second astronaut to set foot on the Moon, made his remarks
  at a conference on space tourism. He said it saddened him that the
  enthusiasm for exploring new worlds had waned.


  The 69-year-old Apollo veteran said he hoped the situation could be
  reversed. "I believe that a whole species must have the humility to
  nurture the Earth and the pride to go to Mars," he said.


  Dreams of humanity


  Aldrin, who followed Neil Armstrong on to the Moon in July 1969, is
  now involved in Starcraft Enterprises, which seeks to promote space
  tourism.


  He said: "I believe that accepting the challenges of space exploration
  will lead to the most prolonged period of socio-economic health the
  world has seen."


  Recalling his historic Apollo XI mission, he added: "For mankind, it
  was a giant leap. We were privileged to represent the hopes and dreams
  of humanity.


  "It was not the rocks we brought back, or what we said - it was the
  impact on the lives of millions of people around the world who
  witnessed it that made the difference."


  Shares in space


  Aldrin believes space tourism will rekindle the passion of the 60s and
  early 70s, allowing ordinary citizens the chance to follow in the
  footsteps of the Apollo pioneers.


  Although the cost of sending civilians into orbit would be expensive,
  Aldrin said his sharespace project would widen the opportunities open
  to people by operating a lottery.


  "A person could purchase a share in the future of space and that share
  would entitle the individual to enter a draw from which a pool of
  people would be selected to fly in space."


  Aldrin looked forward to the next generation of space rockets which he
  said would carry between 80 and 100 people, making space flights
  economically viable.


  Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin logged over 288 hours in space.


  [UK 9]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Monday 2nd August 1999


  Brits hit Mars


  A British spacecraft looking for alien life seems set to land on Mars
  in 2003, after the UK Science Minister pledged 35 million of
  additional funding. Science Minister, Lord Sainsbury: "It will land on
  Christmas Day 2003"


  Beagle Two aims to travel to Mars aboard the European Space Agency's
  Mars Express mission. When Mars Express enters the red planet's orbit,
  Beagle Two will be released and descend to the surface.


  There it will send out a "mole" to gather samples of rock, soil and
  gas wh ich will be examined by equipment on Beagle Two for chemical
  traces of life.


  Evidence that life once existed on Mars has come from Martian
  meteorites found on Earth, but is not regarded as proof.


  325 million mission


  UK Science Minister, Lord Sainsbury, told the BBC that the government
  would provide 35 million towards the estimated 325 million cost of the
  mission.


  He said that the Beagle Two team had already arranged 313m of funding
  from industrial and other sponsors, as well as 33m from the Particle
  Physics and Astronomy R esearch Council. The Beagle Two team is led by
  Professor Colin Pillinger at the Open Univer sity. He would not
  confirm to News Online that 313m of sponsorship had been raised but
  said the team have until October to convince ESA that they can raise
  the rest of the money.


  Speaking to News Online, a spokesperson for the Department of Trade
  and In dustry ruled out any further government funding in the event of
  a shortfall.


  Lord Sainsbury said: "It's exciting science and an enormous
  engineering ch allenge and I think it will be a demonstration of the
  creativity of Britis h scientists in this field."


  He believes that technology for sampling and analysing other planets
  and t hen sending back the data could have commercial potential, if it
  is proved to work by Beagle Two.


  British backing


  Beagle Two will weigh about 60 kilograms (132 pounds) and be the size
  of a microwave oven. It will land using air bags to cushion the
  impact. In addition to the mole and analytical equipment, it will
  carry solar pane ls to provide power and cameras and microscopes.


  Fundraising publicity has emphasised Beagle Two's British origin and
  the spacecraft is likely to carry a Union Jack on its side.


  UK artist Damien Hirst is reported to have provided paintings to
  travel on the spacecraft. These would be used as test cards for the
  cameras. Members of the pop group Blur have also been involved in
  publicity.


  Lord Sainsbury will announce more details of the government's support
  for Beagle Two on Tuesday in London.


  [UK 10]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Thursday 26th August 1999


  ET look-a-likes land in London


  A pair of creatures with staring eyes and long, slender fingers have
  been given a temporary home at London Zoo. Tany and Mamy are aye-ayes,
  and look remarkably like the endearing film alien ET. But they are in
  fact nocturnal primates from the African island of Madagascar.


  They even have a third finger far longer than the others, but rather
  than using it to phone home it is put to a more practical use -
  removing insect larvae from bamboo stems.


  The aye-ayes are on "breeding loan" from the Durrell Wildlife
  Conservation Trust in Jersey.


  In the wild, they produce only one offspring every two or three years,
  and with the loss of habitat through logging and agriculture, they are
  considered an endangered species.


  Andrea McKenna, senior keeper of the Small Mammal House, said London
  Zoo had not housed any aye-ayes since 1932.


  "They might look meek and mild, but they are well adapted to chomping
  their way through woody vegetation," she said. "As a result, we have
  had to make their enclosure particularly strong."


  [UK 11]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: 31st August 1999


  Woodhenge discovered near Stonehenge


  By Jane O'Brien, BBC West of England correspondent


  British archaeologists have uncovered evidence of what they believe to
  be a huge wooden cousin of Stonehenge, the famous stone circle in
  Wiltshire, UK. The site has revealed human remains, suggesting a link
  with burials The discovery of deep holes thought to have supported
  large oak poles came near another stone circle at Avebury, just 20
  miles from Stonehenge.


  Archaeologist Michael Pitts told the BBC: "There are big implications
  for Stonehenge. If there were lots of timber structures like, or even
  bigger than, Stonehenge around at the same time, then Stonehenge is no
  longer something weird or unique. It becomes part of the religious
  scenery of the time."


  The team uncovered the foundations of the timber structure at
  Avebury's Sanctuary. There were two concentric stone circles here
  which were destroyed in the 18th Century.


  In the centre of where these would have been, giant post holes have
  been found. They are up to six feet deep and could have supported
  wooden pillars up to 17ft high. Six to eight rings appear to have
  existed.


  One theory is that they were supports for a ritual building but they
  are much thicker and closer together than would have been needed to
  hold up a roof. The archaeologists believe they are more likely to
  have formed a free-standing "woodhenge".


  They think there may have been nearly 40 similar wooden structures in
  the ancient kingdom of Wessex - some of them much bigger.


  The Avebury Sanctuary stone circle was last excavated in 1930.


  The National Trust, which manages the site, says the new information
  could be used to create a reconstruction which would help people
  understand what Avebury looked like 4,500 years ago.


  -[continued in part 3]-






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                Issue 103 - Pt3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ukufonw@FREENETNAME.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 18:23:58 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:23:32 -0500
Subject: Issue 103 - Pt3 - United Kingdom UFO Network

          ______ _______ ______
  ------ /  /  //  ____//     /---------------------------------------
   U K  /  /  //  ___/ /  /  /                      18th November 1999
       /  /  //  /    /  /  /  N E T W O R K   Part 3 of 3 - Issue 103
  --- (_____//__/    (_____/------------------------------------------


  The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with
  subscribers in 58 countries.


  This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail:
  ufo@ukufonw.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted
  to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g.
  Repost {103} part 1, part 2 etc.


  e-mail us: ufo@ukufonw.co.uk
  fax us: (44) 0870 0883592
  web site: www.ukufonw.co.uk


  World News
  ----------


  [W 1]******


  Source: MSN News


  By Alan Boyle


  Lonnie Owens and Jim Suttle say religious issues should be considered
  when discussing UFOs.


  Pastors keep the faith in UFO capital


  Clergy highlight a Christian view of Roswells alien craze


  Even as thousands of UFO fans gathered to recall the Roswell Incident,
  church leaders organized a conference exploring Christian perspectives
  on UFO phenomena.


  Satan and his forces are using the UFOs to lead people astray, says
  Jim Suttle, pastor of Calvary Chapel of Roswell.


  Some scholars have drawn parallels between UFO phenomena and biblical
  even thoss such as the visions of the prophet Ezekiel or the dramatic
  conversion of St. Paul on the road to Damascus.


  But Suttle says it would be a mistake to reinterpret the Bible in
  ufological terms.


  In any case, Suttle notes that the Roswell UFO Incident is of more
  concern to outsiders than to his own flock.


  The July conference, titled Alien Encounter, was presented with the
  support of Koinonia House, an Idaho-based Christian research center.
  Working along with Suttle to organize the Roswell event was Lonnie
  Owens, the associate pastor of Christs Church in Roswell.


  Owens expresses his distress over outer-space worshippers, such as the
  39 Heavens Gate believers who ended their lives in hopes of entering a
  spaceship following in the wake of Comet Hale-Bopp.


  [W 2]******


  Source: BBC News
  Publish Date: Friday 9 July 1999


  Doomsday cult under guard


  Mexican police have placed 150 members of a doomsday cult under
  constant guard in order to prevent them committing suicide. The cult,
  known as Spiritual Prayer, is based in the central Mexican state of
  Michoacan.


  Police were alerted to the possibility of a mass suicide last month,
  after cult members were told to sell their belongings in order to
  prepare for the end of the world.


  The instruction apparently came from the group's leader, Francisco de
  la Cruz, who has now disappeared.


  Meanwhile, in northern Colombia, police are continuing their search
  for around 60 members of another doomsday cult.


  The Stella Maris Gnostic Church members have disappeared into the
  mountains of the Sierra Nevada in the apparent belief that they had a
  rendezvous with a spaceship.


  The cult members were hoping the UFO would save them from "the end of
  the world", according to a relative.


  Nothing has been heard of them since the weekend.


  [W 3]******


  Source: MSN News


  The battle over Roswell alien turf.


  Hub Corn boosts his farm as crash site amid rival claims.


  By Alan Boyle


  Hub Corn owns a farm 35 miles north of Roswell that some claim was the
  site of a flying-saucer crash in 1947. That claim has come under
  dispute, however: Even the descendants of those who owned the property
  at the time of the Roswell UFO incident say they have no evidence that
  any alien anomaly or military cover-up operation took place there.



  IN FACT, CORNs own search of the site has produced little proof of a
  flying-saucer crash. With the backing of some ufologists, the
  International UFO Museum and Research Center favors a different area,
  55 miles west of Roswell, as the authentic site of the saucer crash.
  And it has an affidavit from purported witness Jim Ragsdale to back up
  its view. (Ragsdale, who died in 1995, initially supported Corns
  claims.)


  Despite the setbacks, Corn sticks by his story and has struck deals
  with promoters and media types anxious for tours of the site. Corn
  says he relies on the conclusions of researchers who believe the ranch
  he bought in 1986 was indeed a UFO crash site.


  And Corn says he has seen strange lights hovering above the property.



  But the farmer reports that strange visitors do not always arrive by
  flying saucer. Some use an automobile.


  [W 4]******


  Source: The Canton, Ohio, Repository newspaper
  Publish Date: 17th August 1999


  By A.J. RENNER Repository staff writer


  Peggy Bryant was out for a walk when she noticed something strange in
  the sky Monday morning.


  "It was unreal -- I've never seen anything like it," said the Perry
  Township resident, who was walking near Miles Avenue. "It looked like
  little balls of light in the sky. ... They were flourescent yellow and
  they glowed, but there were some white ones, pure white. ... it was
  like stars in the daylight."


  Not sure whether she was hallucinating, Mrs. Bryant hastily called a
  neighbor who was out walking with her children. According to the
  neighbor, it was no hallucination.


  "I can't even describe it. It reminded me of a ghost -- it was kind of
  wiggly," Lisa Pileggi said. "It just looked like a ball of light. You
  know when it's really hot, and you look at a street, and there's sort
  of a glare, and it wiggles?"


  Mrs. Pileggi said that most of the lights were round, but one was
  triangular.


  Interviewed separately, both women said the lights, which held a
  definite shape, drifted back and forth, up and down.


  "It was almost like they were dancing around in the sky," Mrs. Pileggi
  said.


  Both women said the lights could not have been balloons.


  The lights appeared to be forming constellations, Mrs. Bryant said.
  She watched them from 11 a.m. to noon, then "they just faded away,"
  she said.


  At least two other people, a mailman and the driver of a pickup truck,
  said they saw the lights, according to Mrs. Bryant. There was no
  record of any unusual activity across the county, however, and by 3:30
  p.m., nobody had called either the Perry Township Police or the Stark
  County Sheriff's Department to report the lights.


  The National Weather Service in Cleveland said neither its radar nor
  its satellites picked up anything unusual.


  Akron-Canton Regional Airport personnel said that the only unusual
  activity at all during the day was a C-130, a military cargo plane,
  practicing landings at the airport, and a Highway Patrol plane flying
  near Canal Fulton.


  Neither of the women used the term UFO, but Paul Rozich, a member of a
  UFO study group, said that the incident bears investigation. "What's
  interesting is the triangular shape; that gives it some credence,"
  said Rozich.


  Rozich, who teaches an adult education course at Alliance High School
  on UFOs and alien abduction phenomena, explained that there have been
  reports of triangular shapes in the sky above Arizona, Montana,
  Illinois and Indiana recently.


  "What they've seen is definitely worth investigating," he said.


  [W 5]******


  Source: Newsworld Online
  Publish Date: Sunday 29th August 1999


  Ontario town worried about U.S. military flights


  ESPANOLA, ONTARIO - Residents of a small town west of Sudbury, Ontario
  are anxious. They think they're getting sick, and they think they know
  why.


  It involves the U.S. military, the government and strange planes
  overhead.


  Tempers at the Espanola town council run high. Residents want to know
  what's flying over their community. Shelly Jordan thinks strange
  planes might be making her kids sick. "I was concerned to see if this
  had anything to do with it, because I've heard of other things that
  are going on with children. I'm just wondering what the ratio is? If
  my daughter is one in 60,000 with her condition? All these other
  things that are happening to kids in this little area. If there are
  more I'd like to hear from them."


  In fact, many in the community have reported respiratory problems and
  strange aches and pains. Town council heard that some believe military
  jets are dropping material over the town as part of a weather
  experiment.


  It isn't just a couple of people who think that. More than two 200
  have signed a petition. Ben McNenly has seen the planes and he thinks
  they're American KC-135s.


  McNenly has led the charge to find out what's going on. "I really
  think our mayor and our council should get behind us and demand some
  answers and some accountability from Ottawa. Because if they don't
  know what's going on, they should sure find out about it. And if they
  do know what's going on, they should put a stop to it."


  The U.S. Air Force has already said it's not flying any planes over
  the town. The local member of Parliament is waiting to hear from the
  Canadian military. And, Espanola town council is  discussing what to
  do next.


  Letters
  -------


  From: "roy1" <roy1@newscientist.net
  Subject: Why so many of the same type of alien abductions


  As a science student I am interested in the reports of alien
  abduction, visits to our planet etc. I would like to know if anyone
  has any theorys on space travel i.e how the aliens travel such vast
  distances. Why ? and if all the abductee cases are true, why would a
  technically advanced race have to repeat the same investigations on
  people, so many times. That is also true of cattle mutilations why so
  many of the same surely a dozen or so would surfice.


  ---


  Dear Friend,


  My name is Brian Kuhn. I am the Producer of "The Paul Garson Show" at
  CyberRadio. We are searching for qualified correspondents to help us
  cover the world.


  CyberRadio Broadcasts live TV-radio programs, globally, over the
  Internet. The Paul Garson Show considers paranormal activity, lost
  civilizations, conspiracies, mysterious creatures, U.F.O's and other
  related phenomenon.


  The Paul Garson show airs Monday through Thursday from 6 p.m. to 8
  p.m. pacific standard time.


  CyberRadio will initiate and pay for telephone communication emanating
  from our Los Angeles studios.


  Again, my name is Brian Kuhn. I am the Producer of the broadcast and
  may be reached at 310-315-4755 x1698  -- or brian@cyberradiotv.com


  ---


  From: "Brian McCalmont" <brian.mccalmont@talk21.com
  Subject: Possible UFO?


  I am sending this e-mail to yourselves as I am unable to identify an
  object I observed at 05:15am Saturday morning past [21st August].


  I live in Warrenpoint Co. Down Northern Ireland  close to the border
  with The Republic of Ireland.


  The object was almost bright Green in colour, "tear drop" shaped, and
  was heading due south just above the cloud base (it was misty at the
  time) It was moving very fast, and at first I thought it was a flare
  (we live beside the sea and a busy port) but I realised that it was
  travelling towards the mountains rather than up in the air. I observed
  the object in the sky for no more than 5 seconds and then it
  disappeared from view behind the Cooley mountains. I also thought it
  may have been a shooting star or a meteor, but that does not explain
  the colour.


  Any ideas?
  Thanks
  Brian McCalmont.


  Meandering thoughts
  -------------------


  By Nesss
  tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk


  Many people have asked a now famous question; Are we being visited by
  beings from other planets? Followed by; what do our governments know
  about the situation? What is rarely asked is; Do the governments of
  the world collaborate on this?


  Well do they? I doubt it. But what if they did??


  At the height of the cold war, it was doubtful that the FBI spoke to
  the CIA or the KGB spoke to the Kremlin, so the likelihood of the
  worlds governments talking to each other over what would appear to be
  a global problem seems almost impossible. But since the cold war has
  been lost by both sides and the Berlin wall crumbled under the
  impressive weight of commercialism, is it possible that the worlds
  governments might now just be talking about these objects asking frank
  questions like; Are they yours?


  The answer could be yes just as often as no. I am damn sure that the
  military of all countries involved spied on the other countries with
  as much vigilance as their neighbours. As I sit here listening to
  "Stairway to heaven, by Far Corporation" I am reminded about this
  ideal world that everyone would like to aspire to, and I ask myself
  why the secrecy?


  Before I try to answer this question I would like to add a few more
  thoughts to the boiling pot. "We" the UFO researchers have abundant
  evidence that we have been visited for thousands of years. There are
  pictograms and tales of fires in the skies from ages now long dead.
  Was the governments of the world in ages long gone so secret? I can't
  believe the "primitive savages" theories when discoveries are
  constantly made by archaeologists that make them ask how did they do
  that?  So just because their technology was different how do we know
  what they knew? Did they have some answers? Did they communicate with
  the visitors? Did they tell their peoples? Or did they keep secrets?
  but to the biggie, if, and that's a big if, we have been visited for
  thousands of years and the sightings have been investigated all this
  time, (poo, poo to modern ufology being a new game,) why do we the
  general public not have any answers? Surely a secret this big must
  have leaked at least some by now? We know that they had the means to
  investigate then because of the stories of glowing demons and fires in
  the skies. Does not Egypt boast the oldest written language? All seven
  thousand years of it. In these writings we have communications from
  ages past that reveal deities that walked on air, gods that had
  chariots that flew through the sky. Makes you wonder doesn't it.


  Secrecy, the need for it?


  Hold on before we go any further, how come when all the governments of
  the world can never agree on anything do they _all_ deny the knowledge
  of UFO's? Hmm, just a thought.  Or is it that the media is restricted
  in what it can print? Are there some countries on this globe that are
  public in their research of the UFO phenomenon? Can we contact them if
  we knew who they where? OK lets assume that the great western
  alliance, that is the rich first world countries, are all in cahoots
  and that the UFO subject is kept under wraps, why? Small question, big
  answer. One answer might be because of the "damage" that it could do
  to the fiscal world. Another could be because of the repercussions in
  the religion industry. Or perhaps Joe Q Public is plain just not ready
  for it. But who decides when he/she is ready for it?


  So back to my starting point,; What if the worlds governments
  communicated over the UFO phenomenon. Can you imagine it, President
  Clinton saying to Tony Blair  I'll tell you all about Roswell if you
  tell me about Rendelsham. Perhaps the king of Norway would chip in,
  well I'll tell you all about the Foo fighters then. I'd give my right
  arm to be a fly on the wall to that meeting!


  The big question is not are we being visited, I believe, I have to say
  believe because I very much doubt that I will ever hold in my hands
  conclusive proof of ET, that we are. As to what our governments know
  about the situation, well you can be damn sure its more than they are
  telling. And the big question, are they communicating over this global
  subject is most probably, NO!


  As I try to bring my meandering thought to some sort of conclusion I
  wonder where I've been and  how I got here, but one thing is certain,
  its been an interesting journey.


  ----------===============******************===============----------


  UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK


  STATEMENT
  UK-UFO-NW statement: The articles or text appearing within these
  pages are not necessarily the views or opinions of United Kingdom UFO
  Network.


  WWW
  Visit us on the World Wide Web at
  www.ukufonw.co.uk


  REPORTS
  Please forward all reports to: ufo@ukufonw.co.uk


  FAX
  You may fax us at any time on telephone number:
  (44) 0870 0883592
  Only users outside of the UK need dial 44 before the rest of the
  number.


  BACK ISSUES
  The last five issues are available from our website. Information on
  how to download all previous issues will be available soon.


  FILES
  To receive information on free files that we can send you via e-mail,
  write to:


  ufo@ukufonw.co.uk


  With 'REQUEST INFO' in the subject line.


  IRC - (INTERNET RELAY CHAT)
  The meetings take place at 11pm (2300hrs) UK time each and every
  Saturday night. Times will vary depending on your location in the
  world. If you would like to know the time in your part of the world
  visit our web site and click on 'World Times'.


  If you are using one of the IRC programs you will find us on the
  Chatnet servers on channel #ufo


  If you would like to connect using your java compatible web browser
  i.e. MS Internet Explorer or Netscape Navigator etc we have just the
  solution.


  Visit our web page and click on the 'Live IRC' button.


  You may get a Security Warning window appear asking if you want to
  install and run "jirc applet". Click on the 'Yes' button. Be patient
  as the program loads.


  Once the login window appears all you need to change by typing over
  what is already there are:


  Nick Name
  &
  Real Name


  Clicking on the 'Connect Now!' button will take you straight to
  uk.ufo.nw 24 hours a day irc chat channel.


  Down the right hand side of the screen you will see yourself
  (nickname) and any other people on the channel. The main window on the
  left is where the conversation text appears. The window at the bottom
  is where you type what you want to say, remembering to press return at
  the end.


  Give it a go. It is very easy, very enjoyable and that is what it's
  all about. You will be made most welcome on the channel.


  SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION
  The UK.UFO.NW free occasional e-zine covering UFO reports and
  information from the UK and around the world is available by
  subscribing to our List Server.


  Send mail to:


  listserv@sjuvm.stjohns.edu


  In the main body of the mail put:


  subscribe ufo fn ln


  note: in place of fn put your first name.
        in place of ln put your last name.


  For example:


  subscribe ufo John Smith


  A confirm mail will then be sent to you which you need to reply to
  within 48 hours to be put on the e-zine mailing list.


  If you have problems you may also subscribe by sending mail to:


  ufo@ukufonw.co.uk


  In the subject section of your mail type: SUBSCRIBE


  That's it - see you next time!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Marty Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 13:43:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:28:45 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 12:38:32 -0500
 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>From: Marty Murray <bubastis@warplink.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 14:14:37 -0500

 >>No one here has yet mentioned that travelling faster than the
 >>speed of light may not be necessary for interstellar travel. It
 >>may be possible to "bend space" using enormous gravitational
 >>forces, so that you are able to "leap" from one point to another
 >>when space snaps back to its original shape, sort of like an
 >>elastic band. I understand that this is theoretically possible.

 >Actually, this was sort of what I had in mind when I mentioned
 >exploring the universe without technology.  I believe this was
 >how the Third Stage Guild Navigators were able to traverse space
 >with the help of the spice melange in the book "Dune", et.al.
 >(Didn't the spice remind you of Lebanese Hashish?)

Howdy Terry!

Yes, you're absolutely right. I read several of the "Dune" books
in college, and saw the movie, which was flawed but had its
moments. I think there definitely was a drug connection in
Herbert's writing!

Art, and science-fiction, often imitate or predict reality,
and since it's obvious, to me at least, that unknown craft are
coming to this world from "somewhere," then it follows that
interstellar space travel is neither impossible nor as difficult
as science presently thinks it is. A technology that has the
ability to "bend space" may be able to create shortcuts in
getting from one point to another.

The "elastic band" theory was one I saw explained by Robert
Lazar. I know he's a controversial figure, so you can put as
much faith as you like in his statement that this is how the
craft travel. However, having said that, I understand that this
theory is feasible, and I've seen video evidence of UFOs in
flight that seems to back it up.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:06:53 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:38:06 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:35:46 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 17:01:09 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >>Incidentally, relativity theory never has said that
 >>slower-than-light interstellar travel was impossible, as some
 >>debunker's claim.

 >Talk about your truisms!

Obviously you don't understand what I'm talking about.  Many
SETI people, e.g., argue that aliens would never come here
because the distances are too vast. To reduce the travel times
requires speeds some significant fraction that of light (say 10
to 30%), which requires vast expenditures of energy.  Thus the
argument, I have frequently heard, that UFOs couldn't exist,
because interstellar travel is impossible -- not extremely
difficult -- simply impossible.  E.g., physics profressor
Lawrence Krauss, in his debate with Stanton Friedman, took that
position.  Kent Jeffrey, in his Roswell debunking debate with
Kevin Randle on Nightline 2 years ago, also took that position.

 >Relativity has always insinuated that
 >any form of interstellar travel would necessarily be subluminal
 >by definition, unless you wanted to become a photon in the process.

No, that's not the point.  The claim is that relativity theory
makes interstellar travel impossible, not because it is
subluminal (sheesh!), but because of the distances and energies
involved.

However, NASA doesn't necessarily agree.  E.g., NASA director
Dan Goldin has proposed a small interstellar probe to Alpha
Centauri, perhaps 40 years from now, powered by large space
lasers aimed at a large sail attached to the probe, and which
could possibly slowly accelerate the probe to 10% light speed.

An article on several proposed interstellar propulsion schemes
appeared recently in Popular Science

(http://www.popularscience.com/context/features/startravel/).

 >But let's talk about interstellar travel at 99% the speed of light.

Why does it have to be 99% of the speed of light?  Most schemes
call for 10 - 30%.  At 10%, a trip to Alpha Centauri takes 50
years.  Journeys between nearby stars on the orders of decades
are certainly managable.

 >How you gonna turn?

Why do you need to turn when going between Star A and Star B --
to visit the next McDonalds?

As you approach your destination, you slow down to more
conventional speeds so that you can explore.

 >And what happens when you run headon into a grain of dust
 >at such speeds, never mind a rock the size of your fist?

Certainly a legitimate practical question, also faced BTW by
other space vehicles.  Near earth orbit, e.g., is far, far
dirtier than interstellar space, which is about as perfect a
vacuum as you are going to get (only about 1 hydrogen atom on
average per cubic centimeter).  How many disastrous dust
collisions have happened so far in tens of thousands of hours of
operation of Mir and space shuttles in dirty near earth orbit?
How many rocks have they run into?  I'm not saying that this
can't happen, just that it isn't that common to run into
anything sizable out in space, particularly in the interstellar
void.

As I remember, one of the Voyager spacecraft was deliberately
sent through the rings of Saturn and emerged unscathed at 70,000
mph.  Interstellar space is far, far cleaner than that.  Odds
are you could fly from here to Alpha Centauri without ever
encountering a dust particle, much less a rock.

Running into a microgram dust particle at 10% light speed would
be like running into a stick of dynamite.  One possible solution
would be to use passive shielding, like that being proposed for
the international space station to protect it from orbiting
space debris.  It would be several perimeters of material like
Kevlar to catch and diffuse any collisions, sort of like a giant
bulletproof vest around the space station.  Something like that
might possibly work for very small material for a starship.

Another possible way to deal with the problem would be active
shielding of some kind, say powerful forward lasers or
microwaves which either directly sweep small material out of the
way, or break it up and ionize it so that it can be steered
around the sides with electromagnetic fields.  This, however,
would require a continuous small propulsion to counter the
braking effect of the active shielding.

 >And how you gonna apply the brakes, anyway?

You decelerate the same way you accelerated to begin with.  Am I
going to fast for you?

 >A pretty picture not, I think.

That's because you're doing your usual mostly pointless stirring
of the pot.

<snip>

  >In any case, interstellar travel and galactic colonization by
  >older, more advanced space races, would indeed seriously change
  >any estimates made by the Drake equation of the number of
  >civilizations out there. With colonization, they could
  >conceivably number in the millions or billions.

  >David Rudiak


 >Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
 >materialized could equally well number in the millions and
 >billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.

What gobblydegook!  The law of large numbers says that even very
improbable events can happen given sufficient trials, such as
someone winning the lottery even if the odds are 10 million to 1
against.  What the hell are you arguing anyway -- that because
there are ten million times more losers there can never be any
winners?

Probability theory also says that the probability of something
happening depends on the number of ways it can happen.  Even
extremely rare events usually have more than one way they can
happen.  Different lottery winners, e.g., don't need to scratch
off the same numbers or buy tickets at the same liquor store.

Even though it is very improbable for intelligent life to evolve
in any given star system, the bet among most scientists is that
the odds are not so small that it won't happen elsewhere in our
galaxy, given the hundreds of billions of stars out there.

David Rudiak









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                 Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:47:05 -0500
Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


Hi All,

Well, some of our American brothers and sisters have reached an
all time low. The possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate"
cult members was -auctioned off- in California today. It was
done in the face of vehement protest from the surviving family
members who tried in vain to legally prevent the ghoulish sale
from happening.

Several of the 'buyers' were interviewed by the media. "I'm
gonna put some of those bunk beds up for auction on the
Internet" drooled one, "These things are going to be worth a lot
of money one day" cooed another.

Not once during the entire thing was mention made of the tragic
and senseless loss of human life that had facilitated this
economic boon for those who attended. It made me ashamed to
belong to the same species as those greedy, money grubbing
opportunists.

Shame on them. Shame on all of us for allowing it and not bowing
to the wishes of the bereaved families for dignity and privacy.
Today, we all reached a new low.

I hope that "one day" Art Bell, Courtney Brown, and others are
called upon to answer for their contribution to the circus
atmosphere surrounding a spectacular (but purely "astronomical")
event.

Let's -all- hang our heads in collective shame.

John Velez

________________________________________________
                         AIC - Abduction Information Center -
                        www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm
                                    jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

              Re: Krapf & 'The Contact Has Begun' - Predictions

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 00:44:21 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:45:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Krapf & 'The Contact Has Begun' - Predictions


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Krapf & 'The Contact Has Begun' - Predictions
 >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 06:35:35 GMT

<snip>

Krapf says in regards to his book:

 >"And third, the mystery of the cattle mutilations that have been
 >taking place in the Southwest for the last 30 years or so will
 >finally be cleared up. It's going to come as a great surprise to
 >many people to learn that this phenomenon has strictly human
 >roots. Aliens have not been responsible. There may or may not be
 >arrests, but it will be categorically and undeniably established
 >that the mutilations have been the handiwork of a small band of
 >social misfits."

Personally, I have no problem with the idea that cattle
mutilations have a purely human explanation.  But I'd be very
surprised to learn that they're the result of "a small band of
social misfits."  This sounds very much like the mainstream
press' eager acceptance of those two English guys who claimed
that they were responsible for crop circles--_all_ of them!

Of course, this prediction has yet to come true, but I don't
think it would take much for a moronic, facile "explanation" to
be swallowed whole by the media--especially if mutilations have
some link with black-ops biological research.  "Misfits" would
make an excellent cover indeed, if handled right.

--Mac Tonnies








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

              UFOs and Nanotechnology [was: The Drake Equation]

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 00:35:12 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:43:50 -0500
Subject: UFOs and Nanotechnology [was: The Drake Equation]


 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 19:54:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 ><snip>

 >>Those of you who have read K. Eric Drexler's seminal "Engines of
 >>Creation" may recall the references to spacecraft manufacture in
 >>the not-so-distant future, when incredibly light materials with
 >>wonderfully resilient properties (Roswell "foil"?) are
 >>manufactured molecule by molecule in computer-controlled vats.

 ><snip>

 >>My attitude is that _if_ UFOs represent a physical
 >>extraterrestrial presence on our planet, then the aliens are
 >>most definitely using nanotechnology, in some form or another.

 ><snip>

 >Hi Mac.

 >Since 1986 when Eric Drexler wrote this, high torque, variable
 >speed and reversible molecular motors (complete with
 >identifiable rotors, stators, bearings, etc.) that run on
 >electricity have been discovered here on Earth - within living
 >cells!

 >This unexpected finding, which points to an Intelligent
 >Designer, is something man is still trying to achieve.  Now even
 >smaller molecular motors (which a Japanese team of scientists
 >were going to use to make "moving toys") have been identified in
 >the form of the enzyme that spins to crank out ATP, the energy
 >source of life.  Such an ATP producing motor (which must
 >automatically change "gears" when carring heavier loads), was
 >proposed by Paul Boyer 20 years ago but fellow scientists were
 >skeptical that such motors really existed since "nature isn't
 >that smart to make these incredible motors through chance
 >alone".

 >Well, Boyer's motors were confirmed by John Walker who imaged
 >them.  Both Boyer and Walker shared the 1997 Nobel Prize for
 >Chemistry for this amazing discovery.  Since cells could not
 >live and reproduce (and hopefully evolve too) without these
 >motors, it raises the question "Who created these motors?".

 >While we look up to the sky for evidence of E.T. life, maybe we
 >should be looking for it within us too.  If UFOs can range in
 >size from a few centimeters to as large as a few kilometers (as
 >in a few reported cases), why can't some also be as small as a
 >few nanometers?  Could nano-UFOs have already colonized us?  ;o)

 >Nick Balaskas

Hi, Nick.

This is the sort of speculation I find especially intriguing,
especially as nanotech becomes a more and more practical venture
for us humans.  Chances are, when we start sending missions to
other stars, the ships we send will look _nothing_ like the
specimens we see on the covers of science-fiction books.  There
is no reason they couldn't be incredibly lightweight, with their
computational faculties woven into their very "fabric" at the
molecular level.  (The metallic stuff harvested from the Roswell
crash might have been a simple form of this: it exhibited
molecular memory.)

One theory I've harbored to explain UFOs and the apparent
intelligence behind them is that we are interacting with an
arbitrarily (but not necessarily incomprehensibly) advanced
mechanical ecology, seeded throughout the universe millions, if
not billions, of years ago by an alien race intent on ushering
emerging civilizations toward a technological singularity. This
would explain why UFOs are seen--and sometimes by many
people--when it seems to me the would be able to hide themselves
entirely.  At the same time, it offers a clue why no overt
contact has ever been made on a national or global scale: open
contact could be disasterous for the lesser civilization, and
could rob it of the intellectual gusto to keep ascending the
technological ladder (it would be a bummer to have to reinvent
the wheel, after all).

(This scheme has the added advantage of explaining the
"impossible" nanomachines you mention, since they need have only
been invented once, and then introduced to Earth in the distant
past; similar ideas aren't hard to find.)

I wonder how far we have to come before we're considered worthy
enough to meet "the aliens," who may well be the architects of
our mythologies.  Maybe never.  Maybe "contact" isn't the point,
but something of a culturally implanted notion to keep us
occupied with someone else's cosmic agenda...

Mac Tonnies

P.S.  Is the John Walker you mention the same as the one
involved with cellular automata?  Could be our universe is
someone else's "screen saver."








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 21

                 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Michael

From: EBK
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 17:19:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 17:19:06 -0500
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' Tonight - Michael

Tonight on 'Strange Days... Indeed'

   ----------------------
  /// Michael Lindemann
-----------------------

Our guest tonight Michael Lindemann, 50, is an internationally
known futurist, journalist and UFO researcher currently residing
in Fort Collins, Colorado.

He is author of the book 'UFOs and the Alien Presence: Six
Viewpoints' (1991; revised edition 1997) and is the editor and
publisher of two online journals: CNI News, reporting the latest
in UFO research and the scientific quest for life in the
universe; and Global Situation Report, covering events and
trends that will shape the new millennium.

He is also working on a new book called 'Contact Scenario:
Meeting the Challenges of Extraterrestrial Life'.

Michael Lindemann has been a featured speaker at scores of major
UFO conferences across the U.S. and abroad, and is a frequent
guest on radio and television. He has a passionate side interest
in the planet Mars and hopes to visit the moon as a tourist,
preferably with his wife Deborah, a professional hypnotherapist.

Join Michael Lindemann, 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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                      Book Review: 'Captured by Aliens'

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 13:11:41 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 02:36:17 -0500
Subject: Book Review: 'Captured by Aliens'


Greetings list -

From: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/entertainment/html98/capt_19991121.html

Book review
Invasion of alien matters
by David Williams
Special to The Seattle Times

Judging from Washington Post reporter Joel Achenbach's humorous
and insightful new book, the crux of the UFO movement and its
related disciplines is whether you are a skeptic or a believer.
For example, is the government covering up the fact that aliens
landed at Roswell, N.M., in July 1947, or was the mysterious
object in the sky above Roswell merely "an innocuous military
balloon?" Or, given the fact that the universe consists of
hundreds of billions of potentially inhabitable planets, are
there other planets with intelligent life... or is Earth the
freak of the universe by having thinking beings?

Achenbach spent a couple of years exploring every conceivable
niche of alien science and science fiction. He traveled to
various UFO congresses and conventions, interviewing people who
claimed they had been abducted, had seen aliens, and/or believed
that aliens already inhabited Earth. He even allowed himself to
be hypnotized as a way to ferret out his past alien encounters.
It was a failure.

Some of the abduction stories may sound incredulous, and
Achenbach does not mince words when he thinks people are a
little bit off in their views. But he also writes: "Only in a
few isolated cases did I ever feel that in talking to a UFO
believer I was in the presence of a crazy person. Most of them
are merely wrong." His discussion of the believers is fair and
entertaining.

Over half of the book is devoted to the more scientific side of
extraterrestrials and space travel. Carl Sagan is the standard
bearer for this group, known as exobiologists, and is featured
prominently by Achenbach. Sagan did not believe in "little green
men," but actively promoted the idea that alien life was out
there for us to find. Achenbach also investigates Mars meteorite
ALH84001 and its hints of Martian life; whether we will
construct a spacecraft with the ability to leave our solar
system any time in the near future; and whether Homo sapiens is
a unique life form.

Achenbach comes across as an open-minded skeptic with a healthy
sense of humor about the UFO movement. He writes: "The most
serious failure of UFO stories is that they aren't really that
interesting. The aliens rarely have anything novel to say.
They're a bunch of motivational speakers, urging humans to make
something better of themselves."

In the end, Achenbach concludes that "The alien question is
bottomless for today, and probably for years to come. There's no
firm ground here." This in part is what makes the topic so
compelling; it is hard to be absolutely wrong on most aspects of
the alien question, so we all can participate and believe what
we want.

One final point. The Puget Sound region figures prominently in
the alien believer world, for this is the birthplace of the UFO
movement. On June 24, 1947, amateur pilot Kenneth Arnold
reported seeing nine mysterious flying objects cruising in the
sky near Mount Rainier. His description of the discs moving
"like a saucer skipping across water" prompted reporters to coin
the term "flying saucers." Unfortunately for us, the world
learned about Roswell and its "actual" landing of a UFO only two
weeks later, and we lost our rightful place as an important spot
for strange encounters with alien beings.


'Captured by Aliens'
by Joel Achenbach
Simon & Schuster, $25

Copyright � 1999 The Seattle Times Company

---

Quite laughable to say that this guy has managed to explore
"every conceivable niche of alien science and science fiction"
in only "a couple of years."

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 18:20:56 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:02:57 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 03:33:18 -0600
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >
 >>>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >>>life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >>>more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >>>Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

 >>Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
 >>have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
 >>that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
 >>than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

 >>If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
 >>nets?

 >>>and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >>>more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >>>Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >>>had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >>>by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >>>understand.

 >>Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.

 >Oh c'mon Mr. Rimmer. The evidence for the intelligence of these
 >animals is so common as to defy the need for citation. Oh -- not
 >as high as *yours* certainly -- but high enough. Tool using,
 >language possessing -- why, some apes can even learn sign
 >language. We don't yet really KNOW what dolphins can do. They
 >may not act in the indefensibly arrogant way that some of US do,
 >but their intelligence is very high indeed -- high enough not to
 >have to depend on "New Age sentimentality," for its
 >manifestation, at any rate. Finally -- it becomes obvious that
 >the expression "Evidence, please" has become the refuge of
 >scoundrels, misdirectors, and scalawags, and that MANY times,
 >the proponent of that expression is not interested in "evidence"
 >at all. There are clever critters all OVER this planet, sir. It
 >argues for their existence elsewhere.

So, "evidence" is the cry of scoundrels. Well that get you out
of having to provide any, doesn't it? The original point of this
argument however is that this world could be packed as full of
intelligent life forms as the bar in a science fiction film, it
does not mean that any other planet has any critters, clever or
otherwise. They may well do so, but we just don't know. There is
no evidence - oops, sorry, I forgot, "evidence" is a dirty word
- so any discussion about non-terrestrail lifeforms is pure
speculation. That's no reason why some of it can't be
intelligent, if rather arid, speculation, but a simple
proclamation that the existence of life on Earth argues for its
existence elsewhere is not even that.

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:20:00 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:28:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 03:50:40 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:18:35 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

 >>From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 09:24:49 EST
 >>Subject: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net<

 >>The number of times I have personally investigated FT sightings
 >>and an easy solution has been found (stars/planets, aircraft
 >>lights are the favourites) beggars belief.

Tony, Tim, onlookers:

I'll have to agree with Tim, here.  My experience has been the
same.

 >Given the amount of sightings of FTs hovering over nuclear power
 >stations on the east coast, do you believe these are stars,
 >planes, or aircraft? If you do believe these are aircraft what
 >purpose do you think they have hovering 100-200 feet above a
 >nuclear power station?

If 30 % of IFOs turn out to be astronomical objects, and 25% or
more are aircraft, and 10% are satellites then one could assume
that 65% of all sightings around nuclear plants are also these
kinds of IFOs. How many sightings are around nuclear plants?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:25:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:33:23 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 18:13:08 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:59:27 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dear Georgina

 >>And my argument remains that I have thoroughly investigated many
 >>cases, and not all of them in the space of one year (that was
 >>just an example).

 >But originally you did claim to have -thoroughly_ investigated
 >hundreds of cases [in your short life span] including over a
 >hundred in one year. I was merely questioning what you yourself
 >had previously stated.

I don't *claim* to have thoroughly investigated hundreds of
cases, oh hairsplitting one, I *know* I have.

In one year alone (September 1987- May 1988), I counted 104
seperate reports, 50 percent of which involved visits to
witnesses and locations [source "Fly-by-Night:: UFO Sightings in
South Yorkshire and neighbouring counties", 3 volumes, published
by the Independent UFO Network, 1988, 164 pages].

Only someone with a very shallow acquaintance of the UK UFO
literature would suggest otherwise. Consult, for example, the
back issues of UFO Brigantia, circa 1985-1989, and you will find
yourself eating your words.

One's age has no relationship to one's capability to objectively
investigate. My published record as a thorough and capable
investigator since the early 80s speaks for itself, and is
reflected in the number of books and articles which cite my
archives, fieldwork and publications (see for example
Earthlights Revelation, Devereux , et al 1989); Phenomenon, ed.
Spencer & Evans 1988).

My record and skill in the collection of material recently saw
me safely  through the rigours of a PhD which took nine years to
complete [whilst working full-time as a crime reporter] and was
examined by two leading academics.

In the meantime, what have we got from Georgina?

One case which she has investigated over three years 16 years
after the events, but which no one other than her publisher has
ever seen. Tell me Georgina - what is *your* background, and how
many cases before Rendlesham have you *thoroughly* investigated?

Have you investigated *any* other cases at all?

You claim you are not a ufologist - well what exactly are you
then? And how come you are not prepared to discuss your
wonderful Rendlesham case material and yet expect others to
provide chapter and verse when *you* feel you want *your*
questions answered?

 >>At the end of the day you might find some of your
 >>charming skeptical friends less of the gentlemen you think they
 >>are  when they rip your book apart in print.

 >When they rip it apart? Interesting! You seem to imply that the
 >sceptics have already made up their mind without having any
 >clues to work with. I suppose you are thinking it is just an
 >updated version of what has already been published about the
 >case - but you are wrong David.

People can only make their decisions on the merits or otherwise
of a particular case based upon what is currently known about it,
and what is in the public domain.

Therefore it is perfectly acceptable for skeptics or whoever to
decide at this moment in time that the case is solved, based
upon the *original* testimony of the airmen witnesses which has
been published by James Easton, among others. As of now, that is
all we have to go on.

Until you finally publish what new evidence you claim you have,
then you can hardly expect the world just to take your word for
it, based purely upon a series of titilating little asides you
post on the Internet.

The proof of the pudding - as they say - is in the eating.

And we seem to have waited a long time to taste this particular
pudding!

In addition it was interesting to see that old chestnut the
"radiation traces" rearing their ugly head in the Press this
week as a result of the publicity surrounding claims the MOD
were to release its UFO files.

In the Daily Mail we had Nick Pope writing that "radiation
readings were subsequently taken from the landing site in the
forest and were found to peak in the three indentations where
the craft had touched down."

Subsequently in the Sun (November 16) we had "high levels of
radiation were found where the craft had landed."

Remember my comments on this list viz the creation of myth, with
the Rendlesham radiation readings one good example?

The Oxford English Dictionary (9th Edition) defines *myth* thus:
"...a traditional narrative...involving supernatural or
imaginary persons..." or more appropriately in this particular
case "a widely held but false notion."

Nothing to do with mythology, eh?

 >>As for Ian Ridpath, he feels the whole Rendlesham saga is a load
 >>of old hogwash,

 >Ian was not involved in the incident and based his theories on
 >other peoples theories - who were also not involved. Therefore,
 >it is no wonder he came to that conclusion.

You reveal once again your shallow grasp of UK ufology I'm afraid
Georgina; the result of too much reading "UFOs behind the Iron
curtain" and other such illuminated texts  methinks.

Back in the early 80s I remember another case which had been
pumped up as much as Rendlesham - namely the Cracoe Fell
UFO photo from North Yorkshire, one the believers like to forget,
but which we like to remind them of now and again.

Here, the Yorkshire UFO Society (as it was then) trumpeted this
case as "the best photographic evidence in this country ever of
a UFO" (sound familiar?)

The witnesses were two police officers, who being police
officers (trained observers, etc) could *not* possibly be
mistaken - this was surely the best evidence ever of ET craft.

When ufologists Nigel Mortimer and Andy Roberts visited the
location and found the "UFOs" were simply caused by the sun's
rays reflecting obliquely off a patch of reflective lichen on
the rock face - what happened then?

There were cries of "you have not spoken to the witnesses",
"they could not possibly be mistaken being police officers",
"you have not been involved in the investigation" blah blah
blah.

Very much in the same tradition in which you follow, viz "you
haven't investigated the case, therefore you know nothing about
it, we have loads of witnesses who say this, that and the
other."

But ultimately, YUFOS were forced to eat their proverbial hat
when Andy exactly replicated one of the "UFOs" on film with the
help of a local farmer. Police officers or not - they could not
even see what had been staring them straight in the face.

Couldn't see the wood for the trees - very apt, don't you think?
(By the way, this was one of the several hundred cases I helped
to thoroughly investigate, or perhaps I just imagined it in one
of my nine lives).

So excuse me for being not a little skeptical when I'm told that
Georgina Bruni's book will provide once again " the evidence
that will silence all the critics."

But I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong.

We will see.........








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 18:22:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 08:43:28 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 18:24:08 PST

 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:55:05 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST

 >>>>From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800

 >John:

 >>Jerry, this comment really puzzles me. You seem to again be
 >>implying that there is some actual phenomenon called "a UFO"
 >>which has an existence in and of itself, and is not simply a
 >>misinterpretation of some other phenomena or a psychological
 >>construct.

 >A "misinterpretation of some other phenomena [sic]

(Jerry, will you ever get sic of this obsessive pedantry? Read
it again. You will see the plural makes perfect sense.)

 >or a
 >psychological construct" is an IFO, not a UFO.

So there _is_ something called "a UFO" which is incapable of
being explained as anything othet than "A UFO"

 >For purposes of clarity, I should have said that when the
 >phenomenon, currently unknown or controversial, behind what were
 >called UFOs is established with some approximate degree of
 >certainty, it may be used inappropriately to explain some new
 >unknown, emerging manifestation.

But then the phenomenon become an IFO, and, according to you, is
of no further interest whatsoever. But it's always instructive
to see the way you manage to duck a straight question


--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                               Happy Bird Day

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 08:58:44 -0500
Subject: Happy Bird Day


The Canal Street Ufological Society wants to wish each and every
one of you, a happy Thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving is a mostly American thing.  So for those who are
not American, let me explain this most important of all
holidays.

Thanksgiving was invented many years ago, when the Pigrims had
lunch with the Native Americans, usually referred to at that
time as, "Redskins,"  "Heathens" and "Funny Lookin Dudes."

Now, the Pilgrims came here from England.  These were the Cuban
Boat People of that time.  Period!  So Americans can have
something else to give thanks to God for.  We turned out OK, in
spite of our roots.

Anyway, on Thanksgiving, we get down (although not on our knees,
we Homeys' don't do dat no more) we get down and stuff our faces
with the meat of the stupidest bred bird in the history of
birds.  I mean, you think chickens are stupid?  You should see a
domestic turkey try to trot.  Woof!  This bird is so stupid,
that after you eat the flesh, you get very sleepy.

We also consume lots of sweet potatoes and make them even
sweeter by adding molasses, sugar and marshmellows.  We drink
Gripple Dripple, make fun of UFO researchers and think of new
ways to get off on Dennis.  Sometimes we get a little
inebriatated, when that happens though, we allow for additional
drinks.

See, after stuffing our faces we usually go out to a local pub
and get even more dorked on GrippleMint or GrippleMist, an Afro
dee Ziak.  Three or four guys go in.  One guy stays sober and
the others drink themselves silly.  Then one of the guys
stumbles to his car, makes numerous attempts at getting the key
in the door, falls into the car whilst pushing the horn button.
By this time, the local cops are ready to arrest this guy for
D&D.  But when they give him all the tests, there is not one
hint of Gripple.  His breatholizer is 0.00 and he can walk a
straight line.  Meanwhile, the others get the hell outa there
quick, while the cops are busy.

When they aks him what's the deal here, the perpetrator says,
"I'm the designated decoy.  Happy Thanksgiving Ossifer."

This is Thanksgiving, American style.

Happy Bird Day.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:05:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:17:05 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:06:53 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Why does it have to be 99% of the speed of light?  Most schemes
 >call for 10 - 30%.  At 10%, a trip to Alpha Centauri takes 50
 >years.  Journeys between nearby stars on the orders of decades
 >are certainly managable.

David,

Managable [sic] is probably right. A robot probe, sure, why not?
Now, let's put people in that spaceship of yours. Getting rid of
their wastes obviously wouldn't be any problem, but what are
they going to eat and drink for the fifty years of the flight? A
half-century box of Tang is still a pretty big box. For that
matter, what does a 50-year oxygen supply look like? Even if you
use some sort of recycling process, the longer the duration of
the flight, the larger your ship has to be to accommodate the
necessities of life, including the number of the crew. Are you
gonna send a doctor along? Is he going to take a 50-year supply
of everything from aspirin to X-ray machines? Are you gonna have
gym equipment onboard so the crew don't turn into vegetables?
Etc.?

Pretty soon you're talking a fairly sizeable enterprise, perhaps
several orders of size larger than today's space shuttle.

And what about the crew itself? Who wants to sign up for a
one-way trip of 50 years? If they were 18 when they left Earth
("bye, mom, bye dad!"), they'd be 68 when they arrived in the
vicinity of Alpha Centauri, or in their early 60s at best, given
the 10% of light speed. Not exactly NASA poster boys (or gals),
in any event. Or very agile "explorers," either, for that
matter.

You make this space travel stuff sound like a Sunday walk in
Central Park, as if a theoretical propulsion system were the
only thing that mattered. Fifty years at 10% the speed of light?
No problem! Most managable!

None of the above absolutely rules it out for all time,
obviously, but it doesn't suggest that it's in our immediate
future, either, Popular Science magazine notwithstanding, of
course.

Again, if you'll send me your snail mail address I'll send you a
copy of the Davis article. That's now about the ninth or tenth
time I've asked.

Sorry to have to stir the pot again.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 21:19:19 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:18:52 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:06:53 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >>In any case, interstellar travel and galactic colonization by
 >>older, more advanced space races, would indeed seriously change
 >>any estimates made by the Drake equation of the number of
 >>civilizations out there. With colonization, they could
 >>conceivably number in the millions or billions.

 >>David Rudiak

 >>Just as the odds against their chances of having ever
 >>materialized could equally well number in the millions and
 >>billions. Very Large Numbers work both ways.

 >What gobblydegook!  The law of large numbers says that even very
 >improbable events can happen given sufficient trials, such as
 >someone winning the lottery even if the odds are 10 million to 1
 >against.  What the hell are you arguing anyway -- that because
 >there are ten million times more losers there can never be any
 >winners?

<snip>

 >Even though it is very improbable for intelligent life to evolve
 >in any given star system, the bet among most scientists is that
 >the odds are not so small that it won't happen elsewhere in our
 >galaxy, given the hundreds of billions of stars out there.

 >David Rudiak


David,

You get so prickly about this stuff!

What I'm saying is this. Texas currently has a six-number
lottery. If I remember aright, the odds of winning same are
approximately one in 14 million.

Interestingly, oddly, or ironically, the Drake equation has six
factors, or is it seven. But just for comparison's sake, let's
say one out of every 14 million planets in the universe has the
potential to evolve intelligent life. Since there are
potentially hundreds of billions of planets in the universe, one
in 14 million will also be a very large number, eventually,
which is the basis of the Very Large Number argument.

As it is, any number of weekly lotteries go by without a winner,
so we know that even one in 14 million isn't "good enough" odds,
so to speak, to produce a winner every time. Now imagine a
lottery in which you had to get 12 or 24 numbers (or factors) or
more just right and in just the right (temporal) _sequence_ to
win the lottery. Now what are your odds?

My point was that you can have very large numbers (odds) working
for or against a particular outcome on either side of the
equation.

It shouldn't be such a difficult concept to grasp.

All we know with certainty is that Earth won the lottery. We
can't say with certainty that there are millions or billions of
other lottery winners out there, because we don't know what the
odds of winning are, or what the odds against winning are. Large
numbers themselves aren't necessarily an indicator or predictor
of anything.

You might as well be arguing that since there are quadrillions
times quadrillions of particles circulating in the universe,
eventually the space shuttle will collide with one of them,
resulting in a catastrophic failure.

Never mind that nasty bit about contingency, I'll concede that
you're right, while admitting that I'm not going to stay up late
or quit breathing waiting for it to happen. But just imagine the
odds: Quadrillions against one. Is it gonna happen during your
lifetime or mine? I think not. And in the wink of a cosmological
space/time eye, the shuttle won't even be around to play the
lottery. Here today, gone tomorrow.

You seem to think favorable planets and the long time scales
necessary for the evolution of intelligent life are relatively
common, a sort of universal "given," because they have so many
opportunities for repetition or replication, ie., lottery
winners.

I'm simply saying that viewpoint may be in need of
reconsidering, and the best argument I've seen for same is the
Davis article.

This is now about the eleventh time I've offered to send you a
copy of same. When are you going to give me an address? If
you're paranoid, I can send it general delivery.

Failing that, I'll have the aliens drop it off.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 22

               Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:42:29 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 12:43:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

Hello All, John,

 >Hi All,

 >Well, some of our American brothers and sisters have reached an
 >all time low. The possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate"
 >cult members was -auctioned off- in California today. It was
 >done in the face of vehement protest from the surviving family
 >members who tried in vain to legally prevent the ghoulish sale
 >from happening.

Yup, lower than a rattler's belly (one of my dear Father's
sayings). By the way this gives no credit to the rattlesnake.

 >Several of the 'buyers' were interviewed by the media. "I'm
 >gonna put some of those bunk beds up for auction on the

Hope they changed the sheets.

 >Internet" drooled one, "These things are going to be worth a lot
 >of money one day" cooed another.

Ah, what would say, van Gough's ear or the Skull of Capitain of
the Titanic bring to these Goulish fools?

 >Not once during the entire thing was mention made of the tragic
 >and senseless loss of human life that had facilitated this
 >economic boon for those who attended. It made me ashamed to
 >belong to the same species as those greedy, money grubbing
 >opportunists.

Unfortunatley we do, this mess reinforces my confidence in
fallen, arrogant, humanity, (not only is the concept lost on
these pathetic folk, they acutally _exploit_the_exploited_!!)

 >Shame on them. Shame on all of us for allowing it and not bowing
 >to the wishes of the bereaved families for dignity and privacy.
 >Today, we all reached a new low.

Yes we are _all_ guilty

 >I hope that "one day" Art Bell, Courtney Brown, and others are
 >called upon to answer for their contribution to the circus
 >atmosphere surrounding a spectacular (but purely "astronomical")
 >event.

They will, friend they, will, possibly in this life, but
surely the next...

 >Let's -all- hang our heads in collective shame.


Yes, I agree, most of the world's religions have some sort
of prohibition against exploiting the families of the dead,
widows and orphans, to be exact.  There is a reason and
of course these Klowns have no idea except they worship
at the alter of (according to a preacher I know): the Un-Holy
Trinity: Me Myself and I.


Right on John, right on.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                     Light From Distant Planet Detected

From: Stig Agermos <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 07:50:47 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 12:46:21 -0500
Subject: Light From Distant Planet Detected


Source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_531000/531486.stm

Stig

***

BBC News Online: Sci/Tech

Monday, 22 November, 1999, 04:22 GMT

Light from a distant planet

By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse

**

British astronomers may have detected light from a planet
orbiting another star.

If so this is the first time this has ever been done and a major
achievement.

It builds on the extraordinary discoveries of recent years which
have revealed Jupiter-sized planets orbiting many of the stars
nearest to our Sun.

Astronomers announced last week they had seen a planet move
across the face of a star and dim its light. Now another team
has detected the light from a planet.

The astronomers, from the Department of Astronomy at St Andrews
University in Scotland, used the William Herschel telescope in
the Canary Islands to observe the relatively nearby star Tau
Bootes.

Tau Bootes is a star that is slightly larger and brighter than
our Sun and is 50 light years distant.


Bigger than Jupiter


It was already known to have a world in orbit around it. In 1996
a team of American astronomers discovered a planet orbiting it
every 3.3 days.

Measurements indicated that it had a mass of almost four times
the mass of Jupiter, the largest planet in our solar system.

Spurred on by this discovery the St Andrews team decided to look
in detail at the spectrum of the star.

Hidden in the light from the star, they argued, must be a small
amount of reflected light actually from the planet.

Their problem was how to extract the planet's light from the
starlight that was estimated to be tens of thousands of times
brighter.

The clue was in knowing the orbit of the planet.

With the knowledge that it circled the star every 3.3 days the
astronomers were able to look at the spectrum of the star and
extract that portion of the star's light that varied over this
timescale. This, they argued, must be the light from the planet.


'Oxygen discovered'


Although they do not have a picture of the planet this is the first
time that the light from another planet has been isolated.

But the astronomers are not yet ready to talk about their discovery.

When contacted by BBC News Online they declined to comment or say if
their research had yet been submitted to a science journal.

In analysing the light from the planet, the researchers are said to
have obtained evidence that the planet's atmosphere is very hot and
contains the elements magnesium, silicon and oxygen.

Detecting the light from a so-called exoplanet, a world circling
another star, is a major astronomical achievement.

The next step, obtaining an actual image of a planet, will
probably have to wait for the next generation of space
observatories that will come into operation in about 10 years'
time.

**

Related to this story:
Extrasolar planet detected  (15 Nov 99 | Sci/Tech)
Planet discovered orbiting Sun-like star  (30 Jul 99 | Sci/Tech)
Planet found orbiting two stars  (18 Aug 99 | Sci/Tech)
When a star swallows a planet  (12 Aug 99 | Sci/Tech)
Is anybody out there?  (21 Apr 99 | Sci/Tech)

Internet Links:
Extrasolar Visions by Lynette Cook
University of St Andrews Planet Search

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 06:34:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 12:49:20 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 18:20:56 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >
 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 03:33:18 -0600
 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >>>>life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >>>>more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >>>>Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

 >>>Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
 >>>have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
 >>>that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
 >>>than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

 >>>If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
 >>>nets?

 >>>>and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >>>>more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >>>>Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >>>>had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >>>>by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >>>>understand.

 >>>Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.

 >>Oh c'mon Mr. Rimmer. The evidence for the intelligence of these
 >>animals is so common as to defy the need for citation. Oh -- not
 >>as high as *yours* certainly -- but high enough. Tool using,
 >>language possessing -- why, some apes can even learn sign
 >>language. We don't yet really KNOW what dolphins can do. They
 >>may not act in the indefensibly arrogant way that some of US do,
 >>but their intelligence is very high indeed -- high enough not to
 >>have to depend on "New Age sentimentality," for its
 >>manifestation, at any rate. Finally -- it becomes obvious that
 >>the expression "Evidence, please" has become the refuge of
 >>scoundrels, misdirectors, and scalawags, and that MANY times,
 >>the proponent of that expression is not interested in "evidence"
 >>at all. There are clever critters all OVER this planet, sir. It
 >>argues for their existence elsewhere.

 >So, "evidence" is the cry of scoundrels.

Some of them -- certainly. Don't pretend that noisily
self-serving contingent doesn't exit.

 >Well that get you out
 >of having to provide any, doesn't it?

It's all around me -- I'm not dictating that you buy in to what
I perceive as the clearest common sense, or that you are foolish
for not doing so. We're not alone, the only thing really
unsettling about that is that we are being kept, so insultingly,
in the dark about the details of it.

 >The original point of this
 >argument however is that this world could be packed as full of
 >intelligent life forms as the bar in a science fiction film, it
 >does not mean that any other planet has any critters, clever or
 >otherwise.

True -- but the spark of intelligence or near intelligence, and
life itself occurring so often in one solar system of billions
of other solar systems does beg the question -- I think you have
to agree.

 >They may well do so, but we just don't know.

And not trying REAL hard to find out, are we! Not that's known
about at any rate.

 >There is
 >no evidence - oops, sorry, I forgot, "evidence" is a dirty word

As used by some -- certainly, unquestionably, and undeniably.

 >- so any discussion about non-terrestrail lifeforms is pure
 >speculation.

Speculations screaming from history, reported from those one
has come to trust, shouted from the different media throats, and
its suggestion witnessed personally -- much support for mere
speculation.

 >That's no reason why some of it can't be
 >intelligent, if rather arid, speculation, but a simple
 >proclamation that the existence of life on Earth argues for its
 >existence elsewhere is not even that.

Just because all the preceding houses have been painted black
does not mean the house around the corner, out of eyeshot, is
black also. It, very well, may be painted white. But if I have
to bet money one way or the other I'm going to put my money
squarely on a black continuance, or off planet intelligence. I
think you would, too.

I'll certainly agree that it is speculation, but the evidence I
can winnow from our contrived and well maintained fog suggests
that it is so. We are not alone, but even if we WERE it would
make more sense to operate as if we were not. It would certainly
be good for us to develop that kind of self consciousness
regarding how we might be perceived by an off planet
intelligence (which most agree is out there *somewhere*) -- we'd
treat each other better.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 20 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 99 10:13:00 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 12:53:52 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 18:22:27 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 18:24:08 PST

 >>>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:55:05 +0000
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST

 >>>>>From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800


John,


 >>For purposes of clarity, I should have said that when the
 >>phenomenon, currently unknown or controversial, behind what were
 >>called UFOs is established with some approximate degree of
 >>certainty, it may be used inappropriately to explain some new
 >>unknown, emerging manifestation.

 >But then the phenomenon become[s] an IFO, and, according to you, is
 >of no further interest whatsoever. But it's always instructive
 >to see the way you manage to duck a straight question

I am at a loss to understand what that last charge is supposed
to mean, but then I often am at a loss to understand the
strangely defense rhetoric of PSHers.

I don't recall saying, by the way, that IFO reports are "of no
further interest whatsoever," but then it seems to be a PSH
custom to put words in their critics' mouths.

Let me repeat, I hope for the last time: by definition, a
phenomenon that is identified is not a phenomenon that is
unidentified.  Is that so hard to grasp?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                                     Re:

From: Michel Potay <michelpotay@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:22:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:00:47 -0500
Subject: Re:


 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


Dear Friends,

You receive this message from France.

I am intrigued by an email which my secretary laid on my desk
this morning, and I am at once happy that some honorable men are
filled with indignation watching an auction in California where
the possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate" cult members are
sold off like Marilyn Monroe's memorabilia with a view to
selling them later at much higher prices.

We French have very little information about the "Heaven's Gate"
cult's drama. Whatever the reason of their suicide, and even if
we do not share the hope they put in it, their end denotes both
an ideal and the despair not to reach that ideal, both far from
being devoid of value in the world now virtually devoid of any
ideal and of despair to have gone that low, as you say.

Their possessions deserved the fire, not a ghoulish auction.

Kind regards           Brother Michel

<http://perso.wanadoo.fr/michelpotay>

<michelpotay@wanadoo.fr>









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 22

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni  <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:20:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:05:47 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:25:06 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear Georgina

 >I don't *claim* to have thoroughly investigated hundreds of
 >cases, oh hairsplitting one, I *know* I have.

David, for one who claims to have been involved in so many cases
I cannot understand why you have not learned more humility.

 >In the meantime, what have we got from Georgina?

I was not making any claims

 >One case which she has investigated over three years 16 years
 >after the events, but which no one other than her publisher has
 >ever seen.

And my agent

 >Tell me Georgina - what is *your* background, and how
 >many cases before Rendlesham have you *thoroughly*
 > investigated?

I was trained by a Scottish private investigator (long since
dead) I have also had some marvelous assistance from former CID
and police officers and security people who taught me how to
work an investigation. Something I never forgot.

My background is in researching the paranormal and the occult
about which I have never bragged: besides I almost always did
under cover work. Then for almost ten years I investigated cults
and religions. You could say I was a cult buster. I travelled
East Asia in search of information on the cult leader Rev Moon
and have discovered shady backgrounds on other cult leaders,
including the Church BTW. My results were devastating for those
at the helm of many of these organisations and I was threatened
on more than one occasion. Much of my findings were handed over
to colleagues (investigative journalists) I also investigated
bogus fortune tellers, people who claimed to heal, talk to the
dead etc etc.

 >Have you investigated *any* other cases at all?

Yes, I have investigated UFO cases if that is what you mean, but
I mostly write about cases and the ufologists themselves.

I first became interested about eleven years ago. I was living
in America at the time and one of our neighbours had had
problems with his cattle (mutilations). I did not know enough
about the subject then and admit at first it didn't really
interest me. After returning to England I learnt about military
involvement and questioned some friends at the MOD (not Nick
Pope) and some people I knew in government and they knew nothing
about it.

Then  in 1991 I met Sir John Whitmore who claimed to have been
communicating with extraterrestrials. John was no crank, and I
became interested in the subject yet again. But my interest was
still on the military sightings. Since then I have interviewed
numerous military witnesses. It was my interest in the military
involvement that prompted me to investigate the Rendlesham case.
I had to first learn all about how the US military machine works
before I could even think of the investigation itself. That was
very time consuming but it was worth it and I had some very fine
top brass military teachers.

 >You claim you are not a ufologist - well what exactly are you
 >then?

In relation to this subject: In the early 1990's I was part of a
group of SYSOPS who launched the UFO Forum on Compuserve. I was
not really a ufologist but I was nevertheless interested in the
subject. I also wrote a regular column for Sightings magazine
until it folded. I now write for UFOCITY www.ufocity.com and for
three years did a regular column on the subject for HOT GOSSIP
UK www.hotgossip.co.uk for which I am Editor in Chief. I hope,
if time permits, I shall be continuing this in a couple of
months.

 >And how come you are not prepared to discuss your
 >wonderful Rendlesham case material and yet expect others to
 >provide chapter and verse when *you* feel you want *your*
 >questions answered?

I am under contract with my publishers not to discuss my
investigation or I would gladly answer your questions.

 >People can only make their decisions on the merits or otherwise
 >of a particular case based upon what is currently known about it,
 >and what is in the public domain.

I agree that much has been published on the Internet by the
sceptics. However, all will be revealed in due course.

 >Until you finally publish what new evidence you claim you have,
 >then you can hardly expect the world just to take your word for
 >it, based purely upon a series of titilating little asides you
 >post on the Internet.

I do not expect you or anyone to take my word for it. The case
will speak for itself. In fact it is not I who keeps bringing
the subject up.

 >And we seem to have waited a long time to taste this particular
 >pudding!

The best things in life are worth waiting for :-)

 >You reveal once again your shallow grasp of UK ufology

So when all else fails, it's back to personal attacks?

 >So excuse me for being not a little skeptical when I'm told that
 >Georgina Bruni's book will provide once again " the evidence
 >that will silence all the critics."

 >But I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong.
 >We will see.........

Indeed, why not wait and see.

Georgina Bruni









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:04:19 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 07:56:55 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 18:20:56 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>So, "evidence" is the cry of scoundrels. Well that get you out
 >>of having to provide any, doesn't it? The original point of this
 >>argument however is that this world could be packed as full of
 >>intelligent life forms as the bar in a science fiction film, it
 >>does not mean that any other planet has any critters, clever or
 >>otherwise. They may well do so, but we just don't know. There is
 >>no evidence - oops, sorry, I forgot, "evidence" is a dirty word
 >>so any discussion about non-terrestrail lifeforms is pure
 >>speculation. That's no reason why some of it can't be
 >>intelligent, if rather arid, speculation, but a simple
 >>proclamation that the existence of life on Earth argues for its
 >>existence elsewhere is not even that.


Hi People,

A Quote....

"I keep having the same argument with the " Christians" where is
God I keep asking' show me this God I want evidence you hear
Flesh & Blood not fables from a book!

"B. Coates 1975"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:17:31 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 07:58:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


Bob Young wrote:

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:20:00 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Tony, Tim, onlookers:

 >>I'll have to agree with Tim, here.  My experience has been the
 >>same.

 >>If 30 % of IFOs turn out to be astronomical objects, and 25% or
 >>more are aircraft, and 10% are satellites then one could assume
 >>that 65% of all sightings around nuclear plants are also these
 >>kinds of IFOs. How many sightings are around nuclear plants?

 >>Clear skies,
 >>Bob Young


Hi All,

I am afraid I have to go along with Tony here. I have had the
occasion of sky watching at Sizewell sometime back, and having
had the chance to read the researched DATA carried out by Tony
and his colleagues, I found the evidence of FT sightings quite
remarkable.

I think we can draw the line here, especially when we are
talking about experienced UFO researchers staking out a place on
a regular basis for further investigation into the FT.

Misidentifications of , stars, planets, meteors etc.. is one
thing but seeing lights hovering and changing course quite often
seen at low-level would only help further the case of those FT
reports which have been coming out of areas such as the Nuclear
power plant of Sizewell Suffolk.

I do know also that not far from the area of Suffolk, in Norfolk
there have been numerous sightings of the FT, as well as other
odd shaped craft such as squares.

These have been seen to hover very low to industrial sites,
giving those witnesses who I talked to  a rather detailed
sighting of what can only be classed  as a very odd shaped
craft. (Also Completely black)

Remember an assumption is just that, an assumption, I think some
sky watching is called for!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 10:44:20 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:02:52 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:05:18 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 15:06:53 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>Why does it have to be 99% of the speed of light? Most schemes
 >>call for 10 - 30%. At 10%, a trip to Alpha Centauri takes 50
 >>years. Journeys between nearby stars on the orders of decades
 >>are certainly managable.

 >David,

 >Managable [sic] is probably right. A robot probe, sure, why not?
 >Now, let's put people in that spaceship of yours.

Dear Dennis:

Let's not put living things into that probe,

I certainly would not.  Is this some sort of straw man?

I wouldn't put a straw man from a movie into any space ship from
Earth, the amenities are just too poor.

Frankly, if I had it in mind to invade planet Earth, I would use
super intelligent robots.  Yeah!  And a few of them would
resemble super sexy French women.

The only thing that saves us turns out to be a love of certain
Scottish whiskeys.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS:  It turns out that the sex-robot is addicted to the same
seven-dollar scotch as the hero!

Gawd doggies.

= = = = = = = = = =

 >Getting rid of
 >their wastes obviously wouldn't be any problem, <snip>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                      Nov.16, 1999 Midwest fireball(s)

From: Andrei Ol'khovatov"<olkhovatov@mtu-net.ru>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 22:16:03 +0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:04:33 -0500
Subject: Nov.16, 1999 Midwest fireball(s)


Dear colleagues,

This e-mail is from Russian geophysicist. I am very interested
in information posted on this and other web-sites on the Nov.16,
1999 Midwest fireball(s) event, as some features of the event
don't resemble a meteoroidal fireball, but resemble a little
known and poorly understood type of geophysical event, even with
no "official" name, which sometimes is called "geophysical
meteors" (see my www-site
www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm ).

So it will be very important to investigate details of the
event. Geophysical data, such as local meteorological conditions
on Nov.16-17 is also very important.

I would be glad to cooperate with somebody in investigation of
the event.

    Hoping for your participation,

    Sincerely yours,
     Andrei Ol'khovatov,
      Russia, Moscow  <olkhovatov@mtu-net.ru>














   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:20:00 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:09:13 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 06:34:15 -0600
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 18:20:56 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 03:33:18 -0600
 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:03:19 +0000
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>>Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 06:28:43 -0600
 >>>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>>>On this planet and at this time have occurred three different
 >>>>>life forms (more with a bit of stretching) that have evolved to
 >>>>>more than breath on rationality and self aware intelligence. The
 >>>>>Bonobo chimp, the dolphin,

 >>>>Apart from a general fuzzy sentimentality and the fact that they
 >>>>have rather nice smiles, just what is your evidence for saying
 >>>>that dolphins (let alone bonobo chimps) have evolved to "more
 >>>>than a breath on rationality and self aware intelliegence"?

 >>>>If they're so smart why do they keep getting caught up in tuna
 >>>>nets?

 >>>>>and lastly we homosaps argue for a
 >>>>>more common sentience than has been previously suggested.
 >>>>>Moreover, some of these animals, the dolphin in particular, have
 >>>>>had millions of years to evolve other intelligences illuminated
 >>>>>by senses that can only be described to us, for we can never
 >>>>>understand.

 >>>>Evidence, please? And not New Age sentimentality.

 >>>Oh c'mon Mr. Rimmer. The evidence for the intelligence of these
 >>>animals is so common as to defy the need for citation. Oh -- not
 >>>as high as *yours* certainly -- but high enough. Tool using,
 >>>language possessing -- why, some apes can even learn sign
 >>>language. We don't yet really KNOW what dolphins can do. They
 >>>may not act in the indefensibly arrogant way that some of US do,
 >>>but their intelligence is very high indeed -- high enough not to
 >>>have to depend on "New Age sentimentality," for its
 >>>manifestation, at any rate. Finally -- it becomes obvious that
 >>>the expression "Evidence, please" has become the refuge of
 >>>scoundrels, misdirectors, and scalawags, and that MANY times,
 >>>the proponent of that expression is not interested in "evidence"
 >>>at all. There are clever critters all OVER this planet, sir. It
 >>>argues for their existence elsewhere.

 >>So, "evidence" is the cry of scoundrels.

 >Some of them -- certainly. Don't pretend that noisily
 >self-serving contingent doesn't exit.

 >>Well that get you out
 >>of having to provide any, doesn't it?

 >It's all around me -- I'm not dictating that you buy in to what
 >I perceive as the clearest common sense, or that you are foolish
 >for not doing so. We're not alone, the only thing really
 >unsettling about that is that we are being kept, so insultingly,
 >in the dark about the details of it.

OK, as most of you folks know, I never stick my head in where it
does not belong.  Please, anyone out there who has the slightest
doubt that we are alone must go to the latest copy of Scientific
American (December 1999) and go straight to page 78.  On the
opposite page is a large scale computer simulation of the
universe. The image was produced by the Virgo Consortium.  Each
particle in the image represents a galaxy.  One Galaxy!  _Not_
One Star!

Look carefully at the image and then think about probability.
If you still believe we are alone, please run for president on
the Independent label and go be head of a church. But not in
that order.

My dad, who is approaching 90 and retired (but still drives
around town in that Taurus I bought him - they all look out for
him when they see him coming.  I bought him a really white one,
looks like a Pelican) helpred write the book on probability and
statistical quality control.  He's the best.  I was brought up
on pablum and numbers.  Maybe it's just me.

Nah!

 >>The original point of this
 >>argument however is that this world could be packed as full of
 >>intelligent life forms as the bar in a science fiction film, it
 >>does not mean that any other planet has any critters, clever or
 >>otherwise.

 >True -- but the spark of intelligence or near intelligence, and
 >life itself occurring so often in one solar system of billions
 >of other solar systems does beg the question -- I think you have
 >to agree.

 >>They may well do so, but we just don't know.

 >And not trying REAL hard to find out, are we! Not that's known
 >about at any rate.

 >>There is
 >>no evidence - oops, sorry, I forgot, "evidence" is a dirty word

 >As used by some -- certainly, unquestionably, and undeniably.

 >>- so any discussion about non-terrestrail lifeforms is pure
 >>speculation.

 >Speculations screaming from history, reported from those one
 >has come to trust, shouted from the different media throats, and
 >its suggestion witnessed personally -- much support for mere
 >speculation.

The good news about the Internet is that it permits the crazies
to have equal access alongside the geniuses.  On the other hand,
everyone in between comes here as well.   People look, listen,
and most important, start to think.  On their own.  Without the
aid of the distortions of those who wish to keep truth from us.
Unless they outlaw it, make it illegal or otherwise place
warning labels on the screen saying, "Caution, the Internet may
cause harm to our company line," or worse, _TAX IT_, then the
truth, which has historically set it's fee, will finally set
itself free.  To be viewed by all to see.

Hey! Lemme! I'm a poet and don't know it.

 >>That's no reason why some of it can't be
 >>intelligent, if rather arid, speculation, but a simple
 >>proclamation that the existence of life on Earth argues for its
 >>existence elsewhere is not even that.

 >Just because all the preceding houses have been painted black
 >does not mean the house around the corner, out of eyeshot, is
 >black also. It, very well, may be painted white. But if I have
 >to bet money one way or the other I'm going to put my money
 >squarely on a black continuance, or off planet intelligence. I
 >think you would, too.

 >I'll certainly agree that it is speculation, but the evidence I
 >can winnow from our contrived and well maintained fog suggests
 >that it is so. We are not alone, but even if we WERE it would
 >make more sense to operate as if we were not. It would certainly
 >be good for us to develop that kind of self consciousness
 >regarding how we might be perceived by an off planet
 >intelligence (which most agree is out there *somewhere*) -- we'd
 >treat each other better.

You've gone one toke over the line Al.  Aksed way too much of us
ho-mans.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:47:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:21:55 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni  <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:20:50 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:25:06 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


 >David, for one who claims to have been involved in so many cases
 >I cannot understand why you have not learned more humility.

Being involved in so many cases has taught me many things; few
of them are about "UFOs" (whatever they may be), but plenty
about the *people* who become entangled in the wacky world of
ufology, and what makes them tick.

One of the most interesting things I have learned is how
newcomers to this subject continually try to re-invent it in
their own image, ignoring the lessons of history along the way.

Also I've seen how people will continue to believe in nonsense
despite the most glaring and damning evidence.

And how others will continue to argue white is black and black
is white ad nauseum because they simply cannot accept they are
wrong.

So yes, you're right, humility tends to wear thin when one has
to keep banging one's head against the wall.

But it's still a lot of fun in a masochistic sort of way.

 >I was trained by a Scottish private investigator (long since
 >dead) I have also had some marvelous assistance from former CID
 >and police officers and security people who taught me how to
 >work an investigation. Something I never forgot.

This sounds like something from an Ian Fleming novel, or one of
those Sherlock Holmes type spy dramas.

I'm looking forward to this book even more now!

Who knows, it might even take pride of place next to "The
Mothman Prophecies" on my shelf.

 >My background is in researching the paranormal and the occult
 >about which I have never bragged: besides I almost always did
 >under cover work.

It's not bragging to point out to people why you feel you are
qualified to comment, or write, about a particular issue or
subject.

If you were a TV crew filming a documentary on brain surgery,
you wouldn't pull some urchin off the street to comment on the
latest advances in the subject.

And yet that's what passes for expertise in ufology - anyone and
everyone's views are as good as any other. No one wonder most
sane and sensible people give it a wide berth, if they value
their sanity.

The power of the Internet eh!

However, it's good that you've shared your experience with us,
and I have to admit you have an interesting background.

We might fundamentally disagree, but I hope we can agree to
differ.

 >>Have you investigated *any* other cases at all?

 >Yes, I have investigated UFO cases if that is what you mean, but
 >I mostly write about cases and the ufologists themselves.

OK which cases - please supply references to your publications.

 >>And how come you are not prepared to discuss your
 >>wonderful Rendlesham case material and yet expect others to
 >>provide chapter and verse when *you* feel you want *your*
 >>questions answered?

 >I am under contract with my publishers not to discuss my
 >investigation or I would gladly answer your questions.

This does not convince me one bit.

In an earlier post you claimed you had not written your book for
commercial reasons - how so!

Never mind letting the world know the truth about the greatest
mystery in the history of mankind, let's not upset the publisher
too much, that's the most important factor in this equation.

It's amusing to hear Georgina being so tight-lipped about the
contents of a book when there is so much banging on about
MOD/Government "secrecy" in this subject.

What about ufological secrecy!  Now there's something the
Freedom of Information bill ought to take a look at.

If you did not want to discuss any aspect of the case because of
some over-riding contract, then why mention it on Updates at
all? I really do hope this book lives up to all the James Bond
type hype you're giving it.

Is it going to be launched at the same time as the next 007
adventure?

I can see I'm going to be shaken, but not stirred.

Cheers Moneypenny,

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 >
   Nov > Nov 23

               Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:42:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:38:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?
 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:42:29 -0800

 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

 >Hello All, John,

 >John wrote:

 >>Hi All,

 >>>Well, some of our American brothers and sisters have reached an
 >>>all time low. The possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate"
 >>>cult members was -auctioned off- in California today. It was
 >>>done in the face of vehement protest from the surviving family
 >>>members who tried in vain to legally prevent the ghoulish sale
 >>>from happening.


Hi GT,

You responded:

Yup, lower than a rattler's belly (one of my dear Father's
sayings). By the way this gives no credit to the rattlesnake.

(snip)

 >Let's -all- hang our heads in collective shame.


Yes, I agree, most of the world's religions have some sort
of prohibition against exploiting the families of the dead,
widows and orphans, to be exact.  There is a reason and
of course these Klowns have no idea except they worship
at the alter of (according to a preacher I know): the Un-Holy
Trinity: Me Myself and I.


Right on John, right on.

What a world, where 'grave robbing' and the desecration of the
dead are considered 'acceptable social activities!' How bidding
on the possessions of suicide victims is somehow "ok" is really
hard for me to 'Grok.'

-The Romans gamble at the foot of the cross for tattered robes
while the original owner watches dying.-

We really need to develop a more life affirming set of values!
Here's for a better tomorrow bro.  ;)

John Velez

________________________________________________
                         AIC - Abduction Information Center -
                        www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm
                                    jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 22:33:13 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:42:10 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 99 10:13:00 PST

 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 18:22:27 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 99 18:24:08 PST

 >>>>Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:55:05 +0000
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>>>Date: Mon, 15 Nov 99 12:42:42 PST

 >>>>>>From: Gavin A. J. McLeod <gavin_mcleod@telus.net>
 >>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?
 >>>>>>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 09:54:45 -0800


 >John,

 >>>For purposes of clarity, I should have said that when the
 >>>phenomenon, currently unknown or controversial, behind what were
 >>>called UFOs is established with some approximate degree of
 >>>certainty, it may be used inappropriately to explain some new
 >>>unknown, emerging manifestation.

 >>But then the phenomenon become[s] an IFO, and, according to you, is
 >>of no further interest whatsoever. But it's always instructive
 >>to see the way you manage to duck a straight question

 >I am at a loss to understand what that last charge is supposed
 >to mean, but then I often am at a loss to understand the
 >strangely defense rhetoric of PSHers.

 >I don't recall saying, by the way, that IFO reports are "of no
 >further interest whatsoever," but then it seems to be a PSH
 >custom to put words in their critics' mouths.

 >Let me repeat, I hope for the last time: by definition, a
 >phenomenon that is identified is not a phenomenon that is
 >unidentified.  Is that so hard to grasp?

Jerry, let me put this as simply as I can. Do you think that
some accounts of UFOs indicate the presence of an actual solid
physical object?

If so do you think that object is a previously undescribed
terrestrial phenomenon, or do you think that object has an
extraterrestrial origin?

--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:36:49 +0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:49:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
 >Subject: Happy Bird Day
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >The Canal Street Ufological Society wants to wish each and every
 >one of you, a happy Thanksgiving.

 >Thanksgiving is a mostly American thing.  So for those who are
 >not American, let me explain this most important of all
 >holidays.

 >Thanksgiving was invented many years ago, when the Pigrims had
 >lunch with the Native Americans, usually referred to at that
 >time as, "Redskins,"  "Heathens" and "Funny Lookin Dudes."

We have a day like that here in Australia.  It's called
Australia Day on the 26th of January, except we didn't sit down
to lunch with the native people, we just slaughtered them and
whoever was left was forced to become alcoholic, petrol sniffing
no-hopers.

I find it hard to celebrate the annihilation of the culture and
livelihood of a unique race of people.

Hope you had a nice lunch
Cheers
Sharon K








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

               Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:10:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:57:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:22:58 +0100
 >Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction-How Low Can We Go?
 >From: Michel Potay <michelpotay@wanadoo.fr>
 >To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

Hello Brother Michel, hi All,

Michel wrote:

 >Dear Friends,

 >You receive this message from France.

 >I am intrigued by an email which my secretary laid on my desk
 >this morning, and I am at once happy that some honorable men are
 >filled with indignation watching an auction in California where
 >the possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate" cult members are
 >sold off like Marilyn Monroe's memorabilia with a view to
 >selling them later at much higher prices.

Re: "Honorable men"

*You are a "Brother" please allow me to 'wax philosophical' for
a moment. I know that you will understand what I am saying.  :)

'Honorable men' are self created creatures. 'Honor' is an
invisible garment worn by those who have taken responsibility
for themselves, their (thoughts) and actions. It is the end
result of years of hard and conscious work on self improvement
and the opening of the Mind and Heart. 'Honor' is a -hard
earned- commodity not one that is bestowed.  :)

Yes mon ami, anyone hearing of this travesty that is not filled
with 'indignation' must have a hardened Heart of stone. (Or, no
Heart at all!) This auction is after all, just a "State sanctioned"
form of -grave robbing and desecration of the dead.-
Upon hearing of it, my immediate concern was for the surviving
family members. Poor devils cannot seem to find any respite from
the nightmare of their loss. Their suffering can only be reawakened
and fueled by such happenings as this.

 >We French have very little information about the "Heaven's Gate"
 >cult's drama. Whatever the reason of their suicide, and even if
 >we do not share the hope they put in it, their end denotes both
 >an ideal and the despair not to reach that ideal, both far from
 >being devoid of value in the world now virtually devoid of any
 >ideal and of despair to have gone that low, as you say.

The implications of your words are ominous to those who covet
power and control. When the day comes that each man/woman takes
responsibility for -creating value- in life, and respecting
others as they would like to be respected in return... there
will no longer be need for Armies, and Police forces, and all
manner of controls to imposed from outside of each person.

Each man and woman will _be_ the very (embodiment) of the
Law!

 >Their possessions deserved the fire, not a ghoulish auction.

I agree. In its destruction by fire there would be closure for
the bereaved surviving loved ones, and a symbolic (if not
actual) ending of the episode for all. When something 'ends'
something else 'begins.' Let's all work towards a future
(through individual effort) where -every man/woman- feels
responsible for the well being of others. We live in a time
where materialism and self absorption are the 'rule' and not the
'exception.'

Peace,

John Velez, Webmaster A.I.C.

________________________________________________
                         AIC - Abduction Information Center -
                        www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm
                                    jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

               Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 12:39:24 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:03:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?


 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:22:58 +0100
 >Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction-How Low Can We Go?
 >From: Michel Potay <michelpotay@wanadoo.fr>
 >To: UFO UpDates Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 02:46:25 -0500>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Heaven's Gate Auction - How Low Can We Go?

 >Dear Friends,

 >You receive this message from France.

 >I am intrigued by an email which my secretary laid on my desk
 >this morning, and I am at once happy that some honorable men are
 >filled with indignation watching an auction in California where
 >the possessions of the deceased "Heaven's Gate" cult members are
 >sold off like Marilyn Monroe's memorabilia with a view to
 >selling them later at much higher prices.

 >We French have very little information about the "Heaven's Gate"
 >cult's drama. Whatever the reason of their suicide, and even if
 >we do not share the hope they put in it, their end denotes both
 >an ideal and the despair not to reach that ideal, both far from
 >being devoid of value in the world now virtually devoid of any
 >ideal and of despair to have gone that low, as you say.

 >Their possessions deserved the fire, not a ghoulish auction.


Dear Michel Mannadoo Potay:

I am also a bit appalled at the sale of 'Heaven's Gate'
memorabilia. But please, consider the altertatives!

1)  Well, there is only one alternative really, and that is to
_not_ sell the HG memorabilia.

This would involve transportation, storage, and all sorts of
other progblemes,  each of which would invite some sore or
martyrdom!

Indeed, anything different than the actual outcome would
encourage further loss of life!


2)  I am sorry that the auction was so poorly presented.

It should have taken place on the tallest playtform in America!
(and much more loudly, and with higher prices) for exactly the
reasons given in #1 above.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                          Re: Beware Of Contrails?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 07:51:32
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:18:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Beware Of Contrails?

Source: San Francisco Chronicle,

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/1999/11/22/ED
66131.DTL&type=printable

Stig

***

Beware of Contrails

ARTHUR HOPPE

Monday, November 22, 1999

�1999 San Francisco Chronicle


**

GOOD NEWS! Those black helicopters that threatened to take over
America for years have vanished. The people who spend their time
warning us about such things have discovered a new menace: jet
contrails.

As menaces go, this is a pretty good one. While hardly anyone
you know has ever seen a black helicopter, a UFO or a giant
man-eating squid, practically everyone's seen a contrail. You
just know they're there.

Unfortunately, among the several hundred Web sites on the
Internet now devoted to this threat, there's some dispute over
exactly what these contrails are doing to us.

Quite a few of our alert citizens are sure that the contrails
are composed of anthrax virus that the government is secretly
showering down on us to inoculate us from terrorists' bacterial
attacks. This may sound like a benevolent enterprise, but our
keen watchdogs report thousands of unexplained deaths and
debilitating illnesses.

Optimists on the Internet think the contrails are only causing
localized flu epidemics. Others are quite sure, though, that the
vapor is actually pesticides. Why we are being sprayed with
pesticides, however, is not quite clear. Perhaps it's in hopes
our children will grow better. If you care, a trucker in Idaho
writes that every time he gets under a contrail his nose burns.

As you can see from all this, contrails would be a far more
menacing menace if its observers could agree on what they are
doing to us. I'm glad to be of help. Actually, contrails are
composed of tiny drops of a liquid detergent that washes our
brains.

Take the case of Name Withheld of Twin Falls, Fla. Mr. Withheld
looked up to see a contrail over his head, walked into an
automobile dealer and bought an SUV. If you think these events
were unrelated, consider that Mr. Withheld could offer no
rational explanation as to why he purchased a gas- guzzling,
road-hogging, universally despised, ugly hunk of expensive
metal.

Then there's Miss Name Withheld (no relation) of Silicon Valley,
S.D. On being attacked by a contrail, Miss Withheld tore down
three ranch homes in the Pruneview Gardens Tract in order to
build a 27- room mansion. While this is not unusual for Silicon
Valley entrepreneurs with families, Miss Withheld has neither a
cat nor a boyfriend.

Another suspect phenomenon is the lack of parking spaces in Hot
Springs, Nev., an area heavily crisscrossed by contrails.
Residents there, it turns out, bought three and four cars each
which they stored by their curbs in hopes they would some day
become classics.

Nor can anyone doubt that contrails have washed the brains of
those poor souls who walk around holding dummy phones to their
ears and talking to themselves. Not dummy phones? Just note that
not one of these phones is ever plugged in!

Thus it's clear the government has developed another new weapon
in its unending efforts to brainwash us. So, when you see a
contrail, take the advice of one of our many eager operatives
out there studying the threat:

STAY CALM AND TAKE COVER! It's a shame the rest of them don't do
the same.

**

Arthur Hoppe's column appears Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.
It is also available at sfgate.com. E-mail: hoppe@sfgate.com

�1999 San Francisco Chronicle   Page A23







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 23

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:20:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:20:00 EST
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net<

 >I'll have to agree with Tim, here.  My experience has been the
 >same.

I must admit that most aerial sightings of FTs probably do fit
the same misidentifications but you still have the low flying
FTs which seem defy the explanations Tim mentions.

 >If 30 % of IFOs turn out to be astronomical objects, and 25% or
 >more are aircraft, and 10% are satellites then one could assume
 >that 65% of all sightings around nuclear plants are also these
 >kinds of IFOs. How many sightings are around nuclear plants?

Using 1997 which was the last full year of data, Sizewell had
704 sightings, Bradwell 416 and Dungeness 291.

What is strange about the sightings in these areas are that the
FTs are seen hovering or moving slowly (30-45 mph) at a mere 100
- 200 feet above ground level. These aren't aerial sightings but
extremely low level and have been seen moving infront of the
buildings at the power stations. Given that information
satellites, aircraft and astronomical events can be ruled out,
although I certainly haven't ruled out a man made vehicle. My
question was, what reason could these lights or vehicles be
visiting the power plants? I would much prefer to explore the
possibilities from a human point of view rather than an alien
view point as this is more likely where the conclusion will lead
us.

Have you any ideas?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                            Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 99 09:52:06 PST
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 00:22:40 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 22:33:13 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDates FAQ?


John,

 >Jerry, let me put this as simply as I can. Do you think that
 >some accounts of UFOs indicate the presence of an actual solid
 >physical object?

Of course.  Haven't you ever heard of CE2s, radar/visuals, photos
like Trindade and McMinnville?

 >If so do you think that object is a previously undescribed
 >terrestrial phenomenon, or do you think that object has an
 >extraterrestrial origin?

Beats the hell out of me.  That's why I call 'em UFOs.

Jerry Clark






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 14:40:56 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 00:25:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:41 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:20:19 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

<snip>

 >Using 1997 which was the last full year of data, Sizewell had
 >704 sightings, Bradwell 416 and Dungeness 291.

 >What is strange about the sightings in these areas are that the
 >FTs are seen hovering or moving slowly (30-45 mph) at a mere 100
 >- 200 feet above ground level. These aren't aerial sightings but
 >extremely low level and have been seen moving infront of the
 >buildings at the power stations. Given that information
 >satellites, aircraft and astronomical events can be ruled out,
 >although I certainly haven't ruled out a man made vehicle. My
 >question was, what reason could these lights or vehicles be
 >visiting the power plants? I would much prefer to explore the
 >possibilities from a human point of view rather than an alien
 >view point as this is more likely where the conclusion will lead
 >us.

I agree with the last point

 >Have you any ideas?

Nope

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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 16:41:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 00:30:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


Hello List,

Some additional Bird Day Facts missed in the earlier missive
from a Gripple-addled correspondent, provided by one of the
frost-backs of the Great White North.

Canadians also celebrate Thanksgiving Day, but do so a month
earlier.

Canadian history scholars, (both of them) have long debated the
reason Canada takes Thanksgiving a month earlier.

One says its because we didn't slaughter our natives with
unabashed gleefully, leaving them drunken, gas-sniffing losers
today.

Instead we made allies of them, signed and honoured treaties,
gave them good land and an adequate social assistance net. Oh
yeah, we also gave them loads and loads of Hudson Bay Co.
blankets, crawling with smallpox, but that's another story. And
could be why Canadian natives turned out as sad, drunken,
gas-sniffing doormats of society.

The other Canadian historian thinks we do it a month early
because we get frost on our pumpkin a month earlier.

Could be.

We too eat ourselves into a stupor, and Canadian turkeys aren't
one bit smarter than their American cousins.

When I was a reporter in Windsor for a radio station, I drove
out to the county one year to interview the biggest local turkey
producer. When I arrived, the first thing he said to me was
"Son, if you got to break wind, do it now. You do it out in the
yard and some of them birds will think they're under fire and
have a heart attack."

I still think he was kidding, but he added, and other farmers
confirmed, that if you leave a 5 gallon pail of water in a yard
with turkeys and go away, when you come back you'll have 5
gallons of drowned turkeys.

As for any other response to the cheerful Bird Day greetings for
the States, all I can say is... sometimes self-righteousness and
universal guilt should take a holiday too!

Save me a drumstick!!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                    Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:38:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 08:19:17 -0500
Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
 >Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:33:29 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 20:26:53 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: British Ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>>What is particularly interesting is that despite this, the
 >>>appearance of UFOs did not change to follow the explanation. I
 >>>must wonder how this can be used to support "myth" hypotheses,
 >>>since with regard to myth one would expect exactly the opposite.

 >>And just how would you expect the appearance to change? Would a
 >>Russian secret weapon necessarily look different to an
 >>extraterrestrial craft? As witnesses would have no idea what
 >>either looked like there is no reason why the descriptions
 >>should change. In fact there was quite a long period when both
 >>"explanations" overlapped.

 >I think it is reasonable to assume that the populace would think
 >that "Russian secret weapons" or even "American secret weapons"
 >would look like aircraft. Advanced aircraft, maybe with highly
 >swept wings, but aircraft, not wingless disks, spheres, and
 >cylinders.

Perhaps, but it's just as likely, especially after the evidence of the
German V2 weapons at the end of the war, that a wingless rocket or
cigar-shape would seem likely for both possible extraterrestrial craft
and potential secret weapons. This certainly seems to have been an
influence on the first UFO "wave", the Scandinavian Ghost Rockets.
 >
 >I would expect that the switch to belief that UFOs were
 >extraterrestrial would convert the most common descriptions to
 >non-aircraft-like geometries which would fit the most common
 >current model of what "alien spacecraft" would look like. I
 >don't believe people thought alien spacecraft and secret weapons
 >would look similar.

 >Do you have evidence to the contrary?

See above. But as I said previously, there was no sudden switch
from belief in secret weapons to believe in alien spcecraft.
Both ideas existed side by side as an explanation for UFO
reports for many years - and to an extent still do.

 >Triangles of one sort or another appear in pre 1980s reports and
 >are one of the classifications in the 1964 UFO Evidence. That
 >they are more common now than in the past is not something yet
 >empirically verified, but even if that were the case, it is not
 >any sort of "proof" of the non-existence of UFOs.

 >UFOs with "towers" do appear in a number of reports from 1949
 >through 1967 and possibly into the 1970s. That geometry has
 >always been among the least common. The most common geometry,
 >the domed disk, continues to be frequently reported. In
 >addition, the tower, unless displaying a luminosity of its own,
 >would probably be invisible in night sightings.

 >Arnold, in case you didn't bother to look at the sketches in the
 >Blue Book report, depicted lenticular disks. As for large wing
 >shaped objects, they have been reported at least since 1951 and
 >continuing through the 1990s. Many of these could be interpreted
 >as having a "croissant" shape.

Yes, certainly any particular shape of UFO can be found in
reports from any era, and individual cases of trianglular UFOs,
as James Easton notes elsewhere, can be found as early as the
nineteen-fifties. But these were isolated instances and do not
have the quantity or consistency of 1980-90 reports. The
lenticular and domed discs are the most commonly reported
shapes, as these are the shapes that are most likely to be
created from misperceptions or atmospheric distortions of stars,
satellites or conventional aircraft.

 >The Socorro geometry (an ellipse) has been reported probably
 >only secondary in frequency to the domed disk. There are many
 >reports of noisy near ground behavior, and blue luminosity as
 >well.

An ellipse, per se, is simply a rather forshortened lenticular
disc, and the same considerations apply. There are rather fewer
reports, certainly in the past ten years, of tripod-equipped,
ovoid objects, with markings, spouting flames.

 >Please familiarize yourself with more than the popular accounts
 >- read the case literature before making statistical
 >pronouncements.

 >BTW, even if UFO shapes kept changing, it would not be evidence
 >of their mythological nature. Aside from dealing with multiple
 >witness cases,

Very few. In most cases the report comes from one or two people.
Other witnesses tend not to be available for interview.

 >the ground traces,

Ambiguous, but I await with interest the full report on Delphos

 >the radar detection,

Mostly old cases unfortunatly, but nonetheless interesting

 >the
 >medical evidence,

Again, ambiguous, but interesting. Hardly proof in itself, and
cases with medical elements tend not be be associated with any
of the above. But they're certainly evidence that *something*
happened

 >etc., proof of the mythological nature of the
 >UFO, would require showing it tracking cultural depictions of
 >the concept to which UFOs are attached. A test such as that
 >which I mentioned (UFO geometries reflecting the common concept
 >of the explanation accepted at the time) would seem to be to be
 >a basic discriminator of the hypothesis. Are you saying it is
 >not? Is that because it does not support your hypothesis?

It is likely that the concept to which UFOs were first attached
(if we conveniently write off 1897 and 1909 as Cashman and Clark
do) was originally terrestrial secret weapons. The shaped
reported in the pre- 1950 era generally conforms to this:
wingless rockets, cigar-shapes, flying discs - shapes which were
perhaps one step beyond the actual technology. Flying discs as a
possible technological development was certainly being discussed
at the period. As belief began to change to the ETH there was no
sudden switch-over to more exotic types.

However, once the ETH becomes established as the main popular
explanation for the phenomenon, "cultural tracking" becomes more
problematical. The reports become part of the phenomenon which
is being culturally tracked.

 >>The only thing all these shapes have in common is that, as a
 >>previous contributor noted, they were prefigured in 1930s
 >>science fiction.

 >As I have pointed out before, statistically, the vast majority
 >of pre-1950s spaceship depictions were either streamlined cigars
 >with fins, cones with wings, or, for the really advanced stuff,
 >submarine shaped objects with giant rivets and rows of ship-like
 >portholes. Also, there are no reports of Flash Gordon like
 >objects, despite the popularity of that serial.

But streamlined cigars were very much a feature of 40s and 50s
reports. I'm not sure what you mean by cones with wings. A
glance through a couple of encyclopaedias of SF doesn't reveal
anything like that, but maybe I'm visualising it wrongly.
"Submarine shaped" - isn't that a lenticular disc seen side on,
or even just a good old cigar-shaped UFO??

 >Where are these in the reports of the time? Also, where is the
 >evidence that UFO reporters were science fiction readers or fans
 >of SF serials?

This comment simply shows how little you understand the
psychosocial hypotheses. Popular depictions, by the very fact
that they are popular, are familiar even to people who do not
take a particular interest in them. I have almost zero interest
in contemporary pop music yet I cannot avoid being familar with
the names, appearance and sounds of groups such as Blur, Oasis
or the Spice Girls.

 >Finally, keep in mind that cultural context goes both ways, and
 >after 1947, most people in the US had a pretty good idea of what
 >UFOs looked like.

Exactly th point I make above

 >Also keep in mind that Jerry Clark and others
 >have shown that a large number of the 1897 airship wave reports,
 >especially those with human occupants, seem to have been
 >journalistic hoaxes.

Maybe, but they still formed part of the cultural background
which influenced how people saw other events.


--
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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:27:01 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 08:46:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:36:49 +0800

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
 >>Subject: Happy Bird Day
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snipped the usual good stuff>

 >I find it hard to celebrate the annihilation of the culture and
 >livelihood of a unique race of people.

 >Hope you had a nice lunch
 >Cheers
 >Sharon K

Great echo on Jim's post, Sharon. It's good too know there are
others willing to cop to the ubiquitous cultural buffoonery.
More behavior like that from the three of us and the questions
we have regarding flying saucers will resolve themselves.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com


~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 20 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                     The Man Who Keeps the FBI's Secrets

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 01:38:49 GMT
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:37:35 -0500
Subject: The Man Who Keeps the FBI's Secrets


Source APB Multimedia Online,

http://www.apbnews.com/media/gfiles/1999/11/22/kelso1122_01.html

Go to the site for interesting link to 'The Real X-Files'

Stig

**

The Man Who Keeps the FBI's Secrets

John Kelso Jr. Oversees the Skeletons in the Nation's Closet

Nov. 22, 1999

By Tami Sheheri

APBnews.com/Jason Miccolo JohnsonJohn Kelso Jr., FBI FOIA/PA section
chief

**

WASHINGTON (APBnews.com) -- John Kelso Jr. stares out from
behind a pile of papers that may -- or may not -- hold the truth
to President Kennedy's assassination, UFOs or any mystery your
imagination can conjure. "People want to know what their
government is doing," he said, "and rightfully so."

Kelso is the section chief of the FBI's Freedom of
Information/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) office, the bureau's enormous
vault of files that are released -- or kept secret -- under his
supervision. He doles out secrets as the law dictates, nothing
more and nothing less.

Anyone can request an FBI file, and they do. Most who request a
file want to know what the government has on them. "The fallacy
is people think the FBI has a file on everybody," said Kelso.
About 58 percent of all requesters are people requesting their
own files, with roughly 15 percent from prisoners. Journalists,
authors and students make up the rest.

"If you're a special agent ... there is legitimate investigative
reason we've done a background investigation on you. Yes, we
will have a file. But if you're Joe Q. Citizen or Sue Q.
Citizen, it doesn't mean we would have a file on you," said
Kelso.

Dossier may not be accurate

Even if the FBI does have a file on you, it may not be accurate.
Agents gather information from a variety of sources, not all of
them reliable. They receive unsolicited messages from people
with grudges, ulterior motives and mental problems. All of it is
noted in the files, where it sits until someone asks to see it.

            APBnews.com/Jason Miccolo JohnsonThe FBI's reading
            room received 226 visitors in 1998. Linda Kloss,
            public information officer, displays some of the
            files available to the public.

For instance, Carol Brightman, author of Sweet Chaos: The
Grateful Dead's American Adventure, who once trailed 1960s bands
such as the Grateful Dead, was also involved in liberal
political movements that caught the eye of the feds. She
recently received a 480-page dossier on herself from the FBI.

Brightman said she was amazed when she read her file, with its
stern warnings calling her "armed and dangerous."

"It's hilarious, in a way," she said. "I never even owned a
gun."

Hurry up and wait

It took four years for Brightman to receive her file. That was
the kind of delay that prompted additional congressional funding
and new procedures initiated by Kelso, which have successfully
whittled down a huge backlog of more than 18,000 separate
requests to just over 7,363 as of Sept. 30.

Kelso said his office handles about 1,000 requests per month,
but not every piece of paper passes his desk. "I don't need to
see every bit of paper."

There are 549 staff members in the FOIA/PA office, and the
office, busting at the seams, expanded over the summer into
space down the block, according to Linda Kloss, FOIA/PA public
information officer.

'Warm and fuzzy' approach

Kelso said he noticed that requesters were tired of receiving
impersonal, computer-generated form letters in the mail. So the
FBI developed a "warm and fuzzy approach to the requesters who
write in," said Kelso. An eight-person negotiation team works
with requesters to narrow the scope of their solicitation and
shorten response time. The three types of categories recognized
by the FBI are: small (one to 500 pages), medium (501 to 2,500
pages) and large (2,501 pages and up).

            APBnews.com/Jason Miccolo JohnsonJohn Kelso Jr.

The negotiation team has managed close to 221 large requests
over the past two years -- 2.9 million pages of documents that
would have otherwise clogged the system, said Kelso. He is
careful to point out that narrowing the scope of their search
does not mean requesters are relinquishing any legal rights --
or their place in line -- to receive the rest. So if 10,000
pages whet the appetite, the other 90,000 are not far behind.

In the past, requesters have been known to age a decade or two
while waiting. Those unhappy with the FBI's final
determinations, redactions or other results of their requests
can appeal to the Office of Information and Privacy, and if
they're still not satisfied, they can opt to go to court.

Agents aren't always pleased

Kelso said that it is not uncommon for his office to encounter
resistance from FBI agents who would rather keep documents
secret and out of the public eye. This, he said, is where his
field experience really counts.

Kelso was a special agent for 30 years, working on cases such as
the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing, the theft of military property
from Camp Pendleton in the 1980s and some gruesome killings of
police officers. "I think it gives you the credibility in terms
of responding to the people under you when they ask a question,"
he said. "Been there, done that," he said with a laugh.

Kelso said he insists on communication. He said he will sit down
and review the file with an unhappy agent. Soon, an agent who
began by saying, "You're giving up what!" turns to "OK, that's
not a problem," Kelso said.

Communication is one of the things Kelso hopes will make his
department, which has been criticized for its snail-like pace
and mammoth backlog, run more smoothly. "People who want
substantial records, if treated in a reasonable manner, will
respond in a reasonable manner," he said.

Entering the electronic age

Kelso said he believes the FOIA office is on the right track.
The Internet and computer technology has made the entire FOIA/PA
process faster and public documents more readily accessible. The
FBI has begun posting some of its processed cases on its Web
site, and plans to sell CD-ROMs of the more popular files are in
the works. However, Kelso said, posting files on the Internet
hasn't significantly cut down on requests.

The FBI is in the process of having a computerized processing
system designed specifically for their FOIA office, where its
team will be able to do everything on screen, from answering
requests to electronically redacting information.

For all its hard work and effort, the FOIA/PA office rarely gets
a thank you from its many requesters. "Hallmarks are fine,"
quipped Kelso. "It's uncommon that we get thanked ... but do any
components of the federal government get thanked?"

Personally speaking

Kelso owes his current job to the Freedom of Information/Privacy
Act, which Congress passed in 1966 (and modified in 1974) to
give people the right to know how the government works by
allowing them access to its files, but his entrance to the FBI
wasn't exactly planned. He said he knew soon after being hired
by a Pittsburgh law firm (where Orin Hatch was a player) that
the "grunt work" associated with freshman lawyers wasn't his
forte.

"I thought, 'Well, gee, maybe I'll try the FBI,'" he said. "And
here I am coming up on 30 years later in the FBI not having made
as much money as I would have practicing law but having a real
sense of fulfillment and accomplishment."

Kelso said he is looking forward to being a grandfather. His two
sons, both Navy fliers -- one in Kosovo and the other serving in
the Persian Gulf -- plan to start families soon. Kelso said his
dream, about 10 years down the line, consists of perfecting his
golf game and dining with his future grandchildren at
McDonald's.

**

Tami Sheheri is an APBnews.com staff writer
(tami.sheheri@apbnews.com).

*G-FILES REPORTS

�Copyright 1999 APB Multimedia 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 >
   Nov > Nov 24

                  Re: CPR-Canada News: New Web Site Address

From: Paul Anderson - TMP/CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 22:06:38 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:37:21 -0500
Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: New Web Site Address


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

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


New Web Site Address


November 23, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


The primary URL for the CPR-Canada web site has changed. The new
address is:

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

Please update your links and bookmarks accordingly. In due time,
a regular domain name should be available. In the meantime, this
should simplify things a bit (thanks to new updates at
Yahoo!Geocities). The previous address will still work as a
backup if needed:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3310


_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/1999.html

20 formations!

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/cpr-canada/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/cpr-canada


� 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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                      Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:35:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 03:26:27 -0500
Subject: Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99


 >From www.abc.net.au/news

The National Space Centre is investigating numerous reports from
eastern Australia about a strange missile-like object seen in
the sky last night.

The centre's national operations director, Ross Dowe, says at
first they suspected a meteor shower, or a satellite, but it
does appear to be something different.

Mr Dowe says the Space Centre received a flood of calls from
9.30pm from New South Wales and into Victoria, about a
cylindrical, or missile-shaped object which appeared to break
up.

"It went over from west to east and there were some strange
illuminations behind it," he said.

"They say it was dark grey with some sort of fireball behind it
and some other strange reflections in front of it as well."

Phone inquiries about the sighting can be made with the UFO
Research Centre on 1800 77 22 88.

Courtesy of Soma(soma@b12.com.au) - alt.ufo.reports


-----

James. james_greive@myself.com

http://abc.net.au/news/newslink/nat/newsnat-24nov1999-47.htm

was the link to this story but it has been removed from the
site. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is
Australia's public broadcaster. Comparable organisations would
be BBC (UK), CBC (Canada), PBS (USA).

Many people were telephoning a popular talkback radio programme
on a Victorian radio station 3AW reporting these events.
Victoria is a state of Australia located in the south-eastern
part of the country.

The reports included the following:

Numerous sightings were reported from Brisbane to Canberra and
on to Melbourne (~2000 kilometres).

A witness stated he saw the object break up into about 30
separate objects, "fly" independently of each other and then
"depart".

The colour of the object was a red/orange colour and had a
flame-like tail.

The most surprising part of all was that at approximately 1 AM,
local time, THE PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA, Mr. John Howard was
on the telephone to try and calm people and reassure them it was
a natural event!

Another odd occurrence was the listing of the Australian UFO
Hotline in the news item.

The radio station has said nothing at all today but last night
it was a major story reported real time and had many witnesses
phoning in right along the eastern coast of Australia.

Kind regards,
James. james_greive@myself.com

Courtesy of alt.ufo.reports


Todd Lemire

-- The UFO Phenomena is the only physical occurrence that we
have ever encountered that actively dictates the terms upon
which it could be studied.  .....our inability to study the
phenomena was part of a calculated program to hide its
activities and purpose.

Taken from "The Threat" by David M. Jacobs, PH.D.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                    MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:08:17 +1300 (NZDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 03:42:45 -0500
Subject: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


Greetings List

I have this matter to ask Stanton Friedman with the request that
you respond to the points raised herein

 From Private discussions I have had with knowledgable
researchers there have been the following discussion raised.

Stanton could you please tell me whether you still trust your
(perhaps your former) research colleage William (Bill) Moore or
at least do you still trust in the authenticity of the MJ12
material which he gave to you?

And How do you respond to the following discussion in light of
the items stated?

In Light of these statements can you still say that the MJ12
still holds up?

I would respectfully request that you answer my enquiry without
any Insults or "slanging match" being generated

The discussion follows herewith

     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stanton Friedman believes the MJ-12 documents to be real. This
is based upon the "discoveries" of his then-partner William
Moore, who along with Jaime Shandera, received copies of most of
the original MJ-12 documents on film. The exception is one
document, the Cutler-Twining memo, which was claimed by Moore
and Shandera to have been "discovered" at the National Archives
under controversial circumstances.

Author Timothy Good, in receipt of the MJ-12 documents from an
"intelligence source" (who happened to use the same photocopier
as William Moore), created the first major publicity splash
about MJ-12 from Britain in 1987 to publicize his book ABOVE TOP
SECRET. This was quickly followed by Moore becoming an MJ-12
public figure in the U.S. Moore (with Shandera) and Good
essentially initiated the MJ-12 controversy.

In recent times, Moore offered his reflections on MJ-12 and Roswell:

"If any of the UFO-related documents cited by me in past
writings are fabrications (a matter which I have always conceded
to be within the bounds of possibility), then I was just as much
taken in and used as anyone else, if not more."  from Saucer
Smear, 4-20-97.

"I no longer am of the opinion that the extraterrestrial
explanation is the best explanation for this event (Roswell)."
from Saucer Smear, 8-5-97.

(on Roswell) "I've always harbored some doubts about this case."
from Saucer Smear, 11-15-97.

Timothy Good, in 1996, said he believed the MJ-12 documents to
be bogus (BEYOND TOP SECRET, 1996, pg. 468), though he
originally claimed to have received them from a source within
the government.

How do these statements, from the initiators of the MJ-12
debate, concur with Friedman's insistence that the documents are
authentic? Moore and Shandera "found" the only document that was
alleged to have come from government sources, which formed the
core of Friedman's faith in the authenticity of the papers. It
hardly sounds like Moore is wholly convinced of this anymore. If
there is a case here, Friedman hasn't convinced his own
colleagues!

If Friedman's case is conclusive, it depends upon the
credibility of William Moore's activities. Does Friedman believe
Moore is an honest man? If he is, why did Moore refer to
Friedman, the chief defender of MJ-12,  as "Fraudmann" (Saucer
Smear, 11-15-97)? Or why would a discoverer of the MJ-12 papers
say this about his colleague:

"As for Friedman, I think he is in this thing way over his head,
and I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him get badly burned by
it. It troubles me greatly to see the money-grubbing showman
side of him dominating his once respectable scientific
acumen."(Saucer Smear, 11-15-96.)


If Moore isn't an honest man, then the debate about MJ-12's
authenticity is academic. Either way, where is Friedman's case
now?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I would respectfully request that you answer my enquiry without
any Insults or "slanging match" being generated

I look forward to your response, Stanton

Regards
Murray Bott

Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
Voice : 64-9-6345285
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                           Perils of UFO Research

From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:21:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 03:36:35 -0500
Subject: Perils of UFO Research


Dear List,

A short story for you today of a recent adventure in UFO
research. I'm posting this for the benefit of those on the List
who don't have the opportunity to do direct, field research on
this topic. I hope the field researchers recognize something of
their own experience herein.

Some background: I'm a news writer/producer at a Toronto TV
station, with a small (very small) reputation as a UFO
researcher, based mainly on media appearances I've made. I made
those appearances because when you drive a car with license
plates that read UFO GUY and you work at a TV station and
they're doing a story on UFOs, who do you think they go to
first?

Anyway, this past weekend, the duty producer got a call from a
viewer who claimed to have shot "the best UFO videotape ever".
The producer, not wanting to walk into that minefield, told the
viewer the station's UFO expert (me) didn't work weekends, "call
back Monday". Then he phoned me at home to give me a heads-up,
adding the caller didn't sound like he had been a Rhodes
scholar... now or in any past life.

On Tuesday, I got the call for the amateur cameraman, inviting
me over to his residence to view the tape. I was told flat out
it was the best viz ever shot of a UFO and would I be able to
suggest how they could make money off it.

I promised to look at the tape, voice an opinion... and suggested
financial opportunities in UFOs were extremely limited, but if
the tape was the real-deal, anything was possible. I got the
address, in a Toronto neighborhood known as Mimico or south
Etobicoke. I've always considered it the drainage ditch of the
city's gene pool.

When I told my wife Kathy of my plans for a UFO video viewing,
she proved once again I married my intellectual superior,
telling me to bring someone with me... just in case. I contacted
our beloved moderator, Errol Bruce-et al, but he was side-lined
by an allergy attack. However, his partner-in-crime Sue Kovios
would join me to examine this possible evidence of aerial
weirdness.

We arrived at the address at the appointed time, the cameraman
lived in the basement apartment of a low-rise building. When the
door opened, Sue and I bravely faced one of the true horrors of
UFO research... not all witnesses are created equal.

We entered an apartment that had the same total square footage
as my garage... but my garage doesn't smell of damp rot and old
gym socks. The place had been tastefully decorated in Early Beer
Fridge, with creative assistance from Homer at the Salvation
Army Thrift Shop. The only thing missing was a painting of Elvis
on black velvet... but I didn't risk using the bathroom, so I
might have missed it.

As for the cameraman/witness, he came as a package deal... he
was there, along with his brother and a family friend, but all
three looked like they knew every note of Dueling Banjos, so who
knows. In the largest city in Canada these three missed urban
sophistication by about 200 miles and a dozen chromosomes. All
three had swallowed a brew or two before we got there... the
family friend probably swallowed most of the afternoon output of
the local brewery.

They regaled us with twenty minutes of talking about how great
the tape was... then finally hit the play button.

A twenty minute drive, followed by twenty minutes of very
shallow breathing in an apartment where they should call in an
air strike and start over... so that Sue and I could watch five
minutes of the most jumpy, blurry, over enlarged views of, you
guessed it, VENUS! ever videotaped by a drunk at four in the
morning.

After signing a receipt for a copy of the tape, which I will
examine thoroughly, just to be on the safe side, Sue and I left
Larry and Daryl and the other buddy, Daryl. It might have been
the proudest moment of my life: neither one of us laughed in
their faces.

So, answering the call to see the 'best UFO video ever', lead me
to the kind of apartment, and people, I knew 20 years ago. It
was nice to stroll down memory lane and even nicer to beat a
hasty retreat.

As for the tape, no ET, no UFO, just a shaky view of Venus...
and a face-to-face encounter with living proof that the rule
against cousins marrying is a sound one.

I hope _your_ next expedition meets with greater success. I'll
feel better when one lands on Parliament Hill and the White
House lawn.


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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 17:56:37 +0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:34:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


 >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:27:01 -0600
 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day

 >>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:36:49 +0800

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
 >>>Subject: Happy Bird Day
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snipped the usual good stuff>

 >>I find it hard to celebrate the annihilation of the culture and
 >>livelihood of a unique race of people.

 >>Hope you had a nice lunch
 >>Cheers
 >>Sharon K

 >Great echo on Jim's post, Sharon. It's good too know there are
 >others willing to cop to the ubiquitous cultural buffoonery.

No denying history, Alfred, just tell it like it is :) (as my
dear ol' dad used to say)

 >More behavior like that from the three of us and the questions
 >we have regarding flying saucers will resolve themselves.

 >Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Hey, anything to help out!  That certainly would save many
talented people a lot of time and effort :)

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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 07:30:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:38:25 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:08:17 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

 >Greetings List

 >I have this matter to ask Stanton Friedman with the request that
 >you respond to the points raised herein

<snip>


I am leaving for Rhode Island in 5 minutes and will respond when
I return on Nov. 30.

It seems strange that no mention is made of my book TOP
SECRET/MAJIC or my Final Report on Operation Majestic 12 or
several other papers. I have published a great deal about this
matter.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                         BBC Is Looking For Hoagland

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 14:23:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:42:10 -0500
Subject: BBC Is Looking For Hoagland


Dear All,

The BBC World Service is trying to contact Richard Hoagland. If
anyone out there can pass this message on to him I'd be most
grateful.

Many thanks,

Phillip Mantle.

---

Neil McCarthy wrote:

Dear Philip,

If you can get hold of a contact email or number for Richard
Hoagland that'd be great.

See you,

Neil

Neil McCarthy
Producer,
Mailto:Neil.McCarthy@bbc.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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                       John Mack on 'Today Show' 11/26

From: Will Buech <willb3d@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 14:43:52 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:34:42 -0500
Subject: John Mack on 'Today Show' 11/26


[Non-Subscriber Post]

FYI - Dr. John Mack may be on the Today Show on Friday Nov. 26th
in support of his new book 'Passport to the Cosmos: Human
Transformation and Alien Encounters'. The interview, conducted
by Matt Lauer, was recorded Nov. 10th for later broadcast.
Friday Nov. 26th is the tentative airdate, and may change
without notice.

An additional segment featuring Dr. Mack and two experiencers
from "Passport to the Cosmos" recorded for the Later Today
program (which airs in some areas after the Today Show), has not
yet been scheduled for airing.

More details to be announced on Dr. Mack's website,

PEER: http://www.peer-mack.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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                         Re: Perils of UFO Research

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 12:19:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:35:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Perils of UFO Research


 >From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Perils of UFO Research
 >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:21:54 -0500

<snip>

 >As for the cameraman/witness, he came as a package deal... he
 >was there, along with his brother and a family friend, but all
 >three looked like they knew every note of Dueling Banjos, so who
 >knows. In the largest city in Canada these three missed urban
 >sophistication by about 200 miles and a dozen chromosomes. All
 >three had swallowed a brew or two before we got there... the
 >family friend probably swallowed most of the afternoon output of
 >the local brewery.

<snip>

And, per the recent newspaper ad, I bet they smoked Winstons,
eh?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:17:31 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:38:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:41 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:20:19 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

<snip>

 >Using 1997 which was the last full year of data, Sizewell had
 >704 sightings, Bradwell 416 and Dungeness 291.

 >What is strange about the sightings in these areas are that the
 >FTs are seen hovering or moving slowly (30-45 mph) at a mere 100
 >- 200 feet above ground level. These aren't aerial sightings but
 >extremely low level and have been seen moving infront of the
 >buildings at the power stations. Given that information
 >satellites, aircraft and astronomical events can be ruled out,
 >although I certainly haven't ruled out a man made vehicle. My
 >question was, what reason could these lights or vehicles be
 >visiting the power plants? I would much prefer to explore the
 >possibilities from a human point of view rather than an alien
 >view point as this is more likely where the conclusion will lead
 >us.

 >Have you any ideas?

Hi, Tony, List:

Actually, other than some sort of balloon, upon further
reflection there are some questions which might help narrow
things down, somewhat.

1) How many of the 709 sightings involved something seeming to
move in front of the power plant buildings?

2) What was the distance of the witness from the said buildings?

3) Where there any roads, railroads, airports between the
witnesses and the buildings?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

             Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures

From: David Gullick <dgullick@interlog.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:38:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:43:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures


 >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 17:58:09 -0500
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear Friends,

Dear Joachim,

 >As wrote here some times in the past: we have been in England
 >during the past nine years every summer, ...

How coincidental! I have been visiting Wessex every year for
the past thiry-four years and, prior to that, I lived there!  In
a remark to Jennifer, a couple of years ago I indicated I have
yet to see a crop- circle. Amazing eh?

 >... we have done our reseach and experiments very intensively
 >and know very well what is going on there.

Really... please tell.

 >... On one hand, by the years, a real crop circle
 >business has established, on the other hand a genuine phenomenon
 >is still there which manifests from time to time.

On which hand are you sitting, Joachim?

How do these phenomena manifest themselves Joachim?

 >The formation beside Devil's Den (Clatford) surely was one of
 >the best this year and those who placed it knew something about
 >the energies around these stones. It is one of the best examples
 >how humans tried to build in their formation the enrgies of the
 >planet, reached a high standard, but could not succeed
 >completely.

By golly, do the scientific community know of these "energies"
and are they affecting such efforts as the space program and
military weaponry? This could be disastrous as weapon
testing/manouvers are carried out in that area.

Have you contacted the Ministry of Defence and NASA about this?

 >I know Ron Russell and estimate him very much because of his
 >modesty and sensitivity towards the genuine phenomenon. He was
 >gifted by the Higher Intelligences, who are at work around Alton
 >Barnes/Averbury, with amazing experiences at several occasions.

Were these "amazing experiences" before, during or after one of
those (in)famous meetings at the local pub? How did they
manifest themselves?

Could you give us a short list/explanation of how to
observe/measure/quantify and record these
energies/manifestations along with a short list of equipment
used including manufacturers and models.

Don't feel abashed at being too scientific or technical as there
are many UpDates readers more than qualified to assist me/us.

Please don't tell me to read books/websites etc;, a short
meassage will suffice.

from a "Mendip Lad",

djg






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Jim Mortellaro Jsmortell@aol.com
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 12:15:18 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:45:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 17:56:37 +0800


 >>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:27:01 -0600
 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day

 >>>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >>>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:36:49 +0800

 >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
 >>>>Subject: Happy Bird Day
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >><snipped the usual good stuff>

 >>>I find it hard to celebrate the annihilation of the culture and
 >>>livelihood of a unique race of people.

 >>>Hope you had a nice lunch
 >>>Cheers
 >>>Sharon K

 >>Great echo on Jim's post, Sharon. It's good too know there are
 >>others willing to cop to the ubiquitous cultural buffoonery.

 >No denying history, Alfred, just tell it like it is :) (as my
 >dear ol' dad used to say)

 >>More behavior like that from the three of us and the questions
 >>we have regarding flying saucers will resolve themselves.

 >>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

 >Hey, anything to help out!  That certainly would save many
 >talented people a lot of time and effort :)

Of course, if one is referring to the Lehmburg-Kardol-Gesundt
team in the same breath as "talented people," then one may be on
the right track.  If, however, one is referring to those UFO
Researchers who cop to pelican droppings in formation, swamp gas
materializing into solid objet d'art, the planet Venus or the
three dudes Docca Woods and Susie visited, you know, the ones
playing the dueling banjo's whilst marrying each other, and they
were related?

Them.

Then I object most strenuously.  But not right now.  I'm
Grippled to the mainsail and sleepy on the meat of the dead
bird. I am also paying my respects to the goodly gentleman, my
buddy out in Kansas and fellow space traveler and perceived
abductee, for the bounty of this 10.8 pound hen he shot dead in
it's flight path. See, domestic turkeys are dumber than dumb.
But a wild turkey is like Wile E. Coyote with brains.  Very
slick.

He thought it was a UFO coming to get him again and decided to
shoot three rounds of well placed #7 bird shot in this hen's
coolie.

She arrived by Fedex in dry ice.  Overnight.  Fedex, UPS and all
the rest will no longer ship guns and ammo.  But they allow us
to ship the innocent dead which have been wantonly murdered by
those self same weapons of mass destruction.

Thank you Fedex, for shipping Tomisina for us. She was
delicious. I don't hunt any longer as I don't have it in me to
take even the life of a lowly animal, unless of course we are
hungry.  Then it's every murderer for him or her self.  But I
won't pass up a dead bird sent with love from a friend.

Besides, the last time I shot at a wild turkey, it scared the
hell outa me when he flushed and I missed.  Happened every time
I used to shoot at birds.

Anyway, I demand that our erected president and other gesheft
fuhrers in goobermint take my guns away.  I am a danger to ...
uh ... actually, I am no longer a danger to anyone.  But they
should take them anyway.  Hell, I might shoot at one of ours
thinking it's a UFO!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                             Re: Happy Bird Day

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:59:12 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:47:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day


 >From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 17:56:37 +0800

 >>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:27:01 -0600
 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day

 >>>From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Happy Bird Day
 >>>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:36:49 +0800

 >>>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:41:16 EST
 >>>>Subject: Happy Bird Day
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >><snipped the usual good stuff>

 >>>I find it hard to celebrate the annihilation of the culture and
 >>>livelihood of a unique race of people.

 >>>Hope you had a nice lunch
 >>>Cheers
 >>>Sharon K

 >>Great echo on Jim's post, Sharon. It's good too know there are
 >>others willing to cop to the ubiquitous cultural buffoonery.

 >No denying history, Alfred,

You ought to live in THIS country <g>.

 >just tell it like it is :) (as my
 >dear ol' dad used to say)

Yeah -- but when?

 >>More behavior like that from the three of us and the questions
 >>we have regarding flying saucers will resolve themselves.

 >Hey, anything to help out!  That certainly would save many
 >talented people a lot of time and effort :)

Perhaps, but maybe they're not doing it right, for it seems that
all that truly remains is the admission -- all the rest dances
and teases for a lot of intelligent people, but languishes for
this base acceptance from our non elected cultural captains.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 20 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                     USAF UFO Annotated Bibiography 1969

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:25:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:32:22 -0500
Subject: USAF UFO Annotated Bibiography 1969


Check out this auction on E-Bay.  Great document for the serious
collector.


http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item7544667

Catoe, Lynn E., Library of Congress. : UFOs AND RELATED
SUBJECTS: An Annotated Bibliography.

Prepared by the Library of Congress Science and Technology
Division for the Air Force Office of Scientific Research /
Office of Airspace Research, USAF. Arlington, Virginia 22209 ...
; Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969. ... under
AFOSR project orders 67-002 and 68-003. 4to (10-1/8 x 7-3/4)
wraps. XI, 401 pp. Illustrated. Author Index. [Rare]., Occult o
UFOs UFOlogy Space Air Force Science Military Occult Metaphysics
Psychology Bibliography


Todd Lemire
--
The UFO Phenomena is the only physical occurrence that we have ever
encountered that actively dictates the terms upon which it could be
studied.  .....our inability to study the phenomena was part of a
calculated program to hide its activities and purpose.

Taken from "The Threat" by David M. Jacobs, PH.D.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 25

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 31

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 20:07:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 18:52:24 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 31


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 31
November 25, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

MYSTERIOUS ENGINE FAILURE
DOOMED EGYPTAIR 990

      Recovery of the cockpit voice recorder from
jetliner EgyptAir 990, which plunged into the
Atlantic Ocean during the early morning hours of
Sunday, October 31, 1999, has allowed the
investigators to piece together the doomed
aircraft's final flight.
      Both of the Boeing 767's jet turbofan engines
shut down during the final minutes before impact.
And the plane's flight recorders and altitude-
reporting trnsponder also stopped working.
      The Boeing 767 "delivered new to Egypt in
1989, was powered by two Pratt & Whitney engines.
It had proven reliable and efficient; it had logged
33,219 hours of flight time, almost as many hours
as the combined tally of its experienced command
crew of four captains and first officers."
      "Flight 990's pilot, Ahmed Mahoud Mohammed
Habashy, was one of the airline's most senior and
respected fliers, a veteran of 35 years in the skies."
      The co-pilot was Gameel Batouti, 59, "a former
Egyptian Air Force pilot who faced mandatory
retirement in March" of 2000.
      Flight 990 took off at 1:19 a.m. on October 31.
"Takeoff and ascent were normal.  Flight 990 began
climbing to the southeast.  At about 120 miles out,
it was vectored to the northeast and settled in for
the long overwater flight (from New York City to
Cairo) at 33,000 feet (10,000 meters).
      "At 1:43 a.m., a routine radio transmission
was made to air traffic control."
      "Early in the flight, according to sources
familiar with the investigation, Batouti, the relief
co-pilot, entered the cockpit and asked to fly,
even though he wasn't scheduled to take over
until far later in the trip.  Batouti was given the
co-pilot's chair."
      "Half an hour into the flight, with the plane at
cruising altitude, Capt. Habashy got up, exchanged
a few words with the co-pilot and left the cockpit,
perhaps to use the bathroom, perhaps to get some
coffee."
      "Sometime in the next five minutes, the co-pilot,
believed to be Batouti, recited a fragment of a
Muslim prayer, "Tawakilt ala Allah."  (Or, to give
the Arabic a free translation, "I put myself in the
hands of God."--J.T.)
      "At 1:49 a.m. and 45 seconds, investigators now
believe, the co-pilot clicked twice on the red button
on his control column, switching off the autopilot."
      "Eight seconds later, the co-pilot pushed his
control column forward, tilting the plane over into a
dive.  The plane's tail raised up; the nose pointed
down.  The dive was so steep that 14 seconds later
Flight 990 reached a zero-gravity state, meaning its
passengers felt weightless--a condition that lasted
about 20 seconds."
      "At almost the same time, Flight 990 surpassed
its maximum allowed speed and plummeted at up
to 94 percent the speed of sound (Mach 1).  A
warning alarm sounded and, because of the zero-
gravity state, engine oil pressure dropped."
      "Capt. Habashy rushed back to the cockpit.
"By some accounts, he got back into his seat
and said, 'What's going on?' or 'What's happening?'
Moments later, the same voice (Habashy's--J.T.):
'Pull with me!  Pull with me!'"
      At 1:50 a.m. and 22 seconds, two odd things
happened."
      "Two devices on the tail began to point in
opposite directions--one commanding the plane
to dive, the other positioning it to climb.  The
'climb' device was being controlled from the
pilot's side while the 'dive' device was controlled
from the co-pilot's side."
      "These left and right elevators, which normally
operate in tandem to control the craft's up and down
movements--split (my emphasis--J.T.) apparently
the result of two pilots pulling and pushing hard in
opposite directions on their control columns."
      "Flight 990 kept diving, kept picking up speed,
plummeting towards the Atlantic."
      "At almost the same moment, someone shut down
the engines (my emphasis--J.T.), a deliberate step that
requires pulling up a shield and pulling a switch.  It
cannot be done accidentally."
      "In the final seconds before the flight recorders
stopped working, someone deployed the plane's speed
brakes, panels mounted atop the wing that can help a
plane descend without overspeeding.  Those familiar
with aerodynamics say that such a maneuver would
only cause the plane to descend even more forcefully
and make it difficult to climb.  The speed brake handle
is on the pilot's side of the cockpit."
      "Nonetheless, for a few seconds at least, Flight 990
seemed to be coming out of its dive, investigators said
Wednesday," November 17, 1999.
      "But not for long. Perhaps eight seconds after the
engine shutdown, the plane's recorders and the altitude-
reporting transponder stopped working (my emphasis--J.T.)
But radar shows the airplane climbing back to 24,000
feet."
      "The climb didn't last long.  Before 2 a.m., Flight 990
stalled, plunged abd broke apart."
      All 217 people aboard were killed when the jetliner
hit the ocean just off the coast of Massachusetts.
      "Debris scattered for about 60 miles off the
Massachusetts coast.  Few remains were found of
the 217 people aboard.  There was never so much as
a distress call from the plane."
      The crash of EgyptAir Flight 990 has been a
hot-button issue in the Egyptian press.  "The most
popular conspiracy theory making the rounds involves
a plot by the Mossad, Israel's secret service, to destroy
the Boeing 767 in retaliation for the United States
passing military know-how to the 33 Egyptian soldiers
on board," who were returning to Cairo after a military
assignment in the USA.
      "Mustafa Bakri, editor of the weekly Al-Osboa
newspaper, says most (Egyptian) people believe the
U.S. or Israeli governments had a hand in Flight 990's
fate."
      "'I'm suspicious about the delay in picking up the
two black boxes and the lack of bodies,' he says,
holding up a headline that reads CIA Touches Black
Boxes before their Release.."
      During a heated two-hour meeting in Cairo on
Monday, November 22, 1999, Egyptian transportation
chief Ibrahim Demiri told the assembly, "Our investigation
confirmed that the accident was not a result of human
error.  This was presented to the president (i.e. Hosni
Mubarak, president of Egypt--J.T.), and he called
President Clinton."  (See the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune
for November 21, 1999, "Questions about EgyptAir
Flight 990 linger," page 13A.  Also USA Today for
November 19, 1999, "Crash conspiracy theories
abound," page 3A, and USA Today for November 23,
1999, "Egypt's report on crash steers away from
sabotage," page 1A.)
(Editor's Comment:  I have just one question about
Flight 990.  In the original underwater photos of the
wrecked cockpit, is the safety shield over the engine
cutoff switch up or down?)

GIGANTIC UFO SEEN BY
THOUSANDS IN THE
SOUTH PACIFIC

      On Thursday, November 4, 1999, a gigantic
UFO was seen by thousands of people on the
large islands of New Britain and New Ireland in
the southwestern Pacific Ocean.
      "Thousands in the New Britain region, the
Gazelle Peninsula, the remote Bainingo ranges,
the Duke of York Islands, the Baining area,,
Vuvu Beach, north coast of Rabaul and Pilapila
currently have apparently witnessed a large,
slow-moving object described variously as a
craft...approximately about 200 metres
(660 feet) long, 50 metres (165 feet) wide
which was 'lit up like a city in the sky,' passing
slowly across the sky making a quiet puffing
noise'--an airship, perhaps?"
      "But other descriptions challenge this
possibility.  People living in the Duke of York
(island) group close to New Ireland reported
seeing a huge craft hovering just metres above
the sea off St. Geroges Channel, and traveling
very slowly.  They also reported other smaller
craft with bright lights circling the large one 'in a
playful manner.'"
      "John Berenti, a family of Namatanal, New
Ireland, saw 'a large craft just above the tops of
the mango trees;' he estimated (the UFO to be)
200 metres (660 feet) to 300 metres (990 feet)
long and 50 metres (165 feet) wide."
      "Raymond Theodore, a police officer, at about
8:30 p.m. (November 4, 1999) on Vuvu Beach,
north Rabaul coast, saw 'a large craft traveling
just metres above the (ocean) surface and saw
it travel over Waton Island.  It had very bright lights
on the back as it moved along.'"
      "Alex Jame and four other boys returning from
Pilapila Community School at 7 p.m. and others
saw bright lights approaching.  As the UFO approached,
Alex related, 'the streetlights dimmed like when the
batteries in a torch (flashlight in the USA--J.T.) are
shot.'  He stated (that) it was noiseless, oblong in
shape, bright lights around the edge with top level
pyramid with some lights around it.  All white lights."
      "The boys said it took 30 minutes to pass them.
Alex said when the object hovered over them, the
place around them lit up and they could see people
near them as if it were daylight.  It eventually
disappeared over the mountains near Vuvu."
      "John McLeod, manager of the Malangan Beach
Resort, New Ireland province, said he watched it and
thought it was a satellite re-entry.  He seems to be
describing something else entirely."  (See the
newspaper Papua New Guinea Post-Courier for
November 11, November 12 and November 15, 1999.
Many thanks to Errol Bruce-Knapp for forwarding
this newspaper article.)

GIANT GREEN FIREBALL
SEEN BY THOUSANDS IN
THE USA'S UPPER MIDWEST

      Shortly after 7 p.m. on Tuesday, November 16,
1999, a giant luminous green fireball flew from
west to east across the states of the USA's
Upper Midwest region, startling thousnads of
eyewitnesses.
      "A little after 6 p.m. (Central time) Tuesday,
a bright light--most reported it as green--streaked
across the eastern sky of the Chicago (Illinois)
area for about 5 to 10 seconds and abruptly broke
into a cascade of particles, causing a variety of
reactions among viewers ranging from cosmically
cool to panic-stricken."
      "Don Troiani, an astronomer at the Cernan
Earth and Space Center at Triton College in River
Grove, Ill. was convinced that the light was caused
by 'space debris' rather than a meteor shower."
      "Shane Crone, the Adler Planetarium's
observatory operator and sky show operator, agreed,
saying the reported bright green color made him
doubt it was a meteor.  More likely, he said, it was
a satellite."
      "But then again, he said, 'It's hard to say.'"
      "Joe Petersen of Island Lake, who was driving
eastbound on Illinois Highway 176 when he saw the
light, said he felt it was a plane crash."  (See the
Chicago Tribune for November 17, 1999, "Tuesday's
spectacle of light a source of color, confusion" by
Marla Donato and Aaner Madhani.)
      In Indiana, UFO Roundup correspondent Steve
Wilson Sr., who lives in Avon, Ind., received phone
calls from 25 witnesses who reported "a very large
fireball that flew over the south side of Indianapolis
at around 7 p.m. (Eastern time)."
      Police switchboards in Columbus, Ohio "were
swamped by callers who mistook what might have
been a meteor for a flaming aircraft."
      "'The average person won't see any that large
in a lifetime,' said Bob Hollinshead, operations
coordinator for the airport.  'We initially got calls
from people who thought it may have been an
aircraft breaking apart in the sky."
(Editor's Comment: Obviously Mr. Hollinshead
hasn't been reading recent issues of UFO Roundup.)
      "The fireball streaked across the sky from west
to east about 7 p.m., stunning stargazers as far
away as Kentucky who were awaiting the arrival
of the Leonid meteor shower."
      "The fireball lasted for twenty seconds before
disappearing over the horizon."
      "'It was gorgeous,' said Tom Burns, director of
the Perkins Observatory in Delaware, Ohio."
      "Samuel Guess and Tiffany Parker had just
placed an order at the Kentucky Fried Chicken
(fast-food restaurant) at Cleveland and Oakland
Park avenues when the fireball streaked by."
      "'It was big and it was really long.  That's how
we knew it wasn't an airplane,' Guess said."
      "It was moving really fast and then it disappeared,'
Parker said."
      "Gerald Newsom, an Ohio State University
astronomy professor, said he believes the fireball
was either a piece of an asteroid or a satellite
entering the atmosphere...At 7 p.m., when the fireball
took to the sky, the (Leonid) meteors were on the
other side of the Earth, he said."  (See the Columbus,
Ohio Dispatch for November 17, 1999, "Fireball stuns
stargazers, 'average' folks" by Roger Alford.)
      At 7:03 p.m., eyewitness O. Kinsbury was
driving through New Philadelphia, Ohio, "just north
of the Stone Creek exit," when he saw "a light train
moving across my field of vision from west to east
about 20 degrees above the road."
      Further south, in Cincinnati, "If you happened to
glance at the sky shortly after 7 p.m., you may have
thought you were getting a piece of tonight's meteor
shower."
      "Many callers to police described seeing a green
ball of fire with a fragmented tail in the sky for about
15 seconds."
      "But two Tristate astronomical experts said the
green glow that was reportedly seen from Kentucky
to Wisconsin wasn't part of the Leonid meteor
shower due to arrive late tonight.  Instead, it was
probably a dead man-made satellite reentering
Earth's atmosphere."
      "'It's definitely not a meteor,' said Paul D. Mohr,
an astronomer with the Cincinnati Observatory, who
did not witness the light show.  'According to the
descriptions, it sounds like it was a satellite.'"
      "Rick Marra of West Chester (Ohio) was driving
north on Snider Drive in Symmes Township Tuesday
when he saw the fragmented object about 7:04 p.m.
'My wife kept saying, 'Rick, stop looking up--stay on
the road,''he said, 'Whatever it was, it was huge.'"
(See the Cincinnati, Ohio Enquirer for November 17,
1999, page 1.)
(Editor's Note: Symmes Township is named for
John Cleve Symmes, an early exponent of the
Hollow Earth theory.  Remind me to tell you about
the Fortean phenomena in that town sometime.)
      At 7:04 p.m., Pamela Z. and her husband
were "walking on the University of Cincinnati
campus with 20 other people.  We all stood and
watched for what seemed like minutes.  It was an
enormous, Titanic-like aircraft.  It was like a
fireball with greenish exhaust behind.  It was quite
spectacular.  It moved slowly from west to east,
over the horizon.  The triangular shape was
apparent and circled with white/yellow lights.
People saw red and green, s well."
      In Kentucky, a Cincinnati resident "while
traveling northbound on Interstate Highway I-75
in Florence, Ky., he and his wife observed two
rows of lights (shortly after 7 p.m.) traveling in
formation."  The formation, he added, "was way
too wide to be an airplane."  (Many thanks to
Pamela Z., Kenneth Young of Cincinnati UFO
Research, Stig Agermose and Steve Wingate
of Skywatch International for their reports.)

FISHERMEN VIDEOTAPE UFO
IN NEW SOUTH WALES

      On Sunday, November 7, 1999, several fishermen
videotaped a UFO from their boat, which was just
offshore from Coffs Harbour, New South Wales,
Australia.
      "Tony Bell, 33, and his colleagues claim to have
seen a strange dome-shaped object when they were
about six natuical miles off the New South Wales
coast near Coffs Harbour, north of Sydney."
      "'This thing just appeared.  It was 100 to 150
feet (30 to 45 meters) up in the sky,' he said, adding
that the object had a bright orange, shiny appearance
and seemed to be coming closer to the two boats the
group were using."
      "'It would move closer, then south of us, then
move closer again.'"
      Grabbing his videocamera, Bell began shooting
footage of the UFO.  "'It was a flying ship for sure,'
he said, 'You can see clearly from the video that it
was some sort of machine.'"
      "The fishermen have sent the video to the
Melbourne-based, privately-run National Space
Centre.  Operations director Ross Dowe said he
was waiting to examine the footage, adding, 'It was
definitely worth looking at.'"
      Coffs Harbour, N.S.W. is 400 kilometers
(250 miles) north of Sydney.  (Many thanks to Ross
Dowe and John Hayes for this report.)
(Editor's Note: Coffs Harbour is also 64 kilometers
(40 miles) southeast of Grafton, N.S.W., the site of
many UFO encounters during the past three years.)

UFOs SIGHTED IN ONTARIO

      Canada's Ontario province was the site of
three UFO sightings last week.
      On Wednesday, November 10, 1999, at
7:10 p.m., Lufthansa Flight 470 was heading west
at 35,000, passing over Springbrook, Ont.
(population 15,539) about 50 miles (80 kilometers)
east of Lake Simcoe, when the crew reportedly
spotted a UFO.
      Camire, 44, who claims to have been a
crew member aboard Flight 470, stated, "We
reported the sighting to Toronto Air Traffic Control
(ATC) Centre."  Another aircraft "ws about five
miles to the right of us and they reported seeing
the light of this object at roughly the same
altitude...It was a very eyecatching sight and
nothing we had ever experienced before."  (Many
thanks to Ben Field for this report.)
      On Wednesday, November 17, 1999, Graham
S.D. spotted a UFO  he deswcribed as "an
extremely bright orange spitting light" that was
"at an altitude of about 100 feet above the water
midway between Toronto and Point Credit, Ont.
(population 14,540), moving a little to the left or
to the right and changing colour to a deeply
beautiful shade of red."
      On Friday, November 19, 1999, at 1:40 a.m.,
Graham reported, "I was closing my son's window.
He was asleep and the rain was coming in.  It
(the UFO) was situated in the northwest sky,
and it was a bright as the sun, and this sucker
was moving fast, bright orange," remaining in view
for "four to five seconds" before zipping away.
      The UFO "made an aaaaahhh sound, hard to
describe but sort of a sigh with a metallic twang.
That would be just about right."  (Email Interview)

UFOs SPOTTED IN TWO
MICHIGAN CITIES

      On Tuesday, November 16, 1999, the witness,
Justin, spotted a UFO in Saginaw, Michigan
(population 69,100), a city on Interstate Highway
I-75 approximately 101 miles (166 kilometers)
northwest of Detroit.
      "The UFO moved from the west to the east,"
Justin reported, "It moved slowly, stopped in
mid-air and then moved on.  I seen it from a
residential area, but it was hard to tell where it
was hovering because of the size and speed
of this thing."  He described the UFO as having
"three lights with two right behind them."
      "My friends and I were walking down the
street, and suddenly we thought this thing was
slowing down.  We all stopped to look at the
object, and, as we did, the object started moving
about.  My friends and I were all afraid of it, and
we began to run toward our homes."   (Many
thanks to Ben Field for this report.)
      The same night, at about 7 p.m., Paul
Williston reported that he "and several other"
motorists were "traveling on U.S. (Route) 131
about twenty miles north of Grand Rapids, Mich.
(population 193,700).  It took over 30 seconds to
travel about 70 percent (of the sky) to the horizon."
      "It had a comet-like appearance with an
extremely bright central body and a very long
trailing tail," Williston reported, "It was brilliant
emerald green in color, fading into white as the
object began to break up it passed beyond the
eastern horizon, and I lost sight of it."
      "The most surprising thing was its very
slow, almost controlled flight that did not seem
to decrease in altitude.  It really seemed to
travel roughly parallel to the ground, and actually
seemed to disappear over the eastern horizon."
(Many thanks to Steve Wingate of Skywatch
International for this news story.)

WOMAN VIDEOTAPES UFO
IN NORTHEAST WISCONSIN

      On Sunday, November 14, 1999, at 8:12 p.m.,
the witness, Traci, was at her home in Stella
township, near Rhinelander, Wisconsin, which
is located 271 miles (433 kilometers) northwest
of Milwaukee, when she spotted an unusual
light in the sky.
      "At 8:12 p.m., my husband and I saw a strange
light in the sky to the south of our home.  We
watched this out our patio window.  I grabbed my
camcorder and started taping.  I only have a few
minutes on tape."
      "The light was hovering above the treetops
and changing colors, from red to green to white,
then starting the color sequence over again.  The
light was slowly moving up, then down, then to
the right.  I called a friend, and she came over
to the house and also caught this on tape."
(Many thanks to Jim Aho of the W-Files for
this report.)

CIGAR-SHAPED UFO SEEN
EAST OF SAN DIEGO

      On Thursday, November 11, 1999, two women
from Independence, Missouri, Margie and Donna,
were driving west on Highway 8 between San Diego
and El Centro, California (population 31,384) when
they saw a metallic silver cigar-shaped UFO
over the mountains.
      They were "fifty miles east of San Diego.  The
elevation was 4,100 feet," Margie reported, "We had
just passed a sign, so that's how we knew it was
the elevation."
      "I was driving and something made me look at
the sky in a northwesterly direction," Margie added,
"I was surprised to see something that was clearly
not a plane because it had no wings or tail, no lights
and no trail behind it.  It looked like a silver metallic
cigar-shaped craft with rounded edges and was
larger at one end (the left, as I looked at it)  The object
was moving very slowly from north to south, just above
the peak of a mountain.  It would periodically slow
down, then speed up."
      "I looked at my friend a couple of seconds after
I first spotted it.  'Donna, what the heck is that!?'
To which she replied that she had no idea and
that she had been watching it for one to one-and-a-
half minutes and was trying to figure this out herself.
We both let out a yell.  'Oh, my God!  I think it's
a UFO.'"
      "At this point, I looked at my watch to verify time,
and it said 4:20 p.m.  The sun was setting in the
west and caused the craft to shine quite brightly.
We both watched the object for approximately
30 seconds and were discussing it when it made
a 90-degree turn very quickly toward the west,
became transparent and disappeared."  (Many
thanks to Morgan Clements, director of World Wide
UFO Reporting Center for this report.)

from the UFO Files...

1902: WHO'S OUT THERE?

      Every so often, you come across an encounter
story that gives you a shiver.  Such as this one.
      It took place in New London, Minnesota
(population 971), a small town on Highway 9 about
90 miles (144 kilometers) west of Minneapolis.
And it happened ninety-seven years ago, on
November 21, 1902.
      Living in the second-story apartment of the
Great Northern Railroad depot at the time (which
is still standing--J.T.) was a man named Jacob
Caylor and his family.  But let's allow his
daughter, Mrs. Deborah Caylor Kriegenbring,
tell the story in her own words.
      "When I was small...oh, let's see, that
would be about 1902...when I was about ten,
I think...of course, I went to bed pretty early.
Some little folks nowadays stay up all hours
of the night, but not me.  I was sent up to my
room by 7:30, or maybe 8 p.m. now and then.
Mine was a second story room that used to
be part of the apartment that the old depot
agent lived in."
      "Anyway, one night (prior to November 21,
1902) I was about to put out my lamp when
something caught my eye.  Some motion,
maybe.  I looked toward the window, and
there was a man's face up against the window.
I remember it plain as day.  Maybe 'cause his
nose was flat against the window and looked
like the biggest part of his face."
      "I called my father, but he didn't believe me.
It happened a few more times.  Always the
same (proboscidian) face.  But when I told my
father, he just said, 'Young lady, I think you
have a very active imagination for a ten-year-old.
Now get some sleep.'"
      "The day after Thanksgiving that year, my
cousin (Edie) from out in the country came to
stay the night.  She kept kicking me and I
wasn't used to sleeping with anyone, so I woke
up in the middle of the night.  It was a beautiful
harvest-moon night.  I looked out the window
to find the man in the moon, and there was
that other face again.  Same one.  I screamed.
That woke cousin Edie, and she saw it, too."
      The rest of the Caylor family came running.
Debbie and Edie described the weird big-nosed
face in the window.  But the adults were still
skeptical.
      "The next morning, Jacob looked around
outside before he went to work at the hardware
store.  He was looking for any impressions that
a ladder would have made in the not-yet-frozen
ground.  There wasn't even any grass broken
from a weight bearing down on it.  Nor were
there any footprints."
    "'Silly girls!' he burst out.  As an afterthought,
he checked the window to see how the oiled
paper, put there to save fuel, was holding up."
      "Suddenly he saw that a hole about the size
of a man's face had been cut into the paper!"
      After that, Jake Caylor was understandably
reluctant to visit the outhouse after dark.  (See
the book Ghostly Tales of Minnesota by Ruth
D. Hein, Adventure Publications, Cambridge,
Minn., 1992, pages 67 to 69.)
(Editor's Comment: You'll be okay, Jake.  Just
don't ever read a story by Ambrose E. Beirce
entitled The Difficulty of Crossing a Field.
Interestingly, the date of the Caylor experience--
November 21, 1902--was the night the steamer
S.S. Bannockburn disappeared on Lake Superior.
That night sailors aboard the Huronic, the
Northern Navigation Line steamship, reported
mysterious lights on the big lake.  The wreck
of the Bannockburn was never found.)

      Today is Thanksgiving Day in the USA.  The
first Thanksgiving was celebrated in Plymouth,
Massachusetts (formerly known as Patuxet) in
November of 1621.  The original name of the
country was Tolba Menaham (meaning Island
of the Great Turtle), but the Pilgrims called it
"the New English Canaan," which eventually
became "New England."
      Here's a ten-second lesson in the language
of Chief Massasoit--Eniskeetompauwaug--so
you can impress your dinner guests.
      In English, friend (singular); friends (plural)
Translated into Eniskeetompauwaug, that's
netop (singular) and netompaug (plural).
      USA readers, enjoy your holiday!

      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."
See you then.

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

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 news item
first appeared.
*********************************************************

Webmasters:

Earn Revenue from adverts by joining Direct Leads
Full details at: http://www.directleads.com/signup/cd3492

*********************************************************

This weeks advertiser:

eFax

http://www.directleads.com/ad.html?o=459&a=cd3492

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
***************************************************

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, plus archives of Filer's Files.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                         Re: Perils of UFO Research

From: Dave Bauer <Xxyyxx@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:27:24 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:45:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Perils of UFO Research


 >From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Perils of UFO Research
 >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:21:54 -0500

 >A short story for you today of a recent adventure in UFO
 >research. I'm posting this for the benefit of those on the List
 >who don't have the opportunity to do direct, field research on
 >this topic. I hope the field researchers recognize something of
 >their own experience herein.

 >Some background: I'm a news writer/producer at a Toronto TV
 >station, with a small (very small) reputation as a UFO
 >researcher, based mainly on media appearances I've made. I made
 >those appearances because when you drive a car with license
 >plates that read UFO GUY and you work at a TV station and
 >they're doing a story on UFOs, who do you think they go to
 >first?

 >Anyway, this past weekend, the duty producer got a call from a
 >viewer who claimed to have shot "the best UFO videotape ever".
 >The producer, not wanting to walk into that minefield, told the
 >viewer the station's UFO expert (me) didn't work weekends, "call
 >back Monday". Then he phoned me at home to give me a heads-up,
 >adding the caller didn't sound like he had been a Rhodes
 >scholar... now or in any past life.


Thanks one of the best posts in a long time, with a story all
enjoyed.

Also I tune in to your internet program almost every week,
have connections problems about 20 percent of the time.
And I do have two internet providers.  AOL and a local one.
the problem is not on my end.

Keep up the good work.


Dave Bauer

(WA2YAS)

lanoka harbor, nj







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                       Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:57:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:51:15 -0500
Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:39:31 -0800
 >From: Matt DeBow <md@ufochronicles.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 >Ian Christopher, a researcher with Mariposa-Pacific Research
 >Institute,

Never met this man personally in Wiltshire in the past years.

 >will present the crop circles of 1999, taken by >renowned
videographer Peter Sorenson.

Peter is a nice and friendly man who makes contact to everyone
to get any information. He is just walking about with his video
camera wherever something is to be seen.

 > This spectacular array of
 >beautifully designed anomalous circle formations, will be
 >presented to you on video from the air and the ground. The
 >formations are images and three dimensional geometric shapes;

Sorry, they are only two dimensional: flattened corn on the
surface of Mother Earth.

 >the intense patterns appear as they come up out of the landscape
 >with depth.

They do not "come out of the landscape" with any "depth" but
they are only pressed down by some well trained (and not always
malevolent) guys. I am sure that Peter knows some of them.

 >Ian will also give us some profound insight as to
 >why the media will not publish these images.<

Well, another one jumped on to the bandwagon.

Sorry, but this is just a mirror of the current state of the
crop circle scene in England: someone creates patterns for
someone who captures them with his video "from the air and the
ground" for someone who later gives lectures about it.

--And who doesn't really know what he is talking about.

The crop circles (as far as they have been genuine up to 1992)
were created by some benevolent Intelligence for us to invite us
to:

look and think

Those who only came down to the Marlborough Downs to celebrate
themselves and who only consumed this phenomenon have failed the
message of these three words above.

By the time, I have read so many things here about the
phenomenon we all here are dedicated to and so many words were
written in the name of the search for the truth and for the
reality of the existence of non-human intelligence.

In fact, contact - an invitation to respond - has already been
made: in Wiltshire in 1991.

In the light of  t h i s  extraordinary event - contact with
non-human intelligences - you could switch of any light in
hangar 8, close the files, forget MJ/Majic/Magic/12, Roswell,
all the military bases in America, all the secret services,
MILABS, unacknowledged special projects, the damned (american?)
black helicopters, the black suit wearing cigarrette smokers and
laugh about any "national security"- it is of no cosmic
importance, it is just the ugly screeching of a superpower which
only lives for itself- and finally will suffocate by itself.

This all comes to your mind when you are on top of Cherhill
beside the Monument and when you  f e e l the wind and h e a r
the skylarks joyfully singing and s m e l l  the air and g e t
i n  t o u c h with the planet beneath your feet and around
yourself - far away from any money and any electronic circuit.

Forget about image processing and retrieving of blackened
documents - in fact and in the light that all our efforts as
permanently complaining UFO-researchers have not really broken
one brick in the wall of the reigning powers -

look and think

The key to overcome our current frustration

a r e  w e  o ur s e l v e s

(We the People - :-)  )

with the mighty power of o

o u r  m i n d  a n d  s p i r i t.

If we remind ourselves of the places of power in the landscapes
- you in America still have some of the guides left who could
lead you there while we in Europe only have to find the traces
which are left- if we would go back to these places then we
would and could - and will - make the change.

We don't need any of our technologies-just ourself and a place.
We can alter the spacetime continuum, we can open stargates, we
can get in contact with any place at any time - only with our
spiritual energy.

Those who would like to argue now with me - please slow down.
You haven't been on top of Adam's Grave, Knap Hill, Barbury
Castle, the Merry Maiden's Stone Circle, Avebury and the
Wandsdyke Path. Once have you been there you would have
recognized that a new quality of human-extraterrestrial-other
dimensional relationship has started. A better one, a positive
one. No one of your American Greys has ever appeared here but
beautiful light spheres and other energetic phenomena.


The change - the necessary change - on this planet will not be
achieved by computer processors, the future of all of us depends
on how important we estimate the power of our spiritual energy -
which in truth is the essence of the universe.

Imagine all the people...


Joachim Koch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 20:51:58 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:57:20 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:07:01 EST
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:11:15 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >Can anybody put numbers on how likely we are to succeed at any
 >of these schemes? I can't, and nobody else can either.

Well, then they remain something which cannot be put into the
Drake Equation, yet.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:26:36 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:59:06 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


Dear Listers:

Here's a number to be subtracted from the Drake Equation - Gamma
Ray Bursts may zap life in galaxies every couple hundred million
years, essentially resetting to zero the time that has been
available for exploration.

For more on this, see the article in New Scientist cited in my
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 23:01:23 EST post to this list.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                              Re: Are We Alone?

From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 22:18:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 08:11:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone?


 >Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 09:54:26 -0500
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:41:05 -0500
 >>From: Jacqueline Cosford <millpond@home.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Are We Alone?

<snip>

 >>Hi Mark

 >>Think on this for a moment....suppose we are the only
 >>intelligent life in the universe and in that vast, open,
 >>uncharted territory....we are ALONE! That to me is far more
 >>terrifying than having aliens visiting us at this moment in
 >>time. Even if they had hostile intentions, the fact that if they
 >>are here, at least proves there could possibly be life elewhere
 >>in the universe, and those entities may be very benvolent.

 >Jacquie, In your opinion what makes you think these entities
 >would be benevolent?  In my opinion, the only thing we have to
 >go on in baseing a decision on their purpose is hypnosis.  I'm
 >not an abductee, but if I were, I don't think being abducted
 >between the hours of 1:00am and 4:00am in the am, and taken
 >against my own free will very benevolent regardless of any
 >"spiritual" implications of the abduction scenario.

Hi Todd,

I wasn't necessarily referring to the grays who abduct people in
the middle of the night. The point of my letter was that IF we
are being visited by aliens i.e. the greasy, then it  leads to
strong conclusions that the rest of the universe may be
literally teaming with life.

 >>If we were the only ones (I find that hard to believe) then we
 >>have a responsibility to explore the universe and "seed" it
 >>with intelligent life.

 >Why do you feel we are responsible for "seeding" the rest of the
 >universe?  What purpose would it serve, in your opinion?

The purpose? Well, our planet may not be around "forever". The
odds are we're not in any immediate danger of annihilation (of
course that could also be debated) but think of hundreds or even
thousands of years into the future. We owe it to our ancestors
to strive for scientific discovery, to explore the universe, see
how it works, understand gravity, find out what dark matter is,
anything that can get us to the stars, literally. With our
present forms of space travel and knowledge of physics, it's
impossible, for humankind to make such a journey. Is it possible
with our knowledge of time and the dimensional space we live
in?? Or will it happen mentally? spiritually?

I once had a dream in which a spacecraft landed and this dark
handsome guy came out (heheheh) anyway, I ran up and asked him
how they did it... how do you travel between the stars? His
simple answer? Mind travel.

 >>It is quite possible that we are an incredibly special form of
 >>life. If that is true, then why do we always assume alien life
 >>will be more advanced than us? Possibly technologically because
 >>most suns are much older than ours, but emotionally, and
 >>spiritually I believe we have much to offer those who come to
 >>call.

 >Above, it seems that you assume the alien entities would have
 >the same emotional and spiritual needs as humans?  Am I correct?
 >If so then you would also assume they would originate from our
 >"creator" persay also?

Not at all, I would never be so presumptuous to assume that
another life form would think and feel the same way I do or have
the same needs. Hell, we can't even assume that amongst
ourselves! I just think that we don't give ourselves enough
credit for what we are and what we can become. It seems to me
that everyone is waiting for these aliens to land and hand us
all the solutions to the problems that exist in the world today.
We are being prepared for something though. You can see it in
the types of movies that are being presented, the shows on TV
and just a general raising of awareness. But through all of
this, are we the ones who are going to manifest these things??
You brought up the subject of God... and yes I do believe there
is a "creator". These are my own thoughts here so please bear
with me.

I think that we are all pieces of "God".... if that is true then
we too are creators. That tells me that our thoughts have much
more power than we can imagine. Once enough people see "aliens"
and UFO's then our human thoughts may reach a point of critical
mass at which time they will be able to permanently enter our
dimension.

 >>I don't think that the human species will ever stop looking for
 >>life in our universe as the thought of being totally alone is
 >>far too terrifying.

Which brings me back to the last thought from my previous
letter. We don't want to be alone in this vast universe, so
we'll either find life... or make it???

Thanks for the response

Jacquie



--
"The truth is within ourselves"






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                         Re: Perils of UFO Research

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 23:51:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:23:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Perils of UFO Research


 >From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
 >To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Perils of UFO Research
 >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:21:54 -0500

 >Dear List,

 >A short story for you today of a recent adventure in UFO
 >research. I'm posting this for the benefit of those on the List
 >who don't have the opportunity to do direct, field research on
 >this topic. I hope the field researchers recognize something of
t>heir own experience herein.>

 >Some background: I'm a news writer/producer at a Toronto TV
 >station, with a small (very small) reputation as a UFO
 >researcher, based mainly on media appearances I've made. I made
 >those appearances because when you drive a car with license
 >plates that read UFO GUY and you work at a TV station and
 >they're doing a story on UFOs, who do you think they go to
 >first?

 >Anyway, this past weekend, the duty producer got a call from a
 >viewer who claimed to have shot "the best UFO videotape ever".
 >The producer, not wanting to walk into that minefield, told the
 >viewer the station's UFO expert (me) didn't work weekends, "call
 >back Monday". Then he phoned me at home to give me a heads-up,
 >>scholar... now or in any past life.

<snip>

 >So, answering the call to see the 'best UFO video ever', lead me
 >to the kind of apartment, and people, I knew 20 years ago. It
 >was nice to stroll down memory lane and even nicer to beat a
 >hasty retreat.

 >As for the tape, no ET, no UFO, just a shaky view of Venus...
 >and a face-to-face encounter with living proof that the rule
 >against cousins marrying is a sound one.

 >I hope _your_ next expedition meets with greater success. I'll
 >feel better when one lands on Parliament Hill and the White
 >House lawn.

I ave had similar experiences a number of times.  I will mention
only two.

Several years ago I received a letter and video from a man in
New Hampshire who clamed he had "the world's best UFO video"
because the UFOs kept passing over his house and landing on the
far side of the mountarin "over there."   All he needed was for
me to verify his claims and then h would even cut me in for a
piece of the "action" as he sold his videos to TV and movies,
etc.

So I looked at the video.   He had some with enough light so
that I could see that the hill "over there" was across a valley,
and he was on a hilltop, so he had a good view. Sure enough,
spots of light moved overhead and isappeared over the hill "over
there"   There was no evidence of "landing," however.   But the
real clincher/joke was wen he videotaped several of his UFOs
when they were close enough to see the diamond shape.  You could
also see the flashing strobes and HEAR THE JET ENGINE SOUND!!!!

Yes, I couldn't believe it.   Either the guy was completely nuts
or he was trying to set me up.... or both.

I'd like to point out that this summary represents events which
took place over nearly a year.

Last spring I got a call at work from an excited man in
Annapolis, MD. "I have the most convincing UFO video ever.
(Where have I heard that before?)   IMMEDIATELY... I'm wary.
He went on to describe how he had been working into the evening
and when he went to his car, THERE IT WAS... hovering in the
sky, so bright it "MUST BE CLOSE." You could tell the way this
guy talked that he was thoroughly convinced and was like a
pressure cooker ready to explode... he had a tough time
restraining his use of superlatives.

Anyway, he described it changing shape, getting big and small,
having some strange structure....etc.  etc.     He was facing
west. I happened to know somthing he didn't.   So I asked him to
return to the location the next day and see it it was still
there, and, if so to videotape it.   Failing that, videotrape
VENES which as "also" in the sky.   I told him where to look.
He would as soon as possible.

In the meantime he sent me his video.   Before I got it,
however, he called me back and was somewhat apologetic.... it
was, indeed, Venus.   A few days later I got a very nice video
of Venus... sort of a "training film" which showed all the
classic effects of trying to videotape a point of light.   I
could go into these, but I wont.

FORTUNATELY, not every time is a bust.   Too bad   Mr. Woods
didn't run into one of these times.

In Late July. 1998 I got a call from a man who had a UFO film.
He did NOT say, this is the best UFO video, nor did he offer to
"cut me in."   What he did say was moderately circumspect:  he
did have a video of a strange object which flew over Ticonderoga,
NY on July 2, 1998.  His wife saw it, too.   He was not the "average
Joe."   Both he and his wife were/are "corrections officers" working
at a prison.  As such, they were essentially law enforcement officers
Low probability of a hoax.

He sent me the video.   It did indeed show a strange object, with some
similarity to his description.  I was able to enlist the help of local
ufo investigators to visit the man, to make measurements and test
  videos, and to investigate the case.  The result was published in
the January 1999 issue of the MUFON Journal  under the title
"flying peanut."   A frame from the video is featured on the front
cover.

So, cheer up, Mr. Woods.   There is some gold in the dross.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 03:23:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:48:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:17:31 EST
 >Subject: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Hi, Tony, List:

 >Actually, other than some sort of balloon, upon further
 >reflection there are some questions which might help narrow
 >things down, somewhat.

 >1) How many of the 709 sightings involved something seeming to
 >move in front of the power plant buildings?

As far as I know all of them, the MO for the FT seems to be
consistent although there are differences in the colour of
lights seen.

 >2) What was the distance of the witness from the said buildings?

Approximately half a mile, however I believe some witnesses have
been much closer.

 >3) Where there any roads, railroads, airports between the
 >witnesses and the buildings?

Only a marsh and fields are between the witnesses and the
buildings. There is a road that runs alongside the power station
but the FT appears to be above street light level and moves into
the area where there is no road. There are no railroads near the
power nor an airport, as you may know there is also an air
exclusion zone over nuclear power stations, for obvious reasons.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                       Commander Frank Borman and UFOs

From: Luis Eduardo Pacheco <ufozone@bigfoot.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 10:30:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:55:07 -0500
Subject: Commander Frank Borman and UFOs


An interesting article with a little quotation about UFOS can be
found in the following adress:

http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Mag/Index/1998/AS/ftgm.html

Bye!

Un abrazo!

********************************************************************
*   Luis Eduardo Pacheco  *  Caseros  *  Buenos Aires * Argentina  *
********************************************************************
*   INFORME ALFA: Una vision de la Ovnilogia y las  Paraciencias   *
*       desde la logica, el sentido comun y la mente abierta       *
*                                                                  *
* http://www.informealfa.com.ar  * Email: informe_alfa@bigfoot.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 >
   Nov > Nov 26

                         Re: Perils of UFO Research

From: Rebecca <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:12:22 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:58:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Perils of UFO Research


 >From: Dave Bauer <Xxyyxx@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:27:24 EST
 >Subject: Re: Perils of UFO Research
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Perils of UFO Research
 >>Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:21:54 -0500


<snippage>

 >Thanks one of the best posts in a long time, with a story all
 >enjoyed.

I thought it was a great post as well. I even saved it and that
is something I rarely do!

 >Also I tune in to your internet program almost every week,
 >have connections problems about 20 percent of the time.
 >And I do have two internet providers.  AOL and a local one.
 >the problem is not on my end.

I'd like to add something here, because I rarely have problems
with a connection, but I hear lots of people complaining about
media player. No fan of Micro$oft here, but for whatever reason
I haven't encountered the problems other folks have.

Best,
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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                          Filer's Files #47 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 10:59:58 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 08:49:47 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #47 -- 1999


Filer's Files #47 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
November 26, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
This weeks Filer's Files sponsored by: www.paranormalnews.com

HAPPY THANKSGIVING, OUR SKIES ARE FILLED WITH WONDERS.

The Halloween crash of a Eygptair Flight 990 killed all 217
people on board, including 106 Americans when it went into the
sea 60 miles south of Nantucket.  The US media was apparently
provided erroneous information about the statements made by the
Boeing 767 copilot.  The original wildly circulated statement
that the copilot Gameel el-Batouty had said, "I made my decision
now," was never uttered.  Only the relatively innocent, "I put
my faith in God's hands" was actually stated. The average
Egyptian frequently calls out for God's help during the course
of each day. Gameel was wealthy and a highly respected man who
was considered faithful family man who was not depressed.  The
Egyptians are very upset at the theory of pilot suicide and
believe an explosion either inside or outside the tail section
was responsible for the crash. General Ahmed head of the
country's flight training program urged Egyptian investigators
to look closely what happened in the rear of plane and to ignore
the suicide scenario.  US Officials have stated the plane was
mechanically sound when the autopilot was turned off while
cruising at 33,000 feet.  Eight seconds later the aircraft went
into a steep dive.  US investigators believe the copilot in the
right seat aggressively pushed forward on the yoke.  The alarm
sounded fourteen seconds after the Boeing 767 started its dive
and exceeded its maximum design speed at Mach 0.86.  No one
knows why the aircraft dove at this time.  US authorities claim
suicide, but the Egyptians claim an explosion in the tail.  One
logical reason to dive a craft is to avoid a collision with an
unidentified flying object such as a missile. UFOs are seen
almost daily moving east to west and west to east over Long
Island.  An outside explosion under the tail would also cause
the plane to go into the dive.  In a similar incident, two 747
Swiss Airline pilots on Flight 127 had a near miss with a UFO
over Long Island on August 9, 1997.  The cylinder shaped UFO
came so close the pilots physically ducked down in their 747
cockpit.  The Swissair was cruising at 23,000 feet when the
pilot interrupted an address to passengers to report the near
miss by a white cylinder.  The facts are that many aircraft have
had to take evasive action to avoid unidentified flying objects
(UFOs) and have even been physically hit by them.  Its difficult
to find the truth as the propaganda battle heats up.

ARTHUR GODFREY NEAR MISS WITH A UFO

PHILADELPHIA - Arthur Godfrey was one of the best known
television personalities and pilot in the 1960's.  He lived in
Virginia and flew his own private plane back and forth to his
broadcasting duties with the CBS in New York City.  On his
coast-to-coast program on June 25, 1965, Godfrey's guest was
comedian Orson Bean, and the subject of UFOs came up.  Mr.
Godfrey said on a night flight he and copilot, Frank Munciello
were flying near Philadelphia when a brightly lighted object
suddenly appeared off the right wing of their twin-engine
Convair.  Godfrey, at the controls, rolled his plane sharply to
the left to avoid a collision.  He contacted the FAA tower at
Philadelphia: 'Any traffic near us?'  "None," the tower replied.
"Well, there's darned well something up here!" Godfrey replied.
At that instant the object reversed its course and circled them
coming up seconds later behind their left wing. Godfrey again
banked sharply away from the UFO and tried to create the
distance between them.  The object banked right with him. Every
time Godfrey made an effort to elude the UFO, it duplicated his
moves. "It stayed right there off my left wing," Godfrey told
his audience, "no matter what I did!"  He also admitted that
both veteran pilots were scared and could not shake the UFO, no
matter what they tried.  It simply stayed right with them until
it veered upward and away into the night.  Thanks to Ron
Hannivig

NEW YORK

LIMESTONE -- William Robert Miller reports seeing a UFO on
November 20, 1999, at 12:00 AM. William states, "I know you
probably won't believe me because this was scary to me." I was
walking when I saw pale blue light with a bright yellow center
hovering in the middle of the street about a 1/4 of a mile ahead
of me.  The light just seemed to 'wiggle' around and came
towards me.  When it got close, I tried to run but could feel
its heat on my back. I ran until I couldn't feel the heat any
longer.  When I looked up the object was pretty high and now had
a red center instead of yellow. It moved around in circular
motion for a few minutes then shot up to appear as a star! Now I
have this round "burn" mark on the right bottom earlobe that
hurts!  I took pictures of some red spots of in the mirror.
Thanks to W. R. Miller and ISUR.  Editor's Note: These are
initial reports and we hope to contact William to investigate
further.

NEW JERSEY FIREBALL

EDISON -- Linda Aliberti says. Our family was driving home on
November 16, 1999,   when I saw a few airplanes and a very
bright light with a tail, at 7:10 PM.  It's appearance was like
a 4th of July sparkler behind a light bulb or a comet.  The
object was traveling north parallel to the earth  at a very slow
speed -- allot slower than the planes but much higher.  My 6
year old asked me if shooting stars fell to the ground, or go up
to the sky like the one we were looking at?  After traveling
about 3 minutes more we saw it again moving slowly north.
Thousands of others would also see odd things in the sky that
night.  Thanks to Linda Aliberti lindaaliberti@erols.com.
Editor's Note: On November 16th some sort of green fireball like
object passed over the USA.  Russian geophysicist Ol'khovatov
noted, "Based on hundreds of descriptions I found on the
Internet it was not a meteoroidal (astronomical) bolide, but a
rare type of geophysical event, sometimes called a "geophysical
meteor").  Thanks to Andrei Ol'khovatov olkhovatov@mtu-net.ru>

PENNSYLVANIA CYLINDER CRAFT WITHOUT WINGS

HARRISBURG -- I observed a very unusual object on Sunday,
November 14, 1999, southwest of the state capital at 5:00 PM.
The object was heading southeast about a mile high in clear
weather.  It was odd because there were no wings or tail
visible.  It appeared like a small airplane without wings.  It
was very reflective and made no sound.  Thanks to:
hej4@webtv.net (John HEJr)

ALLENTOWN - On November 15, at 1:15 PM I was outside my office
having a smoke break. I looked to the east, and observed a
silver cigar shaped object at high altitude, and was moving very
rapidly from south to north. At first I thought it was an
airplane, but the object made a U turn in a fraction of a
second, and headed back to the south at an even faster speed. It
covered the entire sky in 4 or 5 seconds. While I watched it
simply disappeared from view. The sky was mostly clear, with a
few scattered clouds, and bright sun. I might add that I have
aircraft experience, having flown over 130 combat missions, and
I have never seen anything like it. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director NUFORC  uforeports@aol.com.

VIRGINIA FLYING TRIANGLE AND SPHERE

SPRINGFIELD -- Chuck and Cathie Warren provided the following
sighting report from a 23 year old Virginia college student and
three other witnesses.  On November 17, 1999, he pulled into his
driveway at 7:15 PM and looked to see if the Leonid's meteors
were visible, but instead he saw a Flying Triangle.  As he
watched he could see it was circling a big area.  At its
farthest point away it was a just a red light, but when it
circled over the house you could see it was an equilateral
triangle making a low humming sound.  He shot some video of it
where the light can be seen circling above looking like a
triangle.  It kept flying the same circular route for more than
4 hours until 10:45 PM!  If it was a plane, why would it be
circling around for no obvious reason?  The size of it at
closest rendezvous was about half a thumbnail at arms length.
The Fairfax County Police were phoned and suggested that it was
a weather balloon.  The four witnesses thought it was a UFO.
Thanks to cewarren@worldnet.att.net (Chuck Warren)  Contrail
Connection http://www.contrailconnection.com

WARRENTON - MUFON State Director Ricardo Atristain writes we are
investigating an October 14, 1999 sighting.  After shopping the
witness observed a metallic sphere hovering in the northern sky
at 6:00 PM.  She then observed a second smaller sphere approach
the first from below. The small one entered into the larger
sphere and they both seemed to vanish.  Driving home, she saw
another similar sphere hovering below and to the left of the
quarter moon.

SALEM - MUFON is also investigating a September 23, 1999,
sighting by a mother and her 15 year old daughter.  They were in
their car traveling south on Duiguild Road at 3:30 PM.  They
both observed a strange boomerang shaped object about a mile
ahead of them.  The object was flying below and in front of a
hillside.  The boomerang was dark in color and traveled slowly
from the southwest to the northeast.  The apex of the object was
pointed down and it appeared to be flying sideways.  The
sighting lasted about 30 seconds before it went behind some
trees. Thanks to Ricardo Atristain
angel_quest@sprynet.com.

INDIANA DARK FLYING TRIANGLE

TERRE HAUTE -- A university student and his friend had a
sighting on November 16, 1999, when they saw a large glowing
green meteor-like object traveling extremely slow horizontally
across the sky at 7:30 PM.  Being intrigued by this sighting the
two roommates and went to the observatory on top of the Indiana
State University Science Building.  They were standing there
with a bunch of other people at 7:55 PM, when a lady said, "Oh
my God!  What is that!?" They looked up to see a large dark
triangle shaped craft flying silently overhead. The sighting
lasted for only 6 seconds.  The lady said she saw faint lights
on the side of it, and they agreed it wasn't like anything they
had ever seen. Thanks to Ben Field and BUFOD.

OHIO UFOs CIRCLE A JUMBO JET

SANDUSKI -- The UFO Reporting Center reports that on November
17, 1999, their witness saw about 20 silver spheres in formation
circle a jumbo jet at 3:00 AM. They were extremely fast and
formed into a V shape at one point. They were headed north and
the plane they were circling was headed north/northwest. At
first, they flew in a group of about twelve circling the
airplane.  Then they came in groups of four. They appeared to be
silver spheres and they were very quick. They had no lights or
flashing and made no noise. They were seen at close range, and
the jumbo jet seemed to be flying lower than usual. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director National UFO Reporting Center
http://www.ufocenter.com.

TEXAS PILOTS  TRANSCRIPT OF UFO SIGHTING

DALLAS - On October 26, 1999, the crews of two commercial
aircraft reported a very large triangular shaped craft at 37,000
feet with extremely bright lights near Dallas. In this
transcript AC#1 is the first aircraft's pilot who saw it, AC#2
is the second aircraft's pilot.  The airline company names have
been removed for protection of the witness's privacy.  This is a
transcript of the radio traffic on 132.450 at 2:00 AM, with Fort
Worth FAA Center (FWC). AC#1: Ah, Ft. Worth Center we just got,
ah, a series of 3 very bright lights, ah, it appears at our 11
o'clock (unintelligible).  We don't know the distance, but it's
pretty far out there, maybe 20 miles or so.  Do you have a
formation of airplanes flying out there?  FWC: I'm not showing
anything.  AC#1: I hate to sound like one of those wacky UFO
reportings, but I have never seen anything like it before.  It's
ah 11 o'clock, for who knows how far, it could be 15-20 miles
away, 3 very, very bright lights.  It looked like they went
west, and the lights appeared, and then disappeared.  AC#1:  Is
there a refueling track out there or something like that, or
could there be somebody out there with their lights on during
refuel?  Or something like that?  FWC: We have a refueling track
out there, but we don't have anybody in it right now, I already
thought about that.  I'm showing some interesting primary
targets but that's probably just some kind of anomaly.  I don't
believe there are any aircraft out there.  Well, actually at
11-12 o'clock at maybe 10 miles.

AC#1: Roger, ah, I have a witness, the copilot and I both saw it
and ah, I don't know what to tell you, it was very odd.  FWC:
(unintelligible)  AC#1: ah we don't see any strobes, or
anything, (unintelligible) ah the lights were far enough apart
that led me to believe the airplanes were closer than further
and, usually after the headlights turn away, ah the landing
lights turn away, you can see strobes or something, but we don't
see anything out there.  FWC:  (unintelligible) approximately,
ah you believe it looks like a flight of 3 you were seeing?
AC#1: it was a flight of 3 and ah, at first glance I would have
thought it was a refueling operation but generally they don't
happen at this time of the morning and ah, if it was an air
refueling operation I know the airplanes are in formation and
ah, the lights were far enough apart that it would lead me to
believe that even in group formation or even ah, a wider
formation, they would be closer to us.  FWC: AC#1 Roger, ah,
approximately what altitude are they at now?  AC#1: I'd say our
altitude ah, plus or minus a couple of thousand feet.  FWC:
Roger, I'll attempt to notify anybody at altitude center.  AC#2:
with you level at 370. FWC: AC#2 Roger. AC#2: We spotted that
flight about 5 mintes ago it looked like it was on the other
side, of, north of Dallas about 80 miles or so away from us.
FWC: Roger, confirming you also saw it?  AC#2: Affirmative!
FWC: Well, it appears you have some collaboration now!  End of
tape. Thanks to aerial@itlnet.net (APRG)

TEXAS UFO DISC SIGHTING REPORT

LAKE TEXANA -- On November 16, 1999, two men were camping out at
about 12:15 AM, just outside of Edna.  They had been fishing off
and on during the night when over head one heard a whooshing
sound like air coming out of a tire.  They looked up and saw a
small disk shaped object about 18 to 25 feet in diameter glide
over.  It was large enough to fit one or two men fit inside it.
There were no lights.  The other man who was dozing saw the
craft without lights pass over head and out over the lake in a
southwest direction. The camp light lit up the gray and black
Frisbee like craft.  Shortly after it disappeared, they heard
another whooshing noise and a second smaller craft was racing
after the first one. This disk was smaller only 10 to 12 feet
across.  The weather was clear and cold.  Thanks to Mike Harman,
http://ufo-pi.homepage.com/index.html,
Mike_Harman@rocketmail.com and Skywatch skyopen@onelist.com

FORT WORTH -- David who is 38, saw three glowing triangular
objects appear and dart across the sky at 10:22 PM on November
21, 1999.  I saw them descend from the clouds and disappear back
into the clouds.  The objects traveled so quickly that they
spanned the sky in a matter of seconds.  The three objects were
flying close enough so that their glow seemed as one. Thanks to
Morgan Clements Director, World Wide UFO Reporting Center
www.ufosightings.net

COLORADO

BOULDER - The witness was walking up Canyon Boulevard on
November 7, 1999, headed west into the foothills at 3:00 AM.  He
became aware of a low humming noise with static electricity type
sounds.  Suddenly he was engulfed in a bright light from
overhead causing his thighs to spasm from the adrenaline jolt.
He could see an elongated cylinder above him with its bright
white light gradually fading to red.  He had been in the 101'st
Airborne but this was not like any craft he had ever seen. The
witness states, "I could see the object quite clearly because it
blocked out the stars."  Abruptly the craft flew straight up and
vanished.  The next day, my fingernails had thickened and I had
a nice sunburn on all exposed flesh, even inside my ears.
Thanks to MUFON's State Director Michael Curta

NEW GUINEA UFO SIGHTED AGAIN

PILAPILA -- On November 11, 1999, Alex James and four boys were
going home from rugby practice when they saw the oblong object
at 7:00 PM.  The five boys saw the craft's bright lights
approach as the streetlights dimmed.  Some neighbors ran inside
and locked their doors, but the boys watched in wonder.  The UFO
hovered above the tall coconut trees and as it passed over they
were left speechless and shocked.  Alex felt it was like the
movie Star Wars, or Babylon Five.'' Alex described the bottom of
the UFO as oblong shaped with bright lights around the edges.
The top was like a pyramid with some lights around it.  There
were no colored lights, just bright white lights that made the
night into day.  The object was huge and took almost 30 minutes
to pass over and disappear in the mountains near Vuvu.  Thanks
to  Russ Hamerly : russell.p.hamerly@boeing.com,
http://dcpio.cs.boeing.com

PLANETS CONFIRMED OUTSIDE OUR SOLAR SYSTEM

Astronomers have witnessed for the first time a distant planet
passing in front of its star, providing direct and independent
confirmation of the existence of extrasolar planets that to date
have been inferred only from the wobble of their star. "This is
the first independent confirmation of a planet discovered
through changes in a star's radial velocity and demonstrates
that our indirect evidence for planets really is due to
planets," said Geoffrey Marcy, a professor of astronomy at the
University of California, Berkeley.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 09:49:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 08:54:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:57:02 -0500
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:39:31 -0800
 >>From: Matt DeBow <md@ufochronicles.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 >>Ian Christopher, a researcher with Mariposa-Pacific Research
 >>Institute,

 >Never met this man personally in Wiltshire in the past years.

 >>will present the crop circles of 1999, taken by renowned
 >>videographer Peter Sorenson.

 >Peter is a nice and friendly man who makes contact to everyone
 >to get any information. He is just walking about with his video
 >camera wherever something is to be seen.

There's no need to try to denigrate Ian Christopher's
crop-circle presentations or Peter Sorensen's video work. We
need as much true information about this subject as possible
spread to the general public, since there's been a virtual news
blackout in the U.S. regarding the English crop-circle
formations ever since Doug & Dave claimed to have made them all
in 1991 (which of course did receive massive news coverage in
this country).

Peter went to a lot of effort to accomplish his videotaping from
a powered hang-glider and from a helicopter.

 >>This spectacular array of
 >>beautifully designed anomalous circle formations, will be
 >>presented to you on video from the air and the ground. The
 >>formations are images and three dimensional geometric shapes;

 >Sorry, they are only two dimensional: flattened corn on the
 >surface of Mother Earth.

You're quoting from a summary here, Joachim. What was meant, of
course, is that in a few of the formations the image when viewed
from above appears three-dimensional, as in the formation with
the giant cube.

 >>the intense patterns appear as they come up out of the
 >>landscape with depth.

 >They do not "come out of the landscape" with any "depth" but
 >they are only pressed down by some well trained (and not always
 >malevolent) guys. I am sure that Peter knows some of them.

Peter and Ian are aware of which ones are hoaxes and which
cannot be. The latter have not been pressed down by any human
guys.

 >>Ian will also give us some profound insight as to
 >>why the media will not publish these images.

 >Well, another one jumped on to the bandwagon. ...

His talk was not just to some ufologists, but to others as well.
Here in the U.S. the public is mostly unaware that the
crop-circle phenomenon is still going on, let alone what its
implications may be. They need to have it explained to them why
the news media (through AP wire service, etc.) don't dare talk
or write about it, and why scientists in general shun it.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 08:56:54 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:26:36 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Bob and listfolk:


 >Here's a number to be subtracted from the Drake Equation - Gamma
 >Ray Bursts may zap life in galaxies every couple hundred million
 >years, essentially resetting to zero the time that has been
 >available for exploration.

 >For more on this, see the article in New Scientist cited in my
 >Fri, 22 Jan 1999 23:01:23 EST post to this list.

I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:

    "The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
    last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
    around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
    profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
    'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two
    planets or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the
    number set to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial
    intelligence may soon seem inevitable, and the Drake equation
    more like Newtonian law.

    "The urge to escape may turn out to be one of the new
    century's strongest impulses.   Now that Everyman is wired up
    for instant, constant communication, he may soon experience
    his own planet as a kind of stalled elevator, with E-mail and
    cellular chatter providing the unstoppable Muzak.
    Psychologically overcrowded, he may be more eager to get away
    than he ever was during the long-ago push to the moon.
    Formerly, even scientific colleagues who were generally
    sympathetic to Sagan's more outre suggestions tended to
    cringe at his musings on interstellar flight, an undertaking
    for which we hardly have the bone mass, life span, or fuel.
    But these days NASA itself is encouraging a small
    Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program, which is devoted to
    solving problems surrounding 'vacuum fluctuation energy, warp
    drives and wormholes, and superliminal quantum effects.' The
    project argues, in a Saganesque formulation, that 'a
    _genuinely_ new, credible idea is likely to _appear_
    non-credible.'"

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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

             Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures

From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:37:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 08:59:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:38:09 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: David Gullick <dgullick@interlog.com>
 >Subject: Re: Fields of Dreams & Ron Russell Circle Lectures


 >Dear Joachim,

Dear David,

 >Were these "amazing experiences" before, during or after one
 >of those (in)famous meetings at the local pub? How did they
 >manifest themselves?

These few words do show who you are, where you stand, what you
expect and what you will not accept.

Do you think you could embrace a tree and say to him: 'I love
you' and hold your cheek next to his skin? Even while others are
watching you? I have learned to do this in your mother country.
It's easy.

Do you think you could embrace a stone and say to him: 'Hi
brother, I would like to tell me something about you?' I have
learned to do this in your mother country. It's easy.

Do you think you could stand on top of a tumulus (you must have
seen them in your mother country) with arms spread open wide and
hear what the wind is telling you? I have learned to do this in
your mother country. It's easy.

Try it. And you will understand a bit better. If you don't want
to - leave it. Stay as you are.

If you want to be ironic then be it if you feel better. The
universe is not ironic, it's just - tolerant.

Yours truly

Joachim









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                     Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 18:39:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:00:57 -0500
Subject: Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra


 >For subs who may have missed the interview this morning...

 >NBC's 'Today Show' Friday November 26th 1999 @ 08:15

 >Dr. John Mack discussed his new book

 > 'Passport To the Cosmos
 >  Human Transformation
 >  Alien Encounters'

 >with interviewer Matt Lauer.

 >ebk

Many thanks for posting this Errol, from all of those missed
this.

--
    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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                     Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra

From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 17:36:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:03:30 -0500
Subject: Re: John Mack on NBC's Today - .ra

Hi,

At 09:35 26/11/99 -0500, you wrote:

 >For subs who may have missed the interview this morning...


 >NBC's 'Today Show' Friday November 26th 1999 @ 08:15

 >Dr. John Mack discussed his new book

 > 'Passport To the Cosmos
 >  Human Transformation
 >  Alien Encounters'

 >with interviewer Matt Lauer.

 >ebk

 >Attachment Converted: "C:\EUDORA\Attach\John Mack-NBC-11-26-99.ra"

        Thanks but... it doesn't play here...

[Then perhaps its your cue to upgrade your RA Player? It seems to
  have worked fine on everyone else's --ebk]



Jacques Poulet         http://www.chucara.com/

Fortean Files CDROM    http://members.tripod.com/jpoulet/
UFO Repetitions        http://www.chucara.com/dossiers/other/gdfawcett_ang.htm
Col Corso's DA Form 66 http://www.multimania.com/jpoulet/corso/bryant.htm
UFO Sightings Reports
http://members.xoom.com/jpoulet/english/reports/index.htm

CHUCARA                Phone: (514) 913-0274
Box 61
La Prairie, Qc
Canada  J5R 3Y1






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 18:06:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:10:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:57:02 -0500
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:39:31 -0800
 >>From: Matt DeBow <md@ufochronicles.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 >>the intense patterns appear as they come up out of the landscape
 >>with depth.

 >They do not "come out of the landscape" with any "depth" but
 >they are only pressed down by some well trained (and not always
 >malevolent) guys. I am sure that Peter knows some of them.

I think Matt was referring to the 3d effect designs that
appeared to be one of the themes of this years formations
rather than anything else.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 01:24:37 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:12:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:47:28 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dear David

 >OK which cases - please supply references to your publications.

Having been around here for almos five years you might find
some of my papers on the web, or you could try back issues of
Hot Gossip UK www.hotgossip.co.uk  Look under "The Unexplained"
or "The Real X Files". We only started an archive about a year
ago though. I don't know if UFOcity.com keep an archive but you
could try there too. I have lots of material on hard copy but do
not have the time to surf through that I'm afraid.

 >>I am under contract with my publishers not to discuss my
 >>investigation or I would gladly answer your questions.

 >This does not convince me one bit.

Then you obviously do not understand the legalities concerning
publishing contracts.

 >In an earlier post you claimed you had not written your book for
 >commercial reasons - how so!

I actually began the investigation before I considered a book.
The case intrigued me and I was aiming to publish it as a
feature but soon realised there was so much valuable material it
was indeed worth a book.  You call it commercial, but you cannot
have any idea how much effort and time, never mind the cost,
that has gone into this project. So no, I did not investigate
the case for commercial reasons, which is what I originally
said.

 >Never mind letting the world know the truth about the greatest
 >mystery in the history of mankind, let's not upset the publisher
 >too much, that's the most important factor in this equation.

It is not a case of upsetting the publisher, it is a matter of
honour and the fact that if one signs a contract one abides by
that contract. The story will be revealed soon enough - be
patient please.

 >If you did not want to discuss any aspect of the case because of
 >some over-riding contract, then why mention it on Updates at
 >all?

As I have already pointed out, it is not I who keeps mentioning
it, but yourself and Jenny Randles. I am only responding to what
I consider erroneous remarks regarding my research and
investigation. There really is no point my promoting it at this
stage because it is not due to be published quite yet.

 >I really do hope this book lives up to all the James Bond
 >type hype you're giving it.

I don't think I am guilty of any hype. The fact that I have been
asked the title of the book on numerous occasions and have said
it is a secret, could have given the impression that there was a
tendency to 'hype' it, but the truth of the matter is, the
title, along with the content, is a secret, and you can read
into that what you like.

 >Is it going to be launched at the same time as the next 007
 >adventure?

Do you mean the movie or the book?

 >I can see I'm going to be shaken, but not stirred.

You may well be shaken David ;-)

Georgina Bruni







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 01:24:37 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:12:31 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:47:28 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Dear David

 >OK which cases - please supply references to your publications.

Having been around here for almos five years you might find
some of my papers on the web, or you could try back issues of
Hot Gossip UK www.hotgossip.co.uk  Look under "The Unexplained"
or "The Real X Files". We only started an archive about a year
ago though. I don't know if UFOcity.com keep an archive but you
could try there too. I have lots of material on hard copy but do
not have the time to surf through that I'm afraid.

 >>I am under contract with my publishers not to discuss my
 >>investigation or I would gladly answer your questions.

 >This does not convince me one bit.

Then you obviously do not understand the legalities concerning
publishing contracts.

 >In an earlier post you claimed you had not written your book for
 >commercial reasons - how so!

I actually began the investigation before I considered a book.
The case intrigued me and I was aiming to publish it as a
feature but soon realised there was so much valuable material it
was indeed worth a book.  You call it commercial, but you cannot
have any idea how much effort and time, never mind the cost,
that has gone into this project. So no, I did not investigate
the case for commercial reasons, which is what I originally
said.

 >Never mind letting the world know the truth about the greatest
 >mystery in the history of mankind, let's not upset the publisher
 >too much, that's the most important factor in this equation.

It is not a case of upsetting the publisher, it is a matter of
honour and the fact that if one signs a contract one abides by
that contract. The story will be revealed soon enough - be
patient please.

 >If you did not want to discuss any aspect of the case because of
 >some over-riding contract, then why mention it on Updates at
 >all?

As I have already pointed out, it is not I who keeps mentioning
it, but yourself and Jenny Randles. I am only responding to what
I consider erroneous remarks regarding my research and
investigation. There really is no point my promoting it at this
stage because it is not due to be published quite yet.

 >I really do hope this book lives up to all the James Bond
 >type hype you're giving it.

I don't think I am guilty of any hype. The fact that I have been
asked the title of the book on numerous occasions and have said
it is a secret, could have given the impression that there was a
tendency to 'hype' it, but the truth of the matter is, the
title, along with the content, is a secret, and you can read
into that what you like.

 >Is it going to be launched at the same time as the next 007
 >adventure?

Do you mean the movie or the book?

 >I can see I'm going to be shaken, but not stirred.

You may well be shaken David ;-)

Georgina Bruni






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                   Oliver Castle 'Crop-Circle' Formation?

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 18:18:34 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:18:53 -0500
Subject: Oliver Castle 'Crop-Circle' Formation?


This has been forwarded a couple of times, and comes from
Australian Mike Farrell <vidhunter@hotmail.com>. It indicates
that we should be very wary of any who claim to have hoaxed this
or that anomalous observation, when in actuality they may be
making the claim falsely in order to debunk some important piece
of UFO evidence.

Jim Deardorff
  -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -

Greetings from Australia!
_________________
Fri. 26th Nov'99
Hello UFO Researchers,

Has anyone else seen the new video by the Enigma Channel called:
"The Crop Circle Update 1999"?

You can find the ad on the back page of Sept-Oct issue of UFO
Magazine from Graham Birdsall (UK) or on their website:
http://www.ufomag.co.uk

Anyway, it's a 3 hour tape which interviews circle researchers
like Andy Thomas, Palden Jenkins, Barbara Lamb, Karen Douglas,
Janet Ossebaard, and Steve Alexander. Also included is a brief
evolution of the crop circle phenomenon from the first known
formation in Poland in 1592, showing the progression of patterns
from early in this century to the first part of the 1999 season,
and featuring important highlights from all the seasons of the
1980's and 1990's. Beautiful color photography, nice music, with
detailed text and voice-over, make this documentary an enjoyable
and informative one.

Certainly the surprise of this film is a 40-minute segment on
the enhancement analysis of the "Oliver Castle" video (also
known as the "Snowflake" video).

Below is my first impressions from just watching the video,
having arrived in the mail today. After my comments is a more
detailed report with transcribed text and frame by frame
analysis.

It's a pleasure to pass on some exciting new findings for those
of you who still hold out hope that the "Oliver Castle" video is
genuine and accurately shows the balls of light or luminosities
that many observers have reported around the world.

Here are the new findings in a nutshell, if my understanding is
correct.

I assume most of you are familiar with the "Oliver Castle"
video. The new information is to be found at the beginning of
the film, in the first few seconds when the camera pulls back to
show both of the fields and the hedgerows, before you see the
two luminosities or balls of light enter the foreground from the
right.

By using computer enhancement (each frame 1/30th of a second),
the analysis shows what appears to be a large luminosity (800
feet from camera) descend from the sky and change to a classic
"flying saucer" shape as it disappears behind the large tree (20
feet across) at the left end of the far hedgerow at the top of
the screen. This UFO cannot be seen on your TV, but after
watching the analysis, I noticed a flash of light on the left
side of the tree when the film is advanced frame by frame on a
standard TV.

At this point the edge of the flat disc-like shape with a bulge
in the middle, is seen poking out of the left side of the tree
on the hedgerow, appearing to be solid and casting a shadow.
This is not a "burmark," as it is below the scan line on the
edge of the tape. Then you see a flash of light and ejection of
a gas-like substance, out of which appears another ball of light
or luminosity.

This luminosity then races across the far field in and out of
the crops and reappears as it crosses the first hedgerow to
enter the foreground as the other two luminosities are exiting
the screen to the top right. These two balls of light which have
just flown around and over the "snowflake" design as it formed
in the field, appear to return to the area where the large tree
is hiding the UFO.

Then as this ball of light enters the front field to make it's
way around the "snowflake" design, it appears to divide itself
into two balls of light, in much the same way that the UFO
captured on tape by Chris Martin (UK) is seen to split into two
pieces and continue flying, as shown by Russel Callaghan in the
film from Graham Birdsall's UFO Magazine, called "Hard
Evidence-Vol.4". These two luminosities then fly around the
"snowflake" design and also appear to return to the large tree
at the far left end of the second hedgerow at the top of the
screen where the UFO is seen hovering.

So what this analysis suggests is that a UFO descended into the
area and hid behind a large tree at the second hedgerow from the
crop field where the "snowflake" formation appeared. Then it
discharged two luminosities which first appeared on the "Oliver
Castle" video, then discharged another ball of light which
followed the other two and split itself into two luminosities on
the second flyover around the "snowflake" design.

So here's the big question! If this "Oliver Castle" video was
hoaxed on a computer, why add in luminosities that could NOT be
seen on a standard TV system? Skeptics would argue that this
analysis presented by the producers is the result of "computer
artifacts", or simply put, just a case of looking too hard.
Additional verification of this computer enhancement by
independent labs would strengthen the case that there's more to
this video than meets the unaided and untrained eye!

Another point to consider is the alleged filmed confession of a
person who claims to know how this "Oliver Castle" video was
faked. Colin Andrews, one of the loudest voices in favor of the
hoax theory, claims to have seen this "confession" and further
investigations of the cameraman has raised doubts and certain
inconsistencies. Unfortunately for the rest of us, we are not
privileged to this evidence.

First we find out that Colin Andrews, a dedicated and pioneering
circle researcher, has resisted attempts by government agencies
to keep quiet about his discoveries, then we find out that this
same Colin Andrews is unable to violate the copyright or wishes
of the film makers to reveal the testimony of this alleged
confession so that we might all have access to the truth and
further avenues of investigation. Sounds a bit suspicious to me!

How convenient and how sad that once again, we in the UFO
Research Community and all it's related subjects of study are
the very ones who are holding back and covering up the very
information that would help us to sort out the "wheat from the
chaff". So it's three years later, and we still can't verify the
background and credentials of those involved in this mysterious
video.

And furthermore, why would the cameraman, John Wabey, stop by
the Barge Inn on the night before he filmed the luminosities,
and invite other researchers to join him in his "UFO hunt"? And
what if others had joined him and also saw what he filmed? Then
would we be calling that group of witnesses a bunch of liars,
hoaxers, and collaborators?

With all due respect to Colin Andrews, it's time to "free the
footage!" or remain bound in the chains of ignorance.

I'd be the first to contribute to his "defence fund" should the
film makers prosecute him for sharing important information.

Unless of course, this so-called "confession" is a hoax to throw
us off the track and keep students of science from asking
serious questions about these many "luminosities" that have been
seen and filmed all over the world, both in and out of crop
formations.

Just ask the British Ministry of Defense!

Military helicoptors have been filmed chasing these same
luminosities or spheres in fields nearby crop formations,
by the very same Colin Andrews, no less!


*****************************************************************

Heres' the transcribed text from the enhancement analysis as shown
on the film by Enigma Channel, "The Crop Circle Update-1999":

"The footage you are about to see was filmed on the morning of
11th August 1996 at Oliver's Castle, near Devizes, in Wiltshire.
The cameraman's name is John Wabey. John Wabey visited the Barge
pub on the night of the 10th August and invited people to join
him 'UFO hunting' with his video camera. It was raining and no
one took up his invitation of accompanying him to camp at
Oliver's Castle for the night.

Early in the morning of the 11th of August in the gloomy light
of dawn, John Wabey was awoken from his tent by an 'electronic
trilling noise', sometimes called the 'crop circle sound' by
researchers.

He grabbed his camera and began to film the fields.

Colin Andrews and some other crop circle researchers have
claimed that this footage was created using computer animation.

"However, the 'snowflake' pattern itself displayed all the
'hallmarks' of a genuine pictogram. It was measured and
photographed on the morning of 11th August. Later, leading crop
circle researchers, Michael Glickman and Patricia Murray
realised that it was the first formation to contain 7-fold
geometry.

"We decided to analyse the Oliver Castle film to see if any
evidence of computer animation could be found. Our enhanced
versions of the film showed no signs of being faked using
computer graphics - but we did notice some other interesting
facts.

"Our enhanced versions of the Oliver's Castle footage revealed
that there was a great deal of UFO-type activity around the
hedgerow behind the rear field.

"On most televisions, the amorphous object which appears at the
very top of the screen and transforms into a classic 'flying
saucer' shape would not be seen. This activity mostly takes
place in an area of the picture which a domestic television is
incapable of showing.

"Therefore, if this footage is indeed hoaxed, as many crop
circle researchers claim, then whoever made it went to a great
deal of trouble creating and animating objects which could not
be seen on a standard television.

Here is a brief summary of our findings:

1.  The enhanced frames are consistent with the picture quality
     attained from a domestic camcorder.

2.  No evidence of 3-dimensional computer animation was detected
     on the video. The crop formation was considered 'genuine' by
     several experienced researchers.

3.  No strings or wires were detected.

4.  The 'flying saucer' object cannot be seen on a standard TV set.

5.  The luminosities or balls of light are no larger than a
     medium-sized beach ball. They travel at around 100 feet per
     second."

*************************************************************

Can anyone else shed any more light on these matters?
Thank you,
__________________________
THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY!
Mike Farrell
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P.O.Box 2526
Port Macquarie
New South Wales
Australia 2444







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                     Re: Commander Frank Borman and UFOs

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 23:07:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:21:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Commander Frank Borman and UFOs


 >Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 10:30:55 -0300
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Luis Eduardo Pacheco <ufozone@bigfoot.com>
 >Subject: Commander Frank Borman and UFOs

 >An interesting article with a little quotation about UFOS can be
 >found in the following adress:

 >http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Mag/Index/1998/AS/ftgm.html

 >Bye!

 >Un abrazo!

I'm getting a 'Connection Refused' on the above link!


Todd Lemire

--

"...UFO's technology embraces a wedding of mind and matter,
often including the disturbing ability to control human
physiological and mental processes... Somehow, "they" have
mastered the puzzle of mind over matter."

What book does this split excerpt come from? And what 2 authors
wrote 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 >
   Nov > Nov 27

                Cattle In Thousands Stampede - Queensland, Oz

From: Tony Robb - PRA <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 06:14:51 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 09:29:23 -0500
Subject: Cattle In Thousands Stampede - Queensland, Oz


Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
Phenomena Research Australia


EBK, Researchers,


The following press item appeared in our State of Victoria
Broadsheet newspaper today. Although there is no UFO connection
in the report, "Cattle Mutilation" experts may find it of some
interest. The full report follows:


"WESTWARD STAMPEDE A MYSTERY"

A daily stampede of thousands of cattle on properties on
Queensland's Darling Downs is baffling graziers.

Every morning, between about 5 and 6.30, "haunted" cows on half
a dozen properties near Chinchilla run to the westernmost end of
the properties.

Farmers don't think the cows are fleeing dingoes or emus, nor do
they think they are being spooked by army exercises in the area.

Darling Downs graziers Zora and John Poulsen have 1000 head
that have been charging westward every morning. So are cows
on neighbouring properties, and at Jandowie, 100 kilometres to
the south-east and at Manango in the east.

The Poulsens think the cattle could be indicating possible
seismic activity.

"They're just absolutely haunted," Mrs Poulsen said.

"It doesn't seem to be any other animals - not the horses, just
the cattle. We really don't know what's happening."

Text:   (c) AAP
Source: The Age 27th Nov 1999, p19
Location: Chinchilla - Lat 26Deg 44' S - Long 150Deg 37' E


THE FIRST REPORT

Barry Taylor, an Independent Researcher from GRAFTON, New South
Wales, and one of Australia's long time top researches reported
to other researchers via an e-mail, dated the 26/11/99 18:09:30
AUS EST, making the first contact on the subject. Barry reported
that he had "Heard [it] on [the] Australian Broadcasting Corp
[ABC], Radio (N.S.W.) Australia, Midday 'Rural Report' -
26th.Nov. 1999"

I will let Barry post his report but he can be contacted below
for more data:

e-mail  <stingray@nor.com.au>
Personal U.F.O. Home Page URL
http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/

PRA may have to send someone up to have a look around. The
mystery is most interesting, from our experience if a farmer
believes its strange its always worthy of an investigation.


'PAPUA NEW GUINEA LARGE UFO'

I am sorry to say, that at present John Auchettl and Ron Barnett
cannot send you this post "I am the mail man". They are both in
Papua New Guinea to research that very large sighting [see
below] in the East New Britain Province and nearby New Ireland
Province of Papua New Guinea.

JOHN AUCHETTL (Director), and RON BARNETT (Deputy Director) have
taken up the research team of 5 to research the encounter. And
from the reports, they have collected some great data. The team
departed on Friday 19th and are not back until at least 28th?

See UFO UpDates Urls:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/nov/m18-019.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/nov/m18-018.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/nov/m18-017.shtml

Best Regards.

Yours Sincerely,

Tony Robb
PRA Research
Group Co-ordinator


FOR: JOHN AUCHETTL   - Director
      Dr RON BARNETT  - Deputy Director


Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                      Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 11-26-99

From: Rense E-News <jocelyn@dewittec.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 00:08:31 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:12:01 -0500
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 11-26-99


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

The Week Ahead

11-28-99 thru 12-4-99

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

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

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

* FROM JEFF'S DESK *

We hope you had a wonderful day of Thanks and rest this last
Thanksgiving of the millennium.  Many of you are busy and don't
always have time to read the Headlines thoroughly, so, I thought it
would be good to bring you just a few current UFO reports from
folks who are seeing some of the strange traffic in those
exceptionally busy skies overhead.  How many sightings never get
reported? 95% Plus.  Keep in mind these events, and thousands like
them, never make the 'monopoly press'...

PENNSYLVANIA CYLINDER CRAFT WITHOUT WINGS

HARRISBURG -- I observed a very unusual object on Sunday,
November 14, 1999, southwest of the state capital at 5:00 PM.
The object was heading southeast about a mile high in clear
weather.  It was odd because there were no wings or tail
visible.  It appeared like a small airplane without wings.
It was very reflective and made no sound.  Thanks to:
hej4@webtv.net (John HEJr)

ALLENTOWN - On November 15, at 1:15 PM I was outside my office
having a smoke break. I looked to the east, and observed a
silver cigar shaped object at high altitude, and was moving very
rapidly from south to north. At first I thought it was an
airplane, but the object made a U turn in a fraction of a
second, and headed back to the south at an even faster speed. It
covered the entire sky in 4 or 5 seconds. While I watched it
simply disappeared from view. The sky was mostly clear, with a
few scattered clouds, and bright sun. I might add that I have
aircraft experience, having flown over 130 combat missions, and
I have never seen anything like it. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director NUFORC uforeports@aol.com.

VIRGINIA FLYING TRIANGLE AND SPHERE

SPRINGFIELD -- Chuck and Cathie Warren provided the following
sighting report from a 23 year old Virginia college student and
three other witnesses.  On November 17, 1999, he pulled into his
driveway at 7:15 PM and looked to see if the Leonid's meteors
were visible, but instead he saw a Flying Triangle. As he
watched he could see it was circling a big area.  At its
farthest point away it was a just a red light, but when it
circled over the house you could see it was an equilateral
triangle making a low humming sound.  He shot some video of it
where the light can be seen circling above looking like a
triangle.  It kept flying the same circular route for more than
4 hours until 10:45 PM!  If it was a plane, why would it be
circling around for no obvious reason?  The size of it at
closest rendezvous was about half a thumbnail at arms length.
The Fairfax County Police were phoned and suggested that it was
a weather balloon.  The four witnesses thought it was a UFO.
Thanks to cewarren@worldnet.att.net (Chuck Warren)
Contrail Connection http://www.contrailconnection.com

WARRENTON - MUFON State Director Ricardo Atristain writes we are
investigating an October 14, 1999 sighting.  After shopping the
witness observed a metallic sphere hovering in the northern sky
at 6:00 PM.  She then observed a second smaller sphere approach
the first from below. The small one entered into the larger
sphere and they both seemed to vanish.  Driving home, she saw
another similar sphere hovering below and to the left of the
quarter moon.

SALEM - MUFON is also investigating a September 23, 1999,
sighting by a mother and her 15 year old daughter.  They were
in their car traveling south on Duiguild Road at 3:30 PM.  They
both observed a strange boomerang shaped object about a mile
ahead of them.  The object was flying below and in front of a
hillside.  The boomerang was dark in color and traveled slowly
from the southwest to the northeast.  The apex of the object
was pointed down and it appeared to be flying sideways.  The
sighting lasted about 30 seconds before it went behind some
trees. Thanks to Ricardo Atristain angel_quest@sprynet.com.

INDIANA DARK FLYING TRIANGLE

TERRE HAUTE -- A university student and his friend had a
sighting on November 16, 1999, when they saw a large glowing
green meteor-like object traveling extremely slow horizontally
across the sky at 7:30 PM.  Being intrigued by this sighting
the two roommates and went to the observatory on top of the
Indiana State University Science Building.  They were standing
there with a bunch of other people at 7:55 PM, when a lady
said, "Oh my God!  What is that!?" They looked up to see a
large dark triangle shaped craft flying silently overhead. The
sighting lasted for only 6 seconds.  The lady said she saw
faint lights on the side of it, and they agreed it wasn't like
anything they had ever seen. Thanks to Ben Field and BUFOD.

OHIO UFOs CIRCLE A JUMBO JET

SANDUSKI -- The UFO Reporting Center reports that on November
17, 1999, their witness saw about 20 silver spheres in formation
circle a jumbo jet at 3:00 AM. They were extremely fast and
formed into a V shape at one point. They were headed north and
the plane they were circling was headed north/northwest. At
first, they flew in a group of about twelve circling the
airplane.  Then they came in groups of four. They appeared to be
silver spheres and they were very quick. They had no lights or
flashing and made no noise. They were seen at close range, and
the jumbo jet seemed to be flying lower than usual. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director National UFO Reporting Center
http://www.ufocenter.com.

 >From Filer's Files #47 -- 1999.  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
November 26, 1999, Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020

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

"Our hope of immortality does not come from any religions, but
nearly all religions come from that hope."
  --Robert Green Ingersoll

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

  Hidden Prophecies for the New Millennium
   By Merlynn Starr

A book that ties together prophecies of the age from the Bible,
Indians, New Age Movement, the Ancients and others!
http://www.immunotex.com/books/hiddenprophecies/

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

  * TOP STORIES *

Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
http://www.sightings.com

* Jeff Rense Is The Subject Of New Weekly Hollywood TV Series
* Tsunami Crashes Over Vanuatu Coast - 7.3 Undersea Quake
* Clinton Administration's Big Lies About Kosovo Being Exposed
* Toxic Waste Spread On Crops - Eventually Served For Dinner
* Most Israeli PMs Said To Have Been Diagnosed Mental Patients
* Flight 990 Tail Blown Off - Crucial Information Withheld For
   Weeks
* Two-Parent Families Only 26% Of Total US Households
* Ruth Montgomery's Remarkable 1979 Earth Changes Prophecies
* Short History Of US BioWeapons Testing On Innocent Civilians
* New Drug Scores Against Drug-Resistant Staph Aureus
* Sony Admits ESP Exists - Research Program Ran For Seven Years
* UPDATE Air Crashes, Black Boxes, And Unsafety Boards
* Rioting For Times Square? - Latest Net Conspiracy Makes Rounds
* Number Of Worldwide AIDS Cases Said 33 Million And Exploding
* Gulf War Veterans Poisoned By Own Uranium Shells
* Al Fayed Accuses Duke Of Edinburgh Of Plotting To Murder Diana
* UPDATE Port Arthur Mass Murder Said Proved UN-Backed Psy-Op
* Major Spy Secrets Found On Disc Left In Phone Booth
* Hale-Bopp Comet May Have A Satellite
* Violent, Deadly Video Games Coming Home To Roost
* Y2K - Essential Military Command System At Risk For Failure
* Y2K - Neediest Americans Said Being Left Behind
* Covert Government Control Of Cyberspace- The Coming Showdown
* Major Media Sneers At Chemtrail Controversy
* Armed Oregon Citizens Stave Off Gun-Wielding Attacker
* Varginha UFO Crash - Brazilian Army Claims 3 Girls Saw
  'Deformed Human'
* Human Computers Through BioEngineering On The Way
* Ear Stellas Found At Sphinx - Are The Gods Listening?
* Americans' Growing Waistline -18% Citizens Are Obese
* Heaven's Gate Cult Members' Belongings Auctioned Off
* 50% Of Americans Now Afraid To Fly
* US Gift Of Death - 'Lost Count Of Uranium Shells Fired in
   Kosovo'

Read the entire text of these stories and more at
   http://www.sightings.com

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

   The God Idea of the Ancients or Sex in Religion
http://www.immunotex.com/books/godidea/

  The History of Herodotus - Indexed!
   http://www.immunotex.com/books/herodotus/

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

   * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
   11-28 Thru 12-04

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

SUN 11-28
Jan Aldrich:  Historic UFO Cases

MON 11-29
Dr. Heather Harder:  'Paranormal' US Presidential Candidate
Mark Stephens:  Realistic Y2K Preparations

TUE 11-30
John Whitley:  New World Order Intelligence Update
Capt. Russell Evans:  China Panama Canal Takeover?

WED 12-1
Peter Robbins:  RAF Bentwaters UFO Case
Skip Goebel:  Y2K Steam Power Update

THU 12-2
MUFON National Report

FRI 12-3
Tim Matthews:  Live From England: A VERY Bizarre UFO Case

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

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

   The Books of Enoch

Although among the most banned, cursed, and hidden early books of
the Biblical writings by the "church", the New Testament quotes
these books over 100 times - but "lost" them for a thousand years.
Fragments were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
  http://www.immunotex.com/books/enoch/

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

  * 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.
_______________________________________________________________



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to tablesaws.
http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/1701



-- Easily schedule meetings and events using the group calendar!
-- http://www.egroups.com/cal?listname=rense_e-news&m=1







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                      Frankovich - 'Where Heavens Meet'

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 15:32:52 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:23:51 -0500
Subject: Frankovich - 'Where Heavens Meet'


Dear All,

I would highly recommend the new book published by 'Language of
Souls Publications' entitled 'Where Heavens Meet' by K.T.
Frankovich.

Listed below are a number of web sites from which thgis and
other titles from Language of Souls Publications can be
obtained.

All the best,

Philip.


http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2VIGI5N
91V&mscssid=67Q9W9XGLSSH2NSC0017QJ1R0RBDCHD3&srefer=&isbn=1894368002
bn.com - Language of Souls

http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2VIGI5N
91V&mscssid=67Q9W9XGLSSH2NSC0017QJ1R0RBDCHD3&srefer=&isbn=1894368177
bn.com - Where Heavens Meet

http://search.borders.com/fcgi-bin/db2www/search/search.d2w/Details?code
=1894368002&mediaType=Book&searchType=ISBNUPC&prodID=&srchPage=Details
Borders.com - Language of Souls

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1894368177/qid%3D943459185/002-41
63530-2814636
Amazon.com: A Glance: Where Heavens Meet

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1894368002/qid%3D943459309/002-41
63530-2814636
Amazon.com: A Glance: Language of Souls

**Where Heavens Meet in borders.com is forthcoming
Where Heavens Meet is forthcoming on Books-A-Million website
Language of Souls is forthcoming on Books-A-Million 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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 03:05:45 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:25:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:57:02 -0500
 >From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Those who would like to argue now with me - please slow down.
 >You haven't been on top of Adam's Grave, Knap Hill, Barbury
 >Castle, the Merry Maiden's Stone Circle, Avebury and the
 >Wandsdyke Path. Once have you been there you would have
 >recognized that a new quality of human-extraterrestrial-other
 >dimensional relationship has started. A better one, a positive
 >one. No one of your American Greys has ever appeared here but
 >beautiful light spheres and other energetic phenomena.


Hi All,

I thought I would just mention if anyone if anyone has seen the
remarkable footage taken on the 7th August this year at Barbury
Castle by a colleague of mine, showing a white ball type object
flying over the Barbury Castle Crop Formation?

I understand Peter has a copy of this, and for anyone who would
like to view you can do so on The Crop Circle Connector
website.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                      Re: Cattle In Thousands Stampede

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 07:44:59 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:29:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Cattle In Thousands Stampede

 >From: Tony Robb - PRA <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 06:14:51 EST
 >Subject: Cattle In Thousands Stampede - Queensland, Oz
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
 >Phenomena Research Australia

 >EBK, Researchers,

 >The following press item appeared in our State of Victoria
 >Broadsheet newspaper today. Although there is no UFO connection
 >in the report, "Cattle Mutilation" experts may find it of some
 >interest. The full report follows:

 >"WESTWARD STAMPEDE A MYSTERY"

 >A daily stampede of thousands of cattle on properties on
 >Queensland's Darling Downs is baffling graziers.

 >Every morning, between about 5 and 6.30, "haunted" cows on half
 >a dozen properties near Chinchilla run to the westernmost end of
 >the properties.

<snip>

 >Tony Robb
 >PRA Research
 >Group Co-ordinator

 >FOR: JOHN AUCHETTL   - Director
 >      Dr RON BARNETT  - Deputy Director

 >Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
 >P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
 >Australian & Asia UFO
 >1961-1999 - 38 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE


Dear Tony Robb:

Thank you for a most interesting report!

It may not be UFO related, but it sounds like a neat little
mystery, and we all love surprises.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 07:34:26 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:35:24 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 01:24:37 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:47:28 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >Dear David

<snip>

 >Georgina Bruni

Dear Georgina, David and others:

I have found a really neat way to free up beaucoups des
Megabytes of disk space!

I use Netscape, so the directions may not seem clear. I'm sure
that one can do the exact same things in Internet Explorer,
Outlook Express or whatever.

1) List all your "Trashed", archived or otherwise saved
email messages.

2) Sort them by subject or topic.

3) Delete those with no-longer-interesting subjects like "The
Rebirth of Sumerian Ufology" or "Pope Nicholas has no clothes!"

This works especially well with long running and pointless
threads.

4) Dump the "Recycle Bin"  or "Trash"  or whatever.

5) Sort your trashed emails by author / sender,.

6) Trash the most prolific,  idiotic and crashing bores per
the methods outlined above.

7) Perform a "defragmentation" routine! This over-writes
old files and speeds up the hard drive. It also prevents
electronic snoops from discovering the junk described
above.

8) Reboot / restart your computer. Its really refreshing.


Very 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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                    Re: Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:38:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 10:00:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99


 >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:35:28 -0500
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Sighting in Australia - 23-11-99

 >>From www.abc.net.au/news

 >The National Space Centre is investigating numerous reports from
 >eastern Australia about a strange missile-like object seen in
 >the sky last night.
 >
 >The centre's national operations director, Ross Dowe, says at
 >first they suspected a meteor shower, or a satellite, but it
 >does appear to be something different.
 >
 >Mr Dowe says the Space Centre received a flood of calls from
 >9.30pm from New South Wales and into Victoria, about a
 >cylindrical, or missile-shaped object which appeared to break
 >up.

 >"It went over from west to east and there were some strange
 >illuminations behind it," he said.

 >"They say it was dark grey with some sort of fireball behind it
 >and some other strange reflections in front of it as well."


Further to this story:

http://abc.net.au/news/newslink/nat/newsnat-24nov1999-47.htm

was the link to this story but it has been removed from the
site. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is
Australia's public broadcaster. Comparable organisations would
be BBC (UK), CBC (Canada), PBS (USA).

Many people were telephoning a popular talkback radio programme
on a Victorian radio station 3AW reporting these events.
Victoria is a state of Australia located in the south-eastern
part of the country.

The reports included the following:

Numerous sightings were reported from Brisbane to Canberra and
on to Melbourne (~2000 kilometres).

A witness stated he saw the object break up into about 30
separate objects, "fly" independently of each other and then
"depart".

The colour of the object was a red/orange colour and had a
flame-like tail.

The most surprising part of all was that at approximately 1 AM,
local time, The Prime Minister Of Australia, Mr. John Howard was
on the telephone to try and calm people and reassure them it was
a natural event!

Another odd occurrence was the listing of the Australian UFO
Hotline in the news item.

The radio station has said nothing at all today but last night
it was a major story reported real time and had many witnesses
phoning in right along the eastern coast of Australia.

Kind regards,
James. james_greive@myself.com

Courtesy of alt.ufo.reports

Todd Lemire
--

The UFO Phenomena is the only physical occurrence that we have
ever encountered that actively dictates the terms upon which it
could be studied.  .....our inability to study the phenomena was
part of a calculated program to hide its activities and purpose.

Taken from "The Threat" by David M. Jacobs, PH.D.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:10:58 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST

<snip>

 >I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
 >New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
 >Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
 >discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
 >possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:

 >"The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
 >last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
 >around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
 >profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
 >'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two
 >planets or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the
 >number set to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial
 >intelligence may soon seem inevitable, and the Drake equation
 >more like Newtonian law.

<snip>

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry, List:

Ah, the perils of popular science writing!

To begin with, Mallon is simply dead wrong when he refers to
"the sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections." As I
posted on this thread earlier this week or late last,
referencing a NY Times article which in turn referenced an
article in Nature, only one of these "planets" has been
confirmed. The other 30 or so presently remain candidates for
confirmation. But even if they are confirmed, along with
countless others like them, their existence wouldn't do anything
to promote the Drake Equation odds; in fact, they would detract
from them, for reasons that should be obvious.

What scientists have found evidence (or indications) of thus far
is a category of solar system which consists of a sun closely
orbited (in most cases in a matter of days) by a gas giant, or,
ye gods, a brown dwarf. What are the chances that such a solar
system will serve as a crucible for the creation and nurturing
of intelligent life? In a word, absolutely zilch.

Imagine our own solar system, with a gas giant the size of
Jupiter or larger occupying such an orbital space. It's doubtful
if anything even remotely resembling the planet Earth could
comfortably exist in such a system, never mind thrive and
prosper for a few billion years. Even worse prospects exist in
the case of a sun orbited by a brown dwarf, with apologies to
all dark-skinned dwarfs everywhere.

Such a scenario just isn't a starter.

If anything, it should give us reason to pause and consider just
what we mean by both the terms planet and solar system. If a
planet is defined as any sizeable, cohesive body orbiting a sun,
then close-orbiting gas giants would certainly qualify as a
planet. On the other hand, if by planet you mean something
potentially capable of supporting intelligent life, then the gas
giants themselves fail the definition rather spectacularly (for
a number of reasons).

Ditto solar system. If a solar system can be defined as a star
orbited by a smaller brown dwarf, then we're engaged in an
exercise in semantics and little more, because that solar system
will never give rise to a stable planet capable of sustaining
intelligent life (for a number of reasons).

In other words, some planets are oranges and many, many, others
apples, as are solar systems, and never the twain shall meet. In
short, Mallon knows not whereof he speaks. And, neither, for
that matter, does Drake, who also mixes his apples and oranges.

We simply don't know what the typical "preferred" planet and
solar system of the universe is at this time. Is the latter one
in which the gas giants closely orbit the central star, middle
orbit the central star, or one in which they occupy the outer
orbits, as in our own particular case?

We simply don't know. Accordingly, the Earth could just as
easily (if not more so) be the exception rather than the rule.
But especially if gas giants prove to be the rule. Never mind
those troublesome brown dwarfs, who could also be the rule.

However, for Mallon to suggest that the discovery of "solar
systems" in which intelligent life couldn't conceivably evolve
somehow _increases_ the likelihood of the latter is, well, in a
word, nonsensical, if not downright antithetical. Of course the
words ignorant and stupid also come to mind, although I would
never use them.

Point here is that people are hearing the words planet and solar
system bandied about which have absolutely no reference
whatsoever in terms of planets and solar systems that could
conceivably incubate and hatch intelligent life and see it
through maturity.

A star closely orbited by a gas giant is not an argument in
_favor_ of the existence of ETI, for God's sakes, it's an
argument _against_ it, at least as far as that particular "solar
system" is involved.

What about this argument doesn't anyone understand?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:01:24 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:26:36 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Bob and listfolk:


 >Here's a number to be subtracted from the Drake Equation - Gamma
 >Ray Bursts may zap life in galaxies every couple hundred million
 >years, essentially resetting to zero the time that has been
 >available for exploration.

 >For more on this, see the article in New Scientist cited in my
 >Fri, 22 Jan 1999 23:01:23 EST post to this list.

I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:

"The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two planets
or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the number set
to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial intelligence may soon
seem inevitable, and the Drake equation more like Newtonian law.

"The urge to escape may turn out to be one of the new century's
strongest impulses.   Now that Everyman is wired up for instant,
constant communication, he may soon experience his own

planet as a kind of stalled elevator, with E-mail and cellular
chatter providing the unstoppable Muzak.  Psychologically
overcrowded, he may be more eager to get away than he ever was
during the long-ago push to the moon.  Formerly, even scientific
colleagues who were generally sympathetic to Sagan's more outre
suggestions tended to cringe at his musings on interstellar
flight, an undertaking for which we hardly have the bone mass,
life span, or fuel.  But these days NASA itself is encouraging a
small Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program, which is devoted
to solving problems surrounding 'vacuum fluctuation energy, warp
drives and wormholes, and superliminal quantum effects.' The
project argues, in a Saganesque formulation, that 'a _genuinely_
new, credible idea is likely to _appear_ non-credible.'"

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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 06:04:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:18:14 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 01:24:37 +0000
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:47:28 -0500
 >>From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


Hi Georgina,

 >>>I am under contract with my publishers not to discuss my
 >>>investigation or I would gladly answer your questions.

 >>This does not convince me one bit.

 >Then you obviously do not understand the legalities concerning
 >publishing contracts.

I'm very aware of the legalities surrounding publishing contracts,
having authored five books with a further two forthcoming next
year (of which total two have had UFOs as their subject, four have
covered folklore and tradition, and one archaeology).

In all cases publicity - any publicity - is the name of the
game; any publisher who shuns publicity doesn't stay a publisher
very long! I've never heard of a PR department who has shunned
publicity, even misleading publicity, in advance by forcing an
author to sign a contract which prevents him or her from
discussing *any* aspect of the subject, and especially the
title, of a forthcoming book.. Jeffrey Archer would be horrified
at such a prospect, as would the by now very rich creators of
the Blair Witch Project.

And, Georgina, you have contradicted yourself because you *have*
discussed your investigation by your own admission on the
Internet and in print, for example in an issue of Beyond magazine,
Vol 2, No 9 (97/98).

Secrecy means secrecy - any undercover agent should know that!
Ooops, don't tell the publisher...

 >You call it commercial, but you cannot
 >have any idea how much effort and time, never mind the cost,
 >that has gone into this project.

Interesting then, isn't it, that in your gossip column published
in said Beyond magazine, the following paragraph appears:

  "I decided the best place to begin my search was by using the
  Internet. So armchair research, it may be, but that's exactly
  what I did...As a result, this month's column is dedicated
  exclusively to what I am calling the Bentwaters/Woodbridge
  file. This information is compiled from several electronic
  public posts and private e-mails."


This kind of research really must have exhausted both your time
and bank balance, Georgina. Especially when it brought forth
such gems as this, which you proceed to quote from one of these
Internet-sourced witnesses:

  "...Some friends and I were drinking outside our barracks when
  we saw a light coming down from the sky... We didn't think
  anything of it because we were all rather drunk at the time...
  I can't tell you anymore. Sorry, I hope you understand."

Your article poses several relevant questions:

Do you regard yourself, Georgina, as "an armchair researcher" as
the quote above seems to suggest?

How much of your research into the Rendlesham incident has been
done via exhanging electronic messages on the Internet - and how
much actually speaking to _real_ people face to face?

Do you believe the Internet is a reliable and important
source of information on UFOs?

How much reliance and importance do you attach to testimony
received anonymously and purely by electronic methods?

And - do you not accept that reliance upon Internet "sources"
(often about as far removed from the real world as is possible),
leaves you wide open to hoaxing?

 >As I have already pointed out, it is not I who keeps mentioning
 >it, but yourself and Jenny Randles. I am only responding to what
 >I consider erroneous remarks regarding my research and
 >investigation. There really is no point my promoting it at this
 >stage because it is not due to be published quite yet.

As for Jenny and myself mentioning it and you never having done
so, I think the list of Internet sources you yourself have
published and the article quoted above demonstrate this is not
entirely the truth.

I also have the right to respond to what I regard as "errroneous
remarks", as in the case of the nonsense printed in the
newspapers recently about the "radiation traces" allegedly found
at Rendlesham. Have you contacted the Daily Mail and the Sun
newspapers to correct this particular piece of "erroneous
information"? Erroneous information, I should point out, which
had in one case been provided by one of your major sources, one
Nick Pope.

You are very quick to pick up on what ufologists say about this
case, but your reluctance to apply the same standards to media
sources speak for themselves.

But I suppose no publicity is bad publicity!

 >The fact that I have been
 >asked the title of the book on numerous occasions and have said
 >it is a secret, could have given the impression that there was a
 >tendency to 'hype' it, but the truth of the matter is, the
 >title, along with the content, is a secret, and you can read
 >into that what you like.

Is it not more far more likely that the title of the book is
secret because it has not been dreamed up yet?

And yes, I think UpDates readers will be reading precisely "what
they like" into your answer.

Government secrecy and UFOs eh?  In my opinion, the biggest
sources of secrecy and cover-up are the ufologists themselves.

 >>Is it going to be launched at the same time as the next 007
 >>adventure?

 >Do you mean the movie or the book?

Ah-ha - no commercial influences eh? I'm shaken already! Thanks
for your answers Georgina, and by the way, it's good to debate
with someone who has a sense of humour....

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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #327

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 05:49:47 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:19:32 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #327


Apology to MW #327 (For November 28, 1999)

We've traveled far across scant time and heard it's whisper,
chilly rhyme, that something *odd* was in our skies to fill our
hearts and heads and eyes, but we dismissed these observations,
written words, these protestations, that machines might fly
IMBUED with what, today, we'd find construed. Saucers make
themselves well known, in lithograph, or carved in bone. Carved
into the walls of tombs, these words transcend the churlish
goons that lean on *science*, much maligned, to prop their
shallow paradigms. But I digress, we should go on, our fate's
approaching fast and strong.

Our century, then, begins at last with what was one TREMENDOUS
blast, and sending shock waves harsh and dire -- Tunguska was,
then, set afire.  A thousand acres of it burned, wildlife
slaughtered men would learn, and it was years before they saw
the devastation of it all. The trees were pushed aside like
matchsticks, mashed down, flattened, winged matrix . . . an
instant of our century's time to sew raw wonder in our minds.
The life that has returned is *changed*, and not so subtlely
rearranged -- this is stuff not talked about, you see it once
then do without. Strange mutations come from space to interact
with Earth life's race, so, ARE we not (us all) effected . . .
over time to change, affected? Forget it may have been a
spacecraft, blowing up before it's impact -- radiation's not
ruled out, and life IS *different* there-a-bouts.

1915 comes around; a world's war distorts and pounds, and from
the British comes a tale of what's beyond the common pale.
Gaining ground in mass attack, they'd take hill sixty (it was
next), but on the hill they found, instead, some clouds some say
were filled with dread. Shaped like lenses, they're described,
lenticular (in smoke they hide); the battle stops and jaws gape
open, but -- cannon fodder's orders spoken, eighty tens must
march that day for if they balked their lives they'd pay! Twenty
men would watch these soldiers march upon their *hill* as
ordered -- they were never seen again; just simply GONE, 800
men! No trace of them was EVER found -- a mystery, and MOST
profound.

Two years later we would see what thousands saw that set them
*free*, and made them make interpretations made out, now, as
weird assertions. Tens of  thousands gather in for worship,
service -- Christian hymns, and seen descending from the sky,
and flying patterns bright and high -- a saucer skims and darts
about -- to ooo's and ahhh's and startled shouts. "Angels flew"
Fatima said, a town in Portugal, we have read. And just above
their upturned faces, the craft "flew down" and hovered,
graceful . . . lifting (then) to pierce the sky, and
disappearing from their eyes. Discounted as religious fervor,
thousands saw, from kings to servers, what they all would, then,
describe . . . a silver craft that day DID fly.

The closer that we get to us becomes the fog of those unjust,
and we can't trust a record, plainly, so beat up . . . abused
insanely . . . so consoled by soothing stalls that act informed
-- professional. Their expressions (smooth, contentious) are
misdirecting ones attentions from a slight of hand they've used
-- to keep us stupid sifting news. Sightings, now, are thick and
heavy, had a few myself, and lately. This is not a fantasy. This
BECOMES reality.  From the forties fog begins as we pursue
atomic *friends*. And their interest there is plain. The UFO's
would come again -- wreaking havoc on our bases, shutting down
our missiles . . .  traceless.

1942 -- Los Angeles, photographed, and simply fabulous! Collins
writes the strange account that throws your mind and heart
about. Shelled from shore by worried guns, the *Japs* were
flying over them . . . an airship filled the summer skies -- was
unaffected but despised, and took the fury for our brothers,
then flew away to join their others. I've wondered how it might
have gone if Steven Speilberg, later on, had made his movie (of
this period) not played for laughs, and been more serious.
Belushi was a comic foil unsuited to this kind of toil -- bet it
would have made more money . . . UFO's are just NOT funny.

The closer that we get in time the more confused the facts are,
Clyde. Facts?  . . . Mushy  data used to make convenient cases
for some *snakes*. Most of it is fake, I've heard, but some of
it is real, sure. So, I'm not fooled by plain derision, affected
by their misdirection, and I know it must be wrong to act, at
all, like we're alone. If they are *there,* as you allow, then
they are *here* -- you shallow brow! Look upon OUR feeble
strides and see potentials *they've* contrived. Evidence abounds
for free; the folks I trust that stand with me, a living
breathing history -- plus the stuff I've plainly seen. We're
awash in innuendo, half truths, lies, and we pretend so. We
pretend that we're alone. We IGNORE our ink and stone. We
pretend that it's a fake for feeble minds and sure mistakes, but
something's written from the past -- beseeches us to grab hold
fast, and listen for what can't be pressured, weighed, assessed,
or even measured. We are not, have never been, alone as we've
been taught, my friend, and real proof we're not alone sure
seems to come . . . from ink and stone.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford.

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 28 November>**
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 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                             Re: Help Requested

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 13:20:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:21:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Help Requested


Dear Colleagues,

I would like to contact the following UFO researchers for a book
I am writing and would therefore like to ask if you have either
an e-mail, or snail mail address for them. They are:

Clifford Stone.

Ted Loman.

Jaime Maussan.


If you can help put me in touch with any of the above please
e-mail me direct at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com


Many thanks,

Philip Mantle.


Please feel free to distribute this message to others.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 28

                Tonight - Chris Rutkowski on 'Strange Days...

From: EBK
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 16:26:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 16:26:56 -0500
Subject: Tonight - Chris Rutkowski on 'Strange Days...

Tonight on 'Strange Days... Indeed'

   ----------------------
  /// Chris Rutkowski
-----------------------

Our guest tonight has been studying reports of UFOs (or PFTs -
"pesky flying things," as he sometimes likes to call them) since
the mid-1970s. A writer and editor for science and technology
publications, he also writes about his investigations and
research into UFO cases.

He publishes an annual compilation of UFO Reports from across
Canada, The Canadian UFO Report. His Swamp

His day-job is with the Astronomy Department of The
University of Manitoba in Winnipeg.

He has three published books, including: 'Visitations?' (1989)
and 'Unnatural History' (1993), the latter of which is in its
third printing. Mysterious Manitoba (1997), co-authored with
Dave Creighton and Brian Fidler, was released in November, 1997.

And now a fourth book, 'Abductions & Aliens - What's Really
Going On' published by Dundurn and will be on sale in your
favourite bookstore later this week.

Join Chris, co-host 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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                             Re: Help Requested

From: Bruno Mancusi <Bruno.Mancusi@com.mcnet.ch>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 20:13:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:38:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Help Requested


 >Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 13:20:30 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Help Requested

 >I would like to contact the following UFO researchers for a book
 >I am writing and would therefore like to ask if you have either
 >an e-mail, or snail mail address for them. They are:

 >Clifford Stone.

 >Ted Loman.

 >Jaime Maussan.

Have these ones:

- Clifford E. Stone,
   1421 East Tilden,
   Roswell,
   NM 88201-7955,
   USA.

- Jaime Maussan,
   Blvd. Adolfo Lopez Mateos 232,
   Col. Lomas De San Angel Inn,
   01060 Mexico, DF, Mexico.


Regards
Bruno







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 99 14:38:03 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:39:57 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST


Dennis,

 >>I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
 >>New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
 >>Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
 >>discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
 >>possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:

 >>"The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
 >>last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
 >>around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
 >>profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
 >>'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two
 >>planets or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the
 >>number set to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial
 >>intelligence may soon seem inevitable, and the Drake equation
 >>more like Newtonian law.

 >Ah, the perils of popular science writing!

Why don't you write The New Yorker -- legendary for its rigid
fact-checking -- and point out to its editors its contributor's
silly and obvious errors?  I'm sure they'd appreciate your
insights.

In any event, speaking of perils, the same could be said for
your own popular-science writing. Mallon, in fact, is expressing
a view familiar to scientists who take an optimistic view of the
proliferation of ETI.  You express a view familiar to scientists
who take a pessimistic view.  What you both have in common is a
claim to certainty, or near-certainty, that doesn't exist at our
current state of knowledge -- though it must be said that the
more we know, the more we seem to be seeing a universe suited,
at least theoretically, to ETI.

Hmmm ... do you think it might just possibly be worth
scientists' time to take, at last, a serious look at the UFO
phenomenon and its possible relationship to ETI?  Nah, of course
not.  Much more fun to  talk -- with absolute certainty -- about
speculative possibilities than to look at something that may be
closer at hand than a whole lot of people who ought to know
better are willing to consider. In the absence of actual
evidence, one is forced to agree with the pronouncement of the
great chemist Leslie Orgel: "We have no way of knowing anything
about the probability of life in the cosmos.  It could be
everywhere, or we could be alone."

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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 16:49:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:41:17 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 07:34:26 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

 >Dear Georgina, David and others:

 >I have found a really neat way to free up beaucoups des
 >Megabytes of disk space!

Thanks for the info. Aren't we all tired of junk mail. I usually
look for the title, then were it came from, if I don't like
either of those I dump it immediately.


Cheers
Georgina

Georgina Bruni
Editor in Chief Hot Gossip UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Big Countdown 01-01-00
It's Coming - 33 Days to the Millennium








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:17:43 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:45:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:10:58 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST

<snip>

 >>I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
 >>New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
 >>Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
 >>discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
 >>possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:

 >>"The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
 >>last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
 >>around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
 >>profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
 >>'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two
 >>planets or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the
 >>number set to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial
 >>intelligence may soon seem inevitable, and the Drake equation
 >>more like Newtonian law.

 >Ah, the perils of popular science writing!

Doesn't seem to stop some people.  What are your scientfic
credentials Dennis?  How do they compare with Mallon's?

 >To begin with, Mallon is simply dead wrong when he refers to
 >"the sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections." As I
 >posted on this thread earlier this week or late last,
 >referencing a NY Times article which in turn referenced an
 >article in Nature, only one of these "planets" has been
 >confirmed. The other 30 or so presently remain candidates for
 >confirmation.

This is just semantic hairsplitting.  Evidence for the existence
of one of these planets has been found using two separate
measuring techniques (Doppler wobble and transit occlusion).
Evidence for the existence of the 30 or so other planets
presently exists using only one of the techniques (Doppler
wobble).

At what point something becomes "confirmed" depends on one's
prejudices.  Many astronomers probably consider detection with
the Doppler wobble technique sufficient to "confirm" the
existence of a nearby planet.  Others demand more evidence.  So
the planet also detected by transit occlusion would probably be
considered to be "more confirmed" than the others.  And I'll bet
there are still some holdouts in the astronomical community who
consider none of this evidence to be confirmation of anything.

That's how scientific opinion _really_ works, particularly with
difficult to measure phenomena.  It's rarely black and white,
with something either definitely "confirmed" or not "confirmed."
What we usually have instead are lines of evidence for and
against. Scientific opinion lines up on all sides, with a lot of
people straddling the fence.

 >But even if they are confirmed, along with
 >countless others like them, their existence wouldn't do anything
 >to promote the Drake Equation odds; in fact, they would detract
 >from them, for reasons that should be obvious.

Stacy starts to move the goalpost.

 >What scientists have found evidence (or indications) of thus far
 >is a category of solar system which consists of a sun closely
 >orbited (in most cases in a matter of days) by a gas giant, or,
 >ye gods, a brown dwarf. What are the chances that such a solar
 >system will serve as a crucible for the creation and nurturing
 >of intelligent life? In a word, absolutely zilch.

Yawn!  I haven't heard anybody argue that these would be good
solar systems for life.  You're just arguing your usual
strawman.

What they do demonstrate is that solar systems are extremely
common.  A few years ago I was arguing with people on Usenet as
to whether there were any other solar systems anywhere.  They
claimed there was no good evidence, therefore ours might be the
only solar system in the Cosmos (what logic!).

Now, just a few years later, we have very good evidence that
there are a lot of other solar systems, the argument seems to
shift to these solar systems not being like ours.  That's what I
mean by moving the goalpost.

Here's a head's-up for you Dennis.  The reason none of these
solar systems are like ours is because the techniques used
cannot detect solar systems like ours.  It's really that simple.
The techniques can only detect large orbiting bodies close to
the parent star, not solar systems like ours, with small rocky
planets in close and large gas giants further out.  In
statistics, this is known as a highly biased sample.

 >Imagine our own solar system, with a gas giant the size of
 >Jupiter or larger occupying such an orbital space. It's doubtful
 >if anything even remotely resembling the planet Earth could
 >comfortably exist in such a system, never mind thrive and
 >prosper for a few billion years. Even worse prospects exist in
 >the case of a sun orbited by a brown dwarf, with apologies to
 >all dark-skinned dwarfs everywhere.

Stacy fluffs up his strawman.

 >Such a scenario just isn't a starter.

 >If anything, it should give us reason to pause and consider just
 >what we mean by both the terms planet and solar system. If a
 >planet is defined as any sizeable, cohesive body orbiting a sun,
 >then close-orbiting gas giants would certainly qualify as a
 >planet.

Uhhh, that is exactly what astronomers mean by a planet, as long
as it has no active fusion processes at its core (as would,
e.g., a brown dwarf star).

 > On the other hand, if by planet you mean something
 >potentially capable of supporting intelligent life, then the gas
 >giants themselves fail the definition rather spectacularly (for
 >a number of reasons).

Nobody but Dennis Stacy seems to be arguing for this definition
of a "planet."  It's another of his laughable strawmen.  Whether
an orbiting body is capable of supporting intelligent life has
nothing to do with whether it is a planet.  Sheesh, Christ
almighty!

Try pulling that one at an astronomy conference Dennis.  Please
argue that our solar system has only one "planet", since only
one orbiting body in our solar sytem supports intelligent life.
The other eight thingees are just orbiting thingees, not
planets.

 >Ditto solar system. If a solar system can be defined as a star
 >orbited by a smaller brown dwarf, then we're engaged in an
 >exercise in semantics and little more, because that solar system
 >will never give rise to a stable planet capable of sustaining
 >intelligent life (for a number of reasons).

Most astronomers would probably call this a double star system
rather than a solar system.  If the orbiting body is not defined
as a star (no fusion processes at its core), then it becomes, by
definition, a planet.   Whether something is defined as a planet
has NOTHING to do with whether it can sustain intelligent life.
Yes, you are engaged in a pointless, floundering exercise in
semantics.

 >In other words, some planets are oranges and many, many, others
 >apples, as are solar systems, and never the twain shall meet. In
 >short, Mallon knows not whereof he speaks. And, neither, for
 >that matter, does Drake, who also mixes his apples and oranges.

The only one who doesn't seem to know of what he speaks is you,
who is definitely mixing apples and oranges.  Mallon and Drake
are well-aware that most stars and solar systems would not be
good candidates for intelligent life.  The Drake equation is not
about how commonplace Earth-like planets and intelligence life
are, but how _uncommon_ they are.  Duhhhh!

 >We simply don't know what the typical "preferred" planet and
 >solar system of the universe is at this time. Is the latter one
 >in which the gas giants closely orbit the central star, middle
 >orbit the central star, or one in which they occupy the outer
 >orbits, as in our own particular case?

 >We simply don't know.

Yep, 30 solar systems isn't much of a representative sample,
particularly when present techniques can only detect one type of
solar system and not others.

No astronomer would argue otherwise.  To get a proper
_representative_ sample of solar systems requires better
measuring techniques, such as NASA's Origins program, with plans
for space-based infrared telescope interferometers.  The one in
progress should be able to sample the nearest 8,000 or so stars
and directly detect their solar systems, including the average
temperatures of the planets, distance from the star, approximate
size, and some of the critical atmospheric gasses (if any) such
as water, oxygen, and carbon dioxide.

So, if the Origins project is successful, and 30 years from now
there is still no evidence of any solar systems or planets
remotely like our own, you can then crow with some justification
about how unique we are and how prescient you were.

But I wouldn't bet on it.  The day is still young and the good
evidence isn't in yet.

 >Accordingly, the Earth could just as easily (if not more so) be
 >the exception rather than the rule.

Earth-like planets are undoubtably the exception, not the rule.
I haven't heard anybody argue otherwise, have you?  The question
is how uncommon are they?  Are they present in one in a hundred
stars, one in ten-thousand, one in a million, etc?

 >But especially if gas giants prove to be the rule.

Of course they are the rule.  We have four in our own solar
system making up about 99.9% of the mass of the solar system.
What we can't do with present techniques is detect that other
0.1% mass, i.e. small rocky planets like Earth, Mars, etc.
Astronomers on Alpha Centauri probably couldn't detect Jupiter
with our present techniques, much less Earth.  That doesn't mean
they aren't there.

 >Never mind those troublesome brown dwarfs, who could also be the rule.

Probably at least half of all stars are part of double or
multi-star systems. This is hardly news.  How common brown
dwarfs are in single and multi-star systems is presently unknown
(we can't see them), but is actively being investigated, since
it is believed they may contain a good percentage of presently
unaccounted for missing mass in the Universe.

The presence of brown dwarfs in solar systems are not
necessarily fatal to the evolution of life and intelligent life,
since they are comparatively small and very dim, cool stars, not
much bigger than Jupiter.  Stick one out around where Jupiter or
Saturn is now, and it might not have made much difference in the
evolution of life on Earth.  There is even serious consideration
to the notion that a brown dwarf IS already part of our solar
system, but orbitting so far out that we can't see it.  There is
some evidence in terms of gravitational anomalies in the orbits
of the outer planets that have never been fully resolved.  If
there is a brown dwarf as part of our solar system, that hardly
stopped us from evolving, did it?

 >However, for Mallon to suggest that the discovery of "solar
 >systems" in which intelligent life couldn't conceivably evolve
 >somehow _increases_ the likelihood of the latter is, well, in a
 >word, nonsensical, if not downright antithetical. Of course the
 >words ignorant and stupid also come to mind, although I would
 >never use them.

No, of course not.  I could also say that your arguments are
largely nonsensical, if not ignorant and stupid, but I would
never say anything like that either.

All I see you doing is raising one strawman after another.
Nobody, but nobody, is arguing that the solar systems discovered
so far are conducive to the evolution of intelligent life.  What
people like Mallon ARE arguing, is that rapid discovery of more
and more solar systems of one type almost certainly points to
the extreme commonality of solar systems of all types.  And that
would point to the increased likelihood of life and intelligent
life elsewhere.

So far we have only a biased sample of one type of solar system
because of the techniques used (gas giants close to home star).
But its a very good bet that as our measuring techniques improve
(e.g. NASA's Origins telescope  interferometer), we're going to
be finding a lot of other types of solar systems in the
not-too-distant future, including some percentage very similar
to our own.

If that turns out not to be the case, then and only then would I
concede your point that our solar system is somehow highly
unusual.  But first we need to get a good _representative_
statistical sample of what solar systems and planets are
actually out there.  Otherwise we end up with Stacian strawman
arguments.

 >Point here is that people are hearing the words planet and solar
 >system bandied about which have absolutely no reference
 >whatsoever in terms of planets and solar systems that could
 >conceivably incubate and hatch intelligent life and see it
 >through maturity.

Sounds like another of your strawmen. Actually, in the news
stories I've read, the astronomers have been very careful to
point out that these planets are nothing like Earth and are
unlikely to harbor any life, much less intelligent life.

What is being reported is that other planets and solar systems
are now being found.  Using any astronomy textbook you wish to
cite, these reports are correct.  As long as some orbiting body
around some star is not defined as a star, it is by definition a
planet, and by definition that star has a solar system.  End of
story.

 >A star closely orbited by a gas giant is not an argument in
 >_favor_ of the existence of ETI, for God's sakes, it's an
 >argument _against_ it, at least as far as that particular "solar
 >system" is involved.

Nobody is saying otherwise.

 >What about this argument doesn't anyone understand?

Everybody understands the argument.  What you don't understand
is that everybody already understood it and you are, as usual,
tilting at windmills.

David Rudiak








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                    Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 21:19:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:47:43 -0500
Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!


 >Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 06:04:31 -0500
 >From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: British ufology Has Been Reborn!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >I'm very aware of the legalities surrounding publishing contracts,
 >having authored five books with a further two forthcoming next
 >year (of which total two have had UFOs as their subject, four have
 >covered folklore and tradition, and one archaeology).

David, I have not read any of your books and would be interested
to know the titles. I suppose it all depends on the publishing
house. Most large publishing companies usually have the
contracts we are referring to. Who were/are your publishers?
Anyone we know?

 >In all cases publicity - any publicity - is the name of the
 >game; any publisher who shuns publicity doesn't stay a publisher
 >very long! I've never heard of a PR department who has shunned
 >publicity, even misleading publicity, in advance by forcing an
 >author to sign a contract which prevents him or her from
 >discussing *any* aspect of the subject, and especially the
 >title, of a forthcoming book.. Jeffrey Archer would be horrified
 >at such a prospect, as would the by now very rich creators of
 >the Blair Witch Project.

It may interest you to know that my profession is as a
PR/Publicist. And I have had to shun publicity on behalf of my
clients, and not everything is for "Immediate Release".You are
_not_ quite right right about all publicity being the name of
the game, I doubt Gary Glitter of child pornography fame has
welcomed his latest. And I can assure you that Jeffrey Archer's
latest problems are not something he is enjoying either. What
you obviously do not understand is how publicity works. There is
absolutely no use promoting a product that is not on the market
or is not quite ready to go on the market. In most professional
cases, publicity usually begins in earnest 3 months beforehand.
This does not mean to say that steps are not taken in forward
planning. Please get your facts right.

 >And, Georgina, you have contradicted yourself because you *have*
 >discussed your investigation by your own admission on the
 >Internet and in print, for example in an issue of Beyond magazine,
 >Vol 2, No 9 (97/98).

That article was written two years ago, long before I even thought
of doing a book. So please get your facts right.

 >Your article poses several relevant questions:

 >Do you regard yourself, Georgina, as "an armchair researcher" as
 >the quote above seems to suggest?
 >How much of your research into the Rendlesham incident has been
 >done via exhanging electronic messages on the Internet - and how
 >much actually speaking to _real_ people face to face?

In the initial stages I did do some armchair research, as you
see, I have openly admitted this. However, when I began working
on the case in earnest, and I would call it an "investigation",
rather than merely research, there is a difference. I most
certainly did talk to real people - and whenever possible - face
to face - and when I say talked, I interviewed them many, many
times. And that, my friend, is not all I have done. So please
once again, get your facts right.

 >Do you believe the Internet is a reliable and important
 >source of information on UFOs?

I presume you mean the Web? It is a good source of information
but one has to be aware that the Web is open to all, therefore
one must carefully check the sources of the material.

It is also especially important that if someone e-mails you
claiming to be an important witness to an event, you should most
certainly check the person's details.

I would want to know that the person is who they say they are.
In the _couple_  of instances that this has happened to me, I
have managed to check that data and make further contact with
the person, either face to face or by telephone depending on
their location. One should also request lots more information,
such as photo's and papers proving who they are, and interview
them several times just to make sure their story is the same.

 >How much reliance and importance do you attach to testimony
 >received anonymously and purely by electronic methods?

I believe I have just answered that question. With regards to a
witness or player wanting to be anonymous. I would not accept
any such information. I am quite willing to keep their name a
secret in any publication because I respect that they have very
good reasons for wanting this. However, I must know their
identity and I must also prove to myself that they are who they
say they are.

 >And - do you not accept that reliance upon Internet "sources"
 >(often about as far removed from the real world as is possible),
 >leaves you wide open to hoaxing?

Indeed, the biggest problem is disinformation, one should be
aware of that.

 >As for Jenny and myself mentioning it and you never having done
 >so, I think the list of Internet sources you yourself have
 >published and the article quoted above demonstrate this is not
 >entirely the truth.

You are referring to an old article which is a long, long way
off from where the case stands at this moment in time. That was
just the tip of the iceberg. You must remember that this was
before I began my investigation in earnest. Get your facts right
David!

 >I also have the right to respond to what I regard as "errroneous
 >remarks", as in the case of the nonsense printed in the
 >newspapers recently about the "radiation traces" allegedly found
 >at Rendlesham. Have you contacted the Daily Mail and the Sun
 >newspapers to correct this particular piece of "erroneous
 >information"? Erroneous information, I should point out, which
 >had in one case been provided by one of your major sources, one
 >Nick Pope.

Erroneous? Don't lets do that one again David. It's been done to
death.

Actually, with regards to the MOD UFO files allegedly being
released, yes,  I contacted the journalist who broke the story
and not only that but I called the MOD Press Office. You're
supposed to be a journalist, did you think of doing that
considering you find it so important? By the way, Nick Pope is
not one of my major sources as you presuppose. How could he be,
he was not involved in the incident or around at the time.

 >You are very quick to pick up on what ufologists say about this
 >case, but your reluctance to apply the same standards to media
 >sources speak for themselves.

What has Nick Pope's articles got to do with me? I am not his
publicist.

 >Is it not more far more likely that the title of the book is
 >secret because it has not been dreamed up yet?

No, you have my word that there is a title.

 >Government secrecy and UFOs eh?  In my opinion, the biggest
 >sources of secrecy and cover-up are the ufologists themselves.

Good job I'm not a ufologist then, isn't it? ;-)

Georgina Bruni

Georgina Bruni
Editor in Chief Hot Gossip UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Big Countdown 01-01-00
It's Coming - 33 Days to the Millennium








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                  CPR-Canada News: Update on Viscount, Sask

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 21:23:40 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 09:41:48 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update on Viscount, Sask


CPR-Canada News
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

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


Update on Viscount, Saskatchewan Formation


November 28, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


More information and photos are now available regarding the
Viscount formation (late September), thanks to a detailed ground
study by Dennis Eklund, on November 7. Images by Dennis, and
also  Dave Yanko, are posted on the web site at:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/viscount99.html

The Viscount circles were also covered in stories by The Star-
Phoenix (November 1 and 2) and The Leader Post (November 1)
newspapers.

Copies of his reports follow:


November 7

Just a bit of an update on the two circles found in Viscount,
Saskatchewan, Canada. Two of us just got back today from
Viscount, as we live in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan approximately an
hour away. Surprisingly the circles were in very good shape
after the period of time that has passed. We did a fairly long
study on the two circles. The smaller circle measured 36 ft
across and the larger one measured 45 ft across. The two circles
were about 30 yards apart and very dramatic in appearance. The
flattened crop was in a very obvious counter clock wise woven
pattern with at least one other layer woven in other directions.
The colour of the crop in the circles was dramatically different
from other flattened crop in the field. The crop was not
flattened hard to the ground, but each stem was bent about 1 to
2 inches from the ground with the heads of the crop still
intact. After taking soil samples in the circle and outside the
circle, it was very obvious that the soil inside the circle had
a layer of about 2 to 3 inches that were very compacted. In
fact, in order to take samples of soil to test future seed
growth, the soil had to be almost shaven off with a knife. We
are presently in the process of comparing seed growth from the
circles with seed outside the circles combined with the soil of
the same. After our experiences and investigations of the day, I
believe this to be a very significent crop circle find. Don't
know if your interested, but just wanted to let you know. If you
have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thanks.


November 9

Thanks for the reply Paul. We would be more than happy to help
out anyway we can. We (partner in life) are both seriously
carrying on our own investigations trying to find answers, she
as I, want to find the answers, we know they are there, its just
persistance, teamwork and study that is going to bring the
answers to the forefront (exactly! - ed.). Although our
experience is limited, and although small in comparison to
others, this site in particular has just strengthened our
wanting to be part of the answer. It is a classic example, stems
bent 2 to 3 inches above the ground line, fantastic layered
weaving, soil compacted without bending the stalks at ground
level, it just leaves the mind wondering. In my opinion, a hoax
in this case is entirely ruled out. To answer your questions
Paul, yes, we have approximately 13 photographs of the circles,
the weaves, and the area that we should have by Wednesday. We
would be glad to supply them to you. I can also supply you with
crop heads outside the circle and inside the circle, these are
quite important because of the colour and density difference.
Something has obviously happened to create this difference. As
far as the nodes on the stalks go, I guess I was more
inquisitive on the seeds in the stalks and broke off my samples
very high up on the stalks. But I can go back and get what ever
you need. I do have a sample of the root system and stalk from
the circle but nothing to compare them to. I think it warrants
another visit, don't you think? (before it snows). Just want to
let you know one thing.... if you need any additional sampling
for this site or any site in the future ....please just let us
know, we want to do it, we need to do it. As you already know,
its the only way we are going to find the answers. Please feel
free to call on us anytime.

In my opinion, the most fascinating aspect of this site is the 3
inch layer of soil that is so hard as mentioned in my previous
email. This is the soil I used in my seed tests, but obviously
it will take awhile. Paul, if there are any other things I
should be looking for, or any other tests... Please let me
know... when I leave, I keep thinking all the way home, is there
something else I should be looking for. I'm sure you have the
experience... I want to learn it. In closing, let us know what
you need... we will do our best to get it. Thanks.


November 25

Just a few notes about the photos I sent you. Sorry they are not
the greatest... but although the crop looks flattened to the
ground, it really isn't. Each stem of the crop stands straight
for about 2 to 3 inches before it is bent. I can't see weight
being a factor or they would be bent at ground level.

You can obviously see the circular pattern but an interesting
thing I thought was that it is in 2 or 3 layers. If you look
under the first layer there is another that is kinda weaved
going in the opposite direction. In regards to the photo of the
centre of the circle, it was hard to tell if someone previously
had cleared it away or not, but there was no hole as in Judy
Arnt's site near Edmonton. It was just bare and very hard.

I think I mentioned to you previously that I did a test seeding
of various combinations. I took two samples of soil outside the
circle, and two inside. I planted seeds from outside the circle
and seed inside the circle in each. To make it brief, the
results are so far... the sample with crop circle soil and crop
circle seeds has a very stunted growth compared to the others.
The sample of outside circle soil and crop circle seed is by far
out performing all the others in |growth by about 2 times.
Although not in a laboratory setting, it is interesting. It
would be interesting to visit that site again next summer to see
if any difference is visible..

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/1999.html

20 Formations!

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/cpr-canada/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/cpr-canada


� 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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                   Uri Geller - Warp Speed On UFO Physics

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 22:11:27 PST
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 17:54:58 -0500
Subject: Uri Geller - Warp Speed On UFO Physics


Greetings list -

From: The Times - London

http://www.the-times.co.uk/news/pages/tim/99/11/29/timintint01016.html?999

Weird Web
Uri Geller

Stardrive Alien spaceships are an impossible concept. How could
they find Earth? Did they set out from home planets thousands of
light-years away, aiming for a speck in the universe that was
showing no signs of intelligent life, no radio, no television,
not even electric light?

How could their crews survive? What kind of fuel could propel a
craft across galaxies? These basic questions expose the myth of
UFOs.

And yet, tens of thousands of reliable witnesses report UFO
sightings each year. Whole cities, as in Mexico last year,
capture spaceships on video. Experienced flyers, such as the
former USAF F-16 pilot at the controls of a passenger jet over
Texas on October 26 this year, offer detailed descriptions of
massive triangular craft spotted above 35,000ft.

Physicist Jack Sarfatti doesn't want to believe in UFOs. He
wants to know. To know how they could function. To know the
hidden laws of physics they must exploit. To know if mankind can
replicate the technology.

His Stardrive project is drawing some of the most adventurous
and reputable scientists in the world, to examine the impossible
questions from a new angle - deducing new laws of science to
explain interstellar travel. Instead of parroting the general
relativity dictum that nothing travels faster than light,
Sarfatti wants to discover a way to outstrip 186,000 miles a
second without cheating on Einstein.

The project has already discovered a formula that lets UFOs
perform their zig-zag acrobatics without having gravity forces
inside the spaceship crush the crew.

Sarfatti is a tanned Californian with a white mane and black
wraparound shades. When Hollywood makes the movie, Jack
Nicholson could take the role.

And if his physics proves feasible, you can expect the film to
premiere on Mars. Or a million light-years beyond.

* Links

http://www.stardrive.org

---

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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 02:10:24 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:08:26 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:08:17 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

 >Author Timothy Good, in receipt of the MJ-12 documents from an
 >"intelligence source" (who happened to use the same photocopier
 >as William Moore), created the first major publicity splash
 >about MJ-12 from Britain in 1987 to publicize his book ABOVE TOP
 >SECRET. This was quickly followed by Moore becoming an MJ-12
 >public figure in the U.S. Moore (with Shandera) and Good
 >essentially initiated the MJ-12 controversy.

Quite awhile ago somebody was claiming that Bill Moore told them
that he was the one who sent the documents to Tim Good.. that
way the documents weren't 'directly leaked from him.'
Supposedly it had something to do with the arrangement with
Moore's govt sources.

There was also the story that Moore supposedly told one
researcher about leaking phony documents in an effort to push
the "coverup" into revealing more information.

 >In recent times, Moore offered his reflections on MJ-12 and Roswell:

 >"If any of the UFO-related documents cited by me in past
 >writings are fabrications (a matter which I have always conceded
 >to be within the bounds of possibility), then I was just as much
 >taken in and used as anyone else, if not more."  from Saucer
 >Smear, 4-20-97.

He sure helped take in and use a number of other people, i.e. by
his own claims Bennowitz, and Linda Howe...when he claimed in
1989 to be involved with a OSI disinformation plot directed
against UFO researchers.

One could easily wonder if the so called MJ-12 and other
documents were also part of the same goverment scheme.

As an aside, I recall in a Fate Magazine series on crashed
saucers (Jerry Clark?) that it talked about how some goverment
source alleged handed Moore some classified govt documents in a
motel room somewhere and gave him some period of time like 11
minutes to copy them or whatever.  As I recall he said he
photographed them with his 35mm camera.  Again, as I recall,
this supposedly happened in the 81-83 time frame.  Some have
speculated that was the MJ-12 documents and Moore was the one
who mailed them to Shandara.

 >"I no longer am of the opinion that the extraterrestrial
 >explanation is the best explanation for this event (Roswell)."
 >from Saucer Smear, 8-5-97.
 >
 >(on Roswell) "I've always harbored some doubts about this case."
 >from Saucer Smear, 11-15-97.
 >
 >Timothy Good, in 1996, said he believed the MJ-12 documents to
 >be bogus (BEYOND TOP SECRET, 1996, pg. 468), though he
 >originally claimed to have received them from a source within
 >the government.
 >
 >How do these statements, from the initiators of the MJ-12
 >debate, concur with Friedman's insistence that the documents are
 >authentic? Moore and Shandera "found" the only document that was
 >alleged to have come from government sources, which formed the
 >core of Friedman's faith in the authenticity of the papers. It
 >hardly sounds like Moore is wholly convinced of this anymore. If
 >there is a case here, Friedman hasn't convinced his own
 >colleagues!
 >
 >If Friedman's case is conclusive, it depends upon the
 >credibility of William Moore's activities. Does Friedman believe
 >Moore is an honest man? If he is, why did Moore refer to
 >Friedman, the chief defender of MJ-12,  as "Fraudmann" (Saucer
 >Smear, 11-15-97)? Or why would a discoverer of the MJ-12 papers
 >say this about his colleague:

 >"As for Friedman, I think he is in this thing way over his head,
 >and I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him get badly burned by
 >it. It troubles me greatly to see the money-grubbing showman
 >side of him dominating his once respectable scientific
 >acumen."(Saucer Smear, 11-15-96.)

Many people belive/think that  Stan is staking  his entire
credibility on the MJ-12 documents (which came through Bill
Moore) being real.

 >If Moore isn't an honest man, then the debate about MJ-12's
 >authenticity is academic. Either way, where is Friedman's case
 >now?


How all this will be rationalized away by the various people who
want to believe in the MJ-12 documents is something like this:

Well when Bill Moore was coming up with the documents and got
the MJ-12 documents he was wonderful  BUT in 1989 when he
admitted to being part of a govt disinformation plot, he turned
into Darth Vader etc.  So, the rationalization will go, we can
trust Moore and his statements/documents prior to 1989 BUT after
1989 he can't be trusted hence why his later comments in 'Saucer
Smear' can instantly be explained away.

Since Bill Moore now doubts the ET explaination of Roswell, it
does tell us what he thinks about the documents he helped unload
on the UFO scene.

The bottom line on MJ-12 is that even with all the published
papers and books, nobody can provide a "authentic" document from
the archives that mentions MJ-12 AND crashed UFO/ET/ in the same
document.

We have yet to see an "authentic" goverment document from the
archives that shows UFO/ET was discussed at a particular meeting
mentioned in "leaked" documents.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                   Sighting Report OZ File 0398 26.11.1999

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@fan.net.au>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 10:54:05 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:55:48 -0500
Subject: Sighting Report OZ File 0398 26.11.1999

The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia

UFO Sighting Report OZ File 0398 26.11.1999

FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN  Qld,
Date:    26.11.99
Time reported: 8.19pm
Name: Tracy
Location: Gold Coast Queensland Australia
Given to investigator: Diane Harrison AUFORN

Report:

I called Tracy she told me, she and 8 witnesses saw a very
strange object in the sky over Labrador, Gold Coast, Qld

Time: 8.05pm
Shape: Long tubes like a flouro light tube
Size: 3 meter long
Objects: 4
Colour:Bright green
Sound: None
Speed: Slow moving
Duration:10 minutes or more
Direction: Easterly out to sea
Witnesses: 8

Tracy said she could see the cloud cover and at first thought it
to be a light show, so she investigated to see if anyone had
been having one and she came up with nothing. Tracy said she and
her neighbors are of the opinion that the object was above the
clouds and was not a ground based light source. The tubes were
positioned along side each other around 30 cm apart all 4 tubes
moved in the same direction "Easterly out to sea". Tracy said it
was astounding it was fantastic we all stood there mouths open
in amassment at what we were looking at.

Still under investigation

Regards Diane Harrison

Director Of The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia
Co Director of The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Skywatch Director

~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
THE KEITH BASTERFIELD NETWORK
(A Non-Profit Organization)

E-Mail: tkbnetw@fan.net.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.fan.net.au/~tkbnetw/new
http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb760221

ADMINISTRATION:

THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK
(A Non-Profit Organization)

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 list.
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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 10:43:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:57:46 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:26:36 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Bob and listfolk:

 >>Here's a number to be subtracted from the Drake Equation - Gamma
 >>Ray Bursts may zap life in galaxies every couple hundred million
 >>years, essentially resetting to zero the time that has been
 >>available for exploration.


Much of the evidence auggests that bursters 'beam' on an axis.
Planetary systems "off axis" are therefore unlikely to be
affected by the burster, even if it is at realtively close
range.

My point re the Drake Equation, which I discussed in another
thread, is that I believe the rise of technological, spacefaring
civilizations might be much rarer than we imagine.
Environmental factors may favor the emergence of intelligence on
many worlds, but the development of technology arises from a
delicate environmental, social, and political mix.  On planets
with 'kind' climates, there probably will be little impetus to
develop a sophisticated technology.

Similarly, here on earth, would our technology have developed
without a fundamentalist religious doctrine and the reaction it
provoked, the Enlightenment?  Institutions and ideology are
important elements in the emergence of technological societies.

Brian






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                       Robinson's Socorro Explanation

From: Jerry Cohen <rjcohen@li.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 11:06:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:00:29 -0500
Subject: Robinson's Socorro Explanation

 >From: Robert Moore <ENGIMA9@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 15:28:27 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 19:21:32 -0400
 >Subject: Socorro: The Zamora 'Insignia'

<snip>

 >Dear list,

 >Today, I read with considerable interest James Easton's recent
 >posting on his "UFO Research" email list, regarding a possible
 >"balloon" explanation cited recently for the "classic"  Lonnie
 >Zamora/Socorro New Mexico CE3 case, which (as you all know)
 >occurred on the 24th April 1964

<snip>

 >The main gist of this claim reads as follows (following text
 >taken from James Easton's original  email):

 ><snip>

 >>I'm not sure how well known [Larry] Robinson's published material is
 >>known and perhaps surprisingly, or maybe not, I've only ever seen
 >>it mentioned once, briefly, on any 'UFO' related forum. He
 >>states:

<snip>

 >Robert Moore,
 >I.U.N.
  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JC      Ah, Larry Robinson and his balloon theories. My computer's
been down for quite awhile and the discussion on this thread may
have already covered what I'm about to write, but I have to
belatedly add my comments here regarding what Robert has
written. If anyone has posted this already, I apologize for the
redundancy.

This is the same Larry Robinson who has posted his "explanation"
for the 1965 Exeter, NH sightings on his website. There was an
internal link to Socorro therein:

http://php.indiana.edu/~lrobins/howiextr.htm

My reply to it regarding Exeter is located at:
http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/rob.rebut.html

If Mr. Robinson's research concerning Socorro is anything like
his attempt to explain the Exeter sightings, I believe most
intelligent readers will see why serious researchers may have
tended to ignore his analyses.

Respectfully,

Jerry Cohen

Author: Oberg/Cooper rebuttals
Website: http://www.li.net/~rjcohen/
UFOmind: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/c/cohen/


BTW:

Glenn Campbell's UFOMind website has a nice page concerning Exeter:
http://www.ufomind.com/place/us/nh/exeter/

It contains some of the following:

Dr. J. Allen Hynek's analysis of the case:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/jan/m26-010.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/jan/m26-008.shtml

and the following Loy Lawhon's comments on Philip Klass'
"Ball Lightning" explanation for the event:
http://ufos.miningco.com/library/weekly/aa090997.htm

and further comments by Mark Cashman concerning
the effects of distance on an observer:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/dec/m05-005.shtml












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                                UFO/Balloon?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:18:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:18:43 -0500
Subject: UFO/Balloon?

Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 10:56:32 -0300
To: updates@globalserve.net
From: Informe Alfa (Luis Eduardo Pacheco) <ufozone@bigfoot.com>
Subject: UFO/Balloon?


Hi list!

First thing: my English it's very ugly so forgive my sometimes
Tarzan's language.

I'm Luis Eduardo Pacheco and I'm writing you from Argentina in
South America.

I'm editor of an electronic free magazine called in Spanish
"INFORME ALFA" (ALPHA REPORT) wich deals with the ufo phenomena
and the paranormal from a point of view of logical thinking and
open mind.

I'm currently investigating and writing an article about a
sighting we had here in September 1985, of an UFO that remains
over Buenos Aires for the lapse of 6 hours. That happening
raised a controversy inside the ufological buffs between those
that think that was a really UFO and those that think that was
only a Meteorological Balloon.

I'm enclosed with my mail a mosaic of the pictures of that
sighting took by the LA PLATA observatory (a city near Buenos
Aires) (The two pics in the right side of the mosaic).

If you see the picture will notice a "stick of light" in the top
of the ufo/balloon.

Some days ago surfing the web I had find a page of a Australian
astronomer that took a picture of the same type of object, (a
balloon) with the cientific instrumental gondolas attached to
him (the left picture of the mosaic).

The case is almost solved ...im in touch with the CNES in France
that confirmed that the picture of Buenos Aires is a balloon
called Montgolfier Infrared whitout the cientific package, but
can't explain the feature on the top of the object.

Of course it's the sun reflection, but over what...?

I'm writing the list in the hope that someone can help me to
find a logical and common sense explication to that "stick of
light", the last point we need to answer to send the case to
rest.

Again, I'm very sorry of the poorness of my english....

I hope soon your responses.

  Mosaic1.jpg

Un abrazo!

********************************************************************
*   Luis Eduardo Pacheco  *  Caseros  *  Buenos Aires * Argentina  *
********************************************************************
*   INFORME ALFA: Una vision de la Ovnilogia y las  Paraciencias   *
*       desde la logica, el sentido comun y la mente abierta       *
*                                                                  *
* http://www.informealfa.com.ar  * Email: informe_alfa@bigfoot.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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                               On False Memory

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:02:20 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:20:38 -0500
Subject: On False Memory


An interesting quote on false memory, as it relates to
abductees, which appears in an interview with Dr. John
Mack at the PEER website (http://www.peer-mack.org/):


MISHLOVE: The issue of memory itself has become increasingly
controversial. When these people are reporting their
memories to you, what tools do you have to know how much
weight you can give to a memory being an actual memory,
as opposed to being some sort of a fantasy?


MACK: Well, the argument around so-called false memory, or
doubting memories, is applied to situations which are not
of core significance to the individual. There's a study at
Harvard going on now where people have been deeply
traumatized, as the abductees have, in many cases -- have
distortions of memory, but not for the traumatic events.
The memory around the traumatic events is highly accurate,
highly reliable. It's all the rest of their lives that
becomes distorted and confused. So there is no evidence that
you get false memory when you have very powerful traumatic
events that are described with great conviction and great
detail by people who are of otherwise sound mind and reliable
observers.

-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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:25:06 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >Date: Sun, 28 Nov 99 14:38:03 PST

 >>Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST

 >Dennis,

 >>>I've just read an interesting review/essay by Thomas Mallon (The
 >>>New Yorker, November 22) on two new biographies of Carl Sagan.
 >>>Mallon makes a couple of points relevant to current list
 >>>discussion about ETI; their significance in terms of the
 >>>possibility of ET visitation should be apparent to all:
 >
 >>>"The astronomer did live to see what he called, in one of his
 >>>last essays, the 'epochal discovery' of a planetary system
 >>>around the pulsar star B 1257 + 12. But he missed the sudden
 >>>profusion of confirmed planet detections: the on-line
 >>>'Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia' now lists thirty-two
 >>>planets or brown dwarfs around main-sequence stars.  With the
 >>>number set to grow exponentially, extraterrestrial
 >>>intelligence may soon seem inevitable, and the Drake equation
 >>>more like Newtonian law.

 >>Ah, the perils of popular science writing!

 >Why don't you write The New Yorker -- legendary for its rigid
 >fact-checking -- and point out to its editors its contributor's
 >silly and obvious errors?  I'm sure they'd appreciate your
 >insights.


Jerry,

It's nice to see you defending bad writing, wherever it appears.
In my dictionary, confirmed means confirmed, not indirectly
confirmed, indirectly suggested, half-confirmed or anything
else.

I only go by what I read in the papers, so you might want to
check out John Noble Wilford's article in the NY Times for Nov.
16, "First Direct Observation of an Extrasolar Planet." For
those unfamiliar with the name, Wilford is the Times's longtime
science correspondent. The reason for the article's being is
that this was the first _confirmation_ of an extrasolar planet
-- _not_ the "sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections"
that Mallon refers to. I also have a hard time with Mallon's use
of "sudden profusion" to describe 32 indirect observations over
four years, but never mind.

 >In any event, speaking of perils, the same could be said for
 >your own popular-science writing. Mallon, in fact, is expressing
 >a view familiar to scientists who take an optimistic view of the
 >proliferation of ETI.  You express a view familiar to scientists
 >who take a pessimistic view.  What you both have in common is a
 >claim to certainty, or near-certainty, that doesn't exist at our
 >current state of knowledge -- though it must be said that the
 >more we know, the more we seem to be seeing a universe suited,
 >at least theoretically, to ETI.


Why are you turning my criticism of Mallon's use of language
into a personal issue? For the record, I've written for a number
of big popular magazines with fact checkers, OMNI and
Smithsonian Air & Space included. The dirty inside secret of
fact-checking? Half the time, the fact-checker calls you with a
list of last minute questions and asks you, the author, if
so-and-so fact is correct. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but
deadlines cause a lot of facts to go unchecked, even at the New
Yorker, but if you want to take Mallon over Wilford and the NY
Times, that's fine by me. Just don't make it personal, because
it ain't.

I wasn't putting myself on a par with Mallon as a popular
science writer (this is an e-mail thread the last time I looked,
not the New Yorker), I was referring to the perils of the job --
and speaking with the voice of experience. I know how hard it is
to get everything right. I don't think Mallon got it right when
he wrote confirmed. Get over it.

As for my claims to certainty in light of our present knowledge,
maybe you ought to go back and read some of my post you snipped.
For example:

"We simply don't know what the typical "preferred" planet and
solar system of the universe is at this time. Is the latter one
in which the gas giants closely orbit the central star, middle
orbit the central star, or one in which they occupy the outer
orbits, as in our own particular case?

"We simply don't know. Accordingly, the Earth could just as
easily (if not more so) be the exception rather than the rule.
But especially if gas giants prove to be the rule. Never mind
those troublesome brown dwarfs, who could also be the rule."

Does that sound like the voice of certainty speaking to you?

 >Hmmm ... do you think it might just possibly be worth
 >scientists' time to take, at last, a serious look at the UFO
 >phenomenon and its possible relationship to ETI?  Nah, of course
 >not.  Much more fun to  talk -- with absolute certainty -- about
 >speculative possibilities than to look at something that may be
 >closer at hand than a whole lot of people who ought to know
 >better are willing to consider. In the absence of actual
 >evidence, one is forced to agree with the pronouncement of the
 >great chemist Leslie Orgel: "We have no way of knowing anything
 >about the probability of life in the cosmos.  It could be
 >everywhere, or we could be alone."

 >Jerry Clark


There you go again! Who said anything with absolute certainty
about the existence of ETI in the universe? I did say that the
chances of ETI arising in a solar system with a gas giant
orbiting the central sun every three or four days are zilch --
and that's based on what I've read about the subject, not
personal opinion. The gas giant would have inevitably
obliterated the so-called "comfort zone" of smaller rocky
planets, if they had formed there in the first place.

As for my opinion of how prevalent ETI is in the universe, I
frankly admit that my views have changed over the years, based
on what I've read and studied (Mike Davis's article in The
Anomalist 5 being a prime factor). Do I hold the early UFO book
you co-authored with Loren Coleman against you? No, I don't.

But I do reserve the right to change my own thinking about
something. I grew up on science fiction and assumed that other
lifeforms were probably the norm. I now think the odds are a lot
less likely than I once did.

So shoot me.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                         Re: Earth's Twin In Space?

From: Erol Erkmen andromeda@mail.koc.net ()
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 00:40:33 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:47:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Earth's Twin In Space?


Earth's Twin In Space?

The question of whether there�s life at space is one of those,
which was asked many times. This question is still actual even
today when space investigations are very intense.

Though anyone Who�s familiar with the Koran only a bit should
reply this question as �yes, there�s�; millions of theologians,
Islamic scientists and readers of the Koran couldn�t find its
answer.

Nevertheless, the verse given below is attracting attention to
the fact that there�s a twin of the earth at space.

�And of everything We have created pairs: that ye may receive
instruction.� (51/49)

 From the point of view of this theory underlined by this and
similar verses, it�s understood that planets and systems such as
earth, sun, moon should be in pairs. Hence, the Koran
emphasizing two easts and two wests, is pointing that our solar
system has a pair.

�(He is) Lord of the two Easts and Lord of the two Wests:�
(55/17)

If we try to illustrate these two wests and two easts, is there
any way out of conceiving two earths with the suns and two
moons? While this verse is emphasizing two mutesabih (similar,
pair) and separate solar systems, the verses below attracting
attention to the fact that there�re several mutesabih solar
systems.

� Now I do call to witness the Lord of all points in the East
and the West that We can certainly� (70/40) .

�Lord of the heavens and of the earth and all between them and
Lord of every point at the rising of the sun!� (37/Saffat: 5)

Exalted Allah, pointing easts and wests, emphasizing several
earths that have life, is attracting attention to the pair or
twin of our earth at space.

�Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments and of the earth a
similar number. Through the midst of them (all) descends His
Command: that ye may know that Allah has power over all things
and that Allah comprehends all things in (His) Knowledge.�
(65/12)

This verse is attracting attention to the fact that earth
including its life resources on itself, is a pair of a planet or
system at space.

7 Firmaments pointed by the verse are attracting attention
primarily to the basic life resources included by both planets.
Because the concept of sky in the Koran, metaphorically,
attracts attention to life and living.

These life resources can be counted as such:

1. Sun
2. Moon
3. Atmosphere
4. Water
5. Plants
6. Animals
7. Humans

The verses below are also attracting attention to the fact that
there�s a pair of the earth at space and there�re many human
beings and living creatures:

�And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the
earth and the living creatures that He has scattered through
them: and He has power to gather them together when He wills.�
(42/29)

�Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must
come to (Allah) Most Gracious as a servant.� (16/93)

�And it is your Lord that knoweth best all beings that are in
the heavens and on earth: We did bestow on some Prophets more
(and other) gifts than on others: and We gave to David (the gift
of) the Psalms.� (17/55)

�And He has subjected to you as from Him all that is in the
heavens and on earth: behold in that are Signs indeed for those
who reflect.� (45/13)

Everybody reading the verses gave upto now and everybody
believing the Koran from several cultural environments will
certainly grasp that there�re innumerable earths and human
beings like us in the Universe.

Anyway, we don�t want to explore whether we�re alone in the
universe or not. There are many institutions and researchers
claiming that we�re not alone. The point that we want to explore
is that whether wee need to get interested in the planets and
the human beings living on these planets particularly our
earth�s pair.


DEATH & BEYOND: All religions and Islamic scientists say that
death is not disappearance or non-existence. But they explain
the questions about the life after death, the place that life
after death takes place in a manner that nobody believing in
reason is convinced. If the lives of deaths are out of the
limits of our capability to understand, doesn�t it mean that
they�re not living. Or, as in the philosophy of vahdet-i vcud,
i.e. death persons are, hasha, getting mixed with Allah out of
the rules of time and space; if a spirit having free will gets
mixed with a metaphysical being, doesn�t it mean its end. Or if
you pour a glass of water into a sea, doesn�t this water vanish?
Or does death, as some Muslims argue, mean an unconscious sleep
upto the Doomsday. If it�s so, isn�t remaining unconsciously for
millions of years a very big punishment especially for a Muslim?

The information that Christian, Jewish and Muslim Islamic
scientists give about death and its beyond is more or less same
and far from being convincing. Only the Koran is giving
satisfactory information about death and its beyond with
thousands of verses and from several points of views. However,
Muslim Islamic scientists obsessed with conditioning are not
able to see these facts.

But, if they only think on how Hz.Mohammad rose to the sky and
how Jesus was lifted to the sky they will immediately understand
what death and its beyond is.

�To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance no
opening will there be of the gates of heaven nor will they enter
the garden until the camel can pass through the eye of the
needle: such is Our reward for those in sin.� (7/40)

Isn�t this verse attracting attention obviously to the fact that
the soul will rise to the sky and heaven is there?

Isn�t this verse emphasizing that the doors of the sky won�t be
opened to the ones who don�t believe in Allah and Allah�s verses
and indicating that the doors the doors will be opened for the
ones who believe in Allah�s verses and they will enter into the
heaven?

As in all religions, it�s obvious that in Islam hell and heaven
are very important and the Koran says lots of things about them.

However, post-century of happiness and today�s Islamic
scientists are claiming that heaven and hell hadn�t been created
yet and would be created after the Doomsday in spite of the
verses below:

�105. The day it arrives no soul shall speak except His leave:
of those (gathered) some will be wretched and some will be
blessed.

106. Those who are wretched shall be in the Fire: there will be
for them therein (nothing but) the heaving of sighs and sobs:

107. They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens
and the earth endure except as thy Lord willeth: for thy Lord is
the (sure) Accomplisher of what He planneth.� (11/105, 106, 107)

These verses are explaining the verses previously given in a
very laconic way.

These verses are attracting attention to the fact that while
earth is staying and life�s going on it, simultaneously, heaven
and hell are existing on the sky and they�re active by the words
of �the heavens and the earth endure?�

These verses are attracting attention to the fact every human
will rise to the sky after death and believers will stay in
heaven while the ones who deny in the hell.

These verses, saying that the ones in the hell and heaven will
leave there, are emphasizing that hell and heaven are temporary.
The verses below are also explaining obviously that everybody
goes somewhere just after death.

�45. Then Allah saved him from (every) ill that they plotted
(against him) but the brunt of the Penalty encompassed on all
sides the People of Pharaoh.

46. In front of the Fire will they be brought morning and
evening: and (the Sentence will be) on the Day that Judgment
will be established: "Cast ye the People of Pharaoh into the
severest Penalty!"� (40/45, 46) Verses are emphasizing an
environment where day and night exist and Pharaoh and his family
who�re suffering torments there.

A place that�s called as �The day it arrives no soul shall speak
except His leave: of those (gathered) some will be wretched and
some will be blessed? They will dwell therein for all the time
that the heavens and the earth endure?� is the place where the
people who are on the sky live and the place where�s emphasized
by the previous verses that we gave.

�169. Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead.
Nay they live finding their sustenance in the presence of their
Lord.

170. They rejoice in the bounty provided by Allah: and with
regard to those left behind who have not yet joined them (in
their bliss) the (martyrs) glory in the fact that on them is no
fear nor have they (cause to) grieve.

171. They glory in the Grace and the Bounty from Allah and in
the fact that Allah suffereth not the reward of the faithful to
be lost (in the least).� (3/169, 170, 171)

The last expression of the verse is emphasizing that believers
will be at the same position with the ones killed on the way of
Allah. By Allah kat, the verse is pointing the heaven in the
sky where the ones consented by Allah will come together after
death. Because you cannot attribute any place to Allah.

The place or stair underlined in the verse is the place called
as �mutlu klnanlar ise cennettedirler.

Gkler ve yer durduka orada srekli kalacaklardr.� (11/107)
All the places and humans that we counted such as heaven, hell
and the ones on them are not metaphysical places and beings as
the Islamic scientists who are not perceptive supposed. Just
like the earth they�re bound by the rules of time and space.

Because in the Universe of Being and Life where exalted Allah is
the sole sovereign there�s nothing metaphysical apart from word
and utterance. Apart from word, utterance or information,
there�s nothing metaphysical. There are invisible material being
such as atom, electron, some rays and air or stars that are so
far to see.

It�s clearly explained in the Miraj event that Hz.Mohammad
experienced, that death is a physical incident and a material
decomposition and beyond death is a place where the rules of
time and space exist.

RETURN TO THE SKIES: If Islamic world and Muslim Islamic
scientists could have grasp only the Isra event which is told in
the Koran, they would have been able to understand death and its
beyond. Post-century of happiness Islamic scientists transformed
Hz.Mohammad�s mysterious travel by adding thousands of
superstition to a power race between prophets and within this
context they led to the blurring of the main message of the
event.

It�s understood from the Koran and hearsay, nobody witnessed the
event apart from Hz.Mohammad and the Koran. It was private event
experienced by Hz.Mohammad and a miracle seen by him. It�s
understood that nobody is aware of the event including his
intimate friends who believe in his prophecy. Then, why did
Hz.Mohammad tell this event to everybody including the ones who
didn�t believe in him and even insulted. There should be a very
important reason. Would the ones who did not believe in
Hz.Mohammad in spite of a miracle such as the Koran which they
saw, believe in Hz.Mohammad�s rise to the sky though they hadn�t
seen.

This Isra event is a very essential event that all prophets are
responsible to tell to their peoples, whether believers or
unbelievers.

�Glory to (Allah) Who did take His Servant for Journey by night
from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque whose precincts We
did Bless in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for
He is the one Who heareth and seeth (all things).� (17/1)

The concept of Isra that was told in sura and became the name of
the sura is emphasizing a travel that is out of body. Because,
man has two separate, i.e. pair bodies one of which is soil in
essence and the other is fire in essence.

The real and immortal body of man is, with the Koran�s
expression, Jann (life), which is a ray that�s fire in essence
and gives life to the other body which is soil in essence.
Moses�s scepter is illustrating this event within the anecdote
about Moses.

�"Now do thou throw thy rod!" But when he saw it moving (of its
own accord) as if it had been a snake He turned back in retreat
and retraced not his steps: "O Moses!" (It was said) "draw near
and fear not: for thou art of those who are secure.� (28/31)

The verse is naming the thing, which gives life and moves the
scepter as Jann. Unfortunately, islamic scientists could not
identify the Jann that the Koran attracted attention to, they
could not understand that the immortal aspect of human is Jann.

However, Jann, as a matter of ray covering all parts of the body
is the main carrier of the soul. And soul is an abstract value
like word and knowledge and it�s not a matter. For instance, if
we compare human with a computer: computer is the body, disc is
the Jann and the data loaded to disc are soul.

Since Islamic scientists didn�t get accustomed to reasoning,
they didn�t understand the soul and want to understand it by
saying that nobody could understand the real essence of the soul
but only Allah could understand. Within the following pages,
we�ll touch the topic of Jann and soul. But, for here, we should
say that soul is the sole property that makes the human
privileged and superior to all other creatures.

Mesjid-i Aksa is not the mosque at Jerusalem as some supposed
but it means the �meeting place at far� and Hz.Mohammad went
there. It�s the place where all people after death rise there by
a journey which is out of body and they remain there upto the
Doomsday. It�s the similar of the earth at sky and rules of time
and space exist there. It�s a very special region of this
planet.

Interestingly, the Koran attracts attention to this planet where
Hz.Mohammad visited and witnessed very important things, as the
desired star.

1. By the Star when it goes down
2. Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled
3. Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire
4. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him:
5. He was taught by one mighty in Power
6. Endued with Wisdom: For he appeared (in stately form)
7. While he was in the highest part of the horizon
8. Then he approached and came closer
9. And was at a distance of but two bow-lengths or (even) nearer;

10. So did (Allah) convey the inspiration to His Servant
     (conveyed) what He (meant) to convey.
11. The (Prophet's) (mind and) heart in no way falsified that
     which he saw.
12. Will ye then dispute with him concerning what he saw?
13. For indeed he saw him at a second descent.
14. Near the Lote-tree beyond which none may pass:
15. Near it is the Garden of Abode.
16. Behold the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!)
17. (His) sight never swerved nor did it go wrong!
18. For truly did he see of the Signs of his Lord the Greatest!�
     (53/1-18)

Since these verses are presenting what Hz.Mohammad experienced
there as separately painted pictures, the meanings given to
these verses don�t reflect sufficiently what Hz.Mohammad had
experienced there. Generally, it�s understood that heaven is at
this star, exalted Allah by becoming manifested to heaven and at
the highest point of the heaven Hz.Mohammad saw exalted Allah.

It�s understood from the interpretation of these verses that
Muslim Islamic scientists, far from understanding what verses
meant, didn�t understand that events are taking place at a star
which could have been understood from the name of the sura
itself and they made funny interpretations. However, the place
that the verses are taking attraction to is Mesjid-i Aksa as the
previous verses we gave indicated. Because, Mesjid-i Aksa is not
a mosque in Jerusalem.

Because

1- It�s emphasized that Mesjid-i Aksa is a holy, fertile and
sacred place. Nevertheless, Mesjid-i Aksa in Jerusalem is
causing wars throughout the last 50 years.

2- The concept of Mesjid-i Aksa means a meeting place at far. If
it�s a mosque in Jerusalem, this verse is meaning a
contradictory thing for the people in Jerusalem.

3- If the place that Hz.Mohammad went out of body is a mosque in
Jerusalem, then the claims about Hz.Mohammad�s rise to the sky
are false. Because there�s no other verse in the Koran pointing
directly to the rise of Hz.Mohammad.

The Koran with hundreds of verses explained the event called as
Miraj means travel out of body to a star at space and this.

In other words; death is Jann�s passage from the current body
and place to another body and place.

The verses below are putting light on the fact that all people
will turn to the sky after death from a different perceptive.

�15. It is He Who has made the earth manageable for you so
traverse ye through its tracts and enjoy of the Sustenance which
He furnishes: but UNTO HIM IS THE RESURRECTION.

16. Do ye feel secure that He Who is in heaven will not cause
you to be swallowed up by the earth when it shakes (as in an
earthquake)?

17. Or do ye feel secure that He Who is in Heaven will not send
against you a violent tornado (with showers of stones) so that
ye shall know how (terrible) was My warning?� (67/ 15, 16, 17)

At first sight, it�s understood that exalted Allah is at the
sky. Nevertheless, only by taking the kl�s whole into
consideration and remembering Allah is out of time and space
it�s understood that these verses are emphasizing the direction
of the return, not the place of Allah.

The verse below are more clearly explaining that return will be
towards the sky and the star on the sky.

�He knows all that goes into the earth and all that comes out
thereof; all that comes down from the sky and all that ascends
thereto: and He is the Most Merciful the Oft-Forgiving.� (34/2)

Let�s re-write the verse with parentheses: �He knows all that
goes into the earth (corps) and all that comes out (Jann)
thereof; all that comes down from the sky (the angel of death)
and all that ascends thereto: and He is the Most Merciful the
Oft-Forgiving.�

It�s understood from the verses below that the angel is the
angel of death.

�In the case of those who say "Our Lord is Allah" and further
stand straight and steadfast the angels descend on them (from
time to time): "Fear ye not!" (they suggest) "nor grieve! but
receive the Glad Tidings of the Garden (of Bliss) the which ye
were promised!� (41/30)

Let�s finish the topic by giving some of the verses that are
directly or indirectly pointing that return is towards the sky.

�And they say: "What! when we lie hidden and lost in the earth
shall we indeed be in a creation renewed?" Nay they deny the
meeting with their Lord!� (32/10)

�16. So I do call to witness the ruddy glow of Sunset ;
17. The Night and its Homing;
18. And the Moon in her Fullness ;
19. Ye shall surely travel from stage to stage.
20. What then is the matter with them that they believe not?�
     (34/16, 20) �And in heaven is your Sustenance as (also) that
     which ye are promised.� (51/22)

The verses below are also attracting attention to the star that
Hz.Mohammad visited and all people will go after death:

�1. By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein)

2. And what will explain to thee what the Night-Visitant is?

3. (It is) the Star of piercing brightness� (86/1, 2, 3)

Since the Islamic scientists understood many of the concepts of
the kl with the meanings fabricated later, they couldn�t
understand many of the events emphasized in the verses.

For instance, the expression of �parlayan yldzdr�: the word
of �Sakp� that is translated as �parlayan� means �to find, to
meet�

In this respect, the most suitable meaning of the verse is the
star that everybody will find or the star where everybody will
meet.

In our point of view if this star on space couldn�t have been
found until now by scientists, it will be found very soon.
That�s to say, man or humanity will be aware of the star where
its ancestors are living.

11th verse of the same sura by emphasizing the return to the
sky, points to the star as the place where everybody will
return.

�11. By the Firmament which returns (in its round)

12. And by the Earth which opens out (for the gushing of springs
or the sprouting of vegetation)

13. Behold this is the Word that distinguishes (Good from Evil):
14. It is not a thing for amusement.� (86/11, 12, 13, 14)

 From the verses we gave and the comments we made until now,
it�s understood that everybody rises to a star after death and
everybody will turn to the re-arranged heavens on the earth to
stay forever.

�104. The Day that we roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled
up for books (completed) even as We produced the first Creation
so shall We produce a new one: a promise We have undertaken:
truly shall We fulfil it.

Naci Celik








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 29

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:36:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:23:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 03:05:45 +0000
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 >>Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:57:02 -0500
 >>From: Joachim Koch <AchimKoch@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Those who would like to argue now with me - please slow down.
 >>You haven't been on top of Adam's Grave, Knap Hill, Barbury
 >>Castle, the Merry Maiden's Stone Circle, Avebury and the
 >>Wandsdyke Path. Once have you been there you would have
 >>recognized that a new quality of human-extraterrestrial-other
 >>dimensional relationship has started. A better one, a positive
 >>one. No one of your American Greys has ever appeared here but
 >>beautiful light spheres and other energetic phenomena.

 >I thought I would just mention if anyone if anyone has seen the
 >remarkable footage taken on the 7th August this year at Barbury
 >Castle by a colleague of mine, showing a white ball type object
 >flying over the Barbury Castle Crop Formation?

 >I understand Peter has a copy of this, and for anyone who would
 >like to view you can do so on The Crop Circle Connector
 >website.

Hi Roy,

Just thought I'd back you up on this one, yes I've seen the
footage you speak of.

I remember you and your colleague bringing the video (of which
I've still got a copy) to my house for me to view on my system.

I have seen a lot of UFO footage, most has been explained away
as natural but this one just left me speechless.

Your colleague set the video camera up on a hill at Barbury in
order to look down on a crop circle when the white ball came
into view.

He managed to follow it as it moved down toward the circle then
up as it sped away until it moved so fast that he couldn't track
it any further.

Because we have the ground behind the object instead of a clear
blue sky it makes it easier to judge the size.

I would guess the object was slightly larger than that of a
tennis ball.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not suggesting that we have tennis
ball sized spacecraft piloted by inch high aliens visiting us,
I do however think there is a lot of strange stuff being seen
and in this

case video'd that at the present time cannot be explained.
I know all about UAV's (unmanned aerial vehicles) or 'remotes'
as the military call them and this was far too small to fit into
that category.

If anyone gets the chance to see this footage and can tell me
what the hell that was I would be very interested to hear.

Dave B.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:01:09 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 07:54:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:17:43 EST
 >Subject: Re: c
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:10:58 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >>Ah, the perils of popular science writing!

 >Doesn't seem to stop some people.  What are your scientfic
 >credentials Dennis?  How do they compare with Mallon's?


I got a National Science Foundation summer scholarship in
highschool and haven't touched the stuff since. I don't know
what Mallon's credentials are; for all I know, he got a degree
in English (like I did) and reviews books for a living. I used
to review books for the English weekly New Scientist, published
an article on meteorites in Smithsonian Air & Space, along with
an article in the same magazine called "When Pilots See UFOs,"
which I assure you was a hard sell. Journalism is the practice
of educating yourself in public. As a consequence, I once got to
don a suit and enter the JPL clean room where the Hubble
Telescope was being constructed. And I can't program a computer,
but I just won an award at the recent COMDEX as best columnist
of the year among PC-user groups magazines. URL available upon
request. I have never claimed or insinuated anywhere that I had
a degree in science. I'm a writer and editor; when I wrote
something for popular consumption, I studied the subject and
then interviewed the specialists in that field, from astronomers
Michael Hart and Martin Rees, to neurophysiologist Michael
Persinger and physicist David Bohm. You had to know enough to be
able to ask intelligent questions.

That said (you asked), I wasn't criticizing Mallon's science so
much as his use of the English language and some of his glib
conclusions. (See my response to Jerry Clark's post.)


 >>To begin with, Mallon is simply dead wrong when he refers to
 >>"the sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections." As I
 >>posted on this thread earlier this week or late last,
 >>referencing a NY Times article which in turn referenced an
 >>article in Nature, only one of these "planets" has been
 >>confirmed. The other 30 or so presently remain candidates for
 >>confirmation.

 >This is just semantic hairsplitting.  Evidence for the existence
 >of one of these planets has been found using two separate
 >measuring techniques (Doppler wobble and transit occlusion).
 >Evidence for the existence of the 30 or so other planets
 >presently exists using only one of the techniques (Doppler
 >wobble).

David, make yourself happy. Check out the web site Mallon
referenced:

http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/encycl.html

Does this site strike you as _the_ definitive word on the
subject, as Mallon seems to suggest?

Regardless, you'll find the following link:

http://www.aas.org/publications/baas/v31n5/aas195/775.htm

which leads to the following:

"Microlensing is the only technique likely, within the next 5
years, to constrain the frequency of Jupiter-analogs. The PLANET
collaboration has monitored nearly 100 microlensing events of
which more than 20 have sensitivity to the perturbations that
would be caused by a Jovian-mass companion to the primary lens.
No clear signatures of such planets have been detected. These
null results indicate that Jupiter mass planets with separations
of 1.5-3 AU occur in less than 1/3 of systems. A similar limit
applies to planets of 3 Jupiter masses for separations of 1-4
AU. These are the best limits for extrasolar planets at these
separations by any technique."

Apparently, there is a third technique at work as well. And I
fail to see where Mallon gets his effusive enthsusiasm from, as
in "the sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections." It
certainly can't be based on the above observation that "No clear
signatures of such planets have been detected." Moreover, we're
talking something like 32 observations over four years, or eight
observations on average a year, only one of which has been
confirmed by direct observation. That's a profusion? As a
writer, I would also object to his use of the word sudden as
opposed, say, to now possible. Mallon is simply writing to an
audience, and I've done enough of it myself to know it when I
see it.

 >At what point something becomes "confirmed" depends on one's
 >prejudices.  Many astronomers probably consider detection with
 >the Doppler wobble technique sufficient to "confirm" the
 >existence of a nearby planet.  Others demand more evidence.  So
 >the planet also detected by transit occlusion would probably be
 >considered to be "more confirmed" than the others.  And I'll bet
 >there are still some holdouts in the astronomical community who
 >consider none of this evidence to be confirmation of anything.

It's not semantic hairsplitting to a writer. Words mean what
they mean -- or they mean something else. Confirmed means
confirmed, and only one had been confirmed at the time Mallon
wrote his article. No one is a little bit pregnant. You either
are or you aren't.

 >That's how scientific opinion _really_ works, particularly with
 >difficult to measure phenomena.  It's rarely black and white,
 >with something either definitely "confirmed" or not "confirmed."
 >What we usually have instead are lines of evidence for and
 >against. Scientific opinion lines up on all sides, with a lot of
 >people straddling the fence.

Then your beef is with Mallon, not me. He's the one who used the
word "confirmed," not me. Wilford, writing in the NY Times, used
the words indirect observation and direct observation, which
speak to the issue.

 >>But even if they are confirmed, along with
 >>countless others like them, their existence wouldn't do anything
 >>to promote the Drake Equation odds; in fact, they would detract
 >>from them, for reasons that should be obvious.

 >Stacy starts to move the goalpost.

 >>What scientists have found evidence (or indications) of thus far
 >>is a category of solar system which consists of a sun closely
 >>orbited (in most cases in a matter of days) by a gas giant, or,
 >>ye gods, a brown dwarf. What are the chances that such a solar
 >>system will serve as a crucible for the creation and nurturing
 >>of intelligent life? In a word, absolutely zilch.

 >Yawn!  I haven't heard anybody argue that these would be good
 >solar systems for life.  You're just arguing your usual
 >strawman.

It's not a strawman, David, except to you. I haven't heard
anyone argue that such systems would be good  candidates for
ETI, either. All I did was reiterate that sentiment in light of
Mallon's remarks.

 >What they do demonstrate is that solar systems are extremely
 >common.  A few years ago I was arguing with people on Usenet as
 >to whether there were any other solar systems anywhere.  They
 >claimed there was no good evidence, therefore ours might be the
 >only solar system in the Cosmos (what logic!).

Solar systems by name, yes. Demonstrated to be "extremely
common"? How so? How many stars have been looked at which
resulted in the 30 or so present potential candidates we now
have? You know everything, so I presume you know that as well.

 >Now, just a few years later, we have very good evidence that
 >there are a lot of other solar systems, the argument seems to
 >shift to these solar systems not being like ours.  That's what I
 >mean by moving the goalpost.

No goalposts have been harmed (or moved) in the course of this
e-mail.

 >Here's a head's-up for you Dennis.  The reason none of these
 >solar systems are like ours is because the techniques used
 >cannot detect solar systems like ours.  It's really that simple.
 >The techniques can only detect large orbiting bodies close to
 >the parent star, not solar systems like ours, with small rocky
 >planets in close and large gas giants further out.  In
 >statistics, this is known as a highly biased sample.

Thanks, David, I knew that already. Mallon himself should have
said as much, and perhaps he did, not having seen the article.

 >>Imagine our own solar system, with a gas giant the size of
 >>Jupiter or larger occupying such an orbital space. It's doubtful
 >>if anything even remotely resembling the planet Earth could
 >>comfortably exist in such a system, never mind thrive and
 >>prosper for a few billion years. Even worse prospects exist in
 >>the case of a sun orbited by a brown dwarf, with apologies to
 >>all dark-skinned dwarfs everywhere.

 >Stacy fluffs up his strawman.

And David does whatever it is that David does, which seems to be
getting upset and personal about anything I post.

 >>Such a scenario just isn't a starter.

 >>If anything, it should give us reason to pause and consider just
 >>what we mean by both the terms planet and solar system. If a
 >>planet is defined as any sizeable, cohesive body orbiting a sun,
 >>then close-orbiting gas giants would certainly qualify as a
 >>planet.

 >Uhhh, that is exactly what astronomers mean by a planet, as long
 >as it has no active fusion processes at its core (as would,
 >e.g., a brown dwarf star).

 >>On the other hand, if by planet you mean something
 >>potentially capable of supporting intelligent life, then the gas
 >>giants themselves fail the definition rather spectacularly (for
 >>a number of reasons).

 >Nobody but Dennis Stacy seems to be arguing for this definition
 >of a "planet."  It's another of his laughable strawmen.  Whether
 >an orbiting body is capable of supporting intelligent life has
 >nothing to do with whether it is a planet.  Sheesh, Christ
 >almighty!

Sorry to have sailed over your head with this one, David, but my
point had to with classifications and the evolution of language.
Let me give you a simple example, the word planetesimal. Why do
you think it was coined? Because it refers to something that is
not quite a planet, as most everyone understands the latter.
English is malleable that way.

My point was one of language. When using words like solar system
and planet most of us have a general  (i.e., generic) conception
of what is meant by same. I simply suggested that it's time to
refine those conceptions with newer ones. Yes, Jupiter and Earth
are both planets by virtue of a single characteristic: they both
circle the sun. Now, put them side by side and tell me how many
other "planetary" characteristics they share? Well, I guess
they're both round. Apples and oranges are both round fruits,
too, but you don't see too many orange pies out there.

<snip>

 >Earth-like planets are undoubtably the exception, not the rule.
 >I haven't heard anybody argue otherwise, have you?  The question
 >is how uncommon are they?  Are they present in one in a hundred
 >stars, one in ten-thousand, one in a million, etc?

Hey, that's _my_ point!

<snip>

 >No, of course not.  I could also say that your arguments are
 >largely nonsensical, if not ignorant and stupid, but I would
 >never say anything like that either.

Ever the gentleman, I know.

 >All I see you doing is raising one strawman after another.
 >Nobody, but nobody, is arguing that the solar systems discovered
 >so far are conducive to the evolution of intelligent life.  What
 >people like Mallon ARE arguing, is that rapid discovery of more
 >and more solar systems of one type almost certainly points to
 >the extreme commonality of solar systems of all types.  And that
 >would point to the increased likelihood of life and intelligent
 >life elsewhere.

I understand precisely the assumption that Mallon and others are
making. Only time will tell if it's right or not. SETI is
operated by scientists under a set of assumptions, too. Do you
agree with it? I doubt it. Is it right? Maybe, maybe not.

 >So far we have only a biased sample of one type of solar system
 >because of the techniques used (gas giants close to home star).
 >But its a very good bet that as our measuring techniques improve
 >(e.g. NASA's Origins telescope  interferometer), we're going to
 >be finding a lot of other types of solar systems in the
 >not-too-distant future, including some percentage very similar
 >to our own.

No argument there, although we won't know until we know.

 >What is being reported is that other planets and solar systems
 >are now being found.  Using any astronomy textbook you wish to
 >cite, these reports are correct.  As long as some orbiting body
 >around some star is not defined as a star, it is by definition a
 >planet, and by definition that star has a solar system.  End of
 >story.

That's one definition of a solar system, true. So what are
asteroids and comets -- teeny, tiny planets? Would a star
circled only by the latter qualify as a solar system? You really
should be more precise in your language.

All I'm saying is that a star circled by a gas giant in a matter
of days is probably a two-object "solar system" and needs a
better name, or descriptor, perhaps proto-solar system, or maybe
something using the Latin root for "failed," or, what the hell,
binary solar system. I'll leave it to the pros to work it out,
in the same way that someone eventually came up with the big
bang and black holes. As for Earth-like planets, maybe "Gaias"
will suffice for the next century.

This is simply the way language works. Once upon a time, we only
had two words to describe the universe, the firmament, which was
everything here, and heaven, which was everything else out
there. As 21st century science evolves and expands, I expect the
language it employs to do likewise. That's how lexicons come
about.

 >Everybody understands the argument.  What you don't understand
 >is that everybody already understood it and you are, as usual,
 >tilting at windmills.

 >David Rudiak

I'm not sure that Mallon understood it, not having read his
article. In any event, tilting at windmills is my job. In my
leisure time, I have been known to erect a strawman or two,
though, increasingly, I think of getting into crop circles. And
I once moved a goalpost at night. But I still draw the line
short of mutilating animals.

Cervantes 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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:50:22 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:22:25 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >... I did say that the
 >chances of ETI arising in a solar system with a gas giant
 >orbiting the central sun every three or four days are zilch --
 >and that's based on what I've read about the subject, not
 >personal opinion. The gas giant would have inevitably
 >obliterated the so-called "comfort zone" of smaller rocky
 >planets, if they had formed there in the first place.

Perhaps for gas giants in 3-4 day orbits.  But one interesting
article I read (sorry, can't cite the source) pointed out that
gas giants at more reasonable "habitability zone" distances from
their parent stars might very well harbor life on their moons,
which could range in size even up to Mars/Earth masses. It would
sure make for an interesting night sky.

-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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Sharon Kardol <sharon@hotmix.com.au>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:34:47 +0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:09:31 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 15:17:43 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 11:10:58 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST

<snip>

 >Yep, 30 solar systems isn't much of a representative sample,
 >particularly when present techniques can only detect one type of
 >solar system and not others.

<snip>

 >David Rudiak

Hi David,

I was curious as to what "other" solar systems might look like?

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                   The UFO, The Sheriff & His Dog's Collar

From: Len Fedullo <lenf1@snip.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:58:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:19:05 -0500
Subject: The UFO, The Sheriff & His Dog's Collar


Hello,

I haven't posted a message in quite a while but I did find this
article when checking various news services today and thought
folks at UFO UpDates might remember this particular sighting or
if not still be interested in it. It's always great to have the
law on our side...

Len Fedullo


Sheriff recalls UFO encounter in 1966 / He suspects craft
somehow linked to dog's death

Friday, October 29, 1999

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.


Len Fedullo
lenf1@snip.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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                             Satellite Pictures?

From: Melanie Mecca <natural.state@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 20:31:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:13:19 -0500
Subject: Satellite Pictures?


Has anyone used this service? Got any interesting ideas about
what co-ordinates (other than Area 51, of course) would be
fruitful to check out?


-----

*** Spy-quality pictures to be sold online

A satellite bringing back the sharpest pictures yet for
commercial, non-spy purposes has returned to Earth with images
that will be available for downloading from the Internet, a U.S.
company said Sunday. The pictures carried back by the Russian
satellite will be detailed enough to distinguish objects as
small as six feet across, the sharpest shots from space to be
sold commercially, Aerial Images Inc. of Raleigh, N.C., said.
The satellite, its speed broken by retrorocket firings, landed
on target Friday, close to its Feb. 17 launch pad at Baikonur
Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.

See:

http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2553625618-eba



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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:55:21 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:27:53 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Jerry,

 >It's nice to see you defending bad writing, wherever it appears.
 >In my dictionary, confirmed means confirmed, not indirectly
 >confirmed, indirectly suggested, half-confirmed or anything
 >else.

<snip>

 >But I do reserve the right to change my own thinking about
 >something. I grew up on science fiction and assumed that other
 >lifeforms were probably the norm. I now think the odds are a lot
 >less likely than I once did.

 >So shoot me.

 >Dennis Stacy
 >http://www.anomalist.com

Dear Dennis,

Uh....

On that last request.... I have a question:

Is that a promise or a threat??  If the former, please
reconsider.  I need you Dennis. My goldfish just died.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:05:59 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:30:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 03:23:55 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 11:48:41 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:17:31 EST
 >>Subject: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>1) How many of the 709 sightings involved something seeming to
 >>move in front of the power plant buildings?

 >As far as I know all of them, the MO for the FT seems to be
 >consistent although there are differences in the colour of
 >lights seen.

 >>2) What was the distance of the witness from the said buildings?

 >Approximately half a mile, however I believe some witnesses have
 >been much closer.

 >>3) Where there any roads, railroads, airports between the
 >>witnesses and the buildings?

 >Only a marsh and fields are between the witnesses and the
 >buildings. There is a road that runs alongside the power station
 >but the FT appears to be above street light level and moves into
 >the area where there is no road. There are no railroads near the
 >power nor an airport, as you may know there is also an air
 >exclusion zone over nuclear power stations, for obvious reasons.

Tony and Anyone:

If all of the sightings, an average of about 2 a night over a
year, involved objects moving in front of the buildings, the
question comes to mind: has anyone thought to try to videotape
these events?  This could establish a range of possible speeds
and sizes.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 03:06:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 08:33:43 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:02:20 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: On False Memory

 >An interesting quote on false memory, as it relates to
 >abductees, which appears in an interview with Dr. John
 >Mack at the PEER website (http://www.peer-mack.org/):


 >MISHLOVE: The issue of memory itself has become increasingly
 >controversial. When these people are reporting their
 >memories to you, what tools do you have to know how much
 >weight you can give to a memory being an actual memory,
 >as opposed to being some sort of a fantasy?


 >MACK: Well, the argument around so-called false memory, or
 >doubting memories, is applied to situations which are not
 >of core significance to the individual. There's a study at
 >Harvard going on now where people have been deeply
 >traumatized, as the abductees have, in many cases -- have
 >distortions of memory, but not for the traumatic events.
 >The memory around the traumatic events is highly accurate,
 >highly reliable. It's all the rest of their lives that
 >becomes distorted and confused. So there is no evidence that
 >you get false memory when you have very powerful traumatic
 >events that are described with great conviction and great
 >detail by people who are of otherwise sound mind and reliable
 >observers.

 >-Brian Cuthbertson


Hi Brian, hi All,

Older than our Western psychology is the study of Human
consciousness that has been conducted over -centuries- by the
Eastern contemplative traditions. Yogi meditation practitioners
have been compiling information about the mechanics of Human
consciousness throughout that long temporal span. Traditionally,
the information is passed down from teacher to student via a one
on one relationship that can last a lifetime. It is hard (but
not impossible) to find this accumulated mass of information in
published books. I'd like to recommend just two:

"Fourteen Lessons in Yogi Philosophy"
by: Yogi Ramacharaka
Originally published in 1903
ISBN # 0 - 911662 - 01 - 4

"Lessons in Gnani Yoga"
by: Yogi Ramacharaka
Originally published in 1907
ISBN # 0 - 911662 - 04 - 9

Re: Memory

The Yogi's teach that, "How much" a person recalls of any given
event is directly proportional to -how much of his/her
attention- was engaged at the time of the event.

During traumatic events when the person is thrown into 'Fight or
flight' mode the entire psyche and physical sensorium
instinctively awaken and become engaged. The mind sends the
'signal' and the glands in the body secrete/supply all of the
complicated chemistry that the brain and body will need to
remain 'survival level' alert and ready to respond. In the light
of these 'older' teachings, Dr. Mack's remarks make perfect
sense and corroborate the older findings.

Speaking as one who has experienced "trauma." Certain events in
life can become -burned- into ones memory. Every detail can be
clearly recalled, down to minutia such as 'odors' or the
'temperature' at the time of the event. These memories even if
blocked, have a tendency to echo/reverberate within the
consciousness of the experiencer. No matter how hard you may
push them away, the subconscious will recycle/regurgitate them
from time to time and demand attention/answers/explanations.
Actually, jump up at the most inconvenient times and literally
bite you on the ass!

Dr. Mack's remarks are reasonable and make sense. More
importantly, they fit in with what has been known for centuries
by others who have dedicated generations and their lives to such
studies.

John Velez


________________________________________________
                         AIC - Abduction Information Center -
                        www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm
                                    jvif@spacelab.net
  "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:09:24 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:50:13 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 02:10:24 EST
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:08:17 +1300 (NZDT)
 >>From: Murray  Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >>To: Updates List  <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: MJ12 - A Request to  Stanton Friedman

 >>Author Timothy Good, in receipt of the MJ-12 documents from
 >>an  "intelligence source" (who happened to use the same
 >>photocopier as William Moore), created the first major
 >>publicity splashabout MJ-12 from Britain in 1987 to
 >>publicize his book ABOVE TOP SECRET. This was quickly
 >>followed by Moore becoming an MJ-12 public figure in the
 >>U.S. Moore (with Shandera) and Good essentially initiated
 >>the MJ-12 controversy.

 >Quite awhile ago somebody was claiming that Bill Moore told
 >them  that he was the one who sent the documents to Tim Good..
 >that way the documents weren't 'directly leaked from him.'
 >Supposedly it had something to do with the arrangement with
 >Moore's govt sources.

 >There was also the story that Moore supposedly told one
 >researcher about leaking phony documents in an effort to push
 >the "coverup" into revealing more information.

Actually Moore told more than one researcher that he was
considering inventing a "Roswell related document" because he
had taken the investigation as far as he could. He thought that
such a document might shake loose some additional information.
Among those he told were Stan Friedman and Brad Sparks. Stan
told me that Moore had made the suggestion to him. Stan even
thought that it might be a good idea.

Bob Pratt told me that he wasn't surprised when the MJ-12 stuff
was released, nor did he believe it. He said that he had heard
it before, as he and Moore were writing a novel about the
Roswell case. MJ-12 was mentioned in the novel, this BEFORE the
MJ-12 documents were received by Shandera and, of course, long
before they were released.

There were three people involved in writing the novel... Moore,
Pratt, and an unidentified third man who was supplying
information about the security classifications and the way
intelligence worked. Pratt, among others, believes this man to
be Richard Doty. Interesting the way all this information leads
back to the same place and then stops.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:53:59 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:02:20 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: On False Memory


List and all -

 >MACK: Well, the argument around so-called false memory, or
 >doubting memories, is applied to situations which are not
 >of core significance to the individual. There's a study at
 >Harvard going on now where people have been deeply
 >traumatized, as the abductees have, in many cases -- have
 >distortions of memory, but not for the traumatic events.
 >The memory around the traumatic events is highly accurate,
 >highly reliable. It's all the rest of their lives that
 >becomes distorted and confused. So there is no evidence that
 >you get false memory when you have very powerful traumatic
 >events that are described with great conviction and great
 >detail by people who are of otherwise sound mind and reliable
 >observers.

This is nonsense. False memories, or doubting memories are often
applied to situations that are considered to be of core
significance to the individual. Those who believe they were
Satanically ritually abused would fall into the category where
the event is of core significance to them. The same can be said
of those who believe they were molested as children.

With Satanic abuse, however, we learn that there is no evidence
that it has ever existed in the way described by so many of the
"victims." The physical evidence, in the form of scars, does not
exist. Outside investigation of the claims has been unable to
confirm that these large groups of Satan worshippers exist, and
the hundreds of sacrifices that have been claimed, were
committed without leaving any evidence for homicide detectives
to find. These beliefs, however, are of core significance to
those who recount them.

This is the same claim that he made about the viability of
hypnosis in such circumstances.  It didn't work then and it
doesn't work now.

I'm not even sure that we can still make the claim that the
memory around traumatic events is highly accurate based on some
recent studies. In THE ABDUCTION ENIGMA, we cite Ulric Neisser's
study of the Challenger disaster. He found that in about 25% of
the cases, the memories of the events around hearing the
disaster were completely false, yet the subjects held onto those
beliefs because it was the way they remembered it, even in the
face of facts that proved them wrong.

Yes, hearing about a traumatic event and living through one are
a different situations. In the days that followed the sinking of
the TITANIC, many of the survivors were interviewed by a senate
investigating committee. Over the next decades, many of those
same people were interviewed time and again. Their statements
could be compared to those made in 1912 and with others who also
lived through that traumatic night. Here were beliefs of core
significance to the witnesses. It is clear that some of those
memories simply don't reflect reality. Molly Brown, for example,
said that she was thrown to the deck when the ship struck the
ice, yet everyone else suggested they felt only a slight
vibration.

There are also many studies, conducted through the VA in which
Vietnam Veterans, whose tales of horrific combat are central to
their core beliefs. When these tales of combat are checked
(which they rarely are) it is found that few of these memories,
gathered under the influence of a group environment, hypnotic
regression, and the use of memory enhancing drugs, are  based in
reality. The memories are strong, detailed, and are of core
significance. They just never happened in the way being related
by the victim.

Mack's whole argument here is based on a false assumption. He
cannot even prove the initial event is reflected in reality so
the idea that it is of core significance is irrelevant.  His
claim sounds good, but it is not an appropriate argument 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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                              Re: UFO/Balloon?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 10:42:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:02:17 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO/Balloon?

 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 10:56:32 -0300
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: Informe Alfa (Luis Eduardo Pacheco) <ufozone@bigfoot.com>
 >Subject: UFO/Balloon?

 >Hi list!

 >First thing: my English it's very ugly so forgive my sometimes
 >Tarzan's language.

 >I'm Luis Eduardo Pacheco and I'm writing you from Argentina in
 >South America.

 >I'm editor of an electronic free magazine called in Spanish
 >"INFORME ALFA" (ALPHA REPORT) wich deals with the ufo phenomena
 >and the paranormal from a point of view of logical thinking and
 >open mind.

 >I'm currently investigating and writing an article about a
 >sighting we had here in September 1985, of an UFO that remains
 >over Buenos Aires for the lapse of 6 hours. That happening
 >raised a controversy inside the ufological buffs between those
 >that think that was a really UFO and those that think that was
 >only a Meteorological Balloon.

 >I'm enclosed with my mail a mosaic of the pictures of that
 >sighting took by the LA PLATA observatory (a city near Buenos
 >Aires) (The two pics in the right side of the mosaic).

 >If you see the picture will notice a "stick of light" in the top
 >of the ufo/balloon.

 >Some days ago surfing the web I had find a page of a Australian
 >astronomer that took a picture of the same type of object, (a
 >balloon) with the cientific instrumental gondolas attached to
 >him (the left picture of the mosaic).

 >The case is almost solved ...im in touch with the CNES in France
 >that confirmed that the picture of Buenos Aires is a balloon
 >called Montgolfier Infrared whitout the cientific package, but
 >can't explain the feature on the top of the object.

 >Of course it's the sun reflection, but over what...?

 >I'm writing the list in the hope that someone can help me to
 >find a logical and common sense explication to that "stick of
 >light", the last point we need to answer to send the case to
 >rest.

 >Again, I'm very sorry of the poorness of my english....

 >I hope soon your responses.


Your English is quite understandable.

The object refecting the sun is the reflective mylar top of the
MIR (Montgolfier InfraRed) balloon.  See:

http://sirius-ci.cst.cnes.fr:8180/html/mir/vehic.htm

Using http://babelfish.altavista.com/cgi-bin/translate? to
translate the description:

Assembled by INTERNATIONAL ZODIAC, balloon MIR is composed thus
of two distinct hemispheres in materials offering an adequate
compromise between the thermo-optical properties and the weight
breakdown. The higher part is out of aluminized Mylar of 12 �m
forming a cavity for the absorption of the ascending infra-red
radiations and preventing any rmission towards the sky. The
lower part is out of linear polyethylene of 15�m, a transparent
for infra-red flows and resistant material when the balloon is
exposed to a cold environment (temperature lower than -80�C)
during its flight. Diagram 1 below illustrates the radiative
assessment of balloon MIR:

<end of translation>

This probably explains other UFO "jellyfish" observations.

Regards,

Terry








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:46:38
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:56:29 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>Date: Sun, 28 Nov 99 14:38:03 PST

 >>>Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 20:16:40 -0600
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>>>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 14:35:18 PST


Dennis,

 >>Why don't you write The New Yorker -- legendary for its rigid
 >>fact-checking -- and point out to its editors its contributor's
 >>silly and obvious errors?  I'm sure they'd appreciate your
 >>insights.

 >It's nice to see you defending bad writing, wherever it appears.
 >In my dictionary, confirmed means confirmed, not indirectly
 >confirmed, indirectly suggested, half-confirmed or anything
 >else.

Interesting to see you attacking an article that, by your own
private admission, you haven't even read.

 >I only go by what I read in the papers, so you might want to
 >check out John Noble Wilford's article in the NY Times for Nov.
 >16, "First Direct Observation of an Extrasolar Planet." For
 >those unfamiliar with the name, Wilford is the Times's longtime
 >science correspondent. The reason for the article's being is
 >that this was the first _confirmation_ of an extrasolar planet
 >-- _not_ the "sudden profusion of confirmed planet detections"
 >that Mallon refers to. I also have a hard time with Mallon's use
 >of "sudden profusion" to describe 32 indirect observations over
 >four years, but never mind.

For the specifics of this discussion, I refer you and listfolk
to David Rudiak's posting.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                     [SO] TLC Airs 'UFO' Footage Dec 04

From: Christopher O'Brien <tmv@amigo.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 13:21:54 -7
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:17:59 -0500
Subject: [SO] TLC Airs 'UFO' Footage Dec 04


Billion Dollar Secret

"Take a behind-the-scenes tour of America's most secretive
defense research facility, Area 51, for a closer look at the
military's most advanced flying machines."

I have worked w/ most of the major shows that produce
programming dealing w/ the UFO and paranormal realm.  Nick Cook,
the correspondant and director Mike Griggsby impressed me
greatly w/ their open-minded approach to the subject matter in
Billion Dollar Secret.  Shot on film and called by Discovery
(Europe) "the most unusual film we have ever broadcast."  Sight
unseen, I recommend this film highly!

Christopher O'Brien



Air Time(s) Eastern/Pacific Time:

                        TLC - 04 Dec 1999 - 09:00 PM

                        TLC - 04 Dec 1999 - 12:00 AM

                        TLC - 11 Dec 1999 - 01:00 PM


Christopher O'Brien
CAUS/Skywatch
tmv@amigo.net
http://home.amigo.net/tmv
Author of The Mysterious Valley (1996)
and Enter The Valley (1999
(St. Martin's Paperbacks)


****************************
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(A Non-Profit Organization)

Please visit the Skywatch International Inc. Website At:
http://www.skywatch-international.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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                     The Drake Equation & 6 New Planets

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 10:39:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:21:07 -0500
Subject: The Drake Equation & 6 New Planets


Dear Kind and Gentle Listfolk,

It's another beautiful day in Paradise...

Planet Earth scientists announced the discovery of six more new
extrasolar planets orbiting stars 65 to 192 light years from
Earth, all Jupiter-sized or larger. The good news is that at
least one of the new gas giants has a surface temperature of
only 108 degrees F, possibly with water, and seems to be in the
habitable zone.

The bad news is that they all appear to orbit their parent stars
in eccentric, oval-shaped orbits. One goes from 36 million miles
away from its star to 214 million miles. "It is beginning to
look like neatly stacked, circular orbits such as we see in our
own solar system are relatively rare," astronomer Steven Vogt
opined.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:48:13 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:22:52 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:50:22 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>... I did say that the
 >>chances of ETI arising in a solar system with a gas giant
 >>orbiting the central sun every three or four days are zilch --
 >>and that's based on what I've read about the subject, not
 >>personal opinion. The gas giant would have inevitably
 >>obliterated the so-called "comfort zone" of smaller rocky
 >>planets, if they had formed there in the first place.

 >Perhaps for gas giants in 3-4 day orbits.  But one interesting
 >article I read (sorry, can't cite the source) pointed out that
 >gas giants at more reasonable "habitability zone" distances from
 >their parent stars might very well harbor life on their moons,
 >which could range in size even up to Mars/Earth masses. It would
 >sure make for an interesting night sky.

 >-Brian Cuthbertson


Brian,

That's mentioned in today's article in the NY Times about the
discovery of six more extrasolar planets, one of which is in the
habitable zone -- at least part of the time, anyway. Most of the
new planets, however, have highly eccentric orbits. One orbits
its sun as close as 36 million miles and then swings out to 214
million miles. That kind of orbit probably plays havoc with the
local environment. And if you're a moon circling a gas giant,
where your gas giant goes, you go.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:39:24 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:24:21 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:55:21 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Dear Dennis,

 >Uh....

 >On that last request.... I have a question:

 >Is that a promise or a threat??  If the former, please
 >reconsider.  I need you Dennis. My goldfish just died.

 >Jim Mortellaro


Jim,

I can only hope it was because you kept him in a bowl of beer
instead of water.

If so, I'm your man! Just don't forget to feed me occasionally.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:49:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:41:12 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 21:08:17 +1300 (NZDT)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

 >Greetings List

 >I have this matter to ask Stanton Friedman with the request that
 >you respond to the points raised herein

 > From Private discussions I have had with knowledgable
 >researchers there have been the following discussion raised.

 >Stanton could you please tell me whether you still trust your
 >(perhaps your former) research colleage William (Bill) Moore or
 >at least do you still trust in the authenticity of the MJ12
 >material which he gave to you?


I don't understand the question. My views about the documents
are detailed at great length in my 272 page book 'Top
Secret/Majic', in my 108 page 'Final Report on Operation
Majestic 12' and in several other lengthy papers.

My views are determined by my very extensive investigation of
the subject documents and a load of collateral material as
observed and reviewed at a host of Archives as detailed in TSM.

I was heavily involved with Bill Moore in the investigation of
Roswell and early on in investigation of the documents...
roughly 1978-l987.

I have never indicated that the documents must be genuine
because Bill and Jaime discovered the CT memo or received the
roll of film with the EBE and TF memos.

Bill was a persistent hardworking researcher. We usually agreed
in our evaluation of people, events and documents.

Our intereaction is described in detail in TSM as is the fact
that he sometimes played games. I suppose this related to his
earlier activities as a Teachers Union negotiator in
Minnesota... Put something on the table and see how people
react.

Bill was a friend.

My first view of the EBE came when Bill visited me at a hospital
in  Long Beach where I was seeing my son who was dying. and saw
me when I came back a few weeks later for my son's memorial
service where he had worked.

Do I think Bill and or Jaime faked the documents?

NO.

I have no reason to think they did.

I was directly involved in the events leading up to their visit
to the National Archives in DC as described in TSM.

Bill called me and read me the CT memo.

I recognized a line that was similar to one in a memo we had
discovered at the Twining Papers in the Library of Congress
Manuscript Div. All this is in TSM.

If you have reasons to believe they faked the documents, I would
like to see them.

 >And How do you respond to the following discussion in light of
 >the items stated?

 >In Light of these statements can you still say that the MJ12
 >still holds up?

 >I would respectfully request that you answer my enquiry without
 >any Insults or "slanging match" being generated

 >The discussion follows herewith

 >     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 >Stanton Friedman believes the MJ-12 documents to be real. This
 >is based upon the "discoveries" of his then-partner William
 >Moore, who along with Jaime Shandera, received copies of most of
 >the original MJ-12 documents on film. The exception is one
 >document, the Cutler-Twining memo, which was claimed by Moore
 >and Shandera to have been "discovered" at the National Archives
 >under controversial circumstances.

This is a grossly inaccurate picture of what happened.

The EBE and TF memo were on a roll of film. The CT memo was
discovered at the Archives. Post cards had been received
pointing to the Archives. All this has been described. I was
read some of the cards over the phone. They went to DC because I
had been told by Jo Ann Williamson at the Archives that the
review of  Entry 267 of RG 341 was finally done.

Where is the controversy?


 >Author Timothy Good, in receipt of the MJ-12 documents from an
 >"intelligence source" (who happened to use the same photocopier
 >as William Moore), created the first major publicity splash
 >about MJ-12 from Britain in 1987 to publicize his book ABOVE TOP
 >SECRET. This was quickly followed by Moore becoming an MJ-12
 >public figure in the U.S. Moore (with Shandera) and Good
 >essentially initiated the MJ-12 controversy.

Again this is not accurate. and I have talked to and met with
Tim many times in the USA and in the UK.

The version of the EBE published by Bill ( with much censorship
in his Newsletter Focus) is different from what Tim received
from apparently a different source.

The copy received, incidently, by Jaime and Bill on film was
totally uncensored.

 >In recent times, Moore offered his reflections on MJ-12 and Roswell:

 >"If any of the UFO-related documents cited by me in past
 >writings are fabrications (a matter which I have always conceded
 >to be within the bounds of possibility), then I was just as much
 >taken in and used as anyone else, if not more."  from Saucer
 >Smear, 4-20-97.

I totally agree with this statement.

"I no longer am of the opinion that the extraterrestrial
 >explanation is the best explanation for this event (Roswell)."
 >from Saucer Smear, 8-5-97.

 >(on Roswell) "I've always harbored some doubts about this case."
 >from Saucer Smear, 11-15-97.

I have not been in touch with Bill for several years (no
response to my letters) so I have no idea what the basis is for
this statement and do NOT concur.

I should add that while I do read 'Saucer Smear' it is a
humorous gossip sheet relating to UFOs and people involved in
ufology. Sometimes it is hilarious. But I hardly take it as a
research journal or to be accurate.

 >Timothy Good, in 1996, said he believed the MJ-12 documents to
 >be bogus (BEYOND TOP SECRET, 1996, pg. 468), though he
 >originally claimed to have received them from a source within
 >the government.

 >How do these statements, from the initiators of the MJ-12
 >debate, concur with Friedman's insistence that the documents are
 >authentic? Moore and Shandera "found" the only document that was
 >alleged to have come from government sources, which formed the
 >core of Friedman's faith in the authenticity of the papers. It
 >hardly sounds like Moore is wholly convinced of this anymore. If
 >there is a case here, Friedman hasn't convinced his own
 >colleagues!

This is frankly nonsense.

Faith??

Read my articles  and book, note the lengthy list of facts not
known to be true until after the documents were found.

Faith has nothing to do with my views.

It was detailed sometimes tedious, time consuming and expensive
research.

Note that Phil Klass paid me $1000. for providing more than ten
documents done with the same size and style PICA type as the CT
memo.

Note the recent comments by the GAO that indeed TOP SECRET
RESTRICTED (used on the CT memo) was a legitimate security
marking in 1954 despite many claims that it was not.

Note all the details I found out about Menzel which had not been
known.

To suggest that my conclusions after 14 years of effort are
based on faith is a view that can only be expressed by somebody
not familiar with my extensive investigation and writing on the
subject.

 >If Friedman's case is conclusive, it depends upon the
 >credibility of William Moore's activities. Does Friedman believe
 >Moore is an honest man? If he is, why did Moore refer to
 >Friedman, the chief defender of MJ-12,  as "Fraudmann" (Saucer

My case depends on the facts, the evidence and data and does not
depend on the credibility of Moore or anybody else.

 >Smear, 11-15-97)? Or why would a discoverer of the MJ-12 papers
 >say this about his colleague:

 >"As for Friedman, I think he is in this thing way over his head,
 >and I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him get badly burned by
 >it. It troubles me greatly to see the money-grubbing showman
 >side of him dominating his once respectable scientific
 >acumen."(Saucer Smear, 11-15-96.)

Ask Bill.

Bill and I have had our arguments. He even talked of suing me
because he didn't land a book deal he hoped to. He settled for
my writing him that if anything I had done had harmed him, I
apologized.

I don't need to defend myself gainst such charges from him.

I certainly castigated him for the paper he presented at MUFON
1989 in Las Vegas and also for using Falcon and Condor in a TV
program when he expected that some of what they would say would
not be true.

I gave him a hard time about not filling mail orders, but
cashing the checks when he was hard up. I wrote a strong
disagreement about his evaluation of Gerald Anderson.

 >If Moore isn't an honest man, then the debate about MJ-12's
 >authenticity is academic. Either way, where is Friedman's case
 >now?

My case is detailed in the above referenced book, report and
papers.

The question revolves around the information in the documents.

It has very little to do with whether Bill has always been
honest about everything.

Why is that so hard to understand?


 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 >I would respectfully request that you answer my enquiry without
 >any Insults or "slanging match" being generated

 >I look forward to your response, Stanton

 >Regards
 >Murray Bott


I would certainly like to know why more homework wasn't done
before these questions were raised.

That only a gossip sheet is referenced certainly raises serious
questions as to your motivation.

As a published scientist I strongly resent the implications of
the questions which seem not to be based on evidence at all, and
certainly not based on the facts and data I have published.

My publications are all available.

Stanton 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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                   Re: The Drake Equeetion & The NY Times

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 13:45:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:43:34 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equeetion & The NY Times


Dear List,

Ah, the perils of popular science headline writing!

I just noticed that the NY Times pulled a real boner. The
article in today's paper (Sec. A, p. 19) about the six new
extrasolar planets carries the following headline:

"6 More Planets Are Reported in Distant Galaxies"

Not true, of course. They were all discovered in this galaxy.

Oops!

Hey, missteaks happen!

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                  CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Tony Craddock <webmaster@cseti.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 12:24:15 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:48:07 -0500
Subject: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


CSETI announced on Monday the completion of the trailer
for its planned five-part Documentary series "Disclosure".

The trailer, hosted by Oscar-nominated actor James Cromwell, and
featuring Dr. Steven Greer, CSETI's founder and International
Director, provides a synopsis of the series.

The trailer can be played from the CSETI Website, and a
companion written summary and proposal are also available for
download.

Videos of the trailer and copies of the written summary are
available for serious investors.

Why don't you help CSETI network in to an investor to fund this
potential blockbuster?

A blockbuster that would help pave the way for the release of
non-polluting technologies that are currently buried deep in
"black" projects, and which can do nothing but help create a
sustainable civilization.  Members of Congress and Government
have told CSETI that such a Documentary is needed to provide
them with the political "Cover" to hold open Hearings on the
UFO/ET issue, which would get the issues and technologies back
into the public domain and under Constitutional controls.

Also featured on the CSETI Website is Dr. Greer's commentary on
the movie 'The Insider', which deals with the betrayal of
tobacco industry whistle-blower Dr. Jeffrey Wigand by CBS News
'60 Minutes'.  Dr. Greer's Position Paper compares this scenario
with the difficulties of getting a major TV network to do an
expose on the UFO/ET subject.

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 >
   Nov > Nov 30

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:56:17 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:49:08 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:50:22 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:07:12 -0600
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>... I did say that the
 >>chances of ETI arising in a solar system with a gas giant
 >>orbiting the central sun every three or four days are zilch --
 >>and that's based on what I've read about the subject, not
 >>personal opinion. The gas giant would have inevitably
 >>obliterated the so-called "comfort zone" of smaller rocky
 >>planets, if they had formed there in the first place.

 >Perhaps for gas giants in 3-4 day orbits.  But one interesting
 >article I read (sorry, can't cite the source) pointed out that
 >gas giants at more reasonable "habitability zone" distances from
 >their parent stars might very well harbor life on their moons,
 >which could range in size even up to Mars/Earth masses. It would
 >sure make for an interesting night sky.

 >-Brian Cuthbertson

Hi Brian.

Unlike The Drake Equation, the formula used to find the
Habitable Zone around a star is fatally flawed because it uses
too few variables.

The average distance of Earth to the Sun is 93,000,000 million
miles or 1 A.U.  It is exactly the same for the Moon.  Both
Earth and the Moon are well within the Habitable Zone around our
star, the Sun, but it is obvious that only one of them can
sustain life as we know it.

Nick Balaskas