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

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Dec 1999

  Dec 1:

   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [124]
   Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth! - Tony Spurrier [14]
   Re: On False Memory - Brian Cuthbertson [48]
   Re: Satellite Pictures? - Bob Young [20]
   Re: On False Memory - Bob Young [27]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [66]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Kevin Randle [28]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [63]
   Satellites Detect Fireballs - Bob Young [5]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Robert Gates [15]
   Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager - Nick Balaskas [101]
   Electrophonic Sounds? - Erol Erkmen [6]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Jerome Clark [31]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [39]

  Dec 2:

   Cattle Mutilation - Len Fedullo [47]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [166]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Tony Spurrier [29]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Stefan Duncan [10]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - UFO UpDates - Toronto [72]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Roy J Hale [63]
   Re: Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager - Mac Tonnies [24]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [84]
   Re: On False Memory - Sue Strickland [31]
   Re: Electrophonic Sounds? - Terry Blanton [13]
   Re: Electrophonic Sounds? - Edoardo Russo [18]
   Re: On False Memory - Todd Lemire [112]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Tony Spurrier [11]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - GT McCoy [23]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Bob Young [23]
   Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready - Steven Kaeser [68]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Steven Kaeser [31]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Ed Gehrman [38]

  Dec 3:

   AA Film Research - Philip Mantle [15]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - royjhale [21]
   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [203]
   Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit - Steven J. Dunn [19]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Kevin Randle [52]
   UFO World Exclusive On 'Sightings' Tonight! - Tim Mathews [21]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [26]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [123]

  Dec 4:

   Filer's Files #48 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [421]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 32 - by way of John Hayes [608]
   Re: The Drake Equation - David Rudiak [551]
   CPR-Canada News: Virtual Saskatchewan - Crop - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [48]
   More on Shanghai UFO - Blair Cummins [39]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [23]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #328 - Alfred Lehmberg [90]
   LAURA LEE E-NEWS: December 6 - 10, 1999 - Laura Lee [119]
   A Satisfactory Answer? - Bob Young [15]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [7]

  Dec 5:

   Housekeeping - ListMail - UFO UpDates - Toronto [21]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [41]

  Dec 6:

   CSETI - New Video On Website - Tony Craddock [35]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [58]
   List's Server Problems - UFO UpDates - Toronto [6]

  Dec 7:

   Re: A Satisfactory Answer? - Majorstar@aol.com [20]
   List Mail Flow - UFO UpDates - Toronto [11]

  Dec 9:

   Server Problems - Moderator UFO UpDates [13]
   Oz 'UFO' Crash Into Dam? - John Auchtel [68]
   Re: World Cup Aliens - Kathy Hotchner [59]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Evans [21]
   US DoD Offers Military Documents Online - Blair Cummins [23]
   Sighting Report OZ File 04.12.1999 - Diane Harrison [56]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Tony Spurrier [36]
   Blather: Blather Doesn't Care - Daev Walsh [312]
   UFO Over Eastern Shore, Baltimore, Maryland? - Blair Cummins [23]
   CPR-Canada News: New Web Site for BLT Research - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [53]
   Object From Sky Slams Into Dam - Kenny Young [24]
   P-47: Breaking Story In Australia - Guyra "UFO" - John Stepkowski [92]
   CSETI New Video - 4 UPN Pieces - Tony Craddock [15]
   Peter Davenport Chat - Blair Cummins [9]
   Re: [M-TRAC - MSAA] Conspiracy? - Sue Kovios [35]
   P-47: Re: Breaking story in Australia Guyra NSW - Bill Chalker [38]
   Australia - Does Guyra Have A UFO In It's Dam? - Ken Margolis [70]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Neil Morris [43]
   Possible Eyewitness To Guyra Mystery - Blair Cummins [74]
   3-Reports On UFO Crashing Into Australian Dam - Kenny Young [59]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Rebecca Keith [81]
   Re: Blather Addendum - Competition! - Daev Walsh [118]
   Re: Astrobiology Program in the U.K. - Nick Balaskas [80]

  Dec 10:

   Guyra 'UFO' - Small Meteorite - Blair Cummins [27]
   Attention Subscribers - UFO UpDates - Toronto [11]
   Meteorite Blamed for Reservoir Mess - Kenny Young [26]

  Dec 11:

   Attention Subscribers - UFO UpDates - Toronto [13]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 33 - Joseph Trainor [420]
   Filer's Files #49 - George A. Filer [432]
   Re: Attention Subscribers - John Velez [27]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [159]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #329 - Alfred Lehmberg [103]

  Dec 12:

   Subscriber Notice - UFO UpDates - Toronto [14]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - James Easton [298]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Evans [44]
   Re: Polar Lander? - Tom Austin [34]
   UFO Video Vault @ UFO Folklore - Dan Geib [6]

  Dec 13:

   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [92]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Neil Morris [151]

  Dec 14:

   Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty? - Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto [60]

  Dec 15:

   Server Switch - Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto [28]
   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [203]
   Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video - Roy J Hale [21]
   AA Film Research - Philip Mantle [15]
   Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit - Steven J. Dunn [19]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Kevin Randle [52]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [123]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [26]
   Scientists go to camera in search for Mars Lander - Steven L. Wilson Sr
   [62]

  Dec 16:

   Re: Alien Autopsy - Rebecca Keith [172]
   SkyFlash or Meteor in Montgomery Alabama? - Stephen MILES Lewis [10]
   Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49] - Bob Young [41]
   UK Conference 2000! - Tim Mathews [60]
   Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth - Tim Matthews [279]
   Re: False Memory - Sue Strickland [40]
   Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty? - Jim Mortellaro [47]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [189]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Karl T Pflock [19]
   Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty? - Chris Rutkowski [36]
   Re: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999 - Brian Straight [11]
   Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49] - Nick Balaskas [98]
   Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49] - Bob Young [6]
   Re: Giant UFO - Nick Balaskas [38]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [64]
   Sighting Report OZ File 13.12.1999 - The Keith Basterfield Network
   Australasia [125]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [110]
   Re: Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth - Henny van der Pluijm
   [23]
   Malaysians Interested In UFOs? - Lesley Cluff [7]
   Peter Davenport Chat Log - Blair Cummins [7]
   TMP News: Possible Alien Life On Europa? - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [101]

  Dec 17:

   Re: The Drake Equation - Roger Evans [48]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Rebecca Keith [70]
   Re: On False Memory - Russ Estes [102]
   Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years... - Sue Kovios [25]
   Re: On False Memory - John C. Thompson [29]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [80]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Patrick Bailey [31]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [86]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 34 - Joseph Trainor [597]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [42]
   Re: Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years... - Bob Young [57]
   Re: On False Memory - Jerome Clark [22]
   Re: On False Memory - Mark Haywood [44]
   Re: On False Memory - Joel Henry [44]
   Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman - Stan Friedman [73]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [76]
   FO Sighting Report OZ File 09.12.1999 - Diane Harrison [77]
   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [145]
   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [64]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Roger Evans [59]

  Dec 18:

   Re: Alien Autopsy - James Easton [96]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Evans [49]
   Filer's Files #50 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [474]
   Re: On False Memory - Stephen G. Bassett [21]
   Re: On False Memory - John C. Thompson [160]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [52]
   An Exceptional Abduction and SETI - Larry Robson [483]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [51]
   PRG Programming Announcement - 12/18/99 - Stephen G. Bassett [33]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Thiago Ticchetti [24]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Larry Hatch [45]
   'Abductions: The Truth' - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [25]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #330 - Alfred Lehmberg [79]
   Re: On False Memory - Jenny Randles [85]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Roger Evans [48]
   Re: On False Memory - Kevin Randle [130]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [56]
   US Air Force To Take Over Area 51 Land - Norio Hayakawa [67]
   Re: On False Memory - Jim Mortellaro [18]
   Re: 'Abductions: The Truth' - John C. Thompson [184]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Rebecca Keith [28]

  Dec 19:

   When Police Meet the Paranormal ... - Stephen Miles Lewis [119]
   Re: On False Memory - Brian Cuthbertson [40]
   More Young People Believe In Aliens Than God - Stephen Miles Lewis [27]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Thiago Ticchetti [27]
   Re: 'Abductions: The Truth' - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [35]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [64]
   Re: On False Memory - Larry Hatch [34]
   Re: On False Memory - John Velez [121]
   Re: 'Abductions: The Truth' - John C. Thompson [58]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Roger Evans [84]

  Dec 20:

   Re: Alien Autopsy - Jim Mortellaro [49]
   Re: 'Abductions: The Truth' - Jim Mortellaro [50]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [44]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [60]
   Re: Conference 2000 Update - Tim Mathews [6]
   Where's Greg? - Roger Evans [7]
   Re: 'Abductions: The Truth' - Mac Tonnies [57]
   Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW - SMiles Lewis [113]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Marty Nosser [81]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Jacques Poulet [39]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Annette Evans [110]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Roger Evans [59]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Henny van der Pluijm [31]
   The Rise of the Replicants - Carlos Roselli [9]
   Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   Re: On False Memory - Jenny Randles [31]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Ed Gehrman [91]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Steven Kaeser [48]
   Little Green Men - John Rimmer [117]
   Re: On False Memory - Larry Hatch [42]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Gildas Bourdais [82]
   New Book: Strange Cop Cases - Stig Agermose [114]
   Re: On False Memory - Alfred Lehmberg [47]
   Re: The Rise of the Replicants - Stephen Miles Lewis [75]
   Re: On False Memory - Jenny Randles [42]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Evans [146]
   Re: Conference 2000 Update - Patrick Bailey [11]
   The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler - Stig Agermose [34]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger R. Prokic [27]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Mark Cashman [32]

  Dec 21:

   Re: Alien Autopsy - James Easton [202]
   ECHELON And Surveilling Citizens - UFO UpDates - Toronto [130]
   Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW - Bruce Maccabee [48]
   Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes? - Mac Tonnies [92]
   Re: The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler - GT McCoy [55]
   Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stig Agermose [76]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Larry Hatch [52]
   CPR-Canada News: Edmonton Formation Update - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [63]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Keith Woodard [27]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [60]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Neil Morris [50]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Neil Morris [26]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Steven Kaeser [59]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - UFO UpDates - Toronto [20]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Jenny Randles [69]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Terry Blanton [21]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Evans [50]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Jim Mortellaro [109]
   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes? - Jim Mortellaro [160]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - ed gehrman [122]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Keith Woodard [114]
   'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet - UFO UpDates - Toronto [82]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Steven Kaeser [22]
   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes? - Brian Cuthbertson [26]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson [89]

  Dec 22:

   Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet - Joseph Trainor [8]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Paul B. Thompson [29]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger Annette Evans [100]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Karl T. Pflock [43]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Keith Woodard [79]
   Re: The Drake Equation - Dennis Stacy [29]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [137]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Rebecca [59]
   Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - michael mchugh [43]
   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes? - Mac Tonnies [83]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Mac Tonnies [50]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Mac Tonnies [32]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bob Young [45]
   Back Engineering From Roswell Debris? - John Auchettl [104]
   Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bob Young [20]
   Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet - Larry Hatch [40]
   Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty? - Michel M. Deschamps [21]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Stan Friedman [40]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Roger R. Prokic [29]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Bob Shell [28]
   Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty? - Donald Ledger [47]
   Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary - Stan Friedman
   [196]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Keith Woodard [47]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson
   [287]
   Re: Alien Autopsy - Sam Sherman [37]
   Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty? - Bill Oliver - UFO*BC [19]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - John C. Thompson [161]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Karl T. Pflock [13]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Dennis Stacy [26]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Karl T. Pflock
   ,Ktperehwon@aol.com. [19]

  Dec 23:

   Re: Seasons Greetings - Henny van der Pluijm [22]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty? - Donald Ledger [27]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bob Young [25]
   Re: On False Memory - GT McCoy [80]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - David Rudiak [244]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - Stan Friedman [193]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [345]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - Georgina Bruni [9]
   Re: #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris? - John Auchettl [61]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [29]
   #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris? - John Auchettl [61]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Karl T. Pflock [25]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bob Young [18]
   Re: Seasons Greetings - Jim Mortellaro [59]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - David Rudiak [38]
   Jay Leno's Take On NASA - Tony Craddock [9]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Joel Carpenter [35]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Jsmortell@aol.com [119]

  Dec 24:

   Re: Corso? - Ralf Zeigermann [35]
   Corso? - Ralf Zeigermann [35]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson
   [136]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson [25]
   Firmage a Floppie? - Royce J. Myers III [27]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [26]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - Mac Tonnies [12]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - Bruce Maccabee [283]
   Re: Corso? - Jacques Poulet [27]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [50]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [63]
   Re: Corso? - Larry Hatch [100]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35 - Joseph Trainor [690]
   Re: Firmage a Floppie - Brian Cuthbertson [16]
   Filer's Files #51 -- 1999 - George A. Filer [233]
   Re: Corso? - Pat McCartney [71]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - David Rudiak [403]
   Re: Corso? - Stan Friedman [61]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Dennis Stacy [28]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Dennis Stacy [38]
   Re: Corso? - Chris Sanderson [13]
   Tim's Christmas Greetings! - Tim Mathews [12]
   As The Centuries Begin To Blend - UFO UpDates - Toronto [50]

  Dec 25:

   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson
   [497]
   Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend - Michel M. Deschamps [9]
   Scientific American: Wormholes and Warp Drives - David Rudiak [21]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Roger Evans [22]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35 - Larry Hatch [50]
   Re: Year 2000 Prediction by Gesundt..... - Jsmortell@aol.com [52]
   Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' - Mac Tonnies [35]
   Re: Corso? - Mac Tonnies [43]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Mac Tonnies [52]
   Re: Filer's Files #51 -- 1999 - Larry Hatch [14]
   Re: Corso? - Larry Hatch [29]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Larry Hatch [36]
   Most FOIA Users Seek Info On UFOs - Stig Agermose [94]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #331 - Alfred Lehmberg [82]
   Filer's Files #51 -- 1999 - Complete Version - by way of John Hayes
   [392]

  Dec 26:

   OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999 - Diane Harison - Keith
   Basterfield Network [120]
   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 12-25-99 - Rense E-News [370]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [72]
   Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend - Sean Jones [8]
   UFO Sighting Report OZ File 26.12.1999 - Diane Harrison - Keith
   Basterfield Network [204]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Bill Weber [14]
   Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend - Mac Tonnies [13]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [22]
   Re: Corso? - Michael Christol [45]
   Re: Corso? - Larry Hatch [62]
   Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999 - Larry Hatch [61]

  Dec 27:

   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [569]
   Re: Corso? - Jerome Clark [55]
   Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999 - Diane Harrison [79]
   Re: Corso? - Mac Tonnies [53]
   Re: Corso? - Mac Tonnies [19]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - David Rudiak [569]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35 - royjhale [21]
   Guyra: ELP? - Andrei Ol'khovatov [23]
   Re: Corso? - Steven W. Kaeser [42]
   Re: Corso? - Ed Gehrman [24]
   Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View - Karl T. Pflock [27]

  Dec 28:

   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson
   [285]
   Re: Corso? - Steven W. Kaeser [49]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Dennis Stacy [89]
   UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Stig Agermose [29]
   CPR-Canada News: Canadian Crop Circle Summary - Paul Anderson - TMP /
   CPR-Canada [233]
   UFO Reported On Mississipi's Gulf Coast - Stig Agermose [22]
   "Discovery Passed Over Gulf Coast" - Stig Agermose [37]
   ET Exhibition Touring Australia - Stig Agermose [52]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Loy Pressley [18]
   AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Philip Mantle - UFO [14]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - David Rudiak [60]
   Re: Corso? - Ed Gehrman [35]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [29]

  Dec 29:

   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Rebecca Keith [20]
   Re: Documentary? - Allen Loper [9]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Loy Pressley [22]
   Re: Documentary? - David Hancock [19]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Sam Sherman [34]
   Re: Documentary? - Sam Sherman [32]
   National Public Radio On Project GRUDGE - Bruce Maccabee [179]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Tom Genereaux [36]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Tom Genereaux [8]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Sam Sherman [24]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [33]
   Re: Corso - David Rudiak [33]
   Re: Auckland Night Lights Mystery - Blair Cummins [39]
   Abductions & Aliens - What 's Really Going On? - Jacques Poulet [55]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [54]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [38]
   Re: Corso? - Steven W. Kaeser [63]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - TMMatthews99@aol.com [35]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Loy Pressley [21]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Loy Pressley [34]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Stan Friedman [175]
   Re: Corso? - John Auchettl [267]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Larry Hatch [67]

  Dec 30:

   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [60]
   Re: Corso? - Larry Hatch [80]
   Re: Corso? - Pat McCartney [52]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Larry Hatch [45]
   Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's? - Tom Genereaux [14]
   Hong Kong UFO Club Website - Moon Fong [29]
   Re: Documentary? - Bruce Maccabee [27]
   Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - Bruce Maccabee [74]
   'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real Life - Stig Agermose [43]
   Re: Corso - Stan Friedman [47]
   Re: Corso - Gildas Bourdais [59]
   Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus - Alex Persky [35]
   F-18's Chase Triangle Over Pensacola - Stig Agermose [51]
   Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash' - Bob Young [125]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Rebecca Keith [44]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - RGates8254@aol.com [31]
   1968 Plane Crash Still Fascinates - Todd Lemire [84]
   Re: 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real - Stig Agermose [7]
   Re: Corso? - Robert Gates [33]
   FSG - Final/Millennial Issue - Scott C. Carr [11]
   Re: Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus - Carlos G. Roselli
   [46]
   Re: Corso? - John Auchettl [136]
   Traces Of The Ancients - Erol Erkmen [6]
   Re: Corso? - Steven Kaeser [48]

  Dec 31:

   Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up? - John C. Thompson [100]
   Re: Corso - John Rimmer [52]
   Re: Corso? - Jim Mortellaro [72]
   Re: Documentary? - Jim Deardorff [61]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Mark Haywood [23]
   UFOcity.com Report 12/99 - Peter Robbins [146]
   Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash' - DRudiak@aol.com [69]
   Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash' - David Rudiak [75]
   Blather - Not the Y2K Bug - Daev Walsh [206]
   A Final Prayer for Something Lost Along the Way - Jim Mortellaro [47]
   Shuttle TV: Is What We See What NASA Gets? - Blair Cummins [112]
   Re: Traces Of The Ancients - Mac Tonnies [65]
   Re: Corso - Gildas Bourdais [27]
   Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip - Roy J Hale [21]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 36 - Joseph Trainor [617]
   Re: Corso? - Steven W. Kaeser [77]
   Re: Corso - Stan Friedman [42]

   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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:25:18 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:11:29 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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.

Gosh, I am so grateful that you cleared that up for us.  In
particular I am happy that the traumatic situations I've had,
which are both burned into my mind and have been verified by
witnesses when applicable, have no basis in your pair of dimes.
Now I can sleep better.

Also, I am happy to note that Dr. John Mack is a psychiatrist
and you are a ... uh ...  UFO researcher.  Or are you no longer
one of those since your own personal transformation?

Ever been shot?  Ever seen a murder?  Ever experience a
perceived abduction or witness a UFO sighting?  Neither has
Mack, or Hopkins, yet they have opinions which claim a view
different from yours.  Does that make you wrong or right?  Of
course not.  So why the statements of such certitude, "This is
nonesense!"  You got your degree in psychiatry I take it?

As I've said so often on this list and elsewhere, when someone
tells me or someone else that they are dead wrong and they have
the truth, I tend to go a little ballistic.  I cannot trust
memories of my own which to me are real, yet so astoundingly
impossible in my personal paradigm, that it just cannot be.  I
am a walking contradiction and you are a walking genius on
truth.  Perhaps the title of your next book should be, "Finally,
the Truth about Who has the Motts!"

 >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.

Well, that certainly is conclusive.  If I read you correctly, in
75% of the cases, the memories of the events around the hearing
the disaster were completely TRUE, yet the subjects held onto
those true beliefs because it was the way they remembered it,
enen in the face of facts that proved right to them.  I see your
25% and raise you 50 more percent.

 >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.

Molley has always tended to embellish her hellish traumatic
events. Personally, I don't recall any vibration.  I was on the
Titanic myself in a past life.  I know this because it's a core
memory.  Or, I had just invented Fresh Wine and was physically
abusing myself.  I think I forgot.

 >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.

You got your PhD by writing your thesis on this subject of Nam
recall? Brother, have you got a lot of stuff to experience.  You
sound like a man who has experienced nothing but opines much on
the experiences he has not experienced.  Whilst I would not
suggest going to battle or volunteering to be in a fire fight,
or for that matter, wishing to be a perceived abductee, until
you experience it yourself, you are going to continue to sound
very silly.  Very silly indeed.  Most especially when you say
things with such certitude.  The experts with all the paper
and/or all the experience are wrong.  It nonesense.  Has no
basis in fact, even the victims of the Titanic tragedy come into
this as examples for your fodder.

Let alone your mudder.

 >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.

Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is based
on a false assumption?  With all due respect Dr. Randle, I
suppose that you can prove that the initial event _is not_
reflected in reality?


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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:30:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:12:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 01:05:59 EST
 >Subject: Re: Secret Weapons And Ufology - Some Truth!
 >To: updates@globalserve.net<

 >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.

Yes is the answer to your question and the video is being
analysed.

The close up observers have estimated the size of the object as
35 feet across travelling at between 30 - 40 mph.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:15:48 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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. ...

<snip>

 >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.

Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

<snip>

 >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.

A. Mack's work with hundreds of abductees has established that
    they appear to have experienced very traumatic events.
    (re his books)

B. The Harvard study (not Mack's claim) seems to establish
    that folks remember traumatic events clearly.

Mack infers then that A+B has implications.

You can debate all you want about the cause of these traumatic
events, or even if Mack is competent to judge whether someone
has experienced a traumatic event.  You can also argue the
merits of the Harvard study if you like (be my guest if you
want to dig it up on the net or elsewhere.)

But given A and given B, I'd say Mack has a point.

-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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                           Re: Satellite Pictures?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 21:18:53 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:38:57 -0500
Subject: Re: 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 coordinates (other than Area 51, of course) would be
 >fruitful to check out?

Melanie, Everybody:

1) How about starting with a daytime incident when a UFO reported
to be more than 6 feet in diameter was hovering someplace
identifiable?  Then check the date and time against their list of
pixs.  Pictures taken with filters showing spectral details might
show something interesting - or might show nothing at all.

2) I wonder if moving aircraft are visible in any of these pixs.
Don't know much about the imaging system but it may adjust for
the Earth's rotation and so maybe planes moving Westward could
be seen more clearly than those flying Eastward.

Does anybody have any ideas?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 21:35:30 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:44:29 -0500
Subject: 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

<snip>

 >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.

Kevin:

This reminds me of Neisser's classic paper in Cognition on John
Dean's Memory.

This is where he showed after reviewing the Nixon tapes and
public testimony that while Dean sort of had the gist of what
had happened at a meeting he was dead wrong about many of the
details.

The most fascinating was Dean's claim that Nixon had told him in
a meeting that he had done a good job, but the actual tapes
showed that Nixon said no such thing.

Neisser concluded that we remember things the way we want them
to have happened, or something similar.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 02:00:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 09:16:02 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:48:13 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >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

= = = = = = = =

Hello, Dennis, Brian et al.

Something is being forgotten here, again.

These are the very first years of actual planetary discovery
with regard to other solar systems.

For the present, only the very largest Jovian planets are being
discovered, since they "waltz" their parent star around enough
to be barely detectable.

It further follows that those with very eccentric orbits should
be seen first .. as they are again most easily seen for the same
reasons.

The upside, for me, is that we have found any planets out there
at all. If memory serves, for the first half of the 20th
century, the reigning paradigm was that our system of planets
was caused by an extremely rare near- collision of stars .. one
which splattered out debris .. which then coalesced.

The discovery of any planets out there at all, and especially
some dozens of them now, shoots that concept to pieces.

Evidently, an accretion disk (or whatever its called) of matter
naturally forms into a central star with a planetary system, in
many cases. Enough cases, I think, to presume that the formation
of planets about ordinary stars is the rule, rather the
exception.

The very least "habitable" of these systems would naturally be
the first ones to be discovered.

Lets see what else is discovered in time.

I would be no surprise at all, if in the next 10 to 30 years, it
turns out that Mars-like, Venus-like and ( yes ) Earth-like
planets are as common as dirt.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:22:20 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 09:18:55 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:49:58 -0400


 >>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

<huge, massive snip>

 >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.

Stan, this point is irrelevant because no matter what Saucer
Smear is, the letters quoted are from the people who wrote them.
No one said that it was a research journal, but we can say that
the letters published reflect the opinions of the people who
wrote them. As you well know, Bill Moore has had letters
appearing there in which he makes some fairly surprising claims.

<another snip to get to the good stuff>

 >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.

Please provide the details of the GAO claim that TOP SECRET
RESTRICTED is a "legitimate security" marking and please provide
examples of such a marking from known and established legitimate
documents from the era.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 19:01:21 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 08:26:43 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:46:38
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.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

<snip>

 >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.

Jerry,

I responded to that part of the Mallon article you posted. I
didn't attack the article as a whole, admitting in my response
to Rudiak that I hadn't seen it in its entirety. In most minds,
that would qualify as a public admission.

And as you well know, my "private admission" consisted of a
request of a copy of the article from you. Is it on the way?

If so, thanks in advance.

 >>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


Ditto. And when in doubt, let someone else do the heavy lifting
for you.

BTW, you're always asking me to comment on something that wasn't
the subject of one of my posts, so let me ask you this: Do you
have the complimentary copy of The Anomalist 5 I sent you? Have
you read the article by Mike Davis therein? Would you care to
make any comments regarding same, or would you prefer to let
David Rudiak speak for you?

And how many times did I have to ask him for permission to
simply send him a copy of same before he finally relented? Yep,
he the open-minded man who know everything! And not certain of
anything, is he, beginning with Roswell? Does he speak for you
on that topic as well?

Over to David.

Dennis Stacy

PS: Got the latest issue of IUR today. Have only had time to
skim it, but it looks very nice: as usual, I might add. Glad to
see that it now accepts ads, a revenue stream I urged on CUFOS
several years back, having originally instigated same at the
MUFON UFO Journal. Or was that Rudiak's idea? Never mind. Expect
a check from me soon for The Anomalist 8 -- as long as it's OK
with David.








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

                         Satellites Detect Fireballs

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:44:45 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:17:23 -0500
Subject: Satellites Detect Fireballs


Here's an interesting USAF site listing press releases of
fireballs imaged by satellites

http://phobos.astro.uwo.ca/~pbrown/usaf.html

Clear skies,

Bob Young







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

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:54:19 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:19:24 -0500
Subject: Re: 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.

   So the bottom line on this deal is they spent a small amount of
cash producing a teaser, so that they can use it as a vehicle to get
investors to invest in the bigger project.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

               Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:42:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:24:28 -0500
Subject: Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager


Hi everyone.

Below is a message I just got about the December 3 Mars landing
from Sagan's Cornell University.

It is interesting that both metric and imperial units are
mentioned in the message.

If this lander confirms the findings of the 1976 Viking
lander(s), we may have our first proof that life exists on
another world.

Nick

------

FOR RELEASE:  Dec. 1, 1999

Contact:  David Brand
Office:  (607) 255-3651
E-mail:  deb27@cornell.edu

ITHACA, N.Y. -- For just under two minutes, shortly before 3:14
p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, Dec. 3, a camera directed toward
the south polar region of Mars will capture and store a series
of about 20 images unique in the annals of planetary
exploration: the surface of a planet (other than the moon) as
seen from altitudes ranging from about 4 miles to only about 30
feet.

The camera, known as the Mars Descent Imager, or MARDI, will be
positioned between the legs of the Mars Polar Lander, with the
exhaust of the hydrazine engines in view.  It will begin
clicking its shutter after the lander vehicle's heat shield has
been jettisoned -- about 6.5 kilometers (about 4 miles) above
the surface -- and while the craft is still swinging on its
parachute harness. The last few images -- perhaps eight -- will
be captured after the parachute has been jettisoned at about the
1 kilometer (.62 mile) altitude and as the craft makes a
controlled descent, slowed by retro rockets, to the frigid
northern edge of the Martian south pole's layered terrain.

"MARDI's images will make all of us much more comfortable in
making interpretations of the lander's pictures because they
will give us a context," says Peter Thomas, a senior researcher
with Cornell University's astronomy department.  "For the first
time we will have a complete scale of pictures of Mars, from
less than a millimeter all the way up to orbiter pictures."  The
camera has a 70-degree field of view, and the estimated
difference in resolution between the first and the last
black-and-white images will be a factor of about 800.

Thomas is one of three Cornell researchers on the MARDI team,
led by Michael Malin, president of Malin Space Science Systems,
San Diego. Also participating in the development of the imaging
system, and present at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
Pasadena, Calif., to interpret the images after they are
received from the Mars Polar Lander, are Cornell astronomy
professors Joseph Veverka, who also is chair of the Cornell
astronomy department, and Steven Squyres. Also on the team are
M.A. Caplinger of Malin Space Science and M.H. Carr of the U.S.
Geological Survey in Flagstaff, Ariz.  MARDI was developed under
a $3.5 million JPL contract.

At present, the highest-resolution images of the Martian
surface, taken from orbit, are made up of pixels (or picture
elements) each covering 1 1/2 yards of terrain.  That is about
to change dramatically to images with each pixel covering a
fraction of an inch of the surface.

The descent camera pictures will be used to interpret ground
features and will aid in the mission's main purpose, studying
the layers of ice and dust covering the polar region. These
images will be captured with a "nesting" technique, meaning that
each successive image will be nested within the previous
picture. As the spacecraft loses altitude, each successive image
will cover a smaller area within the previous larger image.  The
camera has no ability to aim, but simply points where the
spacecraft points.  "The first image will be several kilometers
on one side, but the camera has a fairly wide angle so that even
with the spacecraft swinging on a parachute, the images should
remain nested within one another," says Thomas.

The nesting technique, he notes, will enable researchers to find
a ground feature, such as a boulder, in the image taken closest
to the ground, then work back to the largest picture.  The
spacecraft's electronic memory retains each image, plus details
of when the image was taken, which direction the spacecraft was
pointing at the time and its altitude.  In this way, says
Thomas, "you can take pictures and reconstruct them from that
geometry."

The number of images returned to JPL will be limited by the
storage capacity of the spacecraft's memory.  For this reason,
the on-board computer has been programmed both to reject some
images taken by the camera and to write over others.  The
computer will be instructing the camera to capture images in
different image formats (in terms of pixels) based both on
altitude and the number of images already taken.  If the
computer determines that the altitude has not changed
sufficiently, it will not save the image.

"If the memory's storage is full and the camera is still taking
images, the computer is programmed to throw out some
lower-resolution pictures," says Thomas.  "We want to maintain
nesting and protect the higher resolution images as we get
really close to the surface. Those images closer to the surface
are of platinum value."

The "overwhelming purpose" of the descent camera's images, says
Thomas, is to tie what  will be seen with the lander's camera on
the surface of Mars with images taken a few feet from the
surface. "We've seen the whole of Mars in 100-meter resolution,
but only 1 percent of the surface in three-meter resolution.
These images will be filling the gap."

                                 -30-

The web version of this release, including accompanying photos,
may be found at
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Dec99/Mars.camera.deb.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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                            Electrophonic Sounds?

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 19:44:57 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:02:02 -0500
Subject: Electrophonic Sounds?


Dear friends,

We are searching web based litarature about 'Electrophonic
Sounds' if you have any information please inform me,

Thanks,

Erol Erkmen
TUVPO






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

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 14:04:00
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:25:00 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 19:01:21 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:46:38
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.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

Dennis,

 >>For the specifics of this discussion, I refer you and listfolk
 >>to David Rudiak's posting.

 >Ditto. And when in doubt, let someone else do the heavy lifting
 >for you.

Nah.  David Rudiak has done such a fine job that I can't imagine
anything I'd have to add to it.  You're entitled to your views,
he to his, and I to mine (and mine happen to be much closer to
Rudiak's than yours).  In any event, I have neither time nor
inclination to get into this with you.  I can't help noting yet
again, however, that (as much as you don't like it when I point
out the obvious) once again you're rushing in to join the
anti-UFO side of the debate.

Thanks, by the way, for the kind words about the new issue of
IUR.  I think it's a splendid one, too, and I hope listfolk who
don't already subscribe will think of joining up. Contact CUFOS
at 2457 West Peterson Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60659, for
information.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 1

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:27:11 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:27:34 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>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 -

<snip>

 >>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.

 >Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
 >sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
 >study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
 >study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

I used the word claim beside he cited no references. He believes
that a study is underway which will underscored his beliefs that
memories of core signifcance are more accurate than memories of
another kind.

He had said about the same thing about memories recovered
through hypnosis, and said he could cite the studies, but, I
have seen nothing to suggest this is true. I looked at the
paperback edition of his book but found nothing in it to
validate his suggestion.

Until the study is completed, we have nothing other than Mack's
suggestion that it might be concluded in the way he says it will
be. In the meantime we can look at the work of Elizabeth Loftus,
Richard Ofshe and Robert Baker about false memories and
hypnosis. Yes, we can look at Lenore Terr's work, which seems to
be at odds with the work of the others, and then we can look at
the evidence as played out in "reality" to decide who has the
better theories.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                              Cattle Mutilation

From: Len Fedullo <lenf1@snip.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 23:05:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 07:24:43 -0500
Subject: Cattle Mutilation


Hi Folks at UFO Updates,

I had a little time Tuesday night to check various news sources
and found this interesting article (worth posting) from MSNBC
affiliate Channel 4 in Albuquerque New Mexico. It seems that the
cattle mutilations are continuing.

---

Station Home Page & More Local Information

Officials baffled by cattle mutilation cases

New Mexico � There is a shocking phenomenon that�s plagued New
Mexico ranchers for many years. Why dozens of cows are mutilated
every year, still remains an unsolved mystery.

It�s a horrifying sight too many ranchers have come face to face
with.

�I haven�t been able to rule out space aliens yet, but we�ve
ruled out Satanic ritual. We�ve ruled out predators and
scavengers,� said Paternoster.

But even after studying dozens of cattle mutilation cases, Taos
County District Attorney John Paternoster still can�t come up
with any answers.

Paternoster has been to three mutilation scenes, treating each
like a homicide.

Paternoster says one incident in particular causes him great
concern.

An 11 month old torito was healthy one day and mutilated the
next.

�The next morning I went to check on him and I found the bull
dead,� said rancher Manuel Archuleta.

�The animal had its lips, tongue and sex organs missing. It�s
tail was gone,� said Paternoster.

On the bull�s outside, there was only a hole the size of a
bullet, but on the inside, there was something much larger.

�My blood ran cold when we lifted the skin up. There was a hole
the size of a bowling ball in its neck, right through the bone,
the grizzle and everything,� said Paternoster.

Witnesses claim they�ve spotted black helicopters near
mutilation scenes, leading to speculation the government is
involved in a covert operation.

With no evidence of human involvement, there�s also the theory
of UFOs.

John Paternoster will keep looking for answers.

�Everybody loves a mystery and even clings to hope. I hope we�ll
be able to solve it,� said Paternoster.

Cattle gave been mutilated for more than 25 years in New Mexico.

Paternoster says every year about two dozen cows fall victim to
the
mysterious killer.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:59:19 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 07:30:34 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:25:18 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>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.

 >Gosh, I am so grateful that you cleared that up for us.  In
 >particular I am happy that the traumatic situations I've had,
 >which are both burned into my mind and have been verified by
 >witnesses when applicable, have no basis in your pair of dimes.
 >Now I can sleep better.

Nope. Didn't say that. Said that Mack's statement was not true
because of other evidence. He was making a blanket statement and
I was saying that it didn't cover everything.

 >Also, I am happy to note that Dr. John Mack is a psychiatrist
 >and you are a ... uh ...  UFO researcher.  Or are you no longer
 >one of those since your own personal transformation?

 >Ever been shot?  Ever seen a murder?  Ever experience a
 >perceived abduction or witness a UFO sighting?  Neither has
 >Mack, or Hopkins, yet they have opinions which claim a view
 >different from yours.  Does that make you wrong or right?  Of
 >course not.  So why the statements of such certitude, "This is
 >nonesense!"  You got your degree in psychiatry I take it?

Shot at? Seen a murder? Relevant, how?

 >As I've said so often on this list and elsewhere, when someone
 >tells me or someone else that they are dead wrong and they have
 >the truth, I tend to go a little ballistic.  I cannot trust
 >memories of my own which to me are real, yet so astoundingly
 >impossible in my personal paradigm, that it just cannot be.  I
 >am a walking contradiction and you are a walking genius on
 >truth.  Perhaps the title of your next book should be, "Finally,
 >the Truth about Who has the Motts!"

Didn't say that and didn't apply it to you. Merely indicated that
Mack's statement about the reliability of memory based on a
core of significance is nonsense. Didn't say that all memory
was false or that a traumatic experience gave rise to a false
memory. Did suggest that Mack's statement was inaccurate.

 >>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.

 >Well, that certainly is conclusive.  If I read you correctly, in
 >75% of the cases, the memories of the events around the hearing
 >the disaster were completely TRUE, yet the subjects held onto
 >those true beliefs because it was the way they remembered it,
 >enen in the face of facts that proved right to them.  I see your
 >25% and raise you 50 more percent.

Nope. Doesn't mean that 75% were accurate, only that 25% of
those in the study were wholly and completely wrong in their
memories of the event. Others were less inaccurate, but nearly
all of them had some flaws in their memories of the event. And,
it didn't mean that all of those looking at their original
statements refused to believe them accurate. It means that some,
even in the face of evidence that proves them wrong, will not
change their minds. I see your 50% and I call.

 >>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.

 >Molley has always tended to embellish her hellish traumatic
 >events. Personally, I don't recall any vibration.  I was on the
 >Titanic myself in a past life.  I know this because it's a core
 >memory.  Or, I had just invented Fresh Wine and was physically
 >abusing myself.  I think I forgot.

 >>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.

 >You got your PhD by writing your thesis on this subject of Nam
 >recall? Brother, have you got a lot of stuff to experience.  You
 >sound like a man who has experienced nothing but opines much on
 >the experiences he has not experienced.  Whilst I would not
 >suggest going to battle or volunteering to be in a fire fight,
 >or for that matter, wishing to be a perceived abductee, until
 >you experience it yourself, you are going to continue to sound
 >very silly.  Very silly indeed.  Most especially when you say
 >things with such certitude.  The experts with all the paper
 >and/or all the experience are wrong.  It nonesense.  Has no
 >basis in fact, even the victims of the Titanic tragedy come into
 >this as examples for your fodder.

Here is where I am outraged. I point to these alleged Vietnam
Vets who are taking VA money from those who really need it.
These alleged Vets tell the most horrifying stories of combat
when their service records, if they were ever in the service,
reveal that their tales are untrue. Read STOLEN VALOR to
understand exactly what is happening here.

And, are you suggesting here that I can't understand the horrors
of combat unless I have lived through them? Are you suggesting
that I can't understand them even if I have talked to veterans
who had actually experienced combat? Is the only path to
understanding through living the experiences?

 >Let alone your mudder.

 >>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.

 >Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is based
 >on a false assumption?  With all due respect Dr. Randle, I
 >suppose that you can prove that the initial event _is not_
 >reflected in reality?

Of course I have considered the possibility that my opinion is
in error. On the other hand, in the case of many of the
abductees who I have interviewed, and those interviewed by
others such as Hopkins, the initial event could have been an
episode of sleep paralysis. David Jacobs describes, in SECRET
LIFE, the typical abduction which is also the typical episode of
sleep paralysis. Are you suggesting that none of those cases are
the result of this psychological problem (not to suggest that
those suffering sleep paralysis have psychological problems) are
the result of sleep paralysis rather than alien abduction?


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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:14:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 07:52:30 -0500
Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:54:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready
 >To: updates@globalserve.net<

 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 12:24:15 -0800
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Tony Craddock <webmaster@cseti.org>
 >Subject: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

 >So the bottom line on this deal is they spent a small amount of
 >cash producing a teaser, so that they can use it as a vehicle to get
 >investors to invest in the bigger project.

I think you'll find the post was a trailer, for the trailer for
something that CSETI has yet to get funds for, which seems very
odd. If you were to produce a documentary wouldn't you agree the
funds first before producing a trailer? I know I would and I
guess CSETI have also, the question remains, why the continued
request for funds.

In addition to this CSETI complain that they can only get their
most secret witnesses to talk via congressional hearings,
therefore, why are CSETI using a documentary to spread their
'word', when their most valid witnesses will refuse to talk?

At this point I would like to ask Tony Craddock one question, if
CSETI requires funding for this documentary why isn't the budget
for the project made available to the public to see where this
funding is projected to be spent. In addition to this, where are
the CSETI finances available for public dissemination which is
allegedly required by US law for non-profit organisations via
their offices?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Stefan Duncan <swduncan@foto.infi.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:34:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:02:21 -0500
Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:54:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>CSETI announced on Monday the completion of the trailer
 >>for its planned five-part Documentary series "Disclosure".


One bullcrap show I will miss. 10 years regression coming up
folks. It is because of Greer I think we lose alot of reputable
researchers.

Duncan









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

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:11:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:13:06 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:22:20 EST
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:49:58 -0400

 >>>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

 ><huge, massive snip>

 >>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.

 >Stan, this point is irrelevant because no matter what Saucer
 >Smear is, the letters quoted are from the people who wrote them.
 >No one said that it was a research journal, but we can say that
 >the letters published reflect the opinions of the people who
 >wrote them. As you well know, Bill Moore has had letters
 >appearing there in which he makes some fairly surprising claims.

 ><another snip to get to the good stuff>

My point was not so much that Saucer Smear is a gossip sheet,
but that somebody asking questions about me and Bill Moore and
MJ-12 should have given some indication that he has reviewed my
very extensive writings... which are listed in the snip.

For those who want the facts I would suggest my book "TOP
SECRET/MAJIC", my "Final Report on Operation Majestic 12", and
my "Operation Majestic 12? YES!" for starters...

 >>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.

 >Please provide the details of the GAO claim that TOP SECRET
 >RESTRICTED is a "legitimate security" marking and please provide
 >examples of such a marking from known and established legitimate
 >documents from the era.

 >KRandle

I didn't say I had any of the other documents using TOP SECRET
RESTRICTED.

Read my comments again.

Here is a direct quote from page 80 of the GAO's 450 page
overview of what they did for  Steve Schiff:


   DATE: December 7, 1994

   Ms. Laura Jackson and I reviewed records pertaining to the Air
   Force Atomic energy projects and certain mission and weapons
   requirements. These files were classified up to and including
   top secret. The period covered by these records was from 1948
   to 1956. There was no mention of the Roswell Incident. No
   information pertaining to the assignment was obtained. In
   several instances we noticed the classification Top Secret
   Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
   because in past references to this classification (Majestic
   12) we were told that it was not used during this period.


It would certainly appear that these were documents that had not
been declassified and are not available to you or me.

I have no problem in believing that the GAO personnel are
telling the truth. Do you?

It would seem extremely unlikely that a forger would use an
unusual security marking bound to raise eyebrows.

Of course, I have discussed the many reasons for accepting that
the CT memo is legitimate, in depth, in the referenced material,
as I am sure you will recall

I would be happy to send a copy of the page via fax or an SASE
sent to UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.

I will also enclose a listing of items available from UFORI
including the "Zeta Reticuli Incident" by Terence Dickinson and
"Update on The Zeta Reticuli Incident". These seem to have been
left out of your discussion about the Betty Hill star map in
your "The Abduction Enigma".

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:59:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:16:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >>Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:36:50 +0000
 >>From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 > >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.

Hi Dave & All,

Well the film is rather interesting and the object caught on
tape is much like the same object which Steve Alexander caught
on video, his now Famous " Milk Hill Footage".

But I must say this has more clarity to it, you see the object a
lot closer to the camera than Steve's footage.

What it is I couldn't exactly say, but from talking to a lot of
people who I meet whilst in Wiltshire looking at Crop
formations' these white ball type objects seem to be pretty
common place.

I think my colleague was in the right place at the right time.

The tape was shown at the last Leeds UFO Quest International
Conference, and received some interest, including Mr Hesseman,
who was quoted as saying he would not leave the UK until he had
a copy of the film in his hands.

So what has become of the August 7th Barbury Crop Formation
video, as far as exposure is concerned? If anyone has seen the
footage I/we - my colleague would like to hear about your
response, so please feel free to jump in.

Also I remember the reaction of those people in Dave's house the
night it was shown on Dave's Huge PC screen, and well they were
taken aback to say the least, me included, and I know that Dave
has looked at this footage for some time and is still quite
mystified by the object and so are a lot of people.

For everyone's convenience I have included  the direct link to
see the footage we are talking about, please go to:

http://cropcircleconnector.com/1999/BarburyCastle/BarburyCastle99b.html#One

Hopefully you will be able to get more of  an opinion on the
footage.

Regards,

Roy..                            Keep Smiling..








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

             Re: Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 00:16:47 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:19:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager


 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:42:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Unique Images Expected From Mars Descent Imager


 >Hi everyone.

 >Below is a message I just got about the December 3 Mars landing
 >from Sagan's Cornell University.

 >It is interesting that both metric and imperial units are
 >mentioned in the message.

 >If this lander confirms the findings of the 1976 Viking
 >lander(s), we may have our first proof that life exists on
 >another world.

 >Nick

<snip>

 >ITHACA, N.Y. -- For just under two minutes, shortly before 3:14
 >p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, Dec. 3, a camera directed toward
 >the south polar region of Mars will capture and store a series
 >of about 20 images unique in the annals of planetary
 >exploration: the surface of a planet (other than the moon) as
 >seen from altitudes ranging from about 4 miles to only about 30
 >feet.

What I would give to have images like this taken of certain
features in Cydonia...

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:34:28 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:27:11 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>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 -

 ><snip>

 >>>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.

 >>Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
 >>sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
 >>study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
 >>study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

Kevin Randle responds:

 >I used the word claim beside he cited no references. He believes
 >that a study is underway which will underscored his beliefs that
 >memories of core signifcance are more accurate than memories of
 >another kind.

 >Until the study is completed, we have nothing other than Mack's
 >suggestion that it might be concluded in the way he says it will
 >be.


"Nothing other than (Mack's) suggestion, . . ."

For someone whose degree in psychology is still 'warm in the
frame' you are quick to dismiss (and minimize) the statements of
a man who headed a psychology department at Harvard! They don't
give posts like that to 'slackers' Kevin. Don't be so quick to
dismiss a man who has -years- of experience over you. You only
do so because his views don't jibe with yours. It's nothing
deeper than that really. It shows in the dismissive language
that litters your comments. Example: Re: Mack's remarks, you
offer the pronouncement, "This is nonsense!" If you don't think
that folks/readers can see through proclamations like that one,
you have a lot more to learn about psychology.

Says you.

In the meantime we can look at the work of Elizabeth Loftus,
Richard Ofshe and Robert Baker about false memories and
hypnosis. Yes, we can look at Lenore Terr's work, which seems to
be at odds with the work of the others, and then we can look at
the evidence as played out in "reality" to decide who has the
better theories.

In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

Without ever having spoken to me (or any of the other abductees
who participated) they edited my comments to unrelated questions
in between Loftus and the late Robert Baker expounding their
"theories" on alien abduction. As if they were "analysing" the
abductees whose cases were reviewed on the program. Now how
"ethical" is that? They all could have 'said something' after
the fact. Not a single one of them made any effort to either
interview us or review our cases (the details of what we were
reporting) before passing judgement on us in a very public
medium. I participated in that thing because I thought mental
health professionals would give us a fair hearing. Boy, was I
ever naive!

Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
actually worked with live human beings!

Gimme a break Kevin. I'm surprised you don't have neck problems
after wearing those gigunda blinders for so long. Open minded
and objective you are not.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:43:33 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:59:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:25:18 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:02:20 -0600 (CST)
 >>>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>>Subject: On False Memory

Dear Kevin,

I would like you to interview me.

IF you do your homework after that interview, and you do it
thoroughly, you will come away with a far different opinion than
you presently hold.

But, because I question your ability to consider having those
opinions changed, I dare say you won't even respond to this
note, much less follow through with a one-on-one interview with
me.

I asked for help several months ago from the list members,
qualifying that it be someone who is _not_ a believer.  You're
in for a shocker, Mr. Randle, whether you decide to interview me
or not.

Sincerely,

Sue Strickland






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

                          Re: Electrophonic Sounds?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 10:02:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:44:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Electrophonic Sounds?


 >From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Electrophonic Sounds?
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 19:44:57 +0200

 >Dear friends,

 >We are searching web based litarature about 'Electrophonic
 >Sounds' if you have any information please inform me,

This Russian researcher has some very interesting ideas
regarding electrophonic sounds associated with bollides and
solar activity:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                          Re: Electrophonic Sounds?

From: Edoardo Russo <edoardo.russo@torino.ALPcom.it>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:30:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:46:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Electrophonic Sounds?


 >From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Electrophonic Sounds?
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 19:44:57 +0200

 >We are searching web based litarature about 'Electrophonic
 >Sounds' if you have any information please inform me,

Hello Erol,

Massimo Silvestri had a detailed article on "Electrophonics and
UFO reports" published in our journal "UFO Forum", issue No. 13,
September 1999. It's in Italian, alas, but you may surely
appreciate his bibliography (mostly in English).


Massimo's paper is readable on the Web at URL
"http://www.ufodatanet.org"

Should you find any difficulty, we can send it to you by e-mail.

Best regards


Edoardo Russo                             Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici
CISU, Casella postale 82, 10100 Torino - tel 011-3290279 - fax 011-545033
http://www.arpnet.it/ufo          e-mail: edoardo.russo@torino.alpcom.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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 12:13:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:48:34 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>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. ...

 >>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.

 >Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
 >sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
 >study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
 >study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

 ><snip>

 >>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.

 >A. Mack's work with hundreds of abductees has established that
 >   they appear to have experienced very traumatic events.
 >   (re his books)
 >
 >B. The Harvard study (not Mack's claim) seems to establish
 >   that folks remember traumatic events clearly.

 >Mack infers then that A+B has implications.

 >You can debate all you want about the cause of these traumatic
 >events, or even if Mack is competent to judge whether someone
 >has experienced a traumatic event.  You can also argue the
 >merits of the Harvard study if you like (be my guest if you
 >want to dig it up on the net or elsewhere.)

 >But given A and given B, I'd say Mack has a point.

 >-Brian Cuthbertson

I think the more important debate here should be, not about
whether or not an abductee actually had a traumatic event or
not, but whether or not the hypnotist or researcher has
influenced the memories of the abductee during hypnosis. Dr.
Jacobs states, "A casual, but calculated, discussion of an event
with a person can instill "memories" in him that have no basis
in reality."  An excellent example of false memory appears in a
book titled "Remembering Satan" written by Lawrence Wright.

Jacobs mentions 5 significant areas in which abductions differ
from false memory syndrome.

1) Abductees do not only recall childhood experiences.

2) Abductees often have indirect corroboration of events.

3) Abductees often remember the events without the aid of a
    therapist.

4) Abductees are often "physically" missing at the time of the
    event.

5) Abductees can often provide independent confirmation of the
    abduction.

Dr. Jacobs also states, "In addition, it is important to note
that unlike victims of false memory syndrome, abductees do not
usually experience disintegration of their personal lives
"after" they become aware of their situation. Knowledge of the
abduction phenomena helps them lead more 'integrated' lives,
rather than having the powerfully disintegrating effects so
common with victims of false memory syndrome."

I have to agree with Brian and Jim here Mr. Randle.  Who is able
to determine what is of core significance to a person, other
than that person?  It's not the therapist, or the hypnotist now
is it? It's the person themself. I know you're aware of the
text I've quoted above as an example because that's where yours
was pulled from... from Jacob's book entitled 'The Threat'.

Another important point here mentioned within the same book is
'Normal Event Memory':

  Memory is not stored linearly.  It is stored in a "relational"
  database.  Each stored memory fragment can become distorted.
  Sometimes a person recalls a memory fragment that only makes
  sense if the person unconsciously creates a scenario, even if
  it is a fictional scenario, to incorporate it.

Another reference mentioned within this text is a book called
'Searching for Memory' by Daniel L. Schacter.  It's not that the
witness or abductee isn't correctly reflecting reality.  It is
_their_ reality, whether it's the correct one or not, as stored
in _their_ memory.  And who is to determine what is a 'reality'?

You also contradict yourself, Mr. Randle, within the same
paragraph in which you state, "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)... ", either
they're studying this or their not?  Which is it? You say
they're rarely checked after you say there were many studies?

You also do have a point Mr. Randle in saying that Mack's
argument is based on an assumption.  One should never base an
argument on an assumption.

Respectfully from the bottom of the investigative totem pole,
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."

UFO Trivia:  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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:36:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:49:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:59:27 +0000
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

 >So what has become of the August 7th Barbury Crop Formation
 >video, as far as exposure is concerned? If anyone has seen the
 >footage I/we - my colleague would like to hear about your
 >response, so please feel free to jump in.<

Hi Roy

Has the footage been analysed?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:06:55 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:52:45 -0500
Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:54:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

Hello, all, Robert

 >>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.

 >So the bottom line on this deal is they spent a small amount of
 >cash producing a teaser, so that they can use it as a vehicle to
 >get investors to invest in the bigger project.

My problem is that this one isn't that creative (not that I
support Greer and his Klowns ) they must be having a "brain
drain" - or at least losing a few neurons. This effort isn't as
good as a phony roof repair con.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 12:34:49 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:03:17 -0500
Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:14:59 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 07:52:30 -0500
 >Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

<snip>

 >At this point I would like to ask Tony Craddock one question, if
 >CSETI requires funding for this documentary why isn't the budget
 >for the project made available to the public to see where this
 >funding is projected to be spent. In addition to this, where are
 >the CSETI finances available for public dissemination which is
 >allegedly required by US law for non-profit organisations via
 >their offices?

Hi, Tony, List:

Reports to the IRS about spending of non-profits may not be
available, unless the organization does it themselves. I'm not
exactly sure about this.

Every state regulates non-profits incorporated or raising above
a certain amount of money in their border.

Someone could find out where CSETI is registered and go to the
State office for charitable organizations. Their reports are
public info.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 12:21:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:00:39 -0500
Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready


 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:14:59 -0500
 >From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: CSETI's 5-Part Documentary Trailer Ready
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

 >I think you'll find the post was a trailer, for the trailer for
 >something that CSETI has yet to get funds for, which seems very
 >odd. If you were to produce a documentary wouldn't you agree the
 >funds first before producing a trailer? I know I would and I
 >guess CSETI have also, the question remains, why the continued
 >request for funds.

It would be a "trailer" if the documentary was already produced
and they were simply trying to promote it.  But producers often
create "teasers" to promote their concept in an effort to secure
funding for a project, and I suspect this falls into that
category.  It seems clear that the proposed documentary is still
a basic proposal and since production costs aren't cheap (for a
professional product) it doesn't surprise me that a request is
being made for funding.

 >In addition to this CSETI complain that they can only get their
 >most secret witnesses to talk via congressional hearings,
 >therefore, why are CSETI using a documentary to spread their
 >'word', when their most valid witnesses will refuse to talk?

Somehow I would suspect that any "secret witness" with
information that could blow the lid off this conspiracy wouldn't
need the protection of a congressional hearing to speak out.
I'm not a lawyer, but I would syspect that the protection
afforded by the publicity and public outrage would be enough to
prevent legal action.  The problem is that these "witnesses"
will have to have more than their reputation and position to
lend credence to tale.  If Corso had appeared before a
Congressional Panel on the issue of his involvement with alien
technology he would have had to provide a lot more information
than he did.

But I've found that the validity of a "secret witness" is often
a reflection of whether or not that person is saying what you
(the listener) want to hear.  Several so-called "witnesses" have
had interesting tales to tell, and they are indeed very sincere
and telling what they believe to the truth.  But upon
examination, the impact of their comments are very annecdotal in
nature and it is only because of WHO they are (or WHERE they
were assigned and what they allegedly witnessed) that makes
their comments interesting in the first place.  The problem
remains that we are dealing with primarily annecdotal
information with no evidence to provide "proof". Congressional
hearings aren't like to change that situation, and unless some
"proof" is developed the chances of any kind of congressional
exmination of this subject is unlikely, IMO.

 >At this point I would like to ask Tony Craddock one question, if
 >CSETI requires funding for this documentary why isn't the budget
 >for the project made available to the public to see where this
 >funding is projected to be spent. In addition to this, where are
 >the CSETI finances available for public dissemination which is
 >allegedly required by US law for non-profit organisations via
 >their offices?

 >Tony

Non-profit agencies that do not receive public funds are not
necessarily required to open their books for public inspection.

It's been quite a few years since I've had any involvement in
this question, but I was surprised to learn that many non-profit
groups are actually very secretive about their organization and
funding sources.

As usual, it is up to those who donate to make the decision as
to how much information they require before they open their
wallet.

On the other hand, there are other regulations that come into
play if public funds are involved.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 13:06:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:11:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 16:59:27 +0000
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

<snip>

 >Hi Dave & All,

 >Well the film is rather interesting and the object caught on
 >tape is much like the same object which Steve Alexander caught
 >on video, his now Famous " Milk Hill Footage".

 >But I must say this has more clarity to it, you see the object a
 >lot closer to the camera than Steve's footage.

 >What it is I couldn't exactly say, but from talking to a lot of
 >people who I meet whilst in Wiltshire looking at Crop
 >formations' these white ball type objects seem to be pretty
 >common place.

 >I think my colleague was in the right place at the right time.

 >The tape was shown at the last Leeds UFO Quest International
 >Conference, and received some interest, including Mr Hesseman,
 >who was quoted as saying he would not leave the UK until he had
 >a copy of the film in his hands.

 >So what has become of the August 7th Barbury Crop Formation
 >video, as far as exposure is concerned? If anyone has seen the
 >footage I/we - my colleague would like to hear about your
 >response, so please feel free to jump in.

<snip>

The video clip is indeed interesting, but I noticed that the
camera seems to anticipate the movement of the object. There is
a lot of jumping around, as the camera operator appears to be
trying to keep the object in view, but also seems to be
anticipating the direction of travel.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 2

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 10:23:58 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:08:54 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:11:41 -0400

<snip>

 >In several instances we noticed the classification Top Secret
 >Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
 >because in past references to this classification (Majestic
 >12) we were told that it was not used during this period.


There is other supporting information on the RESTRICTED
classification which can be found on pages 387-389 in 'UFOs
Exist' by Paris Flammonde (1976) and in the Condon report pgs.
894-897..

For those of you who aren't able to access these books, here's a
summary.


On Sept 23rd., 1947 General Nathan Twining wrote General George
Schulgen and informed him that the UFO "phenomenon(sic)... is
something real and not visionary or fictitious" and that he
wanted to establish an investigative section to deal with all
unkown aerial activity.

He requested that it be given a code name and a security and
priority classification.

There is much more, and the letter should be read by all. It's
an important document that everyone agrees is authentic.

Another authentic document is the reply to this request from
General Craigie, Chief of staff, USAF, who on December 30th,
1947 wrote that the Airforce would not ignore UFO activity but
would investigate these reports.  He was forming a project to
"implement this policy".

This section was given the priority 2-A, the second highest
possible, and a security designation of "restricted" and the
code name of "SIGN".

It was also stated that " Where data of a classification higher
than restricted is handled by the project such data should be
classified accordingly."

Therefore TOP SECRET RESTRICTED is a logical  classification for
that period. I hope this helps.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 3

                              AA Film Research

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:42:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:09:18 -0500
Subject: AA Film Research


Dear All,

Does anyone out there happen to have a copy of the research done
by Rob Irving on the alleged film canister labels from the Alien
Autopsy film?

Rob specifically looked at the 'official stamp' on the labels
and suggested that it was bogus as it did not exist at the time.

Unfortunately I have been unable to contact Ronb Irving to ask
him for a copy hence my request here.

Please be aware that Tim Mathews and I are about to embark on a
new book on the alien autopsy film which will be well balanced
giving all sides of the argument. If you therefore have any
information on the film I would greatly appreciate it if you
could contact me direct at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com


Many thanks,


Philip Mantle.









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

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:28:07 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:05:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:36:54 -0500
 >>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Hi Roy

 >>Has the footage been analysed?

 >>Tony


Hi Tony,

As far as I know the footage has not yet been analysed, although
saying this I am not quite sure if Peter Sorrensen or any other
researcher who has a copy of the footage has had it analysed.

I do know that Dave Bowden has taken a good close up look of the
tape, and perhaps Dave could jump in here and tell us what he
found out?

Also if you look close enough you can just about see a second
object shoot off the screen as the first one disappears.

What I personally like about the footage is the acceleration of
the first object as it climbs and the brilliant colour & clarity
of the whole film.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 3

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:35:48 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:03:34 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:59:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:25:18 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>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.

 >>>>Snip

 >>Gosh, I am so grateful that you cleared that up for us.  In
 >>particular I am happy that the traumatic situations I've had,
 >>which are both burned into my mind and have been verified by
 >>witnesses when applicable, have no basis in your pair of dimes.
 >>Now I can sleep better.

 >Nope. Didn't say that. Said that Mack's statement was not true
 >because of other evidence. He was making a blanket statement and
 >I was saying that it didn't cover everything.

My take was your statement, "This is nonesense...!"

I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but I can see your
attitude as being just as king sized a blanket as the one you
accuse Mack of using.  He said:

 >>>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.

He went on to say that in this case, the traumatic event is
recalled accurately and it is the rest of the poor bastard's
life which often becomes confused.  He did not say that this was
so in every case. That was your assumption.

However what irritates is your certainty.  Perhaps Mack, with
all his pychiatric credentials is wrong.  However if so, it is
less likely than your being wrong.  At least in my opinion.

I would debate a point with a client, but never with an opponent
who knows a hell of a lot more than I do, unless I had proof
positive.  Fortunately for both of you gentlemen, neither of you
does, have prood positive.  Opinion?  Yes.  Allowed.  Certainty?
I don't think so.  What I have had in spades, is the actual
perceived event happen to me. That, in my not so humble opinion,
makes me as expert on the subject from the perspective of the
perceived abductee.

 >>Also, I am happy to note that Dr. John Mack is a psychiatrist
 >>and you are a ... uh ...  UFO researcher.  Or are you no
longer >>one of those since your own personal transformation? >
 >>Ever been shot?  Ever seen a murder?  Ever experience a
 >>perceived abduction or witness a UFO sighting?  Neither has
 >>Mack, or Hopkins, yet they have opinions which claim a view
 >>different from yours.  Does that make you wrong or right?  Of
 >>course not.  So why the statements of such certitude, "This is
 >>nonesense!"  You got your degree in psychiatry I take it? >
 >Shot at? Seen a murder? Relevant, how?

Could be any traumatic experience taken from your own life.  Use
this as a litmus test for your opinion as to recall.  It turns
out that I've had all of those things happen to me and I can
assure you that I remember every detail, and wherever possible
to do so, verified every detail.  So in my case, at least, you
are mistaken.  I tend therefore, to agree with John Mack.

 >>As I've said so often on this list and elsewhere, when someone
 >>tells me or someone else that they are dead wrong and they have
 >>the truth, I tend to go a little ballistic.  I cannot trust
 >>memories of my own which to me are real, yet so astoundingly
 >>impossible in my personal paradigm, that it just cannot be.  I
 >>am a walking contradiction and you are a walking genius on
 >>truth.  Perhaps the title of your next book should be, "Finally,
 >>the Truth about Who has the Motts!"

 >Didn't say that and didn't apply it to you. Merely indicated that
 >Mack's statement about the reliability of memory based on a
 >core of significance is nonsense. Didn't say that all memory
 >was false or that a traumatic experience gave rise to a false
 >memory. Did suggest that Mack's statement was inaccurate.

It is not inaccurate in my case, as an experiencer.  However
I've never read the book and had trouble with Psych one and two
in college.  I also had trouble with the electron in a box
theory. I can only go by what I know to be true.

 >>>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.

 >>Well, that certainly is conclusive.  If I read you correctly, in
 >>75% of the cases, the memories of the events around the hearing
 >>the disaster were completely TRUE, yet the subjects held onto
 >>those true beliefs because it was the way they remembered it,
 >>enen in the face of facts that proved right to them.  I see your
 >>25% and raise you 50 more percent.

 >Nope. Doesn't mean that 75% were accurate, only that 25% of
 >those in the study were wholly and completely wrong in their
 >memories of the event. Others were less inaccurate, but nearly
 >all of them had some flaws in their memories of the event. And,
 >it didn't mean that all of those looking at their original
 >statements refused to believe them accurate. It means that some,
 >even in the face of evidence that proves them wrong, will not
 >change their minds. I see your 50% and I call.

Surely memory, being based in electro chemical reactions in the
nervous system, are prevelent in any given situation.  However
in your original post, you said nothing but that 25% of the
people tested were wholly and completely wrong in their recall.
Nothing was said about the remaining group.  The assumption for
a simple soul such as me is the one drawn.

 >>>Yes, hearing about a traumatic event and living through one are
 >>>a different situations. In the days that followed the sinking of

 >>>Snip

 >>>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.

 >Snip

 >Here is where I am outraged. I point to these alleged Vietnam
 >Vets who are taking VA money from those who really need it.
 >These alleged Vets tell the most horrifying stories of combat
 >when their service records, if they were ever in the service,
 >reveal that their tales are untrue. Read STOLEN VALOR to
 >understand exactly what is happening here.

Excuse me, Sir, but in your own words, you point to Vietnam vets
whose recall is false when tested and in your own words, are
rarely tested, then you tell us that the Vets you referred to
are those attempting to steal valor or obtain services or
benefits to which they are not entitled.  You got there pretty
quick in the paragraph above, but one would have to be prescient
indeed to get there from your original statement, Sir. You
wrote:

 >The memories are strong, detailed, and are of core
 >significance. They just never happened in the way being related
 >by the victim.

Where does it say about:

 >Here is where I am outraged. I point to these alleged Vietnam
 >Vets who are taking VA money from those who really need it.
 >These alleged Vets tell the most horrifying stories of combat
 >when their service records, if they were ever in the service,
 >reveal that their tales are untrue. Read STOLEN VALOR to
 >understand exactly what is happening here.

And _YOU_ are outraged?  Oy!

 >And, are you suggesting here that I can't understand the horrors
 >of combat unless I have lived through them? Are you suggesting
 >that I can't understand them even if I have talked to veterans
 >who had actually experienced combat? Is the only path to
 >understanding through living the experiences?

In a way, yes.  Guilty, with an excuse.  Perhaps I should have
said that had you experienced any of the above, you would, I
assure you, _NOT_ have the strength of conviction you
demonstrate in your posts.  That would have been more accurate.


 >>>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.

 >>Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is based
 >>on a false assumption?  With all due respect Dr. Randle, I
 >>suppose that you can prove that the initial event _is not_
 >>reflected in reality?

 >Of course I have considered the possibility that my opinion is
 >in error. On the other hand, in the case of many of the
 >abductees who I have interviewed, and those interviewed by
 >others such as Hopkins, the initial event could have been an
 >episode of sleep paralysis. David Jacobs describes, in SECRET
 >LIFE, the typical abduction which is also the typical episode of
 >sleep paralysis. Are you suggesting that none of those cases are
 >the result of this psychological problem (not to suggest that
 >those suffering sleep paralysis have psychological problems) are
 >the result of sleep paralysis rather than alien abduction?

No, I am not.  However I have experienced sleep paralysis on a
few occasions, admittedly not many.  Maybe half a dozen time in
my life. But I have experienced perceived abduction, have been
shot, and shot at, have witnessed cold blooded murder and, in my
case, and in my opinion, your assumptions are wrong and Mack's
are correct.  And the only thing of which I am certain, is that
I am not certain.  You seem not to suffer from that human
failing.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 3

                   Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit

From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:14:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:12:16 -0500
Subject: Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit


Friday December 3 1:20 AM ET

Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Shanghai appeared convinced on Friday that
an unidentified flying object had visited China's commercial
capital.

Usually staid official newspapers insisted Thursday's sighting
was no vision.

"UFO darts across the city's skyline," screamed a headline in
the official Shanghai Daily.

"UFO appears in the sky over Shanghai," the Wenhui Daily said
in a front page story with color photographs.

Nearly 100 people claimed to have seen a cylindrical object with
a flaming orange tail moving over the western part of the city
for about an hour on Thursday afternoon, the newspapers said.
They offered no theories on what it might have been.

But the Shanghai Daily ran the story on the same page as an
advertisement for "The X Files Movie," based on the popular
television series about two U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation
agents who probe unexplained phenomena.






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

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:08:50 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:16:03 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:11:41 -0400


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:22:20 EST
 >>Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >My point was not so much that Saucer Smear is a gossip sheet,
 >but that somebody asking questions about me and Bill Moore and
 >MJ-12 should have given some indication that he has reviewed my
 >very extensive writings... which are listed in the snip.

Okay, Stan, fair enough.

<snip>


 >I didn't say I had any of the other documents using TOP SECRET
 >RESTRICTED.

 >Read my comments again.

 >Here is a direct quote from page 80 of the GAO's 450 page
 >overview of what they did for  Steve Schiff:


 >DATE: December 7, 1994

    >Ms. Laura Jackson and I reviewed records pertaining to the Air
    >Force Atomic energy projects and certain mission and weapons
    >requirements. These files were classified up to and including
    >top secret. The period covered by these records was from 1948
    >to 1956. There was no mention of the Roswell Incident. No
    >information pertaining to the assignment was obtained. In
    >several instances we noticed the classification Top Secret
    >Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
    >because in past references to this classification (Majestic
    >12) we were told that it was not used during this period.


 >It would certainly appear that these were documents that had not
 >been declassified and are not available to you or me.

 >I have no problem in believing that the GAO personnel are
 >telling the truth. Do you?

Of course not. However, there is the possibility that they have
made a mistake. That is why it would be nice to see some of these
documents that they mentioned. That would resolve this aspect of
the question.

 >It would seem extremely unlikely that a forger would use an
 >unusual security marking bound to raise eyebrows.

It was also seem unlikely that a forger of great works of art
would sing his own name to them somewhere but that has
happened.

  <snip>

 >I will also enclose a listing of items available from UFORI
 >including the "Zeta Reticuli Incident" by Terence Dickinson and
 >"Update on The Zeta Reticuli Incident". These seem to have been
 >left out of your discussion about the Betty Hill star map in
 >your "The Abduction Enigma".

Irrelevant to the current discussion of MJ-12.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 3

                 UFO World Exclusive On 'Sightings' Tonight!

From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:31:55 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:23:34 -0500
Subject: UFO World Exclusive On 'Sightings' Tonight!


Dear All,

TONIGHT, 3rd December 1999, myself and Steve Mera of MAPIT will
present frankly remarkable information relating to a modern-day
MIB-type visitation and UFO event at a remote location on Winter
Hill, situated in North-Western England.

It took place over the w/end of 13/10.

Nobody else has the story.....

For those unable to tune in, you can listen via Real Audio; just
go to;

www.sightings.com

and click on live broadcast. See the site for the details!

This case involves an initial UFO report, a radiation mark on
the witnesses face, a visit by men claiming to work for a UK
government department, a cover-up of possibly massive
proportions and the disappearance of the witness!

Hear the evidence, make your own mind up!

All this and much more....tonight on Sightings!

Matthews speaks out!

Tim Matthews - Commercial Editor, Quest for Knowledge and Beyond
magazines. Director, Discovery UK.

www.sightings.com - the best programme on the radio.....






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

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:52:51 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:21:39 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:14 -0700

 >Dear Kevin,

 >I would like you to interview me.

 >IF you do your homework after that interview, and you do it
 >thoroughly, you will come away with a far different opinion than
 >you presently hold.

But what if I don't. What if after all of this, I find a
plausible explanation?

Are you going to be willing to review that explanation
objectively, or will you reject it out of hand?

 >But, because I question your ability to consider having those
 >opinions changed, I dare say you won't even respond to this
 >note, much less follow through with a one-on-one interview with
 >me.

How do you suggest that we conduct this interview? Over the
telephone? In person? Through the internet? And if we don't do
it in person, will that invalidate it in the minds of some?

 >I asked for help several months ago from the list members,
 >qualifying that it be someone who is _not_ a believer.  You're
 >in for a shocker, Mr. Randle, whether you decide to interview me
 >or not.

Wouldn't be the first time I was shocked.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 3

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:41:03 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:19:45 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:27:11 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>>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 -

 >><snip>

 >>>>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.

 >>>Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
 >>>sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
 >>>study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
 >>>study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

 >Kevin Randle responds:

 >>I used the word claim beside he cited no references. He believes
 >>that a study is underway which will underscored his beliefs that
 >>memories of core signifcance are more accurate than memories of
 >>another kind.

 >>Until the study is completed, we have nothing other than Mack's
 >>suggestion that it might be concluded in the way he says it will
 >>be.


 >"Nothing other than (Mack's) suggestion, . . ."

 >For someone whose degree in psychology is still 'warm in the
 >frame' you are quick to dismiss (and minimize) the statements of
 >a man who headed a psychology department at Harvard! They don't
 >give posts like that to 'slackers' Kevin. Don't be so quick to
 >dismiss a man who has -years- of experience over you. You only
 >do so because his views don't jibe with yours. It's nothing
 >deeper than that really. It shows in the dismissive language
 >that litters your comments. Example: Re: Mack's remarks, you
 >offer the pronouncement, "This is nonsense!" If you don't think
 >that folks/readers can see through proclamations like that one,
 >you have a lot more to learn about psychology.

Sorry, but his comment about the memory around an experience of
"core" importance being better has not been scientifically
proved and the information available suggests the opposite.

I certainly agree that John Mack has impressive credentials, but
that doesn't mean he is automatically right. I have seen him
claim that confabulation is the result of alcoholism and is
associated only with alcoholism and therefore is not relevant to
a discussion of alien abduction. But, other, equally
credentialed people have said that confabulation can be caused
by a number of problems and is not necessarily related to
alcoholism.

 >Says you.

 >In the meantime we can look at the work of Elizabeth Loftus,
 >Richard Ofshe and Robert Baker about false memories and
 >hypnosis. Yes, we can look at Lenore Terr's work, which seems to
 >be at odds with the work of the others, and then we can look at
 >the evidence as played out in "reality" to decide who has the
 >better theories.

 >In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
 >"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
 >of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
 >mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
 >explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
 >worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

Haven't you just dismissed their work without giving it a fair
hearing? Can't we say the same about the abduction researchers
putting out mutually exclusive theories? Can Budd Hopkins'
aliens be the same as those reported by David Jacobs or John
Mack? We can read Mack's comment that "It seems clear to me that
Jacobs, Hopkins and Nyman may pull out of their experiencers
what they want to see." Hasn't Mack just suggested here that a
key to understanding the abduction experience is understanding
the belief structure of the researcher? Hasn't Mack really just
accused these others of leading their witnesses into the arena
they want?

David Jacobs criticizes other researchers writing in 'The
Threat' that researchers such as Dr. John Mack, Dr. Leo
Sprinkle, (he who shall remain nameless, and John Hunter Gray,
among others, suggest that the abduction experience is
essentially positive. Jacobs rejects the positive outlook,
suggesting that it is the result of "incompetent hypnosis" (his
words, not mine). Jacob writes, "Without links to a temporal
sequence, the abductee can interpret the events without the
facts necessary to guide his thoughts, which leads to
confabulation and other memory problems."

So Jacobs is suggesting that even if the core of experience is
important to the abductee, the researcher, using incompetent
hypnosis can induce false memories in the abductee. That would
seem to contradict the statement by Mack which touched off this
threat.

 >Without ever having spoken to me (or any of the other abductees
 >who participated) they edited my comments to unrelated questions
 >in between Loftus and the late Robert Baker expounding their
 >"theories" on alien abduction. As if they were "analysing" the
 >abductees whose cases were reviewed on the program. Now how
 >"ethical" is that? They all could have 'said something' after
 >the fact. Not a single one of them made any effort to either
 >interview us or review our cases (the details of what we were
 >reporting) before passing judgement on us in a very public
 >medium. I participated in that thing because I thought mental
 >health professionals would give us a fair hearing. Boy, was I
 >ever naive!

 >Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
 >should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
 >credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
 >actually worked with live human beings!

And we can say the same things about the abduction researchers.
They can't agree among themselves so why should we give them
credence? See above.

 >Gimme a break Kevin. I'm surprised you don't have neck problems
 >after wearing those gigunda blinders for so long. Open minded
 >and objective you are not.

Is it really necessary to devolve into personal attacks?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                          Filer's Files #48 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:36:42 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 10:01:54 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999

Filer's Files #48 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
December 2, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020

Surf the Web and get paid cash at:http://www.prowebsurfersunion.com/

Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren
Webmaster.

EVIDENCE FOR LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE CONTINUES TO MOUNT.

When President Clinton first came into office, he gave Webb
Hubbell one of his most trusted subordinates a specific request
to obtain an answer to the question, "Are there UFOs?" Hubbell
apparently never was given a satisfactory answer.

On August 5, 1996, President Clinton went on live National
Television to announce that life was found within a meteorite
believed to have come from Mars.  Worm like creatures 360
nanometers long were found inside the ancient artifact.  Clinton
stated, "I am determined that American Space program will put
its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the
search for further evidence of life on Mars.  If the findings
are borne out, it will surely be one of the most stunning
insights into our world that science has ever uncovered.  Its
implications are as far reaching and as awe inspiring as can be
imagined."  Some of the television footage was used in the Jodie
Foster movie "Contact."    The film clip supported the main
theme of the movie that we are in contact with extraterestrials.
The White House allowed the clip to be used in the movie, but
did not endorse the main theme.  The President seemed to want to
maintain deniability in either direction.

FIVE NEW PLANETS MAY SUPPORT LIFE

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Astronomers scanning distant stars
have detected six more massive planets, five of which orbit
their suns at just the right distance to support liquid water
and -- theoretically -- life. The discoveries brought to 28 the
total number of so-called "extrasolar" planets found over the
past five years as astronomers survey hundreds of stars similar
to Earth's sun for signs they may have planets in tow. Five out
of the six are in what astronomers call the "habitable zone"
which could allow the existence of liquid water, a prerequisite
for life. This makes them different from most of the extrasolar
planets found before this, which have been either to hot or too
cold. "That five out of six of these things are in the habitable
zones of their stars shows it is not an accident," Astronomer
Vogt said, noting that planetary temperatures could range from
-38 degrees to 112 degrees Fahrenheit (-39 to 44 degrees
Celsius). Hopes for life in these star systems would focus on
possible moons of the giant gas planets, he said.

PLANETS CONFIRMED VISUALLY OUTSIDE OUR SOLAR SYSTEM

Until now confirmation of the existence of extrasolar planets
have been inferred by the wobble of the parent star.  Now
astronomers have witnessed for the first time a distant planet
passing in front of it's star, providing direct and independent
evidence that extrasolar planets exist.

NEW INTELLIGENT SIGNALS FROM SPACE

ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO -- Gannett News Service reports that on
November 29, 1999, the world's largest radio telescope, picked
up what appeared to be an intelligent signal coming from a small
star named HD119850. What's more a backup telescope at Jodrell
Bank near Manchester, England was hearing the same beacon a
clear sign the signal was not from Earth. Astronomer Jill Tarter
55, is chief scientist with the SETI Institute of Mountain View.
Jody Foster played Jill in the movie "Contact." Other tests were
conducted from the Arecibo control room to determine if the
signal coming from 106 trillion miles away was real.  The
telescope was moved away from the target star. The signal
vanished and only returned when it was aimed again at the target
star. Editor's Note: The evidence is growing that there is
intelligent life out there. Here's my scientific theory: "If
intelligent life exists outside Earth it is reasonable to assume
they could be visiting us?"

MASSACHUSETTES

CHESHIRE -- Bruce Tilden sent this interesting report. An Adams,
Massachusetts police officer reports that on November 18, 1999,
he observed 4 circles of light high in the cloudy sky above his
home in rural Cheshire. The equidistant spaced lights formed a
diamond and would rotate clockwise one quarter of a turn, then
come together into one light. A second later, they would
separate into the original pattern, again rotate clockwise one
quarter turn, close together and so on. When the lights were
apart they covered a 3 to 4 inch area at arm's length, and could
be covered by the palm of the witness's hand. This event lasted
for more than an hour and was witnessed by the officer's
daughter, son, and the son's friend. Although no light shaft was
seen shining up from the ground, the witness "called around" to
see if there was some sort of an opening celebration where
spotlights were being used. The result of this query was
negative, and he was certain that the lights did not originate
from the ground. Thanks to Bruce Tilden MUFON Field
Investigator/State Sections Director  Brewsteret

NEW JERSEY TWO CYLINDERS AND DISC VIDEOTAPED

RARITAN CENTER -- Reverend Damian Barna indicates that in using
computer enhancement of his eight minute video tape,  he has
been able to see small balls of energy departing from one
cylinder shaped UFO.  The enhancement infers that the plasma
energy balls are fired between the UFOs as if they were engaged
in an aerial battle only fifteen miles from New York City.  An
apparently hostile UFO appears to shoot green plasma charges at
other intruding objects.  The craft could also be transferring
the plasma energy from one object to another.  The large
cylinder shaped UFO is estimated to be at least a hundred feet
long.  During the filming the cylinder like cloud seems to morph
or gradually move from one position to another.  This may be
part of a cloaking device. Thanks to Rev. Barna who is pastor of
the New Freedom Church. Editor's Note:  I have seen video of
many cylinder shaped objects but never one that dissipates on
the left (south) of the screen and  rebuilds itself on the right
(north) portion.  It appears to teleport itself from one place
to the other. The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Bible and many
significant religious writings predict a war between the forces
of light and darkness.  Reverend Barna appears to have captured
on film amazing evidence of a pillar or cylinder cloud. The film
is being copyrighted but individual frames can be seen on
www.filersfiles.com.

VIRGINIA UFO SIGHTING

SPRINGFIELD -- Ceryn L and wrote concerning last week's Filer's
Files.  "I just read with interest your November 17, 1999, UFO
sighting report."  Just wanted to add that I also saw the same
formation at approximately 7:10 PM.  I live just off the
Huntington Metro stop south of Alexandria, VA on the hill
overlooking the city with a clear view of the sky.  I saw a
triangular formation flying quite low out of the northwest
toward the southeast though it looked more like a lead ship with
two wingmen.  My very first thought was my god, UFOs, followed
by trying to rationalize that it was a plane coming into
National Airport  (but much too fast and it didn't turn for the
approach) or a fighter headed for Andrews Air Force Base but
still much too fast.  It was gone in a blink and I did not see
it again though I stood and searched the sky for some moments.
Next day I read about the meteor shower and palmed it off as
that, until I read your account. Weather balloons don't fly that
fast, neither do commercial jets or even our fighters and it was
totally silent.   Thanks to cland@kl.com Chuck Warren
cewarren@worldnet.att.net


FLORIDA SKY EXPLOSION

TAMPA -- On December 2, 1999,  I was interviewed on the Malcolm
Hathorne show.  A caller reported that on October 25, 1999, he
was driving on Highway 301 towards the south when he saw a
strange explosion in the sky that lasted for thirty seconds.
The explosion occurred between 5:00 and 5:30 AM.  Many people
saw the object in the sky and phoned the Bruce Williams radio
show.  Thanks to Malcolm Hathorne Malcolmh@gte.net


GEORGIA

LA GRANGE -- On November 25, 1999, John Thompson my boy Corey
says at 11:45 p.m last night he saw a spectacular meteor (I
presume). It was travelling BELOW heavy cloud cover going to the
northeast. He was laying on his back in our family room when he
saw it outside behind our house to the northwest. The light
covered 20 degrees of arc in one second and made no sound.  It
was a solid egg shape non-blinking yellowish white light with an
apparent size of a quarter moon. Apparent speed was many times
of an airliner and it seemed to be flying slightly upward. No
trail or sparks were seen.    I'm ruling out an airplane because
of large apparent size, extreme speed and no sonic boom was
heard.  I would guess the cloud ceiling last night was below
20,000 feet.  Thanks to John Thompson.


OHIO SPHERE SHAPED CRAFT

LIMA -- On November 21, 1999, the witnesses were driving
northbound on I-75 towards Lima at mile marker 117, when they
saw a sphere shaped craft moving slowly through a field.   It
was just east of the highway and low to ground in swirling fog.
The craft was randomly shining a light onto the ground below it
at 1:30 AM.   The witness said, "We first noticed the object
when we suddenly saw the ground beneath it light up." The
witnesses pulled their car onto the shoulder of the road and
stopped to observe the object.  Although, there was no visible
light source on the craft, the ground reflected off it's mirror
like surface when the light was activated.  It was difficult to
estimate the exact distance to the craft, but it seemed fairly
close. The craft was moving southbound very slowly. The light
would activate randomly and had no particular pattern or color.
The witness stated, "You could detect movement by the reflection
off of the object while the light was on."

When there was no light from the craft you could barely see it
due to the fog.   Only a faint outline of the top portion was
visible. Traffic was sparse and other cars/trucks passed, but no
one else stopped.  After a few minutes the passenger rolled down
his window. We could hear no sounds but could still see the
object.  It lit up the trees to the north of us and our parking
area. The lights went off and the object left at a moderate
speed north bound over the tree area it had just lit up. "The
fog flowed around the craft as it moved and that was when we got
a good look at it."  There were no windows visible or lights on
its smooth and shiny surface. The object then faded out of view.

COLUMBUS - On November 18, 1999, while on patrol in my police
cruiser I noticed a dark object coming from the east at 1:50 AM.
As it grew closer I noticed it was triangular in shape.  It made
a banking turn and continued north and out of sight. I am a
police officer for a suburb of Columbus, Ohio.

I had a ride-along passenger, who is a reserve officer for
another agency in the area. We were attempting to find a dark
area within the city to observe the  Leonid Meteor Shower as it
was a slow night. We stopped the cruiser, when I noticed an
object coming from east to west just west of downtown Columbus.
At first I assumed it was an airplane. I quickly realized this
was not the case. It appeared similar in shape to an F-117
Stealth Fighter as it approached head-on.  I say this because it
seemed to have similar sharp angled features.  After watching it
for about 7 seconds I told my partner to get out of the car as I
was doing the same.  I pointed in it's direction and said "Do
you see that thing?"  He too spotted the object just before it
began to make a slow right banking turn. As it turned, it showed
it's underside that had some sort of distortion to it almost as
if it were camouflaged.. It appeared to be an equalateral
triangle shape. There were no flashing lights and absolutely no
sound. It appeared to be relatively close to us.  So I tried to
shine my spotlight on it to light it up but it was too far away
to be illuminated by it.

We often have the police helicopter fly by and making a
comparison the craft was much larger in size. After completing a
90 degree turn it leveled off and continued north. It was
traveled slower than the helicopter.  It just seemed to glide to
the north as a stingray does through the ocean. I  called
another officer to meet me and we told him about the incident.
I called the Port Columbus Airport Police and identified myself
to them and asked if there was  anyway they could find out if
the tower had anything unidentified on  their radar. The
dispatcher advised me she'd been in touch with Tracon and they
had nothing unusual on their radar in the time frame I'd
reported. I have seen and F-117 fly and I  know they are quite
loud.  It was close enough to us that we could distinctly see
it's edges and shape although it was not self-illuminated. I am
truly baffled by what we saw. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
NUFORC www.ufocenter.com


OKLAHOMA CITY UFO ON CBS TELEVISION

Jim Hickman recently interviewed Emmy winner weatherman Gary
England, inventor of the Doppler radar who is  his 26th year as
Chief Meteorologist at KWTV. On July 16, 1999, KWTV the CBS
affiliate showed film of a UFO taken by their helicopter crew
during the May 3, 1999, tornado.  He calls it "The Unidentified
Flying Thing" (UFT). Meteorologist Gary England stated that the
film had been analyzed and the object was indeed unknown. There
was other independent ground observation by two other witnesses.
He is also recognized for his development of First Warning' and
'Storm Tracker' technology-- automated severe weather systems
now in use nationwide.  Jim Hickman said, "I think your May 3rd
sighting is very important and needs to be fully investigated,
especially since you have both the great video and two reputable
eyewitnesses to back it up." Gary said: "Thanks Jim, as you are
aware, a government employee captured a similar "unknown" object
on still camera near Newcastle, Ok, also on May 3, 1999."   Jim
stated: "Yes, we have attempted to contact him. I have found
similar objects in my research before, we have been calling them
Roswell Rods for lack of a better name; as you know, they were
first discovered in Roswell, New Mexico back in 1994.  Gary: In
fact, when we were showing our tornado video on the air, he is
the one that spotted the "UFT".  He came to our station and we
went through the video and found the images he had seen at home
on his television.  Jim: It's strange that we are seeing so many
unusual objects here in Oklahoma lately. I don't know if you
remember the storm chaser video taken by Lan Lamphere in Loco,
Oklahoma back a few years ago? I was one of the first
investigators of that sighting. He had 3 videos taken of that
object. He took one and several Oklahoma City news crews
video-taped the others, including your station. NASA has studied
the video and determined it to be an unknown object flying at
24,000 mph. Gary: Yes, and he had nothing but problems since
too!  He presented his May 3 case to scientists at Norman and
they declined to investigate because "before research can begin,
there must be a theory" and no one has any idea what the UFT is.
Jim: Maybe we can get the scientific community interested if
enough reputable people come forward and make reports of what
they see.  If only the scientists would work with us, we have
theories, years of research, just no answers.  Thanks to Jim
Hickman, Aerial Phenomena Research Group - (Video is online at:
http://www.kwtv.com/wx/wxcenter.htm)

CONTRAILS IN OKLAHOMA

ELK CITY -- November 29, 1999, Scarecrow writes, "I observed a
whole sky full of parallel contrails. There were 21 huge lines
in the sky, all parallel. Then there were about 6 contrails
crossing the first at right angles. We drove 75 miles south, and
never even passed half of them.    Of course I stirred up a lot
of excitement since the people there had not heard of the
"contrail" question before. But they became believers, because
it was so obvious. The next morning, I awoke with and still have
a very nasty and acute cough.  My wife and brother-in-law also
came up suddenly ill.  I cannot believe this pattern emerges in
broad daylight for everyone to see, and yet it still is not
getting any real coverage in the media.  About time for a new
wave of unusual Asian flu to hit, isn't it?    Thanks to
Scarecrow and Skywatch -    Scarecrow  "Lions and Tigers and
Grays, Oh My!

scarecrow@colaw.net

Editor's Note:  There are many stories explaining why Air Force
and government aircraft are spraying large areas of the country
with unknown substances.  Some of the best explanations indicate
that some kind of anti-viral, or anti-bacteria spray is being
spread to kill disease or biological warfare agents.


TV'S ROSEANN CLAIMS SHE IS AN ABDUCTEE

Television star RoseAnn on her November 24, 1999, show on
network TV stated she has had  extraterrestrial encounters
repeatedly during her life, which started in  early childhood.
Thus, Roseann joined the growing circle of celebrities, along
with Rosie O'Donnell, Shirley McLaine and former L.A. Times
Editor Phillip  Krapf, who have admitted they have had
encounters with aliens.  Richard Boylan, Ph.D. was interviewed
on the show.

NEVADA AREA 51 VISIT

AREA 51 - August 25, 1999, I had taken my son to Nevada for a
mini road trip we were on the Highway 15 north, when my saw a
dark object flying towards us at 8:45 PM.  I looked up and saw
that it was large and black, with two head lights at an
estimated two arm's length apart.  The weird thing is that while
we driving forward, this object looked like it was coming
towards us at first, then it started moving backwards.  Then all
of a sudden my son asked where did it go.  He said that it just
disappeared.  The next day we drove on the "ET Highway to Rachel
and stayed in the Lil Alien Inn.  My 7 year old son and I got a
glimpse of a small round in circumference, flat on the bottom
craft.  It had a clear dome on top, where you can see the pilot.
The rear of the craft was shaped like a stingray with two wide
pointed ends with one long one in the middle.   The engine was
in the rear and its maneuvers were sharp. It flew low then made
a sharp 360 turn back over the mountain.   Later that night we
met a mother and daughter, and drove 20 miles in land to view
Area 51.  We observed with my binoculars, a spinning, glowing a
red light, that turned to blue, then green then an amber, then
black covering the red and so on in that order.  This object
hovered there doing this in a spinning motion counter clockwise.
Sort of like the way a disco spot light would turn and change
colors on a slide.  Also at this same time we noticed that three
other star like objects were mimicking each other.  The objects
hovered, then descended slowly wavering down behind Bald
Mountain.  A white jeep Cherokee security vehicle with its siren
blasting came out to warn us off of civilian territory.  The
next morning after a sleepless night we saw round objects moving
and what looked like communication.  I stepped down the stairs
and opened the door to my vehicle, when a black helicopter came
swooping up from behind me and almost hit us it was so close and
low.  There was one pilot wearing dark eyeglasses staring at us
intently as he slowly made a left turn in front of us, then
disappeared out of sight.  Thanks to Peijay30.

MEXICAN AIRLINER ENCOUNTERS UFOs

Tom Sheets writes that Tony Loredo, one of our MUFON members,
stated his mother was watching the Spanish TV News on channel 51
in Miami, December 1, 1999, and she saw story about a Mexican
airliner that encountered three UFOs, as if the jet was
surrounded they lost some form of control, maybe instruments,
don't know really, but landed safely.

The newscaster played the taped conversation with the ATC in
tower and she told Tony it was chilling. We don't have any other
info and have checked several sources.  We would appreciate an
update from any of our readers.  It's a Hispanic documentary
show that is shown each evening from 5 to 6:00 PM.  The show is
called  'It Happened This Way'.  Probably a cross between our
'Entertainment Tonight' or '20-20. It is a pot-pouri of events
happening all across Latin America.

On December 2, the Mexican UFO encounter was mentioned again,
saying that the aircrew was being prohibited from speaking to
reporters.  Then they did a story on a real intense UFO flap
occurring over the last few days in Bolivia, in a village called
Cocha Bomba. Thanks to Tom Sheets and Tony Loredo.

CHINA UFO VISIT

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Shanghai appeared convinced on Friday
December 3, 1999, that an unidentified flying object had visited
China's commercial capital.

Usually staid official newspapers insisted Thursday's UFO
sighting was no vision. "UFO darts across the city's skyline,"
screamed a headline in the official Shanghai Daily. UFO appears
in the sky over Shanghai,'' the Wenhui Daily said in a front
page story with color photographs. Nearly 100 people claimed to
have seen a cylindrical object with a flaming orange tail moving
over the western part of the city for about an hour on Thursday
afternoon, the newspapers said. They offered no theories on what
it might have been. The Chinese government is very sensitive to
UFO reports because the outlawed Falun Gong are believers in the
phenomenon and extraterrestrial. Thousands of the groups leaders
have been arrested across China. Only the several million
Christians imprisoned by the government exceed the persecution
of the Falun Gong.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 32

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> (by way of John Hayes <webmaster@ufoin
fo.com>)
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:37:06 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:00:47 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 32


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 32
December 2, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

BIGFOOT SIGHTED IN
RURAL PENNSYLVANIA

      Long-time UFO researcher Stan Gordon is
investigating a Bigfoot sighting that took place in
rural western Pennsylvania on either October 21
or October 28, 1999.
      According to Gordon, a couple was driving
through a wooded area just outside of Pleasant
Unity, Pennsylvania (population 900) when the wife
spotted "a hair-covered manlike creature, with long
arms extending below the knees."
      "The creature was stooped over, and its arms
were swinging back and forth very quickly.  No facial
features could be determined.  The witness estimated
that the creature was about six feet tall, but would have
been much taller if it had stood erect.  The hair, which
spread over the entire body, was smooth and colored
reddish-brown in color.  There did appear to be an area
of larger bushy hair on its ankles and legs towards
the feet."
      "The creature appeared to be very broad across the
shoulders (about three feet).  The most outstanding
physical feature was the head.  The head was
described as very large, and it seemed to slope back into
a cone shape.  It was about 18 inches (36 centimeters)
from the jaw to the peak of the head.  The witness
indicated that a neck was not apparent."
      "The husband stated, 'It seemed to be in a hurry.
It looked human but it wasn't.  What struck me was how
fast it was, and how it crossed the road, and didn't
hesitate to go into the woods on the other side.  A
human would probably hesitate and go looking for
footing and watching their step, but this thing didn't.'"
      Pleasant Unity, Pa. is at the intersection of
Routes 130 and 981 about 40 miles (64 kilometers)
southeast of Pittsburgh.  Gordon stated that this
area of the Allegeheny Mountains has had many
Bigfoot sightings, dating back to the first reported
sighting in 1931.  (Many thanks to Stan Gordon for
this news story.)

V-SHAPED UFO SEEN BY A
FAMILY IN WEST VIRGINIA

      On Sunday, November 14, 1999, Michele W.
and her children were driving on Interstate Highway
I-64, and, just before reaching the small city of
Lewisburg, West Virginia (population 3,598), she
spotted an unusual object in the sky.
      "While traveling on I-64 eastbound, I saw a
quickly-moving V-shaped craft fly soundlessly
over the road and  disappear over the mountain,"
Michele reported, "I saw it approaching from the
right side of the road (i.e., south--J.T.)  And by the
time I yelled to the kids, 'Do you see what I see?'
it had disappeared over the mountains."
      "The lights were red and steady, not blinking,"
she added, "It seemed like it was flying low, but it
was completely soundless.  Did anyone else see
this?"
      Lewisburg, W.V. is on Highway 60 approximately
104 miles (166 kilometers) southeast of Charleston,
the state capital.  (Email Interview)

TWO ORANGE UFOs SEEN
IN FOXTON, NEW ZEALAND

      On Saturday, November 6, 1999, at 5:30 p.m.,
a New Zealand motorist spotted two glowing
orange UFOs low in the sky.  The sighting took
place 10 miles (16 kilometers) north of Foxton,
a small city on the North Island about 80 miles
(128 kilometers) north of Wellington.
     The witness told ufologist Ross Dowe of
Australia's National Space Centre that "whilst
travelling up north, 10 miles from Foxton, we
saw an orange light above another.  The top one
was bigger than the other at the bottom.  The
lights were so close together that the glow
around them made them look like a round line.
I was staring at these lights for about 20 seconds
and then they disappeared.  They came back about
one minute later but quite a distance from where I
first saw them.  Then they disappeared for seven
seconds and came back for 15 seconds, then
disappeared all together."
      "The evening was perfectly calm.  There were a
few clouds," the witness stated, adding that at
first he thought they were milking shed lights,
"but they were too high."  He then thought they
might be lights from RZNAF Ohakea, a nearby
Royal New Zealand Air Force base.  "But we were
too far away to see the (air base) lights.  I just
can't explain what I saw."  (Many thanks to Ross
Dowe of Australia's National Space Centre for
forwarding this report.)

GREEN DOME-SHAPED UFO
SIGHTED IN SHROPSHIRE

      On Thursday, November 18, 1999, at 9:45 p.m.,
Nicholas G. spotted a UFO from the window of his
home in Bridgnorth, Shropshire, UK.
      "Being bored with the program on TV, I went
to the large window, drew back the curtain and
opened the window.  The sky was clear as I began
to search for meteors, hoping to see stragglers
from the night before (the annual Leonid meteor
storm--J.T.), the display we could not see here in
UK because of cloud."
      "My window faces east, and suddenly there
appeared from the ground up an enormous dome
of green light.  I estimate that it had been about
one mile (1.6 kilometers) in diameter and about
half a mile (800 meters) away."
      "It remained visible for about one to two
seconds, while in the room behind was the noise
of all the electrical equipment going off and then
resetting itself.  The electricity supply for all of
Bridgnorth had been lost."
      Afterward, Nick contacted a friend in Hilton,
five miles east of Bridgnorth, and asked if that
town had lost its electrical power, as well.  "He,
like myself, has one of those digital bedroom
clocks which reset to zero on the slightest blip."
      The friend told Nick there had been no
power outages in Hilton.
      "All I can say is that it was a strange
experience," Nick added.
      Bridgnorth is located about 45 miles
(72 kilometers) west of Birmingham.  (Email
Interview)

UFOs REPORTED IN THREE
AUSTRALIAN STATES

      On Tuesday, November 23, 1999, at about
9:30 p.m., Australia's National Space Centre
"received a flood of calls...from New South Wales
and Victoria (states) about a cylindrical or missile-
shaped object which appeared to break up."
      According to ufologist Ross Dowe of the
National Space Centre, "It went from west to east
and there were some strange illuminations behind
it."
      "They say it was dark grey with some sort of
fireball behind and some other strange reflections
in the front, as well."  (Many thanks to Ross Dowe
for this report.)
      In Victoria state, radio station 3AW stated,
"Numerous sightings were reported at Brisbane
and Canberra (Australia's capital--J.T.) and on to
Melbourne."
      "A witness stated he saw the object break up
into 30 separate objects, 'fly' independently of each
other and then 'depart.'  The colour of the object
was a red-orange colour and (it) had a flame-like
tail."  (Many thanks to Todd Lemire and Errol
Bruce-Knapp for this report.)
      On Friday, November 26, 1999, a large,
bright green UFO composed of four cylindrical
components was sighted at 8:05 p.m. by several
witnesses in Labrador, Queensland, Australia.
      A woman named Tracy "observed it for 10
minutes or more.  Tracy said that at first she
could see cloud cover and she thought it was a
light show" but then realized that "the object was
above the clouds and not a ground-based light
source."
      She described the UFO's components as
"long tubes like a flouro (flourescent) light tube,"
adding, "The tubes were positioned alongisde
each other about 30 centimeters (15 inches)
apart.  All four tubes moved in the same direction,
easterly out to sea."
      "It was astounding.  It was fantastic," Tracy
reported, "We all stood there, mouths open, in
amazement at what we were looking at."  (Many
thanks to Diane Harrison of Australian UFO
Research Network for this report.)

ANOTHER UFO SIGHTING
IN SARDINIA

      On Saturday, November 27, 1999, at 10:25 p.m.,
three UFOs passed over the town of Sorso on
Sardinia, a large island in the Mediterranean Sea
belonging to Italy.
      Witnesses in Sorso saw "two large pulsating
lights of a yellowish-white color, followed by another
flying multicolored light."  The slow-moving UFOs
"were seen for several minutes by residents of Sorso.
The formation was moving slowly from west to east,
crossing a clear star-filled sky."  (Grazie a Antonio
Cuccu e Alfredo Lissoni di Centro Ufologico
Nazionale d'Italia per questo rapporto.)

PHANTOM DANCERS SEEN
BY HUNDREDS IN IRAQ

      "Ghost stories are pretty common around the
old Iraqi city of Haditha.  Still, when the ghosts
start dancing naked in front of oncoming motorists,
it creates quite a stir."
      According to the Iraqi weekly newspaper,
Al-Alwan, "drivers passing through the Horan
Valley outside the town of Haditha, 135 miles
(216 kilometers) northeast of Baghdad, were
reporting that 'ghosts appeared next to the bridge,
naked and doing some acrobatic moves.'"
      "The ghosts were causing the drivers to
panic, the paper said."
      "Alwan quoted motorist Shawki Sabar as
saying, 'they were almost human--although I
could not concentrate on their looks because
I was so scared and it was dark.'"
      "The ghosts were so lifelike that one
motorist thought he'd hit a person and
reported the accident to police."  (See the
weekly newspaper Al-Alwan for August 21,
1999.  See also the Charlotte, N.C. Observer
for August 22, 1999, "Iraqi drivers see 'dancing
ghosts' on road."  Many thanks to Lou Farrish
of UFO Newsclipping Service for this news story.)
(Editor's Note:  Haditha is the legendary
birthplace of Lilitu, the Sumerian goddess
of darkness.)
(Editor's Comment:  First this, and next that
weird 12-hour dance opera planned for the Great
Pyramid on New Year's Eve.  Is this the
Millenium?  Or the Second Coming of Ginger
Rogers?)

PROTEST GROUPS RIOT AT
UN TRADE CONFERENCE

      Twenty-six thousand protesters jammed
the streets of Seattle, Washington state, USA
on Tuesday, November 30, 1999, forcing a one-
day postponement of the World Trade Organization
(WTO) conference.  A second day of protests on
Wednesday, December 1, 1999 resulted in the
arrest of 400 demonstrators.
      It was the biggest anti-UN demonstration
in the USA since the militia gathering in Lansing,
Michigan on October 24, 1998.
      At 5 p.m., following heavy rioting outside the
convention center, Seattle mayor Paul Schell
"declared a civil emergency Tuesday and imposed
an all-night curfew on downtown Seattle."
      Gary Locke, governor of Washington state,
"called up two special units of the (state's)
National Guard trained in crowd control."  The
troops were deployed in downtown Seattle
on Wednesday, December 1, 1999.
      The curfew area included all of the downtown
area "from the Space Needle (on Broad Street--J.T.)
south to the Kingdome (on Fourth Avenue) and
from Puget Sound east to Interstate (Highway) 5."
Fifty blocks of downtown Seattle were declared
a "no-protest zone."
      Trouble began on Monday, November 29, when
a handful of demonstrators vandalized a McDonald's
fast-food restaurant near the convention center.
      On Tuesday morning, "a small group of men,
dressed in black clothing and masks and ignoring
cries of 'Shame on you!' from other protestors,
smashed windows and spray-painted graffiti at
downtown stores like Nordstrom, Niketown,
Starbucks and the Gap."
      "'Stop the WTO!' protestors shouted as they
blocked half a dozen streets leading to the center."
      "Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and
other scheduled speakers for opening day were
unable to get through the crowd, which in many
cases blocked intersections by linking hands or
lying down on the street."
      "Seattle police officers, reinforced by state and
suburban police and FBI agents, fought back with
clouds of tear gas, pepper spray and rubber-like
pellets fired from rifles."
      "The morning crowds, estimated at more than
7,000 by FBI officials were swelled just after noon
when another 20,000 marchers organized by the
AFL-CIO paraded peacefully through downtown
Seattle."
      Also trapped in his hotel room was UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who cancelled
his opening day speech.  "In his prepared text,
he said, 'Unless we convince developing countries
that globalization really does benefit them, the
backlash against it will become irresistible.  That
would be a tragedy for the developing world.'"
      Prior to the march, the AFL-CIO members
"packed Memorial Stadium, next to the Space
Needle, to hear anti-WTO speakers," including
Teamsters union presidents James Hoffa Jr. and
Sierra Club president Carl Pope.
      "To thunderous applause, Jay Mazur, president
of the Needletrades, Industrail and Textile Employees
(union), said, 'The rules of this new global economy
have been rigged against workers, and we're not
going to play by them any more.'"
      Early Tuesday afternon, conference chairman
Mike Moore, former prime minister of New Zealand,
"announced that the opening ceremonies would be
put off.  But he vowed that trade talks would go on."
      On Wednesday, "by nightfall 400 demonstrators
were in custody, many at a former Navy brig.  Police,
who were stunned by the ferocity of the protests,
fired curtains of tear gas around the hotel where
President Clinton spoke Wednesday."
      At 5 p.m., Mayor Schell "announced another
all-night curfew...There were reports of at least
40 injuries, mostly minor."
      Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, the
first troops of a United Nations army of occupation
landed in Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone, a
small nation in western Africa.
      "The first wave of a 6,000-person UN force, the
largest UN peacekeeping mission in Africa in two
years, arrived in Sierra Leone to help restore peace
after an eight-year civil war.  It is seen as a litmus
test of the world community's readiness to act in
African conflicts--especially if fighting resumes."
      "'The UN force will stay in Sierra Leone until the
Security Council decides otherwise, and until its
mandate is fulfilled,' UN special envoy Francis Okelo
told the all-Kenyan force."
      "That commitment could be tested.  Rebel leader
Foday Sankoh opposes the deployment of UN forces
in the West African country.  'It's up to Sierra Leoneans
to solve their own problems,' he said, accusing the (UN)
peacekeepers of living 'on blood money.'"  (See the
newspapers USA Today for December 2, 1999,
"400 arrested; curfew holds," page 1A and "Seattle
bears brunt of violence," page 3A and December 1, 1999
"Seattle tension mounts," page 1A, "'Stop the WTO':
Protestors say goal achieved," page 19A and "Sierra
Leone Conflict," page 8A.  Also the Duluth, Minn.
News-Tribune for December 1, 1999, "Chaos delays
trade talks," page 1.)
(Editor's Comment: Let's hope Seattle quiets down
before Kofi Annan sends his Blue Helmets to occupy
Pioneer Square.)

Y2K: NEW WORLD ORDER ON
A BUILDUP TO D-DAY

      With only thirty days to go until New Year's Eve,
stories of government preparation for a Y2K event
are appearing in many media sources.
      "Contingency plans are now in place throughout
the country (USA), from the Pentagon to Seattle,
aimed at responding to technology failures caused
by Y2K."
      "Presidential Decision Directive 67, as the order
is known, could be triggered by an event worse than
what's expected from the Y2K problem and comparable
to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, according to
Energy Department emergency planning documents."
      "The Treasury Department's front yard is now home
to a gas-fired green generator the size of a small
mobile home.  It will provide backup power for the
Treasury Department's intelligence operations, its
communications networks and the Secret Service
command center, said Treasury spokeswoman
Una Gallagher."
      "Contingency planners focusing on the Y2K
problem are busy all over Washington (D.C.).
They are refining phone lists for calling in workers
during an emergency, lining up food, flashlights
and battery-operated radios, making backup copies
of crucial files and in some cases readying other
building sites if their headquarters are disabled."
      "The Energy Department, which will run an
emergency operations center with the electric
power industry over the New Year's weekend at
its downtown Washington headquarters, has
readied another building in Germantown, Md.
(Maryland) if needed."
      "Similar preparations are underway across
the country at 42 Energy Department sites
concerned with nuclear fuels and weapons,
including the Pantex facility near Amarillo
(Texas)."
      "The department plans to halt ALL shipments
of nuclear materials from at least December 28
to January 4...and will suspend handling of
nuclear materials at several of its plants." (See
the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune for November 22,
1999, "Y2K review leads to cyber terrorism defense
upgrade," pages 5A and 6A.)
(Editor's Comments:  Readers, this is the first I've
heard of a week-long "state of emergency" related
to Y2K.  If the Energy Department is ending all
road and rail transportation of nuclear materials,
the Y2K event must be serious, indeed.)
      Meanwhile, reports of strange military activity
that may be related to Operation Abacus continue
to surface.
      On Tuesday, November 23, 1999, a man
telephoned the offices of Newswatch magazine
and said he had seen unidentified troops with blue
helmets and wearing woodland camoflauge battle
dress uniforms (BDUs) supervising the offloading
of white Humvees at a dock in Corpus Christi,
Texas (population 257,453).  According to
publisher Rev. David J. Smith, "He was so excited
he was hyperventilating."
      The following day, Wednesday, November 24,
1999, police in Temple, Texas (population 46,109)
received a report that a bomb had been placed
aboard a Greyhound bus.  The bus driver was
contacted by radio and was asked to pull off
Interstate Highway I-35 at the main exit.
      When the bus pulled to a stop, it was "surrounded
by military troops in woodland camo" who emerged
from unmarked "white vans and utility vehicles" while
"several black helicopters circled overhead."
      This event was reported in the local daily newspaper
in Temple and nowhere else.
      On Friday, November 12, 1999, two truck drivers
met at a cafe in Lafayette, Louisiana (population 94,440),
a city on Interstate Highway I-10 about 55 miles
(88 kilometers) west of Baton Rouge.  One driver, an
independent hauler, said, "Wait till you see what
I'm carrying."
      Opening the trailer doors, the driver showed his
friend hundreds of unmarked boxes.  He then opened
one box and displayed a bright yellow rectangular
sign with the legend CITY CLOSED - MARTIAL LAW.
The driver's destination was New Orleans.
      On September 22, 1999, a truck driver hauling
freight for a nationally-known retailer pulled into the
weight stop off Interstate Highway I-90 in Conneaut,
Ohio (population 13,241), a small town about 78
miles (125 kilometers) east of Cleveland.  The weight
inspector asked what he was hauling.  "I don't know,"
the driver said, "I just had orders to pick up this
trailer."
      "Let's have a look at the cargo," the inspector said.
      When they opened the trailer's rear doors, they
found hundreds of identical unmarked cardboard boxes.
The inspector asked what was inside the boxes, and
the driver said he didn't know.
      Yielding to curiosity, the inspector opened one
"and found about a hundred plastic signs, each one
about two feet by three feet," rectanguilar and bright
yellow, with the legend THIS CITY UNDER MARTIAL
LAW, and in smaller print, a reference to federal
legislation.  The driver had been on his way to
Cleveland.  (Email Interviews)
(Editor's Comment:  The mystery cargo stuff sounds
like an urban legend, a variation on a typical "Harry
the Truck Driver" story.  On the other hand, the
details differ slightly in each report.  The whole Y2K
thing just gets weirder and weirder every day.)

from the UFO Files...

1901: ARIZONA'S AMAZING
           INVISIBLE MAN

      The old Territorial Prison at Yuma, Arizona has
witnessed many a strange tale, but none quite as
strange as that of John Boot, "the invisible man."
      Boot is usually overshadowed by his partner in
crime, Pearl Hart, sometimes called "the last of
the stagecoach robbers" or "the Arizona Bandit
Queen."
      Boot's actual name was John J. Bowen, and
he was born in Ashburnham, Massachusetts, a
tiny town just northwest of Fitchburg, in 1874.
When John was ten, his family relocated to Kansas
City, and it was here that he met 18-year-old Pearl
Hart in the summer of 1898.
      By 1899, the two lovers found themselves in
an Arizona mining camp.  Tiring of kitchen work,
Pearl "convinced him there was more money in
robbing stagecoaches than in mining."
      "On May 30, 1899, Peal and Boot held up
the Benson-Globe stage.  As Boot collected the
loot from the three passengers...Pearl, her long
brunette locks stuffed under a hat, trained a
six-gun on the driver and the victims."  They
netted a total of $431.
      Their bandit careers proved short-lived, however.
Days later, the pair were arrested at Poston's
Butte, just outside Florence, Arizona by Sheriff
William Truman.
      "At Florence, however, there were no
accomodations for women, so Pearl was taken
to the Pima County Jail in Tucson to await trial.
She remained there only overnight.  The next day,
the turnkey discovered that Pearl had cut a hole
through a thin partition and escaped."
      "On the same night, John Boot, in some
mysterious manner, disappeared from his cell
in Florence."
      True enough!  The deputy, bringing Bowen
the evening meal, was stunned to find the barred
door locked and the cell empty.  He quickly
opened the door and looked around, testing
the bars on the windows.  But there was no
trace of Bowen.  Leaving the cell door wide open,
he ran to fetch Sheriff Truman.
      But Pearl and John's luck ran out again.
They were captured two weeks later near Deming,
New Mexico by a posse out hunting for cattle
rustlers.
      Both were convicted of robbery.  John was
sentenced to 35 years in Yuma.  Pearl drew a
five-year sentence and immediately became a
celebrity upon her arrival at the prison.
      "Pearl was wearing tight jeans, a man's blouse
and was smoking a cigarette, all three of which
were considered unladylike" back in 1899.  "By
contrast, Boot was quiet, well-spoken and seemed
to sigh with relief when he was separated from his
mistress."
      As the only female inmate in Yuma, Pearl had
a custom-made uniform hand-sewed by the wife of
the warden, Captain F.S. Ingalls.  "Sunday visitors
asked her to pose for pictures in the jail yard, and
she always obliged."
      She also caused Capt. Ingalls no end of
trouble.  "One of her favorite pastimes was to call
out through the bars of her cell for some man to
come and join her, an invitation which so upset
most of the inmates 'that they would howl like
coyotes all during the night,'" Capt. Ingalls said.
      The prison at Yuma is built right up against
steep granite bluffs on the banks of the Colorado
River.  "Boot was a model prisoner.  He responded
to orders with alacrity.  The only thing he volunteered
about his background was that his name was not
Boot, and his accent indicated that he came from
somewhere in New England."
      "Then one day (in 1901), a little less than two
years after he had been admitted, he vanished.  He
had become so unobtrusive that no one missed him
between breakfast and the customary bunk check
at night."
      "No one ever saw him again."
      One prisoner told a bizarre tale of how he'd
seen Bowen near the vertical granite bluff.  He said
Bowen had stood with his palms facing the rock
and had made an unusual humming noise.  Then
he stepped forward--and vanished.
      The other inmate hobbled over to the spot as
fast as his leg irons would allow.  He thought he
had seen "Boot" walk into solid rock!  But Capt.
Ingalls dismissed the man's story, noting that
"the fellow is addicted to the liquor habit."
      There are two curious postscripts to the story
of Arizona's "invisible man."
      In 1939, an American named Elijah Bowen
turned up in Madras, India.  He was searching, as
many tourists do, for the Hidden Masters.  He was
interned by the British at the same time Mohandas
Gandhi and Jawarhalal Nehru were arrested.  And
where was Mr. Bowen from?  None other than
Ashburnham, Massachusetts, USA.
      In 1899, right after the robbery, John and Pearl
hid out on Poston's Butte during an unusual (for
Arizona, anyway) three-day downpour.  That
particular butte has a strange history.
      It was purchased by Charles Poston, one of
Arizona's earliest pioneers.  "In 1863, Poston
assumed his duties as Superintendent of Indian
Affairs for Arizona, an office creted especially for
him; the following year he was elected delegate to
Congress in the first territorial election.  After
completing his term in Congress, he traveled
extensively in Europe and Asia and returned to
Florence, Ariz. in 1878.  While in India he became
a sun worshipper and upon his return built a road,
costing several thousand dollars, to the top of this
butte, which he called 'Parsee Hill.' and where he
erected a pyre of continuous fire as a temple to
the sun.  After burning for several months, the fire
died and the project became Poston's Folly."
      Two men forty years apart.  The same last name.
 From the same tiny town in Massachusetts.  And
both with strange unexplained linkages to India.
There's a mystery here for anyone who'd care to
solve it.  (See The Encyclopedia of American Crime
by Carl Sifakis, Facts on File Inc., New York, N.Y.
1982, page 317.  Also Pioneer Days in Arizona by
Francis Cummins Lockwood, Macmillan, New York,
N.Y., 1932.  Also Lost Legends of the West by
Brad Williams and Choral Pepper, Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, NewYork, N.Y., 1970, pages 30 to 35.)

      Well, that's it for this week.  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."  Have an
enjoyable week.

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan
Productions, all rights reserved.  Eaders 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.
*********************************************************

IMPORTANT Please Read:
======================

The Hunger Site
---------------

http://www.thehungersite.com

Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the
deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site
and clicking on a button you can donate free food.

There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation -
the food is paid for by sponsors.

Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference!

If you have a web site download a banner and give a link!
*********************************************************

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:17:59 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:11:16 -0500
Subject: 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: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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.

So some talent there, but apparently since dissipated on sex, drugs,
rock-and-roll ... and then debunking.

Thank you for your honesty here.  Your absence of any formal post-high-school
science training is obvious from your frequently mushy-headed posts dealing
with scientific topics.
<....>

 >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.

But do you know enough to understand the answers?  That takes some sort of
formal scientific training.  From your posts here, it seems you don't
understand much of what you ramble on about.

 >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.)

As will be clear soon, his language is the same as some of the experts
themselves who refer to the extra-solar planets as "confirmed."  His
conclusions are also the same as many of the astronomers, who comment that
the results suggest that solar systems are probably dirt common.  E.g., one
quote by Geoff Marcy, one of the pioneers astronomers in the detection of
extra-solar planets, was that these early results suggest that there are
probably hundreds of millions of earth-like planets in our galaxy.

 >>>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

Thank you for this very useful web site, which is of
Observatoire de Paris, and maintained by astrophysicist Jean
Schneider. I just checked it out and if you go to link 2 titled
"Extrasolar Planets Catalog," updated just last week (Nov. 23),
you will find the following interesting catalog listings by
Schneider.

The first list is of 38 bodies  which Schneider calls "CONFIRMED
planets/brown dwarfs around main sequence stars."  (10 of these
may be large enough to be brown dwarfs.)  The second list is of
2 "CONFIRMED planets around pulsars."  That's 40 orbiting bodies
in all which Schneider calls "CONFIRMED," and dating all within
the last 3 years.

Perhaps this helps explain Mallon's use of the phrase "the
sudden profusion of CONFIMED planet detections?"

List 4 is of 14 other bodies which Schneider calls "Unconfirmed,
doubtful or unpublished objects."  Seven of these he refers to
as "to be confirmed" (suggesting the data is good but remains to
be corroborated) and 2 are of unpublished data.  Another catalog
of 21 stars is listed as "no planet found" using present
techniques.  If you further check this list out, the stars are
all of very similar mass and size to the sun.

 >Does this site strike you as _the_ definitive word on the >
subject, as Mallon seems to suggest?

Gee, Dennis, what a dilemma for a science writer!  Mallon could
either use the description of an astrophysicist and an expert on
the subject as to whether the objects are considered "confirmed"
or not. (And Schneider isn't the only astronomer using that word
-- see below.)  Or he could use the opinion of a rabble rouser
who never went beyond a high-school education in
science.  Which would you choose?

 >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."

Perhaps from some of the involved scientists themselves who use
exactly the word "confirmed" to describe planetary detection by
another technique?  How about the fact that the number of such
such planets or brown dwarves has gone from zero to about 40 in
only three years?  Maybe that has something to do with the
"sudden profusion" part.

 >It certainly can't be based on the above observation that "No clear
 >signatures of such planets have been detected."

No clear signature of such planets have been detected using a
completely different technique covering a different realm of
planetary distances for a lesser period of time on far fewer
candidate stars.  Do you understand this?  I doubt it.  Perhaps
we should go to the Web links themselves to see exactly what is
being said here.

First of all, you are quoting from a short abstract.  But even
from the abstract we are told that the gravitational lensing
technique as applied so far is only capable of detecting
Jupiter-size or larger planets in the realm of 1 to 4 AU (1 AU =
distance of Earth to the Sun).

In contrast, the radial velocity technique, which has been used
to detect those 30 or so other Jupiter-size bodies, works best
within 1 AU (because the gravitational wobble due to pull of the
planet is more noticable).  If you go to Schneider's table, of
20 such bodies with masses up to about 3 Jupiters, 15 are
calculated to lie within 1 AU of the star.  So the techniques
are working in mostly different distance realms.  Only about a
quarter of the objects found by radial velocity would overlap
with the distances that work best with microlensing.    When you
further consider that approximately a third to half of the stars
examined in detail by radial velocity seem to have Jupiter-like
orbiting bodies, that means that the number of bodies that might
be detectable by microlensing in its distance realm of 1 to 4 AU
drops to maybe 10-15%.   (That means that of the 20 stars
examined by microlensing, only 2 or 3 might be expected to have
Jupiter-size planets from 1-4 AU.)

Now, what does the abstract on microlensing say?  "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."

So results from microlensing suggest fewer than 33% of the stars
have Jupiter mass planets in the range of 1-4 AU.  Results from
radial velocity suggest that fewer than 15% of the systems will
have them.  Stacy interprets the null results of microlensing as
invalidating radial velocity, whereas the two techniques are
actually in basic agreement with one another.

Our own gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn also lie beyond the 4
AU outer limit described in the abstract.  Jupiter is at 5.2 AU
and Saturn at 9.5 AU.  Apparently they wouldn't have been
detected either.  The microlensing technique is looking for gas
giants in the orbital realm of Earth and Mars and the asteroids,
and so far hasn't found anything.

The reasons it is so difficult to find planets using
microlensing become clearer if you follow their suggested link
for further information:

http://www.astro.rug.nl/~planet

 >From there go to the link under the heading "Extra-solar planets
Introduction: The search for extra-solar planets by microlensing" ,

http://www.astro.rug.nl/~planet/planeet.html

Which has the following information:

***"The planetary anomaly, or extra wiggle in the light curve,
will last only a few hours to a few days, and so observing teams
like PLANET must be constantly vigilant, with astronomers on
watch around the globe, in order to observe the effect. ***

In other words, unless you happen to be watching at the right
moment, the blip in the light intensity curve indicating a large
planet there would go completely unnoticed.  At the distances
from the stars they are looking at, orbital periods of these
planets would be typically several years, meaning there is less
than a 1 in a 1000 chance of catching one of these events on any
given star on any given observational night.  Given limited
optimal observation time, vagaries of the weather, and the fact
that half of these stars will typically not be visible in the
night sky, there are probably only half a dozen at a time out of
20 which can be observed, and they must be observed
continuously.  That means the cooperation of at least a half
dozen telescopes scattered around the globe to maintain the
monitoring, which must be done over a period of years.

So the negative results on only 20 stars so far can hardly be
considered surprising.  The gravitational lensing technique is
extremely observationally intensive, much more so than the
radial velocity technique used to detect the other bodies.  I
might point out that Geoff Marcy and Paul Butler, so far the
champions at detecting these bodies using radial velocity,
examined over 120 candidate stars for 15 year period before
announcing their first discovery in 1996. They were working from
a much bigger data base and for a longer time.

"Planetary wiggles in microlensing light curves are caused by
the same gravitational effects that create the much more
dramatic caustic crossings that can occur in double-star lenses,
but are more subtle. ***The effect will be largest for planets
orbiting a few to several AU from their mother lenses. (1 AU =
the distance from the Earth to our own Sun.)***

Again, the technique works in a mostly different realm of
distances than the radial velocity technique.  The microlensing
technique at present might not even find Jupiter or Saturn in
our own solar system, which lie at distances apparently outside
the optimal range for microlensing detection.  It might,
however, detect a few of the bodies greater than 1AU found by
radial velocity.

"In our own Solar System, several planets are in these kinds of
orbits."

Earth, Mars, and maybe Jupiter

"The effect will also be larger for larger planets. The smaller
the planet, the smaller the defect in the main lensing pattern
and so the smaller the chances that the background star will be
affected by the planet. Astronomers estimate that ***several
tens of microlensing events constantly monitored with good
precision in order to see  the effects of a planet like our own
Jupiter, even if every distant lens has a Jupiter orbiting
it.***"

So far, there haven't been the resources to constantly monitor
tens of planets to find a Jupiter-size planet within a few AU of
the parent star, even if every one of them had such a planet.

" These are the planets that the PLANET collaboration is most
likely to find with its current strategy. (Planets found by the
radial velocity technique, like that around the star 51 Peg --
the first CONFIRMED extra-solar planet discovered -- are much
closer to their mother suns and so probably have a different
history from our own Jupiter.) "

Again, microlensing operates in a mostly different realm of
distances from the radial velocity technique, as the astronomers
point out.  So the null results so far obtained from
microlensing have little to do with the positive results that
have come from radial velocity.

Please notice that these astronomers also use the word
"CONFIRMED" to describe the planetary detection results of the
radial velocity technique, Stacy be damned.

The statement also suggests that there may be two fundamental
types of solar systems with different histories.  One type would
be more like our solar system, with gas giants further out.  The
other has gas giants much closer in to the parent star.

The ability of the microlensing technique to detect something
like Jupiter or Saturn at their distances isn't entirely clear.

"Several hundreds of microlensing events must be monitored with
even higher precision before Earth-mass planets could be
expected to be detected with microlensing; this may become
possible in the next few years, but is currently out of reach. "

It'll take a lot of bucks, a lot of time, relentless
observation, and the cooperation of a lot of observatories if
the technique has any hope of detecting Earth-mass planets.

 >Moreover, we're  talking something like 32 observations over
four years

More like 40 over 3-4 years, but who's counting?  The pace of
announcements has also been accelerating since then as more and
more astronomers turn their energies to discovering planets and
as more periodic patterns are extracted from previously
collected data

 >, or eight observations on average a year,

More like a dozen a year, or one a month.

 >only one of which has been confirmed by direct observation.

According to the actual astronomical experts who put up these
two cited Web pages, some 30-40 some bodies have been
"confirmed" using only the radial velocity technique.

"Confirmed" in scientific parlance generally means the
observation has been corroborated in some form, usually by some
other group(s) repeating the same observation.  Furthermore, no
plausible alternative explanation for the data has been
proferred that might explain it in terms of some other
phenomenon, instrument artifact, systematic error, etc.

What Stacy calls "direct observation" is also a matter of
semantics.  What is being labeled as "direct observation" is
really transit of the suspected planet as it passes between the
Earth and the parent star.  This causes a very slight dip in the
star's intensity as some small fraction of its light is blocked.
The presence of a planet is determined indirectly from the data,
just as it is using the radial velocity technique.

"Direct observation," at least to my way of thinking, would mean
taking a photo of the planet as distinctly separate from the
star, rather than inferring its presence by periodic changes in
spectral or light intensity data.  It's the difference between
taking an actual picture of someone vs. measuring the brightness
of their shadow.

 >That's a profusion?

To go from zero "confirmed" extra-solar planets to several dozen
in only the last 3 years?  Yes, the would certainly qualify as a
"profusion" of discovery.  Maybe Stacy could point to some other
period in astronomical history when humanity has been
discovering new planets at the rate of one a month?

 >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.

More than three years ago, there was no evidential consensus for extra-solar
planets .  Now we have a general consensus among astronomers that the
evidence is very strong for several dozen such bodies. That is indeed
"sudden."

 >>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.

Since when did the scientific world appoint you the word Czar?
You don't have the slightest idea of what you are talking about.
If you bothered to read your own Web links, you will see some of
the astronomers speaking of how the radial velocity technique
ALONE has resulted in several dozen "confirmed" observations of
large orbiting extra-solar planets or brown dwarfs.  "Confirmed"
means the observations have been repeated.  That means they
aren't data flukes, nor has anybody come up with some
alternative explanation for the results that can explain them
away as an artifact of the technique.

 >>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.

My beef is with you, who constantly mouths off on all sorts of
issues of which you have minimal comprehension.  You even admit
not reading Mallon's article, yet you trash the contents, which
you haven't read.  You quote from Web links, but obviously
haven't read them closely, or lack the basic science background
to properly understand them.

 >He's the one who used the word "confirmed," not me.

Uh, Dennis, read, the Web pages, where the scientists there also
used "confirmed."

Why don't you e-mail them and berate them about their improper
use of the English language?

 >Wilford, writing in the NY Times, used
 >the words indirect observation and direct observation, which
 >speak to the issue.

What issue is that?  All I see is another science writer placing
his own interpretation on the significance of the data.  Can
Stacy explain to us why Wilford's spin is _necessarily_ better
than Mallon's or of astronomers whom Mallon quotes?

Basically I see this as nothing more than a pointless debate in
semantics as to what is meant by "confirmed" and such things as
"direct" and "indirect" observation.  These words do not have
absolute meanings and reasonable people can disagree as to what
they do mean.

Wilford's article can be found at the Marcy/Butler Web page:
http://www.physics.sfsu.edu/~gmarcy/planetsearch/planetsearch.html

Go to:

http://astron.berkeley.edu/~gmarcy/hd/nytimes.html

Wilford does indeed refer to radial velocity as indirect
measurement and transit occultation as direct.  He also speaks
of this somehow being the first confirmation of the existence of
extra-solar planets which had previously been "detected"
indirectly by  the radial velocity technique.  However, consider
this paraphrase:

"Dr. Paul Butler of the Carnegie Institution in Washington, who
collaborates with Marcy, said that not only did the new findings
confirm the presence of extrasolar planets by independent
means..."

Again, in scientific parlance, this means the previous discovery
was ALSO corroborated by a second line of evidence, not that the
first line of evidence (radial velocity) was doubted.  In fact,
if you read the article, it was the radial velocity results that
were used to predict when to look for the planetary transit.

 >>>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....

 >>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.

Mallon's point is no different than that of a lot of astronomers
engaged in the search.   Solar systems are dirt common.  They
aren't some fluke.  There are probably a lot of Sun-like solar
systems and Earth-like planets out there.

 >>What they do demonstrate is that solar systems are extremely
 >>common. ...

 >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.

Butler and Marcy, for one, looked at 120.  I don't know how
complete their data is on all 120 stars.  The list posted by
Schneider has about 75 stars on which there is good data, about
30 of which have orbiting bodies that are smaller than brown
dwarfs or planetary "gas giants" like Jupiter, about 10 of which
seem to be brown dwarf in size, several more candidates which
may be "confirmed" soon, and 20 or so in which nothing has been
found.  Thus so far roughly 40% of the examined stars (almost
all dwarf stars like our sun), have been found to have gas
giants.

 >>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....

 >>Thanks, David, I knew that already. Mallon himself should have
 >>said as much, and perhaps he did, not having seen the article.

It's comments like that which have people on the list shaking
their heads in utter disbelief.  Even though you admit not
reading the article, you attack the man for not writing
something which he may actually have written.  Sheesh!

 >>>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....

 >>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.

You're just a guy who likes to stir the pot with a lot of
pointless rants.  You also tend to be extremely personal and
irrational in your attacks (like malligning Mallon for not
writing something, then in the same breath admitting you hadn't
read the article and maybe he did).

<...>

 >>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.

English, we've all noticed, is especially malleable in your
hands.  "Confirmed" becomes "not confirmed"; "sudden" becomes
"not sudden"; "indirect" becomes "direct"; "planet is an
orbiting body" becomes "planet only has intelligent life on it"

 >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.

Why don't you bring this up at an astronomy conference so that
the astronomers can all laugh at your fussing over absolutely
nothing.

You don't like astronomers calling these extra-solar thingees
"planets" and "solar systems?"  Well, tough bananas.

 >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.

So what exactly are you saying Mr. Science Writer?  That you are
the first to notice that Jupiter and Earth are not the same and
therefore what?  That astronomers shouldn't be calling them both
planets, even though that's been the custom for hundreds of
years?

Again, why don't you raise this at the next major astronomical
conference so that all the textbooks can be rewritten?
Apparently you have deemed that the public is somehow being
misled by astronomers calling Jupiter-like gas giants "planets."
Instead, let's call them "StacyBalls," in your honor, since you
are the first to draw the clear distinction between them and
TruePlanets, like Earth, which can only be called planets if
they harbor intelligent life.

 >>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!

Nobody knows what your point is, except to make noise.

 ><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.

Just as much a gentleman as you, with your backhand of Mallon as
nonsensical, ignorant, and stupid.  By your own admission below,
you didn't even bother to read the article.  You haven't even
bothered to carefully read your own referenced Websites, which
support exactly what Mallon was saying.  There you'll find the
experts using the dreaded word "confirmed" in speaking of dozens
of extra-solar planets  being discovered.

 >>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.

Sure SETI is operating under a set of assumptions.  The only
connection between SETI's assumptions and the present discovery
of extrasolar planets is in the equation about how common
extra-solar planets and solar systems might be.

Very common apparently among the smaller Sun-like dwarf stars
that have been examined so far.

<snip>

 >Would a star circled only by the latter qualify as a solar system?

You tell us Mr. Science Writer.  Astronomers, however, define
this as a binary star system, not a solar system.  Do you know
the basic distinction between a planet and star?  Do you know
what fusion is?

 >You really should be more precise in your language.

Just covering up your ignorance with bluster, as usual.  You're
the one butchering the 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....

If you check your main referenced Web page, two of the 38
"confirmed" main sequence stars with large orbiting bodies are
now believed to harbor more than one planet, based on other
periodic shifts in the spectroscopic data.  One of these is
believed to have three bodies (two different  groups have come
up with the same data and conclusion).  In both cases, there is
a large body ("gas giant") circling the star every few days.
Apparently, this doesn't preclude the existence of other planets
in the system.

A NASA Web site announcing the discovery of the system with 3
planets can be found at:

http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast15apr99_1.htm

It has the following quote:

"This will shake up the theory of planet formation," Robert
Noyes, a professor of astronomy at Harvard-Smithsonian CfA and a
member of the CfA-HAO team said. "A nagging question was whether
the massive bodies orbiting in apparent isolation around stars
really are planets, but now that we see three around the same
star, it is hard to imagine anything else."

So to give Stacy his devilish due, there was some debate among
astronomers as to whether these discoveries might properly be
called "solar systems" in the same sense as our solar system of
multiple planets.  But since the discovery that at least two of
these systems consist of more than one planet, the debate has
changed.

Or how about the quote from the Wilford NY Times article on the
recent so-called "direct observation" of one of these bodies by
transit dimming of the star?:

"This is a spectacular discovery," said Dr. Geoffrey Marcy of
the University of California at Berkeley, the leading seeker of
planets around other stars. "There's just no question that the
planets we have been detecting from indirect evidence really are
planets."

"...hard to imagine [them] as anything else [but planets]"
"There's just no question that  [they] really are planets."
These are quotes from two major astronomers involved.  Maybe
Stacy should e-mail them and berate them about their improper
use of the word "planets."

 >>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.

Absolutely.  Windmill tilter and hell-raiser you are.  A science
writer you aren't -- at least, not on this list.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                CPR-Canada News: Virtual Saskatchewan - Crop

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:14:57 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:27:38 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Virtual Saskatchewan - Crop




CPR-CANADA NEWS
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada


Virtual Saskatchewan - Crop Circle Central


December 3, 1999

_____________________________


Editor:
Paul Anderson

_____________________________


An excellent article by David Yanko featuring some of the past
and this year's Saskatchewan crop circles, is available at the
Virtual Saskatchewan webzine web site:

http://www.virtualsk.com/current_issue/circle_central.html

With ten out of the twenty reported formations this year across
Canada, Saskatchewan continues to be the Canadian equivalent of
Wiltshire in England, with the most concentration of reports.
Truly "crop circle central"!

_____________________________


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 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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                            More on Shanghai UFO

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 23:45:50 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:32:49 -0500
Subject: More on Shanghai UFO


Greetings list -

From:

http://www.scmp.com/News/China/Article/FullText_asp_ArticleID-19991204023454691.
asp

(Contains photograph of object)

UFO sighting one for Shanghai's X-Files
JOSEPHINE MA

The usually staid state media in Shanghai carried reports
yesterday that an unidentified flying object had been sighted in
the city.

In a front-page story, with colour photographs of an object
resembling a meteor, the Wenhui Daily said the UFO was spotted
over western Shanghai on Thursday afternoon.

The paper said one of its reporters dashed to the 43rd floor of
a building after receiving a call from a reader about the
sighting. The reporter claimed he saw an illuminated object
which remained stationary in the sky for about 10 minutes before
it disappeared.

Two Shanghai television channels broadcast footage of an object
darting through the sky with a flaming orange tail, saying
nearly 100 people saw it.

A former researcher at the Shanghai Observatory, Professor Jiang
Xiaoyuan, was among the witnesses but he could not offer any
explanation.

The UFO hovered over Shanghai for 1.5 hours, reports said.

The city's aviation bureau and Hongqiao airport said their radar
did not detect anything.

The Shanghai Daily also reported the incident in a story
headlined "UFO darts across the city's skyline".

The paper ran its story on the same page as an advertisement for
the X-Files movie, which is based on the television series about
two American Federal Bureau of Investigation agents who probe
unexplained phenomena.

The paper's Web site also listed incidents of UFO reports from
different parts of the mainland throughout the year.

---

The Shanghai Daily's report on this incident is available at:
http://www.shanghai-daily.com/data/city/9912m/city991204.html#1

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 22:35:37 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:28:45 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 14:04:00
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >Nah.  David Rudiak has done such a fine job that I can't imagine
 >anything I'd have to add to it.  You're entitled to your views,
 >he to his, and I to mine (and mine happen to be much closer to
 >Rudiak's than yours).  In any event, I have neither time nor
 >inclination to get into this with you.  I can't help noting yet
 >again, however, that (as much as you don't like it when I point
 >out the obvious) once again you're rushing in to join the
 >anti-UFO side of the debate.


Jerry,

Thanks for your remarks, and also see my private post.

I haven't "rushed" to join anything, obvious or otherwise. See,
for example, my forthcoming Field Guide to UFOs, co-authored
with Patrick Huyghe, from Avon Books, Quill -- whoever.

That said -- and UFOs aside for the moment -- it's hard to run
our own solar system backwards -- in the same way that you would
rewind a videotape -- and get a simple accretion disk. For
reasons too lengthy to go into now.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #328

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 08:00:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:37:25 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #328


Apology to MW #328 (For December 4, 1999)

Johnny Ford is MUCH maligned, and I cannot (how?) seem to find a
shred of info on his plight and wonder on his uphill fight. Does
*someone* know the current news (?), has strained the "crap" for
simple truths. What I *have* is so bizarre! It passed for facts
but goes too far! Gaping doubt, indeed, the case -- that he grew
UP to know disgrace -- be locked inside some hole afraid,
considering his curse they've made. And he was always such a
citizen. Politically? Conservatism! He served the bench, an
honored officer, where would come his new philosopher *DOING*
crimes he would have SEEN must fail and become obscene. Are you
crazy Johnny Ford? Is this all of YOUR discord? Are you guilty
as it's *said* -- that you three boneheads went ahead and
planned a scheme so damned retarded I'd dismiss and disregard
it?

I can't see it; from the FIRST when our Paul Harvey's *data
burst* remarked on tooth paste used as poison laced with "hot"
stuff (?) -- I was voiceless! Something even then was *said*,
and UFO's were raised in dread. Said between his lines, he read,
in solemn Harvey tones (well bred), were pointing fingers at the
one who'd look beneath the rocks for fun. Like it figured,
"right as rain", that UFO's had made *insane* some schnook from
Suffolk, loser-boy -- who planned to kill for thrills and joy.

Time went on and I heard more, and found I couldn't SHUT this
door! Folks that knew him knew a man that, kind and gentle, took
*some* stand. He had time and inclination, knew the law and
loved his nation. NOT a nut -- enthusiastic! Focused, aimed and
democratic. Organized (if quite Republican), he thought he saw
what was insulting him, so spit the bit betwixt his teeth and
hotly chased what he thought teased: proof of some acute
conspiracy, evidence of graft and tyranny, and rank illegal
wounding secrecy, criminal beyond ALL decency. He would pay for
his impertinence, dearly -- linked with flying saucers queerly,
set-up like a fattened lamb for those with scruples black and
damned.

On a search for more on John, it's precious little I have found,
and there is ever NAUGHT to say on present status, day to day.
News (we all get) won't be found -- it's up to ME to snoop
around  (AND be set up <<like he WAS?>> for heinous crimes that
flash and buzz? I'm a teacher, and risk my stand -- be false
accused like any man. At the whim of my society, that could
reach out undeniably -- snatch me from my useful spot . . . and
crush me like a rag of snot.

Quite a spot to put me in, sensing something wrong that's been
(?) -- poking MY nose into spots that garnered Ford HIS cooking
pot? And I RESENT that imposition I would earn with my decision
I'm compelled to make FOR John  (betrayed, accused, and
woebegone), and must (then) make some kind of  ~*noise*~  to
keep from shame *they* must enjoy.

Bears and eagles feast on *fish* that swim the waters of THIS
ditch! John is ALL alone it seems, without a lawyer, friend --
in need. Most peculiar, with a look, one can see the holes and
hooks that festoon all the evil plans that drip from Suffolk's
monstrous hands. The county's dirty, it's no secret, it's ground
up more than John -- believe it! Yes, fighting city hall's a
bitch, and never goes without a hitch, but these are *warlords*
doing WHAT they've done for EONS! It must stop! John is caught
in a machine, and DRIVEN crazy it would seem . . . there before
God's grace, go you. Take a breath -- feel truth!

I hope Joe Firmage stays alert to *ways* and *means* that maim
and hurt. I Hope he's got some kind of hand, and folks he trusts
to help him plan. I can see him picked like fruit; one more down
who'd know the truth -- found at last to be incompetent, belief
in UFO's respondent. What of HIS temerity -- to spend his cash
so he might see!  He surely does what I'd have done, but I'm
without his lawyer's guns, so must content my fevered brow to
write these missives then and now. But I digress and must get
cracking, as common sense with John is lacking, and likely, IS
it, he was rooked -- so, sure, deserves another look.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

This kind of thing has happened too often in the past to allow
now. Verily, it CREATES it's opposite, all that a rabid
twitcharian would decry. This is where a notion for *grand
conspiracy* comes from, forgetting for a moment that the
evidences of these conspiracies unravel around us as we speak
(or what was that latest breaking bit of news on the FBI/JFK
connection, again?).

Restore John Ford! Now!


--
~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 4 December>**
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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                   LAURA LEE E-NEWS: December 6 - 10, 1999

From: Laura Lee <webmaster@lauralee.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 00:00:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:36:12 -0500
Subject: LAURA LEE E-NEWS: December 6 - 10, 1999



LAURA LEE E-NEWS Week of: December 6 - 10, 1999
By Subscription Only
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DID YOU SEE US ON TV? Thank you CNN Headline News, for featuring
www.lauralee.com in a report on websites of interest. CNN's
coverage of our website, highlighting our audio conversations on
ancient mysteries, new science, and spirituality, posted
articles, guest list and links, and more, ran three times on
December 1st.  We have received email from new website visitors
from around the country - Welcome and thanks for your kind
comments!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ UPCOMING TOPIC/GUEST LINE-UP DAILY SHOW: 7-8pm PST/10-11pm EST
Lineup for the Week of: Dec 6 - 10, 1999 Here's what is
scheduled for the coming week.

Monday, Dec 6 Russell Blaylock: The Health Risks of Excitotoxins
Dr. Blaylock, a board-certified neurosurgeon, presents the
latest research findings to demonstrate how exposure to
excitotoxins will damage nerve cells in the brain. The use of
aspartame, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, and monosodium
glutamate in prepared foods and beverages continues to increase
on a yearly basis. Dr. Blaylock demonstrates that the neurotoxic
potential of excitotoxins such as MSG and aspartame is so
overwhelming that it can no longer be ignored. A list of sources
of MSG is available at http://www.lauralee.com/blaylock.htm

Tuesday, Dec 7 - NEW Bob Bigelow: Searching for Elusive Hard
Evidence Rescheduled from last Friday. Bob Bigelow's report on
UFO cases includes some he investigated himself, some
investigated by the team of scientists at The National Institute
for Discovery Science (NIDS) and some which occured at "the
ranch," property located in the midst of a high-activity area
for UFOs.

Wednesday, Dec 8 -- LIVE Burt Webb: Analyzing our Future in
Space Science Fiction film script writer and science enthusiast
Burt Webb shares his lively and provocative take on our future
in space, the policies of today that will impact the future, and
the ideas and projections offered up by sci-fi movies and books
and TV series.

Thursday, Dec 9 -- LIVE Jon Rappoport: After twenty years of
research on ancient signs and symbols, Jon has found a way to
arrange these symbols into codes.  Each code is 26 shapes, and
each shape corresponds to a letter of the alphabet.  Jon "reads"
for companies and people, as well as global situations and
futures, by putting keywords and phrases through these codes.
"Some very remarkable information is coming through," he says.
"One thing that is revealed are archetypes of consciousness,
which can unconsciously create futures that may or may not be
desirable." Jon continues, "I believe that these readings reveal
unconscious creations of consciousness, that, when brought into
one's awareness, changes the whole game."

Friday, Dec 10 Michael Cremo - Rethinking Human Origins An
ardent critic of the abuse of scientific position and power,
Michael Cremo is considered a leading authority on anomalous
archeological evidence relating to the antiquity of the human
race.   His persistent investigation during the eight years of
writing the internationally acclaimed book, Forbidden Archeology
has documented a major scientific cover-up
http://209.245.176.138/cremo.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS FOLLOW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE LAURA LEE SHOW WEBSITE:
http://www.lauralee.com

WRITE TO US AT: lauralee@lauralee.com

AUDIO ARCHIVES:
Now formatted in Windows Media Player.
http://www.worldwebcast.net/shows/llb/archives/index.htm

AUDIO CASSETTES:
Audio cassettes are available at 1-800-243-1438.
Tapes are edited of commercial and news breaks, are often on
90-minute cassettes, and only $7 each. See complete listing of
cassettes at http://www.lauralee.com/cassette.htm

LIVE WEBCAST:
During live show hours, for audio only:
http://www.lauralee.com - select AUDIO ONLY button. The
webcasting  uses Windows Media Player.  This software is free at:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/mediaplayer/download/default.asp


CHATROOM
We have a new chatroom at with muliply features.
Chat only: http://www.worldwebcast.net/chat/
Chat with Visuals: http://www.worldwebcast.net/activescreen/chatframe.htm
Visuals with Audio: http://www.worldwebcast.net/activescreen/

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. Offer your own, or simply
read the musings of others.
http://www.worldwebcast.net/shows/llb/messageboard/

WEEKDAY SHOW HOURS:
Monday - Friday  7-8pm PST/10-11pm EST
http://209.245.176.138/radio.htm

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

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.  Our list
is kept confidential and will not be shared with anyone else.
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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                           A Satisfactory Answer?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:05:45 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:39:42 -0500
Subject: A Satisfactory Answer?


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:36:42 EST
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 10:01:54 -0500
 >Subject: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999

<snip>

 >When President Clinton first came into office, he gave Webb
 >Hubbell one of his most trusted subordinates a specific request
 >to obtain an answer to the question, "Are there UFOs?" Hubbell
 >apparently never was given a satisfactory answer..

Hi, George, List:

What was the answer Clinton was given?  What would a
satisfactory answer be?  Satisfactory to believers, satisfactory
to skeptics, satisfactory to politicians?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 4

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 12:33:05 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:42:31 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


List,

Quote of the day on solar system formation:

"It's like the whole puzzle. It gets you crazy because you're
dealing with contingencies all the time."

Bill Parcells, coach of the NY Jets, in the NY Times.

Hey, stuff is where you find it.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 5

                           Housekeeping - ListMail

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:17:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:17:36 -0500
Subject: Housekeeping - ListMail



Dear Long Suffering, gentle list-folk,

It seems that as of around 12:00pm last Thursday, globalserve.net -
bought-out by iprimus.ca - put some sort of limiter on the number
of addresses that UFO UpDates can be sent to. With _no_ out-bound
bounce notifiers to the originating address.

Naturally, being a 'communications' company has not endowed them,
iprimus.ca, with the wisdom and art of not pissing clients-off by
letting said clients know what is going on.

Messages have come into UpDates from a few disgruntled subscribers,
and I'm trying to compile a list of affected addresses - there appears
to be no logic to the dropped addresses.

Of course, it _is_ Sunday and why on earth _any_ ISP, with more than
60,000 subscribers, would have more than minimal-customer support
_is_ really a no-brainer, is it not?

So, for those of you affected and reading this at the Archive, please
bear with the so-called 'management' at iprimus.ca while they
founder around desperately trying to reprovide a vague resemblence
of the customer service that globalserve.net used to provide and
drew iprimus.ca to purchase and destroy one of the best damn InterNet
Service Providers in Canada.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 5

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 22:15:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 10:31:33 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 14:04:00
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

 >Nah.  David Rudiak has done such a fine job that I can't imagine
 >anything I'd have to add to it.  You're entitled to your views,
 >he to his, and I to mine (and mine happen to be much closer to
 >Rudiak's than yours).

<snip>

Jerry and List,

For those who think I'm somehow promoting a minority point of
view about solar system formation and subsequent suitability for
the evolution of intelligent life, please direct your browsers
to the following:

http://cannon.sfsu.edu/~gmarcy/planetsearch/news.html

and

http://cannon.sfsu.edu/~gmarcy/planetsearch/bd/ecc.html

The following quotes are excerpted from the latter:

"The occurrence of circular orbits may require special initial
conditions, to avoid the gravitational perturbations and to
avoid the tendency of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics to scramble
the orbital ellipticities of planets. Perhaps, our Solar System,
with its coplanar, nearly circular orbits represents a
remarkably fortuitous low-entropy state for a planetary system."

Note the use of the phrase "remarkably fortuitous."

And under the heading, "Are Circular Orbits the Planetary Norm?":

"The circular orbit of Jupiter in our Solar System promotes the
stability of circular orbits among the other 8 planets. If our
Jupiter were in an eccentric orbit, the Earth and Mars would
likely be gravitationally scattered out of the Solar System.
Thus our existence, and the existence of life in the habitable
zone, depends on both Jupiter and Earth being in mutually
stable, circular orbits...

"Eccentric orbits may occur relatively commonly for extrasolar
planets. Just one eccentric giant planet orbiting a star can
spell dynamical doom for terrestrial planets, and may bode ill
for slowly evolving creatures. The claim that all planetary
orbits must be like ours may well be a circular argument."

Etc.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 6

                        CSETI - New Video On Website

From: Tony Craddock <webmaster@cseti.org>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 14:55:27 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 16:46:25 -0500
Subject: CSETI - New Video On Website


For a good example of why the UFO/ET Disclosure effort should
shy away from the major TV networks, watch NBC "Dateline"s
incredulous treatment of proud old soldier and American hero
Col. Philip Corso during their "Roswell" special, the video of
which is now up on the CSETI Website linked to the "Roswell"
panel.

The interesting thing is that Corso's blunt credibility actually
dominates the piece.

And listen very carefully to the end of the interview when he
makes reference to a "time machine" that was "fading" and an
enigmatic reference to "the Germans", and promised future
revelations.  These were, alas, not to be, as he was betrayed by
those around him and died in the midst of the stress of dealing
with their machinations.

Also up on the Website is video about the 1989 Soviet Phobos 2
mission, which shows a photo of the alleged huge spacecraft that
was taken immediately prior to the demise of the probe.  Word
was that Phobos, the Martian moon that CSETI sources say houses
an ET base, was in fact being threatened by the Phobos 2 probe.

In light of today's seeming failure of yet another Mars probe,
it might be appropriate to watch the excerpt of Dr. Greer's 1999
Lecture at UC Santa Barbara for a possible explanation, which
can be played in RealVideo G2 from the Website.

This video, incidentally, makes an excellent Xmas gift, and is
great value, running 3 hours for under $30.

Plus of course Dr. Greer's blockbuster book (Extraterrestrial
Contact - the Evidence and Implications) can still be ordered in
time for Xmas from http://www.drgreer.com - again, 550 pages of
cogent, spin-free information on the UFO/ET subject for under
$20 is unsurpassed.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 6

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:42:53 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >Subject: AA Film Research

 >Dear All,

 >Does anyone out there happen to have a copy of the research done
 >by Rob Irving on the alleged film canister labels from the Alien
 >Autopsy film?

<snip>


I realize that you and Ray are friends but I just can�t see how
there could ever be a "balanced discussion" of the Santilli
alien autopsy?  The decision has already been made by most
Ufologists and the common folk: The footage is a bald hoax and a
scam.

Case closed, right?

Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at
best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
dishonest con man and schemer( and worse), or a dupe or
disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.
But what does seem to be true is that Ray Santilli, through a
set of fortuitous circumstances, came into possession of some
marvelously intriguing rolls of fifty year old film which shows
the dissection of a "creature with no business here" and some of
the debris from the creature's vehicle.


The problem Kevin Randle seems to have with the classification
of "Restricted Top Secret" is an example of the type of
disinformation/misinformation that surrounds the autopsy
footage.

In Kent Jeffrey's hit piece on Santilli, Jeffrey makes a big
deal about the "restricted" designation found on the first film
that Santilli publicly showed.  Kent felt "restricted"  wasn't a
legitimate military security designation:

"RESTRICTED ACCESS
A01 CLASSIFICATION
SUBJECT 1 of 2
JULY 30th 1947"

Jeffrey adds:  "The Sunday Times article points out, however,
that 'restricted' access' is not a recognized U.S. military code
and that the A01 classification had been dismissed as 'pure
Hollywood'. Even more telling is the month-day-year format of
the date. The U.S. military always uses a day-month-year format.
Therefore, the date should have read '30 July 1947'."

The problem is that I had researched the subject and found
evidence that "restricted" was in fact legitimate and that
sometimes, under certain circumstances the date could be written
as July 30th 1947.  I contacted Kent Jeffreys through one of his
researchers( a member of this list) and told them of my
information.  They said the letters I cited had been
debunked,and they were sure of their facts.  They were wrong.
But that didn't prevent them from releasing information they
knew was in doubt.  There are many other examples of critics
using false assertions to condemn the footage and then not
correcting the record.   I certainly don't mean any disrespect
to you or Tim, but what the Alien Autopsy needs, more than
another book, is a re-examination and debate, one that is, open,
honest, and cooperative.

Would you be willing to work toward those ends?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 6

                           List's Server Problems

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 23:46:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 23:46:35 -0500
Subject: List's Server Problems

globalserve.net has been arbitrarily removing addresses from
messages to the List and I need to know which addresses.

Please, click reply and add your first and last names
below.

Thanks

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 >
   Dec > Dec 7

                         Re: A Satisfactory Answer?

From: Majorstar@aol.com
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:44:17 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 08:45:24 -0500
Subject: Re: A Satisfactory Answer?

 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:05:45 EST
 >Subject: A Satisfactory Answer?
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:36:42 EST
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 10:01:54 -0500
 >>Subject: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999

 ><snip>

 >>When President Clinton first came into office, he gave Webb
 >>Hubbell one of his most trusted subordinates a specific request
 >>to obtain an answer to the question, "Are there UFOs?" Hubbell
 >>apparently never was given a satisfactory answer..

 >Hi, George, List:

 >What was the answer Clinton was given?  What would a
 >satisfactory answer be?  Satisfactory to believers, satisfactory
 >to skeptics, satisfactory to politicians?

Allegedly Hubbell was told there were no alien craft by a NORAD colonel.

Regards.

Georege Filer





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 7

                               List Mail Flow

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 16:41:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 16:41:39 -0500
Subject: List Mail Flow




Dear subscribers,

Thanks for your forebearance and patience. Let us not
lose sight of the raison d'etre of the List which is
information movement. Don't hold back on your posts.

This message is a test of a restructuring of outgoing
mail header format, as required by iprimus.ca  - I
found out today that, yes indeed they changed servers
5/6 to a new configuration as of last Thursday.

Damn good job no one on their system was affected and
that they didn't need to let anyone know...


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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                               Server Problems

From: Moderator UFO UpDates
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 08:34:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 08:34:55 -0500
Subject: Server Problems




The problem with globalserve.net/iprimus.ca, which has been
on-going since March of this year has come to a head.

Despite advance payment for service, iprimus.ca has reneged on
the basic term of service which was agreed to with
globalserve.net when I signed with them - primarily, to supply
delivery of mail to the UFO UpDates subscriber list.

Arrangements are being made to switch services and will take
a few more days...

Recent messages for posting will appear here, at the UpDates
Archive and will be re-sent to the list once the new service is
in place.

The patience of Subscribers is appreciated,


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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                          Oz 'UFO' Crash Into Dam?

From: John Auchtel <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 19:46:51 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:52:41 -0500
Subject: Oz 'UFO' Crash Into Dam?


PRESS RELEASE

9th DEC 1999
0900hr EDST

SUBJECT:  UFO IN GUYRA DAM
                     NSW ARMIDALE DISTRICT


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK, Researchers,

Researchers from Phenomena Research Australia (PRA) on location
at Guyra, NSW, have reported that the investigation is at
present a POLICE matter. The alleged object was _not_ seen to
enter the dam and until further evidence is presented the matter
remains unresolved.

Melbourne researchers, John Auchettl and Ron Barnett reported
from the location this morning:


"There is a surface mark and burns that lead into the dam
indicating some impact, but this was not evidence of a satellite
or meteorite impact. The splash marks are consistent with an
impact. However, an explosive device would produce a similar
effect."

"Until we get to see what is at the bottom of the dam, we can
not rule out anything from a car to a elaborate hoax. Samples of
the burnt area and water have been taken for further
investigation."

"It must be stated, that until more work has been done on the
area, the alleged UFO story has no foundation, but the isolation
and security of the site was mandatory and recommended, to
preserve the data."


The police will have to get into the dam and have a look, and
after that, the field investigators could make some decision.

http://www.theage.com.au/breaking/9912/09/A26303-1999Dec9.shtml

A township in northern New South Wales has had its water supply
cut off after an unidentified object crashed into the local dam.
Plans are now in place to truck water in from Armidale and Glen
Innes.

Some time between Monday and mid-day yesterday the projectile
slammed into the Guyra water supply dam on the outskirts of the
town, north of Armidale.

Police said it was first noticed by a local council employee
carrying out routine maintenance work.

Fire brigade spokesman John Hobar said an area of reed beds
measuring four metres by 10 metres had been flattened, fuelling
suspicion that the object may have fallen from the sky.

But he said he had checked with a number of space agencies,
meterological experts and authorities in Canberra and there had
been no sightings of an unidentified object falling from the
sky.

Hobar said the brigade's hazardous material unit went to the
scene and tested the water for toxins and radioactive material,
but the results were clear. "We're not prepared to declare the
water safe until we actually site the object. We're not prepared
to take any risks."

Water supply would only be restored when authorities could
guarantee its safety, he said.

The local council has isolated water supply to the town by
switching off pumps and treatment works.

Hobar said crews were unable to identify the object last night
because it had become embedded in the dam and the water was
muddy.

Divers will be brought in this morning to try to make a positive
identification.

Regards

Tony Robb
PRA Research Group Co-ordinator


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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                            Re: World Cup Aliens

From: Kathy Hotchner <khotchner@uswest.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 16:31:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:09:11 -0500
Subject: Re: World Cup Aliens


Hello List,

I'm a new subscriber who has been reading your dialogues for
about a year.

This is my first post so excuse me if I do it wrong.  I found
this article today and thought it would be of interest.  Love
the last paragraph.

http://www.iht.com:80/IHT/TODAY/thu/SPT/atmos.2.html

Paris, Thursday, December 2, 1999

World Cup Goes Boldly In Search of Alien Mascots

TOKYO  -

Japan and South Korea on Wednesday unveiled space aliens named
Atmos as mascots for the 2002 World Cup soccer finals, which the
two countries are to host jointly.

The audience at a news conference appeared stunned when Japanese
Cup organizers showed a video of the three translucent animation
characters somersaulting in soccer boots. "We believe the 2002
World Cup is a totally new event, and we have chosen a totally
new kind of mascot," said Terence Oliver, who has headed the
mascot project.

"It is the first FIFA World Cup of the millennium, the first to
be held in Asia and the first to be co-hosted," said Oliver,
the Asia-Pacific chief of the design company Interbrand, which
designed the mascots.  Japanese and South Korean members of the
project, he said, had "brought up the idea of using national
symbols like flowers or animals as a matter of course."

"But, since it will be co-hosted as a worldwide event, we have
parted with an ordinary approach," Oliver said. "I know you
are surprised, as I expect you to be." FIFA said it was
delighted with the creations, which cost about 1 million Swiss
francs ($630,000) to develop over the past 18 months. There are
three Atmos mascots. Great Atmo Leader is golden and carries a
soccer ball. The others are Young Atmo A, which is violet, and
Young Atmo B, which is blue.

According to the South Korean organizing committee, the Atmos,
who live in the "atmozone" and play their own version of
football, are intended to symbolize "harmony, unity and
cooperation." Choi Chang Shin, secretary general of the South
Korean organizing committee, said, "They have mysterious powers
to fan enthusiasm among the audience at football matches." He
said an international competition would be organized to name the
three characters.

"Mascots in the past have been two-dimensional and quite
crude," said Glen Kirton, a senior executive with ISL, FIFA's
marketing partner. "We wanted to use the latest technology to
reflect the modernity of the host countries." Kirton added,
"We have long felt more could be done than just have a furry
little animal- cute and cuddly as mascots like World Cup Willie,
Footix and all the others have been in their day.

"The whole concept of the Atmos is different and will add
significant muscle to the marketing program. They have neither
Korean or Japanese characteristics but are very much in keeping
with the Oriental cartoon feel and animation from this part of
the world.

"A number of people within FIFA have said that some of the
imagery is a little frightening - but I think kids like to be
frightened a little bit. And they are quite lovable and
mischievous once you get to know them."

I wish they had posted a picture!

Kathy Hotchner






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 22:26:59 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:17:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy



 >From: Ed Gehrman
 >Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >Previously, Ed wrote:


 >>I realize that (Philip Mantle) and Ray are friends but I just can�t
 >see how
 >>there could ever be a "balanced discussion" of the Santilli
 >>alien autopsy?  The decision has already been made by most
 >>Ufologists and the common folk: The footage is a bald hoax and a
 >>scam.

 ><snip>

 >>Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at
 >>best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
 >>dishonest con man and schemer( and worse), or a dupe or
 >>disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.

Dear Ed,

Prove it.

Better, yet; let _Ray_ prove it.

The AA footage is a piece of crap.

Roger Evans








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                   US DoD Offers Military Documents Online

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 20:58:37 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:19:36 -0500
Subject: US DoD Offers Military Documents Online


Greetings list -

The Department of Defense has made available over 80,000
documents online. Topics range from space vehicles to electronic
communications. According to the website:

"The ASSIST-Online is a robust, comprehensive web site providing
access to current information associated with military and
federal specifications and standards in the management of the
Defense Standardization Program (DSP).

Managed by the DoD Single Stock Point (DoDSSP), Philadelphia,
ASSIST-Online provides public access to standardization
documents over the Internet. ASSIST-Online includes many
powerful reporting features and an exhaustive collection of both
digital and warehouse documents. ASSIST is the official source
of DoD specifications and standards."

Many of the documents located on the site can be downloaded free
of charge and viewed with Adobe Acrobat, and while I haven't
found anything specifically related to UFOs, I think many of you
will find the site interesting as well as useful.

The URL is:

http://assist.daps.mil/

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                     Sighting Report OZ File 04.12.1999

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 22:26:31 +1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:23:05 -0500
Subject: Sighting Report OZ File 04.12.1999

Sighting Report OZ File 04.12.1999

FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN
1800 Callin Code: 00402  04.12.1999

Date: 04.12.1999
Day: Saturday
Time Reported: 7.25pm
Location: Jimboomba Brisbane QLD
Reportee: Fred C
Report given to nearest rep: Diane Harrison  AUFORN
Tel: 07  55

Report:

Shape: Star like
Size: Size Venus
Objects: 2
Colour: White star colour
Sound: None
Speed: Faster than a plane
Duration: 10 minutes
Direction: Traveling south westerly
Witnesses: 2

(Fred Said )

I stepped outside to have a smoke when I noticed these 2 star
like objects traveling together from the Southeast.

What I  thought was  really strange they stopped for a while
then they moved around a  meter and stopped again.

They did this twice, I noticed a plane going past but it was a
lot lower than the 2 objects. I could see that the plane had
flashing lights. I see lots of planes because we are on the
Brisbane to Sydney flight path so I know a plane when I see it.
I very sure this wasn't a plane, I have never seen a plane act
like these things did.

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:20:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:31:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video



 >From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:28:07 +0000
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 20:05:35 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:36:54 -0500
 >>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >As far as I know the footage has not yet been analysed, although
 >saying this I am not quite sure if Peter Sorrensen or any other
 >researcher who has a copy of the footage has had it analysed.

It should be the first step by any researcher to have video
footage analysed. This should certainly be done before
publicising the footage as the analysis may find something quite
ordinary.

 >I do know that Dave Bowden has taken a good close up look of the
 >tape, and perhaps Dave could jump in here and tell us what he
 >found out?

That would be good.

 >Also if you look close enough you can just about see a second
 >object shoot off the screen as the first one disappears.

I've seen the footage a couple of times but have yet to see
the second 'thing'.

 >What I personally like about the footage is the acceleration of
 >the first object as it climbs and the brilliant colour & clarity
 >of the whole film.

Can you fill us in on what happened prior to where the footage
starts? When did the 'thing' first appear, how long was it
observed prior to the footage starting, was anyone observing it
whilst the footage was taken, etc.

If you or Don want the footage analysed I have a contact in
Germany who may be able to help. You'd need to supply a 1st
generation copy for him, and an assurance would be given that
the footage wouldn't be used for anything other than the
analysis.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                        Blather: Blather Doesn't Care

From: Daev Walsh <daev@blather.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 02:49:45 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 15:51:17 -0500
Subject: Blather: Blather Doesn't Care

______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
December 8th 01999, Dublin, Ireland   Vol 3. No. 7
_______________________________________________________


BLATHER DOESN'T CARE
- An end of the pseudo-m*llennium special

As we are mere weeks away from the end of the year, Blather
would like to make it known that *we don't care* about the
(change of) m*llennium.

We don't.

Ok?


'Blather is here.

As we advance to make our bow, you will in vain for signs of
servility or for any evidence of a desire to please. We are an
arrogant and depraved body of men. We are as proud as bantams
and as vain as peacocks.

"*Blather* doesn't care." A sardonic laugh escapes us as we bow,
cruel and cynical hounds that we are. It is a terrible laugh, the
laugh of lost men. Do you get the smell of porter?'

- from the original *Blather*, issue 1, published in 1934 by
Brian O'Nolan a.k.a. Flann O'Brien a.k.a. Myles na gCopaleen.

http://www.hellshaw.com/flann


THE SPIEL

In between the last few issues, we've been prostrating
ourselves, itching in our liquid latex hairshirts, and
flagellating ourselves with the guilt of not producing Blather
on a more regular basis. It's not that we've been short of
material, rather we have had very little time to devote to the
matter, and what time we've had has been spent considering the
path that Blather should take, as we enter what is alleged to be
the final month of the 'millennium'. We promise that we will do
better in future. Somehow.

Since the last rant, this Blatherskite has been living in
interesting times, turning his life upside down and travelling
to distant lands. And we still, somehow, managed to annoy *some*
people at least. In the last Blather, we stated that we were to
be 'pitted against one Alan Sewell of the Irish Centre for UFO
studies in *UFOs Exist. A debate*' at *Octocon*, the 10th Irish
National Science Fiction Convention, held on the 9th and 10th of
October in The Royal Marine Hotel, Dun Laoghaire. We showed up
on the day, apprehensive but full of devilment. Alas, Mr. Sewell
pulled out at the 11th hour, apparently stating that he felt
Blather's Dave Walsh would 'only twist his words'.

Feeling both flattered and disappointed, we instead took part in
a ramshackle assortment of panelists for the UFO discussion,
which included authors Robert Rankin and Eugene Byrne. The
result was pleasantly chaotic - we probably didn't really get
anywhere constructive, but it was a lot of fun, with some
frighteningly concise all-encompassing conspiracy theories For
Everything Including UFOs getting aired. Much thanks to Pdraig
'Malid and the other organisers, and cheers to Robert Rankin,
who entertained us with tales of having his car windows shot out
and the culinary horrors of human-chicken relationships.

A few weeks later, on the afternoon November 5th, not long back
from having spent Samhain (Halloween) in the hills of Leitrim
with the fine people at the Grove of Sinann (Irish readers
should look out for more about the Grove in a forthcoming issue
of *Source* magazine), we found ourselves being fed an
improbable cornucopia of alcoholic beverages by an
Australian-German British Airways hostess at about 35,000 ft
over the south-west Irish coast. Landing at Baltimore, this
blatherskite was whisked off to the hotel where the The
International Fortean Organization's Fortfest 99 was to take
place - the 29th annual conference on anomalous phenomena.

Speakers present included the wonderful John Keel, author of
*The Mothman Prophecies* and *Operation Trojan Horse*, the
elegantly droll Doug Skinner, Michael Grosso on miracles and the
like, Budd Hopkins (who showed us endless slides of, er, implant
scars), the highly enjoyable Paul Harrison - president of the
Loch Ness Monster Research Society and Paul LaViollette - 'the
first astronomer to disprove the expanding universe theory and
the first to discover concentrations of cosmic dust and gold in
ice age polar ice'. Also speaking were Doug Rogers on crop
circles, J. Antonio Huneeus on UFOs, Tom Vallone on 'free
energy' and Vincent Bridges on 'Alchemy, Fulcanelli and The
Great Cross'.

This Blatherskite ended up being the final speaker of the
two-day conference, recounting tales of *Accidental Satanists* -
a further exploration of the Hell-Fire Clubs of the 18th
century, a subject previously touched up in this publication.

Memories of the weekend (vague as they are) include getting a
gift of a deer bone discovered during drunken fortean forays
behind the hotel, sitting on the podium with John Keel, Larry
Arnold and others, recounting all kinds of crazy after-dinner
stories, consuming unwise amounts of Jameson 1780 at 4am at the
party that just kind of happened in Jim and Brent's room, secret
self-service at the hotel bar, six people crushed into a
five-seater car on a quest into the strip-mall hell that is
College Park, Maryland, in an long hilarious and hopeless search
of *yet more* drinkables, getting yelled at by the audience
during *Accidental Satanists* 'cos we were too quiet, too fast
and too Irish (it was all good natured of course), and the
entertaining Monday drive to New York City, passed by
storytelling and poetry.

The cast: dozens, but you know who you are. Special thanks to
Jim Boyd and his warrior-sprog Kiarna, Phyllis Benjamin and
Sheila and Corinna
Makris.

Octocon
http://www.lostcarpark.com/octocon/

The Grove of Sinann
http://www.iol.ie/~sinann/

A Mothman Retrospective
http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no5.html

The International Fortean Organization
http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/info

Doug Skinner @ White Knuckle Sandwich
http://www.whiteknucklesandwich.com/



FORTEAN FALLS

On November 29th, the RTE email news *UPDATE* (amongst other RTE
media types) announced that Astronomy Ireland had reported the
possibility of a meteorite landing on the night of the November
28th, around 10:10pm. A large fireball had been seen *and* heard
in many parts of Ireland.

They're apparently looking for witnesses who may be able to help
them plot its trajectory. No meteorite has been found in the
Republic of Ireland since 1835 - one fell in Northern Ireland in
1969.

For more see:
http://www.astronomy.ie/fireball.html

In the last issue, we reported on claims of 'Black Rays' over
Lough Neagh. Harriet Moore, who lives 4 miles (6.4km) from
Aldergrove Airport a similar distance away from Lough Neagh,
emailed to tell us of not black *rays*, but *black rain*.

'We saw it one Sunday morning about 10/11am. In our estimation
it was fuel dumped from aeroplanes, and as it isn't very far
from the airport to the Irish Sea, we reckoned the planes were
dumping fuel. Certainly didn't look like anything else we could
think of. It started as black parallel 'lines' roughly where the
wings would be, and with high altitude winds, cloud formation
etc., the two 'lines' gradually spread out and could be seen
'falling' in much the same way as contrails do.'

Harriet continues:

'There also was weekend rave in the Nutts Corner area in late
June/Early July. It lasted from Friday to Sunday night and was
attended by something over 1,500 people. Of course Laser lights
and other stuff to create light effects were in use at the time.
I have seen laser lights bouncing off low cloud cover from a
distance of 20 miles which turned out to be a Laser show in
Belfast which I could see from Dromore, south of Hillsborough.
It was weird initially as I was driving along the dual
carriageway, but I pulled over and watched.'

Shereen Beckett was in touch, from the Carrickfergus area - she
informed us that, having asked around, she can confirm that
no-one locally had picked up the 'black rays' story, including
the media.

See: *Funny what you can find near Bundoran...*
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no6.html#blackray



UFOs AT HOME AND ABROAD

It seems to have been remarkably quiet on the UFO side of things
recently, at least in Ireland. Despite the Leonid meteor showers
of mid-november, no reports have come our way, except a
third-hand report from Co. Wexford. On the night of December 2nd
01999, a power cut, apparently due to high winds, plunged some
of the county into darkness. During the black-out, two large,
slow-moving bright lights were reported in the Carne area (south
of Rosslare Harbour and east of Kilmore). They were also
reported as being seen near Tuskar Rock, the island lighthouse
to the south-east of Rosslare, some 8km (5 miles) off the coast,
and as far away as Duncormick, some 20km (12.5 miles) west of
Carne.

That's all we have for now, more reports welcome...

While we're on the subject, we should add that Blather's Turkish
correspondent, Soner Goksu, informed us that around the 7th and
8th of November, there were UFO sightings over Istanbul. Soner
commented that they've been seen regularly since the eclipse of
August 11th. We would point out that the horrific Turkish
earthquake took placed mere days after the eclipse. Any possible
correlation? The phenomena of 'earthquake lights' has been
explored in the past by Paul Devereux and Michael Persinger -
see:

*The Tectonic Strain Theory as an Explanation for UFO Phenomena*
http://www.laurentian.ca/www/neurosci/tectonicedit.htm



UFOS OVER SHANGHAI?
"UFO darts across the city's skyline", reported the Shanghai Daily,
"UFO appears in the sky over Shanghai", said the Wenhui Daily, on
Thursday 3rd December...

'Nearly 100 people claimed to have seen a cylindrical object
with a flaming orange tail moving over the western part of the
city for about an hour Thursday afternoon, the newspapers said.
They offered no theories on what it might have been', said Fox
News...the following day.

Even odder, the Shanghai Daily ran the story *next * to an
advertisement for the X-Files movie, and of course, we got the
story from Fox, who of course are the company behind the
X-Files, and...

http://www.foxnews.com/js_index.sml?content=/etcetera/wires/1203
/e_rt_1203_24.sm


ALIEN FOETUS NEWS

Curiously, the Irish alien foetus story has died a death. We
certainly haven't heard anymore about it. However, our favoured
webzine at the moment, the fascinating *GettingIt*, recently ran
an article which may be of interest to alien foetus fans, called
*Have You Hurled a Fetus today? - England's in love with alien
embryos*:

'They've been called "the most disgusting toy in the world."
This may be so, but there's certainly a sick thrill in
recklessly hurling embryos against a wall. Especially as they
collapse on impact with a satisfying splat into formless
ectoplasm. But the best part is there's no mess to clean up
afterwards. Slowly peel them off and they magically reconstitute
themselves into embryonic form.'

Click here to be taken to GettingIt article:
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no7_gettingit.html

*Funny what you can find near Bundoran...*
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no6.html#embryo


EMAILS IN:
From: Ettye Hurleu
Subject: Christina Gallagher

Comments:

'Having visited Achill Island on pilgrimage and having prayed at
the House of Prayer, I witnessed first hand what you have chosen
to disregard - in your sophistication. Open your heart.'

Blather sez: We fear that Ettye is oblivious to our peculiar
blend of ironic impartiality. If we had chose to disregard, we
wouldn't have mentioned Ms. Gallagher at all... we do not
dismiss the claims of miracles at The House of Prayer on Achill
Island, we simply choose to doubt. Is that such a sin? We use
'alleged' because we cannot vouch for what we ourselves have not
experienced.

For more on the Achill/House of Prayer story see:

*Weird Achill*
http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no9.html

*Baaaaah-Humbug*
http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no2.html

*Rocks from Irish Skies*
http://www.blather.net/archives/issue1no33.html



LORD LUCAN SIGHTINGS

Following Blather's stint on South African radio, we're happy to
say that Lord Lucan was back in the news, albeit briefly. On
Wednesday October 27th, *The Irish Times* reported that the
British government had declared Lord Lucan officially dead.

*Lucan's family 'draws line' under disappearance*
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/1999/1027/break5.htm

On Saturday October 30th, 01999, *The Irish Times* printed:

'He still qualifies for a place in the profile slot - just. It
was the obituary page editors who were flexing their muscles
earlier in the week as Lord Lucan, the missing earl, was
reported "officially" dead. He was promptly resurrected on
Wednesday, however, and officially declared alive and well and
living in . . . well, take your pick.'

*Missing earl who died and was resurrected*
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/newsfeatures/1999/1030/newsfea18.htm

*The Things We Get Asked To Do*
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no5.html


BLATHER RECOMMENDS:
The Village - Building Sustainable Community - Sustainable Projects
Ireland Ltd.
http://www.sustainable.buz.org/sustainable_projects_pages/

'Sustainable Projects Ireland Ltd. wants to create an ecological
settlement of about 40 houses on an 100 acre rural site, about
one hour from Dublin. The village is to be a model of
sustainable development for the next millennium. Its aim is to
lead the way in ecological building techniques, local enterprise
creation, renewable energy systems, rural regeneration,
worthwhile job creation, waste management, and
environmental/social education.'

Voice of Irish Concern for the Environment
http://voice.buz.org/

Signum Magazine: Meaning & Paranoia by Blather's Barry Kavanagh
http://www.slm-net.com/signum/marrow/madness1.html

*Are You... Experienced?* by Skylaire Alfvegren - all about a
'jazz singer who happens to be in touch with higher beings'
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/99/52/reverb-alfvegren.shtml

Our *favourite* webzine of the moment, *GettingIt*
http://www.gettingit.com

An *Irish Times* retrospective on the 'moving statue
phenomenon'.
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/features/1999/1130/fea1.htm

23
http://www.twentythree.co.uk

Adbusters - Culture Jammers Headquarters
http://www.adbusters.org

Time Travel Hangar Grand Opening
http://members.aol.com/AppleAlien

'This site contains info on several first-ever SETI and Time
experiments plus much overblown hype. You may be interested in
publicizing the effort.'

______________________________________________________
This issue can also be found at:
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no7.html
______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.blather.net/archives/index.html

_______________________________________________________


SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<list@blather.net>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<list@blather.net>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email admin@blather.net
_______________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                UFO Over Eastern Shore, Baltimore, Maryland?

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 18:00:56 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:01:46 -0500
Subject: UFO Over Eastern Shore, Baltimore, Maryland?


Greetings list -

From: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WBAL/40924.asp


UFO over Eastern Shore?
Larry Frum, Jr.

Preston, Dec. 8 - At least two people report seeing glowing
objects over the Eastern Shore.

Kathy Dink of Federalsburg was delivering Christmas trees and
wreaths yesterday when she saw a "bright, blue flame that looked
like a missile or a rocket."

Dink says at the same time, she spotted a missile or tube-shaped
object about 20 to 30 feet in length traveling in a different
direction. She says the two objects seemed to collide.

Jim Henderson of Princess Anne says he was hunting when he saw
something similar. He says he saw what looked like a yellow and
orange comet tail.

Henderson called the NASA Wallops Flight Facility on the Eastern
Shore because he was afraid a plane might have crashed.

Spokesmen at Wallops and at the Patuxent River Naval Air Station
in Southern Maryland say they can�t explain the sightings or
confirm the existence of any aircraft in the area at the time.

---

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

               CPR-Canada News: New Web Site for BLT Research

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:16:12 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:10:55 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: New Web Site for BLT Research


CPR-CANADA NEWS
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada


New  Web Site for BLT Research;  New Oliver's Castle Video Analysis


December 8, 1999

_____________________________


Field Report 12.8.99


BLT Research, Inc. now has its own new web site (currently under
construction), which will highlight the laboratory analysis work
of Dr. W. C. Levengood, who has been doing extensive analysis of
plant and soil samples from crop circle formations in England
and around the world for the past several years, (including some
of the fantastic Canadian formations this year!).

http://www.bltresearch.net


Also, a new analysis report on the famed Oliver's Castle video
of the small balls of light creating a large crop formation is
making the rounds - possible evidence that there may be more to
it than meets the eye (after now being considered a hoax by most
researchers)? Read and judge for yourself.

http://www.sightings.com/ufo5/analys.htm


Paul Anderson
Director

_____________________________


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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                       Object From Sky Slams Into Dam

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:58:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:27:15 -0500
Subject: Object From Sky Slams Into Dam


Source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/state/nsw/metnsw-9dec1999-1.htm

Unidentified object slams into NSW town's water supply

Emergency services have swung into action at Guyra in the north
of New South Wales where the town's water supply dam has been
hit by something which has crashed from the sky.

Police, fire brigade, council officers and scientists have begun
investigations.

Emergency services are mystified as to what has happened at the
dam, except to say something has crashed from the sky with great
force, enough force to throw up piles of mud and flatten reeds
in an area 15 metres long and six metres wide.

Fire brigade hazardous materials units are on the scene which
has been cordoned off.

Tests are currently being carried out on the water supply to see
if it has been polluted with an unknown agent and until then
Guyra Shire Council has imposed severe emergency water
restrictions.

A meeting will be held tomorrow to determine just what steps
will be necessary to identify what might have crashed into the
dam and if its done something to the water making it unfit to
drink.

There are no casualties.
--
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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

               P-47: Breaking Story In Australia - Guyra "UFO"

From: John Stepkowski <legion@MIRA.NET>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:47:52 +1100
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:44:09 -0500
Subject: P-47: Breaking Story In Australia - Guyra "UFO"


  * Herb Taylor writes:

 >Greetings to the list:

 >This has just come in, having been heard on the Paul Harvey news show less
 >than an hour ago.  It seems that an unidentified object was seen to fall from
 >the sky in Australia, causing a lot of ground damage, and apparently sunk
 >into some mud.  The area has been cordoned off by the authorities.  An
 >interesting story that needs to be followed.  Perhaps our colleague Bill
 >Chalker can give us the latest on what this is all about.

An early story about this:

 >From: http://www.theage.com.au/news/19991210/A27445-1999Dec9.html

A bolt from the loo? A town deals with an alien experience

By GREG BEARUP
GUYRA

Friday 10 December 1999

Locals examine the area flattened by an unidentified projectile
in Guyra, New South Wales. Picture: RICK STEVENS

"Obviously," observed a droll Roger Woodward - well-known
concert pianist and conspiracy theorist - "they are coming".

Woodward was yesterday part of the crowd trying to get a look at
the site where an as yet unidentified flying object ploughed
through bullrushes and into a reservoir in the Great Dividing
Range in northern New South Wales.

The pianist happened to be in the neighborhood looking at real
estate. But hot on his heels were crowds of media, officials and
space cadets drawn by the mysterious crater. There hasn't been
this much unearthly activity in town since the Guyra Ghost
terrorised a local family back in the `20s.

The thing fell from the sky sometime between Monday and
Wednesday, when a local official spotted its track through the
bullrushes into the dam. Divers discovered yesterday that
whatever it was had drilled a tunnel of about 40cms diameter
deep in the sludge at the bottom. It can't be unearthed until
heavy equipment is brought in this morning.

Mr David Blanks, who works in "investments", made a special
detour to the site, north of Armidale, when he heard of the
event on radio as he drove from Sydney to Brisbane.

Mr Blanks said he did some serious investigations into alien
abductions while he was living in America. "People don't take
this sort of thing seriously in Australia but in America and
Europe there are whole government departments looking at this."
Is there a need for such a  department, say, in NSW? "Maybe
there already is one."

Speculating on whether we could be looking at an alien abduction
scenario here, one of the locals expressed the hope that
whatever was down there could hold its breath better than Harold
Holt. "Oh, there is an amphibious variety," confided Mr Blanks.

Putting a dampener on the extra-terrestrial angle was the editor
of _Sky and Space magazine_, Mr Jonathan Nally. His bet is that
the mystery projectile is either a hoax, a meteorite or frozen
waste from the toilet of a passing aircraft.

Peter Starr, who manages the Guyra water treatment works,
started the frenzy when he made his regular check on the
reservoir. "Well, I seen where the reeds had been flattened and
I didn't know what had caused it," Mr Starr said yesterday. "I
just knew that whatever it was it had fallen from the sky." He
didn't go into the water to find out what had caused it. "No
bloody fear I didn't," he said. "There's no future in that."

A stop has been placed on the pumping of water from the dam to
the town and severe water restrictions are in place until the
mystery is solved.

The ranges near Guyra are used by the RAAF for dummy bombing
runs. Two F1-11s have ploughed into nearby hills in the past 20
years but the local policeman, Sergeant Larry Hoffman, said the
RAAF insisted they had no planes in the area and all parts are
accounted for.

"We really have no idea what caused it," Sergeant Hoffman said.
But he wouldn't mind if Sigourney Weaver emerged from the swamp,
he said.

============================================================

Update:

Tests on the water in the dam have revealed no toxins or
radioactivity and it's expected to be cleared for pumping to the
local township at 6:00 p.m. tonight local time.

A possible eyewitness saw what he described as a "falling star"
at approx. 9 p.m on Monday.

    "It was blue, between the size of a golf ball and a tennis
    ball and it came from an easterly direction.  It shot down at
    a 45-degree angle."

Police divers have located a 20 metre long by 1 metre wide
tunnel in the mud at the bottom of the dam.  Earth-moving
equipment will be used later this morning in an attempt to
recover whatever might be buried at the other end of the tunnel.

One local Guyra car dealership is already advertising:

                        FOR SALE
                      SECOND HAND
                       UFO PARTS
                  Limited Supply Only


Keep an eye on eBay to see if any of these "parts" turn up
there -- along with the Polar Lander. ;-)


Regards,
         John


--

PROJECT 1947                  |  E-Mail:
http://www.project1947.com/   |  legion@mira.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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                       CSETI New Video - 4 UPN Pieces

From: Tony Craddock <webmaster@cseti.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:00:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:08:12 -0500
Subject: CSETI New Video - 4 UPN Pieces


Four new videos are up on the CSETI Website .

All are UPN News Investigative Reports.

They are on the Sturrock UFO report (next to the USA Today
flag), anomalies on the Moon, and under "Mars", the
Investigative Reports Parts 1 and 2 for the Cydonia region of
Mars.

In Part 2, listen to NASA JPL's Dr. Arden Albee get highly
defensive when Tammy Taylor puts him on the spot about removing
60% of the data from the Cydonia images from the Mars Global
Surveyor.




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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                            Peter Davenport Chat

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 18:05:12 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:03:45 -0500
Subject: Peter Davenport Chat


Greetings list -

Peter Davenport, director of the National UFO Reporting Center,
will be chatting live on Monday, December 13 at 7 PM CST at the
Alabama Live website.

For more information, please visit:

http://www.al.com/chat/chats/peterdavenport.html

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                       Re: [M-TRAC - MSAA] Conspiracy?

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 23:27:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:16:03 -0500
Subject: Re: [M-TRAC - MSAA] Conspiracy?


Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 09:41:56 -0800
From: John Dyck <JDYCK@cymbolic.com>
To: cydonia@listbox.com
Subject: [M-TRAC - MSAA] Conspiracy?


Bit of interesting trivia here:

While listening to the radio on my way to work this morning, the
morning news came on and during the news the subject of the
failed Mars polar lander came up.

During this conversation they also mentioned the failed Mars
global orbiter and went on further to say that yesterday on the
internet they had come across a story about the orbiter and the
fact that one day before the orbiter was due to reach Mars,
staff at Nasa had noticed two people were uploading new
telemetry data to the orbiter.

Security was called and these two were checked out. Their I.D's
were verified and apparently did check out at the time. However,
according to this story, about a month later, they were again
investigated and found to have never worked at Nasa or JPL.

So, this was aired this morning here in Vancouver, B.C by the
radio station CFOX.  99.3 F.M on your dial. The morning deejays
are Larry and Willy. They have a website at CFOX.com.  They
talked about this at 7:00 am during the height of rush-hour and
again at 9:00 am.

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

Mars Surface Anomaly Analysis
Possible artifacts on Mars http://www.mufor.org/ares/

The M-TRAC Project
A private, unmanned mission to Mars
http://www.mufor.org/mtrac/

Please support this mailing list by sending $1
to Malta UFO Research,
PO Box 14, Rabat RBT 01, Malta
or if you want to buy any books from Amazon.com use
the links and search engine at http://www.mufor.org/store.html
from which we earn a small commission. 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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

               P-47: Re: Breaking story in Australia Guyra NSW

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@BIGPOND.COM>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:25:17 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:43:36 -0500
Subject: P-47: Re: Breaking story in Australia Guyra NSW


 >From: HerbUFO@AOL.COM <HerbUFO@AOL.COM>
 >To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM <PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
 >Date: Thursday, December 09, 1999 11:55 AM
 >Subject: Breaking story in Australia


The media have had a field day.  The evidence at this stage
appears to support some sort of impact from above and most
authorities seem to favour a meteorite.

Some sort of event precipitated the effects on the reeds on the
edge of the town water supply dam - 15 m by 6 m reed effect on
surface.  No apparent prosaic contamination or radiation.

Evidence seems to support entery at 45 degrees or less.

A 40 cm diameter "tunnel" of some 12 metres in length (to be
confirmed).

No explicit correlations with UFO event, but a number of reports
are emerging of activity on Monday night, 6/12.

Nothing seen at site Monday afternoon.

Found during day Tuesday, Dec 7th reports vary from around
midday to 3.15 pm by local worker involved in routine monitoring
of dam.

Evidence of a number of reports on Monday night involving red
beams of light.

An extraordinary report from a 74 year old gent driving between
Armidale and Glen Innes at 2.30 am, Tuesday morning, in which he
encountered strange light display, disorientation, sharp radio
interference, heat and short duration rapid red/orange light
illumination.

He experienced strong eye" burn" - UV?

Canberra Siesmic centre (Kevin McCe) is reporting some sort of
"sonic disturbance" over nearby Armidale at 8.15 pm Tuesday.

Another witness, Barbara Ross reported visual sighting - an
"object", then suddenly green light - the air was filled with
green light - then about 30 secs later a loud explosion - timing
and exact location unknown, but presumed in Guyra area.

So a lot to sort out, but intriguing.

A bit of a circus zoo atmosphere and there are UFO investigators
there already and more to follow!

Best wishes,

Bill Chalker
----------







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 9

               Australia - Does Guyra Have A UFO In It's Dam?

From: Ken Margolis <Kenmargo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 00:47:24 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:22:12 -0500
Subject: Australia - Does Guyra Have A UFO In It's Dam?



DOES GUYRA HAVE A UFO IN IT'S DAM?
9th Dec 1999

<radio transcript snips>

Melbourne researchers, John Auchettl [LtCol] and Ron Barnett
[Dr] from Phenomena Research Australia (PRA) reported on Radio
National today.

"We flew up from Melbourne yesterday and have been up at the
location for over 24 hours. We plan to do a 'fly over' to get
some vision on the ground effect.  But at present the site is
cold and from reports the event has taken place some time
between Monday and midday yesterday.

We went over the impact site in some detail. It is located in
the Guyra water supply dam on the outskirts of the town, north
of Armidale (NSW Australia). We arrived at the location very
early on the 8th [Dec] and checked out the location with a
number of research tools. The radiation level at the site was at
normal back ground level. That night, an IR camera was used to
look for hot spots, none were located. Samples has been taken
and will be looked at.

We did find the site interesting. Normally, we would not travel
to such sites, but the information sent to us from DoD warranted
a look. So yes, the impact has some strange aspects to it that
need to be looked at. For example:


�   Angle of entry to the dam was very shallow less than 45
     degrees.

�   For such an impact to occur in a population of about 2000 no
     one recalls a sound of a sonic boom or explosion.

�   The surface has burn marks; this is very unusual for a
     meteorite impact.

�   I had a good look at the reeds on the bank. They are down in
     a strange shape not quite like an explosion but have the
     characteristics of a compression wave.

�   The mud splash is also interesting as it lets us know how
     much energy was in the impact but the sting in the tail,
     with this impact, is on the other side [bank], the object
     may have skipped on the water.

�   There was no witness to the impact.

After our examination, I cannot rule out an explosive device, or
some elaborate hoax. Viewing the site makes me feel confident
that it's not man made. We need to get the samples looked at and
someone needs to go down into the mud and water and have a look.
My first hypothesis is that it a meteorite. But that just
conjecture.

We felt that the area should be shut down until the police
cleared it, and they have done that at last. The media - radio
and TV - have taken to this story with some vigour and it's
turned into a bit of a "zoo". Some of the stories are starting
to develop and the precision will soon be lost.  One, media
reporter wanted me to run the alien story line. I can tell you
right now there is no report of 'little green men'; in fact,
there is not report of the event from any locals, around the
area at present.

The alleged object was not seen entering the dam and while the
subject is 'press hot' and everyone is running around the area,
little can be done. I can say until further evidence is
presented the matter remains unresolved and at the moment a
police and EPA problem. With time we will follow up any data
that may end the mystery."

REF:

(Phenomena Research Australia [PRA] - P.O. Box 523,
Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170 - praufo@aol.com)

OTHER WEB DATA:

THE AGE - MELBOURNE -
http://www.theage.com.au/breaking/9912/09/A26303-1999Dec9.shtml

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH - SYDNEY -
http://www.news.com.au/

ABC NEWS -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/default.htm

SOUND + VIDEO VISION -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/1999/12/item19991209122818_1.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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 20:51:06 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:26:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >>Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:42:53 +0000
 >>From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>Subject: AA Film Research

 >>Dear All,

 >>Does anyone out there happen to have a copy of the research done
 >>by Rob Irving on the alleged film canister labels from the Alien
 >>Autopsy film?

 ><snip>

 >The problem is that I had researched the subject and found
 >evidence that "restricted" was in fact legitimate and that
 >sometimes, under certain circumstances the date could be written
 >as July 30th 1947.  I contacted Kent Jeffrey through one of his
 >researchers( a member of this list) and told them of my
 >information.  They said the letters I cited had been
 >debunked,and they were sure of their facts.  They were wrong.
 >But that didn't prevent them from releasing information they
 >knew was in doubt.  There are many other examples of critics
 >using false assertions to condemn the footage and then not
 >correcting the record.   I certainly don't mean any disrespect
 >to you or Tim, but what the Alien Autopsy needs, more than
 >another book, is a re-examination and debate, one that is, open,
 >honest, and cooperative.

 >Would you be willing to work toward those ends?

 >Ed


Dear Ed,

I think Philip would be the first to agree he and Ray and _not_
the best of friends.<g>

I note your continued interest in the AA film and concure with
your view it does indeed need a re-evaluation. Please look out
for the RPIT Report No2 to be issued shortly for my reasons, you
may be suprised, if not shocked.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                    Possible Eyewitness To Guyra Mystery

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 13:19:37 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:28:04 -0500
Subject: Possible Eyewitness To Guyra Mystery


Greetings list -

From: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/s72148.htm
(Audio Available)

Possible eyewitness to Guyra mystery
PM - Thursday, December  9, 1999  6:33

COMPERE: I was wondering if perhaps the Martians had sent back
the Polar Lander, but there is one man who's sure the mystery
object is a meteorite.

Fossicker Doug Strang was having a quiet beer and watching the
sky near Mt Isa in north-west Queensland last night when
something passed overhead. He described what he saw to Gerald
Tooth.

DOUG STRANG: A white object with tailings it was obviously
burning up and it was going a nice steady pace. I mean was it a
shooting star? It looked like a comet. It was obviously burning
up. I surmised it was something that had entered the atmosphere.

GERALD TOOTH: And you saw it travelling across the sky toward
the horizon, is that right?

DOUG STRANG: Yes. And as it moved towards the horizon it split
up into three or four sections.

GERALD TOOTH: It broke up into various pieces?

DOUG STRANG: Yes, three or four little dots came out of the big
one. So ...

GERALD TOOTH: And could you see what those pieces did? Did they
fall to ground?

DOUG STRANG: Actually no. What I did see after four little,
smaller dots in alignment and then nothing. That was it. I
didn't see anything fall.

GERALD TOOTH: Could what you saw be connected to the incident in
Guyra where an unknown object dropped into a dam?

DOUG STRANG: Without a doubt. Without a doubt.

GERALD TOOTH: So you think what you saw was a meteorite breaking
up and part of that could have fallen into the dam at Guyra?

DOUG STRANG: Yes I'd say that. So as three or four other pieces
of debris [indistinct] obviously.

GERALD TOOTH: Where did you see this?

DOUG STRANG: Twenty K, north-east of Mt Isa. Twenty K.

GERALD TOOTH: And you were out fossicking at the time and just
looked up at the sky and saw this meteorite going over?

DOUG STRANG: Well it getting towards dark and I was heading
home, and I stopped off for a drink - [laughs].

GERALD TOOTH: Stopped off for a beer or two?

DOUG STRANG: Yeah, I mean, to relax and have a beer before I go
home.

GERALD TOOTH: Did anybody else see this incident?

DOUG STRANG: No, no, no. There was no cars on the highway at the
time either. It was just off the highway. I always do this. I
relax and have a beer and enjoy the sky. I'm like that, and
there it was.

GERALD TOOTH: Have you ever seen anything like this before?

DOUG STRANG: Nothing like that. No, but like I said, I think I
did tell you I saw an Apollo entry. I saw one of those years ago
and that was fantastic, but I know what that looks like.

GERALD TOOTH: And this didn't look like that?

DOUG STRANG: Oh no, no way. No this was too close. No this was a
definite burning up. It was very, very close.

GERALD TOOTH: Could it have been a space craft coming into the
atmosphere?

DOUG STRANG: Oh look, look, space craft, I don't know about
that. I'm not into that. Space crafts. I've never seen a space
craft so I wouldn't know. [Laughs].

GERALD TOOTH: What did you think it was?

DOUG STRANG: I thought at first, for the first couple of seconds
oh a comet. Magic, I thought, oh this is fantastic, and then I
thought, no, it can't be, it can't be a comet. It would have to
be a meteor or actually space junk was the other one. I thought
the space junk re-entering the atmosphere. It was definitely not
a space ship. It didn't resemble anything like that, no way, no,
no.

COMPERE: Doug Strang, a fossicker from Mt Isa talking to Gerald
Tooth.

---

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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                3-Reports On UFO Crashing Into Australian Dam

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:21:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:31:31 -0500
Subject: 3-Reports On UFO Crashing Into Australian Dam



Here are three news reports from the Australian Broadcasting
Corporation:

=================================================

Source:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/regionals/neweng/regeng-9dec1999-10.htm

Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:19 AEDT
LOCAL NEWS: Tamworth

"Divers find cavern in hunt for mystery object"

Police divers searching the water supply dam at Guyra, on the
New South Wales northern tablelands, have found what they
describe as a subterranean cavern, or tunnel, below the water
line.

The divers were called in after suspicions that a meteorite or a
piece of space junk had crashed into the dam.

Late this afternoon, the police divers found the cavern,
indicating that an object had entered the water and the floor of
the dam at high speed. They say it traveled through the earth
for about 12 metres after impact.

No object has yet been found. The divers have now suspended
their search until tomorrow morning.

Meanwhile, this afternoon health authorities announced water in
the Guyra dam is not contaminated.

� 1999 Australian Broadcasting Corporation

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

Source:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/regionals/neweng/regeng-9dec1999-9.htm

Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:38 AEDT
LOCAL NEWS: Tamworth

"Guyra dam searched for unidentified object"

Police divers have been searching the water supply dam at Guyra,
on the NSW northern tablelands, for an unidentified object
believed to have crashed into the storage.

Reeds near the water's edge were flattened and large areas of
mud disturbed when something crashed into the water.

But no-one knows exactly what it could have been.

Authorities say the most likely scenario is a piece of junk or a
small meteorite.

Meanwhile, health authorities have announced that tests have
found water in the Guyra Dam is not contaminated.

� 1999 Australian Broadcasting Corporation

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

Source:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/regionals/neweng/regeng-9dec1999-8.htm

Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:30 AEDT
LOCAL NEWS: Tamworth

"Suspicious object subject to speculation"

Mystery still surrounds what has fallen into the water supply
dam at Guyra, on the northern tablelands.

Police divers are being brought in this afternoon with, water
sample test results to be announced by the Environment
Protection Authority.

Police and emergency services say they do not know what it is,
but it has flattened reeds and thrown up a large area of mud.

Experts have come up with any number of theories, including a
piece of space junk, a meteorite, a falling star, a frozen block
of sewage from a passenger aircraft, the Mars probe looking for
water or even martians landing on earth.

Police have sealed off the area and releases from the dam have
been stopped, pending the water test results.

� 1999 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
--
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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:12:51 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:49:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >I realize that you and Ray are friends but I just can�t see how
 >there could ever be a "balanced discussion" of the Santilli
 >alien autopsy?  The decision has already been made by most
 >Ufologists and the common folk: The footage is a bald hoax and
 >a scam.

And this is the wrong decision, because...

 >Case closed, right?

Case closed, for me, a long time ago. But it was, IMO, Theresa
Carlson, who really put the final nail in the autopsy alien's
coffin.

 >Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at

How so? Perhaps it is sketchy to you because you refuse to see
the autopsy for the scam, perpetrated on all of us by Ray
Santilli and others (including Philip Mantle), that it really
is.

 >best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
 >dishonest con man and schemer( and worse), or a dupe or
 >disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.

So, what is he Ed? A Saint? I don't think so. Ray saw a way to
make money and he, more than likely, did.

 >But what does seem to be true is that Ray Santilli, through a
 >set of fortuitous circumstances, came into possession of some
 >marvelously intriguing rolls of fifty year old film which shows
 >the dissection of a "creature with no business here" and some
 >of the debris from the creature's vehicle.

No one has seen any fifty-year-old film with pictures of the
autopsy alien on it.

 >The problem Kevin Randle seems to have with the classification
 >of "Restricted Top Secret" is an example of the type of
 >disinformation/misinformation that surrounds the autopsy
 >footage.

 >In Kent Jeffrey's hit piece on Santilli, Jeffrey makes a big
 >deal about the "restricted" designation found on the first film
 >that Santilli publicly showed.  Kent felt "restricted"  wasn't
 >a legitimate military security designation:

 >"RESTRICTED ACCESS
 >A01 CLASSIFICATION
 >SUBJECT 1 of 2
 >JULY 30th 1947"

 >Jeffrey adds:  "The Sunday Times article points out, however,
 >that 'restricted' access' is not a recognized U.S. military
 >code and that the A01 classification had been dismissed as 'pure
 >Hollywood'. Even more telling is the month-day-year format of
 >the date. The U.S. military always uses a day-month-year
 >format. Therefore, the date should have read '30 July 1947'."

 >The problem is that I had researched the subject and found
 >evidence that "restricted" was in fact legitimate and that
 >sometimes, under certain circumstances the date could be
 >written as July 30th 1947.

 >I contacted Kent Jeffreys through one of his
 >researchers (a member of this list) and told them of my
 >information.  They said the letters I cited had been
 >debunked,and they were sure of their facts.  They were wrong.
 >But that didn't prevent them from releasing information they
 >knew was in doubt.  There are many other examples of critics
 >using false assertions to condemn the footage and then not
 >correcting the record.   I certainly don't mean any disrespect
 >to you or Tim, but what the Alien Autopsy needs, more than
 >another book, is a re-examination and debate, one that is,
 >open, honest, and cooperative.

Even if these documents you claim exist were valid, that would
not make the autopsy real. All that would do is make that one
assertion by Jeffrey incorrect.

BTW, I suspect you are talking about me because I seem to
remember having several tiring emails from you. I didn't  do
Kent's research for him, all I did was answer a few questions
and emails for him. Any questions you had were passed on to him
and any reply you received was a reply he directed me to send.
While I haven't looked at any of this autopsy crap (great
phrasing Roger!) in over a year and a half, I probably still
stand-by what Kent wrote in his last article about the autopsy
footage.

Best,
Rebecca

PS. The last thing anyone needs to do is rehash the autopsy
crap. If you have something new that requires a response, great,
if not, it's over for 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 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                     Re: Blather Addendum - Competition!

From: Daev Walsh <daev@blather.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 19:59:59 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 20:58:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Blather Addendum - Competition!


BLATHER HASN'T A CLUE

Idjits, gobdaws, amadans that we are - in our haste to deliver
the oul Blather, didn't we forget to include details of the
Blather competition - who won the last one, and how you can win
Jock Howson's '2020: Hindsight', Paul Krassner's 'Pot Stories
for the Soul', and '3 Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts' by the
Rhipidon Society. Head on to
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html for more details.

The winners of last issues's competition were: Ted Kane in Los
Angeles, who gets a copy of the complete works of Charles Fort,
thanks to the fine people of the International Fortean Society
(http://www.research.umbc.edu/~frizzell/info). Michael Benedetti
in New Jersey gets his hands on a copy of 'Everything Is Under
Control: Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-Ups'
(http://www.rawilson.com/bookstore.html), thanks to Robert Anton
Wilson (http://www.rawilson.com/). And finally, Shereen Beckett
in Carrickfergus, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland, receives a copy
of '1900' by Mike Jay and Michael Neve
(http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0141180838/qid%3D93569
0365/s r%3D1-1/026-6526334-4090826).

And the questions were:

1) Charles Fort was born in Albany, New York, in 1874, and died
in New York City in 1932. He lived for several years - more than
eight, in fact, in one other city. What was the city?

NOT: Chicago
ANSWER: London
NOT: Dublin

2) When U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in
Dallas on November 22, 1963, An 8mm film of the event was
captured by:

NOT: Oliver Stone
NOT: Jim Garrison
ANSWER: Abraham Zapruder

3) Who wrote the novel 'War of the Worlds'?

NOT: Orson Welles
ANSWER: H.G. Wells
NOT: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle



AND NOW, YES YOU WIN MORE STUFF....

Yes, Blatherskites, we're giving 'more' stuff away. Actually, to
be more precise, Blather is facilitating the giving away of
stuff by other people, and this time there will be _three_
winners, each of which will win one of three prizes. To enter,
make your way to: http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html

Prize One: '2020: Hindsight - The Book of the Bug'
By Jock Howson

Jock writes: 2020:Hindsight is a new and uniquely challenging
entrant into the Post-holocaust lists. Ranking alonside Miller's
'Canticle for Leibowitz' and Pournelle's 'Lucifer's Hammer', it
predicates the collapse of western society as a result of severe
financial and technical problems associated with the Millennium
Bug.

Written retrospectively in the year 2020, it is the tale of how
a small community survives the horrors and torments of The End
and the chaos and confusion that follows. The narrator, known
only as The Librarian, a man crippled in the food riots which
precede the final collapse, tells the tale of how the Bug, both
directly and indirectly, causes economic and social collapse. He
tells us also of his small community's tragicomically inept
fight against external and internal social disintegration.

Through the Librarian's rambling and doubtful account we come to
understand the true nature of their passage through a Hobbesian
decline to a dysfunctional and ultimately doomed existence.

The book is primarily black comedy and bitter satire,
indelicately interwoven with farce and tragedy in a complex and
innovative structure and style. Largely devoid of plot or
character or narrative description but structurally and
textually rich and demanding, it is full of thought-provoking
incident and allusion. It brings into question most of our
literary and social precepts, challenging our views on personal
relationships and on the relationships between perception and
belief, and fiction and reality, and truth and deception. And
self-deception.

It must also makes us question just what will happen
when the new Millennium arrives.

A very worrying entertainment.

(http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0953614107/qid=943643698/sr=
1-10/02 6-4870404-2448035)





Prize Two: Pot Stories For
the Soul
Compiled by Paul Krassner
With a foreword by Harlan Ellison
Published by 'High Times'
(http://www.hightimes.com/)

'For this book, Paul Krassner contacted 250 friends and
acquaintances to cull stories. These true tales, ranging from
funny to bizarre to poignant, include "How the Yippies Mailed
30,000 Joints to Perfect Strangers," "The Bust at Ken Kesey's
Place," and "The Acid Trip of a Death Row Prisoner.'

(http://www.hightimes.com/ht/baz/product.tmpl$showpage?var1=Pot%20Stor
ies%20For%20The%20Soul&cart=302744090184)



Prize Three: '3 Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts'
by the Rhipidon Society

'Three Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts (ISBN 0-9659512-3-5)
features essays that explain the mythical origins of three
powerful archetypes: the Phoenix, the Baphomet and the Greek god
Dionysus. Named after the truth-seekers who meet a child-god in
Phillip K. Dick's literary, gnostic landmark, VALIS, the
Rhipidon Society pokes and prods these subjects to unravel
hidden symbolism and historical connections that will enlighten
and challenge those who wish to take this academic and
speculative joyride through a landscape populated by weird
beasts, brazen maenads, and goat-headed gods. Secret societies,
strange heretics, and forbidden rites are handled with a steady
balance between esoteric insight and absurd humor, as if the
book were a collaboration between Joseph Campbell and the
Fleischer Cartoon Studios. Students of the occult and lovers of
mythology will find Three Myths to be a valuable resource.'

'3 Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts' was donated by Breck
Outland, and is available through the The Pentaradial Press
(http://www.pentaradial.com/).

To enter, make your way to:
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html






daev
________________________________
Dave Walsh, Blatherskite 'extra ordinem'
        http://www.blather.net
     Paranormal Agent Provocateurism
________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 9

                    Re: Astrobiology Program in the U.K.

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:28:08 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:12:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Astrobiology Program in the U.K.


Hi everyone.

With the loss of NASA's Mars Polar Lander, we now have to wait
exactly four years until December 2003 for the next attempt to
search for life on the surface of Mars since the Viking landers
in 1976 detected something...  This time the latest Mars lander,
Beagle 2, will be from the United Kingdom.

With the inauguration of the U.K. Astrobiology Network, the first
announcement that alien life has been discovered on another world
may well come from the U.K.

Below is a notice I got about U.K's plans to find the answer to
the question, "Are we alone in the universe?".

<snip>

Date: 9 December 1999
For immediate release

Ref. PN 99/37

Issued by: Peter Bond
RAS Press Officer (Space Science)
Office & home phone: +44 (0)1483 268672
FAX: +44 (0)1483 274047
E-mail: 100604.1111@compuserve.com
RAS Web: http://www.ras.org.uk/ras/

<snip>

LAUNCH OF A NEW SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE IN THE U.K. - BNSC PRESS
BRIEFING TO PRESENT THE FIRST U.K.REPORT ON ASTROBIOLOGY, THE
SEARCH FOR LIFE BEYOND EARTH.

Members of the media are invited to attend a Press Briefing to
mark the publication of the U.K. Astrobiology Report and the
formal inauguration of the U.K. Astrobiology Network on:

MONDAY 13 DECEMBER 1999 at 11 am in the Spencer Gallery of The
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London.  Enter via the
Museum's Cromwell Road Entrance.

Is there anyone out there? This question has intrigued humanity
for centuries, but until now, there has been no organised,
concerted effort by the scientific community to answer this
fundamental question.

This situation is about to change. At the request of the British
National Space Centre (BNSC), scientists from many different
disciplines - geology, atmospheric physics, biology, chemistry,
and astronomy - have come together as the U.K. Astrobiology Forum
(formerly the U.K. Exobiology Forum) to consider the way forward
for the U.K. in this important, pioneering area of research.

The end product of this consultative process is a new Report on
the status of Astrobiology-related studies in this country and
the potential for groundbreaking research into the possibility of
extraterrestrial life in the years ahead.

This U.K. Astrobiology Report has now been published and it will
be presented for the first time to the media and the scientific
community at a meeting organised by BNSC (for details see above).

A panel of experts will be available to discuss the contents of
the Report. Each panelist will also briefly describe his or her
different research interests and perspectives on the search for
life beyond Earth.

Presenting the report to the U.K. government on the way forward
for this new scientific discipline will be:

  Dr Don Cowan, (Chairman, BNSC UK Astrobiology Panel), University
  College London. Dr. Cowan is an expert on extremophiles - life
  forms which live in the most hostile environments found on
  Earth.

  Dr Monica Grady, The Natural History Museum, London. Dr. Grady
  is an expert on meteorites and has taken part in studies of the
  Martian meteorite ALH 84001 which is considered by some
  scientists to contain evidence of primitive life on Mars.

  Dr Alan Penny, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot,
  Oxfordshire. Dr. Penny is an expert on the possibility of
  discovering Earth-like planets around other stars and a leading
  proponent of the Darwin space telescope.

  Professor Colin Pillinger, Open University, Milton Keynes.
  Professor Pillinger is the leader of the team to design and
  build Beagle 2, a lander which will fly piggyback on the
  European Space Agency's Mars Express mission and touch down on
  the surface of Mars to search for signs of life.

There will also be a video presentation by Dr. David
Wynn-Williams of the British Antarctic Survey. Dr. Wynn-Williams
is a research group leader with 25 years' experience in studying
Antarctic microbiology.

There will be opportunities for questions and interviews after
the presentations. Copies of the printed report will also be
available.

The briefing is expected to end by 12.30 pm.

<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 >
   Dec > Dec 10

                        Guyra 'UFO' - Small Meteorite

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:32:43 PST
Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:11:18 -0500
Subject: Guyra 'UFO' - Small Meteorite


Greetings list -

From: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/01_national/story_10797.asp

Guyra UFO mystery solved
3:36 am AEST October 12 1999

AAP -- The mystery of the unidentified flying object that
crashed into a northern New South Wales dam has been solved with
police today confirming a small meteorite was responsible.

Police divers recovered sediment and fragments from the Guyra
dam and geologists believed the sediment came from a small
meteorite the size of a golf ball.

The meteorite penetrated the mud at the bottom of the dam and
now was embedded about four metres into soft granite and was
unable to be removed, police said.

Emergency services have left the area.

A council worker raised the alarm on Wednesday, when he
discovered a 15m area of flattened reeds in the Guyra Reservoir
at about 9am.

Several locals reported seeing an object falling out of the sky
sometime between Monday and Wednesday morning.

Local authorities quickly cut-off the town's water supply after
the discovery, concerned the object may have contaminated the
water supply.

But experts yesterday said the water had not been contaminated
and reinstated the town's water supply.

---

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 >
   Dec > Dec 10

                            Attention Subscribers

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:55:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:55:44 -0500
Subject: Attention Subscribers

Changes made by iprimus.ca are causing messages to the UFO
UpDates list to be 'sucked up' by the mail servers and consigned
to a cyber-dump. No delivery. No bounce-notifications to this
address.

A new service is being set-up and should be completed by the
middle of next week. You'll be notified of the new address.

Again, no one's address has been removed by UFO UpDates -
globalserve/imprimus are the culprits.

I am still able to e-mail individual addresses - hence your
being able to read this.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 10

                     Meteorite Blamed for Reservoir Mess

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:41:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:40:34 -0500
Subject: Meteorite Blamed for Reservoir Mess


Source:

http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=AUSANT&STORYID=APIS71873MG0

DECEMBER 09, 22:22 EST

Meteorite Blamed for Reservoir Mess

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) � An object that crashed into an
Australian reservoir was most likely a meteorite the size of a
golf ball, authorities said Friday.

After signs that something had fallen into a reservoir,
officials shut off the water supply to the nearby town of 235
miles north of Sydney.

Police set up barricades and scientists carrying Geiger-counters
were called in to investigate.

The mystery made national news reports Thursday and triggered
calls to radio talk shows from people offering explanations
ranging from a Martian landing to a hoax by mischievous
townsfolk.

A worker raised the alarm late Wednesday after noticing a path
50 feet long and several feet wide had been gouged through reeds
growing next to the reservoir's dam, police said.

On Friday, police divers recovered sediment from the reservoir
that geologists believe was stirred up by a small meteorite.
Police said the meteorite was embedded about 14 feet into soft
rock and could not be quickly removed.

Officials said radiation levels were normal and the water was
not contaminated. Guyra's water supply was later turned back on.

-- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                            Attention Subscribers

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:44:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:44:21 -0500
Subject: Attention Subscribers

Changes made by iprimus.ca are causing messages to the UFO
UpDates list to be 'sucked up' by the mail servers and consigned
to a cyber-dump. No delivery. No bounce-notifications to this
address.

A new service is being set-up and should be completed by the
middle of next week. You'll be notified of the new address.

Again, no one's address has been removed by UFO UpDates -
globalserve/imprimus are the culprits.

I am still able to e-mail individual addresses - hence your
being able to read this.

Send your responses to posts here at the archive to
updates@globalserve.net - for now.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 33

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:57:02 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:39:47 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 33


UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 33
December 9, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

MARS POLAR LANDER VANISHES

Like its sister spacecraft, the Mars Climate Orbiter, the Mars
Polar Lander (MPL) vanished on Friday, December 3, 1999 while on
the final leg of its trip to Mars.

The $165 million spacecraft performed almost flawlessly during
its 11-month, 470-million-mile voyage to Mars.  It was set to
land in the planet's southern hemisphere near the South Pole.
Upon landing, two $29 million electronic probes were to be
jettisoned in order to burrow into the soil in search of water
or ice.  The probes were named Scott and Amundsen after two
Antarctic explorers.

The Mars Polar Lander entered the planet's atmosphere shortly
before noon (California time). The spacecraft sent a radio
signal acknowledging the launch of the Scott and Amundsen probes
at 12:06 p.m.  The MPL then began a 30-minute period of radio
silence as it descended to the surface.

"After the first contact (with MPL) failed at 12:39 p.m.PST,
there was a second try around 2:04 p.m. and a third try at 8:30
p.m., but there was no success in those efforts, either."

"'So far I feel like I've been stood up on a date,' Mars program
scientist Dave Crisp said late FRiday.  But he held out hope
that his date with Mars is not off, just late.  'If that's the
case, all is forgiven.'"

"Engineers kept telling the probe to scan the sky to look for
Earth late Friday, but it couldn't connect."

All day on Saturday, December 4, 1999, the team at the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, USA attempted to
make radio contact with the Mars Polar Lander and its two
mini-probes. ""Going into two more tries late Saturday,
officials at the Jet Propulsion Lab have tried 13 times to
contact the three different probes without success."

Sunday, December 5, 1999, saw more heartbreaking news for MPL
team members. "The failure to communicate with the spacecraft
Sunday morning was a serious blow."  MPL scientists "planned all
day to try another method of communication at 9:40 p.m. PST, and
if that failed, several more in the following days."

The Mars Polar Lander had two high-tech radio antennae aboard.
The dish-shaped medium-gain antenna, located on the MPL's side,
had to be pointed directly at Earth to communicate with the
controllers.  The tube-shaped ultra-high-frequency (UHF) antenna
on top of the probe was able to communicate indirectly with
Earth.  The UHF antenna could send a signal to the Mars Global
Surveyor, already in orbit around the planet, which would then
relay the MPL signal to Earth.

"Just after 1 a.m. on Monday, scientists listened for a signal
from the spacecraft's main antenna but heard nothing."

On Tuesday, December 7, the MPL team looked for "messages from a
backup (UHF) antenna on the lander."

"If that failed, scientists were to make a final serious attempt
to establish contact.  They were to order the lander's main
antenna to sweep the sky on Wednesday and beam signals to a wide
swath of the universe."

"Two pods that rode the lander to Mars and were supposed to
probe the Martian atmosphere almost are certainly lost.  Nothing
was heard from them Monday, the deadline for them to make
contact with Earth."

Although no specific cause of the loss of the Mars Polar Lander
has yet been announced, some NASA officials are speculating that
the lander's rocket thruster fuel may have frozen during its
long voyage through space.

"In particular, the panel warned that the hydrazine fuel for the
lander's retrorockets might freeze in space, producing ignition
delays, irregular pulses and possibly leading to a topsy-turvy
landing."

On Tuesday, December 7, NASA officials said they had turned on
"heaters to begin warming the hydrazine...before the lander
began its descent on Friday."

"The panel" which investigated the loss of the Mars Climate
Orbiter ten weeks ago "expressed worry that the lander's 12
thrusters had 'to act in unison to ensure a stable descent,' and
that such a complex feat had never been tried before."

The loss of the Mars Polar Lander follows a pattern of doomed
Mars missions.  MPL's sister spacecraft, Mars Climate Orbiter,
vanished while passing behind Mars to enter orbit.  Pathfiner
and its companion robot explorer, Sojourner, landed successfully
on Mars but went dead six weeks later in 1997.  The $1 billion
Mars Observer vanished while enroute to Mars in 1993. (See the
Minneaplois, Minn. Star-Tribune for December 8, 1999, "NASA
plans sweeping review," page 1; the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune
for December 4, 1999, "Mars probe fails to make connection with
scientists" and December 8, 1999, "NASA report blasts inner
workings of two Mars projects."  Also USA Today for December 6,
1999, "Still no noise from Mars Polar Lander, probes;" December
7, 1999, "NASA prepares for last calls to silent spacecraft:'
and December 8, 1999, "NASA may delay Mars missions." (Editor's
Comment: Why do I get the feeling that the Mars Polar Lander is
sitting in some giant saucer's cargo hold, right next to the
Mars Climate Orbiter and the Mars Observer.  Maybe the alien
skipper plans to open a museum.)

CYLINDRICAL UFO HOVERS OVER SHANGHAI


A large light gray cylindrical UFO appeared over the western end
of Shanghai, the largest city in China, and hovered there for
one hour on Thursday afternoon, December 2, 1999.

The hovering UFO was seen by about 100 people and was reported
in two large newspapers, the Shanghai Daily, and the Wenhui
Daily, in their Friday, December 3, editions.

Upon receiving a telephone call from an eyewitness, "a reporter
for Wenhui Daily hurried to the 43rd floor of a building" and
"claimed he saw an illuminated object stationary in the sky for
ten minutes before it disappeared."

Two TV stations in Shanghai broadcast color video footage of the
UFO, described as "an object darting through the sky with a
flaming orange tail."

"A former researcher at the Shanghai Observatory, Professor
Jiang Xiaoyuan, was one of the witnesses but he could not offer
an explanation."

"The UFO hovered over the city for an hour and a half, reports
said."

Radar operators at Hongqiao International Airport near Shanghai
said they detected "nothing out of the ordinary" on their radar
sets.  (See the Chinese newspaper Wenhui Daily for December 3,
1999, "UFO appears in the sky over Shanghai."  Many thanks to
Jim Hickman of Aerial Phenomena Research Group for forwarding
the newspaper article.)

CHINESE BIGFOOT TRACKED AT NATURE PRESERVE

On Sunday, December 5, 1999, the China Daily reported that a
scientific team in the Shennongjia mountains of Hubeir Province,
China had found physical evidence of a large hairy hominid,
which they called "a wild man."

"Standing eight feet tall with long red hair and a taste for
corn on the cob, (China's) Big Foot is back and apparently
running around a nature preserve in central China."

"Chinese scientists are on the trail of the legendary beast
after a hunter reported seeing a creature in Hubeir province in
Shenongjia Nature Reserve two months ago, the China Daily said.
The scientists found 16-inch footprints, brown hair and chewed
corncobs and concluded they were not left by a bear."  (See USA
Today for December 8, 1999, "Big Foot Returns," page 24A)
(Editor's Note:  Reports of hairy "wild men" in the Shennongjia
mountains of Hubei province date back to 2,000 B.C.  More
recently,  Zhou Guoxing encountered a seven-foot-tall hominid in
the preserve in 1977.  See Unexplained Mysteries of the
Twentieth Century by Janet and Colin Bord, Contemporary Books,
1982, page 207.)

SEVEN UFOs SIGHTED IN BANDON, OREGON


On Monday, November 1, 1999, eyewitness A.S. and 12 other
witnesses saw seven "circular things" in the sky over Bandon,
Oregon (population 2,215), a small town on Highway 101 85 miles
(112 kilometers) west of Roseburg.

"I was in Bandon at 9 a.m., visiting the cheese factory," A.S.
reported, "And all of a sudden, I saw a flash of gray and looked
and these things were headed for the (Pacific) ocean, which was
right next to a campsite."

"They had a weird color on the bottom, like a little flash of
blue light.  They were going about twenty miles per hour and
were three miles up. When I could not see them (anymore), I left
my car."  (Email Form Report)

SILVER CYLINDRICAL UFO SEEN IN DANDRIDGE


UFO hotspot Dandridge, Tennessee (population 1,540) is back in
the news again.

On Thursday, December 2, 1999, Patricia G. reports, "At 12:25
p.m. this afternoon, I was sky-watching and actually got lucky.
A silver cylinder flying north to southwest was flying rather
slowly.  I'm afraid I can't tell the altitude, but it was
large."

"At first I thought it might be a jumbo jet, so I looked through
my binoculars, and to my delight there were no wings or tail,
just a smooth silver cylinder.  There was no jetstream or
contrail or whatever you call it."

On Wednesday night, December 1, Patricia's daughter "saw a blue
light that pulsated in the northeast sky.  She said it was as
large as a pencil eraser.  She was driving home and lost sight
of it when she got home."

Dandridge is located 23 miles (36 kilometers) east of Knoxville.
(Email Interview)

GREECE DEPORTS TWO BORN-AGAIN CHRISTIANS


"Two suspected members of a U.S. doomsday cult were deported to
New York on Tuesday," December 7, 1999, "the second group
expelled from Greece ahead of the millenium."

"Police said the two suspected cult members of the Denver-based
group Concerned Christians and two children were taken into
custody Monday (December 6, 1999) near the seaside town of
Rafina, 15 miles (25 kilometers) east of Athens. Eighteen others
were expelled Sunday (December 5, 1999) amid fears that the
group was planning to mark 2000 with mass suicide."

"Those deported were U.S. citizens with expired resident
permits, police said."

"Police have been looking for other suspected cult members near
Athens, where the group is thought to have settled after 14
alleged members were deported from Israel in January."  (See UFO
Roundup volume 4, number 2--J.T.)

"The group's leader, Monte Kim Miller, has said he would die in
Jerusalem this month and be resurrected three days later."  (See
the Minneapolis, Minn. Star-Tribune for December 8, 1999,
"Greece deports two suspected soomsday cult members to N.Y.,"
page A10.)

Although the professed born-again Christians of Miller's sect
have committed no crimes, they have been hunted and hounded by
the Shin Bet, Israel's security police.  In October, "twenty-one
evangelical Christians, including at least 13 Americans, were
arrested in Jerusalem early Monday and ordered to leave Israel
by Thursday." (See USA Today for October 26, 1999, "Israel
orders religious groups out.")

(Editor's Comment: So much for religious freedom in the NATO
countries.  Yeah, you can tell these born-agains are a bunch of
"terrorists."  They're always walking around with a KJV.  That's
a Bible, by the way, not a firearm.)


Y2K: IT'S BEGINNING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE D-DAY


December 28 is shaping up as a key day in the Y2K computer
crisis.  Several sources now cite this date as the launch point
of the USA government's response to Y2K problems.

According to WorldNet Daily, "President Clinton has already made
plans to declare a national emergency because of expected
disruptions caused by the Y2K computer problem, according to
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) documents.

"A final training session followed by a mock Y2K disaster
exercise will include the actual disruptions and problems that
Y2K emergency planners believe will take place during the change
to the New Year."

"Plans for the emergency" response "were made known to the FEMA
officials and all federal employees in preparation for use by
the Information Coordinating Center, run by the President's
Council on the Year 2000 Technology Problem."

"The staff on hand at the Information Coordinating Center have
been told to expect a presidential declaration of a national
emergency. FEMA staff who will run the actual operation centers
have been told the same thing."

"Should it become necessary, a presidential 'emergency' rather
than a 'major disaster,' will be declared, and assistance will
be focused on determining threats to life, health, safety and
property, the Senate committee was told in a report from Lacy E.
Suiter from the Response and Recovery Directorate of FEMA."

"A national emergency will be declared because FEMA officials
have concluded that there will be more than 50 simultaneous Y2K-
related disruptions throughout the country, which will stretch
the nation's local, state and national emergency resources to
the limit."

"The (USA) Department of Defense is so concerned that Deputy
Secretary of Defense John J. Hamre has issued a memorandum to
commanders in the field to be very cautious about using the
military to assist civilian agencies.  Hamre said local requests
for help might seem appropriate, but he urged local commanders
to be cautious about using the military to help with Y2K
disruptions."

"'Immediate responses that appear rational from a local
perspective, but could collectively undermine the Department's
ability to execute operational missions, should be ruled out,'
Hamre said."

"Hamre has ordered commanders to avoid using the military for
Y2K problems unless there is a threat to life or damage to
property."

"A presidential 'emergency' rather than a 'major disaster'
declaration will be made if Y2K" disruptions exceed state and
local resources available to deal with them, FEMA and other
federal employees were told at the training sessions.  (See
WorldNet Daily for December 2, 1999, "Clinton set to declare
national emergency.")

On Wednesday, December 1, 1999, Edwards Air Force Base, 50 miles
(80 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, suddenly terminated
telephone and email communication with the outside world. The
sudden security buildup triggered much speculation in the UFO
community.

According to Rev. Billy Dee of UFO Sky Searchers Inernational
(UFOSSI), residents in nearby Lancaster and Palmdale, California
"saw 20 more (UH-60) Blackhawk helicopters brought in, along
with many Marines.  The Marines already have several large twin
and single rotor helicopters, and I've seen them every night
this week, flying in groups of three over Lancaster and
Palmdale."

On Friday, December 3, 1999, a large truck convoy arrived at the
base, Rev. Dee reported, which included "23 semis with stainless
steel tank trailers, like fuel trucks, just plain stainless
steel with no markings, 40 cement trucks, 13 flatbed semis
carrying pallets of plywood, and four flatbed semis carrying
nothing but Porta- Potties."

(Editor's Comment:  No, I don't think the Porta- Potties are for
aliens.  Sounds like another big MOUT exercise to me.)

In addition, an airman with the New York state Air National
Guard confirmed that December 28 would be the date of some sort
of gocernment response to the Y2K crisis.

The airman, John B., told UFOSSI, "I am in the New York Air
National Guard in an Active Guard Reserve status, and we were
told yesterday (December 5, 1999) that we, as a unit in (USAF)
Security Forces, are going to be on call from the 28th of
December to the 7th of January for Y2K. Not that we are going to
be deployed but just on standby."  (Many thanks to Rev. Billy
Dee for this report.)

(Editor's Comment:  So it looks like the USA has joined Canada,
the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Israel in putting troops on
alert for possible Y2K trouble during the last week of December.
Will Operation Abacus be launched?  Stay tuned.)

from the UFO Files...

1864: ROSWELL IN UPSTATE NEW YORK?


In 1920, horror and fantasy writer Howard Phillips Lovecraft
(1890-1937) wrote to fellow members of the Gallomo literary
club, talking about a strange dream he had recently experienced.

"I have lately had another odd dream--specially singular because
in it I possessed another personality-- a personality just as
definite and vivid as the Lovecraft personality which
characterises my waking hours."

"My name was Dr. Eben Spencer, and I was dressing before a
mirror in my own room, in the house where I was born, in a small
village (Dolgeville, N.Y., formerly called Brockett's
Bridge--J.T.) of northern New York state.  It was the first time
I had donned civilian clothes in three years, for I was an Army
surgeon with the rank of 1st Lieut.."

"I seemed to be home on a furlough--slightly wounded.  On the
wall was a calendar reading FRIDAY, July 8, 1864  (Actually,
July 8 that year was a Saturday--J.T.)  I was very glad to be in
regular attire again, though my suit was not a new one, but one
left over from 1861."

"After carefully tying my stock (tie), I donned my coat and hat,
took a cane from a rack downstairs and sallied forth upon the
village street.  Soon a very young man of my acquaintance came
up to me with an air of anxiety and began to speak in guarded
accents.  He wished me to go with him to his brother--my
professional colleague Dr. Chester-- whose actions were greatly
alarming him."

"I, having been his best friend, might have some influence in
getting him to speak freely--for surely he had much to tell.
The doctor for the past two years had been conducting secret
experiments in a laboratory in the attic of his home, and beyond
that locked door he would admit no one but himself. Sickening
odours were often detected near the door...and odd sounds were
at times not absent."

"The doctor was aging rapidly; lines of care-- and of something
else--were creeping into his dark, thin face, and his hair was
rapidly going grey.  He would remain in that locked room for
dangerously long intervals without food and seemed uncommonly
saturnine.  All questions from the younger brother were met with
scorn or rage--with perhaps a little uneasiness, so the brother
was much worried, and stopped me on the street for advice and
aid."

"I went with him to the Chester house--a white structure of two
stories and attic in a pretty yard with a picket fence.  It was
in a quiet side street, where peace seemed to abide despite the
trying nature of the times.  In the darkened parlour, where I
waited for some time, was a marble-topped table, much haircloth
furniture and several pleasing whatnots covered with pebbles,
curios and bric-a- brac.  Soon Dr. Chester came down--and he had
aged.  He greeted me with a saturnine smile, and I began to
question him, as tactfully as I could, about his strange
actions."

"At first he was rather defiant and insulting-- he said with a
sort of leer, 'Better not ask, Spencer! Better not ask!'"

"Then when I grew persistent (for by this time I was interested
on my own account--HPL) he changed abruptly and snapped out,
'Well, if you must know, come up.'"

"Up two flights of stairs we plodded, and stood before the
locked door.  Dr. Chester opened it, and there was an odour.  I
entered after him, young Chester bringing up the rear.  The room
was low but spacious in area and had been divided into two parts
by an oddly incongruous plush red portiere. In the half next
(to) the door there was a dissecting table, many bookcases, and
several imposing cabinets of chemical and surgical instruments.
Young Chester and I remained here, whilst the doctor went behind
the curtain."

"Soon he emerged, bearing on a large glass slab what appeared to
be a human arm, neatly severed just below the elbow.  It was
damp, gelatinous and bluish-white, and the fingers were without
nails.  (my emphasis--J.T.)"

"'Well, Spencer,' said Dr. Chester sneeringly, 'I suppose you've
had a good deal of amputation practice in the army.  What do you
think, professionally, of this job?'"

"I had seen clearly that this was not a human arm, and said
sarcastically, 'You are a better sculptor than doctor, Chester.
This is not the arm of any living thing.'"

"And Chester replied in a tone that made me blood congeal, 'Not
yet, Spencer.  Not yet!'"

"Then he disappeared again behind the portiere and emerged once
more, bringing another and slightly larger arm.  Both were left
arms.  (my emphasis--J.T.)"

"I felt sure that I was on the brink of a great revelation, and
awaited with impatience the tantalisingly deliberate motions of
my sinister colleague."

"'This is only the beginning, Spencer,' he said as he went
behind the curtain for the third time. 'Watch the curtain.'"

"And now ends the fictionally available part of my dream, for
the residue is grotesque anticlimax. I have said that I was in
civilian clothes for the first time since '61 (i.e.
1861--J.T.)--and naturally I was rather self-conscious.  As I
waited for the final revelation, I caught sight of my reflection
in the glass door of an instrument case and discovered that my
very-carefully-tied stock was awry.  Moving to a long mirror, I
sought to adjust it, but the black bow proved hard to fashion
artistically. And the whole scene began to fade--and damn the
luck!  I awaked in the distressful year of 1920, with the
personality of H.P. Lovecraft restored. I have never seen Dr.
Chester, or his young brother, or that village since.  I do not
know what village it was.  I never heard the name of Eben
Spencer before or since.  Some dream!"

The strange thing is, Lovecraft's "dream" has roots in reality.
There really was a Lieutenant Spencer.  He was 1st Lieutenant E.
Gary Spencer of the 94th New York Regiment, U.S. Army, and he
was born in 1839 in the small town of Brockett's Bridge, N.Y.,
in the foothills of the Adirondack Mountains.  I've seen the
house where he was born.  It's still standing! (See Selected
Letters of H.P. Lovecraft, volume 1, Arkham House, Sauk City,
Wisconsin, 1965, pages 100 to 102.)

Next Week: In Search of Doc Chester's Unusual Houseguest.


Unless Y2K comes early, we'll be back in seven days with more
UFO and paranormal news from around the planet--and some pretty
strange documentation from upstate New York--all 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 news groups provided that they credit
the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue
in which the item first appeared.

*********************************************************
IMPORTANT Please Read:
======================

The Hunger Site
---------------
http://www.thehungersite.com

Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the
deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site
and clicking on a button you can donate free food.
There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation -
the food is paid for by sponsors.
Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference!
If you have a web site download a banner and give a link!
*********************************************************



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 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                              Filer's Files #49

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 00:54:13 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:20:40 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #49


Filer's Files #49 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
December 9, 1999,   Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.

IS ET CAPTURING OUR MARS SPACECRAFT?

One of the few scientists who ever studied UFOs, was Germany's world-famous
father of rocketry, Professor Hermann Oberth.  After three years of studying
the information supplied by his own and other governments, the outspoken
Oberth said at a news conference in 1954: "There is no doubt in my mind that
these objects (UFO's) are interplanetary craft of some sort.  I am confident
that they do not originate in our solar system, but they may use Mars or some
other body for a way station." MUFON's Antonio Huneeus interviewed him later
and Oberth said he stood by his statements.  His comments have new meaning
based on the Mars Polar Lander failure and the September failure of the Mars
Climate Orbiter. It is a total loss for the entire, $330 million Mars '98
project, which consisted of Polar Lander, the Deep Space 2 microprobes and
the Climate Orbiter.  Doesn't it seem strange that two out of every three of
Earth's space probes going to Mars fail?  You might remember we lost the
billion dollar Mars Observer spacecraft in 1993, just as it was about to go
into orbit.  That gave NASA a wakeup call particularly since the Russian
probes at met a similar fate.  I suggest that Dan Goldin and NASA review the
March 28, 1989, images showing a huge cylinder shaped craft intercepting the
Soviet Phobos 2 spacecraft. The UFO interceptor is very similar to the ones
reported by hundreds of witnesses here on Earth.  We have multiple witness
reports including pilot reports, videotapes and photos of these objects.  ET
may be waiting near Mars to capture or knock out our probes, but they are
also here on Earth.

NASA realized it's kind of tough to reveal to the American public that we're
losing billion dollar spacecraft to ET, even if they do pay for allot of
scientists.  So they did the next best thing.  They cheapened the cost of
spacecraft so American taxpayers only lost $157 million dollars for the Mars
Polar Lander.  Let's face it, NASA is in a tough spot.  Congress may get
upset with failed space probes and cut NASA's budget even further.  It's
tough to blame the failed probes on ET, so they have to admit they made some
sort of a mistake.  NASA continues to search for life on Mars.  However, the
fact that only a few of our space probes succeed provides evidence that
something is out there.  These Filer's Files costs nothing and operate on a
shoe string, but we're apparently getting closer to proving intelligent life
exits in the universe than NASA.  Of course we have the services of a lot of
dedicated MUFON, ISUR, National Reporting Center, Skywatch and other
volunteer investigators.  Ufolgists are getting better evidence each day.
Imagine the kind of videos we could get with a few million dollars.  The
Filer Research Institute would be happy to consult with NASA and give them
some techniques for getting past the ET defenders.  NASA Administrator Daniel
Goldin said, "It is conceivable that we will completely change our approach.
"If I was Dan Goldin, I would want to get out the old Phobos 2 images and
learn by the Soviet mistakes and a few of ours.  According to Colonel Maria
Popovich the Phobos infrared cameras picked up a great deal of heat in
certain key areas indicating possible underground facilities on Mars.  When
the Soviet probe was ready to go into orbit of the Martian moon Phobos, an
unidentified flying object came up to meet their craft.  The ET welcoming
team apparently captured the Soviet probe.  If you assume ET actually exists
your whole approach to visiting Mars changes.  Other Mar's missions are now
in preparation and much could be done to get them through the ET defenses.
Dan Goldin admits privately something is out there.  I suggest it might be
time to start looking for evidence ET is visiting Earth and Mars on a regular
basis.  NASA might even want to start examining those so-called ice crystals
they keep spotting near the Space Shuttle.  Those ice crystals are making 90
degree turns, fly over thunderstorms and suddenly stop.  These objects defy
the laws of physics if they are not intelligently controlled.  It seems odd
that our astronauts operating the space shuttle cameras spend time zooming in
on these disc shaped ice crystals?  I suggest NASA look closely at some of
their own videos.  They might be surprised at the evidence they have in their
own files.  The Filer Research Institute will even work on a contingency
basis.  NASA only has to pay expenses unless our craft get through to Mars.
We'll even check to see if your calculations are correct.  As a former USAF
Intelligence Officer, I'm prepared to brief NASA or anyone else on the ET
intelligence situation.  Its time to weigh the evidence.  We either have
incompetent scientists at JPL and NASA or something else is out there causing
these failures.

NOAA SATELLITE PICKS UP GIANT UFO IN EARTH ORBIT

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has several
Geosynchronous Orbiting Environmental Satellites (GOES) in orbit watching the
Earth's weather and environment.  On November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z hours our
satellites caught an amazing photo of a UFO at an estimated hundred miles
above the Earth off the coast of the state of Washington.  Russel Kirchner
phoned to inform me that he had obtained the satellite photos and was sending
them for all to see.  The University of Colorado also keeps these photos on
file for reference.  One of the satellites is designed to pick up water vapor
or clouds from space.  When Russel caught sight of the UFO in the display he
zoomed in and could see the steam coming off a UFO.  It was the type we
identify as a large Mother Ship.  We discussed the possibility of the object
image being caused by a computer error.  Similar photos taken on June 8,
1995, over South America have also been widely distributed.  Philip Imbrogno
studied this case and NOAA explained the image was a "moon shadow UFO."  This
excuse will not hold in the latest photos.  This UFO was present for only a
few minutes and is not seen in images taken prior or afterwards.  The UFO has
structure, windows, and radiates heat in the infrared spectrum.  Thanks to
Russel Kirchner. www.goes.noaa.gov/ See photo at www/filersfiles.com.

V-SHAPED UFO SEEN BY A FAMILY IN WEST VIRGINIA

LEWISBURG - November 14, 1999, Michele W.  and her children were driving on
Interstate Highway I-64, and, just before reaching Lewisburg, she spotted an
unusual object in the sky.  "While traveling on I-64 eastbound, I saw a
quickly moving V-shaped craft fly soundlessly over the road and disappear
over the mountain," Michele reported, "I saw it approaching from the right
side of the south."  And by the time I yelled to the kids, 'Do you see what I
see?' it had disappeared over the mountains."  "The lights were red and
steady, not blinking," she added, "It seemed like it was flying low, but it
was completely soundless.  Did anyone else see this?" (Email Interview)
Thanks to UFO Roundup, Vol. 4, #32, Joe Trainor, Masinaigan@aol.com.

GEORGIA UFO

WATKINSVILLE -- On November 27, 1999, a UFO constantly changed shape and size
and darted to higher altitudes for more than three hours starting around 9:00
PM. Ten friends and family members were camping out and hunting when one of
the family members observed three small lights (green, orange, blue) that
were zig zagging as one.  As these lights were moving they eventually came
together and changed into a small shape that was a circle at one end and star
shaped at the other end. The craft appeared to come towards us extremely fast
as a huge spinning rainbow colored ball. While closer to us, it changed back
into the star shape very bright light. It was moving so fast and changing
into so many shapes that it is difficult to accurately explain what was
happening. Everything was caught on videotape.  Thanks to the National UFO
Reporting Center  www.ufosightings.com. NUFORC Note: "We talked to the
witness who has submitted this report, and are satisfied that the events she
describes here cannot be ascribed to the optics of her camcorder."

GEORGIA AND ALABAMA METEOR

John Thompson reports that in the early morning hours of Sunday, December 5,
1999, a huge bluish-white light was seen to cross the skies in Alabama and
Georgia. According to Anderson Williams of Fox 6 News in Birmingham, Alabama
a video of the large light was taken by a store surveillance camera
positioned outside Caperton's in Weogufka, AL. The tape showed complete
darkness until a brilliant light passed across the sky illuminating the area
for three seconds as it passed.  Seventy seconds later, the sound of an
explosion could be heard." Light like the sun was rising was seen at 3:15 and
5:15 AM Eastern Time.  Many reports of the white light being seen were called
in to WLAG and WTRP radio stations in LaGrange, Georgia.  Manager Mike
Thompson of WTRP has given the best description of the meteor. He said while
on his way to work at 5:15 AM, he saw a huge flash in the West. A split
second later he saw a brilliant white ball, with tail, go "straight down" in
the West. The ball had no sparkler or rolling effect but did seem to be on
fire he said. The ball had an apparent size larger than a full moon and the
tail was somewhat smaller. The meteor was of an intensity not seen since 2
February 1993 when tens of thousands saw a huge reddish-orange-white
meteorite travel northward along the Georgia-Alabama border. One witness on
the Atlanta TV news broadcast was convinced he saw a UFO with a trial of
smoke behind it.  This individual thought he saw a triangle shaped UFO with
red, yellow and purple lights. The smoke trail, of course, is a
characteristic of a low burning meteor.  Russ Henderson article can be seen
at wttp://www.annistonstar.com/news/news_19991206_3457.html.  Thanks to John
Thompson.

ALABAMA UFO SIGHTING

BIRMINGHAM - J Vinsant writes, "At about 4:25 A.M. on December 5, 1999, I
woke up to see a bright white light had lit up my entire back yard.  I woke
my wife and she also witnessed the light.  The light then slowly climbed up
my windows at a very slow pace, as if it were rising from the ground.  We
then watched the darkness of our house light up for approximately ten to
fifteen seconds.  Just as the light climbed up the window the darkness
climbed up it also.  Two minutes later, I heard an explosion that rocked most
of Birmingham and was passed off as a meteor.  I live south of Birmingham on
a five hundred acre farm.  However, my concern is not the light or the sonic
boom.  My concern is the UFO that I witnessed with my wife and her parents.
After I heard the sound I then walked outside and saw an oval/circular shape
covered with lights that was hovering over the mountain. The lights would
rotate around the dish and would flash bright like a light house when they
shone in our direction.  We watched for an hour and a half.  The UFO flew
around and hovered without making any sound.  It would sometimes appear to be
one bright light and sometimes it appeared to be a complete circular saucer.
Thanks to Mark Vinsant


WISCONSIN AIR NATIONAL GUARD F-16 CRASHES CHASING UFO?

BLANCHARDVILLE -- Bill McNeff, the MUFON Minnesota State Director reports
that on September 13, 1999, a fighter aircraft thought to be from the 128th
Fighter Wing (ANG) had crashed chasing a UFO at 2:15 AM.  This was in the
paper one day and then it was not mentioned again, Wisconsin State Journal
09/07/99 afternoon edition (Capital Times). (rough copied for speed) (API).
The ANG was making unannounced low level flyby's and it (they) seemed to be
chasing 6 little balls of light.  This is not the first time either. Four
previous nights they have been awakening folks in the middle of the night.
However, the Control Tower at Truax Field denies any flight activity.  Well
today the proof is not in they're hands, one of their F-16's did in-fact go
down south of Mt. Horeb for no apparent reason.  The Guard unit blames the
crash on mechanical failure.  Witnesses describe a
shoot out between the jets and the objects.  One of the lights turned a
different color and emitted a ray type of glow and took out the F-16
#WNG46-5607 piloted by Col. Ralph Emmit the Wing Commander. He was
unavailable for comment and still is in University of Wisconsin Hospital
being treated for nonlife threatening injuries. The Air  National Guard has
not officially commented on this matter and the NTSB was not present at the
crash site.  Editor's Note: We're attempting to investigate the report
further for clarification.  Thanks to NUFORC and Bill McNeff MUFON Minnesota.

CANADA DIAMOND LIGHT GROUP

MONTREAL - I read your Filer's files about the police in Massachusetts seeing
a Diamond Light Group.  My son and my husband, a friend who lives several
miles away and another friend west of Montreal saw something similar in
October at about 9:45 PM.  Ron called to tell us to go out to see the lights
in the sky. He told me to look in the western sky to see if we could see
anything like that here.  I saw it and so Philip and JG came out to see them
too.  Then when we came back inside JG called Ron and they chalked it up to
some kind of spotlight for some sale. However at about 1:00 AM Florence who
had just gotten home called us about the lights as she saw them too, through
her balcony window. She said she had driven through the business areas there
were no search lights.  We hadn't thought more of it until I read this
article. When I did I read it out loud our jaws just dropped because of the
similar sighting. Thanks to Frances: francess@sprint.ca (Frances Fontaine)

NEW ZEALAND UFO SIGHTING

BETHWELLS BEACH -- My name is Jason Monds and we were on a holiday to North
Island on November 26, 1999, when we saw a UFO.  A group of my friends were
heading to the beach for a late night dip at about 11:30 PM, because it's
extremely hot.  Before we made it to the beach, all five of us saw a cigar
shaped object making incredibly fast advances up and down the shore.  It was
incredibly fast and silent.  It was glowing glistening silver and would
dematerialized and reappear. We could see the reflection of the moonlight on
the water and then onto the craft.  It would almost disappear and then
re-materialize at a different point along the shore.  It had no visible
lights, but at one point, there did seem to be a line of dots or smudges
along the side/edge of it.  My friend Andrew, his dog Wilbur and myself made
an advance up the beach towards the craft.  It stopped moving and hovered 500
meters off shore, although the shimmery appearance make it hard to estimate
distance.  So Andrew stupidly picked up a few shells and threw them towards
the craft.  I shouted, " I didn't think it was a good idea." Wilber kept
barking and ran toward the craft every time it would move. We had been
watching the craft now for about ten minutes and the craft had left the
beach, hovering over the water about 600 meters off shore.  I screamed at
Andrew to stop messing about but he said he wasn't going to leave without the
dog, which was standing in the water barking.  Andrew entered the water and
felt a strange gravity or static energy run through him, but he grabbed his
dog and dragged him back to shore.  By this time I was more frightened than I
have ever been in my entire life.  I felt the craft was watching us so we ran
back along the beach as quickly as we could.  The craft was sitting about 100
feet off the water when it suddenly gained altitude.  It dematerialized
again, leaving a strange shimmer and it was gone.  Once we got back to the
batch one of the girls, Jess had already dialed 111 emergency and contacted
the police.  She was in a hysterical state but the police turned up an hour
later due to the remoteness of our place. We went back onto the beach with
the police but the UFO had gone.  Bethell's Beach is regarded by the local
natives as a highly spiritual area and scientist's have found massive
concentrations of iron in the sand, giving it a black or purple appearance.
I spoke to Manu, a New Zealand native Maori who has lived on the beach for 30
years. He claims UFOs are a regular occurrence and that he'd actually made
contact with the craft's occupants on a number of occasions.  He said, that
in Maori legend the natives had actually been guided by the sea beings to New
Zealand on their journey from the Hawaiian Islands long before white people
had arrived.  Thanks to Jason Monds Christchurch, pointblanknz@angelfire.com.

METALLIC MATERIAL FOUND ON MUTILATED CATTLE

HEREFORD - The Amarillo Globe Daily News story reports: Law-enforcement
officers in the Hereford, Texas found they had something in common with
officers in the Taos, N.M. On Dec. 9, 1978, officers found out that a
metallic material on the hides of mutilated Texas cows was nearly identical
to the material found on mutilated cows in New Mexico.  The unexplained
mutilations occurred during the previous summer.  Between 15 and 20 of the
mutilations happened near Hereford while 12 cattle were killed inexplicably
in northern New Mexico.  In both places, the mutilations were discovered
after local people reported seeing UFOs.  To make the incident even more
strange, ranchers in both places reported that the udders, rectums, tongues,
ears, testicles and sometimes tails were cut off the animals with sharp and
precise instruments. Entire reproductive tracts were missing from some of the
animals. But other cattle were left intact.  Officers in both places reported
that there were no tracks or traces of human activity around or leading to
where the cattle were found dead.  The substance found at both places looked
like slivers of gray paint and contained high amounts of potassium and
magnesium. The material was not fully identified, but was believed to be some
type of Teflon. Thanks to twitch02@hotmail.com (Jeff Behnke) and compiled by
Terry Moore Globe-News writer
http://www.amarillonet.com/stories/120999/new_tales.shtml.  Editors Note:
Similar slivers of silver material has been found on abductees in New Jersey.


CORRECTION ON "NEW INTELLIGENT SIGNALS FROM SPACE"

ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO - Last week I ran a summary of a Gannett News article by
Todd Halvorson that was published in the Home News Tribune on November 29,
1999.  The newspaper did not run the entire article and left the reader with
the impression this was a viable contact.  The article indicated that the
world's largest radio telescope, picked up what appeared to be an intelligent
signal coming from a small star named HD119850.  What's more a backup
telescope at Jodrell Bank near Manchester, England was hearing the same
beacon a clear sign the signal was not from Earth. Other tests were conducted
from the Arecibo control room to determine if the signal coming from 106
trillion miles away was real.  The telescope was moved away from the target
star. The signal vanished and only returned when it was aimed again at the
target star. The SETI Institute and Jodrell Bank wrote me to correct the
story that the signal had faded and was never confirmed. I discovered later
that the Home News Tribune did not carry the entire story.  It ended the
story prior to the announcement that this signal was not confirmed based on
SETI scientific protocol.  Editor's Note: Despite the denials several people
wrote saying that the initial story is correct and what is not public
knowledge is that the SETI people have very probably already intercepted
dozens of ET 'messages' and radar signals.  The signals from space are being
picked up regularly.  The problem is they do not stay long enough to be
verified.  I'm sorry for any inconvenience error this may have caused.

CHINA UFO STAYS FOR 90 MINUTES OVER SHANGHAI

SHANGHAI - As reported last week, a UFO was seen over China's commercial
capital Shanghai on December 2, 1999.  Various newspapers and television
carried the story.  The UFO apparently stayed in view for 90 minutes allowing
thousands to view the event.  The object was cylindrical in shape with a long
bright tail and appeared similar to a comet.  The flying object may be a
signal for further unrest and rioting.  Usually staid official newspapers
insisted Thursday's UFO sighting was no vision. Headlines shouted, "UFO Darts
Across the City's Skyline,"  in the official Shanghai Daily. The Wenhui Daily
said in a front-page story with color photographs "UFO Appears in the Sky
Over Shanghai''. Nearly 100 people claimed to have seen a cylindrical object
with a flaming orange tail moving over the western part of the city for more
than an hour on Thursday afternoon, the newspapers said. They offered no
theories on what it might have been. The Chinese government is very sensitive
to UFO reports because the outlawed Falun Gong are believers in
extraterrestrials and UFOs. Thousands of Falun Gong leaders have been
arrested across China.  Only the several million Christians imprisoned by the
government exceed the persecution of the Falun Gong.  The photo can be viewed
at:
http://www.scmp.com/News/China/Article/largephoto_asp_ArticleID-19991204023454
691.asp


ALIENS ARE CHILDREN OF GOD TOO?

Whitley Streiber, hosting the Dreamland Nationwide Radio Program carried a
story on November 28, 1999, a child asked the following question of Pope John
Paul II during one of the Pontiff's Q+A sessions on one of his recent tours:
"What about aliens?" The Pope replied: "We have to remember that they are
children of God too."   Several times, spokespersons within the Vatican have
remarked publicly that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has evidence and
official confirmations from the world's governments that UFOs and their
occupants are a reality. Thanks to Dreamland.

NEWSDAY REPORTS FIRE FROM EGYPTAIR FLIGHT 990

The Newsday (Long Island) Edition: Nassau and Suffolk for November 4, 1999,
stated, "The dull orange glow caught Stuart Flegg's attention in the dark sky
of a bracing Halloween night on Nantucket island. And for the next four to
five seconds, his eyes tracked the light falling down until it vanished into
the horizon formed by the ink-black Atlantic Ocean.  Hours later, Flegg and
his friend Scott Proffitt, who also saw the dime-sized orange spot, concluded
they'd viewed the flaming wreckage of EgyptAir Flight 990, which plunged from
33,000 feet at 24,000 feet per minute on what was supposed to be a routine
flight from New York to Cairo. They called police, and Tuesday, they told
their story to the FBI.  "What caught my eye was like an orange glow in the
sky. And then it was falling rapidly. I mean, it was falling very fast. And
then, about halfway down, it started slowing down," Flegg, 32, said
yesterday. "And then the flame got a little wider. As it was falling down, it
got longer. And then it just kept coming down, going slower, slower, slower
and then it just passed over the horizon from where I was."   At first, Flegg
thought the small ball-shaped glow was a meteor, a comet or a shooting star,
but it was moving much too fast. It "didn't look anything like" those things,
he said. Proffitt, 22, said the orange light dotting the black sky initially
looked like fireworks. "But then I noticed that it was way too far up in the
sky to be a Roman candle and too far away," Proffitt said. "It wasn't an
extraordinary brightness, but it got our attention. It was orange. If I had
to pick a shade, I would say burnt orange." Both men said they heard no sound
at all.  The men, carpenters who work together, were among a group of about
five left after a Halloween party of 40 or so people at the Fleggs'. They
were seated in chairs around a backyard fire pit about a mile from the water
enjoying the last moments with friends and some beer. Though they cannot pin
down the exact time they saw the glow, they said it was between 1:30 a.m. and
2:30 a.m., when they retired for the night. The plane's signal was lost
shortly before 2 a.m. more than 50 miles south of Nantucket...  "I believe I
saw the plane," Proffitt said yesterday. "I mean, there is no other
explanation for what I saw.  We were facing the right direction, it was the
right time of the night, and I know it was not a shooting star.  So I
definitely believe I saw the plane."       The men told their story Monday to
local folks and to two local television crews. The next day, two FBI agents
showed up with a lot of pointed questions. "They asked me how the lawn was
set up with the yard chairs," said Stuart's wife, Monica Flegg, 34, who had
gone to sleep before the crash. "I showed them the yard and showed them how
it was set up.  Then they interviewed Stuart and Scott, separately." Flegg
said he told them he was facing south-southeast, with Proffitt sitting to his
left. He said he saw it first, tapped Proffitt on the shoulder, and said,
"Look at that." He told them there is very little light pollution off
Nantucket, that you can see a "long,   long way," and that he often sits in
his backyard and watches airplanes on similar flight patterns.  Sometimes he
can even see their shining lights.  Flegg acknowledges that he and the others
had had "a couple beers" that night, but, "I mean, we weren't falling over
backwards, stone drunk." "I know what I saw-that's what I told the FBI guys,"
Flegg said. "I don't care what they say, I know what I saw. It was definitely
that plane going down that I saw. It was definitely on fire."...  Given this
eyewitness testimony, the pilot's action in switching off both engines is
again inconsistent with the suicide theory.  Flegg and Proffitt described the
EgyptAir 990 incident using phrases such as: orange glow, dime-sized spot ...
fireworks ... Roman candle ... no sound. These eyewitness descriptions are
remarkably similar to   the descriptions of TWA 800's destruction given by
Bushton, Desyron, Dougherty and Levine ..Why is it that the FBI can't believe
eyewitnesses? It pulled in the CIA in the TWA 800 case to try to prove that a
couple of hundred of them didn't see what they said they saw. "  Thanks to
Kent Steadman
http://library.newsday.com/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=384da06f178612MshakeP11000&d
oc=results.html

GEMINIDS SHOULD PROVIDE GOOD SHOW THIS YEAR

Geminids will start on December 7, but reach full scale observation on Monday
December 13, 1999. Most well known meteor showers, like the Perseids and
Leonids, are old. They've been observed for hundreds or even thousands of
years. The earliest record of a modern-day meteor shower is probably a
notation in Chinese annals dated 36 AD, regarding the Perseids, where it is
said that "more than 100 meteors flew thither in the morning."  The Geminids
are a different story. The first Geminid meteors suddenly appeared in the
mid-1800's. Those early showers were unimpressive, boasting a mere 10-20
shooting stars per hour.  Since then, however, the Geminids have grown in
intensity until today it is one of the most spectacular annual showers with
as many as 140 per hour (zenithal hourly rate).

Surf the Web and earn cash! http://www.prowebsurfersunion.com/

An interesting web site tells some of the secrets of Wright Patterson Air
Force Base http://home.sprintmail.com/~rigoletto/Sanctuary_Of_The_Birds.htm

KECKSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA CRASH TAPE -- UFO crash/retrieval Video Documentary
Most readers of this column are familiar with the Roswell event, but many are
unaware that a similar incident occurred in Pennsylvania in 1965, near a
small rural community called Kecksburg.  Veteran UFO researcher Stan Gordon,
has been gathering information on this case for many years, and has produced
a studio made 92 minute video called "Kecksburg The Untold Story."  This
production recently won the 1998 EBE film award for the Best Historical UFO
Documentary.  The video contains interviews with many people who have
information about the case.  Witnesses came across a large metallic acorn
shaped object with strange markings, partially buried in the ground, before
the military arrived on the scene.  A witness says he saw the odd acorn
shaped object on the back of an army flatbed tractor trailer truck.
Civilians claim they were confronted by armed military personnel.  For the
first time witnesses speak out on camera discussing information which
suggests that there could have been a cover-up.  A startling revelation is
revealed here from a witness, who says he saw a body in the same building
with the Kecksburg object at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base only days after
it was delivered there.  Also contained in the documentary are some of the
actual audio excerpts from the WHJB radio special called "Object in the
woods." To order your copy of "Kecksburg The Untold Story" send a check or
money order to: Stan Gordon Productions, Dept. GF, P.O. Box 936, Greensburg,
PA 15601. The cost of the tape including shipping and handling is $35.90.
For PA residents the cost including tax, S&H is $38.05. For more info check
out Stan's website at www.westol.com/~paufo

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 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                          Re: Attention Subscribers

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 03:31:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 08:52:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Attention Subscribers


 >Many requests for "re-subscription" have been received. Let me
 >once again stress that subscribers have _not_ been removed from
 >the list by UFO UpDates.

 >Changes made by iprimus.ca are causing messages to the UFO
 >UpDates list to be 'sucked up' by the mail servers and consigned
 >to a cyber-dump. No delivery. No bounce-notifications to this
 >address.

 >A new service is being set-up and should be completed by the
 >middle of next week. You'll be notified of the new address.

 >Again, no one's address has been removed by UFO UpDates -
 >globalserve/imprimus are the culprits.

 >I am still able to e-mail individual addresses - hence your
 >being able to read this.


 >ebk


Thanx for all your hard work and hours of suffering so that we
can all find something interesting to read on our favorite
subject. I know what it's like to miss reading the UpDates.
Apparently some folks 'go a little nuts' when the posts stop
flowing. <VBG>

You're a good man Charlie Brown. Keep up the good work.  :)

John Velez, UpDates junkie

________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:49:03 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:30:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:12:51 -0800 (PST)
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:49:21 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
 >>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >I realize that you and Ray are friends but I just can't see how
 >there could ever be a "balanced discussion" of the Santilli
 >alien autopsy?  The decision has already been made by most
 >Ufologists and the common folk: The footage is a bald hoax and
 >a scam.

 >And this is the wrong decision, because...

Because when all the so-called "evidence" against the AA  is
examined, its found to be mostly flim flam, distortion, and
hype.

 >Case closed, right?

 >Case closed, for me, a long time ago. But it was, IMO, Theresa
 >Carlson, who really put the final nail in the autopsy alien's
 >coffin.

I don't think Theresa's efforts proved anything except that she
believes that the footage is faked.  She has no proof, just more
creative speculation, very creative and interesting but not
evidence.

 >Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at

 >How so? Perhaps it is sketchy to you because you refuse to see
 >the autopsy for the scam, perpetrated on all of us by Ray
 >Santilli and others (including Philip Mantle), that it really
 >is.

What is your proof for this statement?

If it is a fraud, then why hasn't Ray been arrested? Or Philip??
And how was this scam perpetrated?  Did Ray contract to have the
film made, then transferred to old stock? Were others involved.
How about Bob Shell?  Was he a dupe or in on it?  Do you have
even one suspect?  Did Ray invent the cammeraman?  Do you know
what slander is?  Do you have even one person willing to state
that Ray is a known cheat and scam artist?  Do you know many
dishonest scammers and hoaxers who are able to ask for and get
$100,000 on their word alone? Do you have any evidence that Ray
has done something like this before? Is Volker also a scam
artist and how did he profit from owning a hoaxed film?  (he
stated that he was more than pleased with his purchase)  Do you
have any idea what it would cost to perpetrate this hoax?  (Yes,
there was a cheap and pathetic hoax, not of the autopsy footage,
but the tent footage and the result is what one would expect
from... a hoax.  This hoax was perpetrated by some of Ray's
friends, but it should not detract from the rest of the footage
which is not hoaxed)

 >best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
 >dishonest con man and schemer( and worse), or a dupe or
 >disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.

 >>>So, what is he Ed? A Saint? I don't think so. Ray saw a way to
 >>>make money and he, more than likely, did.

That question has been asked before. This was Ray's answer:


Subj: A question of money
From: Ray Santilli
To: All
Date: 20-Feb-96 17:20

I have been accused by some of profiteering, well lets look at
the whole picture who has profited and who has lost???.

1. Is it the broadcasters who worldwide have achieved massive
viewing figures and secured lucrative advertisers??.

2. Is it the News Papers that ran the story and increased their
circulation??

3. Is it the Skeptical UFO publications that found their
readership almost doubled as a result of the story and the
debate??

4. Is it the UFO researchers that suddenly found themselves being
offered money to appear on talk shows worldwide ???

5. Is it the experts that suddenly found themselves being offered
money to write for publications and publishers??.

6. Is it the Internet forums that didn't know what hit them???.
7. Is it the Special Effects experts who suddenly found a means
of free publicity??.

8. Is it the many people within the media that have traded (sold)
pictures of the creature, based on the fact that if it's real,
its in public Domain.
9. Is it either myself or my company.???

The point of the above is that hypocrisy runs rife, I have never
tried to disguise the fact that I saw a commercial opportunity
when I found the film, With regard to the above..that's a
different matter. As far as the commercial aspect is concerned
"let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Meanwhile
something far more important has been lost in all this.

Best regards,

Ray Santilli

---

 >But what does seem to be true is that Ray Santilli, through a
 >set of fortuitous circumstances, came into possession of some
 >marvelously intriguing rolls of fifty year old film which shows
 >the dissection of a "creature with no business here" and some
 >of the debris from the creature's vehicle.

<snip>

 >In Kent Jeffrey's hit piece on Santilli, Jeffrey makes a big
 >deal about the "restricted" designation found on the first film
 >that Santilli publicly showed.  Kent felt "restricted"  wasn't
 >a legitimate military security designation:

 >"RESTRICTED ACCESS
 >A01 CLASSIFICATION
 >SUBJECT 1 of 2
 >JULY 30th 1947"

 >Jeffrey adds:  "The Sunday Times article points out, however,
 >that 'restricted' access' is not a recognized U.S. military
 >code and that the A01 classification had been dismissed as 'pure
 >Hollywood'. Even more telling is the month-day-year format of
 >the date. The U.S. military always uses a day-month-year
 >format. Therefore, the date should have read '30 July 1947'."

 >The problem is that I had researched the subject and found
 >evidence that "restricted" was in fact legitimate and that
 >sometimes, under certain circumstances the date could be
 >written as July 30th 1947.

 >I contacted Kent Jeffreys through one of his
 >researchers (a member of this list) and told them of my
 >information.  They said the letters I cited had been
 >debunked,and they were sure of their facts.  They were wrong.
 >But that didn't prevent them from releasing information they
 >knew was in doubt.  There are many other examples of critics
 >using false assertions to condemn the footage and then not
 >correcting the record.   I certainly don't mean any disrespect
 >to you or Tim, but what the Alien Autopsy needs, more than
 >another book, is a re-examination and debate, one that is,
 >open, honest, and cooperative.

 >Even if these documents you claim exist were valid, that would
 >not make the autopsy real. All that would do is make that one
 >assertion by Jeffrey incorrect.

Perhaps, but these are not claims;  you can verify the
information yourself and it may be one of the strongest bits of
evidence we have. It's hard to say just yet because all is not
known about the circumstances under which these codes were
obtained.  They were part of the Tent footage but I don't know
how the hoaxers came by them, yet.  If anyone does know how the
codes were obtained, I'd sure like to know.

 >BTW, I suspect you are talking about me because I seem to
 >remember having several tiring emails from you. I didn't  do
 >Kent's research for him, all I did was answer a few questions
 >and emails for him. Any questions you had were passed on to him
 >and any reply you received was a reply he directed me to send.
 >While I haven't looked at any of this autopsy crap (great
 >phrasing Roger!) in over a year and a half, I probably still
 >stand-by what Kent wrote in his last article about the autopsy
 >footage.<

 >Best,
 >Rebecca

 >If you have something new that requires a response, great,
 >if not, it's over for me.

Yes Rebecca, I was talking about you and I believe your response
was about the same.  That's my point.  You weren't looking to
find the truth about the Autopsy. I don't know why.  If you were
you would have considered my request that you reconsider the
"restricted" matter.  My proof was rock solid and it might have
changed the whole tone of Kent's article.

It also made Kent look bad; his article contained serious
disinformation and caused confusion over the "restricted" codes.
Also I didn't expect you to want to be part of a new
investigation, but all are welcome.  You did have some very
interesting information and doubts and you were a great help.
I'd also like to interview the three cammeraman.  Can you help
with that?

Thanks again.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 11

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #329

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:12:24 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 23:38:54 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #329


Apology to MW #329 (For December 11, 1999)

On its wave crest flying time -- we soar and cleave in words
that rhyme. But we tire naming dates that *might* have happened
soon or late. We have watched the haunting colors, splashing
stories under cover, settled blues of satisfaction drifting
twixt the main distractions, forgetting that it might be true --
that you have been insulted. You!

You who buy in to the lie that keeps things as they are --
contrived. You that just accepted *heroes*, made to order paper
zeros -- mythic fathers *deified* to keep alive the lie
despised.  If a fraction of this stuff is on the mark (!) --
we've had enough! We deserve the hidden info kept from view and
incognito.

Let it go! Become of USE! Treat us with respect we're DUE.

"You don't want to know the truth", is what I get from the aloof
-- those that hold selected cards that they've maintained -- the
way things are. Forgetting those that keep their nose within the
*trough* so indisposed, I wonder at the SHAME they feel, when
comes, at last, to rest . . . their wheel. I factor in their
living *well*, with many homes (such trees to smell!) and know
they're threatened by their *slaves* who prop them up -- like
Sparta's days. They would see us turn them out; they're likely
RIGHT, I hope to shout! They have earned our righteous anger --
putting us so far in danger. We're mere slaves and just don't
matter (?), they live behind their walls and gather --
*berries*, *nuts*, and freeze dried food to insulate THEIR
cherished broods.

All the science we are *shown* is just a fraction on the *bone*
that keeps *their* status quo alive so *they* can live as *they*
desire. Much remains that IS suppressed . . . would make a man
autonomous -- would make a woman stand alone, and live a life
that she would own. Energy, its sad production, is overpriced is
my deduction. This is true or we would see the profits made
could set us free. There would be NO misery, gone the threat to
you and me. Homeless people disappear, battered women lose their
fear, worried men take easy breaths, and we would come to KNOW
we're blessed. Not a few, or a minority, even most, or a
majority, but ALL the people satisfied by what they make of
joyful lives.

The point is to self-actualize. To build upon what's realized.
So, taking Maslow at his word, we build the tiers of pyramids,
sir. Everyone a place to stay, with food and health a given,
say. Education on demand, plus ethics training -- understanding!
Looking for those single persons, those reaching for a star's
assertions, but copping to ubiquities of most of us in so much
need. Many reaching for the stars still team up gladly -- fly to
Mars . . . make the belt 'twixt Mar's and Jove a three ring
garden treasure trove. Bubbles blown up huge in space that,
fusion heated (just so placed), would make a wealth, yes (!),
unimagined by the greatest minds imagined. Near Earth Asteroids
are a BOON ignored by our contentious loons who place the center
of their lives in Aristotle's spheres despised.

Lost in seas of ignorance, awash in our belligerence, and TAUGHT
our lack of confidence I ponder our inconsequence.  We won't BE,
at all, superior, we will tend to the inferior; we will lose our
glad interiors, and ROT consume our false exteriors. Buying in
to Earth's rape WILLS we swallow bitter poison pills, counting
all the maimed and killed -- surveying massive graves we've
filled . . .  but COP, and we could make it passed this paying
down the bill amassed by unelected (jealous) men who'd live
sweet lives becoming them. More could share, it's not denied,
the lack of it's to be decried, and we could be as gods
(described) if we but looked into our skies.

We'd extend our grasp and reach, have brand new stuff to learn
and teach, and fly the plumbless, endless skies that are the
futures we'd desire. We can take our trips through time, and
sing our songs of righteous rhyme to vibrate down their castle
walls -- these chosen few who'd cause our fall. Less is more,
one would imagine, and we can have our nice distractions, watch
them curl, a pleasing tease, to bring you from your scarred up
knees.

The colors shall be pulsing order, faces lifting (painted
borders), colored kisses meant for fun when you, at last, see
insult done. And you BEAR your insult, more, from church and
state, and corner store; you see them on your smaller screen
from institutions cold and mean. It's all about manipulation,
our selling soap and burger nation -- making millions from the
ones that pay their taxes under guns. We deserve much more than
that, and get it trading phact� for fact, for we could cure our
own disease if we got up from callused knees. Presently we have
*some* answers (lost in drawers or killed by *sponsors*) that
we'd USE for elevation, self improvement -- satisfaction. First,
SEE the insult done to you and open wide your field of view. You
would gain; you would not lose -- to open up the gates they've
used to hide the *secrets* from your eyes that fall like fruit
from starry skies.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

On the crest of your wave and rushing gleefully to some foreign
shore. Whatever recedes in my rearview mirror was NEVER Kansas!
I'll know it when I see it; I came from there after all.

Restore John Ford!

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 11 December>**
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 >
   Dec > Dec 12

                              Subscriber Notice

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:14:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:14:00 -0500
Subject: Subscriber Notice

No one's address has been removed by UFO UpDates -
imprimus/globalserve are the culprits.

Changes made by iprimus.ca, who bought out old-faithful
globalserve.net, are causing posts to the UFO UpDates list to be
'sucked up' by their mail servers and consigned to a cyber-dump.
No delivery. No bounce-notifications to this address.

A new, high-speed, ADSL service is being set-up and should be
completed by the middle of next week. You'll be notified of the
new address.

I am still able to e-mail individual addresses - hence your
being able to read this.

Please send your responses to list-posts at the archive [URL
below] to updates@globalserve.net - for now.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 12

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 05:14:31 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:20:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:49:03 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:30:56 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:12:51 -0800 (PST)
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:49:21 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

Ed wrote:

 >....when all the so-called "evidence" against the AA is
 >examined, its found to be mostly flim flam, distortion, and
 >hype.

 >I don't think Theresa's efforts proved anything except that she
 >believes that the footage is faked.

Ed,

I have to question if you have studied Theresa's comprehensive
exhibition of why the footage must be a hoax.

The evidence which highlights our celebrated footage as an
unequivocal ruse is substantial and so far as I'm aware,
factually unchallenged.

 >She has no proof, just more creative speculation, very creative
 >and interesting but not evidence.

Of course it's evidence - which components can you cite as being
otherwise and again, more importantly, where can we find the
refutation of the facts Theresa presented?

Last I heard, this was unassailable, however, factual reasons to
the contrary would be of great interest. That requires providing
explanations for the anomalies Theresa so painstakingly
demonstrated.

 >Yes, there was a cheap and pathetic hoax, not of the autopsy
 >footage, but the tent footage and the result is what one would
 >expect from... a hoax.

This 'cheap and pathetic hoax', was proclaimed by Michael
Hesemann in October 1995 to be one of his 'major revelations' at
the then forthcoming 'World UFO Congress Dialogue with the
Universe' in Dusseldorf-Kaarst, Hesemann exuberant that "Phil
Mantle will show the complete tent footage".

Philip also took our 'tent footage' to the July 1996 Mutual UFO
Network (MUFON) conference in Greensboro.

As I mentioned long time ago, in correspondence with Hesemann,
he replied thus to my suggestions that the 'tent footage' was a
probable hoax:

  "I saw the tent footage many times and just the speed of the
  movements and also the sharpness of the images indicates it was
  shot with a 16 mm camera and not with video. The only reason
  why Ray doesn't like it is that it is so bloody dark (dimly
  lit) and looks pathetically bad. I personally think it shows
  the being when the medics try to remove its spacesuit. A tent
  in the desert at night... with no electricity, that's why it is
  so dark. But all these sceptics will say again: Look, they have
  something to hide, looks, why is it so bad..".

We now know it was the consummate cheap production and can in
hindsight dismiss it as 'pathetic', however, it wasn't
universally considered as such when there was no proof
otherwise.

You previously wrote:

  "In Kent Jeffrey's hit piece on Santilli, Jeffrey makes a big
  deal about the "restricted" designation found on the first film
  that Santilli publicly showed.  Kent felt "restricted"  wasn't
  a legitimate military security designation:

  "RESTRICTED ACCESS
  A01 CLASSIFICATION
  SUBJECT 1 of 2
  JULY 30th 1947"

  Jeffrey adds:  "The Sunday Times article points out, however,
  that 'restricted' access' is not a recognized U.S. military
  code and that the A01 classification had been dismissed as
  'pure Hollywood'. Even more telling is the month-day-year
  format of the date. The U.S. military always uses a
  day-month-year format. Therefore, the date should have read '30
  July 1947'."


  The problem is that I had researched the subject and found
  evidence that "restricted" was in fact legitimate and that
  sometimes, under certain circumstances the date could be
  written as July 30th 1947.

  I contacted Kent Jeffrey through one of his researchers (a
  member of this list) and told them of my information.  They
  said the letters I cited had been debunked, and they were sure
  of their facts.  They were wrong. But that didn't prevent them
  from releasing information they knew was in doubt.  There are
  many other examples of critics using false assertions to
  condemn the footage and then not correcting the record".

Now adding:

 >...it may be one of the strongest bits of evidence we have.

 >It's hard to say just yet because all is not known about the
 >circumstances under which these codes were obtained.  They were
 >part of the Tent footage but I don't know how the hoaxers came
 >by them, yet.  If anyone does know how the codes were obtained,
 >I'd sure like to know.

I can certainly fill in those details for you.

As you may recall, on the CompuServe 'UFO' forum, Ray sometimes
contributed to discussions and I asked him about 'security
coding' which Colin Andrews had reported in his newsletter as
being visible in the 'tent footage' (the first film which Ray
had privately shown). The notice read:

RESTRICTED ACCESS
AO1 CLASSIFICATION
SUBJECT 1 OF 2
JULY 30th 1947

Ray responded that, "On part of the tent footage there is a date
board which was added after (it continues after the footage is
over) It could be the date of process (we don't know)".

However, the true story was first published in the 'Mail on
Sunday' article on 17 January 1999, as explained in the
following extract:

"...knowing Santilli was in the market for this kind of
material, Bateman and Price-Watts decided to try to make their
own version.

Their research led them to a story already well established in
UFO mythology - of how, after a space-craft had supposedly
crashed at Roswell, an alien had been taken to a barn nearby
where a medical examination had taken place. President Truman
was rumoured to have visited during the operation.

'We found a barn in the quiet village of Ridgmont, Bedfordshire,
through a farmer I knew,' says Andy-Price Watts. 'I had an old
paraffin lamp and we brought along a table, some sheets,
overalls and rubber gloves.

'We filmed it in the evening to make it look as if it had been
shot in the dark. The gloves - Marigolds - looked too modern so
we had to discard them. We tried to get a mannequin from a local
store, but it was impossible. Elstree studios offered to make us
one for 25,000 pounds, which was ludicrous.

'In the end we used a wig holder we bought for a few quid, which
Elliot Willis, our tape operator, transformed using painted
orange peel for the eyes. Elliot and the local butcher, Roger
Baker, played the two medical staff. Roger got the part because
he could supply the chicken guts we used as the alien's innards.

'We were thinking of using human pig guts, but they looked too
human.' As they were filming, the farmer walked in to see what
they were doing. 'I suddenly thought we could use him,' says
Bateman. 'There was an old scarecrow in the corner of the barn
and we got the coat from it, put it on him and he had a little
cameo role as President Truman. We could hardly stop ourselves
laughing as we shot the video, which took about an hour and a
half to complete.'

Andy Price-Watts' 12-year-old son played the alien, with his
head covered by the sheet and the dummy head placed on top. 'We
used a Sony video camera mounted on a tripod and kept jogging it
to give the impression it was being held,' says Andy. 'The
strange camera angles added to the veracity of the film'.

The resulting film was edited down to six minutes. Shot in
colour, it was processed in black and white and animators in the
studio drew scratch lines on computer and overlaid this onto the
film. It was then transferred between different video formats to
make it as grainy as possible.

'We then went to see Santilli and told him we had some alien
footage which we had bought in the states,' says Bateman. 'He
told us we had been conned and didn't think it was very good. He
said it should have been clearer and should also have a
restricted notice on it'. Bateman got the film back,
superimposed the bogus classification message and sent it back
to Santilli, who told the two men he could not use it".


Yet, Ray did use it and it was the first 'autopsy' film
privately shown to Reg Presley, Colin Andrews and others during
December 1994/January 1995. The central 'alien autopsy' footage
didn't appear until April 1995.

There's a copy of a still from the 'tent footage', showing that
'RESTRICTED' notice, on my web site at:

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


In all the early correspondence Ray and I had about this and in
his public statements, he never once indicated, to my knowledge,
that the 'tent footage' wasn't part of the claimed 'archive
film' acquired from the cameraman who supposedly shot it.

On the contrary, Ray initially promoted it as an integral
component and for further evidence of this, I suggest you read
my detailed, archived UpDates posting at:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m22-013.shtml


 >Jeffrey adds:  "The Sunday Times article points out, however,
 >that 'restricted' access' is not a recognized U.S. military code
 >and that the A01 classification had been dismissed as 'pure
 >Hollywood'. Even more telling is the month-day-year format of
 >the date. The U.S. military always uses a day-month-year format.
 >Therefore, the date should have read '30 July 1947'."

The Sunday Times article wasn't original research and the
author, their resident 'hard core sceptic', Maurice Chittenden,
had poached some of my comments on the CompuServe forum without
attributing them.

The source is in public mail I sent to Ray, when I wrote:


"The following are self explanatory and originate from someone
with a detailed knowledge of classified documents:

'RESTRICTED ACCESS

Not a valid classification. RESTRICTED DATA is a marking that has
been used for probably 50 years on nuclear weapons information.

AO1 CLASSIFICATION

I've never heard of anything like this. Sometimes, the
classification  has a codeword designator indicating the program,
i.e. TOP SECRET-DINAR where DINAR was a NSA program.

JULY 30th 1947

Invalid date format. Since World War II, military documents use a
different date format, Day Month Year. For example, 30 July
1947.'

These comments are supported by further independent evaluations
from contacts with comprehensive experience of working within the
military intelligence services:

''Restricted Access' as a 'classification' is a new one on me.'

'Classification status 'AO1' sounds like Hollywood.'

At which point, you will hopefully appreciate that if this
"security marker" alone is bogus, there are potentially terminal
problems here.
[End]


It's all superseded by our knowledge this 'security coding' was
simply made up.

If defending the probable reliability of Ray's claims, we should
additionally keep in mind some material I have also previously
highlighted:


"In August 1995, I further asked of the 'tent footage', allegedly
part of the archive 16mm film acquired in December 1994-January
1995:

'I was wondering how you were able to show some of the footage,
already carefully transferred to video from the original 16mm
reels, as early as the first week or so of January 1995'.

Santilli explained: 'Some of the footage needed little or no
work'."

Do you find this consistent with the fact we now realise where
the 'tent footage' came from and that Ray always knew it wasn't
part of the purported 'archive film'?


Or, can we equate the following information I confirmed - before
it was known the 'tent footage' had been created in a rural barn
- with that later disclosure? :

"In September 1995, Bob Shell, editor of the US photographic
magazine 'Shutterbug' and who had offered to assist in dating the
claimed archive 16mm film, responded to questions being raised
about the late release of Santilli's own mail order video,
'Roswell: The Footage' stating:

'I'm assured that the delay was only because Ray was trying his
best to get permission to include the first autopsy and the rest
of the tent scene. These negotiations apparently were not
successful'.

Shell has just reaffirmed to me, 'This is what I was told at the
time'.

Shortly afterwards, he confirmed again having spoken to
Santilli's company:

'This morning I asked about the absence of the tent footage from
the video. I am told this was just loose in the box and that the
cameraman now says he can't recall what this is or when and where
he shot it'.

Shell, however, also stated at this time that he had been told:

'The tent footage, shot at the crash site under light from
emergency lanterns, shows technicians cutting the 'space suit'
off one of the bodies because, to quote the cameraman, it was
holding in heat and hastening decomposition. The fabric was very
tough, and they eventually had to use sheet metal cutters to cut
it'.

In January 1996, in reply to some queries I had raised, Bob Shell
confirmed to me:

'Ray said to me that the complete tent footage was contained
within the 'junk reel' when I was in his office in October. He
motioned with his hands to indicate the diameter of the reel. He
also mentioned at that time about the football game, family
stuff, and other unidentifiable footage included in this reel'."

Do you see any indications here that Ray knew the 'tent footage'
had come from another source and wasn't part of the alleged
cameraman's crumbling 16mm 'autopsy' reels?

Or do we perhaps clearly see something else entirely.

 >Yes Rebecca, I was talking about you and I believe your response
 >was about the same.  That's my point.  You weren't looking to
 >find the truth about the Autopsy. I don't know why.  If you were
 >you would have considered my request that you reconsider the
 >"restricted" matter.  My proof was rock solid and it might have
 >changed the whole tone of Kent's article.

Appreciating how seductive the entire 'alien autopsy/government
cover up/only we know the truth' scenario is, there's also a need
for some critical and sceptical appraisal.

 >It also made Kent look bad; his article contained serious
 >disinformation and caused confusion over the "restricted" codes.

Serious disinformation?

As you can contemplate, the 'restricted' codes were the simplest
spoof imaginable, being the product of rank (sic) amateur
hoaxers.

Kent merely saw common sense about the entire 'Roswell' debacle.
To be fair, surely Kent doesn't look half as bad when considered
in the light of how that 'cheap and pathetic hoax' was
sufficiently believable to be vehemently defended and reach the
platforms of at least two (I recall more) paramount 'UFO' related
conferences.

Something I haven't mentioned publicly before, is being contacted
by the person who was involved in producing that finished 'tent
footage' video for Keith Bateman and Andy Price-Watts. He
summarised:

"I have worked (but no longer) for Keith & Andy for the past 7
years as manager of the animation department dealing with
computer animation and graphics. You'll find my name printed on
various videos that we've produced either on the credits or the
back sleeve for the design. My involvement in the Tent Footage
was to put the scratches and bits of dirt onto the video (I say
video because none of it was on film, all Beta and VHS). I
created such a loop of a few thousand frames so that any small
section of the footage would not show the loop. From the
computer, the animated scratches and bits were laid over the
footage".

His insights into the story are interesting and I'll publish
them, together with his identity, in due course.

I can only point out some facts which should perhaps be taken
into account in the context of Ray's overall story.

More than that, I leave for now.


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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 12

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 00:51:57 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:20:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >>Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:49:03 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:30:56 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >Previously, Ed declared:

 >>If it is a fraud, then why hasn't Ray been arrested? Or Philip??
 >>And how was this scam perpetrated?  Did Ray contract to have the
 >>film made, then transferred to old stock? Were others involved.
 >>How about Bob Shell?  Was he a dupe or in on it?  Do you have
 >>even one suspect?  Did Ray invent the cammeraman?  Do you know
 >>what slander is?  Do you have even one person willing to state
 >>that Ray is a known cheat and scam artist?  Do you know many
 >>dishonest scammers and hoaxers who are able to ask for and get
 >>$100,000 on their word alone? Do you have any evidence that Ray
 >>has done something like this before? Is Volker also a scam
 >>artist and how did he profit from owning a hoaxed film?  (he
 >>stated that he was more than pleased with his purchase)  Do you
 >>have any idea what it would cost to perpetrate this hoax?  (Yes,
 >>there was a cheap and pathetic hoax, not of the autopsy footage,
 >>but the tent footage and the result is what one would expect
 >>from... a hoax.  This hoax was perpetrated by some of Ray's
 >>friends, but it should not detract from the rest of the footage
 >>which is not hoaxed)

Hi, Ed.

Oh, if only the producers of bad television could really be
punished by law.....

Your theory seems to be something like this:

Ray wasn't arrested for fraud, therefore AA is real.

You can't think of a way to fake it, therefore AA is real.

Ray says he didn't contract someone to produce it, therefore AA
is real.

Bob Shell hasn't said that the film is fake, therefore AA is real.

Ray says he didn't invent the cameraman, therefore AA is real.

Because Ray has no history of fraud, therefore AA is real.

Ray got paid for it, therefore AA is real.

You _assume_ it would cost a lot to fake, therefore AA is real.

The tent footage was shot down, therefore AA is real.


Give us some _proof_, Ed.

Or do you have a bumper sticker on your car that reads, "Ray
said it. I believe it. And that settles it."?

Dumb....No, wait....Yeah. Dumb.

Later,

Roger Evans








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 12

                              Re: Polar Lander?

From: Tom Austin <toaustin@toaustin.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 11:21:21 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:25:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Polar Lander?


I have just had this sent to me and I am forwarding it for
comments or information which sheds light.

I know the source of this message very well, and I can assure
you that if he says he sat and watched it on Terrestrial TV here
in the UK, you can be certain this did happen as it described
below.  Did this interview also appear on any US news feeds?


1999 1:05 AM
Subject: Polar Lander

Hi Tom,

Dean has been watching the BBC News 24 lately in the very early
hours of the morning. On two nights together the Polar Lander
was featured. On the first night A guy from NASA was being given
a hard time by some other guy who was asking why they were lying
about its not working when in fact it was sending data in a
coded fashion.

On the second night the BBC told the story of a disgruntled NASA
employee who has, supposedly, placed the necessary de-coding
information on the net to enable people to de-code the info sent
by the Lander.

I don't know if this second guy is Kosher or not. Is there
anything flying around the net on the subject?

The guy on the first night also accused NASA of lying about the
Climate Orbiter burning up and that it was also sending coded
info back to NASA.

Interesting that the BBC should feature this, eh? Also
interesting that they should only feature it when most people
are in bed, but to be expected!




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

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 >
   Dec > Dec 12

                       UFO Video Vault @ UFO Folklore

From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:16:07 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:36:38 -0500
Subject: UFO Video Vault @ UFO Folklore


Hello all and Happy Holidays,

I have recently finished posting all the shuttle UFO videos,
several Cylinder UFO videos, Triangular UFOs, UFO videos from
Mexico and some military unconventional drone videos.

They are located in the UFO Folklore Video Archive at:


http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.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 >
   Dec > Dec 13

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 10:36:29 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 02:43:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 05:14:31 -0000


James,

I think we should take one thing at a time.

I'd like to deal with the security codes and get them cleared up
first, but I want you to understand that I can _only_ defend the
Alien Autopsy footage, not the tent which I too have had serious
problems with from the start.

Also Ray isn't a saint, just not a scammer or a faker or a
hoaxer and you have absolutly _no_ evidence he is.  He may not
have handled the AA just as folks would have wanted but I think
he did the best he could under the circumstances.

His friends have caused him problems, as in the tent footage,
but what are friends for, anyway.

I'd like you or Teresa to also explain, in simple English, just
why you think her work is so important.  I don't see anything of
substance there.  Just what is her point?

But on to "RESTRICTED".

You said:



 >"The following are self explanatory and originate from someone
 >with a detailed knowledge of classified documents:

 >'RESTRICTED ACCESS

 >Not a valid classification. RESTRICTED DATA is a marking that has
 >been used for probably 50 years on nuclear weapons information.

 >AO1 CLASSIFICATION

 >I've never heard of anything like this. Sometimes, the
 >classification  has a codeword designator indicating the program,
 >i.e. TOP SECRET-DINAR where DINAR was a NSA program.

 >JULY 30th 1947

 >Invalid date format. Since World War II, military documents use a
 >different date format, Day Month Year. For example, 30 July
 >1947.'

 >These comments are supported by further independent evaluations
 >from contacts with comprehensive experience of working within the
 >military intelligence services:

 >''Restricted Access' as a 'classification' is a new one on me.'

 >'Classification status 'AO1' sounds like Hollywood.'

 >At which point, you will hopefully appreciate that if this
 >"security marker" alone is bogus, there are potentially terminal
 >problems here.
 >[End]


Sorry James but you are wrong, very wrong.


"RESTRICTED ACCESS  This is a known and proven security
designation for the time, known to only a few, but I have the
proof of its reality.  The hoaxers must have seen it written on
something because "restricted" would have been the designation
for the AA, as it turns out.

A01 CLASSIFICATION  This is the priority.  This means that if
you have a full desk of things to work on, AO1 would be the
number one you would start working on.  This was the way the
Army did things.  Everything had a priority of some kind. I have
examples of this also.

SUBJECT 1 of 2  This is common and is the way it is written.

JULY 30th 1947"  Mostly the date would have been written 30 JULY
1947 but that's when it is used as the lead date, usually in the
upper right hand corner of a letter, directive or memo but if
its found in a list as above I have an example of it being
written as July 30, 1947.  So while not common, it was done that
way, sometimes; so the date problem is certainly no reason to
declare the AA a hoax.

I guess you haven't been following the list lately.  I posted
this a while back:

There is other supporting information on the RESTRICTED
classification which can be found on pages 387-389 in 'UFOs
Exist' by Paris Flammonde (1976) and in the Condon report pgs.
894-897..

For those of you who aren't able to access these books, here's a
summary.


On Sept 23rd., 1947 General Nathan Twining wrote General George
Schulgen and informed him that the UFO "phenomenon(sic)... is
something real and not visionary or fictitious" and that he
wanted to establish an investigative section to deal with all
unkown aerial activity.

He requested that it be given a code name and a security and
priority classification.

There is much more, and the letter should be read by all. It's
an important document that everyone agrees is authentic.

Another authentic document is the reply to this request from
General Craigie, Chief of staff, USAF, who on December 30th,
1947 wrote that the Airforce would not ignore UFO activity but
would investigate these reports.  He was forming a project to
"implement this policy".

This section was given the priority 2-A, the second highest
possible, and a security designation of "restricted" and the
code name of "SIGN".

It was also stated that " Where data of a classification higher
than restricted is handled by the project such data should be
classified accordingly."

Therefore TOP SECRET RESTRICTED is a logical classification for
that period.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 13

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:09:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 02:55:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 05:14:31 -0000
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 09:20:29 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:49:03 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:30:56 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>>From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:12:51 -0800 (PST)
 >>>Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:49:21 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy



Dear All,

I'd just like to add a couple of comments to the following.


 >Ed wrote:

 >>....when all the so-called "evidence" against the AA is
 >>examined, its found to be mostly flim flam, distortion, and
 >>hype.

 >>I don't think Theresa's efforts proved anything except that she
 >>believes that the footage is faked.

 >Ed,

 >I have to question if you have studied Theresa's comprehensive
 >exhibition of why the footage must be a hoax.

 >The evidence which highlights our celebrated footage as an
 >unequivocal ruse is substantial and so far as I'm aware,
 >factually unchallenged.

 >>She has no proof, just more creative speculation, very creative
 >>and interesting but not evidence.

 >Of course it's evidence - which components can you cite as being
 >otherwise and again, more importantly, where can we find the
 >refutation of the facts Theresa presented?

 >Last I heard, this was unassailable, however, factual reasons to
 >the contrary would be of great interest. That requires providing
 >explanations for the anomalies Theresa so painstakingly
 >demonstrated.


I think it's correct to say Theresa did a stirling job of
observation regarding the AA footage, the one fly in the
ointment though as I see it, is that her analysis hinges on the
fact of taking the film reel sequence as given by the film box
numbers as a cast iron fact.

As I understand it there were no physical numberings on the film
reels or film stock, _only_ the boxes carried the sequence
numbers, it would only take two of these reels to be cross boxed
to provide the "evidence" that Theresa found to judge the film
by.

My local cinema, now sadly closed, could still manage to run
reels out of sequence _and_ backwards too!, and they had the
assistance of reel numbers on the film leaders!. (Mmmm maybe
thats why they're now closed?<g>)

 >>Yes, there was a cheap and pathetic hoax, not of the autopsy
 >>footage, but the tent footage and the result is what one would
 >>expect from... a hoax.

 >This 'cheap and pathetic hoax', was proclaimed by Michael
 >Hesemann in October 1995 to be one of his 'major revelations' at
 >the then forthcoming 'World UFO Congress Dialogue with the
 >Universe' in Dusseldorf-Kaarst, Hesemann exuberant that "Phil
 >Mantle will show the complete tent footage".

 >Philip also took our 'tent footage' to the July 1996 Mutual UFO
 >Network (MUFON) conference in Greensboro.

 >As I mentioned long time ago, in correspondence with Hesemann,
 >he replied thus to my suggestions that the 'tent footage' was a
 >probable hoax:

<snip>

Re the Hoax Tent Footage Story... some of this as published, I
find a little questionable in itself.

 >The resulting film was edited down to six minutes. Shot in
 >colour, it was processed in black and white and animators in the
 >studio drew scratch lines on computer and overlaid this onto the
 >film. It was then transferred between different video formats to
 >make it as grainy as possible.

 >'We then went to see Santilli and told him we had some alien
 >footage which we had bought in the states,' says Bateman. 'He
 >told us we had been conned and didn't think it was very good. He
 >said it should have been clearer and should also have a
 >restricted notice on it'. Bateman got the film back,
 >superimposed the bogus classification message and sent it back
 >to Santilli, who told the two men he could not use it".

????? They try to sell "version one" to Santilli, he doesn't
think it's much good so they go away rehash it by adding the
"Restricted" notice and try to sell it to him again _still_ as
"original footage" _version_two_????

They were slightly giving the game away here weren't they, if
they _were_ trying to sell "original" footage?, modifying it as
they went along?

I find this scenario hardly credable.

Did Ray twig he was being sold a "dummy" at the first bite? Did
he know all along? Or maybe he concluded he couldn't get away
with passing such poor footage off as original along with the
rest?

Well only Ray can tell us what was going through his head at the
time.

 >Yet, Ray did use it and it was the first 'autopsy' film
 >privately shown to Reg Presley, Colin Andrews and others during
 >December 1994/January 1995. The central 'alien autopsy' footage
 >didn't appear until April 1995.

A trial run to "test the water" and judge acceptance of the TF?

Or was he really having problems with the core footage and felt
he had to produce/show something, anything, to provide time and
keep interest alive after being "outed" in public earlier than
planed by Reg's over-enthusiasm.

 >There's a copy of a still from the 'tent footage', showing that
 >'RESTRICTED' notice, on my web site at:

 >http://web.ukonline.co.uk/voyager/mail_os.htm

"Version one" stills _minus_ the notice board can be seen at:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tentft.htm

 >In all the early correspondence Ray and I had about this and in
 >his public statements, he never once indicated, to my knowledge,
 >that the 'tent footage' wasn't part of the claimed 'archive
 >film' acquired from the cameraman who supposedly shot it.

 >On the contrary, Ray initially promoted it as an integral
 >component and for further evidence of this, I suggest you read
 >my detailed, archived UpDates posting at:

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m22-013.shtml


More film would generate more money at the end of the day.

If he was "thinking" of trying to pass the TF as part of the
package he would have been potty to come out and say it wasn't
sourced with the other stuff, it would make far more business
sense to vaguely "gloss over" or avoid addressing the point
altogether.

Remember Ray was out to maximise his profits, you don't knock
your own product do you? He didn't set out to "get to the
truth" or "uncover the US Govt's dirty bed linen", he was just
out to sell a film for the best price he could get, one way or
another.

 >If defending the probable reliability of Ray's claims, we should
 >additionally keep in mind some material I have also previously
 >highlighted:

I would suggest that Ray was a little more than creative (but in
a very good marketing way) at times with his claims all the way
through this saga, so what we can or cannot take as fact is
moot. What is true, is that the remainder of the "footage" has
been badly tainted by all this, but at the end of the day that
might have been the point of the exercise.

On the positive side, yes there is one, the remaining footage
still has a few suprises left up it's sleeve, and these I
suspect even Ray, Volker or even our creative friends with the
barn and camcorder didn't know about.


Neil.


--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 14

                         Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:36:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:36:17 -0500
Subject: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

The National Post - Toronto,

Monday, December 13, 1999

Page A1

---

Canada�s X-Files grow dusty as fewer people spot UFOs

BY PAUL WALDIE


Maybe we�re getting too much science fiction on television or
maybe we just don�t care anymore.

Whatever the reason, Canadians are reporting fewer UFO
sightings, according to the federal bureaucrat who receives the
reports.

"I would say it�s really dropped off," said Mike Hunzicker, who
heads Transport Canada�s Aviation Operations Centre in Ottawa.
"Nobody really cares anymore. I really wish I could find
somebody who wanted these [reports]. UFOs are just a non-issue."

The centre monitors all air traffic in Canada but it also has
the job of keeping reports of UFOs. At onetime, the military and
the National Research Council monitored UFO sightings. But they
stopped doing that years ago, Mr. Hunzicker said. Now the
sightings end up in a folder marked "X-Files" that sits in a
drawer in his office.

See UFOs on Page A2



Aliens scarce
UFOs
Continued from Page Al

"We seem to be the only ones that are collecting these things,"
he said, adding that he receives about one report a month. "We
used to take these things and pass them to the military thinking
they were doing something with them, and they were sending them
back to us thinking we were doing something with them. Now we�re
the end of the line."

Mr. Hunzicker said most of the sightings end up being meteorites
or "space junk" that�s burning up while re-entering Earth�s
atmosphere. Many of those reports are passed on to researchers
at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick who are studying
meteorites.

The centre is not generally open to the public and most reports
it receives have been passed on from local air traffic control
towers. Although regular people sometimes manage to get through
on the phone, the centre has no plan to prepare for any rash of
calls when the millennium closes. Instead, it�s concentrating on
monitoring possible computer problems associated with the new
year.

"That�s all I need are UFO calls. We just don�t need to tie up
our phone lines with that."

When asked if he believes in extraterrestrials, Mr. Hunzicker
replied: "I�d like to think so. I think it would be neat"

So, has he ever seen a UFO? "I haven�t been that drunk yet."
National Post


-------


I talked with Paul Waldie on 12-14-99.

Waldie checks, on-line, for Canadian access to information
releases. One area he checks regularly is the Canadian Military,
who post all the access to information requests on a monthly
basis. One request was for UFO information. He ordered a copy
of the request and found that it contained "basically nothing -
just Hunziker's telephone number... that was it. I thought it
would include some reports, because in the past there have
been some reports. So I started with him." [Hunziker]

I have Hunziker's telephone number should any Canadian
Researcher's feel the need to get in touch with him.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                                Server Switch

From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:13:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 15:13:22 -0500
Subject: Server Switch




Gentle & Patient Subscriber,

Seems like a month or two has gone by since I was last able to
mail the List directly.

Globalserve.net, who were bought out by iprimius.ca at the
beginning of the year, reneged on their contract with me and
made it impossible to operate UFO UpDates in the way that it has
over the past few years.

Consequently, the List has been moved to a new address - and
with any luck the List will function better because of it.

Please change your address book to reflect the change to
updates@sympatico.ca - globalserve.net will be phased out in the
next week or two.

There were many over the List 'outage' who perhaps did read the
housekeeping and posting rule messages in the past but failed to
retain essential info such as, "if you don't receive UpDates for
any length of time, please check the archive at:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/ ."


I received _dozens_ of individual messages asking what was wrong
- all of which was explained at the Ufomind site this past week.

Please, in future, should you be deprived of your UpDates check
at the Archive first.

Following this message will be re-posts of the few messages that
did make it out of here and to Ufomind and that you may have
missed.

UFO UpDates is back on-line - please send in your mail - without
your input this List is nothing.

Thanks,

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:35:48 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:47:43 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 12:59:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:25:18 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>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.

 >>>>Snip

 >>Gosh, I am so grateful that you cleared that up for us.  In
 >>particular I am happy that the traumatic situations I've had,
 >>which are both burned into my mind and have been verified by
 >>witnesses when applicable, have no basis in your pair of dimes.
 >>Now I can sleep better.

 >Nope. Didn't say that. Said that Mack's statement was not true
 >because of other evidence. He was making a blanket statement and
 >I was saying that it didn't cover everything.

My take was your statement, "This is nonesense...!"

I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but I can see your
attitude as being just as king sized a blanket as the one you
accuse Mack of using.  He said:

 >>>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.

He went on to say that in this case, the traumatic event is
recalled accurately and it is the rest of the poor bastard's
life which often becomes confused.  He did not say that this was
so in every case. That was your assumption.

However what irritates is your certainty.  Perhaps Mack, with
all his pychiatric credentials is wrong.  However if so, it is
less likely than your being wrong.  At least in my opinion.

I would debate a point with a client, but never with an opponent
who knows a hell of a lot more than I do, unless I had proof
positive.  Fortunately for both of you gentlemen, neither of you
does, have prood positive.  Opinion?  Yes.  Allowed.  Certainty?
I don't think so.  What I have had in spades, is the actual
perceived event happen to me. That, in my not so humble opinion,
makes me as expert on the subject from the perspective of the
perceived abductee.

 >>Also, I am happy to note that Dr. John Mack is a psychiatrist
 >>and you are a ... uh ...  UFO researcher.  Or are you no
longer >>one of those since your own personal transformation? >
 >>Ever been shot?  Ever seen a murder?  Ever experience a
 >>perceived abduction or witness a UFO sighting?  Neither has
 >>Mack, or Hopkins, yet they have opinions which claim a view
 >>different from yours.  Does that make you wrong or right?  Of
 >>course not.  So why the statements of such certitude, "This is
 >>nonesense!"  You got your degree in psychiatry I take it? >
 >Shot at? Seen a murder? Relevant, how?

Could be any traumatic experience taken from your own life.  Use
this as a litmus test for your opinion as to recall.  It turns
out that I've had all of those things happen to me and I can
assure you that I remember every detail, and wherever possible
to do so, verified every detail.  So in my case, at least, you
are mistaken.  I tend therefore, to agree with John Mack.

 >>As I've said so often on this list and elsewhere, when someone
 >>tells me or someone else that they are dead wrong and they have
 >>the truth, I tend to go a little ballistic.  I cannot trust
 >>memories of my own which to me are real, yet so astoundingly
 >>impossible in my personal paradigm, that it just cannot be.  I
 >>am a walking contradiction and you are a walking genius on
 >>truth.  Perhaps the title of your next book should be, "Finally,
 >>the Truth about Who has the Motts!"

 >Didn't say that and didn't apply it to you. Merely indicated that
 >Mack's statement about the reliability of memory based on a
 >core of significance is nonsense. Didn't say that all memory
 >was false or that a traumatic experience gave rise to a false
 >memory. Did suggest that Mack's statement was inaccurate.

It is not inaccurate in my case, as an experiencer.  However
I've never read the book and had trouble with Psych one and two
in college.  I also had trouble with the electron in a box
theory. I can only go by what I know to be true.

 >>>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.

 >>Well, that certainly is conclusive.  If I read you correctly, in
 >>75% of the cases, the memories of the events around the hearing
 >>the disaster were completely TRUE, yet the subjects held onto
 >>those true beliefs because it was the way they remembered it,
 >>enen in the face of facts that proved right to them.  I see your
 >>25% and raise you 50 more percent.

 >Nope. Doesn't mean that 75% were accurate, only that 25% of
 >those in the study were wholly and completely wrong in their
 >memories of the event. Others were less inaccurate, but nearly
 >all of them had some flaws in their memories of the event. And,
 >it didn't mean that all of those looking at their original
 >statements refused to believe them accurate. It means that some,
 >even in the face of evidence that proves them wrong, will not
 >change their minds. I see your 50% and I call.

Surely memory, being based in electro chemical reactions in the
nervous system, are prevelent in any given situation.  However
in your original post, you said nothing but that 25% of the
people tested were wholly and completely wrong in their recall.
Nothing was said about the remaining group.  The assumption for
a simple soul such as me is the one drawn.

 >>>Yes, hearing about a traumatic event and living through one are
 >>>a different situations. In the days that followed the sinking of

 >>>Snip

 >>>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.

 >Snip

 >Here is where I am outraged. I point to these alleged Vietnam
 >Vets who are taking VA money from those who really need it.
 >These alleged Vets tell the most horrifying stories of combat
 >when their service records, if they were ever in the service,
 >reveal that their tales are untrue. Read STOLEN VALOR to
 >understand exactly what is happening here.

Excuse me, Sir, but in your own words, you point to Vietnam vets
whose recall is false when tested and in your own words, are
rarely tested, then you tell us that the Vets you referred to
are those attempting to steal valor or obtain services or
benefits to which they are not entitled.  You got there pretty
quick in the paragraph above, but one would have to be prescient
indeed to get there from your original statement, Sir. You
wrote:

 >The memories are strong, detailed, and are of core
 >significance. They just never happened in the way being related
 >by the victim.

Where does it say about:

 >Here is where I am outraged. I point to these alleged Vietnam
 >Vets who are taking VA money from those who really need it.
 >These alleged Vets tell the most horrifying stories of combat
 >when their service records, if they were ever in the service,
 >reveal that their tales are untrue. Read STOLEN VALOR to
 >understand exactly what is happening here.

And _YOU_ are outraged?  Oy!

 >And, are you suggesting here that I can't understand the horrors
 >of combat unless I have lived through them? Are you suggesting
 >that I can't understand them even if I have talked to veterans
 >who had actually experienced combat? Is the only path to
 >understanding through living the experiences?

In a way, yes.  Guilty, with an excuse.  Perhaps I should have
said that had you experienced any of the above, you would, I
assure you, _NOT_ have the strength of conviction you
demonstrate in your posts.  That would have been more accurate.


 >>>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.

 >>Have you considered the possibility that your opinion is based
 >>on a false assumption?  With all due respect Dr. Randle, I
 >>suppose that you can prove that the initial event _is not_
 >>reflected in reality?

 >Of course I have considered the possibility that my opinion is
 >in error. On the other hand, in the case of many of the
 >abductees who I have interviewed, and those interviewed by
 >others such as Hopkins, the initial event could have been an
 >episode of sleep paralysis. David Jacobs describes, in SECRET
 >LIFE, the typical abduction which is also the typical episode of
 >sleep paralysis. Are you suggesting that none of those cases are
 >the result of this psychological problem (not to suggest that
 >those suffering sleep paralysis have psychological problems) are
 >the result of sleep paralysis rather than alien abduction?

No, I am not.  However I have experienced sleep paralysis on a
few occasions, admittedly not many.  Maybe half a dozen time in
my life. But I have experienced perceived abduction, have been
shot, and shot at, have witnessed cold blooded murder and, in my
case, and in my opinion, your assumptions are wrong and Mack's
are correct.  And the only thing of which I am certain, is that
I am not certain.  You seem not to suffer from that human
failing.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                     Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 16:28:07 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:50:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video


 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:36:54 -0500
 >>From: Tony Spurrier <TSpurrier@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles '99 Lecture/Video
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

 >>Hi Roy

 >>Has the footage been analysed?

 >>Tony


Hi Tony,

As far as I know the footage has not yet been analysed, although
saying this I am not quite sure if Peter Sorrensen or any other
researcher who has a copy of the footage has had it analysed.

I do know that Dave Bowden has taken a good close up look of the
tape, and perhaps Dave could jump in here and tell us what he
found out?

Also if you look close enough you can just about see a second
object shoot off the screen as the first one disappears.

What I personally like about the footage is the acceleration of
the first object as it climbs and the brilliant colour & clarity
of the whole film.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                              AA Film Research

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:42:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:51:00 -0500
Subject: AA Film Research


Dear All,

Does anyone out there happen to have a copy of the research done
by Rob Irving on the alleged film canister labels from the Alien
Autopsy film?

Rob specifically looked at the 'official stamp' on the labels
and suggested that it was bogus as it did not exist at the time.

Unfortunately I have been unable to contact Ronb Irving to ask
him for a copy hence my request here.

Please be aware that Tim Mathews and I are about to embark on a
new book on the alien autopsy film which will be well balanced
giving all sides of the argument. If you therefore have any
information on the film I would greatly appreciate it if you
could contact me direct at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com


Many thanks,


Philip Mantle.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                   Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit

From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@logicon.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 05:14:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:52:41 -0500
Subject: Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit


Friday December 3 1:20 AM ET

Shanghai Appears Convinced of UFO Visit

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Shanghai appeared convinced on Friday that
an unidentified flying object had visited China's commercial
capital.

Usually staid official newspapers insisted Thursday's sighting
was no vision.

"UFO darts across the city's skyline," screamed a headline in
the official Shanghai Daily.

"UFO appears in the sky over Shanghai," the Wenhui Daily said
in a front page story with color photographs.

Nearly 100 people claimed to have seen a cylindrical object with
a flaming orange tail moving over the western part of the city
for about an hour on Thursday afternoon, the newspapers said.
They offered no theories on what it might have been.

But the Shanghai Daily ran the story on the same page as an
advertisement for "The X Files Movie," based on the popular
television series about two U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation
agents who probe unexplained phenomena.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:08:50 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:56:20 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:11:41 -0400


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:22:20 EST
 >>Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >My point was not so much that Saucer Smear is a gossip sheet,
 >but that somebody asking questions about me and Bill Moore and
 >MJ-12 should have given some indication that he has reviewed my
 >very extensive writings... which are listed in the snip.

Okay, Stan, fair enough.

<snip>


 >I didn't say I had any of the other documents using TOP SECRET
 >RESTRICTED.

 >Read my comments again.

 >Here is a direct quote from page 80 of the GAO's 450 page
 >overview of what they did for  Steve Schiff:


 >DATE: December 7, 1994

    >Ms. Laura Jackson and I reviewed records pertaining to the Air
    >Force Atomic energy projects and certain mission and weapons
    >requirements. These files were classified up to and including
    >top secret. The period covered by these records was from 1948
    >to 1956. There was no mention of the Roswell Incident. No
    >information pertaining to the assignment was obtained. In
    >several instances we noticed the classification Top Secret
    >Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
    >because in past references to this classification (Majestic
    >12) we were told that it was not used during this period.


 >It would certainly appear that these were documents that had not
 >been declassified and are not available to you or me.

 >I have no problem in believing that the GAO personnel are
 >telling the truth. Do you?

Of course not. However, there is the possibility that they have
made a mistake. That is why it would be nice to see some of these
documents that they mentioned. That would resolve this aspect of
the question.

 >It would seem extremely unlikely that a forger would use an
 >unusual security marking bound to raise eyebrows.

It was also seem unlikely that a forger of great works of art
would sing his own name to them somewhere but that has
happened.

  <snip>

 >I will also enclose a listing of items available from UFORI
 >including the "Zeta Reticuli Incident" by Terence Dickinson and
 >"Update on The Zeta Reticuli Incident". These seem to have been
 >left out of your discussion about the Betty Hill star map in
 >your "The Abduction Enigma".

Irrelevant to the current discussion of MJ-12.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:41:03 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:59:26 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:27:11 EST
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:18:57 -0600 (CST)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:48:31 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>>>>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 -

 >><snip>

 >>>>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.

 >>>Just an observation based on Mack's quote:  Mack's comment
 >>>sounds less like a "claim" than a recital of results of a real
 >>>study at Harvard, maybe not even his study (he didn't say "my"
 >>>study).  That would be a bit more than a "claim".

 >Kevin Randle responds:

 >>I used the word claim beside he cited no references. He believes
 >>that a study is underway which will underscored his beliefs that
 >>memories of core signifcance are more accurate than memories of
 >>another kind.

 >>Until the study is completed, we have nothing other than Mack's
 >>suggestion that it might be concluded in the way he says it will
 >>be.


 >"Nothing other than (Mack's) suggestion, . . ."

 >For someone whose degree in psychology is still 'warm in the
 >frame' you are quick to dismiss (and minimize) the statements of
 >a man who headed a psychology department at Harvard! They don't
 >give posts like that to 'slackers' Kevin. Don't be so quick to
 >dismiss a man who has -years- of experience over you. You only
 >do so because his views don't jibe with yours. It's nothing
 >deeper than that really. It shows in the dismissive language
 >that litters your comments. Example: Re: Mack's remarks, you
 >offer the pronouncement, "This is nonsense!" If you don't think
 >that folks/readers can see through proclamations like that one,
 >you have a lot more to learn about psychology.

Sorry, but his comment about the memory around an experience of
"core" importance being better has not been scientifically
proved and the information available suggests the opposite.

I certainly agree that John Mack has impressive credentials, but
that doesn't mean he is automatically right. I have seen him
claim that confabulation is the result of alcoholism and is
associated only with alcoholism and therefore is not relevant to
a discussion of alien abduction. But, other, equally
credentialed people have said that confabulation can be caused
by a number of problems and is not necessarily related to
alcoholism.

 >Says you.

 >In the meantime we can look at the work of Elizabeth Loftus,
 >Richard Ofshe and Robert Baker about false memories and
 >hypnosis. Yes, we can look at Lenore Terr's work, which seems to
 >be at odds with the work of the others, and then we can look at
 >the evidence as played out in "reality" to decide who has the
 >better theories.

 >In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
 >"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
 >of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
 >mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
 >explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
 >worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

Haven't you just dismissed their work without giving it a fair
hearing? Can't we say the same about the abduction researchers
putting out mutually exclusive theories? Can Budd Hopkins'
aliens be the same as those reported by David Jacobs or John
Mack? We can read Mack's comment that "It seems clear to me that
Jacobs, Hopkins and Nyman may pull out of their experiencers
what they want to see." Hasn't Mack just suggested here that a
key to understanding the abduction experience is understanding
the belief structure of the researcher? Hasn't Mack really just
accused these others of leading their witnesses into the arena
they want?

David Jacobs criticizes other researchers writing in 'The
Threat' that researchers such as Dr. John Mack, Dr. Leo
Sprinkle, (he who shall remain nameless, and John Hunter Gray,
among others, suggest that the abduction experience is
essentially positive. Jacobs rejects the positive outlook,
suggesting that it is the result of "incompetent hypnosis" (his
words, not mine). Jacob writes, "Without links to a temporal
sequence, the abductee can interpret the events without the
facts necessary to guide his thoughts, which leads to
confabulation and other memory problems."

So Jacobs is suggesting that even if the core of experience is
important to the abductee, the researcher, using incompetent
hypnosis can induce false memories in the abductee. That would
seem to contradict the statement by Mack which touched off this
threat.

 >Without ever having spoken to me (or any of the other abductees
 >who participated) they edited my comments to unrelated questions
 >in between Loftus and the late Robert Baker expounding their
 >"theories" on alien abduction. As if they were "analysing" the
 >abductees whose cases were reviewed on the program. Now how
 >"ethical" is that? They all could have 'said something' after
 >the fact. Not a single one of them made any effort to either
 >interview us or review our cases (the details of what we were
 >reporting) before passing judgement on us in a very public
 >medium. I participated in that thing because I thought mental
 >health professionals would give us a fair hearing. Boy, was I
 >ever naive!

 >Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
 >should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
 >credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
 >actually worked with live human beings!

And we can say the same things about the abduction researchers.
They can't agree among themselves so why should we give them
credence? See above.

 >Gimme a break Kevin. I'm surprised you don't have neck problems
 >after wearing those gigunda blinders for so long. Open minded
 >and objective you are not.

Is it really necessary to devolve into personal attacks?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:52:51 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 18:00:41 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:14 -0700

 >Dear Kevin,

 >I would like you to interview me.

 >IF you do your homework after that interview, and you do it
 >thoroughly, you will come away with a far different opinion than
 >you presently hold.

But what if I don't. What if after all of this, I find a
plausible explanation?

Are you going to be willing to review that explanation
objectively, or will you reject it out of hand?

 >But, because I question your ability to consider having those
 >opinions changed, I dare say you won't even respond to this
 >note, much less follow through with a one-on-one interview with
 >me.

How do you suggest that we conduct this interview? Over the
telephone? In person? Through the internet? And if we don't do
it in person, will that invalidate it in the minds of some?

 >I asked for help several months ago from the list members,
 >qualifying that it be someone who is _not_ a believer.  You're
 >in for a shocker, Mr. Randle, whether you decide to interview me
 >or not.

Wouldn't be the first time I was shocked.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 15

              Scientists go to camera in search for Mars Lander

From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 21:47:34 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:11:03 -0500
Subject: Scientists go to camera in search for Mars Lander


Scientists go to camera in search for Mars Lander

By Michael Kahn


SAN FRANCISCO, Dec 13 (Reuters) - Scientists will try to learn
later this week whether the ill-fated Mars Polar Lander landed
on the Martian surface even though they have not been able to
make direct contact with the spacecraft, a project scientist on
the mission said on Monday.

The Mars Global Surveyor, currently orbiting the red planet,
will begin using its powerful camera on Thursday in an effort to
locate the spindly, three-legged lander, scientist Richard Zurek
said.

"We believe it is on the surface of Mars," Zurek said at the
fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU). "We're
really putting some hope into seeing something on the surface
itself."

Zurek and a team of scientists had planned to present the first
results from the mission at the AGU meeting. But they instead
held a news conference to detail their attempts to keep
contacting the missing lander and emphasise the need for further
missions to the red planet.

The $165 million Mars Polar Lander was supposed to have landed
on the planet's south pole on Dec. 3 to probe the barren Martian
surface for signs of water -- which, if found, could have
provided vital clues on whether life ever existed there.

But the lander has not been heard from since it made its final
approach toward the planet -- so far failing to signal that it
has landed safely on the Martian surface. Now scientists are
ready to turn to the Mars Global Surveyor's camera for help in
locating the spacecraft.

The search will focus on an area of a few square kilometres and
scientists hope to find the lander's 65-foot long (20 metres)
parachute draped over the surface.

Because the lander is too small to show up in the images beamed
from the satellite, the parachute gives researchers the best
chance of finding the missing spacecraft and would provide
important data for future missions, Zurek said.

"If you see the parachute is there, you know it separated from
the the cruise stage; you know that it deployed the parachute
and you also know you are very close to where the lander is," he
said.

But Zurek cautioned that pinning down the parachute was no easy
task, although he said it was within the "realm of possibility.

The best chance for success is if the parachute is spread along
the Martian surface and not covered in dust or balled-up, he
added. "If it is spread out, we should be able to see it."

It could take up to three weeks to gather a complete picture of
the area and scientists should see the first images as soon as
Friday.

The failure of the Mars Polar Lander, which disappeared along
with two probes, is not the first high-profile snafu for NASA.

The lander's sister ship, the Mars Climate Orbiter, was lost due
to human error in September, and the two probes that accompanied
the lander to the red planet also failed to call home -- adding
up to a $265 million loss for the latest Mars mission.

21:08 12-13-99

Copyright 1999 Reuters Limited.  All rights reserved.
Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by
framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the
prior written consent of Reuters.  Reuters shall not be liable
for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions
taken in reliance thereon.  All active hyperlinks have been
inserted by AOL.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 20:01:37 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:10:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


It's deja vu all over again.

 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:49:03 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:30:56 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>>I realize that you and Ray are friends but I just can't see how
 >>>there could ever be a "balanced discussion" of the Santilli
 >>>alien autopsy?  The decision has already been made by most
 >>>Ufologists and the common folk: The footage is a bald hoax and
 >>>a scam.

 >>And this is the wrong decision, because...

 >Because when all the so-called "evidence" against the AA  is
 >examined, its found to be mostly flim flam, distortion, and
 >hype.

Ed, I really don't want to get into a lengthy discussion here,
but, IMO, the most important evidence against the film, is the
lack of evidence supporting its reality. First you have to find
some of Ray's 50+-year-old film with a picture of the "alien" on
it then you need to test the damn film and prove it is 50+ years
old and I might be interested in it again. Until that happens,
count me out.

 >>>Case closed, right?

 >>>Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at

 >>How so? Perhaps it is sketchy to you because you refuse to see
 >>the autopsy for the scam, perpetrated on all of us by Ray
 >>Santilli and others (including Philip Mantle), that it really
 >>is.

 >What is your proof for this statement?

It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it!

 >If it is a fraud, then why hasn't Ray been arrested? Or Philip??

I think the police have better things to do. Why hasn't Ray
asserted his copyright?

 >And how was this scam perpetrated?  Did Ray contract to have the
 >film made, then transferred to old stock? Were others involved.

Don't know. Probably on the contract or maybe he saw a unique
marketing opportunity. Others, hmmm. I think so, yes.

 >How about Bob Shell?  Was he a dupe or in on it?  Do you have

Unfortunately, I think Bob went into this with good intentions
and got mixed-up with the wrong folks.

 >even one suspect?  Did Ray invent the cammeraman?  Do you know

Yes, I have at least one suspect: Ray. Probably the cameraman
was "invented."

 >what slander is?  Do you have even one person willing to state

Yes, I know what slander is.

 >that Ray is a known cheat and scam artist?  Do you know many

Nope, not my area.

 >dishonest scammers and hoaxers who are able to ask for and get
 >$100,000 on their word alone? Do you have any evidence that Ray

Several of them were arrested in Houston recently. I think the
paper said $2 million had changed hands in one evening -- all on
someone's word.

 >has done something like this before? Is Volker also a scam

Nope.

 >artist and how did he profit from owning a hoaxed film?  (he

How do you know Volker owns the film? And I'd think about that
question a little, if I were you. If Volker owns the film, I
think we could figure out how he made his profit.

 >stated that he was more than pleased with his purchase)  Do you
 >have any idea what it would cost to perpetrate this hoax? (Yes,

I have an idea, but so what? I'm not an expert on making videos.

 >there was a cheap and pathetic hoax, not of the autopsy footage,
 >but the tent footage and the result is what one would expect
 >from... a hoax.  This hoax was perpetrated by some of Ray's
 >friends, but it should not detract from the rest of the footage
 >hich is not hoaxed)

I don't follow your logic at all.

 >>best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
 >>dishonest con man and schemer( and worse), or a dupe or
 >>disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.

 >>>So, what is he Ed? A Saint? I don't think so. Ray saw a way to
 >>>make money and he, more than likely, did.

 >that question has been asked before. This was Ray's answer:

<snip>

 >I have been accused by some of profiteering, well lets look at
 >the whole picture who has profited and who has lost???.

 >1. Is it the broadcasters who worldwide have achieved massive
 >viewing figures and secured lucrative advertisers??

I'm not accusing him, Ed. The man has a right to make a profit,
I guess. If he doesn't want to be accused of profiteering,
perhaps he should be prepared to back-up his claims. He hasn't
done that.

 >2. Is it the News Papers that ran the story and increased their
 >circulation??

I doubt that you could really call those tabloids newspapers.
And I doubt that they made a lot of money off the autopsy. But
hey, tabloids carry hoaxes all the time. What better place for
Ray to get free advertising.

 >3. Is it the Skeptical UFO publications that found their
 >readership almost doubled as a result of the story and the
 >debate??

" Skeptical UFO publications?" Name five.

 >4. Is it the UFO researchers that suddenly found themselves being
 >offered money to appear on talk shows worldwide ???

They've never been offered money before. And hey, more free
advertising for Ray! He didn't have to pay a dime.

 >5. Is it the experts that suddenly found themselves being offered
 >money to write for publications and publishers??.

Michael Hesemann had written "books" before. As had Bob Shell,
so I doubt that they found themselves newly confounded with the
big bucks to advertise Ray's movie for him.

 >6. Is it the Internet forums that didn't know what hit them???.

Ray came into the game at the right time. The internet did love
this story. But more free advertising for Ray.

 >7. Is it the Special Effects experts who suddenly found a means
 >of free publicity??.

As if the Stan Winston's of the world needed more publicity.
Honestly, Ray couldn't believe that these fellows did these
programs just to get more gigs. A good SFx expert doesn't need
that kind of publicity.

 >8. Is it the many people within the media that have traded (sold)
 >pictures of the creature, based on the fact that if it's real,
 >its in public Domain.

Not sure I understand that, but Ray could sue those folks who
violated his copyright, couldn't he. Any smart businessman would
do this.

 >9. Is it either myself or my company.???

 >The point of the above is that hypocrisy runs rife, I have never
 >tried to disguise the fact that I saw a commercial opportunity
 >when I found the film, With regard to the above..that's a
 >different matter. As far as the commercial aspect is concerned
 >"let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Meanwhile
 >something far more important has been lost in all this.

I read Ray's words when he first wrote them. And for the life of
me I can't see why he's complaining about all the free publicity
he received.

<more on the Restricted nonsense snipped>

 >Perhaps, but these are not claims;  you can verify the
 >information yourself and it may be one of the strongest bits of
 >evidence we have. It's hard to say just yet because all is not
 >known about the circumstances under which these codes were
 >obtained.  They were part of the Tent footage but I don't know
 >how the hoaxers came by them, yet.  If anyone does know how the
 >codes were obtained, I'd sure like to know.

Ed, seriously I don't follow your logic. Maybe it's me. I
haven't been all that well and perhaps I have forgotten a few
things, but if you claim, as I believe you do, that the tent
footage is a hoax, then what is the importance of the markings
on something which has been hoaxed? How does that validate the
autopsy video?

 >Yes Rebecca, I was talking about you and I believe your
response >was about the same.  That's my point.  You weren't
looking to >find the truth about the Autopsy. I don't know why.
If you were

You are absolutely wrong about that. You don't know me at all
and you do not know what I think.

 >you would have considered my request that you reconsider the
 >"restricted" matter.  My proof was rock solid and it might have
 >changed the whole tone of Kent's article.

Well, having read your reply to James Easton, I don't see how
your proof is "rock solid" but that's just my opinion vs your
opinion. However, I feel confident there are any number of folks
on this list who can shoot your opinion down. Maybe they will
care enough to do that.

 >It also made Kent look bad; his article contained serious
 >disinformation and caused confusion over the "restricted" codes.
 >Also I didn't expect you to want to be part of a new
 >investigation, but all are welcome.  You did have some very
 >interesting information and doubts and you were a great help.
 >I'd also like to interview the three cammeraman.  Can you help
 >with that?

I don't think it bothers Kent that he looks bad in some people's
eyes. I'm sure he sleeps well at night. You are right that I
don't want to be a part of any new investigation. Perhaps you
can help Phil Mantle with his new book about the film. Maybe you
can profit from Ray's business venture, too.

As for the three cameraman...many have asked but I don't have
that information. I only had access to it. You could try finding
them the same way Kent did. It's called research. He didn't know
these guys, he found them. If he found them, I imagine you can
too.

Thanks,

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                  SkyFlash or Meteor in Montgomery Alabama?

From: Stephen MILES Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 21:35:36 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:23:32 -0500
Subject: SkyFlash or Meteor in Montgomery Alabama?


Just saw a news blurb on CNN about a sky flash which some
suspect was actually a meteor which flew by last night.

The news blurb showed a security camera of a gas station with a
gradual lighting up of the scene "as bright as day" (in the B&W
footage) as the source seems to move or pass by. The source can
not be seen but the scenes illumination seems to shift as if the
source did so as well.

Any more info available out there?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                   Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 16:43:54 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:18:59 -0500
Subject: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 00:54:13 EST
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:20:40 -0500
 >Subject: Filer's Files #49

<snip>

 >NOAA SATELLITE PICKS UP GIANT UFO IN EARTH ORBIT

 >The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
 >several Geosynchronous Orbiting Environmental Satellites (GOES)
 >in orbit watching the Earth's weather and environment.  On
 >November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z hours our satellites caught an
 >amazing photo of a UFO at an estimated hundred miles above the
 >Earth off the coast of the state of Washington.

<snip>

 >It was the type we identify as a large Mother Ship.

<snip>

 >Similar photos taken on June 8, 1995, over South America have
 >also been widely distributed.  Philip Imbrogno studied this
 >case and NOAA explained the image was a "moon shadow UFO."
 >This excuse will not hold in the latest photos.  This UFO was
 >present for only a few minutes and is not seen in images taken
 >prior or afterwards.  The UFO has structure, windows, and
 >radiates heat in the infrared spectrum

[http://www.filersfiles.com/noaaimages.htm --ebk]

So does the Moon (about 15%).  Astronomer Rik Hill checked this
out and found that our natural satellite was at the right place,
and showing the right phase to account for the oval image at the
time the pix was taken.

Some additional information about this picture:

The shape of the object was due to the motion of the Moon, which
caused trailing, even though the Moon phase was nearly Full, so
the actual disk was about circular. The time between pictures
was 30 minutes, not 15 minutes.  Therefore the shifts of the
Moon from one picture to the next are about 15 Moon diameters.
The pictures are usually cropped and the Moon is not visible.
The picture that you received seemed to have been cropped fairly
wide, which made the Moon visible.


Clear skies,

Bob Young

No man really becomes a fool until he stops asking questions.
-- Charles Steinmetz (1865-1923), electrical engineer, helped
pioneer alternating current systems in the U.S.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                             UK Conference 2000!

From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:24:52 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:42:54 -0500
Subject: UK Conference 2000!


Dear All,

Tim Matthews here - the Ufologist the governments want to shut
up - at any cost.....

I'm just taking a little time out from looking after my
beautiful three-week old daughter Alexandra to bring you
important information on "CONFERENCE 2000! Worlds Without End!"

Well - my annual Conference takes place on Saturday 29th January
2000 (let's hope we get past Y2K - we've been stocking up just
in case..) and details are available on my new website:

www.angelfire.com/sd/discoveryuk/index.html

This promises to be a great event and you're all welcome.
Speakers include;

Roger Hennessey - author/researcher/philosopher, speaking on his
new book "Worlds Without End", which deals with the
philosophical, historical and scientific aspects of SETI.

Jenny Randles - Britain's best-known researcher and writer on
matter Paranormal, speaking on "Living in the Past -
investigating British cases of reincarnation.

Jon Downes - world authority on matters Fortean; Director of the
Centre for Fortean Zoology, Environmental Editor to the new UK
newspaper, The Planet on Sunday.

Ralph Ellis - author and airline pilot! Has written two
critically acclaimed books on sacred sites, ancient monuments
and the links between them....

Andy Roberts - Armchair Ufologist and sceptic, speaking on his
latest book "the UFOs That Never Were" (pub. Alice and Busby).

Brian Allan - Strange Phenomena Investigations/SPI Scotland -
speaking on Rosslyn Chapel and the Knights Templar

Tim Matthews - ever-controversial and brilliant researcher whose
investigations into military UFO systems have landed him in BIG
trouble and made him a focus for a smear campaign funded by MI5.
He has recently investigated the Winter Hill MIB case - perhaps
the biggest UFO-related event since the Alan Godfrey abduction
of 1980.

Steve Mera - Manchester-based researcher of UFOs, the Paranormal
and primary investigator of the recent 'black helicopter' and
MIB sightings in the North West.

All this - latest and best research - for 0nly �10 - just �8
before 24th/12/99.

Book now to avoid disappointment - our best conference yet!

Tickets from �8 via; The Secretary, P.O.Box 15, Southport, UK,
PR8 1GR.

(Free to non-UK visitors!)

Cheques/Postal Orders and gold teeth to "Tim Matthews".

If you want the truth, then Conference 2000 is your event! Video
cameras, press, TV welcome.

(Larry O'Hara and his MI5 buddies; admission �100.)

Ring for details on (01704) 213517 and 233255.

My new email; TMMatthews99@aol.com

Organiser, Carrie Smith, Secretary, Brenda Wilkinson.

Central Library, Union St., Chorley, Lancashire, Saturday 29Th
January 2000.

Starts 10.30pm, finishes 8pm. tea/coffee/snacks available,
central location, across road from bus/coach station, 5 minutes
from rail station, plenty of local hotel and b/b accommodation

Opening the StarGate 2000;

www.angelfire.com/sd/stargate2000/index.html
www.adriangilbert.co.uk

Bye for now - best wishes for the season and the New Year! Take care!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth

From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:37:50 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 03:05:33 -0500
Subject: Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth


Tim Matthews, P.O.Box 15, Southport PR8 1GR.
Tel; (01704) 213517 Mobile; (07944) 047195
Email; TMMatthews99@aol.com

Open Letter To Steve Booth And Larry O'Hara.

(Background; last week O'Hara and Booth, both political
extremists, (Booth has served time for conpsiracy to cause
violence etc.) fulfilled the terms of their agreement with MI5 -
or whomever - and were apparently paid to publish a glossy and
patently ridiculous smear booklet about me, Jenny Randles, Kevin
McClure, Eric Morris, Rory Lushman and various other noted
Ufologists entitled "At War with the Universe" claiming that I
had 'invented sightings' and worked for virtually every
intelligence organisation they could spell.

Any ufologist work his/her salt knows that their claims are;

1 - Libelous 2 - Defamatory 3 - Illegal 4 - Factually incorrect
5 - Ludicrous

Their claims are so full of holes, factual errors and mistakes
that actually many of us over here have been crying with
laughter. Nevertheless, and given the ability of Ufology to
believe just about anything, I thought I should shoot down some
of the glaring errors.

What O'Hara and Booth known about modern Ufology could be
written on the back of a postage stamp from a small Balkan
republic.....

The more sinister side to all this is that in recent weeks
members of my research team have had their houses burgled, I
have my phone tapped, our mortgage payments were mysteriously
cancelled... and that's just for starters. To cap it all, this
latest publication appears at a time when several of us are
looking into potentially the biggest UFO case in the UK for 20
years; the Winter Hill MIB and CE3 case, exclusively featured on
Jeff Rense Sightings a couple of weeks ago.)

...........

10th December 1999

Dear Steve and Larry,


Firstly, I'd like to congratulate you both on keeping both
myself, my wife, numerous friends, relatives and colleagues in
fits of laughter over the last few days as we have read excerpts
from your fictional "At War With The Universe". Can I suggest a
better title; "Larry and Steve, at War With Reality!"

Of course, the more paranoid amongst us (that's you guys) might
ask where you get all the money to peddle and print your lunatic
theories…

Perhaps, Steve, you did some sort of a 'deal' in order to get
yourself out of prison. I bet it was a shock in there when you
discovered that in the real world (there is one beyond the
realms of Anarchist conspiracy) there are no 'get out of prison
free' cards! What was it; "Now then Steve, we know you're a
reasonable man, now how's about your cooperating with us? You've
got a wife, a teenage son…."

I must say, you two clowns have made so many factual errors in
your new booklet that I haven't the time to answer them all.
Incidentally, I'm more than happy to appear in a 'filmed debate'
with you idiots, as long as it's organised fairly. This time
we'll be ready for any sneak attacks. Having said that, you only
have around 5 supporters in the whole world -  and I think we'll
smell them coming….

You really must get it organised! I'll enjoy wiping the floor
with your fantasies, exposing your incredible lack of knowledge
regarding classified aircraft projects and UFOs, your inability
to grasp simple facts and the violence and hatred that oozes out
of your various publications.

I think that Steve's City Death was once described by Paul
'Petroleum' Rogers as the "Turner Diaries of the Left".

How apt.

Of course, moving away from the hilarity, I must pass comment
(although passing wind might be more appropriate - given the
contents of your booklet) on some of the glaring errors
contained within "At War", not to mention the less than subtle
irony.

First of all, Steve, you will remember your Philosophy course at
the University of Lancaster. I have met several of the people
who had the misfortune to have to put up with your miserable
'pop philosophy' - as I understand some of your MA work was
later described. One of these, Albert Hewerdine has become a
friend of mine. In August 1996, I was no longer running my music
shop in Lancaster because of my unfortunate bankruptcy (these
things happen to better people than me).

Albert and I both share a love for Philosophy and, more
particularly, classical music.

Albert's long-time partner Wendy Pattinson (she's calling
herself Lully Pattinson now; unlike you Steve, she got a first
class Honours degree from the University this Summer) knew of my
interest in things Ufological and reported the 29th August
sighting to me.

She drew me a brief sketch of her 'UFO' and she gave me the
basic details of the event. Whilst we can all argue and debate
what was actually seen, the facts are clear; other people in
Kendal saw the object, described as triangular.

Ironic, don't you think, that the witness to a so-called "hoax"
sighting should be the partner of one of your old University
betters Steve? Albert and Wendy still live at the same address -
in Stirling Road, Lancaster. They know that the sighting is
mentioned in my excellent and fully-referenced UFO Revelation,
and they agree with the treatment I gave it.

Bottom line - a real sighting, a real witness. Wendy was,
indeed, on the phone to Albert when the event took place!!

You, Steve and Larry, have really cocked up this time! You
shouldn't have listened to those losers in the NLUFOIG group -
they're well-known for their lack of investigative ability!

The October 1997 'HMS Shetland affair'.

This, not unlike the Kendal sighting, can hardly be described -
and hasn't been by me at any time - as a 'major' case; just
another intriguing case in the annals of Ufology.

The facts are again clear. I was invited to appear (twice) on
the popular Tony Newman nightly talk radio (Red Rose 999MW) show
AFTER the sighting had been reported to the station. I had been
on Tony's show before where I had discussed the whole UFO
situation. As usual, my appearance improved ratings and led to
an enjoyable and thought-provoking programme. Furthermore,
numerous Ufologists heard the show, including members of our
friendly rivals, the Lancashire Aerial Phenomena Investigation
Society (LAPIS), one of whom phoned in to give out their number.

Neither they, nor I, could make any forward progress. The MOD
admitted that the HMS Shetland was indeed on patrol at the time
of the reported event. In addition, there have been several
well-documented cases involving 'high strangeness' off the Fylde
Coast. No doubt you were both unaware of this when you wrote "At
War"…

The 'Knutsford Incident'.

When this bizarre story broke, I was in Scotland on a music
course - a fact to which every member of the British UFO Studies
Centre, my wife Lynda and the rest of the family are able to
testify. I heard about the claimed 'landing' case from Carolyn
Buckley, one of the BUFOSC investigators whose full report I
have and which was sent to several Ufologists and Fortean Times.

This was indeed a most suspicious business with two obvious
liars - Wenham and Sutton - trying to hoax BUFOSC. Eric Morris,
Dave Kelly, Irene Dale and Sarah Cardwell were also involved in
aspects of the investigation and Carolyn's full report is
available from her via email;

cosmiccarrie@hotmail.com

She awaits your request for information with interest.

She will be able, no doubt, to confirm having met the two
witnesses to this claimed event, namely Caroline Bradley and
Graham Wenham.

These are but three examples of your complete idiocy, your
inability or unwillingness to ask the right people the right
questions and more than enough evidence to relegate the whole of
your booklet to the ashcan of history - where it belongs.

I am very tempted to ask you for a bulk discount on, say, 50
copies of "At War." I could give them to friends and family as
joke Christmas presents. Let's be honest guys - nobody takes you
seriously; not even the left where activists like Noel Molland
have made it perfectly clear that they were responsible for
their actions in regards to their arrest. Molland rejects any
notion of 'state conspiracy' - I have his letter here. In other
words, he (and others) acted as they did in the full and certain
knowledge that they were breaking the law.  I quote him
directly;

""Statement by Noel Molland. Sent to SchNEWS on 25 December
1997.

"There has been a rumour going around that Agent Provocateurs
encouraged the Gandalf Defendants to write allegedly inciting
material. I totally distance myself from such theories.

As the editor of Eco-Vegan, a contributor for Earth Liberation
Prisoners Journal, the early editions of Do or Die and the Diary
of Animal Liberation, and Eco-Defence diary contributor in GA
mag, I know I was never encouraged by an Agent Provocateur to
write such stuff. All of the above have been held up as
containing inciting material. I take full responsibility for my
own writings. I do not try to cowardly shift the blame onto
anyone else."

I remember, when discussing one of your (Larry) lunatic
outbursts with Stuart Booth (by the way, he's a respected and
Senior Editor at Cassell, and not the non-entity you seem to
claim), his comment that your claims were 'completely
impossible'. I saw copies of the letters you wrote to the
Cassell directors and you will be glad to know that at no time
did I even consider mentioning you in my book!

Larry - you're not even in the proofs!!

In terms of the book you will have noticed - as have a host of
reviewers - that all my material is referenced. The vast, vast
majority of pages are unrelated to any 'German' material and I
have always made it perfectly clear that I am interested in the
work of the Horten Brothers, Alexander Lippisch and friends only
because of their immediate and direct impact on post-war
American aviation design - and, therefore, man-made UFOs. For
instance, one of the more successful aircraft, the Douglas
Skyray, was developed using German expertise. The fact is that
the German jet engines were far more effective than similar US
systems. This is an historical fact - and nothing to do with
supposed "nazi" propaganda.

These historical facts - that you willfully choose to ignore -
are available in any (and every) standard history of aviation,
whether it be the Jane's team or Bill Gunston as Editors.

We are all fully aware - and highly critical - of the war
records of many of the Paperclip scientists, and I have made
this point very clear in lectures, on TV and radio.

As to your other comments, what can a sane person say? They are
so inaccurate, hateful and libelous. I knew that before long you
pair of idiots would outdo yourselves and make such wild claims
that nobody would take them seriously.

It now appears that we have arrived at that point.

You have no evidence of my being involved in organising or
attending paramilitary camps; no evidence of my handling
explosives, of being a 'member' of Combat 18, of using
'stormtrooper tactics' and mob violence at the lectures to which
you often send your flunkies. Oh, and if you're still sore about
being ejected from our Conference in 1998 - tough. You sneaked
in at the back with Rogers and co and got thrown out. If you
turn up to a future event, we'll throw you out again.

You have no evidence because there is NO EVIDENCE. All you have
is childish conspiracy theories and in Steve's case, only
yourself to blame for falling foul of the law. After all Steve,
you were the one who published the violent novels, encouraged
and promoted violence in Green Anarchist, produced hitlists of
bailiffs for attack in 1990/1 (we all remember that, you
hypocrite!) and a great deal more.

And then there's Larry's lunatic letters to my parents. His
implied threats and the very fact that he wrote in such hateful
terms to a couple of pensioners speaks volumes for the kind of
men you both are.

They have put the matter in the hands of their solicitors.

So, Larry and Steve, continue to keep us all amused - and
horrified - by your stupidity. Don't forget to do me a bulk deal
on the booklets and get that debate organised. (I'm sure you
have a kangaroo court in mind though!) In terms of your
'understanding' of Ufology, you have none and are regarded as a
joke by one and all. For your information, it was my wife Lynda
who encouraged me to get involved in Ufology in March 1995. She
has an excellent track record in terms of paranormal
investigation as shown in her articles for Beyond magazine.
Given this, and her tireless devotion to 'ghost hunting' and so
on, I think you would be wise to stop criticizing her
investigative abilities.

Finally, the fact that you chose to send out this barrage of
hate and venom at the same time as Lynda and I are celebrating
the birth of our first (and beautiful) daughter Alexandra Maia,
is all the evidence people need to make a sensible decision
about your modus operandi.

Some researchers have also commented upon the fact that you did
this at the same time that a group of us is investigating a
potentially very significant case involving MIB reports in the
Bolton area - as featured on US talk radio last week.

We wonder who is really pulling your strings - because nobody
can be so stupid.

This letter will be posted on the Internet and on the new Tim
vs. Larry website that I am struggling to put together at the
moment. You see, guys, my computer skills are limited and this
machine is only 18 months old. This rather disqualifies me from
being able to produce high-class hoax 'alien' photos in early
1996!

Yet again, it looks like you've got it wrong! At least some
things never change.

I await your reply in anticipation. Perhaps a free review copy
for my CV?

Best wishes,


Tim Matthews.

PS - More provable nonsense from y'all.

1 - In your booklet you claim that Dave Baker of the Yorkshire
UFO Society. I haven't got a copy of your booklet but Jenny
Randles states, in relation to Dave's efforts;

"The two references I saw to you are the fact that Tim
deliberately set up your meetings at the Cranes because its a
Nazi pub and he reckons possibly bugged by Special Branch (no
doubt with mikes hiding in the cocktail umbrellas). I should
imagine this is as big a load of twaddle as much else in this
book. Why would Tim set up your meeting venue when you live in
the city and he lives 100 miles away?

In a recent edition of Lobster, some guy wrote in to completely
dismiss the idea that the Three Cranes Public House is a "Nazi
Pub". In fact, the correspondent stated, the Sheffield Humanist
Society regular meets at the Queen St. location!!

Your suggestion that this is either a 'Nazi pub' or 'bugged by
Special Branch' probably qualifies you for an 'MIWC' award; Men
In White Coats.

Wrong AGAIN guys!

(I thought that MI5 and SB ops were mutually exclusive; I must
re-read my manual!)

PPS - I understand that you're hoping for some sort of a witch
hunt undertaken against me against your alleged 'sources'. Sorry
guys - I'll have to leave the witch-hunting to you two instead!

In any case, I'm really not bothered if Ufology likes me or not.
I'm just hoping you two will keep boosting my profile...

Thanks guys!

QUESTION: When is an Animal Liberationist revolutionary not an
Animal Liberationist revolutionary?

ANSWER; When his name is Steve Booth, he eats meat and enjoys
waking up to a bacon sandwich in the morning!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                              Re: False Memory

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 22:39:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 03:16:09 -0500
Subject: Re: False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:52:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:11:14 -0700

Dear Kevin,

First, thank you for responding to my note.  I am very surprised
that you did so, and even more surprised that you tentatively
suggest (dare I say "agree") to interview me.  It would be
*wonderful* if you could find a plausible explanation for what
has happened to me.  Period.  I will not reject out-of-hand
anything you suggest.  I will weigh it and gauge it against the
burn incident, which is the only tangible "proof" I have that
all that happened prior to that incident was also real.

I can talk over the phone with you, but I imagine a one-on-one
interview would be more productive for both of us.  If you think
it is important for the truth to be understood by others, then
you will probably want to either tape the conversation and/or
interview me in person with a witness or colleague with you.

You are welcome to stay at our home.  We live in the mountains
between Conifer and Bailey, Colorado.  I can take a few days off
from work, if you can arrange to get to DIA in Denver, I can
pick you up at the airport.  Unfortunately, I can't pay for your
plane ticket.  I don't know where you live, so maybe you could
drive the distance, or we could meet 1/2 way somewhere.

I will need you to do some homework after discussing what I tell
you. Are you ready?  Will you *let* yourself follow-up, despite
what your better judgment tells you?  When you hit a road block
will you stop, or will you push ahead because something nettles
your mind?  Because what I tell you will bother you.  Will you
later crumble and fall in a deep abyss if you're able to get
your mind around what I tell you? I'm asking you if you are of
sound mind and body now, because you will question *everything*
after this interview. I need you to be strong. It is important
to me to know you *really want to know.*  If you do, fine.  If
not, maybe someone else will offer to help me.  Sincerely, Sue
Strickland








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                       Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 17:15:02 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 03:31:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?


 >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:36:17 -0500
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >The National Post - Toronto,

 >Monday, December 13, 1999

 >Page A1

 >Canada's X-Files grow dusty as fewer people spot UFOs

 >BY PAUL WALDIE

<snip>

ebk

===============================

Regarding the article in the Toronto Post...

Is this to be interpreted as meaning that there are only two
categories of interest in the UFO phenom...

1) Those who are interested

2) The rest of the world (ROW) who could care less?

On the assumption that the ROW hasn't the faintest interest in
the subject, then this leaves us, a small group of ragtag
lunatics, who just happen to have an open mind on the issue.  In
fact, "just having an open mind" is probably a wild
understatement. From my perspective, "fascination" on the
subject would be just as much if not more the understatement.

We listers seem to have an opinion on everything from Venus to
Pelican droppings (crap circles).  I would be very interested in
commentary from the UFO researchers on list.

Personally, I do not understand the article, relative to the
fact that my entire life revolves around this subject. Is it
that people have compartmentalized this issue as a result of
exposure to half a century of maligning people such as we?  Our
entertainment media use a level of "reality" such as never
before in our recent history. Blood squirts wildy from entrance
and exist wounds, brains splatter over wide areas, clothing
tends to be removed often, body parts openly (literally)
displayed without shame, etc..... etc.... etc.....

Have people developed an immunity to this subject and relegated
it to "entertainment" and/or "making fun" value only?

Reality appears to be relegated only to that which can be
presented to appear real on the big screen.  But imagination,
that faculty of the brain which we used in the days of radio,
has been discontinued due to lack of interest and use.

I am confused by this article.  Whilst I respect those who seek
truth, asking for the opinion of UFO researchers may be what
happens before rigor mortis.  A death rattle.

(sighs)

So what's your opinion folks?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 04:08:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:23:55 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:41:03 EST
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@globalserve.net


 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory


Kevin wrote in reference to John Mack:

 >Sorry, but his comment about the memory around an experience of
 >"core" importance being better has not been scientifically
 >proved and the information available suggests the opposite.


Depends on 'whose' information you are giving more
credence/weight to Kevin. Although I cannot quote 'chapter and
verse' I have read papers that reinforce Macks statement. (That
memory which is associated with experiences of core importance
are better.) I'm sure that equally compelling arguments can be
made for both views. What I was objecting to was your
_blanket_dismissal_ of Dr. Mack's statements with the
proclamation that, "This is nonsense."

Until one theory 'checkmates' the other, it remains an open
question as to which one better describes how memory actually
functions. How then can you make such a statement? If it is
based solely on the theories that are expounded by the
researchers that you happen to agree with, then the remark is
prejudiced.

 >I certainly agree that John Mack has impressive credentials, but
 >that doesn't mean he is automatically right.

Doesn't automatically make everything he says, "nonsense"
either! It's not just the credentials Kevin. The guy has _years_
of experience working with 'live ones' which is one hell of a
lot more than can be said for Loftus, et al. Because of that
very important factor I have a tendency to give more weight to
comments from a guy who has actually worked the trenches than an
"Ivory Tower" academic who never deals with anyone over the age
of 20 and most of them only trying to 'please' the professor.
(Either for 'grades' or a spot in the department.) Think about
that. It's true.

I have seen him claim that confabulation is the result of
alcoholism and is associated only with alcoholism and therefore
is not relevant to a discussion of alien abduction. But, other,
equally credentialed people have said that confabulation can be
caused by a number of problems and is not necessarily related to
alcoholism.

I don't agree with _everything_ the man says either Kevin. You
read UpDates and you know that I have criticized him strongly on
more than one occasion.

Re: confabulation

Until it can be proven on a case by case basis whether abductees
as a group are all telling manufactured/elaborate lies folks should
be taken at their word. Maybe I'm just naive and old fashioned but
I hesitate to imply that a whole group of folks are engaged in
propagating the same elaborate lie. In all of it's details.

You speak of 'confabulation' as if it was a given and that there
was enough hard evidence to justify considering it as an
acceptable explanation for a majority of abduction reports.

That's not true.

As you are fond of saying, "it hasn't been proven yet!" In fact,
the opposite is true! What few psychological studies _have_ been
performed on those who claim 'abduction' experiences shows them
to be no more or less neurotic than anyone else in the
population. People who tell elaborate lies 'usually' lie
compulsively. Yet no significant character disorder has been
discovered or reported about those 'experiencers' who were
tested psychologically.

I wrote:

 >>In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
 >>"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
 >>of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
 >>mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
 >>explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
 >>worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

Kevin responds:

 >Haven't you just dismissed their work without giving it a fair
 >hearing?

Not at all Kevin. When I consented to participate in the NOVA
episode that was 'allegedly' looking into UFO abductions I
learned that Loftus, Baker, Persinger, and Sagan would also be
participating. I made it my business to bone up on who they
were, what their credentials were, and what theories they were
expounding.

Tell me Kevin doesn't "their work" also include _proving_ the
value of their theories in 'real world' situations?

Wouldn't you think that before claiming (in a very public venue)
that those of us who appeared on that program were either
suffering from; 'delusions/hallucinations' (that one was from
the eminent psychologist Carl Sagan,) or false memory (Loftus)
or sleep paralysis (Baker) they would have to (at the very
least) take the time to interview us and review our case
histories? Even if just to determine whether their theories
actually applied to us or not.

No, like yourself, they made pronouncements and presumed to
'diagnose' us _on-air_ without ever once having spoken to _any_
of us! Without knowing who we were or the details of what we
were reporting.

If that is the way academic psychologists formulate their
original theories (in a vacuum) then no, I don't give them or
their theories much credence at all. They are much more
interested in getting attention for their own 'pet theories'
than they are in determining any truth.

For 'academics' life revolves around things like 'grants' and
'publishing.' (publish or perish!) Nope, sorry, they _showed_me_
(first person) what they were 'made of' and how they conduct
their business. I'm not impressed.

 >Can't we say the same about the abduction researchers
 >putting out mutually exclusive theories?

You bet. I'm not defending them here. As far as I'm concerned
most of them are as incompetent and full of it as Loftus and
Baker and that sad clown Persinger and his electric football
helmet! I agree with you that many of them and their 'theories'
are no better.

 >Can Budd Hopkins' aliens be the same as those reported by David
 >Jacobs or John Mack?

See, this is the kind of insidious/unsubstantiated stuff that
you have a nasty habit of 'putting out there' Kevin.

They are not "Budd's or Mack's or Jacob's" aliens. They are
_our_ "aliens!" Those of us who have reported to them. Budd or
David didn't 'invent' Grey aliens and then 'suggest' them to all
of us who went to them. We _told_ them! All they have done is to
report that in their accounts of the cases they have worked
with.

That's a far cry from what you implied in your statement.

 >Hasn't Mack really just accused these others of leading their
 >witnesses into the arena they want?

I can only speak for myself Kevin. I spent a _ton_ of time over
a six year period working very closely with Budd. I have also
had the pleasure of spending time talking with Dave Jacobs.
(both of whom are very intelligent, honest, and straightforward
men.) Never, (not once) in all those years did I hear _anything_
come from either of them that could even remotely be considered
'leading.' Or an 'attempt' to lead me or anyone else.

That's just another one of those 'bones' that skeptics are fond
of giving voice to that has no basis in reality. Lawyers do
stuff like that. I believe the axiom is, "Just say the words!"
Even if the judge strikes the comments from the record it's too
late... the jury already "heard the words."

'Saying it' (that abduction researchers all 'lead' their
clients) doesn't make it so.

I wrote re: NOVA

 >>Without ever having spoken to me (or any of the other abductees
 >>who participated) they edited my comments to unrelated questions
 >>in between Loftus and the late Robert Baker expounding their
 >>"theories" on alien abduction. As if they were "analysing" the
 >>abductees whose cases were reviewed on the program. Now how
 >>"ethical" is that? They all could have 'said something' after
 >>the fact. Not a single one of them made any effort to either
 >>interview us or review our cases (the details of what we were
 >>reporting) before passing judgement on us in a very public
 >>medium. I participated in that thing because I thought mental
 >>health professionals would give us a fair hearing. Boy, was I
 >>ever naive!

 >Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
 >should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
 >credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
 >actually worked with live human beings!

 >And we can say the same things about the abduction researchers.
 >They can't agree among themselves so why should we give them
 >credence? See above.

See my comments above about what I think of most abduction
researchers!

I wrote:

 >>Gimme a break Kevin. I'm surprised you don't have neck problems
 >>after wearing those gigunda blinders for so long. Open minded
 >>and objective you are not.

Kevin responds:

 >Is it really necessary to devolve into personal attacks?

Gee Kevin, that's just what I wonder about you when you imply
that abductees are 'confabulating' their stories (if not telling
outright elaborate lies) or that we are _all_ so weak minded
that we are all being 'led' by abduction researchers. Why is it
okay for you to imply that we are all nuts, liars, or some form
of mental deficients and it isn't okay for me to say that I
don't think you're being very objective.

Personal attacks?

I believe it was _you_ who started that. I don't take well to
being called a liar or told that things that happened to me in
real life while I was fully conscious and awake are all somehow
mistakes because after all, they just have to be 'something
else' other than what is being reported. Again I say, gimme a
break Kevin. Look into a 'mirror' from time to time other than
to shave.

Peace,

John :)

________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Karl T Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:01:58 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 08:30:59 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 22:15:50 -0600
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 14:04:00
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

<snip>

DENNIS et al. --

 >The occurrence of circular orbits may require special initial
 >conditions, to avoid the gravitational perturbations and to
 >avoid the tendency of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics to scramble
 >the orbital ellipticities of planets. Perhaps, our Solar System,
 >with its coplanar, nearly circular orbits represents a
 >remarkably fortuitous low-entropy state for a planetary system."

 >Note the use of the phrase "remarkably fortuitous."

Note the word "may" in the first sentence above.

-- KARL







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                       Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:18:45 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:23:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?


 >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:36:17 -0500
 >To: updates@globalserve.net
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Canadas X-Files Grow Dusty?

 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >The National Post - Toronto,

 >Monday, December 13, 1999

 >Page A1

 >---

 >Canada�s X-Files grow dusty as fewer people spot UFOs

 >BY PAUL WALDIE

<snip>

 >I talked with Paul Waldie on 12-14-99.

 >Waldie checks, on-line, for Canadian access to information
 >releases. One area he checks regularly is the Canadian Military,
 >who post all the access to information requests on a monthly
 >basis. One request was for UFO information. He ordered a copy
 >of the request and found that it contained "basically nothing -
 >just Hunziker's telephone number... that was it. I thought it
 >would include some reports, because in the past there have
 >been some reports. So I started with him." [Hunziker]

 >I have Hunziker's telephone number should any Canadian
 >Researchers feel the need to get in touch with him.

 >ebk


Errol:

After several conversations with DOT, I have arranged that any
unidentified aerial object reports they receive will be passed
along to me for inclusion in our annual survey of UFO activity
in Canada. Unfortunately, this is not retroactive. It will apply
only to reports received as of Jan 1, 2000. (This assumes the
end of the world will not occur on Dec 31, 1999.)

So, the good news is that these reports will not be lost.
Previously, the reports were received *and discarded* after 30
days. Such is the march of science.

- Chris Rutkowski
- Ufology Research of Manitoba

--
Nobody in particular






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                        Re: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 09:22:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:25:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 13:36:42 EST
 >Subject: Filer's Files #48 -- 1999
 >To: undisclosed-recipients:;

 >NEW INTELLIGENT SIGNALS FROM SPACE

 >ARECIBO, PUERTO RICO -- Gannett News Service reports that on
 >November 29, 1999, the world's largest radio telescope, picked
 >up what appeared to be an intelligent signal coming from a small
 >star named HD119850.

This story has subsequently been exposed as a hoax.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                 Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:06:40 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:29:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 16:43:54 EST
 >Subject: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 00:54:13 EST
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:20:40 -0500
 >>Subject: Filer's Files #49

<snip>

 >>NOAA SATELLITE PICKS UP GIANT UFO IN EARTH ORBIT

 >>The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
 >>several Geosynchronous Orbiting Environmental Satellites (GOES)
 >>in orbit watching the Earth's weather and environment.  On
 >>November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z hours our satellites caught an
 >>amazing photo of a UFO at an estimated hundred miles above the
 >>Earth off the coast of the state of Washington.

<snip>

 >>It was the type we identify as a large Mother Ship.

<snip>

 >>Similar photos taken on June 8, 1995, over South America have
 >>also been widely distributed.  Philip Imbrogno studied this
 >>case and NOAA explained the image was a "moon shadow UFO."
 >>This excuse will not hold in the latest photos.  This UFO was
 >>present for only a few minutes and is not seen in images taken
 >>prior or afterwards.  The UFO has structure, windows, and
 >>radiates heat in the infrared spectrum

 > [http://www.filersfiles.com/noaaimages.htm --ebk]

 >So does the Moon (about 15%).  Astronomer Rik Hill checked this
 >out and found that our natural satellite was at the right place,
 >and showing the right phase to account for the oval image at the
 >time the pix was taken.

 >Some additional information about this picture:

 >The shape of the object was due to the motion of the Moon, which
 >caused trailing, even though the Moon phase was nearly Full, so
 >the actual disk was about circular. The time between pictures
 >was 30 minutes, not 15 minutes.  Therefore the shifts of the
 >Moon from one picture to the next are about 15 Moon diameters.
 >The pictures are usually cropped and the Moon is not visible.
 >The picture that you received seemed to have been cropped fairly
 >wide, which made the Moon visible.

Hi Bob.

I sent an e-mail request to NOAA for any other images of the
full Earth they have which also include the Moon in the same
pictures.

Until then, let's do a quick mathematical check to see if the
alleged UFO Mother Ship was in fact the Moon.

The mean diameter of the Moon: 3475 km

The mean diameter of the Earth: 12,756 km

The mean distance of the Moon to the Earth: 384,500 km

The approximate distance of NOAA's GOES satellite to the Earth
(since it is in geostationary orbit): 35,786 km

The approximate distance of NOAA's GOES satellite to the Moon
(since the Moon is on the opposite side of the Earth with
respect to GOES, this will be 384,500 plus 35,786 or): 420,286
km


 From trigonometry we get:

tan X(M) = 3475/420,286 = 8.268 x 10^-3
and
tan X(E) = 12,756/35,786 = 3.564 x 10^-1

where X(M) is the angular size of the Moon and X(E) is the
angular size of the Earth.

 From the inverse tans we get:

X(M) = 0.47 degrees  and  X(E) = 19.62 degrees

The ratio in sizes of the Earth to the Moon in the GEOS images
should be 19.62/0.47 = 41.7.  In other words, the Earth should
appear 41.7 times larger.

The diameter of the Moon (long axis) on one GEOS images I
downloaded was about 3 mm (plus or minus 0.5 mm) and the
diameter of the Earth was 96 mm (plus or minus 1.0 mm).  This
gives ratios as large as 97/2.5 = 38.8 or as small as 95/3.5 =
27.1.

Observations:

The object in the GEOS images is smaller than what we would
expect for the Moon (assuming there is no pronounced distortions
near the edges of the GEOS images).

Also, the axis of the nearly full Moon phase (less than two days
from Full Moon), should be parallel to the Earth's N-S axis.  It
isn't (nonsymmetrical distortions?).

Yes, GEOS images of the Earth are taken every 30 minutes but it
does not take up to 30 minutes to take this image so no trailing
of the Moon should be evident.  Note that the Moon revolves
around the Earth once (360 degrees) in just over 27 days so in a
30 minute time frame the Moon would move in the sky by:

(360 degrees / 27 days) / (24 hours x 2) = 0.27 degrees in 30
minutes.

This is about a half Moon diameter, not the 15 Moon diameters
you mention.

If we assume it is the Moon in the GEOS image, since it is a few
lunar diameters from the edge of the Earth and it moves about
half a lunar diameter in the sky each 30 minutes, there MUST be
a few more images of the Moon in GEOS images taken before and
after this one.

Conclusion:

The object in the GEOS image (taken November 21, 1999 at 14:45Z
cannot be easily explained as the Moon - it remains a UFO.

Nick Balaskas
Physics and Astronomy
York University









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                 Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:58:34 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:31:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]


Stuart Goldman of SKY & TELESCOPE Magazine has posted a view of
what the sky should have looked like at the moment the satellite
pix of Moon was taken.  Go to:

http://members.aol.com/MrAstro/NotUFO.gif

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                                Re: Giant UFO

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:51:23 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 15:04:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Giant UFO


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:58:34 EST
 >Subject: Giant UFO [was: Re: Filer's Files #49]
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >Stuart Goldman of SKY & TELESCOPE Magazine has posted a view of
 >what the sky should have looked like at the moment the satellite
 >pix of Moon was taken.  Go to:

 >http://members.aol.com/MrAstro/NotUFO.gif

Hello again Bob.

Jupiter was at opposition (opposite the Sun with respect to the
Earth) a month before the November 21 GEOS picture.  Why does it
appear to be behind the Earth in the picture I thought?  Well
since the Sun was not shining directly down on the Earth but a
little to the right (notice that the left edge of the Earth is
not as sharp as the right edge), Jupiter would be roughly at the
location where Sky & Telescope says.

Then I thought, where would the Moon be with respect to Jupiter?
Well since the Moon moves by just over 12 degrees in the sky
each day and according the my Observer's Handbook the Moon had
the same R.A. or celestial longitude as Jupiter on November 20
at about 22:00Z, then 3/4 of a day later when the GEOS picture
was taken the Moon be nearly 10 degrees further East (to the
left of the picture).  Since I calculated earlier that the Earth
in the GEOS picture was about 20 degrees across, the Moon would
indeed be in the general vicinity of the UFO is in the picture.

Conclusion:  Our "...Giant UFO in Earth Orbit" (there is no way
one can in fact tell) is now an IFO - the Moon.  This conclusion
agrees (well within an order of magnitude) with the relative
sizes of the Earth and the Moon I got in the calculations I made
in my earlier e-mail (taking the usual sources of errors into
account).

I am still looking forward to seeing any other images of the
Moon taken by GEOS, especially those just before or after where
it was claimed that the UFO was "not seen in [GEOS] images taken
prior or afterwards".

Nick Balaskas
Physics and Astronomy
York University









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 11:48:35 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 15:13:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 20:01:37 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

<snip>

 >Ed, I really don't want to get into a lengthy discussion here,
 >but, IMO, the most important evidence against the film, is the
 >lack of evidence supporting its reality. First you have to find
 >some of Ray's 50+-year-old film with a picture of the "alien" on
 >it then you need to test the damn film and prove it is 50+ years
 >old and I might be interested in it again. Until that happens,
 >count me out.

Rebecca,

Yes one of the difficult problems in working with the footage is
that Ray seems to hesitate when it comes to providing enough
film ( with the image of the Alien) to prove that the footage is
what he and the cammeraman say it is. I can't explain this. But
this doesn't mean the footage is a hoax.  If you wish to prove
that, you have to find problems with the film itself as Teresa
did. (I don't believe that Teresa has made a case for hoaxing
but her work is important.  The problem is that there were 200
rolls of film shot by the cammeraman and he sold Ray 22.  The
film itself wasn't marked so one or two rolls may be out of
order and that would invalidate Teresa's efforts, but not the
eligance of the experiment.) It's that type of work that will
eventually pay off.  Also have you seen Dennis Murphy's work on
the debris.  I think it's brilliant and is another example of
what can be found through effort and research:

http://www.uforeport.com/debris.htm

<snip>

 >seriously I don't follow your logic. Maybe it's me. I
 >haven't been all that well and perhaps I have forgotten a few
 >things, but if you claim, as I believe you do, that the tent
 >footage is a hoax, then what is the importance of the markings
 >on something which has been hoaxed? How does that validate the
 >autopsy video?

Yes the tent footage is a hoax.  That is admitted by all; but
the security codes are another matter.  The hoaxers used
information from somewhere for the codes.  I believe that they
copied the labels from the film cans.  This is important
information because it could not have been guessed.
"Restricted" should have been the designated marking for the
film and should have been found on the film cans.  If the
hoaxers copied this information from the cans, then we have
proof that the film cans, at least, were legitimate.  This code
was unknown to most folks and continues to be.  You still refuse
to even look for yourself.

<snip>

 >Well, having read your reply to James Easton, I don't see how
 >your proof is "rock solid" but that's just my opinion vs your
 >opinion. However, I feel confident there are any number of folks
 >on this list who can shoot your opinion down. Maybe they will
 >care enough to do that.

It's not a matter of opinion and this is "deja vu all over
again" because it's exactly the way you reacted at the time,
three years ago when I first told you about the restricted
codes.  If you were interested in the "truth", you would have
simply looked at the letters I told you about to see for
yourself that this is not a matter of opinion but as I said
"rock solid".  If there are those who can refute this, have at
it.

Also, as then, I was looking for cooperation, not confrontation.
You have many connections that I and others don't.  Why can't we
all work together on 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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                     Sighting Report OZ File 13.12.1999

From: The Keith Basterfield Network Australasia <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:58:02 +1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:35:09 -0500
Subject: Sighting Report OZ File 13.12.1999


Sighting Report OZ File  13.12.1999

FOLLOWUP Charmaine Ballam AUFORN SA

1800 Callin Code: 00431 13.12.1999

Date:  13.12.99
Day: Sunday
Time:   9.11pm
Name:  Venessa & Nick
Location: North Field Adelaide SA
Telephone number:
Given to investigator:  Charmaine Ballam AUFORN SA

Report:

Shape: Star Trek like spaceship
Size: A loaf of bread
Objects: 1
Colour:  Blue
Sound: None
Speed: Fast
Duration:  15 seconds
Direction: West to East over to where Yatala Gaol on a level path
Witnesses: 4

(Charmaine)

I called Vanessa today about her phone call, she told me that
she had actually called on behalf of her husband Nick, who had
seen the UFO, with 3 other men.

She then proceeded to hand the phone over to her husband Nick.
Nick was sitting outside with 3 of his mates, when all of a
sudden a bright light appeared out of no where in the sky.
First off, Nick thought it might be the Police helicopter, and
that it had turned on its search light. But, what seemed strange
to Nick and made him change his mind, is that as the object got
closer he could make out that it was quite large, and coloured a
blue colour, not white, like the search light would be.

When I asked Nick how big he thought the object looked to him,
he said roughly the size of a loaf of bread...it was long and
quite large.  He said, he felt it looked like a ship and
reminded him of a Star Trek like spaceship.

(Nick )
"It just appeared from behind a tree !!... I sat there with my
mates and we watched it travel levelly for about 15 secs.  I
live near the Northfield Velladrome and it moved from West to
East over to where  Yatala Gaol is.The funny thing was, it all
of a sudden spurted a bright fluro coloured  tail...the same
sort of colour that you get with a gas flame..that colour blue.

It seem to spit out the flame, which then  made it move...then
it again stopped...spitted once, then twice, the flame came
spinning out of its end and started to move off again, then to
our suprise, as we  watched it just  disappeared.

(Charmaine)
"I spoke to Nick about how it  had been said in the  media that
a Meteorite was reported in the night sky at the same time.

(Nick replied)
"NO, NO, I know what a meteorite looks like, I,ve been
interested in the night sky for some years now, since I was a
young kid. My parents owned a shack down at Willunga, and I know
I have seen some strange things in the sky down there, in fact I
would say some UFO's.  I own a telescope, (Charmaine said)
[which he has had for approx. 12wks] and have read up on things
in the night sky, so I truly believe that it was NOT a
meteorite, but something else. " How did could a meteorite just
disappeared into thin air??", "  I should have been able to
follow its path through the sky "

(Charmaine said)
Nick and  his mates sighting lasted for  approx. 15 secs, and
during that time, Nick states the  object travelled on a level
path. Nick is happy to be contacted again, if any further  info
is required.

End of Report.

Thankyou Charmaine for this report

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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.
~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to Aussiepost-unsubscribe@listbot.com
______________________________________________________________________
Free Holiday Offer from MyFavoritiePC.com!
Get a Free PC with a 3-year subscription to the Microsoft Network. New PC
features 400MHz Celeron, 32 MB, 4GB HDD, 40S CD, 3D graphics and 56K modem.
Come to http://www.listbot.com/links/myfavoritepc for details. Act Now!

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:23:03 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:40:09 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 21:17:59 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>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


 >So some talent there, but apparently since dissipated on sex, drugs,
 >rock-and-roll ... and then debunking.

David,

And during the same time-frame, approximating, of course, you
were no doubt squandering your family's money on charm school,
which apparently was money down the drain.

So try this instead: Howabout a wonderful marriage and an
8-year-old son? How about creating The Anomalist out of thin
air? What about that Donald E. Keyhoe Journalism award for my
six-part series in OMNI? What about that UFO book I edited with
Hilary Evans, UFOs 1947-1997: Fifty Years of Flying Saucers?
What about editing the MUFON UFO Journal for 12 years? (Oh, I
forgot: the CIA made me do that.)

And for my next debunking effort? Check out:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380802651/

And you're contributing _what_ to the UFO literature in the
meantime? Pretty much zilch, as far as I can determine, but
maybe you'd like to enlighten the List if I'm wrong? Favor us
with a list of your UFO or relevant scientific publications,
please. None? Now why did I instinctively think that?

 >Thank you for your honesty here.

No thanks for honesty needed. Why would you expect anything else?

 >>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.)

 >As will be clear soon, his language is the same as some of the experts
 >themselves who refer to the extra-solar planets as "confirmed."  His
 >conclusions are also the same as many of the astronomers, who comment that
 >the results suggest that solar systems are probably dirt common.  E.g., one
 >quote by Geoff Marcy, one of the pioneers astronomers in the detection of
 >extra-solar planets, was that these early results suggest that there are
 >probably hundreds of millions of earth-like planets in our galaxy.

If you want this feather in your cap, I'll happily concede the
point. See, I went to charm school, too. I responded as I did
because it so happened that the very day I read the Mallon
quotes the NY Times had a headline announcing the first
confirmation by direct observation of an extrasolar planet. As a
professional writer myself, I wouldn't have used the same words
Mallon did, such as "sudden profusion of confirmed planet
detections" -- and that's still my opinion. But I'm confident
you'll get over it.

That said, you have your experts, I have mine. Here are a
couple:

"David C. Black of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston,
Texas considers Gatewood's sighting to be the only one that
would satisfy his definition of what a planet is. "It is not
clear that any of the others have anything to do with planets,"
he says, arguing that they probably formed in a fundamentally
different way than the planets that orbit the sun."  See:

http://www.sciam.com/explorations/052796explorations.html

And this:

http://cannon.sfsu.edu/~gmarcy/planetsearch/bd/ecc.html

Which contains the following:

"The occurrence of circular orbits may require special initial
conditions, to avoid the gravitational perturbations and to
avoid the tendency of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics to scramble
the orbital ellipticities of planets. Perhaps, our Solar System,
with its coplanar, nearly circular orbits represents a
remarkably fortuitous low-entropy state for a planetary system."

Note the use of the phrase "remarkably fortuitous."

When we get past the snide personal remarks and Rudiak's
tendency to endlessly nitpick (this is a man who could nitpick
an elephant to death with a pair of tweezers), we're left with
the following:

The solar systems presently being discovered in no way resemble
our own; They were completley unanticipated and cannot be
accounted for by current theories of solar system formation,
unless Rudiak would like to correct me. (Charm school pays off?)

They are planets and solar system by name only.

I don't really have the time or inclnation to go into this(
having dissipated so much of my available energies on drugs,
sex, and rock and roll), but the reason why astronomers can
refer to something as a Class-G sun has to do with their
realization that not all suns (or stars) are created equally.
Hence a clasification system.

Yes, Rudiak is right if he wants to say that almost any
sparkling light in the night sky is a sun and any conglomerated
body circling same a planet, and that the combination of the two
constitutes a solar system by definition -- thereby, somehow
(and inevitably) leading to more creatures like us, only more
advanced.

But it doesn't take too much deep reading or shallow Internet
surfing to see that Rudiak's main gripe is both a canard and a
red herring (intermixed with anything I have to say about
anything).

The "solar systems" presently being discovered in no way
resemble our own; for the most part it is hard to imagine how
they could have given rise to life at all, let alone ETI. That
is, they are non-starters from the word get-go.

What I suggested was, that as time went along, scientists would
find a new terminology to refer to such systems, just as they
can now look at stars spread throughout the universe and refer
to them as Class-G or other type stars.

Rudiak seems to be opposed to this idea, seemingly arguing that
all clasification systems are already fixed -- for now and
evermore. Or that while we can apply them to suns (hey, I
thought all suns were the same by definition?), we can't apply
them to planets and solar systems.

My viewpoint remains the same. Rudiak needs to go back to charm
school. That, or drugs and rock and roll. Nothing else seems to
help much.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

              Re: Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 02:28:38 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:42:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth


At 03:05 16-12-99 -0500, you wrote:

 >Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:37:50 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
 >Subject: Open Letter To Larry O'Hara And Steven Booth
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Tim Matthews, P.O.Box 15, Southport PR8 1GR.
 >Tel; (01704) 213517 Mobile; (07944) 047195
 >Email; TMMatthews99@aol.com

 >Open Letter To Steve Booth And Larry O'Hara.

 >(Background; last week O'Hara and Booth, both political
 >extremists, (Booth has served time for conpsiracy to cause
 >violence etc.) fulfilled the terms of their agreement with MI5 -
 >or whomever - and were apparently paid to publish a glossy and
 >patently ridiculous smear booklet about me, Jenny Randles, Kevin
 >McClure, Eric Morris, Rory Lushman and various other noted
 >Ufologists entitled "At War with the Universe" claiming that I
 >had 'invented sightings' and worked for virtually every
 >intelligence organisation they could spell.



Dear Tim,

What evidence or indication do you have that these people
work for MI5?



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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                       Malaysians Interested In UFOs?

From: Lesley Cluff <manitou@fox.nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:57:42 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:50:30 -0500
Subject: Malaysians Interested In UFOs?


I have a strange request of the list for a friend who is off to
teach math in Malaysia the end of this month. Is anyone out
there in or know of anyone in the capital area of Malaysia who
is into UFOs?

Rather than clutter the list, would appreciate any responses to
manitou@fox.nstn.ca so I can pass the info onto Kevin.

Lesley Cluff







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                          Peter Davenport Chat Log

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:33:48 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 23:02:14 -0500
Subject: Peter Davenport Chat Log


Greetings list -

The chat log from Mr. Davenport's December 13th chat at the
Alabama Live website can be found at:

http://www.al.com/chat/chats/peterdavenport.html

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 >
   Dec > Dec 16

                  TMP News: Possible Alien Life On Europa?

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 20:06:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 23:27:42 -0500
Subject: TMP News: Possible Alien Life On Europa?



TMP NEWS
News and Reports from The Millennium Project

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa

December 16, 1999



Scientists Look to Jupiter's Moon for Possible Life


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Scientists looking for possible alien
life are focusing on Jupiter's moon Europa, where huge cracks in
the surface indicate that a massive liquid ocean may be sloshing
under an icy crust.

"I don't know if there are organisms (on Europa), but it's a
great environment to live in," Richard Greenberg of the Lunar
and Planetary Laboratory at the University of Arizona-Tucson
said on Thursday.

Scientists have posited the possibility of life on Europa
before. But Greenberg told reporters at a meeting of the
American Geophysical Union here on Thursday that new evidence
from the moon, including photographs returned only last week
from the Galileo spacecraft, show a "clement and comfortable"
world where microorganisms may well have taken hold.

"It really is an environment very conducive to life," he said.

Key to the evolving theory of possible life on Europa is the
notion that the moon is not only covered by ocean, but that it
also experiences tides which - - interacting with the icy
surface crust -- could generate friction and heat enough to
sustain life.

Scientists are fairly certain that Europa, which is about the
size of our moon, has a 100-mile thick layer of water which, at
least on the surface where temperatures hover around minus 170
degrees Celsius (minus 274 Fahrenheit), is ice.

But if liquid exists beneath the surface then Jupiter, which is
300 times as massive as the Earth, would exert an enormous tidal
pull.

Greenberg said that this theory was gaining strength as new
photographs show Europa to be covered by a network of mysterious
surface cracks, known as "cycloids", which may have been
caused by tidal forces in the partially frozen ocean.

Stressed by the ebb and flow of the tides, the cracks open and
close, pushing water and partially-frozen slush to the surface,
the scientists believe.

"As a result of tides, liquid water regularly bathed crustal
cracks and surfaces with heat and whatever nutrients are
included in the oceanic chemistry, creating a variety of
potentially habitable crustal environments," Greenberg said in
his report.

"Moreover, these various processes in the crust make life
possible in the ocean as well, because if the ocean were not
regularly exposed to oxidants in the surface, oceanic life would
suffocate," he added.

Other parts of Europa's surface show evidence of huge
"melt-throughs" as the ocean reached the surface through thin
ice, leaving terrain which appears to include huge icebergs that
have been refrozen into the surface.

And Greenberg said that scientists were eager to take a closer
look at the "cycloid" cracks themselves -- giant fissures
which can stretch for thousands of miles and appear in some
cases to be flanked by some sort of orangey-brown residue.

"We don't know what that stuff is. But it sure looks
delicious," Greenberg said with a smile, adding in a serious
aside that it was far too early to suggest that the residue
might be some sort of organic material.

These and other questions about Europa may get clearer answers
in 2003, when NASA's Europa Orbiter is due to visit the moon to
look for closer evidence of an ocean. More information about
that mission can be found at http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/ice --
fire//europao.htm.

Copyright � 1996-1999 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.


Paul Anderson
Director
The Millennium Project

_____________________________


Links to additional and previous news stories, reports and updates:

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/news.html

_____________________________


TMP News is the e-mail update service of The Millennium
Project, 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 TMP News" or "unsubscribe TMP News" and e-mail
address to:

mailto:psa@direct.ca

The Millennium Project is an independent research organization
which chronicles the most phenomenal, controversial and
enigmatic issues of our time, and their possible present and
future implications as we approach the beginning of the 21st
Century and the next Millennium. TMP was founded in 1999 by
future studies researcher Paul Anderson, also director of
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada, as an alternative source of
information to both the mainstream and tabloid media, to provide
a forum for open, serious journalistic enquiry into these
issues. Extensive resources are available to interested persons
or groups.

TMP welcomes your reports and submissions. Forward all
correspondence to:


THE MILLENNIUM PROJECT

Suite 202 - 2086 West 2nd Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V6J 1J4
Canada
Tel / Fax: 604.731.8522
E-Mail: mailto:psa@direct.ca
Web: http://persweb.direct.ca/psa


� The Millennium Project, 1999







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:55:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:01:58 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Dennis Stacy
 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:23:03 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:40:09 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >Previously, Dennis offered:

<snip>


 >The "solar systems" presently being discovered in no way
 >resemble our own; for the most part it is hard to imagine how
 >they could have given rise to life at all, let alone ETI. That
 >is, they are non-starters from the word get-go.

<snip>


Hi Dennis,

I'm not necessarily taking sides, here. However, I believe that
the context of this entire discussion has been less about what
constitutes a planet and more about what constitutes a "livable"
planet. I understand your point as it regards the possibility of
life as we know it. But you must admit the term "as we know it"
really becomes very subjective and leaves out hundreds, perhaps,
millions of possibilities that are simply beyond our limited
imagination.

For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to find
sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing should survive.
In addition,  fish, crustaceans and microscopic organisms have been
found to thrive in underwater "thermal spouts" ranging from several
hundred degrees to thousands of degrees F. Until recently,
none of these conditions were thought to support living organisms,
yet they do.

If you want to take the position that only Earthlike planets can support

life as we know it; fine. But I think it would be narrow minded to
assume
that ONLY Earthlike planets can support life of ANY  kind.
As far fetched as it may sound, perhaps a gas giant has it's own unique
life forms; something we simply don't understand or recognize.
Perhaps they, too, assume that life can only develop via another
gas giant! ;)

Besides, I'm not at all convinced that man is native to this
planet.

After all, everywhere he leaves his mark, things seem to be in
conflict with nature. I truly feel that we are simply unwelcome
visitors with our feet on the coffee table. Once we disappear,
the Earth will revert to it's original balance. Unlike all other
life on this planet, we have nothing to contribute to the
"natural' order of things.

In view of this, does the term "life as we know it" really seem
to apply to _this_ Earthlike planet?

Just a thought....

later,

Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:54:13 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:27:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 11:48:35 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Yes one of the difficult problems in working with the footage
 >is that Ray seems to hesitate when it comes to providing enough

Seems to hesitate... geez Ed, you are so kind. The man doesn't
semm to hesitate -- he has flat-out refused. Very suspicious.

 >film ( with the image of the Alien) to prove that the footage
 >is what he and the cammeraman say it is. I can't explain this.
 >But this doesn't mean the footage is a hoax.  If you wish to prove
 >that, you have to find problems with the film itself as Teresa

Actually Ed, I don't have to prove anything a hoax, it is up to
Ray to prove his claims, something he has failed to do!

 >did. (I don't believe that Teresa has made a case for hoaxing
 >but her work is important.  The problem is that there were 200
 >rolls of film shot by the cammeraman and he sold Ray 22.  The
 >film itself wasn't marked so one or two rolls may be out of
 >order and that would invalidate Teresa's efforts, but not the
 >eligance of the experiment.) It's that type of work that will
 >eventually pay off.  Also have you seen Dennis Murphy's work on
 >the debris.  I think it's brilliant and is another example of
 >what can be found through effort and research:

Ask Dennis Murphy what he thinks now!

 >Yes the tent footage is a hoax.  That is admitted by all; but
 >the security codes are another matter.  The hoaxers used
 >information from somewhere for the codes.  I believe that they

Could the hoaxers have gotten this information from the say...
the same place you got it?

 >copied the labels from the film cans.  This is important
 >information because it could not have been guessed.
 >"Restricted" should have been the designated marking for the
 >film and should have been found on the film cans.  If the
 >hoaxers copied this information from the cans, then we have
 >proof that the film cans, at least, were legitimate.  This
 >code was unknown to most folks and continues to be.  You still
 >refuse to even look for yourself.

Because it is nonsense, Ed. _You_ refuse to even understand what
I've been trying to say for all these years: I DON'T CARE!
There's enough evidence for me, personally,  to call it hoax.
But really what does it matter what _I_ think? I'm not anyone
special.

 >>Well, having read your reply to James Easton, I don't see how
 >>your proof is "rock solid" but that's just my opinion vs your
 >>opinion. However, I feel confident there are any number of
 >>folks on this list who can shoot your opinion down. Maybe they
 >>will care enough to do that.

 >It's not a matter of opinion and this is "deja vu all over
 >again" because it's exactly the way you reacted at the time,
 >three years ago when I first told you about the restricted
 >codes.  If you were interested in the "truth", you would have
 >simply looked at the letters I told you about to see for
 >yourself that this is not a matter of opinion but as I said
 >"rock solid".  If there are those who can refute this, have at
 >it.

Maybe they will, but more than likely they are smarter than I
and are staying out of this silly mess. Ed, give it up!

 >Also, as then, I was looking for cooperation, not confrontation.
 >You have many connections that I and others don't.  Why can't
 >we all work together on this.

I don't have any connections that I haven't made via the
internet and writing right here on UpDates. Yes, some I may have
pursued. Some I met the MUFON and/or UFO gatherings. It's called
networking. I've done my work, you do yours.

I'm only confrontational because you annoy me. You annoyed me
three years ago and you annoy me now.

I'm sorry to be so rude, but I don't have time for this. Perhaps
someone else will listen to what you have to say.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 09:41:27 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


As Dennis Miller once said, "I don't want to rant ... but,"
Ranting is an easy thing to do.

I have been on this list for over two years and I have posted
two whole times, this will be the third.

The first time that I posted it was a comment in support of firm
scientific protocols for the research of paranormal anomalies
including the UFO Phenomenon.

My second post was in defense of Stanton Friedman and the fine
work that he had done in the past and a question directed to Mr.
Friedman as to the protocols that he used in his research. The
response from Mr. Friedman was as negative as they get. He
questioned my motives for even asking that question without
reading his many papers and books. Oddly enough I have read most
of what Mr. Friedman has put into the public arena and I still
wondered what protocols he used, needless to say, I never got
the answer.

When I first became aware of this list I thought, what a great
idea, an insiders list where the sharing of information could
possibly get us closer to the real answers. How silly I was to
think that. It was easy to see that opposing opinions turned to
personal battles at the drop of a hat. I often wanted to throw
my two cents worth into the ring but then I thought that life is
far too short to waste my time battling or dueling with others
for no other reason than to stoke a fire that is already
blazing.

I have seen questions asked and challenges made . Of course when
some answers were posted the questioner would reject any
comments out of hand or attack the motives of the individual who
dares to post an opposing view.

What has prompted my post are the following comments made by
John Velez;


 >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >For someone whose degree in psychology is still 'warm in the
 >frame' you are quick to dismiss (and minimize) the statements of
 >a man who headed a psychology department at Harvard! They don't
 >give posts like that to 'slackers' Kevin. Don't be so quick to
 >dismiss a man who has -years- of experience over you. You only
 >do so because his views don't jibe with yours. It's nothing
 >deeper than that really. It shows in the dismissive language
 >that litters your comments. Example: Re: Mack's remarks, you
 >offer the pronouncement, "This is nonsense!" If you don't think
 >that folks/readers can see through proclamations like that one,
 >you have a lot more to learn about psychology.

I would now like to clear a few things up for Mr. Velez about
his personal attack on Kevin Randle and his "still warm in the
frame" degree.

I am sure that it is common knowledge that Kevin and I have
co-authored three books, One of those books is "The Abduction
Enigma" with William P. Cone Ph.D..

Over 6 years of hands on research went into that book. The
opinions that Kevin posted about memory are not only his but
also mine and Dr. Cone, whose Diploma is not a bit warm in its
frame. Matter of fact, Dr. Cone has over 25 years of clinical
experience with a vast majority of that time dealing with memory
and the human mind.

John Velez Continues:

 >In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
 >"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
 >of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
 >mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
 >explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
 >worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

<snip>

 >Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
 >should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
 >credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
 >actually worked with live human beings!

The above noted comments are very interesting if you consider
the fact that Dr. Mack has "Mutually exclusive theories" of his
own. Budd Hopkins aliens are of the malevolent variety and Dr.
Macks are of the benevolent ilk.  And then we have the "Academic
Psychologists" comment.  Again very interesting considering that
Harvard, at least to my recollection is still Academia and a
true Ivory Tower if there ever was one.  Also when we look at
false memory we must look long and hard at the work of Dr,
Elizabeth Loftus who actually did a number of proper scientific
studies with real "Live human beings."

 >Gimme a break Kevin. I'm surprised you don't have neck problems
 >after wearing those gigunda blinders for so long. Open minded
 >and objective you are not.
 >John Velez

I have considered Kevin Randle a friend for a very long time and
I am proud of him for the effort that he put forth in gaining
his Ph.D..  He did that for his own reasons not to do the
research for the 'Abduction Enigma'. All of that research was
done long before his degree was even in the works. The degree
does not make the person, the person brings credit to the
degree.

Now that I have had my rant I suppose that I have left the door
open for dagger throwing in my direction. I will warn the list
that I'm not into name calling or dueling for no better reason
than to put down another person for their research or their
views. My opinions are all in the book 'The Abduction Enigma'.
If you haven't read it you might just find it an interesting
read. None of us have all of the answers and we will never get
the answers if we don't stop all of the bickering and get
together with some standardized protocols and cooperation.

It's My Opinion... I May Be Wrong,

Russ Estes









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                     Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 05:29:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:32:51 -0500
Subject: Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...


http://www.earthchangestv.com/breaking/index.htm

Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...12/12/99

Everyone should mark their calendars this month.  It will be the
Last Lunar Hurrah of the Millennium:

This year will be the first full moon to occur on the winter
solstice, Dec. 22, commonly called the first day of winter.
Since a full moon on the winter solstice occurred in conjunction
with a lunar perigee (point in the moon's orbit that is closest
to Earth) The moon will appear about 14% larger than it does at
apogee (the point in it's elliptical orbit that is farthest from
the Earth) since the Earth is also several million miles closer
to the sun at this time of the year than in the summer, sunlight
striking the moon is about 7% stronger making it brighter.

Also, this will be the closest perigee of the Moon of the year
since the moon's orbit is constantly deforming.  If the weather
is clear and there is a snow cover where you live, it is
believed that even car headlights will be superfluous.

In laymen's terms it will be a super bright full moon, much more
than the usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years!
Our ancestor's 133 years ago saw this.  Our descendants 100 or
so years from now will see this again.

Remember this will happen December 22, 1999.....
Laurie L Brown
International Space Station Support
Puget Sound Location via "Scott" <Creators@inet.net.nz>








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:54:15 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >As Dennis Miller once said, "I don't want to rant ... but,"
 >Ranting is an easy thing to do.

 >I have been on this list for over two years and I have posted
 >two whole times, this will be the third.

<snip>

Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
is on abductions.

With no physical proof or reliable witnesses to support physical
"abductions" it is pathetic that any follow these accounts at
all. I have, yet, to meet an abductee, whose story of space
aliens snatching them,  would hold up. It's not that hard to
kill their stories; just a minimal amount of investigation and
background checks will do it.

Abductions by space aliens and their space-ships have been the
biggest fraud put on the American public since ufology became an
art (_not_ a science) 52 years ago.

My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
far better than anything else I've seen.

John C. Thompson












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:51:34 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:58:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:54:13 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Rebecca:

 >Seems to hesitate... geez Ed, you are so kind. The man doesn't
 >semm to hesitate -- he has flat-out refused. Very suspicious.

Yes I am kind to Ray. His actions are not the actions of a
criminal or hoaxer but someone confused and perhaps somewhat
frightened. I have had many email conversations with Ray and
found him to be honest, open but unable to answer all my
questions. Those who know him think he's honest. Volker was
pleased with his purchase. The footage is owned mostly by Volker
but Ray and the cammeraman still retain some rights. Ray hasn't
flatout refused to give out a sample, but he is hesitant and I
doubt if he now controls the film and can do only as he pleases.
Volker has made it clear that he doesn't care one whit about
proving the film authentic.

I don't think the UFO community gave Ray the reception he
imagined or deserved. Do you know that at the first showing in
95 one UFologist stole Ray's copy of the footage video (from a
table Ray had placed it on), took it to his room, had it for
some time, then returned it to Ray that evening. Instead of
being upset or perturbed, Ray sent the guy a bottle of wine for
returning the video. Does that sound like the behavior of a
crook or hoaxer? There are other forces at work. Ray was visited
by the US Authorities (MIB maybe) and won't talk about it. I
just think you should leave the door open to the possibility
that there are other factors working that we don't quite
understand.

 >actually Ed, I don't have to prove anything a hoax, it is up to
 >Ray to prove his claims, something he has failed to do!

I thought we were trying to find out if the film was legitimate
or not. What if we only had the film and were trying to prove it
was what it seemed to be. No Ray, no cammeraman, just the film
and the cannisters it came in. What would we do then? This is
important footage. Would we just let it sit there and wring our
hands and say "I don't have to prove anything"? Aren't you
interested?

 >Ask Dennis Murphy what he thinks now!

I did contact Dennis and have given him this address and realize
he now has doubts. I hope he follows this discussion and can
make up his own mind. I think he's at least open to being
convinced. I also would like to hear what Teresa has to say
about all this. I reviewed my copy of the AA and believe that at
least two sequences are out of order. Also her reference to the
second autopsy isn't clear to me. I thought she might answer
Neil's post.

 >Could the hoaxers have gotten this information from the say...
 >the same place you got it?

No there is no evidence they did because they didn't use the
same priority number and had no idea about the processing date
on the film which was correct: July 30th, 1947. These guys were
not ufologists and would have no access to the information. I
believe they copied the information from somewhere. I'm sure
they didn't guess!

 >Because it is nonsense, Ed. _You_ refuse to even understand what
 >I've been trying to say for all these years: I DON'T CARE!
 >There's enough evidence for me, personally, to call it hoax.
 >But really what does it matter what _I_ think? I'm not anyone
 >special.

Rebecca, you are someone special. You and Kent are/were/continue
to have a major influence on how folks think about this footage.
I don't believe you have any evidence that the film was hoaxed
except Ray's refusal to cooperate with you. If it were only
you, personally, then of course it wouldn't matter, but I do
believe you care and besides it's much bigger than you or Ray or
Kent or any individual. Aren't we trying to get to the truth of
the matter? Kent never gave the footage a chance. He left the
film showing in 95 and declared the footage a hoax and never, as
far as I can tell, looked back.

 >Maybe they will, but more than likely they are smarter than I
 >and are staying out of this silly mess. Ed, give it up!

Why is trying to find the truth about this "silly mess" a
problem for you? If the Santilli footage is proved to be
legimitate, it would be the most important evidence we have so
far that these creatures exist and that our government knows it.
It's a worthwhile project, and a way to practice our cooperative
behaviors, too. You might even enjoy it.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Patrick Bailey <pgb@padrak.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:11:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 19:28:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 22:26:59 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Ed Gehrman
 >>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:13:51 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>Previously, Ed wrote:


 >>>I realize that (Philip Mantle) and Ray are friends but I
 >>>just can't see how there could ever be a "balanced
 >>>discussion" of the Santilli alien autopsy?  The decision
 >>>has already been made by most Ufologists and the common
 >>>folk: The footage is a bald hoax and a scam.

 >><snip>

 >>>Never mind that the evidence against the footage is sketchy, at
 >>>best. Ray has been unjustifiably made to look like either a
 >>>dishonest con man and schemer (and worse), or a dupe or
 >>>disinfomationist.  Not one of these characterizations is true.

 >Dear Ed,

 >Prove it.

 >Better, yet; let _Ray_ prove it.

 >The AA footage is a piece of crap.

 >Roger Evans


I find your comments very insulting.

Please provide one (just 1) piece of evidence from the film that
proves that the film itself is a hoax.

Anyone?

It may be a scam, and it has _not_ been proved a hoax.

PB

http://www.padrak.com/ufo/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:29:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 19:40:09 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Russ Estes wrote:

 >When I first became aware of this list I thought, what a great
 >idea, an insiders list where the sharing of information could
 >possibly get us closer to the real answers. How silly I was to
 >think that. It was easy to see that opposing opinions turned to
 >personal battles at the drop of a hat. I often wanted to throw
 >my two cents worth into the ring but then I thought that life is
 >far too short to waste my time battling or dueling with others
 >for no other reason than to stoke a fire that is already
 >blazing.

Hi Russ.

I find your highly selective labeling amusing. It's cute how any
implied insults toward those who report abduction experiences
(when it comes from 'your own views') are to be taken as a noble
intellectual inquiry of some kind, while any opposing views (or
God forbid, should someone actually take offense at _Kevin's_
unsubstantiated statements) are labelled 'rants' or 'personal
attacks.' BTW, has your name been mentioned? Why am I 'suddenly'
talking to you and not Kevin?  Hmmm, interesting phenomenon. You
talk to one head and like the game, Smack the Mole you find that
another one has 'popped up' to take its place!  <lol> You two
guys are a pisser. Chinese tag team eh?

 >I have seen questions asked and challenges made . Of course
 >when some answers were posted the questioner would reject any
 >comments out of hand or attack the motives of the individual
 >who dares to post an opposing view.

Comical. Turn it around and aim it back at yourselves! What
prompted my original response was Kevin's "out of hand attack"
of John Mack's "opposing views" with the statement/proclamation:
"This is nonsense!" It seems to me the pot calls the kettle
black here.  :)

 >I would now like to clear a few things up for Mr. Velez about
 >his personal attack on Kevin Randle and his "still warm in the
 >frame" degree.

There was nothing any more 'personal' in my comments, than those
issued by Kevin in regard to abductees over the years. Somehow
we're not supposed to question anything he says. Here -you- are
'defending him!' (do you really think he needs to be defended
Russ?)

I never mentioned your name _anywhere_ in _any_ of my postings.
Yet here you are "setting me straight" and taking your partners
place in the discussion. What are you guys a WWF tag team? When
one guy is 'floundering' you slap hands and change places in the
ring? Someone should have told me! I would have gotten Greg
Sandow or someone to be my 'Red cross' partner!  <lol>

 >I am sure that it is common knowledge that Kevin and I have
 >co-authored three books, One of those books is "The Abduction
 >Enigma" with William P. Cone Ph.D..

Apparently you guys have been attached at the hip longer than
I was aware of. Explains why _you_ are responding and not Kevin.
(To whom I was speaking.)

 >Over 6 years of hands on research went into that book. The
 >opinions that Kevin posted about memory are not only his but
 >also mine and Dr. Cone, whose Diploma is not a bit warm in its
 >frame. Matter of fact, Dr. Cone has over 25 years of clinical
 >Texperience with a vast majority of that time dealing with memory
 >and the human mind.

Ha, ha, ha! <lmao!>

Kevin has expounded these -same- interpretations and 'beliefs'
about the nature of abduction -long before he got his degree-
Russ. There is nothing 'new' in -anything- Kevin has for sale. So
what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Was his opinion -before-
he knew anything about memory different from what it is now?
Or, has he just found a new 'vehicle' for his own personal bias.

Chicken, egg, chicken, egg, . . . . such a conundrum!  :)

John Velez Continues:

Russ I don't mean to be disrespectful but I -was- speaking to
Kevin. If Kevin wishes to respond to any of my comments then
fine, I'm here.

Personal note: I grew up on some tough streets in NYC Russ. I've
been 'ganged up on' before. I'm _not_ going to allow myself to
get sucked into your 'tag team' match.

Your partner is a 'big boy' and fully capable of speaking for/
defending himself. You really should have a bit more confidence
in him and allow him to fight his own battles!  :)

John Velez, solo wrestler/"one, . . . against a thousand!"  ;)
________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 34

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 19:07:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 19:43:26 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 34


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 34
December 16, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

UFO CRASHES INTO DAM
IN NEW SOUTH WALES

      On Wednesday, December 8, 1999, radio
stations in Australia broadcasted the startling news
that "a UFO had crashed into a water supply dam"
in Guyra, New South Wales, Australia.
      The incident took place sometime after dark
on Tuesday, December 7.  "Witnesses reported
the object skipped across the (reservoir's) surface
and left a gouge of flattened reeds and mud
measuring 15 metres (50 feet) by 8 metres
(24 feet).  Media people were being turned away
from the site by the hazardous material officers."
      According to Australian press reports, "a
township in northern New South Wales is having
severe water restrictions after an unidentified object
crashed into the local dam."
      "The projectile slammed into the Guyra water
supply dam at the outskirts of the town, north of
Armidale," or about 236 miles (377 kilometers)
north of Sydney.
      "Police said it was first noticed by an employee
carrying on routine maintenance tasks at the dam"
on Wednesday.
      "Fire brigade spokesman John Hobar said an
area of reed beds measuring four by ten metres
had been flattened, fuelling suspicion that the object
may have fallen from the sky.."
      "But he had said that he had checked with a
number of space agencies, meteorological experts
and officials in Canberra (Australia's capital--J.T.)
and there had been no sighting of an unidentified
object falling from the sky."
      "'There's a township of about 5,000 people and
they're on severe water restrictions,' Mr. Hobar said.
      On Thursday, December 9, 1999, divers entered
the lake behind the Guyra dam "to test for toxins
or radioactive material."
      On Friday, December 10, 1999, "Authorities
lifted the restrictions after tests showed the water
is safe to drink.  Police divers have found a 12-metre
(39.6 feet) cavern in the floor of the dam.  The object
has not been found, and the divers are going to
continue the search today.  The object came from the
south on a 45 degree" angle of approach.
      "Speculations seem to be fixed on either a
meteorite or a piece of space junk.  One scientist
has suggested it was approximately one and a half
inches (3.3 centimeters) in diameter."
      USA Today reported that some people were
speculating that the object was one of the two
mini-probes, Scott or Amundsen, which disappeared
with the Mars Polar Lander last week.  (See USA Today
for December 11, 1999, "UFO," page 4A.)
      Over the weekend, authorities announced that
the divers had indeed found the "meteorite" lodged
in the cavern.  (Many thanks to Peter Van Komen,
UFO Roundup correspondent in Australia, and to
Trevor Griffett, and to Diane Harrison of Australian
UFO Research Network for the many Guyra reports.)
(Editor's Comment:  Totally forgotten are the original
witness reports of a large object and the mysterious
120-square-foot "gouge" in the reed beds.)

TWO STAR-LIKE UFOs SEEN
IN JIMBOOMBA, QUEENSLAND

      On Saturday, December 4, 1999, at 7:25 p.m.,
Fred C. stepped outside his workplace in Jimboomba,
Queensland, a suburb of Brisbane, for a smoke and
saw an unusual object in the sky.
      "I stepped outside to have a smoke when I noticed
these two star-like objects travelling together from the
southeast," Fred reported.  "What I thought was really
strange, they stopped for a while., then they moved
around a metre and stopped again.  They did this
twice."
      "I noticed a plane going past but it was a lot
lower than the two objects.  I could see that the plane
had flashing lights.  I see lots of planes because we
are on the Brisbane-to-Sydney flight path, and I know
a plane when I see it.  I'm very sure this wasn't a plane.
I have never seen a plane act like these things did."
(Many thanks to Diane Harrison of AUFORN for
this news story.)

LUMINOUS UFO SIGHTED IN
NATAL, SOUTH AFRICA

      On September 21, 1999, Gary S. and his family
were at their home in Zinkwazi, a small port in
northern Natal, about 275 kilometers (165 miles)
north of Durban, South Africa.
      At 3:30 p.m., they saw a luminous object
approaching from the northeast, Gary reported.
"We saw a strange light that looked like an
airplane at first, but it was much too fast to be
one.  It also turned way too sharp.  It wasn't
flashing.  It just shone with a very white blinding
light--a roundish object of a very bright white
appearance."
      Gary estimated the UFO's speed at "about
600 kilometers per hour (360 miles per hour)
at a height (altitude) of 10,000 meters (33,000
feet)."  (Email Form Report)

MORE UFOs REPORTED
IN ITALY

      On Saturday, December 4, 1999, at 11 a.m.,
two people in Li Punti, a suburb of Sassari, a
large city in the northwest corner of Sardinia,
"watched for several seconds a silver flying
object in the form of a tube coming with
flattened ends.  The flying object was headed
in the direction of Osilo."
      "Another tube-shaped OVNI (Italian acronym
for UFO--J.T.) was seen at the same hour by
a motorist on highway SS-131 near Li Punti."
      Sardinia is a large island in the Mediterranean
Sea belonging to Italy.
      The following day, Sunday, December 5, 1999,
at 11:10 a.m., three people in Aosta in northern
Italy "sighted in the sky a brilliant luminous form
that moved extremely slowly."  The witnesses were
interviewed by Italian ufologist Danilo Tacchino of
CUN Piemonte e Val d'Aosta.
      Aosta is a city in the Alps about 150 kilometers
(90 miles) west of Milano (Milan) and located very
close to the border with Switzerland.  (Grazie a
Alfredo Lissoni, Antonio Cuccu e Danilo Tacchino
di Centro Ufologico Nazionale d'Italia, CUN, per
questi rapporti.)

WOMAN VIDEOTAPES UFO
IN WEST LOTHIAN, SCOTLAND

      On Monday, November 29, 1999, at 8:13 p.m.,
Sandra Whelan was at her home in Craigshill,
Livingston, West Lothian, Scotland, UK when she
"saw two bright golden oval-shaped objects in the
sky."
      Immediately Ms. Whelan rushed to grab her
videocamera and began shooting footage of the
two objects.  "The lights were seen changing
shape from ovals to rhomboids."
      The local newspaper ran a story on the sighting
and "actually showed a still from the video on
the front page," John D. reported, "It seems the
MoD (UK Ministry of Defence--J.T.) is very interested
in the video."  (Many thanks to John D. for this report.)

MYSTERIOUS SKY SOUNDS
PUZZLE OHIO POLICEMEN

      On Sunday, December 5, 1999, from 10:30 p.m.
to 11:30 p.m." several residents of Defiance. Ohio
(population 16,768) telephoned the city police to
report weird sounds in the sky above their homes.
      "Several city residents along with two Defiance
police officers reported hearing strange sounds
coming from the skies above the city Sunday night."
      "According to police, the sounds were heard
'moving very fast' above Wildwood Drive residences
and from as far away as Ayersville."
      "The noises, which one witness described as
sounding like a motorcycle hum, were reported
between 10:30 and 11:30 p.m."
      "Police have not determined a possible
source for the noises."
      Defiance is on Route 24 approximately 53 miles
(84 kilometers) southwest of Toledo.  (See the
Defiance, Ohio Crescent-News for December 6,
1999, "Defiance residents report strange sounds,"
page 1.  Many thanks to Kenneth Young of
Cincinnati UFO Research for forwarding the
newspaper article.)

TRIANGULAR UFOs SPOTTED
IN PLEASANTVILLE, N.Y.

      On Sunday, December 12, 1999, at 10:09 p.m.,
Paul S. was at his home in Pleasantville, New York
(population 6,592) when he spotted an unusual
light through his living room window.  Because
the window has an excellent view of nearby
Westchester County Airport, he thought at first
it was a plane's landing lights.  But then it did
something very strange--it halted in mid-air!
      "Tonight, however, a light appeared out of the
northwest and stopped.  I kept expecting it to
turn south, as all the planes do, but it just stayed
there.  After about 20 seconds, another light, or
another object (for now they were both close
enough for me to see two or three white lights
on each object--P.S.) seemed to appear out of
nowhere.  My view was greatly blocked by bare
tree branches."
      "A few seconds after it appeared, both objects
began to move slowly towards the west.  I quickly
ran to fetch a pair of binoculars out of my closet,
and the objects were still in view when I returned,
slowly moving to the west."
      "For about 10 or 15 seconds, I watched with
the binoculars until they passed out of sight, slowly
but steadily gaining speed, then quickly ran to my
bedroom, which has a northward-facing window.
By the time I got the blinds up and the window
opened, one of the objects had disappeared, but
the second was closer than ever, traveling to the
west, or perhaps the southwest."
      "I could see that the three white lights were
actually three corners of an equilateral triangle,
and there was one dimmer red light in the center
of the bottom of the object.  I have no idea how
high it was, but it seemed that it was about the
size of a dime held at arm's length when it was
closest, just before it passed out of view."
      He had the UFO in view until 10:12 p.m.
      Pleasantville is on Route 1 approximately
27 miles (43 kilometers) north of New York City.
(Email Form Report)
(Editor's Note:  Pleasantville is also the home
of Reader's Digest magazine.)

BLACK HELICOPTERS
INVADE NEW ZEALAND

      Two black helicopters were seen flying
over Godzone, near the large city of Auckland,
on New Zealand's North Island, around
November 15, 1999.
      This was the first reported sighting of
black helicopters in New Zealand.
      According to eyewitness C.S.M., "two
black Iroquois helicopters flew over my workplace.
The helicopters were black, not olive drab.  They
were flying at 300 feet and were easy to identify.
A pity I didn't have a camera."
      The Royal New Zealand Air Force operates
a fleet of 12 UH-18/H Iroquois or Huey helicopters
from two air bases, RZNAF Hobsonville and RZNAF
Manurewa, near Auckland.  However, these
helicopters are olive drab and have clearly identifiable
RZNAF blue-and-red roundels on the tail boom.
      Another witness reported seeing a black
helicopter over the Waikato Valley south of Auckland.
"After flying around for a while, it headed out to sea."
(Email Interview)
(Editor's Comment: Auckland, with its population
of one million people, will be the first major
municipality to experience Y2K when the midnight
rollover to January 1, 2000 occurs two weeks
from now.  Could someone be positioning black
helicopters in New Zealand in anticipation of this?)

Y2K: MAGAW TAKES OVER
SPECIAL FEMA TASK FORCE

      "The outgoing director of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) said Monday
(December 13, 1999) that he thinks Olympic
bombing suspect Eric Robert Rudolph, a fugitive
for almost two years, is dead."
      "'My gut instinct is that he is still there, in a
cave, and he is dead,' ATF director John Magaw
said.  'That's only my opinion."
      "The last reported sighting of Rudolph was
more than a year ago near Andrews," North
Carolina.
      "Rudolph is the only person on the 'most
wanted' lists of both the ATF and the FBI."
(Editor's Comment: By now, Rudolph could
have hiked from Andrews, N.C. to Van Buren,
Maine...by way of Cuddapali, India!)
      "Magaw, who steps down next Monday as
the ATF director, said that despite his own
opinions, authorities will continue working the
case and 'trying to create a situation where he
can never be a threat again,'"
      "Magaw has been director of the ATF since
1993.  He is leaving to coordinate the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
domestic terrorism efforts.  Before joining the
ATF, he was the director of the Secret Service."
(See USA Today for December 14, 1999,
"Outgoing ATF chief expects fugitive is dead.")
      Some researchers have questioned FEMA's
statements about the severity of the Y2K problem
and are questioning the agency's policies
concerning the evangelical Christian community.
      On Sunday, December 12, 1999, at 6:30 p.m.
Central USA time, Michael Bunker, author of
Mark of the Beast: The Final Connection,
appeared on the radio show The Prophecy Club
of Topeka, Kansas and talked about secret FEMA
training sessions that were held in June 1999.
       According to Bunker, a police officer who
attended the session said the all-day seminar
included speakers from the FBI, ATF, FEMA,
U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Marshals
Service, and the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS), with emphasis upon the USA
federal government's plans to respond to Y2K.
      Bunker claimed that the FBI Special Agent
in Charge (SAC) was asked by a state official,
"Just what plans does the federal government
have?  And from your comments, it doesn't look
like state and local governments will be consulted
or even included in the making of this plan?"
      The SAC reportedly replied, "American
government is set up to continue under the most
stressful conditions.  However, it has always fought
on foreign soil.  (Editor's Comment:  Dolley Madison
and Jefferson Davis might give you an argument
about that, friend.)  No one can say for sure what
a civil war would be like.  To be frankly blunt, the
(Clinton) administration has been cultivating
friendships to help with this, but we will not go into
that.  I see no need for it, and I am not sure how
much I can say."
(Editor's Comment:  Translation--NATO troops in
the USA for training under the Partnership for Peace
program will be used to combat rioters during any
Y2K-related civil unrest.)
      Bunker said the FEMA representative "talked
about disruption of the food supply, possible
hijackings (of food trucks--J.T.), differences between
hoarding and stockpiling,.  And other subjects
included price gouging, bank runs, store runs, gas
runs, the power grid and the emergency distribution
of electricity."
      The representative of the U.S. Marshals Service,
Bunker added, said their role in a Y2K crisis would
be "to transport prisoners to the right place of
internment" and "to work together with the FBI to
monitor people and their activities around the
country."
(Editor's Comment:  Begins to sound more and more
like Roosevelt's roundup of the Nisei--the Japanese-
Americans--back in 1942, doesn't it?)
      Meanwhile, more strange military activities have
been reported in the southern USA.
      On Wednesday, December 8, 1999, several
motorists traveling on Interstate Highway I-24
just east of Pleasant View, Tennessee, 20 miles
(32 kilometers) northwest of Nashville, reported
seeing two C-130 Hercules turboprop transport
planes "flying low and heading north towards
Kentucky."  The planes were painted white and
had the black letters UN on the fuselage.
      On Tuesday, November 10, 1999, a man from
Fort Smith, Arkansas was hunting in the woods
near the decommissioned Army post of Fort
Chaffee.  He said he "saw brand-new chainlink
fences surrounding the (existing) barracks.  At
the top of the fence was razor wire turned inward
to keep people in."  (Newswatch magazine radio
broadcast for December 10, 1999, courtesy of
Pastor David J. Smith.)
(Editor's Note:  From 1980 to 1982, Fort Chaffee
was the camp where the Marielito Cubans were
interned after Castro deported them from Cuba.)

from the UFO Files...

1997: CHEAP DETECTIVE

      I don't have a trenchcoat.  Or a gun.  Or a
1949 Cadillac Coupe de Ville.  I don't call women
"dame" or "sister."  Why, I don't even own a
fedora!  So why was I playing private eye in the
Mohawk Valley of upstate New York in 1997?
      Well, it all started when I read H.P. Lovecraft's
1920 letter to the Gallomo literary club.  If you
recall last week's UFO Roundup, (See UFO
Roundup, volume 4, number 33), Lovecraft had a
strange dream in which he, as an army surgeon
named Lieutenant Spencer, visited his hometown
in update New York in July 1864.  Prompted by a
worried young man, Spencer paid a call on his
old friend, Dr. Chester.  Although resistant at
first, Dr. Chester finally invited his visitors to a
locked attic and showed them an astounding
sight--two amputated arms of a clearly non-
human creature.
      Lovecraft's "dream" seemed so startlingly
lifelike that I began to wonder if there might be
anything to it.  HPL had certainly left enough
verifiable details in the narrative, so I decided,
come vacation time, I would drive to New York
state from Rhode Island and do some on-site
research.
      First I asked a librarian friend in Windham,
Connecticut how to track down a Civil War
soldier.  She told me that in 1884 the Adjutant
General had compiled a list of everyone who
had served in the Union army during the USA's
Civil War (also known as the War for Southern
Independence in Mother Dixie--J.T.).  Each state
had its own book listing all of its Civil War veterans.
      Before my trip, I wondered if "Lt. Spencer" might
have a Rhode Island connection.  Perhaps he had
earned his medical degree at Brown University in
Providence.  No such luck!  The Alumni office at
brown had no record of an "E. Spencer" from
New York state studying there in the middle of
the Nineteenth Century.
      At the end of May 1997, I set out for Saratoga,
N.Y.  I'd used their library previously and was
pretty familiar with it.  But again I struck out.
Same story in Troy, N.Y.  The librarian there
warned me that I was in search of the proverbial
needle.  Nearly 500,000 men from New York state
served in the Union army during the Civil War.
Here I was, 132 years later, trying to find one
soldier out of half a million.  But he did point me
in the right direction--to the State Capitol Library
in Albany, N.Y.
      The microfilmed enlistment records listed
four "E. Spencers."  Two were from New York
City.  I dismissed them out of hand.  Another
was from Binghamton, in the southern part of
the state.  That didn't fit HPL's narrative.  He was
quite explicit about "northern New York state."
      That left Number Four--First Lieutenant
E. Gary Spencer, surgeon, 94th New York
Regiment, from Brockett's Bridge, N.Y.
      "Where's Brockett's Bridge?" I asked the
librarian, as I returned the box of microfilms.
      She gave me a blank look.  "Never heard
of it."
      Returning to the car, I got out my trusty
Rand-McNally 1997 Road Atlas.  No listing
for a Brockett's Bridge, N.Y. in the index.
      I purchased the most detailed New York
state road map I could find at a gas station
in East Schodack.  No Brockett's Bridge!
     Crestfallen, I started back to Rhode Island.
I was almost ready to give up.  But then I
started wondering if this Brockett's Bridge
was a portion of an existing New York city
or town.
      Back to the library--this time to a
community college.  The student librarian
showed me their extensive collection of
books on New York state.  I began poring over
the index of each one.  She was very helpful.
      "Brockett's Bridge," she murmured, "I know
I've heard that name somewhere.  But I just
can't remember where."
     And then...paydirt!  The elusive name of
Brockett's Bridge turned up in an 1855 book
entitled The Gazeteer of New York State.
"On the banks of West Canada Creek," it said.
      "Where's that?" I asked.
      "Up north,  Near Herkimer."
      Herkimer!  The Mohawk Valley!  Northern
New York!  I thought excitedly, Yesssss!
      Don't ask me how, but I kept under the speed
limit as I drove back to Albany, past Amsterdam,
past Syracuse and on to Little Falls.  I got there
late in the day and checked in at Best Western.
      At first I thought Brockett's Bridge was the
original name of Little Falls.  But a trip to their
public library put me straight.  Brockett's Bridge,
founded in 1794, was the original name of the
nearby town of Dolgeville.
      Here at the Little Falls library, I dug up more
information about Lt. Spencer. including the
family address on Fourth Street in what used
to be Brockett's Bridge.  But no mention of a
Chester family.
      Next stop--Dolgeville.  To show you how
completely the name Brockett's Bridge had been
forgotten, only one person at the Town Hall knew
the original name.  But they were all extremely
helpful and friendly and said my best bet would
be to check out the county historical museum
in Herkimer, N.Y.
      Here I learned everything I needed to know
about Gary Spencer, as I've come to think of
him, from his birth in March 1839 to his
enlistment in the U.S. Army in 1862.  He was
one of six children, his father Thomas was
town schoolteacher, and his grandfather was
one of the original settlers.  Yes, there was
quite a bit about Gary, nee Elbridge Gerry
Spencer, a.k.a. Eben Spencer, age 16, in the
original town census of 1855.
      I also learned the real name of the sinister
"Dr. Chester."  There were four doctors in town
back then.  Doc Chester is the oldest one, the
herbalist, the one with the baby brother.
      Another strange fact--in 1871, a Swiss
financier named Alfred M. Dolge stepped off
the boat in New York City--and without stopping
for lunch at Delmonico's--hopped the first train
to Little Falls and confronted the town council
of Brockett's Bridge with an amazing proposition.
      If you will rename your town after me, said
Dolge, I will, at my own personal expense, build
a shoe factory here in town AND a railroad spur
line to connect with the main New York Central
track in Little Falls.
      Mighty generous of him, eh?  You have to
wonder why this wealthy European was so
eager to erase the name of Brockett's Bridge.
      And there's another strange fact.  According
to the 1870 Census and the first Dolgeville town
directory of 1881, there are no listings for Gary
Spencer, Doc Chester or the baby brother.
Apparently, they all up and left town before
the year 1870.
      So here's my theory of what happened.
Sometime between April and July of 1862,
during a period of intense UFO activity
(Fate magazine in 1998 reported UFO sightings
in Niagara Falls, N.Y. and Manassas, Virginia
for that year.  Also, Charles Fort recorded
numerous instances of mysterious lights on
the moon during the same period--J.T.), a
saucer crashed in the remote rural area
between Salisbury Center, N.Y. and West
Canada Creek.  Either the alien pilot was
badly injured or the crew was killed and there
was only one survivor--a bluish-green humanoid
with four arms and two legs.
      Along comes Doc Chester, out in the
woods gathering herbs.  He either sees the
crash or encounters the injured pilot.  He gets
the creature back to nearby Brockett's Bridge
under cover of darkness.
      In this age beforee antibiotics, Doc Chester
cannot save the alien's two left arms.  But
somehow he pulls the alien through and nurses
him back to health.  And his unusual houseguest
learns English and tells him about new forms of
life out there beyond Earth's atmosphere.
      But now it's July 1864 and Doc Chester is
getting nervous.  He knows that someday the
alien's friends will be back.  Worse, the ever-
present strain of discovery is getting to him.
Confederate guerrilla raids in Vermont have
triggered a spy hunt that has reached even
sleepy Brockett's Bridge.
      I mean, the good doctor can't exactly write
to Abe Lincoln and say, "Guess who's staying
at my house?"
      So finally he lets his baby brother and Gary
Spencer in on the big secret.  And then....
      I don't know.  I don't know what happened.
All I know is that Gary and the brothers Chester
were no longer in Dolgeville, N.Y. in 1870.
      An obituary of Gary's sister printed in the
Herkimer newspaper in 1889 simply states that
he "vanished twenty years ago.".
      And there the matter rests--for now.  And
why do I even bring it up?  Two reasons, actually.
      My on-site research confirmed  a number of the
facts in Lovecraft's 1920 "dream" story.  There are
too many verifiable facts to be merely coincidence.
      Also, it's been two years, and I don't know
when--if ever--I'll be able to get back to upstate
New York and do some more digging.  And since
there's no Nobel Prize for ufology, I've decided to
make my research public in the hope that an
honest ufologist will someday continue this
important research.
      The year 2000 rollover could be the biggest
fizzle since the Comet Kohoutek in 1974.  Or it
could be a watershed event like the assassination
of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914.
      On the chance that Y2K is the latter, I am
giving this vital information to the UFO community.
Brockett's Bridge is too important a story to keep
to myself.  We could have a Nineteenth Century
Roswell here.  I hope someone will find out
for certain.
      So, to whichever Roundup reader takes up
the quest, here are the clues you need.
      Good hunting!

      We'll be back in seven days with more on
the flap in China and plenty of UFO news from
elsewhere in the world, brought to you by "the
paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
      Get that shopping done.  It's nine days until
Christmas...and 16 days till D-Day!
      Have a great week.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan
Productions, all rights reserved.  Readers may post
news items from UFO Roundup on their websites
or in news groups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date
of issue in which the item first appeared.
*********************************************************

IMPORTANT Please Read:
======================

The Hunger Site
---------------

http://www.thehungersite.com

Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the
deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site
and clicking on a button you can donate free food.
There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation -
the food is paid for by sponsors.

Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference!
If you have a web site download a banner and give a link!
*********************************************************

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:49:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 19:55:22 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 ><snip>

 >Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >is on abductions.

 >With no physical proof or reliable witnesses to support physical
 >"abductions" it is pathetic that any follow these accounts at
 >all. I have, yet, to meet an abductee, whose story of space
 >aliens snatching them,  would hold up. It's not that hard to
 >kill their stories; just a minimal amount of investigation and
 >background checks will do it.

 >Abductions by space aliens and their space-ships have been the
 >biggest fraud put on the American public since ufology became an
 >art (_not_ a science) 52 years ago.

 >My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

 >http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

 >No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
 >far better than anything else I've seen.

 >John C. Thompson


Hello John,

Thank you John. I'll get onto intensive psychotherapy
immediately and I promise to take my Prozac regularly. It's so
good that after all this time 'someone' finally came along and
stopped the insanity and to clear things up as you have!

In deep gratitude for your unbiased contribution, I remain,

John Velez, Mentally disabled abductee

________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                   Re: Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 15:13:23 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:01:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...


 >From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 05:29:51 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:32:51 -0500
 >Subject: Brightest Full Moon In 133 Years...

 >http://www.earthchangestv.com/breaking/index.htm

<snip>

 >This year will be the first full moon to occur on the winter
 >solstice, Dec. 22, commonly called the first day of winter.

Ever?  In this Millennium?  It couldn't be this year because
by definition there is only one Solstice.  The cycle of lunar
phases is 18.6 years long and in known as the Saros cycle
of eclipses, well known to the ancients.  I got my 1980
RASC Observers' Handbook out and there was a Full Moon
on Solstice day then, it was even closer to the Solstice than
this year.

 >Since a full moon on the winter solstice occurred in conjunction
 >with a lunar perigee (point in the moon's orbit that
 >is closest to Earth) The moon will appear about 14%
 >larger than it does at apogee (the point in it's elliptical
 >orbit that is farthest from the Earth)

Something which happens each month.

 >since the Earth is also several million miles closer to the
 >sun at this time of the year than in the summer, therefore
 >, sunlight striking the moon is about 7% stronger making
 >it brighter.

Joe Rao, a meteorologist and experiences amateur astronomer has
called attention on another list to, Jean Meeus, a Belgium
meteorologist and renowned celestial mechanic, who recently
wrote of the closest/largest full Moon of the 20th century
(which occurred in  1912):

"The most extreme perigee, of January 4, 1912, coincided almost
exactly with the full moon.  Moreover, the Earth was very close
to its perihelion, so that the Moon received more sunlight than
under average circumstances.  Was that full moon exceptionally
bright?

"The perigee distance on that date was 356,375 km.  Let us also
suppose than an observer saw the Moon directly overhead,
yielding a distance to its center of only 349,997 km. The
Earth's distance to the Sun was 0.9832 astronomical unit.

"Now, remembering that the mean distance of the Earth-Moon is
384,400 km. and the Earth-Sun 1.0 a.u., and that the apparent
brightness of a body varies inversely as the square of its
distance, we find that the full moon was (384,400/349,997) 2 x
(1.0/0.9832)2 = 1.2478 times as bright as the "mean" full moon.
This corresponds to an increase of only 0.24 magnitude; thus the
moonlight was not exceptionally bright."

<snip>

 >If the weather is clear and there is a snow cover where you
 >live, it is believed that even car headlights will be
 >superfluous.

Nonsense.

The main thing is that the Moon will be as high in the sky as it
gets, because it is close to the Solstice.  Most of us probably
remembers brilliant winter Full Moons lighting up a snowy
landscape.

Enjoy 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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:17:11 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:04:42 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >is on abductions.

I am unaware of any actual psychological data to substantiate
the above, which seems merely an expression of hostile opinion.
Whatever the abduction experience may or may not be, the
available empirical evidence suggests that the average abductee
is within the normal psychological range.  Of course, it's
always more fun to kill the messenger than to hear what one
doesn't want to hear, isn't it?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:21:26 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:16:11 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 ><snip>

 >Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >is on abductions.

 >With no physical proof or reliable witnesses to support physical
 >"abductions" it is pathetic that any follow these accounts at
 >all. I have, yet, to meet an abductee, whose story of space
 >aliens snatching them,  would hold up. It's not that hard to
 >kill their stories; just a minimal amount of investigation and
 >background checks will do it.

 >Abductions by space aliens and their space-ships have been the
 >biggest fraud put on the American public since ufology became an
 >art (_not_ a science) 52 years ago.

 >My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

 >http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

 >No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
 >far better than anything else I've seen.

 >John C. Thompson

Thanks to Mr J. Thompson we have just relegated anyone who said
something that doesn't fit in with physical science to the loony
bin.

To say that many are ill, unstable individuals, with sexual
hang-ups is the biggest hog-wash I have ever heard.

There may be no physical proof of abductions, but something is
happening to these people.  Why don't we examine what we know is
happening, that people are "experiencing" things "in their own
minds" and that they could do with some help dealing with it.

Kicking these people into the gutter, as Mr Thompson has just
done helps no-one.

Fantastic discoveries have been made by science and individuals
over thousands of years, usually by accident.  Science does not
prove theories, it merely provides the best one, until another
comes along to overturn it.

I don't doubt that some abductees are swinging the lead, but the
gutter that Mr Thompson throws them all into is very long and
there is plenty of room for him in it.

Mark Haywood









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:17:02 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:23:31 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >is on abductions.

<snip>

 >My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

 >http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

 >No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
 >far better than anything else I've seen.

 >John C. Thompson


Probably because it isn't true. Most abductees are _not_
mentally ill or unstable. _Some_ abductees are. They are in the
minority not the majority. Anyone who has done enough work with
them including psych workups have found this to be true. The
so-called sexual hangups are the result of the sexual abuse of
the abductions. Just look at rape victims. They have the same
symptoms and problems, only it's a lot harder to get over
because it is so bizarre and usually happens multiple times.

As far as stories holding up, what would you do if it happened
to you and all you had to show for it was marks on your body,
strange pregnancies, and the occasional implant. I think you
need to do a better job of selecting what sources your data
comes from. Check with John Carpenter. He has accounts where
people have witnessed the abductions of others without
themselves being abducted and they fully conscious during the
event.

Your opinion shows us only what you personally can accept. I
started out being very skeptical about alien abductions. As time
went on and I learned more, and experience with MUFON field
investigations with our local group amassed enough information,
I began to realise that it is possible for even the most bizarre
and unlikely things to be be true.

Joel Henry
Minnesota MUFON FI

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota MUFON Field Investigator, Minnesota MUFON Journal Editor,
Minnesota MUFON Webmaster
Minnesota MUFON Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~jhenry/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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                  Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 18:38:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:27:42 -0500
Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 09:08:50 EST
 >Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 23:11:41 -0400

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:22:20 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: MJ12 - A Request to Stanton Friedman
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net

 ><snip>

 >>My point was not so much that Saucer Smear is a gossip sheet,
 >>but that somebody asking questions about me and Bill Moore and
 >>MJ-12 should have given some indication that he has reviewed my
 >>very extensive writings... which are listed in the snip.

 >Okay, Stan, fair enough.

 ><snip>

 >>I didn't say I had any of the other documents using TOP SECRET
 >>RESTRICTED.

 >>Read my comments again.

 >>Here is a direct quote from page 80 of the GAO's 450 page
 >>overview of what they did for Steve Schiff:

 >>DATE: December 7, 1994

 >>Ms. Laura Jackson and I reviewed records pertaining to the Air
 >>Force Atomic energy projects and certain mission and weapons
 >>requirements. These files were classified up to and including
 >>top secret. The period covered by these records was from 1948
 >>to 1956. There was no mention of the Roswell Incident. No
 >>information pertaining to the assignment was obtained. In
 >>several instances we noticed the classification Top Secret
 >>Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
 >>because in past references to this classification (Majestic
 >>12) we were told that it was not used during this period.

 >>It would certainly appear that these were documents that had
 >>not been declassified and are not available to you or me.

 >>I have no problem in believing that the GAO personnel are
 >>telling the truth. Do you?

 >Of course not. However, there is the possibility that they have
 >made a mistake. That is why it would be nice to see some of these
 >documents that they mentioned. That would resolve this aspect of
 >the question.


Yes, I would very much like to see any of these documents and
had talked to several GAO people. Nothing useful yet..  and not
very suprising considering the huge volume they reviewed.. Their
whole goal was to find stuff about Roswell. I am just glad that
they even mentioned this finding. It is hard to believe that
they were mistaken.

It seems to me that they were quite surprised or they wouldn't
have made note.

One might hope that some of these documents have been
declassified in response to Executive Order 12958. Unfortunately
the deadline for review and declassification has been extended
from April 2000 to April 2003

 >>It would seem extremely unlikely that a forger would use an
 >>unusual security marking bound to raise eyebrows.

 >It was also seem unlikely that a forger of great works of art
 >would sing his own name to them somewhere but that has
 >happened.

 ><snip>

 >>I will also enclose a listing of items available from UFORI
 >>including the "Zeta Reticuli Incident" by Terence Dickinson and
 >>"Update on The Zeta Reticuli Incident". These seem to have been
 >>left out of your discussion about the Betty Hill star map in
 >>your "The Abduction Enigma".

 >Irrelevant to the current discussion of MJ-12.

 >KRandle

Not really, since leaving out significant information is a
frequent tactic in ufology including in the attacks on the early
MJ-12 documents as I noted in my long paper "Operation Majestic
12? YES!"

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:38:24 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:33:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:55:25 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy
 >>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:23:03 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:40:09 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Previously, Dennis offered:

 ><snip>

 >>The "solar systems" presently being discovered in no way
 >>resemble our own; for the most part it is hard to imagine how
 >>they could have given rise to life at all, let alone ETI. That
 >>is, they are non-starters from the word get-go.

 ><snip>

 >Hi Dennis,

 >I'm not necessarily taking sides, here. However, I believe that
 >the context of this entire discussion has been less about what
 >constitutes a planet and more about what constitutes a "livable"
 >planet. I understand your point as it regards the possibility of
 >life as we know it. But you must admit the term "as we know it"
 >really becomes very subjective and leaves out hundreds, perhaps,
 >millions of possibilities that are simply beyond our limited
 >imagination.

 >For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to
 >find sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing
 >should survive. In addition, fish, crustaceans and microscopic
 >organisms have been found to thrive in underwater "thermal
 >spouts" ranging from several hundred degrees to thousands of
 >degrees F. Until recently, none of these conditions were
 >thought to support living organisms, yet they do.

 >If you want to take the position that only Earthlike planets
 >can support life as we know it; fine. But I think it would be
 >narrow minded to assume that ONLY Earthlike planets can
 >support life of ANY  kind. As far fetched as it may sound,
 >perhaps a gas giant has it's own unique life forms; something
 >we simply don't understand or recognize. Perhaps they, too,
 >assume that life can only develop via another gas giant! ;)

Roger,

I couldn't agree more. Even Sagan speculated that balloon-like
beings might have evolved on one of our solar systems. He even
wanted the Mars Rover (I think it was) to carry a flashlight
they could turn on at night and watch with remote camera to see
if it might attract Martian moths. (See Captured by Aliens for
more details.)

What we're looking for is a stable planetary environment that
could not only give rise to life, but, eventually, spacefaring
life. For instance, there may well be planets out there
completely covered in water. Maybe superintelligent dolphins are
swimming around in them right now. But as Michael Swords has
pointed out numerous times, intelligent dolphins are not likely
to develop spaceships for the obvious reason that they will
never undergo an Iron Age. It's damnably difficult to light a
furnace and smelt iron ore when you're surrounded by water.

The deeep vent discoveries are truly phenomenal and show that
old Mother Earth hasn't given up all her surprises yet, just as
we continue to find something new and startling on an almost
regular basis about our own solar system and the larger universe
at large. Such as the new gas giant systems which were totally
unexpected in numbers and nature that they will undoubtedly
result in new theories of planetary and solar system formation.
It may well be that huge gas giants are the "preferred"
byproduct of solar systems, not puny little rocky ones like
ours. Our own system has two, conveniently placed where they
don't do us any harm, and in the case of Jupiter may even serve
as a sort of inner solar system sentry, sucking up all sorts of
space debris that we'd otherwise not want to encounter at this
particular stage of our evolution.

Evolution is a strange bird, too. It hung around this paradise
of a place (roughly speaking) for something like 3 billion years
in single cell form before starting down the road that led to
ufologists and astronomers. If only it had started a few million
years earlier, who knows, we might really be somewhere --
instead of where we are now. Anyway, it should be an interesting
century.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                    FO Sighting Report OZ File 09.12.1999

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:19:59 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:41:09 -0500
Subject: FO Sighting Report OZ File 09.12.1999


FOLLOWUP Russell Boundy UFORB 1800 Callin Code: 00422
09.12.1999

UFO Sighting Report OZ File 09.12.1999

Date: 09.12.99
Day: Friday
Time Reported: 8.31pm
Location: Helenvale , Cooktown North QLD
Reportee: Carol & Kids
Report given to: Russell Boundy UFORB QLD
Tel: 07

Report:

Shape: Star like
Size: ?
Objects: 4
Colour: Bright white
Sound: None
Speed: Of a  jet aircraft
Duration: ?
Direction: South to North
Witnesses: 1 & Kids

Carol stated that she was in her residence when her "kids" ( nb:
the "kids" are adult children) called her outside,  when she
went out they pointed out a light high in the clear night sky.

The object was a bright white star like light and moved in a
steady trajectory across the sky from South to North,  a moment
later a second similar object followed the same trajectory, then
followed a third then a fourth similar object all on the same
trajectory at similar separations apart.

The flight trajectory of all objects was horizontal and they
travelled out of sight to the North. Carol went inside again to
call someone about her observations when she  was called back
out side, this time a similar object to those previously seen
travelled from North to South on the same track, a moment later
this was  followed by a second object again on the  same track
(N-S) All of the objects  were of the same appearance and
travelled about the speed  of a jet aircraft  silently across
the sky, they appeared to be high in the sky.

The light on all of the objects was of a constant brightness.
The witnesses also saw a satellite pass on a different track
during their observation, the satellite was flashing and
travelled much slower in an arc across the sky.

Carol said she was very familiar with high altitude aircraft
passing over the area, south west of her location on track from
Darwin or Cairns.  The objects did not display normal aviation
lighting and were not on the usual flight track. Checks with
Cairns ATC revealed no military flights in the area at the time
of the incident.

The reporter also recalled a sighting of a large bright object
about eight years ago near Aloomba South of Cairns.

End Message.

Regards to all Russell Boundy.

Thankyou Russell Boundy for this report

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:06:44 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:52:28 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >As Dennis Miller once said, "I don't want to rant ... but,"
 >Ranting is an easy thing to do.

 >I have been on this list for over two years and I have posted
 >two whole times, this will be the third.

 >The first time that I posted it was a comment in support of firm
 >scientific protocols for the research of paranormal anomalies
 >including the UFO Phenomenon.

 >My second post was in defense of Stanton Friedman and the fine
 >work that he had done in the past and a question directed to Mr.
 >Friedman as to the protocols that he used in his research. The
 >response from Mr. Friedman was as negative as they get. He
 >questioned my motives for even asking that question without
 >reading his many papers and books. Oddly enough I have read most
 >of what Mr. Friedman has put into the public arena and I still
 >wondered what protocols he used, needless to say, I never got
 >the answer.
 >
 >When I first became aware of this list I thought, what a great
 >idea, an insiders list where the sharing of information could
 >possibly get us closer to the real answers. How silly I was to
 >think that. It was easy to see that opposing opinions turned to
 >personal battles at the drop of a hat. I often wanted to throw
 >my two cents worth into the ring but then I thought that life is
 >far too short to waste my time battling or dueling with others
 >for no other reason than to stoke a fire that is already
 >blazing.

 >I have seen questions asked and challenges made . Of course when
 >some answers were posted the questioner would reject any
 >comments out of hand or attack the motives of the individual who
 >dares to post an opposing view.

 >What has prompted my post are the following comments made by
 >John Velez;

 >>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 02:45:25 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>For someone whose degree in psychology is still 'warm in the
 >>frame' you are quick to dismiss (and minimize) the statements of
 >>a man who headed a psychology department at Harvard! They don't
 >>give posts like that to 'slackers' Kevin. Don't be so quick to
 >>dismiss a man who has -years- of experience over you. You only
 >>do so because his views don't jibe with yours. It's nothing
 >>deeper than that really. It shows in the dismissive language
 >>that litters your comments. Example: Re: Mack's remarks, you
 >>offer the pronouncement, "This is nonsense!" If you don't think
 >>that folks/readers can see through proclamations like that one,
 >>you have a lot more to learn about psychology.
 >
 >I would now like to clear a few things up for Mr. Velez about
 >his personal attack on Kevin Randle and his "still warm in the
 >frame" degree.
 >
 >I am sure that it is common knowledge that Kevin and I have
 >co-authored three books, One of those books is "The Abduction
 >Enigma" with William P. Cone Ph.D..

 >Over 6 years of hands on research went into that book. The
 >opinions that Kevin posted about memory are not only his but
 >also mine and Dr. Cone, whose Diploma is not a bit warm in its
 >frame. Matter of fact, Dr. Cone has over 25 years of clinical
 >experience with a vast majority of that time dealing with memory
 >and the human mind.

 >John Velez Continues:

 >>In place of John Mack you would have people turn to the work of
 >>"academic psychologists" who have never spoken to anyone outside
 >>of a lab or a college campus. Each of the individuals you have
 >>mentioned have all put forth mutually exclusive theories and
 >>explanations regarding alien abductions. None of them -has ever-
 >>worked with anyone who is reporting alien abduction.

 ><snip>

 >>Loftus, Baker, et al can't find agreement among themselves. Why
 >>should we give them (or their mutually exclusive theories) 'more
 >>credence' than we'd give to someone like Dr Mack who has
 >>actually worked with live human beings!

 >The above noted comments are very interesting if you consider
 >the fact that Dr. Mack has "Mutually exclusive theories" of his
 >own. Budd Hopkins aliens are of the malevolent variety and Dr.
 >Macks are of the benevolent ilk.  And then we have the "Academic
 >Psychologists" comment.  Again very interesting considering that
 >Harvard, at least to my recollection is still Academia and a
 >true Ivory Tower if there ever was one.  Also when we look at
 >false memory we must look long and hard at the work of Dr,
 >Elizabeth Loftus who actually did a number of proper scientific
 >studies with real "Live human beings."

Dear Russ, Errol and Listers, kind, gentle and all the rest...

Velez can defend himself, this one's for me.

_Budd Hopkins' aliens_?  _John Mack's aliens_? _Gesundt's
aliens_?  These are not anyone's aliens, they are those which have
been described by Mack's patients and Budd's perceived abductees.

You assume (a very dangerous thing to do when one considers the
act of making an ass out of you and me... you know the old cliche')
that these aliens belong to those men.  Now don't you feel a little
silly?  No?  You should.

Your paradigm does not fit into those of either Hopkins or Mack.
They certainly do not fit into mine.  And I have seen, heard and
perceived myself to have been with aliens.  Along come a few
researchers with or without degrees, who proceed to inform me
(us) that what we've perceived is not likely what actually
happened. You folks wrote that down in a book.  Then, some other
folks come down on you for drawing conclusions different from
theirs. You don't like that.  Too bad.  It's the nature of this
beast.

But don't feel too badly.  I for one, react similarly. Which
brings me to several conclusions.  That you are quite correct in
your estimation of the current situation in the field.  And
secondly, quite correct about another matter, that of degrees.

They mean dicksquat.  And I have several, maybe even more than
several.  Some people seem to get really uptight, some
intimidated and some, downright ticked off over the number and
level of a person's degree of education.  How many times have I
heard remarks about people with Ph.D.'s being about as useful as
mammary glands on a log.

But you know?  The degree doesn't really matter. It's what a man
is worth by virtue of his word, not his education or lack of it.
I just happen to be among the best at what I do.  But I was so
long before my wife decided that she liked the sound of "Doctor"
before my name.  Now that we've been thru hell together, it no
longer matters.

Want to know what does?  Matter, I mean.  How people perceive
YOUR truth.  Right or wrong.  How they perceive your word
matters.  You can be downright dead bloody wrong about
everything.  But you may still be respected for your soul, your
heart and your attitude, care, love and respect for others and
their opinions.

See what I mean?

Snip

 >I have considered Kevin Randle a friend for a very long time and
 >I am proud of him for the effort that he put forth in gaining
 >his Ph.D..  He did that for his own reasons not to do the
 >research for the 'Abduction Enigma'. All of that research was
 >done long before his degree was even in the works. The degree
 >does not make the person, the person brings credit to the
 >degree.

 >Now that I have had my rant I suppose that I have left the door
 >open for dagger throwing in my direction. I will warn the list
 >that I'm not into name calling or dueling for no better reason
 >than to put down another person for their research or their
 >views. My opinions are all in the book 'The Abduction Enigma'.
 >If you haven't read it you might just find it an interesting
 >read. None of us have all of the answers and we will never get
 >the answers if we don't stop all of the bickering and get
 >together with some standardized protocols and cooperation.

 >It's My Opinion... I May Be Wrong,

And here sir is where you redeem yourself.  At least in my book.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:46:43 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:59:26 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>As Dennis Miller once said, "I don't want to rant ... but,"
 >>Ranting is an easy thing to do.

 >>I have been on this list for over two years and I have posted
 >>two whole times, this will be the third.

 ><snip>

 >Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >is on abductions.

 >With no physical proof or reliable witnesses to support physical
 >"abductions" it is pathetic that any follow these accounts at
 >all. I have, yet, to meet an abductee, whose story of space
 >aliens snatching them,  would hold up. It's not that hard to
 >kill their stories; just a minimal amount of investigation and
 >background checks will do it.

 >Abductions by space aliens and their space-ships have been the
 >biggest fraud put on the American public since ufology became an
 >art (_not_ a science) 52 years ago.

 >My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

 >http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

 >No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
 >far better than anything else I've seen.

 >John C. Thompson

Dear John:

Well, you got me.  I am defeated.  I am deflated (which if you've
ever seen me will draw a gasp, as the deflation process would
likely create a huge tsunami up to Kansas).  No! Really.

I really mean that I agree with you wholeheartedly.  However,
I would like you and the other listers to understand _why_ I
agree with you.  Are you guys ready?

Good.

It's because I went to the site address you gave above, you
know, the: http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html
address....

Well, was I shocked and impressed when I read the title of your
tomb... tome... whatever... it was _exactly_ the title and
nothing more which drove me over to your side.  Didn't even have
to read it, altho I did.  'S OK, I took a prozac.

The title is:
Abductions: The Truth
By John C. Thompson. Copyright 1999, all rights reserved

I think I am about to have an orgasm.  And not only are all my
clothes on, not only are my hands at the keyboard of this
putter, but even Pia Zadora is not here.  And yet, I am about to
explode.

God speed John C. Thompson.  You made my day.  And as me granny
used to say ... uh ... I can't say that here.  Oh well, you get
the stench of it.  I meant to write "drift of it."  I don't know
what's the matter with me.

Doctor J. Jaime Gesundt, Ph.D.'s too numerous to mention.

PS:

And some of 'em I never even aksed for even.  God, whilst I am
pretty smart, I aint nearly as smart as you.  You are blessed
with the truth.  Uh, I was wondering, has it set you 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 >
   Dec > Dec 17

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 21:19:43 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Dennis Stacy
 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:38:24 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:33:12 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:55:25 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, I offered:

 >>For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to
 >>find sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing
 >>should survive. In addition, fish, crustaceans and microscopic
 >>organisms have been found to thrive in underwater "thermal
 >>spouts" ranging from several hundred degrees to thousands of
 >>degrees F. Until recently, none of these conditions were
 >>thought to support living organisms, yet they do.

 >>If you want to take the position that only Earthlike planets
 >>can support life as we know it; fine. But I think it would be
 >>narrow minded to assume that ONLY Earthlike planets can
 >>support life of ANY  kind. As far fetched as it may sound,
 >>perhaps a gas giant has it's own unique life forms; something
 >>we simply don't understand or recognize. Perhaps they, too,
 >>assume that life can only develop via another gas giant! ;)

Dennis replied:

<snip>

 >What we're looking for is a stable planetary environment that
 >could not only give rise to life, but, eventually, spacefaring
 >life. For instance, there may well be planets out there
 >completely covered in water. Maybe superintelligent dolphins are
 >swimming around in them right now. But as Michael Swords has
 >pointed out numerous times, intelligent dolphins are not likely
 >to develop spaceships for the obvious reason that they will
 >never undergo an Iron Age. It's damnably difficult to light a
 >furnace and smelt iron ore when you're surrounded by water.

<snip>

Hi, Dennis.

I think you miss my point. Science assumed that no carbon based
life form could survive in the high temperatures of "thermal
spouts". Now, of course, it's known as fact. Likewise regarding
carbon based organisms found surviving the tremendous pressures
at the bottom of the ocean. According to science, they shouldn't
exist. But they do.

We simply can't use the development of Earth as the litmus for
worlds we haven't seen when the world we've seen for thousands
of years still holds so many contradictions to scientific
assumptions about what defines the term "life as we know it".

And if we're wrong about "life as we know it" here on our own
planet, then "life as we DON'T know it" must surely be within
the realm of possibility on other planets; even seemingly
hostile ones.

When one begins to include the possibility of non-carbon based
life forms, even more opportunities present themselves.

Regarding your assumption about underwater metal work; obviously
you are unaware of underwater welding? Submerged metal work is
done all the time. Besides, I would think working in the
relative weightless environment of space would be very familiar
to a sea creature like a dolphin! ;)

take care,

Roger Evans









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:34:33 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:25:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


Regarding:

 >Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 10:36:29 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

Ed wrote:

 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 05:14:31 -0000

 >James,

 >But on to "RESTRICTED".

 >You said:

 >>"The following are self explanatory and originate from someone
 >>with a detailed knowledge of classified documents:

 >>'RESTRICTED ACCESS

 >>Not a valid classification. RESTRICTED DATA is a marking that has
 >>been used for probably 50 years on nuclear weapons information.

 >>AO1 CLASSIFICATION

 >>I've never heard of anything like this. Sometimes, the
 >>classification  has a codeword designator indicating the program,
 >>i.e. TOP SECRET-DINAR where DINAR was a NSA program.

 >>JULY 30th 1947

 >>Invalid date format. Since World War II, military documents use a
 >>different date format, Day Month Year. For example, 30 July
 >>1947.'

 >>These comments are supported by further independent evaluations
 >>from contacts with comprehensive experience of working within the
 >>military intelligence services:

 >>''Restricted Access' as a 'classification' is a new one on me.'

 >>'Classification status 'AO1' sounds like Hollywood.'

 >>At which point, you will hopefully appreciate that if this
 >>"security marker" alone is bogus, there are potentially terminal
 >>problems here.

[End]


 >Sorry James but you are wrong, very wrong.

Ed,

If I clarify further, it will hopefully set this in context.

Firstly, the above comments were, as stated, an explanation of
where the debate originated and why the 'Sunday Times' article
mentioned some comments I made to Ray, without attributing their
source was a discussion on the CompuServe 'UFO' forum.

Subsequent to this, it was known that, for example, as I
disclosed long ago in an article, 'The Manikin Who Fell to
Earth':

"Researcher John Stepkowski had written to historian Steven
Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, asking for
an informed opinion on the use of a 'Restricted Access'
classification in general.

Aftergood's opinion was that, 'The term Restricted Access has
sometimes been used interchangeably with Special Access, which
refers to special dissemination controls above and beyond the
classification level and the clearance level of the recipient'.

'Classification markings from that era were not standardized or
consistent. Every organization could use more or less whatever
markings it wanted'." [End]


The full article, which still contains by far the most factual
and objective summary of the footage, can be seen at:

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


My observation in the UpDates posting was that, "It's all
superseded by our knowledge this 'security coding' was simply
made up".

Which was why I hadn't gone into more detail. Given that we know
the 'security codes' from our tent footage were, like the
filming itself, the product of a hilarious prank which
capitalised on an earnest belief in 'Rowell, plus specifically,
related 'alien autopsy' tales, I thought it unnecessary to
elaborate.

Your demonstration why the 'security codes' may have some
validity is noted, however, in context it seems to highlight how
we can 'make something out of nothing'.

I'm sure, as with myself and John having objectively taking
time, pre 'hoax proof',  to seek related opinions from some
eminent historians [there were others I obtained and never
published], it would be of great amusement to those who must
have wondered if anyone would actually take it seriously.

Aside from the consummate footage analysis which evidences it to
be a hoax - quelle surprise - and much as we might like to see
some reality in the 'alien autopsy', I would have thought by now
any contemplation that the US government has 'covered up'
evidence of alien contact, whether crashed saucers and requisite
autopsies, reverse engineered Meier-like saucers at Area 51,
underground bases and so on, would have been seen to be
exhausted of evidence.

Some might say that's a charitable conclusion and the farcical
'cover up' nonsense, exemplified by the MJ-12, 'everyone else is
fooled but us, and we're no fools' junk, is a major factor in
why, what is demonstrably an ongoing 'UFO' enigma, has become an
increasing anathema to ever being taken seriously.

At some point we do actually have to be sceptical and embark on
critical investigation.

Otherwise, we are prone to be gullible and even defend
embarrassing garbage, perhaps more than the hoaxers ever
conceived was possible.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:42:37 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:28:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Ed Gehrman
 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:51:34 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:58:17 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:54:13 -0800 (PST)
 >>From: Rebecca Keith
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Previously, a very patient Rebecca wrote:

 >>actually Ed, I don't have to prove anything a hoax, it is up to
 >>Ray to prove his claims, something he has failed to do!

To which Ed replied:

 >I thought we were trying to find out if the film was legitimate
 >or not. What if we only had the film and were trying to prove it
 >was what it seemed to be. No Ray, no cammeraman, just the film
 >and the cannisters it came in. What would we do then?

Well, Ed, to a degree, that's where we are right now!

Ray's participation in his own defense is non existent. So,
there's no Ray. On top of that, Ray refuses to reveal the
identity of the cameraman.

So... No Ray. No Cameraman..... No proof.

It's all well and fine to say, "Let's pretend that there's no
Ray and the self imposed notoriety that surrounds him and, by
extension, AA."

But the truth is, we can't. And that doesn't mean that we are
mean spirited or that we don't want the truth about AA. It's
simply that truth is relative to the available information.
Since Santilli has provided only the information he wants us to
have, you can't get bent out of shape by the "truth" we've
arrived at.

On the other hand, you want to supplant Santilli's known
information with information of your own making in order to
change the "truth" we've arrived at. It doesn't work that way.
Santilli has no evidence to back his claims and neither do you.
In fact, you have even less.

Let me ask you a question. Why do you defend someone that has
the means but won't defend himself? All Ray has to do is reveal
the identity of the cameraman so the story can be checked out.
Don't you find it more than a bit suspicious? After all, you
maintain that Ray is confused and frightened. If so, then why
not spill the beans? If Ray is telling the truth, then the best
way to vindicate himself is to provide the proof that only he
supposedly has access to. To not do so reveals more about
Santilli's motives than you are obviously willing to accept.

I'm sure your intentions are just, but I feel you are wasting
your time.

I think Rebecca has been very patient, considering.

Take care,
Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                          Filer's Files #50 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 22:53:18 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:43:24 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #50 -- 1999


Filer's Files #50 -- 1999,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
December 17, 1999,  Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Visit our Website at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
Free Daily UFO/ET Newsletter via E-mail! http://www.ufonetwork.com/
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

NOTE: I would like to point out that these files contain initial
reports from concerned people who spend a considerable bit of effort
and time to report their sightings.  They have observed,
photographed, or video taped unidentified flying objects (UFOs).  A
UFO is not necessarily an alien craft, it may be any type of various
phenomenon such as plasmas, Earth lights, classified aircraft,
blimps, etc. The cases are investigated whenever possible and only a
small portion are determined to be truly unidentified.  This
investigation may take weeks or even years.  Often these initial
reports are supported by others observers, creating a stronger case
for a particular UFO.  Hundreds of reports are received each month
from high quality observers.
---George Filer

Arthur C. Clark stated, "We are either alone in the universe or we
are not.  Either case is over whelming!"


TWENTY THREE OUT OF THIRTY  ONE MARS PROBES FAIL

My experience chasing a UFO while in the Air Force has led me to
believe that we are not alone in the universe.  I attempt to show
evidence that supports this belief.  Officially, NASA, the US
Government, most scientists, and numerous Ufologists feel that I'm
wrong, and I admit I may be in error.  I certainly could be, but
many people who I never thought would agree with my perspective are
sending letters of support.  By far the hardest people to convince
are those who claim to be Ufologists. This phenomena is a valid one
that's needs investigation using scientific instruments and
research.  The phenomena is real and in my opinion the evidence
exists in space, on Mars, and here on Earth.  The scientific images
of a large cylindrical shaped object taken by the Soviet's Phobos 2
scientific mission to Mars is virtually the same cylindrical shaped
object described by a witness in the Florida story below.  These
images and testimony could be used in a court of law and should be
considered as scientific evidence as well.  The objects are reported
by hundreds of witnesses each month.  Insiders seem very worried and
encourage these reports.

NASA claims they are searching for intelligent life on Mars with
something like 15 Billion dollars of the taxpayer's money.  I can
only assume these are competent scientists with advanced technology.

On December 16, 1999, I phoned Doug Isbelle at NASA Public
Relations (407 867-2468) who told me that better than 90 percent
of all missions sent into space are successful. He did admit
that something like 23 out of 31 probes going to Mars have
failed. Only eight got through for a 26% success rate.  I
explained my theories that someone or something was laying in
wait near Mars, and was preventing our space probes from getting
through.  He stated, "There is not much evidence anything is out
there so they are reviewing their technology, computers, mission
management, and the craft themselves to determine why Mars
missions are jinxed.  I told him, I was at one time a Flight
Planner, intelligence officer and flyer that planned flights for
the President of the US, various military transports and
fighters.  All flights were successful to my knowledge.  If we
lost over two-thirds of our aircraft we would have been fired.
I suggested that if you even suspect foul play, you must make
adjustments in how the mission is flown.  There are numerous
penetration techniques that might improve our chances of getting
through to Mars and save billions of dollars.  NASA has already
announced that bacterial life once existed on Mars.  Perhaps it
has grown up?  Furthermore, the 1989, last images from the
Soviet Phobos mission showed a huge cylinder UFO closing on the
Phobos spacecraft just before it stopped operating.  Doug
stated, "That was an old Soviet mission to Mars and not really
of any interest to NASA."  He assured me that they have
decreased the cost of each mission down from the billion dollars
each, and that the newer missions are much more reasonable.  I
wish to point out that Soviet Colonel Maria Popovitch, one of
the world's most famous test pilots appeared on the television
show Hardcopy with a video of a long cigar shaped object that
apparently caused the failure of Phobos 2.  Photos of the UFO
can be seen on my www.filerfiles.com Webpage. Hit, : "Is ET
capturing our Mars Spacecraft?" at the top of the page.

NEW JERSEY

THOROFARE - Nick Altamuro was driving to work on Route 295 on
December 17, 1999, when he spotted a bright pinkish light in the sky
at 7:15 AM.  The light descended vertically and suddenly streaked
off to the northwest disappearing at tremendous speed.  The color
and high speed movement was much faster than any normal aircraft in
the sky and lasted for only 30 seconds.  Thanks to Nick Altamuro
Woodbury, NJ.

PENNSYLVANIA PLASMA UFO

LANSDOWNE -- In a most unusual experience prior to this summer,
myself, my sister Dolores and friend Kathleen Simon watched as a jet
flew due west of Philadelphia. It formed a contrail along its path
from which an object broke off of the trail, just a short distance
behind the jet. Afterwards, the object veered off for about ten to
fifteen seconds and then, vanished.  The object was well defined so
as not to be simply vapor from the trail itself.  This curious event
occurred May 30, 1999, 8:00 PM EST This has been, undoubtedly,
the most outstanding incident in sightings for myself and others here.
Thanks to: Michael Kelly kellyguy65@hotmail.com

On December 15, 1999, at 9:52 PM a friend and helpful assistant
with my UFO Discussion Groups at the local Sidetracks Cafe in
Lansdowne, PA related having noticed a streak of bluegrass light
through the window of her sixth floor apartment.  The light came
from the direction of the roof just left of her window which curved
to the right.  It seemed like a firework and made a popping sound.
She was frightened and couldn't explain it.  Her room glowed,
briefly.  We discussed the possibility of arcing electricity but
didn't come to any conclusion. Michael Kelly
<skyecj@bellatlantic.net>Editors Note: We suspect a buildup of
electrical energy or plasma causes this phenomenon.


VIRGINIA THREE DISCS

DANVILLE -- Adam Clark reports that on November 4, 1999, at 5:30 PM
my friend and I were outside talking when I noticed three disc
shaped objects in the sky.  I told my friend to look and we watched
the three objects for about 30 minutes when the objects flew off.
One of the disc objects was smaller than the other two.  They were
metallic gray in color.  No detail could be seen.  On November 18,
we were outside again and my friend told me to look up, because the
same three objects were in the sky.  We watched them for about 10
minutes around 5:30 PM. Thanks to Adam Clark doc45@gamewood.net


GEORGIA UFO ACTIVITY

NORCROSS -- MUFON State Director Tom Sheets reports that NUFORC has
several recent cases posted from our area to include a November 21,
1999, illuminated object near Highway 141 in Norcross, possible disc
hovered and then accelerated at a tremendous speed.

LAWERENCEVILLE -- On November 24, 1999, a circle shape was observed
near Highway 316.  It was the size of a large car sending out
blinding flashes like lightening strikes.  ASD Mark Ausmus of
Lawrenceville also observed some sort of unusual explosion in the
sky a little over a week ago.  Possibly related to the above is a
witness living outside of Cumming at the south end of Lake Lanier.
He has observed unusual bright multicolored star like objects coming
up above the horizon and then going back down.  Within the last few
days, the witness has observed these darting objects again.

ROME -- A few weeks ago, our Diane Headrick referred a witness to
SSD Janssen in Rome regarding a 'ferris wheel' appearing UFO.

ZEBULON - On December 12, 1999, at 2:10 PM, a dump truck operator
was unloading on County Line Rd. in Pike County.  As he checked his
outside mirror, he noticed a distant object in the sky, his truck
facing to the SW, appearing just over the top of his mirror.  He
stuck his hand out and spread his fingers to measure it's travel
from NE to SW and stated that it went from the tip of thumb to tip
of finger in about 3 seconds.  He continued to watch the object for
about 10 seconds, describing it as round, aluminum color,
glistening in the sun, about 3 times the size of a BB shot or small
ball bearing at arm's length.  The witness indicated that it had no
aircraft like structures such as wings, tail etc.  He had earlier
been watching regular jet liners leaving contrails overhead, and
that the viewing conditions were good in the blue sky. This witness
was an attendee at a recent MUFONGA meeting.


TENNESSEE SILVER CYLINDRICAL UFO

DANDRIDGE -- On December 2, 1999, Patricia G. reports, "At 12:25
PM, I was sky-watching and saw a silver cylinder flying north to
southwest rather flying slowly.  I'm afraid I can't tell the altitude, but it
was large." "At first I thought it might be a jumbo jet, so I looked through
my binoculars, and to my delight there were no wings or tail, just a smooth
silver cylinder.   There was no jetstream or contrail." On Wednesday night,
December 1, Patricia's daughter "saw a blue light that pulsated in the
northeast sky.  She said it was as large as a pencil eraser.  She was
driving home and lost sight of it when she got home."  Thanks to UFO
Roundup Vol. 4, # 33, 12/9/9,  Editor: Joseph Trainor


ALABAMA METEOR

John Thompson writes I think the December 5, 1999, flash was caused
by a bolide.  I believe the meteor blew up between Anniston and
Birmingham. There was no direction to speak of because one or more
pieces fell basically straight down. This would explain why most
people near Montgomery and LaGrange only saw flashes and the folks
in Tennessee only saw a flash. The radio manager down here was in a
totally cleared area he said. He caught the "ball" just barely going
down. In truth, he probably saw it at its highest -- 20 miles or
higher -- and saw it disappeared because of the curvature of the earth
between LaGrange and the location where it blew up at. The deputies
probably saw much the same in Douglas County except they were
looking more to the west whereas the radio man was looking to the
northwest. It might have traveled somewhat down to the west but
I'll bet it was almost a pure vertical free-fall for the ball and
tail into Alabama. We know the bolide wasn't that high because of
the witnesses in Alabama say they heard it only 1 1/2 minutes to 2
minutes later. Simple math of 760 mph for the speed of sound shows
it was not more than 25 miles away when the flash occurred. That's
not that high at all. Joel Vincent said that since the December 5,
explosion he has had lots of callers from Georgia and Alabama saying
that their have been crisscrossed "chem-trials" galore in the sky.
Joel was implied a decontamination effort was under way.  He asked
if I had heard about "cow poop" hitting north of Atlanta in August.
He said he got a call off the air that some stuff that can only be
described as cow manure had seemed to have been hurled to the ground
and splattered. It was not cow manure but it looked like this.
Strange! I told him the Big Birds have returned! I was wondered what
had happened to them. Best Regards, gin@wp-lag.mindspring.


FLORIDA CYLINDER

TAMPA - The witness was driving south on Highway 75, and saw this
cylinder shaped object in very pale muted blue and green cast sky.
It stood out as a huge cylindrical upright object.  It appeared as
if the sky was a fabric and that this object was coming through a
slit in the fabric.  The witness was not sure what could be so huge
and its vertical position like a column was unlike the horizontal
positions of a plane, craft or birds, etc.  It was solid white in
color with a definite outline to it and it did not mover or change
shape.  The witness watched for about five minutes.  The length of
the object at arm's length was about the size of a new pencil, eight
inches by half an inch in width.  The witness also compares the
length of the object to approximately six full moons, at arm's
length. The sighting took place on November 9, 1996, at 9:00 AM.
Thanks to MUFON's Baywatch Newsletter 12/99 editor Fred Miller.


TEXAS GOLDEN FLYING TRIANGLE

SILSBEE -- Sue reports that she observed a UFO, 25 miles north of
Beaumont, Texas on December 10, 1999.  Sue was traveling home from
work when she saw a large golden flying triangle at 5:00 PM.  It
appeared to be heading towards the ground on a fairly steep angle.
She thought it might crash and looked for the smoke or fire and the
sound of a crash, but there was none.  She tried to get her husband
to come outside and look but he doesn't believe in UFOs.  This is
the first time Sue ever saw a UFO.  Sue said, "This is my first
sighting ever."  Thanks to: SANKYSUE13

HOUSTON -- On December 10, 1999, at 8:00 - My daughter was looking
at the sky and asked me, "What is that?" and I replied it's the
Moon.  She said, "The moon is to the right!" I looked again and seen
this bright light with what looked like lots of stars or fire maybe,
behind it.  I was amazed. We watched it for about 20 seconds and
went to get my wife and she came out, but it was gone. We stood
there a couple more minutes and saw it again going the other
direction.  First, we saw it coming down.  The second time it was
shooting up.  I can only explain it as a strange feeling.  It looked
more like a rocket landing or missile.  We thought Russia sent one
at us, but the second time we saw it going the other way.  Well, we
were amazed. Thanks to the World Wide UFO Reporting Center


CONTRAILS IN OKLAHOMA AND NEW MEXICO SKY AGAIN

ELK CITY -- was visited again on December 16, 1999, by Contrails.
The contrails were last observed on November 29, 1999, Scarecrow
writes, "I observed a whole sky full of parallel contrails. There
were huge lines in the sky at low level, all parallel. Then there
were contrails crossing the first at right angles causing a checker
board sky. Thanks to Scarecrow "Lions and Tigers and Grays, Oh My!
scarecrow@colaw.net Editor's Note: There are many stories explaining
why Air Force and government aircraft are spraying large areas of
the country with unknown substances.  Some of the best explanations
indicate that some kind of anti-viral, or anti-bacteria spray is
being spread to kill disease or biological warfare agents. See
www.filersfiles.com and www.contrailconnnections.com. link for
photos.


EGYPTIAN PILOTS REJECT SUICIDE

CAIRO -- Egyptian pilots have threatened a US television station
with legal action over a news report into the theory that Egyptian
Flight 990 was brought down by a copilot suicide.  All 217 people
aboard the EgyptAir flight to Cairo died.  The head of the Egyptian
Pilots' Association, Captain Walid Murad rejected a report on CNN,
which said the pilot suicide theory had not been ruled out.  Captain
Murad said: "The association reserves the right to take legal action
against these allegations, which amount to defamation. "These
accusations are unacceptable and I don't know on what they are
basing them."  US television network CNN quoted "two sources
familiar with the investigation" as saying that a recently completed
transcription of the cockpit conversations did not alter the suicide
theory.

The sources said relief copilot Gambol al-Baitty was heard asking
or offering to take the controls half-an-hour after Flight 990 left
New York for Cairo, CNN said.  He was then heard saying "I put my
faith in God's hands", which he uttered "multiple times" before a
series of unexplained maneuvers.  The autopilot was turned off, the
plane went into a dive, the elevators went in different directions
and the engines were turned off, CNN said.  The sources emphasized
that the voice recorder information was not conclusive by it and
acknowledged that there has been considerable debate about the
meaning of the religious phrase, CNN said, EgyptAir president was
not accepting the possibility that one of his pilots was responsible
for the disaster.  He said in an interview published in the Al-Ahram
weekly, that "serious damage" to the aircraft's tail section might
have been the cause of the crash.  He said: "Serious damage to the
tail unit caused, perhaps, by a collision with a solid body, would
explain the rapid descent."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_555000/555823.stm


NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY DEEP SPACE PROBES

Bill Hamilton Executive Director of Skywatch International, Inc.
writes that when I served in the US Air Force in the 1960s I was
assigned to Security Service which reported directly to the National
Security Agency (NSA).  NSA is mainly concerned with signal
intelligence (SIGINT) and uses the finest radio equipment to tune
into the signals transmitted by various military organizations
throughout the world.  These military communications are often
encrypted so that only the intended receiver can decipher them.  We
have heard from various sources that have worked within
compartmentalized NSA projects that NSA may also be interested in
intercepting signals from extraterrestrial sources in order to
maintain national security.  We know from documents released from
FOIA requests that the NSA has maintained an interest in UFOs.  The
mission of tapping some type of signal from UFOs operating within or
without our atmosphere, or from planetary bases of operation is
conceivable.  "There are many intelligence reports that NSA may have
numerous "Deep Space Probes" some reaching beyond the orbit of
Neptune.  The real purpose of these space probes has not been
determined.  NSA/OCR is the reported office responsible for tracking
these probes.  Why then is NSA in deep space when the "threat" as we
know it is centered here in the near Earth environment?  A NSA
source reported that one of these NSA Deep Space Probes detected a
failed parachute on the Mars' Lander.  NSA reported this to JPL, but
JPL did not inform the public.  And, the "Aliens" are reportedly
suppose to have a base on Neptune's moon Triton.  Perhaps these NSA
Deep Space Probes monitor "Alien" activity in our Solar System? A
list of the successful NSA probes can be seen at:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~rigoletto/reports/nsa_deep_space_probes.htm
Thanks to Bill Hamilton: skywatcher22@hotmail.com.


SATELLITE  DISAPPEARANCES

Mike Smeltzer comments that for several years I have watched a growing
list of satellites and space probes just disappear. I watched footage of
the Space shuttle Columbia explosion, only to discover less than one
second before the explosion occurred, two UFO fly past at high speed
(they only appear in two frames of video). This was the real beginnings
of my watching of strange situations unfold (only two weeks after the shuttle
explosion, the Russians watched Chernobyl go into meltdown). The list is
growing. Several Canadian communication satellites just stop broadcasting.
Two CIA black project Mars probes just disappear, one of which was launched
shortly after our Mars probe stopped broadcasting. The other CIA satellite,
after the Russian Mars probe video transmissions stop. The list goes on and
on. Insurance company's are not only just aware of the tremendous lose of
satellites but also the five fold increase in lost aircraft over the past
several
years. I feel some ones or some things are trying to tell us that we are NOT
in control of the skies.  (Snip.) Thanks to Mike Smeltzer <mikes@ptway.com>


AIR FORCE CLAIMS MJ-12 DOCUMENTS FABRICATED

Researcher Joseph Stefula writes: In his book "The F.B.I. Files-The
FBI's UFO Top Secrets Exposed," Nick Redfern, a FBI memo from SAC,
Dallas, to Director, FBI, states they had received copy of a MJ-12
document.  (MJ-12 Documents claim that an alien craft crashed at
Roswell.)  Dallas requested Headquarters discern if the document is
still classified?  Dallas would withhold any investigation in
abeyance until further direction from FBI Headquarters.

FBI Headquarters inquired if the Air Force's AFOSI, Washington, DC,
had any information on MJ12, the FBI would like to know? On November
30, 1988, Headquarters AFOSI advised the FBI that the document was
"fabricated''.  But Special Agent Frank Batten, Chief of the Information
Release Division at the Investigative Operations Center
admitted to Mr. Redfern that AFOSI had no records pertaining to MJ12
or any investigation that the papers were faked.  This situation is
odd to say the least, without any investigation how could Air Force
AFOSI state to the FBI that the MJ12 document was faked?  Redfern
interviewed Col. Dick Weaver (ret).  He , too, conceded, however,
that there were "no documents responsive to Redfern's request for
Air force files on how such a determination was reached."


INVESTIGATION CONTINUES ON SATELLITE OF UFO OR MOON?

Numerous experts have attempted to solve the mystery of the giant
anomalous object picked up on November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z on the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Geosynchronous Orbiting Environmental Satellite (GOES) in orbit
watching the Earth's weather.  Nicla Camerin writes that he had
observed the NOAA Satellite photos above Earth.  These objects are
not the moon.  I looked at the images for the day before and after
at the same time.  If that object had been the moon, it would have
been there on those days as well." The image appears to be a full
disk, and in the left corner you can see another 'spot'.  I zoomed
in, and rendered and seems to be another 'object'.  Do you have any
idea at what timing are get this satellite images? 1/500, 1/1000,
1/8000 etc.  In the full disk 4 seems to be a 'blur'  in the top-left part
instead of the bottom are defined.  In the full disk there seems to be
some kind of heat around the object.  Thanks to Nicla.

  Another person wrote US Military satellites also pick up the Fast
Walkers on a regular basis.  They are the ones knocking out our
satellites.

Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@York U. So does the Moon (about 15%).
Astronomer Rik Hill checked this out and found that our natural
satellite was at the right place, and showing the right phase to
account for the oval image at the time the pix was taken.  The shape
of the object was due to the motion of the Moon, which caused
trailing, even though the Moon phase was nearly Full, so the actual
disk was about circular. The time between pictures was 30 minutes,
not 15 minutes.  Therefore the shifts of the Moon from one picture
to the next are about 15 Moon diameters.

I sent an E-mail request to NOAA for any other images of the full
Earth they have which also include the Moon in the same pictures.
Until then, let's do a quick mathematical check to see if the
alleged UFO Mother Ship was in fact the Moon.

The mean diameter of the Moon is: 3475 km, while the mean diameter
of the Earth: 12,756 km.  The mean distance of the Moon to the
Earth: 384,500 km.  The approximate distance of NOAA's GOES
satellite to the Earth (since it is in geostationery orbit): 35,786
km.  The approximate distance of NOAA's GOES satellite to the Moon
(since the Moon is on the opposite side of the Earth with  respect
to GOES, this will be 384,500 plus 35,786 or): 420,286 km.   From
trigonometry we get: tan X(M) = 3475/420,286 = 8.268 x 10^-3 And tan
X(E) = 12,756/35,786 = 3.564 x 10^-1 where X(M) is the angular size
of the Moon and X(E) is the angular size of the Earth.  From the
inverse tans we get: X(M) = 0.47 degrees  and X(E) = 19.62 degrees,
The ratio in sizes of the Earth to the Moon in the GEOS images
should be 19.62/0.47 = 41.7.  In other words, the Earth should appear
41.7 times larger.  The diameter of the Moon (long axis) on the GEOS
images I downloaded was about 3 mm (plus or minus 0.5 mm) and the
diameter of the Earth was 96 mm (plus or minus 1.0 mm). This gives
ratios as large as 97/2.5 = 38.8 or as small as 95/3.5 =27.1.

Observations: The object in the GEOS images is smaller than what we
would expect for the Moon (assuming there is no pronounced
distortions near the edges of the GEOS images).  Also, the axis of
the nearly full Moon phase (less than two days from Full Moon),
should be parallel to the Earth's N-S axis.  It isn't
(nonsymmetrical distortions?).  Yes, GEOS images of the Earth are
taken every 30 minutes but it does not take up to 30 minutes to take
this image so no trailing of the Moon should be evident.  Note that
the Moon revolves around the Earth once (360 degrees) in just over
27 days so in a 30 minute time frame the Moon would move in the sky
by: (360 degrees / 27 days) / (24 hours x 2) = 0.27 degrees in 30
minutes.  This is about a half Moon diameter, not the 15 Moon
diameters you mention. If we assume it is the Moon in the GEOS
image, since it is a few lunar diameters from the edge of the Earth
and it moves about half a lunar diameter in the sky each 30 minutes,
there MUST be a few more images of the Moon in GEOS images taken
before and after this one. Conclusion: The object in the GEOS image
(taken November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z cannot be easily explained as
the Moon - it remains a UFO.  Nick Balaskas, Physics and Astronomy,
York University Thanks to Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>

There is some disagreement if the moon will show up on infrared.
Anyone know?  The Photos are located at:
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c01.jpg
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c03.jpg
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c04.jpg


 >>>> Reach thousands with your message! Filer's Files can be
sponsored. Reasonable rates. Please E-mail Majorstar@aol.com for
more information today!


RARITAN NEW JERSEY VIDEO - Extraordinary eight minutes of video
taken on V Day (Veterans Day) by Reverend Damian Barna.  This is an
extraordinary UFO video shot 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 video was taken at 4:50 PM over
Raritan Center.  This is an extraordinary tape of very strange UFO
activity. Mail your check for $19.95 for your copy of the video to:
Reverend Barna, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ. 08055.


KECKSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA CRASH TAPE -- UFO crash/retrieval Video
Documentary Most readers of this column are familiar with the
Roswell event, but many are unaware that a similar incident occurred
in Pennsylvania in 1965, near a small rural community called
Kecksburg.  Veteran UFO researcher Stan Gordon, has been gathering
information on this case for many years, and has produced a studio
made 92 minute video called "Kecksburg The Untold Story."  This
production recently won the 1998 EBE film award for the Best
Historical UFO Documentary.  A startling revelation is revealed here
from a witness, who says he saw a body in the building at Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base only days after it was delivered there.  Send a
check or money order to: Stan Gordon Productions, Dept. GF, P.O. Box
936, Greensburg, PA 15601. The cost is $35.90.  For more info
check out Stan's Website at www.westol.com/~paufo


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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:01:40 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:52:41 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


Members,

After reviewing the 20 or so posts of this lively and
interesting thread, I was forcibly grabbed by this thought:

For 55 years we have been witnessing a continuous outpouring of
phenomena and events.  The top media go against every basic
tenet of their profession, turn away and refuse to engage it.
The university leadership cower at any possible inclusion of the
field in their realm.  The politicians will literally flee the
podium rather than respond intelligently to the issues raised.
The government has tied itself up with so many lies, it will
take a new and separate agency just to sort them out.

And then, out of this cauldron of fear, elitist self delusion,
avoidance, failure and subversion; a few, then many, then a
torrent of basic citizens - with reluctance and trepidation -
step forward and say, "This is happening to me.  It troubles me,
it harms me, it elates or confuses me.  Will someone help?   Can
someone assist me to understand?

A very good case could be made that these experiencers,
abductees, or whatever they wish to be called, are the only
"sane" people involved in this ongoing human fiasco.

Steve Bassett







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:20:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:58:41 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:17:02 -0600
 >From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:24:31 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

I said:

 >>Why doesn't someone point out that many "abductees" are mentally
 >>ill or unstable. Many are, also, lonely and sad people who seem
 >>to have some kind of sexual hang-ups. There is so much hog-wash
 >>afloat regarding abuctions I can't believe anyone would consider
 >>anything they obtain as being reliable; whatever your position
 >>is on abductions.

<snip>

 >>My own idea of what "abductions" constitute can be seen at:

 >>http://www.isur.com/articles/john_int.html

 >>No, I wouldn't stake my life that is what is happening but it's
 >>far better than anything else I've seen.

 >>John C. Thompson


 >Probably because it isn't true. Most abductees are _not_
 >mentally ill or unstable. _Some_ abductees are. They are in the
 >minority not the majority. Anyone who has done enough work with
 >them including psych workups have found this to be true. The
 >so-called sexual hangups are the result of the sexual abuse of
 >the abductions. Just look at rape victims. They have the same
 >symptoms and problems, only it's a lot harder to get over
 >because it is so bizarre and usually happens multiple times.

I didn't say "most" I said "many." Let's see I had one that
told his shrink that he had been abducted at one place but told
me another. Then on confronting him on this he said he was
embarrassed to tell me about the second encounter because the
giant aliens had told him on their next attempt they were "going
to fix his brain." His shrink didn't believe a word of it; I'm
more neutral. His wife who was frozen during his abduction --he
claimed--never spoke to me to prove she saw him abducted..

Then on the many with "sexual hang-ups" I had one tell me that
he had a naked lady put a metal box on his chest and then the
mean ol' aliens cored out his bottom. I like the guy and I
respect him--he's a real worker and I do believe he believes
what he is telling me-- but he's not all there. It's really
tragic but the guy doesn't have a shred of proof of what he
claims. Others have met him and pretty much agree with my
assessment.

Well, then we have the abductee who's been married for nearly 20
years and was abducted into a big white light. Never told her
husband but told a complete stranger--me--her account.. Her
mother, a shrink, told her she just had a bad nightmare. I think
mom was closer to the truth.

A retired homicide detective and licensed hypnotherapist
wouldn't touch her with a 20 foot pole. His conclusion after
talking to her: She may have been sexually abused when young and
not by aliens. Oh yea: she freely admitted that she was on
anti-depression medicine and once did illegal drugs but not
while she was being abducted. In short, how could anyone call
this person a credible witness? Abduction accounts aren't worth
the paper they're dribbled on if background and reputation
checks aren't made on those who claim to be abducted. Indeed,
all sensational UFO accounts fall in the same category.

Gee, I had one who claimed several years ago that her car was
stopped by a flying saucer. The sucker put out so much heat she
had to roll her windows up to keep the heat out . She, of
course, had a friend with her to verify this. But the friend
didn't want to talk to me because she "might lose her RN job if
word got out." Even her boyfriend verified both of them telling
him of the account and washing "silver dollar" paint spots off
their car because of the intense heat that saucer put out. They
had missing time and thought they might be abducted....

Guess what? You got to know these folks for a long time! Keep
tabs on them. The witness, who signed a standarized UFO case
form, was just arrested for being the get-away driver in an
armed robbery where a man was beaten. I found out through one of
my sources that out of all the lie-dectector tests ever given by
this particular police agency that has arrested her she was the
biggest liar ever seen! Her now ex-boyfriend says, "I don't know
what to believe from her." Yes, I guess we could say this all
came about from the terrible trama related to her assumed
abduction; sure!

Then we have the little engine that wouldn't pull. Now he isn't
crazy he just wants lots of attention. He read Fate magazines
all his life and almost conned me. He really had cooked one up.
Even went to the point of waking an old lady up to tell her he
had seen a UFO and was missing time. Told the police too about
seeing his UFO. But the little ol' lady and her son, the Bank VP
who was there when the little engine who couldn't pull came in,
said he didn't remember seeing anything strange on the
abductee's pickup. (He had claimed that splotches were left on
it but the truck was gone before I met him.). They didn't
remember the cinnamon smell his mother said was all over his
clothes the next day. That's because he got the cinnamon idea
from Whitneys' first book and doused himself between leaving the
lady's house and arriving at his own home.

Well, I got so taken in by his bull I tried to make this guy a
UFO investigator.

Big mistake! Never allow an abductee to investigate anything!

I found the strangest things: He had witnesses saying things
they never said!

When not enough, embellish, embellish!

Then mom told me that he lived in HER house and she didn't want
him to be making long-distance calls anymore as she was all out
of money. Real crunch time came when the Atlanta Journal
Constitution writer met him and concluded rightly the guy was a
flake. He wrote him out of the story and Mr. Abductee didn't
show up for his coming out party in Atlanta where he was going
to tell all to the world. Around the same time he abruptly quit
running for city coucil two days before the election because his
old buddy the police chief threatened him. The police chief was
going to plant "four pounds of marijuana" in his car to stop him
from cleaning up corruption in their fair community. You get the
idea: the little engine who couldn't pull always had a script
where he was going to save the world. Last I saw he was still
living at mom's house.


 >As far as stories holding up, what would you do if it happened
 >to you and all you had to show for it was marks on your body,
 >strange pregnancies, and the occasional implant. I think you
 >need to do a better job of selecting what sources your data
 >comes from. Check with John Carpenter. He has accounts where
 >people have witnessed the abductions of others without
 >themselves being abducted and they fully conscious during the
 >event.


I don't need to talk to John Carpenter, Mack, Hopkins or whoever
else you want me to talk to. I do my own investigations and am
bored to tears with abduction accounts. They got their views, I
got mine. By-the-way all those "abductees" of above signed
standarized MUFON case forms or other similar forms and
consented to video testimoney; didn't make any difference.

Now when we come to those who only claim to see entities, the
score is better. Their basic story is "I saw a shadow or
something similar and I don't know what it was." Oh yea: Most
have a thought that what they saw was evil. Jacobs is on to
something here.

On marks on body never saw any that could be conclusively proven
to come from aliens. Much is coincidence; much like all the
physical trace events; horse hockey. If is was all over as many
claim I would have seen it in my 120 plus formal investigations
in Georgia and Alabama. Nothing is ever conclusive about
physical evidence or physical abductions. I'm sorry but it's
just not there. . I started out believing and became skeptical
after so many sensational claims falling through. I predict if
you do many cases you will come back to where you rightfully
began: a skeptic regarding physical abductions. Abductions are a
mental process pure and simple, if anything. I could spend 20
pages expanding but this is enough. My work can be seen at
htpp://www.isur.com

Nearly all my work has been peered review at one time or
another; even by the director of the Georgia Emergency
Management Agency who said my report on an 8/2/99 mystery boom
near LaGrange, Georgia was "thorough." Considering I told him
that his Agency and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation were
dead wrong on concluding the 8/2/99 blasts were caused by a
meteor I'd say my work must not be too shabby..

I should point out that ISUR or MUFON, who I sent about 90
UFO/entity/abduction signed reports to, do not necessary endorse
or agree with my views. I am solely responsible for my own
investigations and where they have taken me. I let the evidence
or lack of evidence drive me; not what I, perhaps, would like to
believe. I do believe there are reliable UFO reports.

What they are remains unknown..










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:42:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:46:10 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:01:40 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory - a comment
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Steve writes:

 >Members,

 >After reviewing the 20 or so posts of this lively and
 >interesting thread, I was forcibly grabbed by this thought:

<snip>

 >A very good case could be made that these experiencers,
 >abductees, or whatever they wish to be called, are the only
 >"sane" people involved in this ongoing human fiasco.

 >Steve Bassett

Hi Steve,

You have no idea how rarely that 'theory' of yours gets tabled!
It has never ceased to amaze me how the possibility that 'some
folks' are simply reporting the truth of events they had to live
through, is beyond consideration for so many.

I 'see' your comment and I 'raise' you one! :)

We live in a world where the basest aspects/parts of humanity
are given all the press, emphasis and attention. Everybody is so
leery and paranoid of one another that a simple concept like
"taking a man or woman at their word" is almost universally
accepted as a patent absurdity. The 'Law of the Land' re:
experiencers is, "guilty until proven innocent!" If it was the
other way around, we would have gotten a serious and thorough
investigation long before now.

You read the list. We are basically the brunt of jokes, pity,
derision, and (even more recently,) a form of extreme 'right
wing' skepticism that proposes: "Let's lock all of them sexual
pervs up in mental institutions and forget em" type of thing.
You know, the run of the mill 'Party Line' for card carrying
morons and _bigots_.

Thank you for giving us the benefit of the doubt. I don't
encounter it often. Most are so preoccupied looking for an
'angle' that they never quite get the import/implications of
dismissing or ignoring what is being reported. It _never_ occurs
to them that what they are hearing from their neighbors "may be"
the _accurate_ reports of _honest_ men and women who care enough
about their fellows to risk ridicule and social rejection.

As far as I'm concerned the biggest contribution I can make to
society right now is to 'report' and stand my ground no matter
what the personal cost. It's that important.

John Velez, Graphic artist, self employed business person,
homeowner, married 30 years, father of two, grandfather of two,
abductee.

________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                      An Exceptional Abduction and SETI

From: Larry Robson <robsons@poco-a-poco.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 10:01:41 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 08:30:17 -0500
Subject: An Exceptional Abduction and SETI


As a member of the Planetary Society and a dedicated UFO
researcher, I am of course very interested in the investigation
of extraterrestial life from both ends of the empirical
enquiry. Having witnessed myself the flight of an extraordinary
disc in broad daylight, quite beyond any technology that we
possess, and therefore having no doubt that contact is
underway, I have the greatest respect for those who logically
come the conclusion that life must be out there and patiently
seek to gather evidence for it in a scientific way, having had
no experience of it to drive them forward.

One such observer is Tim Ferris, who has done much to promote
the search for extraterrestial intelligence and in an article
in the current Planetary Report (The Planetary Society's
Magazine Vol XIX Number 6) says in response to the question of
what attracted him to the subject of extraterrestial life:"One
of the things that troubles me most about this subject is that
the human species has only begun to learn how to think about
it. I'm most often asked if I believe there is life out there,
and that's the WRONG question. Questions of belief have their
place in life, but they are wholly irrelevant to questions of
what might be out there. I've always couched the question in
empirical terms.

For scientific and philosophical reasons, WE WON'T UNDERSTAND
OURSELVES UNTIL WE KNOW ABOUT EXTRATERRESTIAL LIFE (my capitals
L.J.R.)

If you are still reading bear this in mind and read on:-

This article by Jorge Martin first appeared in EVIDENCIA OVNI
(Puerto Rico) numbers 9 10 11(1995-1996). When it was first
published in Puerto Rico and later in this country the two
ladies concerned prefered to be quoted under the pseudonyms
Myriam and Sonia Rivera. The reason for this may well have been
that "Myriam" (Marleen) had become Jorge Martin's wife. It was
translated from Spanish by Gordon Creighton and published in
the Flying Saucer Review Volume 43/1 Spring 1998 and again
drawn attention to in The Flying Saucer Review Volume 44/3
Autumn 1999. Gordon Creighton, Editor of the Review, has given
permission for this article to be published.

I have chosen to omit Marleen's mother's account, brimming with
unimpeded detail, simply because I am wilting with the effort
of reproducing this. However her mother gave us a very
important date which I feel obliged to quote..."August 16th of
the year 2010. On that date many things are going to happen"

Back numbers of the Flying Saucer Review are available on order
from http://www.corpex.com/users/archmage/fsr/fsrhome.htm
should anyone wish to have the full translation. I stress this
is not an advertising gimmick. There are useful details in the
mother's account but the essential message was given to
Marleen. Larry Robson.

Jorge Martin writes:Throughout the entire history of the study
of the UFO Phenomenon there have been certain cases of
encounters with these devices and their occupants which present
extremely interesting angles, inasmuch as they appear to be
related to the Spiritual, the Transcendental....

These cases have led some students of the subject to ask
themselves whether the phenomenon may not fit with the
conception of a manifestation, on our physical plane of
existence from Superior or Angelic levels. This following case
from Puerto Rico which we now present, and which has been
investigated by us, reveals certain aspects which might imply
precisely that possibility. We invite you to read and study it,
and reflect on the information that is given.

A few years ago we have already published some details of a
case of what, up until that time, had seemed to be merely a
matter of teletransportation (the paranormal and sudden
transportation of persons or objects to another place distant
in time and space.)

It involved a young woman (NOW the wife of Jorge Martin Editor
of Evidencia Ovni Puerto Rico but at that time unknown to him
L.J.R.) and her mother as they were travelling in their car
along Puerto Rico Highway No. 2 in the Bayamon area, right
behind the West Bayamon Commercial Centre, at about 7p.m. one
day in the Summer of 1979-80.

They were going from the capital San Juan,to the municipal
region of Florida. The young woman was taking her mother there
so that her uncle - the mother's brother - might look after
her, as she was suffering from a grave state of mental
depression. The father had recently died, and this had been
such an emotional shock for the wife that she was unable to get
over it, and had fallen into this profound depression and now
weighed only 85lbs.In despair the daughter prayed for her
recovery. the shock of losing her mother would be unbearable.
So she removed her mother form the sanatorium where she was
being treated and was now taking her westward to the uncle,
with the plan to leave the car with her too, for the uncle to
use if necessary. Another person (who prefers to remain
un-named at present) was following them in a second car, in
order to bring the daughter back to San Juan.

As we were saying, just as they were at Hato Tejas, at a point
behind the Commercial Centre there, the mother and daughter
suddenly found everything becoming dark and obscure, and
everything seemed to have vanished from view - the road, the
trees, the street lamps - everything!

They began to hear a strange humming noise, and to feel queer
themselves. As Marleen recalls it," the car seemed too light.
She could not feel as if they were on the road, and she was
very confused. She asked her mother what she thought was
happening, but the mother did not answer, and simply sat there,
gazing ahead, "as though in a trance". On the other hand, the
mother said the very same thing about her daughter!

A mysterious bluish-white light entered the car, and the next
thing that they both remembered was being still in the car and
seeing the roed and trees and the street lamps reappearing
before them. But they were now arriving at Arecibo, and they
had no idea how they got there! Looking at their watches, they
saw that it was 9.30 p.m. Two-and-a-half hours had
elapsed...and they had no memory of what had occurred during
that period.

For years they both continued wonder what could have happened.
But this situation changed when, at last, in the summer of
1994, both ladies - separately underwent a number of sessions
of regressive hypnosis. We present below, the revelations which
were derived from these sessions of hypnosis:-

(To avoid the "contamination" of the statement of either of
them, it was decided that each one of them should undergo her
sessions separately from the other, and that neither of them
would know anything about what the other one had said until the
hypnosis sessions were over. We were thus able to be quite
certain that the information arising from each of them would be
totally independent and free of any influence by details
furnished by the other.)

The sessions of hypnosis were conducted by the well known
hypnotist, Manuel Mendez del Toro, assisted by myself.


HYPNOSIS SESSION WITH MARLEEN LOPEZ DE MARTIN

Under hypnosis she remembered that she wa driving her 1974
Montecarlo car along the Hato Tejas sector,when everything
became dark and obscure, she was no longer aware of the
road,and all she could see was a faint mistiness around the
car, and all she could hear was a loud hum.

Then a bluish-white light came down and invaded the car. and
she asked her mother what was happening, because she could not
understand it. But her mother, gave no answer, and seemed to be
in a trance.

The a brilliant ray of white light came into the car from the
right side, and enveloped the mother who disappeared!

Terrified and bewildered, Marleen looked out of the car, and
saw that hanging above it was a large flting object of a
metallic silvery grey colour.

At that same time another beam of light enveloped her too.
Terrified, she tried to hunch doe into the corner of the car
and puther arms up to protect her face, and found herself going
out of the car through the roof - passing through it as though
it did not exist.

At this point she shouts, weeping and distraught with fear,
"What's this! What's this!...(sobs, desperation)...Where's
Mama?"

Glancing back she saw that the car was floating in the air
there, at a great height, very close to the huge round object!
And far below in the distance she could see faint white lights
- the street lamps and lights in the houses.

Terrified, she went on weeping and asking what was going on,
unable to make any sense of it. She looked up again at the
flying object, and saw that a door in the side of it was
starting to open.

Then, to her amazement, she saw that there was a very strange,
very tall figure standing in the doorway. He was a humanoid
being, about six feet in height, and very white, very slim. He
had a large head, somewhat rounded, dark eyes not very big, and
a gentle tender mien and look. His mouth was very small, almost
imperceptable, with a soft smile, and his nose was like ours,
but very small. He had long arms, and hands with fingers like
us, but long. He did not appear to have clothing, and his
entire skin was of a pale grey, whitish shade. "He is very
dainty, delicate", says Marleen.

Addressing her mentally, the grey being said: "Come with me.
Don't be afraid. We aren't going to harm you. Don't worry", and
she felt he was speaking truthfully, and at once felt calm and
at great peace. She said: "I felt great goodness emanate from
that being".

He stretched out his hands, gripping them gently, lovingly, and
took her into the flying saucer. She felt even calmer now. Once
they were inside, he continued to tell her, telepathically, in
a voice that sounded masculine, but yet tender, that she should
not be afraid, that everything was going to be alright, and
that nothing bad was going to happen to her

Marleen asked about her mother, and he assured her that her
mother was there too,that she should not be fearful on her
account, and that all was well with her.

The entire interior of the craft was a pearly-silver shade,
very beautiful.

The next thing that Marleen remembered is that a number of
others of the "Grey" type appear, similar to the tall one, but
very small, only about 3 1/2 feet high, and together with the
tall one they take her up a little curved passage to a round
chamber on one of the walls of which there is a curved
protuberance which appears to be a "sort of seat that comes out
from the wall itself."

In fact everything in the chamber appears to be moulded in one
piece, with the sole exception of a small metallic bed, with
something like a white sheet on it, standing in the middle of
the chamber. Beside the bed there is a small metallic table
with a tray, also of metal, and silvery colours "like stainless
steel" with many strange instruments, many long small rods, and
something resembling a compass.

Marleen continues: "In the chamber there are more of the little
beings, very graceful; they emanate a great sensation of love
and peace. They too talk to me mentally. They tell me that they
are going to help me."

The "tiny ones" lift Marleen up under the arms and carry her to
the small bed, where a source of very bright light is placed
upon her head. And there the tall being and the little ones
examined her physically and, at a given moment introduced the
sort of very fine, long metallic rods into various parts of her
body: her feet, knees, elbows,and especially into the abdomen,
through a point corresponding to the position of the ovaries.
They explain that they are giving her an energy reinforcement.
so as to improve the condition of her organism.

Furthermore they took samples from her body with the same
little rods. Then the small beings brought some strange
instruments resembling clamps like those that are put on the
legs of people having any sort of orthopaedic problem, and
fitted them onto her legs, while the tall being continues to
tell Marleen not to be afraid, that she was ill, but they now
are curing her with that instrument.

She said : "Those things had a rectangular metallic plate on
which the feet were put, and on the upper end thay had five
little rings, as it were, and they put my toes into the
rings...they have some pins on them, and they put them in and
they close them on my legs above the knees"

Instantly, as they fixed the devices on her legs, Marleen felt
a powerful heat or energy rising up throughout her entire body,
seemingly passing up through her bones. The sensation was a
strange one, no pain or discomfort, but indeed rather pleasant.
(Ever since she was a small child, Marleen had been suffering
severe pain in the bones of her legs and in her joints, but the
doctors had never been able to diagnose the cause of the pain.)

On the right-hand wall of the chamber, several of the "little
greys" were manipulating machines like computers with lots of
little lights. Marleen said: "it was just like a laboratory,
and there they were, at those little machines with the little
lights , working away... On the other (left-side) side there
was nothing - just the wall with the seat attached to it. At
the extreme right of the left-hand side there was a gap - a
curvature - showing that part led into another chamber.


EXAMINATION HEALING AND EXPLANATION OF IT ALL

Gazing tenderly at her, the tall "Grey" said: "You have got
what your people call cancer of the bones, but don't be afraid,
we are curing you, because you have got to be well for some
very important work that you are going to have to do in the
future, and you need to be in complete good health to do that
work.

"In the future you are going to meet a person who is also doing
very important work, and who will make known something very
important for mankind; he will reveal the relationship that you
humans have with us, and you will have to join with him in
order to be able to help him carry out his job.

"You are both going to have to inform people about the reality
of our existence. This person has come to do this very
important work, which will be connected with information, with
the process of evolution, and with changes that are going to
take place in your world."

Marleen asked where her mother was, and the being answered:
"Don't have any fears about her. She is here too. She is very
seriously ill, but we are curing her, because her condition
also affects you very greatly, and if anything were to happen
to her, you would not be in the right condition for carrying
out that important work that you will have to do in the future.
And that is why we are curing her too."

Thereupon one of the small beings handed to the tall one an
instrument "resembling a compass" and placed it on Marleen's
forehead. Instantly the strange instrument began to emit
flashes, while the tall being explained to her that "this is
for the psyche (apparently for some psychic effect), it will
deepen your intuition even further." It was a metallic thing, a
silvery grey, but long V with something curving across it like
a compass.

After that they let her sit up in bed, and at that moment
another being of completely human appearance, came into the
chamber. He was about six feet tall and very handsome, with a
rosy pink complexion, light greenish eyes and fair hair, and
with a very tender countenance and smile. He was wearing a
shining white tunic, and he projected a sensation of enormous
love.

Meanwhile, the tall "Grey" was explaining to Marleen who they
were, and why they were here. He said: "All of us are working
together (the tall "Greys", the little ones, and the beings of
human type) in a great mission."

He went on to explain that his species spercifically, is a
very, very ancient race, in a very high grade of development,
already close to the creation, on a quasi-spiritual plane, and
that they do not come from any spercific point in our physical
universe (i.e. giving her to understand that his species
transcends the dimensional planes.)

He also explained that his species is working "in one of
creation's plans which watches over the continuity of the
evolution of the worlds and of the races that inhabit them, and
that they are very near to the Originator, the Creation.

He said: "We have many problems with your world (the earth),
for it has been very difficult for us to help both yourselves
as a species, and the planet itself, to evolve. You have fallen
into a vicious circle due to your excessive materialism, which
does not permit you to transcend, to grow, to enter upon the
process of evolution. This time the process is irreversible. It
has got to work... the whole Globe itself , and yourselves as a
race, are going to enter into a new vibratory dimension."

"If you do not develop a consiousness of the spiritual world,
side-by-side with your consciousness of the world of matter,
then you will not survive, many, many lives will be lost, for
the vibrational shock, which will be reflected on the physical
plane, will be so great that you will be unable to stand it,
you will be unable to transcend...and you will die.

"Only by raising the level of your consciousness through
knowledge, will you be able to refine yourselves vibrationally
and be capable of transcending this process. The moment is
approaching and there is almost no time left to prepare
yourselves. The work that that person will be doing, will help
you all understand where you come from... your relationship to
us... and to the universe."

"The origins of your species and of earth are far, far older
then you have all been led to believe to believe, because the
Earth, and you, have evolved three times and then fallen back
three times and started afresh. The archealogical remains that
your people have found and have investigated are only the most
recent remains of the most recent of the vanished
civilisations, of the last attempts at evolution on the
planet... but there are far, far more."

"The origins of the evolution of the Earth and of the human
beings inhabiting it, have undergone interventions by beings
from other worlds and from other planes of existence who have
come to help you evolve.

"On various occasions those other species have mingled with
you, have crossbred with you, and your Authorities (not
necessarily covert government L.J.R.) know this but don't want
to reveal it because they want to maintain their own total
control, and knowledge of all this would bring down the entire
system of power and manipulation which they have created in
order to control the human beings, their own terrestrial
brethren.

"But the change which is coming, IS ALREADY IRREVERSIBLE, and
this time it has got to succeed. And the terrestrial humans
have got to develop a consciousness, but in order to grow and
evolve, the terrestrial human must be conscious of who he is,
and from whence he really comes, in order to be able to enter
into the Light Ray, the vibration which has to carry him
towards God. The human beings must break away from material
things, if not they will not be able to enter into that
vibration, that divine energy."

While the tall being was explaining all this to Marleen, she
saw him suddenly light up, become transfigured, and a beautiful
aura of light enveloped him, and simultaneously she felt a
powerful sensation of love and goodness emanating from him. "It
was something sublime - you could see it, feel it, that he was
very, very wise...with a lofty level of spirituality - very
lofty. I never felt, here on earth, the love, the goodness that
emanated from himself."

He also told me that there are other beings, resembling
themselves, who are doing things with our governments, and that
this ought not to be happening, for the other species, less
evolved than they are, has a very grave problem, which has led
them to form an association with governments of the earth in
exchange for something they need.

"He said that our governments have availed themselves of those
beings and of their need, and have managed to secure for
themselves technical information which is hightly dangerous for
anyone in that state of consciousness in which we ourselves are
at present.

"He assured her that he and his people had no connection
whatsoever with that other species that resembles them, and
that they condemn the activities of those others here."

The tall being went on to describe some of the physical changes
that are coming upon the Earth. Then they let Marleen get
dressed again. Standing close by was the tall, fair "human"
type being,wearing a pearly-white coloured tunic of some
shining material like linen. The tunic fitted tighly at the
neck, and gathered on the chest in pleats,and with long sleeves
down to the wrists. On his feet he had gilded sandals.

The tall "Grey" told Marleen that this other type of being
(fair "human" type) are another species of humans, very
evolved, and related to us terrestial humans, and that these
highly evolved ones are working together with the tall Greys to
assist the evolution of the Earth and of the Earth's
inhabitants. He explained furthermore that these fair
extraterrestrial humans, although originating from a very
distant place in the Universe, actually also have a base on
Mars.

And because they are brethren of our own species, although more
evolved the we are, having already passed through the
evolutionary stage through which we are present going, they
want to help us take this forward step.

In order to make certain facets of their work here easier, they
mingle with our populations and interact with us socially,
bringing about certain changes, inasmuch as, being so like us,
they are able to pass so easily for terrestrial. All this helps
them speed up their work here.

The tall "Grey" remained behind in the examination chamber
along with some of the little ones, and the tall Blond,
accompanied by a few of the little "greys", took Marleen to a
part of the craft which she thought would be the front - a
curved chamber with many control panels and a wide curved
window. In addition there were a lot of chairs set in rows in
the rear part of this chamber, with five or six of the little
greys standing there watching Marleen and the blond man.

To her right was the entrance through which she had been
brought into the craft by the tall "Grey". Looking through that
entrance, she saw that the craft was standing - landed
somewhere high up, and in the distance down below she could see
what seemed to be a village with very nice little houses.

Looking out through the wide curved window, she could see a
lovely landscape, with great mountains, of which the highest
had snow on its summit. The tall blond being told her mentally
that they were at a very high spot in the Swiss Alps. Down
below the craft, there was a very deep precipice, in a hollow
between the mountains. She was unable to see the bottom, but
the tall blond told her:

"Down there, right at the foot of this precipice, is the
entrance to one of our bases in your world. That's where our
craft go in and out. We have another of our main bases in your
country (Puerto Rico) The entrance to it is in a very deep spot
under the sea, but one can also get to it via the ground, under
one of the mountains"

"People from your Governments have tried to penetrate our base
there, but they have never succeeded so far. There are
individuals in the Governments of your world who don't want to
see this change take place which has simply got to occur for
you and your world to evolve to a higher and more spiritual
level.

" They want to maintain the present state of affairs so as to
be able to go on controlling and manipulating everybody. the
only things they are interested in are economic and political
power, for their own benefit - nothing else.

"And those other beings who are working with them (i.e. the
other variety of "Greys") are helping them too with the aim of
preventing the coming of this change, this evolutionary leap
forward.

"But the change has got to come - for if it doesn't, you would
be preventing many other worlds from being able to follow you
too in the evolutionary chain. You are not alone...and what you
do affects others.

"For that reason the change has got to happen this time. The
process is already an irreversible one."

Marleen and her mother were reunited, and the tall blond took
them back into the craft, which shortly afterwards touched down
on a beautiful spot rather like an extensive beach. And there
Marleen and her mother had an even more astounding experience.
For they found the husband and father who had died nine months
previously - in September 1978.

During the last years of his life, he had been severely wounded
in the Korean War, was quite unable to walk. Now he ws walking
perfectly as he came towards Marleen and took her into his
arms. Marleen was in tears, for she had not felt strong enough
to bear going to see him in hospital just before his death - or
even to attend the funeral - and she felt very guilty over
that....

The craft finally put both the women down during the night,
right beside their 1974 Montecarlo car.

The next thing of which became aware - without the benefit of
hypnosis - was that she was once more driving the car, with her
mother sitting beside her.

Marleen glanced at her watch. It was 9.30p.m.,and they were
just coming into Arecibo! They had no knowledge whatsoever as
to how they had come to be there, and of course no knowledge of
anything which had been happening (and which has just been
described).

Terrified and confused, Marleen turned back an drove off to her
uncle's home in Florida, which lies inland to the south-east of
Arecibo.

Postscript:

It is thought (with good reason) that information derived from
hypnotic regression should be treated with the utmost caution.
However, if one accepts that abductions are occuring, as strong
circumstantial evidence shows, then serious researchers are in
danger of throwing out the baby of communion for the bathwater
of yet another fleeting observation. No one wants to be made a
fool of. Contact with alien beings, so likely to be full of
misperception, deception, and gullibility, provides those
seeking credibilty (witnesses and researchers alike) with a
powerful motive for denial and skepticism. Professional
researchers are particularly vulnerable.

As a pious atheist, (to quote Jonathen Miller), I do not find
it hard to believe that Angels require a base on Mars nor that
"getting close to the Creation" (the Big Bang) produces
profound knowledge, as witness the mind experiments of our
physicists. Nor do I find it difficult to cope with the idea of
an advanced civilisation providing those of us capable of
perceiving it, with a vibrational lifeline in the event of a
necessary short term calamity to our civilisation. (I am sure a
Christian would find echos in "It is easier for a rich man to
pass through the eye of a needle then into the kingdom of
heaven")

I earnestly recommend anyone who wishes to cross the bridge
from speculative guess work to a practical understanding in
this field, to study "The Sensory Order" An Inquiry into the
Foundations of Theoretical Psychology by F.A.HAYEK. (Routledge
and Kegan Paul) Larry Robson












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:06:38 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:15:17 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy
 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:38:24 -0600
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:33:12 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:55:25 -0600
 >>>From: Roger Evans
 >>>Subject: The Drake Equation
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously, I offered:

 >>>For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to
 >>>find sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing
 >>>should survive.

<snip>

 >Hi, Dennis.

 >I think you miss my point. Science assumed that no carbon based
 >life form could survive in the high temperatures of "thermal
 >spouts". Now, of course, it's known as fact. Likewise regarding
 >carbon based organisms found surviving the tremendous pressures
 >at the bottom of the ocean. According to science, they shouldn't
 >exist. But they do.

I do not recall "science" or any particular scientists
disallowing life at high pressures. I could be wrong, but I've
never heard anyone argue that before... maybe that was the
belief one or more centuries ago. As long as the internal
pressure of an organism pretty much matches his environment,
there's no problem. -LH

 >We simply can't use the development of Earth as the litmus for
 >worlds we haven't seen when the world we've seen for thousands
 >of years still holds so many contradictions to scientific

 >And if we're wrong about "life as we know it" here on our own
 >planet, then "life as we DON'T know it" must surely be within
 >the realm of possibility on other planets; even seemingly
 >hostile ones.

 >When one begins to include the possibility of non-carbon based
 >life forms, even more opportunities present themselves.

 >Regarding your assumption about underwater metal work; obviously
 >you are unaware of underwater welding? Submerged metal work is
 >done all the time. Besides, I would think working in the
 >relative weightless environment of space would be very familiar
 >to a sea creature like a dolphin! ;)

How about a creature as intelligent as a dolphin say, but with
claws like a crab and/or tentacles like a squid. Its interesting
to speculate what a critter like that might evolve into, given
an environment where smarts is at a premium.

Who knows? Maybe they would make excellent musicians.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                   PRG Programming Announcement - 12/18/99

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:10:03 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:18:48 -0500
Subject: PRG Programming Announcement - 12/18/99


Paradigm Research Group www.paradigmclock.com X-PPAC
www.x-ppac.org

12/17/99

Stephen Bassett, consultant, lobbyist and executive director of
X-PPAC, will speak on the Politics of UFOs/Disclosure and other
topics at the following upcoming venues:


What:  UFO Desk w/ host Paul Williams
              (w/ Peter Gersten, Larry Bryant)
              www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk
When:  Jan. 3, 1999, Monday
              May be available sooner at url:
              www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk
Where: WBAI  FM 99.5 FM
              New York
              www.wbai.org/
Netcast:  www.anomalies.net/~ufodesk


What:   Fox News Cable Channel, One Hour Documentary
When:   Mid December  w/ repeats into January
Where:  Fox News Cable Channel - National


What:   Talk Back with Larry Hughes
When:   Dec 21, 1999, Tuesday, 8:15 am EST
Where:  WEOK AM 1390
               WALL AM 1340
               Poughkeepsie, NY


When:   Dec 18, 1999, Saturday, 9:10 pm EST
What:   CyberCity with Jack Landman
               www.ktsa.com/cybercity.shtml
Where:  KTSA AM 550
               San Antonio
               www.ktsa.com/
Netcast: www.ktsa.com

The PRG / X-PPAC speaking schedule is located at:
http://www.paradigmclock.com/speaking&eventschedule.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 08:53:25 -0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:30:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:42:37 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hello,

Well you're talking about the Alien Autopsy...

I interviewed Mr. Ray Santilli in May and June this year.

I asked him about the identity of the cameraman, besides I told
him that the name could be Jack Barnett, but he died in 1967, so
at first Santilli agree with the name, but then said that he
never would revel the name.

The FOX Network, you can corret me if I'm wrong, made a TV
special trying to expose all the great lies on the 20th century,
and the A.A. was one of then... still in time, the FOX exhibited
the show for the first time!

In that interview Ray claimed that he believed that the film was
real... but he gave us no proof of this.

Roger is right, we must be patient.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:37:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 08:53:25 -0200
 >From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:42:37 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hello,

 >Well you're talking about the Alien Autopsy...

 >I interviewed Mr. Ray Santilli in May and June this year.

 >I asked him about the identity of the cameraman, besides I told
 >him that the name could be Jack Barnett, but he died in 1967, so
 >at first Santilli agree with the name, but then said that he
 >never would revel the name.

 >The FOX Network, you can corret me if I'm wrong, made a TV
 >special trying to expose all the great lies on the 20th century,
 >and the A.A. was one of then... still in time, the FOX exhibited
 >the show for the first time!

 >In that interview Ray claimed that he believed that the film was
 >real... but he gave us no proof of this.

 >Roger is right, we must be patient.


Dear Thiago:

Thank you for your very welcome comments.

The Santilli affair has been kicked around by this and other
UFO lists for years now.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
nothing but complete and utter fakes.

If this is wrong, then please allow me to say that my personal
opinion is (again) that Santilli and company are complete and
utter fakes, attempting to squeeze the last ten centavos out of
an artfully constructed fake film.

It is Santilli and his crew making the extraordinary claim that
he has film of an Alien Autopsy. I don't care if its in a tent
or a saloon Tucson,AZ. Santilli makes the claims, and he must
provide the extraordinary proof.

Failure to do so puts him in the Adamski league in my not so
humble opinion.

I would advise anyone who gives even a passing glance at the AA
story to look through the archives of this very list.

Personally, I think that the Santilli/AA story is complete and
utter bilge. ['Crap' --ed.]

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                           'Abductions: The Truth'

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:07:12 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:42:22 -0500
Subject: 'Abductions: The Truth'


Dear Mr. John C. Thompson

I read your 'Abductions: The Truth' and here are some of my
points:

We have to compare the abductions reports with the sighteeng
reports. We can't said they are all "extraterrestrial" or
"Innerterrestrial as you point out. After severe study, manny
UFOs sighting became IFOs, the same goes to the "abductions".

Yes, there are abductions cases with physical proof and reliable
witnesses. We studied one of those cases; the Filiberto
Cardena's case.

Hybrid experiments are rare in South America; Villas Boa's
encounter is different and it could be compared to those here.

Of course, there are  demons, gnomes, ghosts, fairies, and so
on. The same way there are satellites, ball of Fire, asteroids,
birds, and so on in the sky.

The real entities (extraterrestrial) with their abduction
programs, manipulating our conscience throughout the world, are
violating our freedom of throught and conscience. They are a
real danger in our conscience.

For more information about these cases visit our web page:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/index.html

Very truly yours,

  Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo Miami UFO Center
  http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #330

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:26:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:44:25 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #330


Apology to MW #330 (For December 18, 1999)

Bottom line? You're unconvincing, authoritarian, and non
thinking. What you call your bearing facts ASSUMES your views
are valid, Jack, and assumptions are what they WOULD be -- an
ass that's made of you and me. Your "proclamation with a sneer"
betrays the tap root of your fear, that non-admitted holes
abound within the walls you've built unsound.  Walls unsound by
inculcation churn elitist infestation, and we're distracted from
our wounds that you discount and would impugn. Conspiracy's a
living monster you would hide or call imposter, but if power and
control are there, then there are those who TAKE that dare.

I'm not your strict *believer*, friend, and I won't pay that
freight -- comprende'?  But I won't buy what YOU sell, either --
it stinks of fish. I need a breather. You would argue tick turds
gladly, spin the facts to dervish madly -- convince us all that
what we're seeing CANNOT be what we're believing. There is
*more* than what you offer, volunteer, propose or proffer, and I
must call your smirking bluff. I'm quite fed up. I've had
enough. You don't make the slightest dent in what I'm thinking
we could spend to do the work and NOT pretend, but YOU won't
even LOOK my *friend*.

You're quick with whistled catcalls, hooting, haughty smirks or
"cheap shot" shooting -- Webs of non support you weave so most
won't know what they believe. It's you that keeps the lie alive,
you fake the truth you have contrived, and you have strained a
stained credulity casting your aspersions (..!.) -- truly! A
living lie is what you use to keep an edge that you abuse -- and
all to keep us on your meter, paying taxes. You foul creature!

Frankly, you're a shameful boor, a cad that should be shone ones
door. You embarrass education, reproductionist's infestation --
you won't call a spade a spade; we live within the lies you've
made. You sell a soulless, useless brew of sharp derision -- sad
excuse. And what does obfuscation do but compliment your glad
abuse. All your aims are systematic, inculcated -- autocratic,
and status quo is what you'd have to keep *your* pleasures close
at hand.

Consider Gingrinch bopping pages, while critiquing Clinton's
graces. *Mourning* "death of all morality", he slides it IN for
them you see. It's YOU, like this, with UFO's. You KNOW that
something flies and glows, yet you find *ways* -- pretend it's
final . . . blow your smoke and make denials. Interpret facts as
you would have them, proclaim some *facts* to keep us guessing
-- add your tiny bit of truth to sell agendas that you use.

Soon, it is, that you're found out, and then we'll see what
you're about. We will find what you have hidden -- take Tesla
out of his derision, read the books that Sitchin writes as text
books that just might be right. We would open hanger doors, we
would search you're *hallowed* floors, we would see what's been
so secret, you've abused your privilege -- SEE it! We would open
wide the shades that keep us stupid, scared -- betrayed. We'd
expose those unelected scabrous thugs now undetected -- living
more fulfilling lives we'd soar and cleave from what's despised.

You will come to know you're through, your time run out and
leaving you to stew in juices you once used to further what you
have construed. I'm glad to say you'll suffer shame, and more
when you avoid your blame. Plain it is you better start (to
break it loose) or come apart. Do it now, you filthy wealthy,
aging *bad* news makes you guilty. Come clean now and save
yourself the slings of *fortune* talked about. I'm betting
you'll procrastinate, and do too little much too late. There's
little hope you see some light, and do your part to put things
right; so I await for your glad demise, and watch our starry,
starry skies. They, at least, admit some truth: that time and
space are monstrous, HUGE, and all that you imagine happens --
plus the stuff you won't . . . imagine.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

You know who you are.

Restore John Ford.

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 18 December>**
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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:00:54 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


Hi,

I have been following this debate with interest and will
contribute a UK perspective.

I have been associated with perhaps 50 abduction cases since
l978 and worked with about ten different clinical psychologists
or psychiatrists in that process. They have many different ideas
about what is going on but not one has ever believed that the
witnesses they have met are suffering from any known form of
psychopathology or obvious signs of unknown psychopathplogy.
Indeed they have often expressed their astonishment at having to
say just that.

In fact only one witness out of maybe 100 that I have worked
with in this area have shown clear signs of this effect. I won't
name them for obvious reasons but their case does feature in a
UFO book.

Ideas that various doctors have expressed about what is
happening range from temporal lobe epilepsy inducing
hallucinations, narcolepsy (of which there is some evidence in
some cases) and an unusually high level of visual creativity
causing internal visions to appear indistinguishable from
reality. However, by far the most proferred explanation given to
me when I have asked doctors at the end of a case is 'this event
really happened - somehow or other - but don't ask me how'.

There have been occasions where false memory has played its
part. My own experiments (being regressed by a clinical
psychologist to a LITS encounter) (reported in the MIT
symposium) proves that conclusively and I have seen it at work
in case histories.  But its a factor, not an explanation. It
complicates the evidence (and is one reason I am totally opposed
to the use of hypnosis) but it does not create the evidence in
the first place.

The abduction phenomenon is a very complex issue. It is clearly
visionary in essence and occurs via an altered state of
consciousness. But it equally clearly cannot be waved away as
imagination or fantasy. These are the obvious first stops on the
road to a solution and have been looked for carefully by
researchers all over the world (especially in sceotical nations
like the UK) and virtually without exception the data has found
these simplistic ideas wanting. The same is true of fantasy
proneness and false memory syndrome that emerge merely as themes
within the data to confuse the issue but do not resolve the
data.

As a result of decades of work by researchers often reluctant to
believe that no rational answer would be traced we surely now
have to conclude that basically normal witnesses, who are
psychopathologically whole, are having experiences that do
happen at some measurable level of reality.

However, we do have to balance that against the clear evidence
that these events occur to visually creative people with
something interesting about the working of their brains (that
for instance facilitates early life recall far beyond the normal
level) and that they essentially happen during an altered state
- the gateway to which is the Oz Factor state.

Also that being an abductee is only different in degree and
interpretation from being an NDE witness or a medium. In fact,
these can (and in some cases I have researched) clearly have
been interchangeable.  Indeed I suspect that we, as ufologists,
bring the baggage of our expectations to an essentially
ineffable experience and in effect shape it unconsciously but
markedly within our own image. Much of the nature of the
abduction is not down to the phenomenon or to the witness but is
a consequence of us.

Which is not to say there is not a real phenomenon occurring
onto which our alien space rider expectations are projected.
There is  very definitely a fundamental 'abduction' phenomenon.
I simply feel we are seeing it through a very frosted glass and
may not really have any true inkling as to what it means because
we are obsessed by proving it to be either some form of delusion
or a genuine visit from an alien civilisation.  This polarised
approach means that we miss much of the most important evidence
because the phenomenon does not actually fit that well with
either of these options.

My guess is that it is neither of these beliefs and that we will
only start to understand what is really going on when we accept
that a lot of what we assume to be true about abduction cases is
imposed by ourselves and the now prevalent cultural expectation.
And also when we realise that there are many cases that are part
of the 'abduction' phenomenon that are hardly ever investigated
by ufologists because they are interpreted and reported
completely beyond our far too narrow context.

You will never solve a mystery if you take notice of less than
half the evidence but thats exactly what we are doing with
abductions.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:16:29 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:41:58 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Larry Hatch
 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:06:38 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:15:17 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, I had offered:

 >>>>For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to
 >>>>find sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing
 >>>>should survive.

Larry correctly points out:

 >I do not recall "science" or any particular scientists
 >disallowing life at high pressures. I could be wrong, but I've
 >never heard anyone argue that before... maybe that was the
 >belief one or more centuries ago. As long as the internal
 >pressure of an organism pretty much matches his environment,
 >there's no problem.

Hi, Larry.

Actually, I sort of grouped a variety of organisms together to
make my point. There are really two different issues here; depth
and pressure. Regarding pressure, you are correct. As long as
the pressures are the same internally and externally, then there
shouldn't be a problem. However, (and I am not an oceanographer)
I have read that scientists have been continually surprised at
how far down air breathing animals such as dolphins and whales
can go; much farther than previously thought.

Regarding depth; beyond a certain point, sunlight ceases to
penetrate. In addition, it gets darned cold!

To find life under such inhospitable conditions is the exception
to the rule regarding scientific expectations about the
development of life "as we know it".

Continuing, Larry offered:

 >How about a creature as intelligent as a dolphin say, but with
 >claws like a crab and/or tentacles like a squid. Its interesting
 >to speculate what a critter like that might evolve into, given
 >an environment where smarts is at a premium.

 >Who knows? Maybe they would make excellent musicians.

They might at that. Of course, intelligence is a relative thing.
One researcher into artificial intelligence was asked what
defines intelligence. For instance, how smart is a cat?

His reply: A cat is VERY smart....at being a cat.

Likewise, a musician is very smart... at being a musician...

Take us out of our natural environment and see how smart _we_
are! :)

take care,
Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:32:16 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 21:47:12 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:29:15 -0500
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Russ Estes wrote:

 >>When I first became aware of this list I thought, what a great
 >>idea, an insiders list where the sharing of information could
 >>possibly get us closer to the real answers. How silly I was to
 >>think that. It was easy to see that opposing opinions turned to
 >>personal battles at the drop of a hat. I often wanted to throw
 >>my two cents worth into the ring but then I thought that life is
 >>far too short to waste my time battling or dueling with others
 >>for no other reason than to stoke a fire that is already
 >>blazing.

 >Hi Russ.

 >I find your highly selective labeling amusing. It's cute how any
 >implied insults toward those who report abduction experiences
 >(when it comes from 'your own views') are to be taken as a noble
 >intellectual inquiry of some kind, while any opposing views (or
 >God forbid, should someone actually take offense at _Kevin's_
 >unsubstantiated statements) are labelled 'rants' or 'personal
 >attacks.' BTW, has your name been mentioned? Why am I 'suddenly'
 >talking to you and not Kevin?  Hmmm, interesting phenomenon. You
 >talk to one head and like the game, Smack the Mole you find that
 >another one has 'popped up' to take its place!  <lol>You two
 >guys are a pisser. Chinese tag team eh?

Well, John, since my first comments were not directed at you,
then why am I talking to you? I thought this was an open forum
in which all the list members were encouraged to express their
opinions. I wasn't aware that we had to wait for an invitation
from you, or a comment directed from you, before we could
participate.

 >>I have seen questions asked and challenges made . Of course
 >>when some answers were posted the questioner would reject any
 >>comments out of hand or attack the motives of the individual
 >>who dares to post an opposing view.

 >Comical. Turn it around and aim it back at yourselves! What
 >prompted my original response was Kevin's "out of hand attack"
 >of John Mack's "opposing views" with the
 >statement/proclamation: "This is nonsense!" It seems to me the
 >pot calls the kettle black here.  :)

Mack's comment was, and is, nonsense. I waited to see if anyone
would bother to check the studies to which he referred to learn
what, if anything, they had to do with personal memories. These
studies are about memorizing lists of real words as opposed to
nonsense words, among other things. They have found that people
more easily, and more accurately, remember the lists of real
words. In one study, a chess master more easily remembered the
position of the pieces on the board if it revealed a crafted
strategy rather than random placement. Mack's attempt to use
these studies to suggest that a traumatic experience, which is
of more importance to a subject than what he or she had for
lunch seven weeks ago Tuesday, are more accurate does not apply
here. The studies he cited do not show what he suggested they
did and therefore, his comment about them was, in fact,
nonsense.

And this was why I mentioned confabulation. Not because I was
suggesting that you confabulated your memories of abduction, but
because Mack had said that confabulation was only associated
with alcoholism. This was nonsense as well.

 >>I would now like to clear a few things up for Mr. Velez about
 >>his personal attack on Kevin Randle and his "still warm in the
 >>frame" degree.

 >There was nothing any more 'personal' in my comments, than those
 >issued by Kevin in regard to abductees over the years. Somehow
 >we're not supposed to question anything he says. Here -you- are
 >'defending him!' (do you really think he needs to be defended
 >Russ?)

No one suggested that, John. But, no one dares to question
anything said by Mack, Hopkins or Jacobs without risking the
wrath of the believers.

 >I never mentioned your name _anywhere_ in _any_ of my postings.
 >Yet here you are "setting me straight" and taking your partners
 >place in the discussion. What are you guys a WWF tag team? When
 >one guy is 'floundering' you slap hands and change places in
 >the ring? Someone should have told me! I would have gotten Greg
 >Sandow or someone to be my 'Red cross' partner!  <lol>

You don't need Greg because you already have half a dozen people
who will join your crusade.

 >>I am sure that it is common knowledge that Kevin and I have
 >>co-authored three books, One of those books is "The Abduction
 >>Enigma" with William P. Cone Ph.D..

 >Apparently you guys have been attached at the hip longer than
 >I was aware of. Explains why _you_ are responding and not
 >Kevin. (To whom I was speaking.)

Gee, John, why are you responding to a comment that was not
directed at you? And when were you appointed to the rules
committee on this list?

 >>Over 6 years of hands on research went into that book. The
 >>opinions that Kevin posted about memory are not only his but
 >>also mine and Dr. Cone, whose Diploma is not a bit warm in its
 >>frame. Matter of fact, Dr. Cone has over 25 years of clinical
 >>Texperience with a vast majority of that time dealing with
 >>memory and the human mind.

 >Ha, ha, ha! <lmao!>

 >Kevin has expounded these -same- interpretations and 'beliefs'
 >about the nature of abduction -long before he got his degree-
 >Russ. There is nothing 'new' in -anything- Kevin has for sale.
 >So what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Was his opinion
 >-before- he knew anything about memory different from what it
 >is now? Or, has he just found a new 'vehicle' for his own
 >personal bias.

 >Chicken, egg, chicken, egg, . . . . such a conundrum!  :)

 >John Velez Continues:

 >Russ I don't mean to be disrespectful but I -was- speaking to
 >Kevin. If Kevin wishes to respond to any of my comments then
 >fine, I'm here.

 >Personal note: I grew up on some tough streets in NYC Russ.
 >I've been 'ganged up on' before. I'm _not_ going to allow
 >myself to get sucked into your 'tag team' match.

This commentary is crapola. There is no tag team.

 >Your partner is a 'big boy' and fully capable of speaking for/
 >defending himself. You really should have a bit more confidence
 >in him and allow him to fight his own battles!  :)

That's right, John. Heaven forbid that someone out there might
agree with me and not you. Heaven forbid that you actually look
at the evidence rather than reject it out of hand because it
doesn't agree with you. Heaven forbid that anyone have an
opinion other than one directed by you.

Have you ever noticed that Hopkins, Mack, and Jacobs have
provided the answers? Mack has said, "It seems to me that
Jacobs, Hopkins and Nyman may pull out of their experiencers
what they want to see?" And, of course, Jacobs is the only
competent hypnotist out there.

You want to understand what is happening? Then open your eyes.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:14:13 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:07:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:34:33 +0000
 >From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

James,

You wrote:

 >Researcher John Stepkowski had written to historian Steven
 >Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, asking for
 >an informed opinion on the use of a 'Restricted Access'
 >classification in general.

 >Aftergood's opinion was that, 'The term Restricted Access has
 >sometimes been used interchangeably with Special Access, which
 >refers to special dissemination controls above and beyond the
 >classification level and the clearance level of the recipient'.

 >'Classification markings from that era were not standardized or
 >consistent. Every organization could use more or less whatever
 >markings it wanted'." [End]

This is what Steven thought was true, but he didn't really know;
it was just his "informed opinion".

When Rebecca gave me advance information on what Kent would
write in his article, I noticed that "the Restricted Codes" were
to be given quite a bit of play and I remembered seeing
something written about "restricted codes" somewhere so I
checked through my collection of UFO material.

This took some time but finally I came across what I knew I had
previously read.  It was from Paris Flammonde's *UFO Exist!* pgs
386-387 and clearly proves that the "restricted Codes" used in
the Santilli tent footage were/could be legitimate.

I informed Rebecca;  she informed Kent and, I guess, you too.

This evidence is "rock solid" as I told Rebecca but you all
ignored it.

Why you did that, and continue to do so is beyond me?.

I'd like a simple answer:  Is "restricted" a legitimate security
marking from that period for UFO related material, or not?

Are you, too, going to refuse to look at the evidence which can
be found on pgs 894-896 of the Condon report.

I don't see how we can keep this discussion going until you
admit that you may have been mistaken about the "restricted"
markings.

Once that's cleared up, then we can go on to something else and
eventually we may be able to come to some conclusions about the
nature of the Santilli footage.

Right now we have only a hodge-podge of observations,
conflicting opinions, research( some of which is very good &
some not so strong), and anomalous facts.

I believe that the preponderance of evidence indicates that the
footage is indeed what Ray and the cammeraman say it is, but I'm
open to being proven wrong.

I've read your opinions on the subject and find little that is
convincing in your arguments.

Would you mind listing what you consider to be your best
evidence for the footage being a hoax? (Not the tent footage
which we all agree is hoaxed)

Keep it simple and direct and I'll try to do the same in
answering.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                   US Air Force To Take Over Area 51 Land

From: Norio Hayakawa <GroomWatch@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:19:50 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:23:19 -0500
Subject: US Air Force To Take Over Area 51 Land


The Las Vegas Review Journal on Thursday, December 16, 1999
reported that the 38,400-acre rectangle surrounding Groom Lake
are (a.k.a. Area 51) is being relinquished by the Department of
Energy and is being officially handed over to the Air Force for
total control, ownership and jurisdiction.

The full article can be found at:

http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/1999/Dec-16-Thu-1999/news/12566049.html

Here is an excerpt (posted on Dec. 16 by Glenn Campbell of Las
Vegas and webmaster of world-renowned UFOMIND.COM) from the
article by Keith Rogers of Las Vegas Review Journal:

The Department of Energy made it official Wednesday:  the Nevada
Test Site has grown by nearly 200 square miles thanks to some
surface contamination from a 1968 nuclear test and President
Clinton's signature on a law this year.

The new law, according to an Energy Department statement, also
serves "to correct several land use and jurisdiction
misalignments throughout the complex".  That means the Air Force
takes control over DOE's rectangle around Groom Lake, along the
northeastern corner of the test site, which had been controlled
by the Air Force under a secret agreement.

The location, also known as Area 51 - the site of at least one
classified airstrip - has been shown on government maps as a
38,400-acre rectangle primarily in Lincoln County that belonged
to the Department of Energy but was controlled by the Air Force
and had not been shown by DOE as part of the Nevada Test Site.

The "misalignments", according to the Energy Department's
statement, "had become outdated and inefficient because of
evolving mission needs among the Department of Energy and
Department of Defense.

--End Excerpt--

COMMENTS by Norio Hayakawa:

What does this all mean?  This basically means that the DOE
gained 200 additional square miles in Nevada in partial exchange
for relinquishing "ownership" of land around Groom Lake to the
Air Force, which was exactly what the latter had wanted all
along!

It means that the Air Force finally got what it always wanted
from the very beginning, i.e., total control and "ownership" of
the 38,400-acre rectangle that surrounds Groom Lake (a.k.a. AREA
51, which had always been a strictly DOE-designated name, not an
Air Force-designated name).

This was the final result of a series of Public Hearings which
were held during 1998 in Nevada to correct "misalignments" and
"confusing jurisdictions" of the past that would have hindered
any new modifications to future land use of the entire Nevada
Test Site.

This means that there will be no more "secret agreements" with
DOE necessary. Now the Air Force will be free to name this base
in Air Force's terms, for example, "Groom Lake Air Base", etc.
and expand its multi-faceted programs at the base, which they
are already doing anyway.

This would be perfectly all right with us, as long as they
address once and for all the yet unresolved issue of former
workers' compensatory rights and also abide by environmental
statutes.

This also means that the Air Force will be able to provide its
own Air Force's Guard Shack and Air Force's own Security
Personnel, without having to rely on "anonymous", semi-private
security contracted through DOE's Special Response Team (SRT) or
even other entities such as Wackenhut Special Security
personnel.

The Air Force will also technically be empowered to erect a
definite, clearly-marked security fence (for safety to the
public) all along the borderlines of Groom Lake base.

What new changes will actually be made at the restricted
boundary line on Groom Lake Road, as a result of this new
"change of hands", remains to be seen.

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:44:51 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Hi,

 >I have been following this debate with interest and will
 >contribute a UK perspective.

<snip>

Dear Ms. Randles, List Members and other assorted - uh -
creatures...

Never have I read a more compelling and sensible homily over the
question of the Abduction Experience.  In point of fact, I've
had to read it thrice in order to make sure I didn't miss some
piece of undigested beef, some Gripple-Addled flashback or
peyote smoke wafting across High Point Condominiums.

Congratulations, Ms.Randles.  Not only could I not have said it
better by myself alone, I could never say it that well.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                         Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:10:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:50:33 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:07:12 -0600
 >From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >Subject: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Dear Mr. John C. Thompson

 >I read your 'Abductions: The Truth' and here are some of my
 >points:

Thanks for taking the time to read it.

 >We have to compare the abductions reports with the sighteeng
 >reports. We can't said they are all "extraterrestrial" or
 >"Innerterrestrial as you point out. After severe study, manny
 >UFOs sighting became IFOs, the same goes to the "abductions".

When I speak of any being extraterrestrail I mean what has been
termed "true" UFOs; not IFOs or unexplained natural phenomenon
which in my estimation constitute over 95 percent of all
reports.

 >Yes, there are abductions cases with physical proof and reliable
 >witnesses. We studied one of those cases; the Filiberto
 >Cardena's case.

I'm sorry but I was unable to examine your report as I have an
old 486 and dated Netscape browser; I got a "netscape protection
fault failure" when I went to your site. This I must ask, how do
you know you have physical proof? .

Also did you investigate the case yourself or personally know
the investigator who did it? If the latter, do you trust this
investigator's methods fully?

Are you sure the physical proof was caused by the alleged
abduction? Or do you just know it occurred around the same time
and assume such?

Was the case investigated  in near real time or much later?  On
the witnesses, were they independent or are they related to each
other? I must say if they are related then you don't have true
independent witnesses.

Here is an example of a true independent witness: I had a couple
see a "moon" UFO at close quarters. The UFO was intially
hovering then left like a streak of lightning.

Twelve  miles away, another person who did not the other
witnesses or know of the event, saw, from her limited vantage
point, a "shooting star" go westward and upward.

This witness reported this to me the very next day before
I had learned of the moon close-encounter. Her estimate
of distance-- she said "eleven miles"--direction and apparent
size all fit in exactly with what she should have seen from
her vantage point.

Here is an example of what is not true indepenent witnesses: I
did another close-encounter case with a mini-van size UFO. An
entire family saw it just above their heads. Some friends claim
to have seen it also.

Now while I believe that is what happened you could not say
these other folks--despite being down the street--are true
indepedent witnesses in the purest sense.

It also troubled me that this lady had a sister and neice who
had had a dramatic close-encounter and had recieved much
attention over it.

Nothing I can prove but it bothers me. On the sister and niece's
UFO encounter, one of the best in Georgia or anywhere. Despite
more witnesses with the other case, I judge the other better as
they ran into a stranger's house they were so terrified.

A strange noise was also heard immediately before by home
dwellers . They called a TV station it bothered them so much.  I
judged the sister to be of strong character.

That's where the judgement and experience of the investigator
comes in. Its not always easy. I can tell you I'm a better
investigator after many, many cases.

Did any independent witnesses see an airborne craft while the
alleged abduction was taking place? Did you do background checks
on all of these folks and see how reliable any and all witnesses
were?

I must say I have had all kinds of STORIES regarding physical
proof. The closest I came was a much dated case in Alexander
City, Alabama. But the witnesses did not see a UFO; they assumed
it could've been a UFO that caused it.

Ten years later there were marks in the concrete driveway when I
met them. The only real strength was that the witnesses were
totally beyond reproach and well educated and respected in their
community. But that doesn't prove  a UFO made the marks.

had others who claimed they've UFOs landed but didn't prove it
to me. I've seen a small crop circle where there was much UFO
activity in an area but again no UFO was seen to make the
circle. Much trace evidence when carefully examine falls along
these lines.

Something is seen strange and UFO activity is going on and
assumptions are made. Of course we all know why mainstream
science won't accept any of this is that even if a connection
could be proven the "evidence" is never of out-of-this world
material; the ultimate proof, which never exists.

I know of one lady here in Georgia who I consider reliable who
says she saw some entities in her bedroom and that a scorched
mark was left on her blanket the next morning. I do not doubt
what she saw but the evidence has proved inconclusive on what it
is. Certainly nothing extraterrestrail or alien. Some have said
a textile imperfection.

To her credit she never claim she saw the entities make the
mark; only that it was there the next morning and she doesn't
know where it came from.

For many, maybe most in the UFO community, this would be
"physical trace" evidence. Not in my book and not in anyone
else's that is truly objective.

 >Hybrid experiments are rare in South America; Villas Boa's
 >encounter is different and it could be compared to those here.

I do not believe at all in hybrid experiments. There is not one
ounce of proof for alien-human intercourse. Let us see one of
these physical creatures!

 >Of course, there are  demons, gnomes, ghosts, fairies, and so
 >on. The same way there are satellites, ball of Fire, asteroids,
 >birds, and so on in the sky.

That's right but the entities are what I call interterrestrials
(INTs). I suspect they were/are real. But their not physical
creatures as we know them. Much like the chupacabras and
Bigfoot, haints or shadows or grays. Its all connected.

The other is only natural phenonemon that is often,
particularily satellites and meteors, confused for UFOs.

 >The real entities (extraterrestrial) with their abduction
 >programs, manipulating our conscience throughout the world, are
 >violating our freedom of throught and conscience. They are a
 >real danger in our conscience.

Interestingly, this same Georgia lady I speak of above thought
she saw several grays with at least one of them having a Panama
Jack style hat on... that is, a hat with wide brim that is turned
down.

She believes the entities she saw were of extraterrestrial
origin. Well I have two other witnesses, all living in different
cities in Georgia, who saw the same type hat on their entities.

Despite one these  witness  being an earlier UFO witness,
neither of them  thought they saw grays. They all thought they
saw haints or INTs.

Now, how can it be that three entities are seen by three
strangers living in seperate cities and they all wear the same
type hat? I believe all of them saw the same type alien and it
is an INT.

It should be pointed out that none of these witnesses, one black
male, one white female and one black female, saw any spacecraft
with their  entities. All entities were only  bedroom visitors.

No one else is known living around or with them that saw any
UFOs near their homes on the night of their visitations. For
that matter no one else saw their entities as they saw them.

Yet, you can't blow it all away as nothing because of the same
hats worn by all three entities.  None of these folks had any
way of knowing what the others saw.

The first drawing was faxed to me by another investigator who
did the so-called gray case. I had the other two witnesses, two
months apart as I came to the cases, draw what they saw on their
entities.

These two were also not told that anybody else had seen a hat on
an entity. They brought it up themselves in their respective
interviews. Only then did I ask them to draw the type hats they
saw

Only after doing their drawings did I tell them others were
seeing entities with the same type hat.  So something real here!

I agree with everything you say in your last snip except "the
threat"--as Dr. Jacobs likes to call it--is NOT extraterrestrial
for reasons stated  in my article.

Can INTs hurt people despite not being physical creatures as we
know them? I am open to this because of other cirmcustances I'm
aware of regarding other INT sightings. How this is possible is
unknown to me and far from conclusive.

I also have investigated a murder case here that seemed to be
out of character. The murderer claims to have seen a haint when
she was 14 years old. She says she heard the "devil talking" in
her head  when she stabbed her new-born baby to death.

It made a roaring noise as the baby came out.

This woman is a mother of another child who by all accounts--and
I did check extensively on all of  this, talking to many he knew
or worked with her--loved this child dearly. She also has never
done drugs or drinks excessivley or exhibited violent behavior..

She was gainfully employed. The house allegely had extreme INT
activity several months before the murder.

According to her mother and sister she, her brother and son fled
the house in terror and didn't return for two nights. The murder
caught my attention because of numerous UFO cases, including the
mini-van one of above, I had already done on this same street
and area in 1995.

TV-33 of LaGrange even filmed a UFO here. (Well, it was not
proven as such but that's another story.)

Their are complications: I, believe she killed the baby because
she was, perhaps, afraid that her boyfriend would leave her if
she had the baby. (He is the father of the other child and did
leave her for awhile after its birth according to the mother and
sister..)

She was also into "Root". Don't know alot about this but
something along the lines of voodoo. Someone makes up potions,
ect. It's a strange world we live in!

Whatever is coming into people's houses is evil; that I'm sure
of.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 18

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:01:42 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:58:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:14:13 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:34:33 +0000
 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >James,

Pardon me for butting in...


<giant snip>

 >Would you mind listing what you consider to be your best
 >evidence for the footage being a hoax? (Not the tent footage
 >which we all agree is hoaxed)

1. 5+ years and still Santilli has yet to  pony up one damn
frame of film with the alien on it to prove his claims!

 >Keep it simple and direct and I'll try to do the same in
 >answering.

Hope that was simple enough for ya!

Doesn't matter one teeny-tiny-little-bitty, bit about security
markings.

You just don't get it, Ed.

Investigate whatever you like -- it's a free country -- but you
will never, ever prove this video to be what it is claimed,
without a qualified film expert testing the film (if there is
even film to begin with).

Have fun!

Rebecca









                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                     When Police Meet the Paranormal ...

From: Stephen Miles Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:00:10 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:17:52 -0500
Subject: When Police Meet the Paranormal ...


Thanks to Felinda for forwarding this to the Forteana list.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

http://www.apbnews.com/media/reviews/books/1999/12/16/hidden1216_01.html

When Police Meet the Paranormal ...
Hidden Files Examines Strange Cop Cases

Dec. 16, 1999

By Maralyn Lois Polak

NEW YORK (APBnews.com) -- In Costa County, Colo., two startled
deputies told their sheriff they witnessed a cow "floating
through the air in a beam of light," held aloft by an unearthly
buzz.

Around the same time in Mora County, N.M., sheriff's Deputy Greg
Laumbach got a call about a cow from a hunter and didn't think
much was amiss, until he actually examined the grotesque wounds
of the mutilated cow.

Skin and half a nostril had been removed from the cow's face in
clean, crisp cuts. The tongue had been sliced off and the cow's
genitalia were missing.

Think Dragnet meets X-Files and you'll have a handle on Sue
Kovach's book Hidden Files: Law Enforcement's True Case Stories
of the Unexplained and Paranormal (Contemporary Books, $14.95)
-- wacky, wild, weird police cases bordering on the incredible,
peculiar, implausible and downright impossible.

Extraterrestrials and U.S. government

Theories behind the cattle mutilations, Kovach speculates, range
from extraterrestrial "harvesting" of cells for some purpose --
perhaps new methods of protecting themselves from disease -- to
secret U.S. government projects about which citizens must be
kept in the dark. Neither prospect floats my boat.

You don't usually hear of regular-joe police involvement in
"paranormal" cases, particularly when it comes to cattle
mutilations, UFO encounters, mysterious monsterlike creatures,
ghost "visitations," unexplained graveyard exhumations, occult
sacrifices and other odd stuff.

But Kovach has uncovered an arresting array of atypical cases in
this vaguely goofy catalog of law enforcement
believe-it-or-nots, where, she writes, "most incidents involve
actual police cases, occurring while the officer was on duty."

There's something for everyone here, from a police chase of an
alleged UFO through several jurisdictions to a supposed spirit
of a Native American medicine man intervening to save the life
of a Royal Canadian Mounted Police constable in 1986.

Police 'paranoia'

The author notes a general police "paranoia" about discussing
such matters on the record. This is prudent logic on their part,
since law enforcement careers have been damaged by mentioning
words such as UFO or ghost. Though, paradoxically, police are --
or would be -- among the most credible witnesses for such
goings-on, since normally they do not truck with superstition or
folklore. Some were willing to share their stories:

Jeopardizing his 21-year police career, Hernando County, Fla.,
sheriff's Deputy Ron Chancey filed a report saying that he'd
seen from his patrol car a huge, dark, boomerang-shaped object
flying some 300 feet off the ground beside him. "It's changed my
life forever and got me thinking about my beliefs," he said. "I
really have to believe there is something else out there. And as
wonderful as that prospect can be, it's also somewhat scary."

Sgt. Jim Riffle recalls eerie goings-on after the West Virginia
State Police converted a deceased man's home into a small
three-person barrack for their troopers. Everything was fine
until they bulldozed and paved over the man's precious, perfect
front lawn. "I think we upset him a bit," Riffle says, recalling
the strange thumpings, typing sounds, pacing noises, door
slammings, and once even a "horrendous bang" as though somebody
had kicked in the back door.

Deep in the Appalachian Mountains of West Virginia, Morgantown
Police Chief Bennie Palmer and Officer Ralph Chapman received a
call from the town cemetery's caretaker about some apparent
vandalism. The lid of a concrete vault had burst through the
ground. There were no signs of digging -- in fact, the ground
had broken from underneath, but it didn't look like it was
caused by an explosion.

It was the grave of Harry Spitz, a child who had died of cholera
in 1912, but the body was well-preserved and still had some
skin. "In fact, you could recognize Harry from his facial
features. He even had lots of long blond hair," Chapman said.
Even after Harry was re-buried and apparently behaving himself,
the officers found themselves haunted by his memory. Not only
had Harry been in remarkably good shape, but so was his
clothing, a stuffed lion found at his feet and some dried
flowers. Yet the fabric on the lid of the casket had rotted
away. No one could explain why.

Paranormal help

Some police officers even shared instances in which paranormal
occurrences have helped them solve cases.

Detective Robert W. Lee of the Lake Oswego, Ore., Police
Department didn't just embrace the paranormal after a psychic
helped him with a homicide investigation -- in which it
eventually was revealed that a husband had killed his wife -- he
even married the woman who provided him with 30 details that
eventually proved true.

When Los Angeles Police Department Detective Tim Moss was
assigned to the brutal stabbing murder case of well-known
California psychic D. Scott Rogo, the officer fielded amazingly
precise predictions from a handful of Rogo's psychic colleagues,
who even were able to pinpoint the owner of a bloody fingerprint
on a drinking glass.

Deputy Rich Strasser, of the El Dorado County, Calif., Sheriff's
Office, was assigned to a baffling missing persons case in June
1994 when a driver called 911 after claiming to spot an
"apparition" of a naked woman by the side of a highway en route
to Nevada from California. An investigation revealed a crashed
car in the nearby underbrush and a 3-year-old boy still alive
next to the amazingly preserved corpse of his 24-year-old
mother. "It's almost as though the condition of her body was
preserved to make things easier for her son," Strasser said. "In
his mind, he thought his mom was just asleep."


Maralyn Lois Polak, a Philadelphia journalist, editor and
spoken-word artist, has reviewed books for The New York Times
and is the author of The Writer as Celebrity: Intimate
Interviews.


Fel

***
Frogstone: http://www.athenet.net/~felinda
Weird Page: http://www.athenet.net/~felinda/WeirdPage.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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:04:29 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:25:52 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:32:16 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Mack's comment was, and is, nonsense. I waited to see if anyone
 >would bother to check the studies to which he referred to learn
 >what, if anything, they had to do with personal memories. These
 >studies are about memorizing lists of real words as opposed to
 >nonsense words, among other things. They have found that people
 >more easily, and more accurately, remember the lists of real
 >words. In one study, a chess master more easily remembered the
 >position of the pieces on the board if it revealed a crafted
 >strategy rather than random placement. Mack's attempt to use
 >these studies to suggest that a traumatic experience, which is
 >of more importance to a subject than what he or she had for
 >lunch seven weeks ago Tuesday, are more accurate does not apply
 >here. The studies he cited do not show what he suggested they
 >did and therefore, his comment about them was, in fact,
 >nonsense.

Just to educate us on his research technique, I wonder if Kevin
might point us at any web references that document his above
claim which ties the studies he cites above to Mack's statement
on the PEER site.  Mack stated that people remember traumatic
events much better than other events.  The above studies sound
_totally_unrelated_ to the study of memories of traumatic
events.

Hence I'd suspect the above studies are NOT the ones Mack is
referencing.  Now, no doubt Mack may be involved in the above
studies; in his position I assume he is/has been involved in any
number of studies, past and ongoing.  But if Kevin can cite hard
references showing conclusively that Mack's comment specifically
references the above study, I'd definitely like to see it "in
print" (as it were) right here.  Point us at a web page or
journal or whatever, Kevin, that clearly ties Mack's PEER site
remark to the specific study you cite above, to the exclusion of
any other study Mack may be involved in.

If you can, my opinion of Mack may take a nosedive;
if you can't, the same may happen with respect to you.

Thanks in advance,

-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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                More Young People Believe In Aliens Than God

From: Stephen Miles Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:13:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:29:18 -0500
Subject: More Young People Believe In Aliens Than God


Another gem from the Forteana list.

SMiles
http://www.elfis.net

----------
From: Apoganza@aol.com
To: forteana@primenet.com
Subject: Young Alien God
Date: Sat, Dec 18, 1999, 4:48 AM


More Young People Believe In Aliens Than God

By Anjali Kwatra, PA News
AOL News
18/12/99

More young people in Britain believe in aliens and ghosts than
in God, according to a new survey.

Some 67% of 15 to 24-year-olds had some belief in ghosts and 61%
in aliens, but only 39% felt the same way about Christianity.

The poll of 1,000 young people was carried out by ROAR, a
consortium of Carlton Screen Advertising, The Guardian/The
Observer, Kiss FM, Channel 4, EMAP Consumer Magazines and
advertising agency, BMP OMD.

A quarter of them said they did believe in ghosts, while 42%
said there was probably something in it, a total of 67%.

Meanwhile 22% said they believed in alien visitations and UFOs
and 39% thought there was something to it, a total of 61%.

And 23% said they believed in Christianity, while 16% said there
was probably something in it, a total of 39%.

And while 10% of people said they did not believe at all in
ghosts, even more people - 13% - did not believe at all in God.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 04:24:18 -0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:33:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Dear Thiago:

 >Thank you for your very welcome comments.

 >The Santilli affair has been kicked around by this and other
 >UFO lists for years now.

 >Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
 >vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
 >nothing but complete and utter fakes.

<snip>


Hello Larry,

I do agree with you! I'm not saying that Santilli is right,
because in my opinion he is not.

That film is amazing, too amazing to be true... and without
proof it gets harder to believe.

The ufology is full of this type of claim, films, photos and
contactees.

I have to see beyond what our eyes can.

See ya

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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                         Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 01:20:05 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:39:06 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'


John C. Thompson wrote:

 >I'm sorry but I was unable to examine your report as I have an
 >old 486 and dated Netscape browser; I got a "netscape protection
 >fault failure" when I went to your site. This I must ask, how do
 >you know you have physical proof? .

 >Also did you investigate the case yourself or personally know
 >the investigator who did it? If the latter, do you trust this
 >investigator's methods fully?

I'm sorry you where unable to enter our web page and miss all
the case data. We spend 9 years in this investigation and still
continue in close contact with Mr. Cardenas.

The Filiberto Cardena's case was published in 1982 in a book
called 'UFO: Contact From Undersea'. We are now in the process of
publishing an updated account of this and others cases in a
book: 'UFOs: Danger In Our Conscience', by February 2000.

During his abduction, Cardenas was told that they expect to have
some 3,000 hybrids to improve their race. If they are able to
reproduce with us, then their chromosomes must be compatible
when the sperm and the ovum are joined. This means that we are
the same species, contrary to some biologist that did not accept
these sexual contacts. Also, if they said is for improving their
race, you will not find those hybrids among us because, against
our will, they are improving their physical defects.

We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
being ugly, they lack the senses,  are deaf-mute,  lack of
touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
manipulating it thoroughly.

Yes, I investigated myself this case with the late Dr. J. Allen
Hynek. And Yes, I trusted this investigator's methods fully.

Sincerely,

  Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
Miami UFO Center
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:15:59 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:47:47 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:16:29 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Larry Hatch
 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:06:38 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:15:17 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >>>From: Roger Evans
 >>>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously, I had offered:

 >>>>>For instance, oceanographers have been constantly surprised to
 >>>>>find sea life at pressure and depths that no living thing
 >>>>>should survive.

 >Larry correctly points out:

 >>I do not recall "science" or any particular scientists
 >>disallowing life at high pressures. I could be wrong, but I've
 >>never heard anyone argue that before... maybe that was the
 >>belief one or more centuries ago. As long as the internal
 >>pressure of an organism pretty much matches his environment,
 >>there's no problem.

 >Hi, Larry.

 >Actually, I sort of grouped a variety of organisms together to
 >make my point. There are really two different issues here; depth
 >and pressure. Regarding pressure, you are correct.

 >Regarding depth; beyond a certain point, sunlight ceases to
 >penetrate. In addition, it gets darned cold!

To a critter at great sea depths, having evolved there for
millions of years, those temperatures must seem quite comfy,
even though I would hate it.

An interesting question nonetheless! As we dig miles into the
Earth for gold mines etc., we find temperatures rising, not
falling. At sea, the specific heat, thermal conductivity and
ocean currents of salt water complicate matters terribly.

I really don't know. Do temperatures rise or fall as probes
descend into oceanic abysmal troughs? By how much?

 >To find life under such inhospitable conditions is the exception
 >to the rule regarding scientific expectations about the
 >development of life "as we know it".

 >Continuing, Larry offered:

 >>How about a creature as intelligent as a dolphin say, but with
 >>claws like a crab and/or tentacles like a squid. Its interesting
 >>to speculate what a critter like that might evolve into, given
 >>an environment where smarts is at a premium.

 >>Who knows? Maybe they would make excellent musicians.

 >They might at that. Of course, intelligence is a relative thing.
 >One researcher into artificial intelligence was asked what
 >defines intelligence. For instance, how smart is a cat?

 >His reply: A cat is VERY smart... at being a cat.

 >Likewise, a musician is very smart... at being a musician...

I would rather debate with a musician, much more fun than a cat.
They are highly opinionated about all the stuff they know
nothing about. I used to be one, so I know.

In fact, I got so bugged not knowing anything else that I went
back to college for a second tour of math, chemistry and
physics. Now I can take my goofy opinions and dress them up with
the proper terminology!

 >Take us out of our natural environment and see how smart _we_
 >are! :)

Agreed.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:25:23 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 08:01:38 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Hi,

 >>I have been following this debate with interest and will
 >>contribute a UK perspective.

 ><snip>

 >Dear Ms. Randles, List Members and other assorted - uh -
 >creatures...

 >Never have I read a more compelling and sensible homily over the
 >question of the Abduction Experience. In point of fact, I've
 >had to read it thrice in order to make sure I didn't miss some
 >piece of undigested beef, some Gripple-Addled flashback or
 >peyote smoke wafting across High Point Condominiums.

 >Congratulations, Ms.Randles. Not only could I not have said it
 >better by myself alone, I could never say it that well.

 >Jim Mortellaro

Dear Jim and Jenny:

One word has me puzzled. Jenny said something like "In a
sceotical nation like the UK..."

Sceotical? I don't know what sceotical means, and my dictionary
is hidden under several layers of dust.

Nevertheless I'm willing to wager that the denizens of
California are as sceotical as anyone else, especially down in
the Los Angeles area.

"Sceotical" sounds like a highly majuberous term to me. Was it a
typo?


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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                             Re: On False Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 04:07:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 08:12:32 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:32:16 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:29:15 -0500
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 01:25:47 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: Russ Estes <BGBOPPER@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hi Kevin, hi All,

Out of sympathy for my fellow list members I'll keep this as
short and sweet as I can.

Mr.Randle writes:

 >Well, John, since my first comments were not directed at you,
 >then why am I talking to you? I thought this was an open forum
 >in which all the list members were encouraged to express their
 >opinions.

Sorry Kevin, I didn't know I wasn't supposed to participate.
Thank you _and_ Russ for taking so much of your valuable time to
'set me straight'.

What a guy(s.)  <g>

 >I wasn't aware that we had to wait for an invitation
 >from you, or a comment directed from you, before we could
 >participate.

You probably weren't aware of it Kevin because it isn't so. See
how that works now? <VBG>

 >Mack's comment was, and is, nonsense.

There it is folks. Pack yer bags and go home. We have heard from
'The' expert. Will the peons be receiving a hard copy of this
Proclamation/Decree or are we supposed to commit it to "memory?"
<lol>

Question:

Kevin, Are you reading your own stuff before you hit the
'send' button? You're burying yourself.

 >No one suggested that, John. But, no one dares to question
 >anything said by Mack, Hopkins or Jacobs without risking the
 >wrath of the believers.

Do tell Mr. Randle, just what are 'my' beliefs? I didn't know
you were a psychic Kevin! Bit of a closet 'New Ager' eh? <g>
C'mon, give it up man. Did you 'remote view' me, or was it
'telepathy?'

I wrote to Russ:

 >>>I never mentioned your name _anywhere_ in _any_ of my postings.
 >>>Yet here you are "setting me straight" and taking your partners
 >>>place in the discussion. What are you guys a WWF tag team? When
 >>>one guy is 'floundering' you slap hands and change places in
 >>>the ring? Someone should have told me! I would have gotten Greg
 >>>Sandow or someone to be my 'Red cross' partner!  <lol>

Kevin responds:

 >You don't need Greg because you already have half a dozen people
 >who will join your crusade.

Nope, just me here Kevin. Just to keep it scientific, I looked
around my office and nope, no one else here. Just me.

Re: My comment about Greg.

Gee Kevin, I just thought that 2 on 2 would be much fairer than
2 on 1. Didn't realize I had to give you 'rook odds' in order to
'play.' <g>

 >>>Apparently you guys have been attached at the hip longer than I
 >>>was aware of. Explains why _you_ are responding and not Kevin.
 >>>(To whom I was speaking.)

 >Gee, John, why are you responding to a comment that was not
 >directed at you? And when were you appointed to the rules
 >committee on this list?

Sorry Kevin, I didn't realize my comment was such a 'low blow.'
I thought that piss poor attempt at a little 2 on 1 was low so I
kinda responded in kind. Funny, I don't like it either when that
kind of stuff is directed at me. We're a lot alike that way!  :)

You still have not addressed the following:

 >>>Kevin has expounded these -same- interpretations and 'beliefs'
 >>>about the nature of abduction -long before he got his degree-
 >>>Russ. There is nothing 'new' in -anything- Kevin has for sale.
 >>>So what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Was his opinion
 >>>-before- he knew anything about memory different from what it
 >>>is now? Or, has he just found a new 'vehicle' for his own
 >>>personal bias.

You skate past that one and instead you chose to respond to
this:

I wrote:

 >>>Russ I don't mean to be disrespectful but I -was- speaking to
 >>>Kevin. If Kevin wishes to respond to any of my comments then
 >>>fine, I'm here.

 >>>Personal note: I grew up on some tough streets in NYC Russ.
 >>>I've been 'ganged up on' before. I'm _not_ going to allow
 >>>myself to get sucked into your 'tag team' match.

Your response:

 >This commentary is crapola. There is no tag team.

You're right! 2 on 2 is a tag team. What you and Russ were
attempting is what we 'Yankees' refer to as a, 'gang bang!'  Set
the alarm clock for a little earlier Kevin. You'll have a better
shot at 'catching me asleep!'

Re: Your 'crapolla' comment:

"Crapolla" eh? Such emotion! Did I 'wing you' with that one
buddy?

 >That's right, John. Heaven forbid that someone out there might
 >agree with me and not you. Heaven forbid that you actually look
 >at the evidence rather than reject it out of hand because it
 >doesn't agree with you. Heaven forbid that anyone have an
 >opinion other than one directed by you.

Sometimes if you let people talk long enough, they'll hang
themselves. Check your neck for 'rope burn' Kevin. ;)

 >Have you ever noticed that Hopkins, Mack, and Jacobs have
 >provided the answers? Mack has said, "It seems to me that
 >Jacobs, Hopkins and Nyman may pull out of their experiencers
 >what they want to see?" And, of course, Jacobs is the only
 >competent hypnotist out there.

Perhaps you should express these feelings directly to them
instead of to me Kevin. You dialed the wrong number. I'm not
Budd or David or John Mack or...

 >You want to understand what is happening? Then open your eyes.

You too buddy!  :)

John Velez, F.C.L.R.C.C.*
*Full of Crap List Rules Committee Chairman  ;)

________________________________________________
                         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 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                         Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:18:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:22:36 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 01:20:05 -0600
 >From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >John C. Thompson wrote:

 >>I'm sorry but I was unable to examine your report as I have an
 >>old 486 and dated Netscape browser; I got a "netscape protection
 >>fault failure" when I went to your site. This I must ask, how do
 >>you know you have physical proof? .

 >>Also did you investigate the case yourself or personally know
 >>the investigator who did it? If the latter, do you trust this
 >>investigator's methods fully?

 >I'm sorry you where unable to enter our web page and miss all
 >the case data. We spend 9 years in this investigation and still
 >continue in close contact with Mr. Cardenas.

 >The Filiberto Cardena's case was published in 1982 in a book
 >called 'UFO: Contact From Undersea'. We are now in the process of
 >publishing an updated account of this and others cases in a
 >book: 'UFOs: Danger In Our Conscience', by February 2000.

 >During his abduction, Cardenas was told that they expect to have
 >some 3,000 hybrids to improve their race. If they are able to
 >reproduce with us, then their chromosomes must be compatible
 >when the sperm and the ovum are joined. This means that we are
 >the same species, contrary to some biologist that did not accept
 >these sexual contacts. Also, if they said is for improving their
 >race, you will not find those hybrids among us because, against
 >our will, they are improving their physical defects.

I'll reserve complete judgement until I can see your site.
Still, I would've thought if y'all had anything you could've at
least given the 'proof' that makes you think this story is real.

Something this sensational--and I believe it was Hynek himself
who made a comment along these lines--requires sensational
proof. Proof that the witness is not a looney helps but its not
enough. Independent witnesses of some physical vehicle being
seen as the abduction took place helps much, much more.

Real physical proof of alien origin, of course, would be the
best; but that doesn't exist anywhere! I would even accept
'Travis Walton' type proof-- mulitple witnesses, although not
independent, going to their local police agency to report a
space-kidnapping--as something at least engaging.

Remember, I'm not argueing that abductions don't happen; I'm
saying they are _not_ a physical process that involves ET
creatures physically snatching folks away. To say that
'abductions' don't happen, would be to say we have millions who
are totally sick; I don't believe that.

 >We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
 >being ugly, they lack the senses, are deaf-mute, lack of
 >touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
 >is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
 >manipulating it thoroughly.

I can think of no other reason why 'abductions' are going on. I
do believe they have and are negatively effecting man's mental
condition and evolution.

I think nearly everyone is probed at one time or another. Most
are unaware of it but successfully resist... Some are,
unfortunately, vulnerable and succumb. The worse of this is that
most of these are unaware they have been 'abducted'. This is
where the real damage is going on at.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 19

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 08:20:09 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >From: Larry Hatch
 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:15:59 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 07:47:47 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:16:29 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, I had mentioned the following as it relates to the
development of life in hostile conditions:

 >>Regarding depth; beyond a certain point, sunlight ceases to
 >>penetrate. In addition, it gets darned cold!

Larry responded:

 >To a critter at great sea depths, having evolved there for
 >millions of years, those temperatures must seem quite comfy,
 >even though I would hate it.

Hi, Larry.

Well, of course, that's the entire point of my post. WE might
hate it. In fact, we might even declare that carbon based life
could never evolve in such an environment. None the less, we are
constantly surprised by what this planet has to offer regarding
the diversity of life. For anyone to assume that they could
predict how life cannot develop on another, unseen world would
be unfounded speculation. The only model they could base their
theories on would be our own planet; something they obviously
don't know enough about as it is.

Moving on, Larry wrote:


 >An interesting question nonetheless! As we dig miles into the
 >Earth for gold mines etc., we find temperatures rising, not
 >falling. At sea, the specific heat, thermal conductivity and
 >ocean currents of salt water complicate matters terribly.

 >I really don't know. Do temperatures rise or fall as probes
 >descend into oceanic abysmal troughs? By how much?
 >

I do not know. But I do know this; NASA was surprised to find
living microbes that had survived a ride through space on a
piece of hardware retrieved by the Space Shuttle. They had no
explanation. In addition, according to one documentary, the only
thing that survived the first atomic tests at Los Alamos were
bugs! (Cockroaches, I believe. No wonder I can't get rid of the
little bastards.)

Continuing, I had offered:


 >>Take us out of our natural environment and see how smart _we_
 >>are! :)

 >Agreed.

Regarding "smarts":

There is a yearly competition among AI (artificial intelligence)
researchers called the "Touring Competition". This was named
after Alan Touring, the man most responsible for breaking the
Enigma Code during WW2. He had envisioned thinking machines and
computers capable of independent thought.

He was also persecuted (and prosecuted) by the British
government for being homosexual. Consequently, he had an
interesting view regarding what constitutes 'apparent thought'.

For instance, he did not appear gay to his co-workers.

Therefore, to them, he was not. It was only after he had been
robbed by someone he picked up that it was revealed. As this
relates to AI, it occurred to Touring that what we _assume_ to
be independent thought is, in reality, only the appearance of
intelligence. That is, much of what we do that seems complex is,
in reality, pre-programmed responses to external stimuli.

Granted, this is not the same thing as the ability to
conceptualize. But, then again, not everyone can conceptualize
exactly the same. In fact, some people seem to be unable to
conceptualize at all, depending on IQ and/or mental handicap.
Yet they would still be considered to have some intelligence,
though limited.

Touring felt that intelligence is relative to one's expectations.

Therefore, he reasoned, if a machine (computer) could be
designed to provide the expected responses enough of the time,
it would fit the most basic description of "intelligence". The
Touring Competition is designed to follow this principle. A
group of people alternately communicate with computers that are
either secretly connected to another person's keyboard, or are
running a competitor's AI program. It's up to the group asking
the questions which is which. Which ever program fools most of
the people most of the time wins. In turn, they share their AI
research with the losers.

As we explore the possibilities of "intelligent life", we might
take a cue from Alan Touring. We simply can't base our
expectations of what constitutes intelligence on our own limited
and somewhat funky thought processes.

In short, we must expect the unexpected or it might pass us by...

Later,
Roger Evans









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:35:45 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:34:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 04:24:18 -0200
 >From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Dear Thiago:

 >>Thank you for your very welcome comments.

 >>The Santilli affair has been kicked around by this and other
 >>UFO lists for years now.

 >>Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
 >>vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
 >>nothing but complete and utter fakes.

 ><snip>


 >Hello Larry,

 >I do agree with you! I'm not saying that Santilli is right,
 >because in my opinion he is not.

 >That film is amazing, too amazing to be true... and without
 >proof it gets harder to believe.

 >The ufology is full of this type of claim, films, photos and
 >contactees.

 >I have to see beyond what our eyes can.

Dear Theo, Lawrence of California and bListers ...

Two things come to mind, both as divergent and dichotomous as
they may be.  Dickens and the New Testament.

In A Christmas Carol, Alistair Simm (the _real_Scrooge) said,
after his night out with the spirits and his transformation into
a believer, "Can you forgive a poor old man for having no eyes
to see with, no ears to hear with?  All these years?"

And in the New Testament, Thomas, the doubting apostle said,
"Unless I place my fingers into His wounds and thrust my hand
into His side, I will not believe He is risen."

And right here on this list, the infamous Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt
said, and this is a direct quote so write it down...

"Unless what you done been 'ducted an sucked up into dem one a
dose frin saucas, you ain't gonna believe nuttin 'cause the ting
is about the ahhhort when it come to da ... uh, fgorget about
it."

Translated from Canalonics (as opposed to Ebonics), it means
that unless it happens to you, it never happened.  Researchers
and main stream science take note.  You'll know it's true, when
it happens to you.  Speaking about main streams, there is a new
drug out on the market for benign prostatic hypertrophy called,
"Flowmax."  And boy do it work fine.  Better than a gallon a
Gripple and peppermint stick. Take it from me, Gesundt never
lies.  Except down.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:45:32 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:38:08 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 01:20:05 -0600
 >From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >John C. Thompson wrote:

 >>I'm sorry but I was unable to examine your report as I have an
 >>old 486 and dated Netscape browser; I got a "netscape protection
 >>fault failure" when I went to your site. This I must ask, how do
 >>you know you have physical proof? .

 >>Also did you investigate the case yourself or personally know
 >>the investigator who did it? If the latter, do you trust this
 >>investigator's methods fully?

 >I'm sorry you where unable to enter our web page and miss all
 >the case data. We spend 9 years in this investigation and still
 >continue in close contact with Mr. Cardenas.

 >The Filiberto Cardena's case was published in 1982 in a book
 >called 'UFO: Contact From Undersea'. We are now in the process of
 >publishing an updated account of this and others cases in a
 >book: 'UFOs: Danger In Our Conscience', by February 2000.

 >During his abduction, Cardenas was told that they expect to have
 >some 3,000 hybrids to improve their race. If they are able to
 >reproduce with us, then their chromosomes must be compatible
 >when the sperm and the ovum are joined. This means that we are
 >the same species, contrary to some biologist that did not accept
 >these sexual contacts. Also, if they said is for improving their
 >race, you will not find those hybrids among us because, against
 >our will, they are improving their physical defects.

 >We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
 >being ugly, they lack the senses,  are deaf-mute,  lack of
 >touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
 >is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
 >manipulating it thoroughly.

 >Yes, I investigated myself this case with the late Dr. J. Allen
 >Hynek. And Yes, I trusted this investigator's methods fully.


Dr. Sanchez-Ocejo;

As a perceived experiencer, I can only say that there is nothing
which these entities can say which I, personally, would believe.

Anyone who comes in the night, steals the lives of humans, even
from the tender age of which I and others like me can recall
(around two years old), plays with our minds, our bodies,
telling one thing to one, another thing to another, stealing our
seed, that which some of us hold dearest, our personal freedom,
cannot be trusted to say truth.

Unfortunately, doctor, neither can many of us.  We appear to be
in a bit of a quandry, eh?  And as Dylan said, "It ain't even
safe no more, in the Palace of the Pope... "

Jim Mortellaro

PS: I would be happy to have anyone examine my apparent duality
of personality...  one moment the great Gesundt, the next, the
great Docca Morty.  It's a curse.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >to: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

Larry,

 >Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
 >vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
 >nothing but complete and utter fakes.

Yes, the vast majority of list readers probably agree with you
but that's because they've been led to believe half truths,
distortions, misinformation and disinformation from you and
others on this list. I offer my research on the "restricted
codes" as an example of how this  operates. You just don't get
it, do you?

I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another film sample is
a serious problem. (He did once but everyone forgets that.
Kodak dishonestly protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
the less that Ray did try to have the film verified) I believe
he has his reasons for not doing this again and I accept that
because I haven't found him to be a dishonest person.  Since
he's not dishonest (if you disagree, what is your evidence for
these views) and a criminal hoaxer, there must be some other
reason.  (As I wrote before, he _was_ visited by US government
authorities and still refuses to talk about it.)

I would think you might understand this and at least keep an
open mind. Knowing that governments and their agents continue to
disrupt and stigmatize legitimate investigations should help us
to understand Ray's dilemma. I wish it weren't so, but it is
something we should factor into our diliberations

After investigating the AA for over four, I still believe the
footage is legitimate.

Why? Because there is not one... again... not one shred of
_evidence_ that it was hoaxed. I'll ask you the same question
I've posed to Rebecca and James:  _Aside_ from not having a
sample of the film, list your best evidence for believing
that... as you say, "Santilli et. cie. are nothing but complete
and utter fakes!".

So far I have the following:

1. Santilli is a fake!

2. Santilli is a liar!

3. Santilli made money!

4. The cammeraman is a big nothing!

Do you have more to add to this list. Why not do some research
for a change?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:04:55 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:45:19 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >And if we're wrong about "life as we know it" here on our own
 >planet, then "life as we DON'T know it" must surely be within
 >the realm of possibility on other planets; even seemingly
 >hostile ones.


Roger,

I don't doubt that there is life elsewhere in the universe. I do
doubt that spacefaring civilizations are a dime a dozen.

Just today I came across a few factoids on life here. In the
approximate 3.5 billion years of life on this planet, there have
been something like a billion species, 99.9% of which are now
extinct, and only one species of which has developed human
intelligence. (How do you like those odds?) I can't think of any
particular reason (that I know of) as to why there aren't 10,
20, or more intelligent species on this planet, but there
aren't.

At least five times in our own past, life on this planet has
suffered huge, apparently abrupt extinctions, either because of
drastic climate changes or through collisions with another
object hurtling through space. And we are not necessarily out of
the woods, either.

I don't have anything against anyone who wants to think the
universe is literally teeming with life, or just fairly common.
But then why isn't it plentiful on Mars and elsewhere in our own
solar system?

All I'm saying is that the path from A (single cell organisms)
to Z (spacefaring civilization) consists of an unbroken string
of a lot of highly contingent (chance) events, any one of which
could drastically alter the eventual outcome. It is by no means
an inevitable certainty that humans will one day become a
spacefaring civilization. All we can say with certainty is that
intelligent life on this planet has cleared a lot of hurdles
over an unimaginable duration of time on the way to outer space
and another solar system -- if that's indeed where we're headed.
What we don't know is what (and how many) hurdles still lie in
our path.

To assume that it's a relatively easy affair, something that
happens almost every day in some corner of the universe, is
simply an assumption that I myself am not willing to make.
Others may be willing.

 >When one begins to include the possibility of non-carbon based
 >life forms, even more opportunities present themselves.

Silicon-based life forms are one obvious possibility, but
biologists don't call it "poor man's carbon" for nothing. If you
get a choice -- take carbon. It's more flexible.

 >Regarding your assumption about underwater metal work; obviously
 >you are unaware of underwater welding? Submerged metal work is
 >done all the time. Besides, I would think working in the
 >relative weightless environment of space would be very familiar
 >to a sea creature like a dolphin! ;)

 >take care,

 >Roger Evans

Submerged metal work is done all the time here because we
evolved on land, having discovered fire along the way. It's not
easy to discover fire underwater.

You take care, too

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         Re: Conference 2000 Update

From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:30:53 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:47:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Conference 2000 Update


For the latest on the exciting 1st Conference of the New
Millennium, Discovery 2000, check out my website;

www.angelfire.com/sd/discoveryuk/index.html

Check out the new speaker profiles!

Be there!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                                Where's Greg?

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:17:32 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:02:10 -0500
Subject: Where's Greg?


Hi, gang...

Just curious if anyone has heard from Greg St. Pierre. I noticed
he hasn't posted since about May of '99. Tried his Email
"Strmnut@aol.com"...

It was returned. Anybody know what's up?

Later,
Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:51:30 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:20:10 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:18:10 -0500
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
 >>being ugly, they lack the senses, are deaf-mute, lack of
 >>touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
 >>is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
 >>manipulating it thoroughly.

 >I can think of no other reason why 'abductions' are going on. I
 >do believe they have and are negatively effecting man's mental
 >condition and evolution.

 >I think nearly everyone is probed at one time or another. Most
 >are unaware of it but successfully resist... Some are,
 >unfortunately, vulnerable and succumb. The worse of this is that
 >most of these are unaware they have been 'abducted'. This is
 >where the real damage is going on at.

My personal theory on the "abduction" phenomenon hinges on many
of the ideas suggested by Jacques Vallee; I think we're dealing
with a legitimate nonhuman intelligence, but not the kind a
superficial examination of the published accounts would have us
think.  I sincerely doubt, for instance, if the "hybridization"
program is for real, for reasons I won't dwell on here.  But
neither do I think those who claim some sort of reproductive
relationship with "aliens" are lying.

It would not surprise me if we are dealing with some sort of
"machine ecology," en essentially automated, sentient
"cyborg-ism" planted here before the human race even existed...a
sort of technological Overmind conceived by some other
intelligence to regulate and reinfoce our technological and
cultural development.  This influence would be very subtle and
persistent by necessity.  "Overt contact" of the kind seen in
many science fiction movies would ruin the "experiment" by
effectively contaminating the test population.  This "Overmind,"
whatever is is, seems to communicate to us by artful
manipulation of our folklore; this idea lends itself rather
neatly to the parallels between the abductions of today and the
weird liason with succubi and fairies and gods that crop up
again and again in our history.

**In short, I think we're being guided toward some technosocial
singularity (Vallee's proposed "schedule of reinforcment would
seem to add weight to this idea).**

An astromer named Bracewell wondered if alien contact would be
achieved via automated probes dispatched to monitor emerging
civilizations and report back to their creators if they found
anything interesting.  Bracewell posited that these probes would
also be equipped to _communicate_ with the terget civilization.
I think this scenario has more going for it than it seems.  Even
though we haven't found any definitive alien artifacts in our
solar system yet, it's not at all unreasonable to think there
might be some sort of "galactic CPU" out there, operating with a
physics possibly _billions_ of years ahead of ours...

The late, great writer Philip K. Dick, who claimed contact with
a nonhuman intelligence, seemed to think he was dealing with a
"cosmic trickster"; Strieber has advanced very similar ideas.

So, yes, the "aliens" are real.  Only they're not.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                    Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW

From: SMiles Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:23:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:53:08 -0500
Subject: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW


 From one elist to the next...

Source: www.gettingit.com


Bugs Bunny and Other UFO Victims
Reality isn't always consensual
BY ROBERT ANTON WILSON

12.13.99

Although few people remember this, Bugs Bunny was the first UFO
"abductee" in a 1952 cartoon called "Hasty Hare."

The next case did not occur until nine years later, in 1961,
when Betty and Barney Hill famously encountered the "greys" from
Zeta Reticuli, who molested them sexually and otherwise, and
were also wearing Nazi uniforms. At least, Barney Hill
remembered the malign midgets as garbed in Nazi regalia; Betty,
for some reason, never did recall that poignantly puzzling
detail.

Now, many millions have allegedly suffered the same sort of
"extraterrestrial" sexual abuse, according to Abductees
Anonymous, a support group for survivors. Budd Hopkins has
become rock star famous for helping people "remember" such
experiences. And this is not just another New Age fad. Dr. John
Mack, a distinguished scientist on the staff of the psychiatry
department at Harvard University, has written two books on the
subject. And Harvard, which once gave Dr. Timothy Leary the
bum's rush for having weird ideas, allows Dr. Mack to remain on
their staff, with all the prestige that bestows upon this
eldritch and Lovecraftian topic.

I've met Dr. Mack, and he seems like a sane and sensible man. He
frankly admits that he's not quite sure what kind of "reality"
these experiences occur in, except that it sure ain't consensus
reality. It's something more like the non-ordinary reality of
Carlos Castaneda's Don Juan books, or of the mystics of all
traditions -- or of Leary and his merry band of acid astronauts.

Peculiarly, both law enforcement and mainstream science seem to
have no interest in this matter at all.

I find that startling. Imagine what would happen if "many
millions" of U.S. citizens said they had been sexually assaulted
by aliens from Mexico or Iraq, instead of aliens from Outer
Space. Obviously, there would be no scientific taboo against
investigating such cases, and Congress might even have declared
war on the invaders by now. If the subjects claimed, as most of
Dr. Mack's subjects do, that they now love their kidnappers and
have received important ecological warnings from them, as well
as learning from their extraterrestrial sermons about how wicked
and wretched our society is, this would be considered evidence
that they had been "brainwashed" as well as raped (think
Stockholm Syndrome). The differences in scientific and political
reactions to atrocities by human aliens and nonhuman aliens seem
even more confusing than the rest of this mystery.

Bill Cooper, who claims to be a former Naval Intelligence
officer, alleges that he saw papers revealing a treaty between
our government and the "greys," who are providing our military
with advanced technology.

The little bastards have broken the treaty, Cooper says, not
only by meddling sexually and/or genetically with our citizens,
but also by mutilating a lot of cattle. But our government can't
stop them because of their superior weapons. The Outer Space
monsters were also behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy,
he says.

Dr. Mack, on the other hand, isn't sure about the literalness of
alien abductions. In his second book, Passport to the Cosmos
(Crown) he no longer calls his subjects "abductees," but
"experiencers," although he remains convinced that they
experienced something and that the experience is real in some
sense.

Consider, in this context, the investigations of Dr. Corey
Hammond of the University of Utah, former president of the
American Society of Clinical Hypnosis. Dr. Hammond has had a lot
of clients who, under hypnosis, remember hideous incidents of
Satanic rituals, infant sacrifice, sadomasochism, coprophilia
and assorted horrors. Dr. Hammond believes that these cases, and
the data he has unearthed on Satanic cults in general, prove
that three distinct groups are working together -- Nazis, the
CIA, and NASA -- who have been secretly and brutally programming
American children for over 50 years to make them part of "a
Satanic order that will rule the world."

Can we believe both Dr. Mack and Dr. Hammond at the same time,
and accept that while extraterrestrials or even weirder
nonhumans have been raping people and teaching ecology, another
conspiracy is simultaneously torturing and reeducating children
to make them Slaves of Satan? Or might we more economically
assume that a lot of people have had a lot of non-ordinary
experiences -- psychedelic trips without drugs -- and we all
tend to interpret these according to our own hopes and fears?

Consider the model offered by Dr. Jacques Vallee, who has been
investigating UFOs for more than 30 years. Dr. Vallee has
suggested as one possible explanation a vast experiment in mind
control and behavior modification by some Intelligence Agency
(he doesn't try to guess which one). Could both Dr. Mack's cases
and Dr. Hammond's cases represent persons who fell victim to
this and retain only shattered and distorted memories of their
ordeal? Considering what has already leaked about the CIA's
MK-ULTRA research, this hypothesis does not seem altogether
extravagant.

Bill Cooper, the guy who says the greys were behind the JFK hit,
has also considered a variation on Vallee's theory. He himself,
Cooper says, may have been deceived by his superiors in Naval
Intelligence. But in that case, he points out, the government (I
no longer feel safe in calling it "our government") must be
using the "grey mythology" as a cover-up to hide something else
-- something even worse than selling us out to rapists from
Reticuli.

Frankly, I cannot accept either the blind faith of the True
Believers or the dogmatic denials of the Establishment. Like Dr.
Mack, I think the whole topic needs less sensationalism and more
open-minded research.

After all, the next person engulfed by this non-ordinary reality
might be you or me.

Robert Anton Wilson is the author of 32 books, including
Everything Is Under Control, an encyclopedia of conspiracy
theories, and maintains the Web's strangest site @
www.rawilson.com. He also serves as CEO of CSICON (the Committee
for Surrealist Investigation of Claims of the Normal).

Robert's column runs every other Monday on www.GettingIt.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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Marty Nosser <ufobia@dreamsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 23:46:55 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:16:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 08:53:25 -0200
 >From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 17:42:37 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hello,

 >Well you're talking about the Alien Autopsy...

 >I interviewed Mr. Ray Santilli in May and June this year.

 >I asked him about the identity of the cameraman, besides I told
 >him that the name could be Jack Barnett, but he died in 1967, so
 >at first Santilli agree with the name, but then said that he
 >never would revel the name.


Dear Thiago,

I recently signed on to "UFO UpDates" and received the messages
sent back and forth between yourself and a Larry Hatch and Roger
Evans concerning the Alien Autopsy and cameraman.  On the one
from you to Larry, you mentioned interviewing Ray Santilli and
that you told him the name of the cameraman could be Jack
Barnett, but that he died in 1967, and that Santilli first
agreed with the name, but then said he never would reveal the
name.

Well, I have a feeling that Santilli is playing it safe by not
confirming the aledged Barnett, and again by saying he would
never reveal the name at all.  I believe that in doing this he
keeps the researchers looking for a dead person, which stops at
just that, thus saying the real guy is still out there.

I'm contacting you for two reasons. One because you seem to want
to believe it could be real,as Ido myself. And because I may
have a lead on another name.  This person was ,also an "early
Elvis photographer".  This person may even be the aledged Jack
Barnett using the name Barnett for protection.  Never the less,
I think it's worth looking into.

In most of the articles I've read on Santilli and the cameraman,
it is known that the two connected over Santilli looking for
footage of early Elvis performances inwhich the cameraman was
one and the same as the Alien Autopsy.  Being an Elvis fan and
collector of memorbilia and also a UFO researchrer and
enthusiest....well things got to clicking in my head.  I have a
rare photgraph of Elvis taken May 6, 1956 by a photographer that
I can't find any information on in any Elvis material I have. I
have coordinated dates with those that have been printed in the
Alien  Autopsy Cameraman info, as far as this man's dates in the
Army, 1942 to 1952 as cameraman; and his supposed age now, along
with the date of the photo I have, 1956, which he would most
likely be out of the service and around the age of 43.  Now
maybe 83.

Also, on one of the pages of info. on the Alien Cameraman, there
was mention of the cameraman keeping the film reels in a
"cardboard box" in his archives. The photo I have of Elvis was
also found in a "cardboard box" along with photos of other movie
stars and music artist such as Frank Sinatra and Marilyn Monroe.
This box of photos were found behind a stage at one of the old
movie studios in Hollywood or L.A.   Either Paramount or MGM. I
forget which.  They had been there for a long, long time as the
person who found them was an acquaintance's father whom worked
as a janitor at the studio when he discovered them and took them
home.  I bought the Elvis one.

On the back of the photo is the date, name of the photographer
and comp.  I believe that the box of photos were throw-aways of
a sort after a certain one was chosen for promotional purposes.
And the box was put aside and forgotten about.

Anyway, I personally do not have the means to do any deep
research on this person or I would have already done so.  But,
if you could, or knew of someone else who could.... I think it
may turn out to be beneficial to this case, possibly leading to
the truth of the matter once and for all.  I think it's got
enough coinsidences to check it out.

If you think I might have something here then contact me and
I'll give you the name,etc.

Or refer me to someone else whom may be interested in searching
for this person.  If one could find out if this person was in
the military at the time of Roswell, for instance, I think for
sure we'd be on the right track.

And, of coarse, if he was still alive in 1992 to meet with
Santilli.


E-mail me and let me know - ufobia@dreamsoft.com

I also am on ICQ-40308086


Sincerely, Marty Nosser








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:29:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:22:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


Hi,

 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >>to: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Larry,

 >>Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
 >>vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
 >>nothing but complete and utter fakes.

 >Yes, the vast majority of list readers probably agree with you
 >but that's because they've been led to believe half truths,
 >distortions, misinformation and disinformation from you and
 >others on this list. I offer my research on the "restricted
 >codes" as an example of how this  operates. You just don't get
 >it, do you?

        I don't either...

 >I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another film sample is
 >a serious problem. (He did once but everyone forgets that.
 >Kodak dishonestly protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
 >the less that Ray did try to have the film verified) I believe

What you mean to say is that he offered some 'leader' for
analysis. No _exposed_ film. If I'm wrong, you'll have to excuse
me and tell me when this was done exactly because I have a
letter from Kodak which says that all they got, for analysis,
was a piece of leader, _no_ film.



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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:28:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Ed Gehrman
 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >>to: Larry Hatch
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

Previously, Larry wrote:

 >>Please correct me if I am wrong, but my perception is that the
 >>vast majority of list readers is that Santilli et. cie. are
 >>nothing but complete and utter fakes.

To which, Ed declared:

 >Yes, the vast majority of list readers probably agree with you
 >but that's because they've been led to believe half truths,
 >distortions, misinformation and disinformation from you and
 >others on this list. I offer my research on the "restricted
 >codes" as an example of how this  operates. You just don't get
 >it, do you?

No, Ed I do not get it.

The restricted codes you speak of mean nothing because they do
not relate directly to the film itself. Let's play your game and
pretend that the codes are real, i.e. correct codes for the
subject at hand. So what? If I write "Top Secret" on a film can
and enclose footage of me wearing a banana costume, does that
mean that the government had secret footage of me engaged in
some alternate lifestyle? Of course not. Beyond that, your
circular logic is totally dependent on believing what ever Ray
tells you. And let us not forget, Ed, that Ray maintained he had
original camera footage until Bob Shell caught him in a lie.

Regarding such, Ed writes:

 >I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another film sample is
 >a serious problem. (He did once but everyone forgets that.
 >Kodak dishonestly protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
 >the less that Ray did try to have the film verified)

Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray Santilli has
_never_ had a scrap of original film. The only footage he has
ever offered for analysis is a dupe or a video tape. No one has
forgotten what Kodak has said about Ray's film; it simply
doesn't matter. On the other hand, where is YOUR proof that
"Kodak dishonestly portrayed this incident"? You complain about
lack of proof. Let's see yours in the next post.

None the less, Ed states:

 >I believe
 >he has his reasons for not doing this again and I accept that
 >because I haven't found him to be a dishonest person.

Really? And what proof do you have for this considering he tried
to mislead everyone about the AA film being camera original?

Incredibly, Ed maintains:

 >Since
 >he's not dishonest (if you disagree, what is your evidence for
 >these views) and a criminal hoaxer, there must be some other
 >reason.  (As I wrote before, he _was_ visited by US government
 >authorities and still refuses to talk about it.)

See the previous paragraph for one of many reasons to doubt
Ray's truthfulness.

Regarding his visit by Government Thugs; Ray refuses to talk
about it, so how much could you possibly know? What research
have you done on the subject? Oh yeah, I forgot. You simply
asked Ray and he said,"Yeah."

Very scientific.

And finally, Ed declares:

 >After investigating the AA for over four, I still believe the
 >footage is legitimate.

 >Why? Because there is not one... again... not one shred of
 >_evidence_ that it was hoaxed. I'll ask you the same question
 >I've posed to Rebecca and James:  _Aside_ from not having a
 >sample of the film, list your best evidence for believing
 >that... as you say, "Santilli et. cie. are nothing but complete
 >and utter fakes!".

 >Do you have more to add to this list. Why not do some research
 >for a change?

Boy, talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

No offense Ed, but your so called "research" seems to go
something like this:


ED:            Hi, Mr. Santilli. Tell me, is the AA film real?

SANTILLI:      Why, yes, Ed. Of course it is.

ED:            Thanks, Mr. Santilli, for your time. Now I can
                wrap up this mystery!

                Boy, everyone on the "Updates" list is sure gonna
                be surprised!"

You know, Ed, if you did even some minor research at the
Archives of this list, you'd find quite a few discussions
regarding faults within the AA footage that do not match the
expectations of footage from that era.

On the other hand, you do maintain that, as a result of said
research, you've found nothing but "half truths, distortions,
misinformation and disinformation" from members on this list. As
a list member, I am offended. Please specify in the archives
you've researched exactly where this occurred. Since it happened
so often, you should have copious notes on where to look. I
expect to see this in your next post.

Regarding the AA film, itself, perhaps you should do some
research into the appropriate anti-contamination procedures for
the 40's and 50's. Did you know that bio-hazard and radiation
suits (like the ones worn in the AA film) were supposed to be
two layers thick? Did you know that they were supposed to be
taped shut at all the seams? Did you know that they were
supposed to have independent air supplies? The suits worn in the
AA film aren't even air tight! A simple surgical mask would have
been just as effective. The suits serve no purpose other than
hiding the identity of the "doctors" on screen.

Sorry, Ed. But the AA film is a fake. Go chase another windmill.

Oh, yeah. If I don't see your own "proof" in your next post, no
matter who it's to, I'll have to assume you are simply engaging
in "half truths, distortions, misinformation and disinformation"
as you put it.

Put up or shut up.

later,
Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:27:42 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:32:15 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Re: The Drake Equation

 >From: Dennis Stacy
 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:04:55 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:45:19 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously I had offered:

 >>And if we're wrong about "life as we know it" here on our own
 >>planet, then "life as we DON'T know it" must surely be within
 >>the realm of possibility on other planets; even seemingly
 >>hostile ones.

Dennis replied:

 >I don't doubt that there is life elsewhere in the universe. I do
 >doubt that spacefaring civilizations are a dime a dozen.

Hi Dennis,

I never implied that life of any kind was a dime a dozen. In
fact, the issue of spacefaring civilizations never came up until
now. I did state that life has been found in conditions that
science always thought were too hostile here on

Earth. If it can happen here, it can happen out there.

Moving on, Dennis wrote:

 >Just today I came across a few factoids on life here. In the
 >approximate 3.5 billion years of life on this planet, there have
 >been something like a billion species, 99.9% of which are now
 >extinct, and only one species of which has developed human
 >intelligence.

Not to be unduly argumentative, Dennis; but how do you know this
to be true? We have no idea how intelligent dolphins are much
less an extinct species. For all we know, dinosaurs played
checkers in the park on Sundays! ;)

Dennis points out:

 >At least five times in our own past, life on this planet has
 >suffered huge, apparently abrupt extinctions, either because of
 >drastic climate changes or through collisions with another
 >object hurtling through space. .

And yet life happened again, and again, and again, and again....
What happened to the delicate chain of circumstances that
brought about life in the first place? Doesn't sound too random
if life keeps coming back, does it?

Finally, I pointed out:

 >Regarding your assumption about underwater metal work; obviously
 >you are unaware of underwater welding? Submerged metal work is
 >done all the time.

Dennis replied:


 >Submerged metal work is done all the time here because we
 >evolved on land, having discovered fire along the way. It's not
 >easy to discover fire underwater.

Perhaps I'm being nit-picky, but that wasn't your original
position when you wrote:

 >It's damnably difficult to light a
 >furnace and smelt iron ore when you're surrounded by water.

The issue was capability to achieve; not discover. On the other
hand, I guess underwater volcanos do not exist. :)

End of the line for me on this topic.

Take care,
Roger







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 18:22:42 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:25:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >>to: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >So far I have the following:

 >1. Santilli is a fake!

 >2. Santilli is a liar!

 >3. Santilli made money!

 >4. The cammeraman is a big nothing!


Dear Ed,

I think you summed it up correctly. There is no convincing
evidence that the AA film is a hoax. The problem is, I think,
fourfold.

1. Ray Santilli doesn't play ball, but his reasons are unclear.

2. The simple human intolerance to ambiguity. Either someone
offers definitive proof or he/she is a fake/liar/conman.

3. Science never offers definitive proof of anything, but many
ufologists are unaware of that or ignore that. This stifles
research, because research that doesn't lead to definitive proof
in the short term seems unproductive to them.

4. Some key persons in the US UFO establishment not only shy
away from research - probably for the above reasons -, but do
pass judgement on people who claim to have a piece of the
puzzle. This was also the case with Philip Corso, whose case was
not properly investigated either and for the same reasons.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         The Rise of the Replicants

From: Carlos Roselli <croselli@email.ypf.com.ar>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:33:29 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:37:09 -0500
Subject: The Rise of the Replicants


Hello from Argentina,

I have read about a lecture given by Jacques Vallee in England,
entitled "The Rise of the Replicants", where he postulates
possible world scenarios for the next years.

It would be very interesting to know what the author thinks,
considering his background.

Any notice, how to get a reprint, who may know, etc?

Thanks,

Carlos








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                  Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:06:36 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:39:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:23:50 -0600
 >From: SMiles Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >Subject:  Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >From one elist to the next...

 >Source: www.gettingit.com

 >Bugs Bunny and Other UFO Victims
 >Reality isn't always consensual
 >BY ROBERT ANTON WILSON

 >12.13.99

 >Although few people remember this, Bugs Bunny was the first UFO
 >"abductee" in a 1952 cartoon called "Hasty Hare."

 >The next case did not occur until nine years later, in 1961,
 >when Betty and Barney Hill famously encountered the "greys" from
 >Zeta Reticuli, who molested them sexually and otherwise, and
 >were also wearing Nazi uniforms. At least, Barney Hill
 >remembered the malign midgets as garbed in Nazi regalia; Betty,
 >for some reason, never did recall that poignantly puzzling
 >detail.
 >
 >Now, many millions have allegedly suffered the same sort of
 >"extraterrestrial" sexual abuse, according to Abductees
 >Anonymous, a support group for survivors. Budd Hopkins has
 >become rock star famous for helping people "remember" such
 >experiences. And this is not just another New Age fad. Dr. John
 >Mack, a distinguished scientist on the staff of the psychiatry
 >department at Harvard University, has written two books on the
 >subject. And Harvard, which once gave Dr. Timothy Leary the
 >bum's rush for having weird ideas, allows Dr. Mack to remain on
 >their staff, with all the prestige that bestows upon this
 >eldritch and Lovecraftian topic.

 >One giant Snip for mankind

 >Frankly, I cannot accept either the blind faith of the True
 >Believers or the dogmatic denials of the Establishment. Like Dr.
 >Mack, I think the whole topic needs less sensationalism and more
 >open-minded research.

 >One small snip for man

 >After all, the next person engulfed by this non-ordinary reality
 >might be you or me.

Another blow to the insanity of opinion disquised as dogma.  Let
the games begin.

The sooner we establish the certaintly of our complete ignorence
on the subject, the quicker will we begin to apply real money to
real research as opposed to some of the fake crap we are forced
to adsorb, absorb and otherwise lap up at the beheast of the
Ex-Spurts (for those who have not been paying attention, a
has-been drip).

It's OK to say "I don't know."  It's not OK to say "I do" unless
you are getting married.  Uh, bad example.  OK, wait!  It's OK
to say "I do" if, for example, you are being sworn in court.....
scheiss, that ain't no good neither.  OK, I got it.  Wait.

You can say I do when you are waiting in line for Pia Zadora.
Anyone out there except my friend on the west coast who dasn't
know who Pia Zadora is, don't worry.  You are dead in the middle
and your life is over.  Just lay down and stop breathing.

J. Jaime Gesundt,  still breathing heavy but it ain't as easy as
it used to be.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:07:50 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:43:36 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:25:23 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Dear Jim and Jenny:

 >One word has me puzzled. Jenny said something like "In a
 >sceotical nation like the UK..."

 >Sceotical? I don't know what sceotical means, and my dictionary
 >is hidden under several layers of dust.

 >Nevertheless I'm willing to wager that the denizens of
 >California are as sceotical as anyone else, especially down in
 >the Los Angeles area.

 >"Sceotical" sounds like a highly majuberous term to me. Was it a
 >typo?

 >Very best wishes

 >- Larry Hatch

Hi,

Yes it was a typo. I was rushing because I have two sets of page
proofs, two indexes and 10,000 words to write for a book by
Christmas.

Sceotical should, of course, be septical. [Uh, sceptical? --ebk]

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:45:41 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:48:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Subject: Alien Autopsy
To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >The restricted codes you speak of mean nothing because they do
 >not relate directly to the film itself. Let's play your game and
 >pretend that the codes are real, i.e. correct codes for the
 >subject at hand. So what? If I write "Top Secret" on a film can
 >and enclose footage of me wearing a banana costume, does that
 >mean that the government had secret footage of me engaged in
 >some alternate lifestyle? Of course not. Beyond that, your
 >circular logic is totally dependent on believing what ever Ray
 >tells you. And let us not forget, Ed, that Ray maintained he had
 >original camera footage until Bob Shell caught him in a lie.

Top Secret is one thing.  All know that designation but no one knew
about "restricted".  Get it...no one.  Top Secret might be the
expected designation on the date board, if they were to guess but they
would never just choose "restricted".  They would never have "guessed
the priority or the correct date for processing, either.  There is no
other explantion other than the hoaxers copying the information from
the film cans that they were given by Ray.  As for what Ray told Bob
S; I'd prefer that Bob answer that one himself.  Bob saw what he saw,
and was convinced 95 % that the film was legit.  The hoaxers were also
given film to try to process and try to get whatever they could from
it.  These were supposed to be honest dealings.  Why should Ray think
otherwise?  Are you saying that there was no film at all, only video.
That is not correct.  There was old film; Bob S and others saw it and
the hoaxers saw it.

<snip>


 >Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray Santilli has
 >_never_ had a scrap of original film. The only footage he has
 >ever offered for analysis is a dupe or a video tape.

No! That is not correct and is an example of misinformation.
Ray had what he bought from the cammeraman: twenty-two rolls of
old film. Volker is pleased, in fact, very pleased with his
purchase.  Do you really think he'd pay $100,000 for a dupe of
an old video?  Is Volker a dupe or in on it and what does he
have to gain from being involved?

<snip>


 >He (Ray) tried
 >to mislead everyone about the AA film being camera original?

What the hell are you talking about here?  Show me the misleading
quote.  I don't think you understand this at all?  Please elaborate.

<snip>

 >Ray refuses to talk
 >about it, so how much could you possibly know? What research
 >have you done on the subject? Oh yeah, I forgot. You simply
 >asked Ray and he said,"Yeah."

Ray, in an online interview, June 95, stated that he would be
meeting with government authorities.  I asked him about that
meeting after the fact and he said he wasn't free to talk about
it.

 >No offense Ed, but your so called "research" seems to go
 >something like this:


 >ED:            Hi, Mr. Santilli. Tell me, is the AA film real?

 >SANTILLI:      Why, yes, Ed. Of course it is.

 >ED:            Thanks, Mr. Santilli, for your time. Now I can
                 >wrap up this mystery!



No Roger, it went like this.  I wrote "Creatures With No Business
Here", back in 96,

http://www.mufor.org/gehrman1.htm

and sent it to Ray asking if there were any mistakes or factual
errors, and if there were, could he point them out to me. That's
how we started our very limited relationship.  I am not his
friend or employee.  I simply believe his version of events, not
yours.  We have had email conversations; that's all!  I also
have letters he wrote to others concerning the film.

 >You know, Ed, if you did even some minor research at the
 >Archives of this list, you'd find quite a few discussions
 >regarding faults within the AA footage that do not match the
 >expectations of footage from that era.

Yes and they've all been answered in one way or another.  There
are no faults that I can find.  Why would hoaxers go to all the
expense of creating  a production like this and then...my god
the contamination suits are all wrong.  Use your head.  How
could this happen in such a well planned and organized event?
The suits are what they are.  Who knows what was going through
their heads or what they were protecting themselves against.
All I can say is that they must have served some function or
they wouldn't have been worn.  The person to the rear in the
footage  is wearing a surgical mask.  Can you tell who he is?
Perhaps Tom Cruise?

 >I expect to see this in your next post.

You do not control this dialogue.  Expect all you want!  Where
is your story line?  How did all this come together.  Where did
Ray get the money to create this "hoax"?

What was his motive?  Please, just one hint as to how this all
came down... and maybe a witness or two.  I know this is hard for
you folks but how about some proof that it all happened as you
say it did.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:28:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:52:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


I've started several responses to this thread and thought better
of getting into it.  However, we are beginning to add to the
confusion with this wandering discussion.

 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:29:25 -0500
 >From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

Ed commented:

 >>I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another film sample is
 >>a serious problem. (He did once but everyone forgets that.
 >>Kodak dishonestly protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
 >>the less that Ray did try to have the film verified) I believe

To which Jacques replied:

 >What you mean to say is that he offered some 'leader' for
 >analysis. No _exposed_ film. If I'm wrong, you'll have to
 >excuse me and tell me when this was done exactly because I have
 >a letter from Kodak which says that all they got, for analysis,
 >was a piece of leader, _no_ film.

The pieces of "film" that were submitted by Ray for analysis
were not leader, but reportedly from the end of one of the reels
of tape.  However, I believe that it has been shown that these
were copies, rather than original.  Bob Shell, if he's still on
the list, can provide more details.

Leader usually has no image on it at all, and the pieces of film
that were sent to Bob Kiviat (and given to Philip Mantle, I
believe) did show some sort of meaningless image that was not
(obviously) related to the AA "film".  There might have been a
connection, but not enough proof was given to solidfy that as
fact.  Those two samples were also torn so that one edge of the
film (which contained the date code markings) was missing.  All
of this was very strange if the film had been truly submitted to
prove anything.  Samples of film were also given to the producer
of the Channel 4 production related to the AA "film", but
nothing was ever announced regarding that material.

I would suspect that some of those in this thread may not have
been involved in all of the discussion this has generated since
1995.  Like many others I have allowed this particular facet of
ufology to drop off my radar screen, awaiting some reason to get
back into a meaningful discussion. Philip's announcement that he
is working on a follow up book on the AA "film" has apparently
sparked further discussion, but I suspect that the theme of this
publication will be far different than that of his earlier work
with Michael Hesseman.

The answer to this ufological mystery lies with Ray Santilli.
He is under no obligation to provide any answers, and I find
that there's little to be gained by beating this same dead horse
over and over again.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Little Green Men

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:47:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:59:02 -0500
Subject: Little Green Men



This may be of some interest to Listfolk:

   ------- Forwarded message follows -------
Little Green Men
Justin Raimondo

The excuses given for big government take many forms. But NASA
has surely come up with something unique in world history. They
are trying to convince us that there is life on Mars, that we'd
better speed our way there to find out more, and that's why they
need more of your money.

Richard Zare of Stanford University explains the significance:
"what if life is not special to earth but ubiquitous in the
universe? We will only be able to answer this question, let
alone understand the consequences, if we revive America's
flagging interest in supporting scientific research."

By pure coincidence, Zare is a scientist doing research. He is a
member of a team of 10 government scientists working on the
life-on- Mars project, and he says what we will find could
"alter the way we think about human existence and our world."
Gee, that sounds like a good reason to spend billions.

Within hours of NASA's announcement of life on Mars--and only
days after consultant Richard Morris leaked the news to his
prostitute-- President Clinton pledged that "the American space
program will put its full intellectual power and technological
prowess behind the search for future evidence of life on Mars."

So far, the "evidence" of this life is so tenuous as to be
practically nonexistent: the presence of certain chemical
compounds embedded in a Martian asteroid. But in the 1950s,
these same compounds were found in asteroids known to have
originated in the early prehistory of the solar system, long
before the beginning of life.

As Stanley Miller of the University of California at San Diego
said, "You find a lot of these hydrocarbon compounds in diesel
exhaust and all kinds of combustion products."

While conceding that their alleged evidence is far from
conclusive, NASA claims that its theory is the "most reasonable
and simplest explanation of the 4.2-pound potato-shaped
meteorite found in Antarctica."

In fact, their theory is far from simple: it presupposes not
only a single organism but a whole population of
extraterrestrial life forms. Add to this the fact that the same
chemical compounds can originate non-biologically, and NASA's
life-on-Mars hypothesis amounts to nothing but wild speculation.

The quasi-religious character of the let's-go-to-Mars movement
is reflected in the hopped-up rhetoric of the president, who
declared that the discovery of extraterrestrial life "will
surely be one of the most stunning insights into the universe
that science has ever uncovered."

"All of us are skeptical, but thrilled and humbled by this
prospect," said a humble Daniel Goldin, NASA administrator. But
scientists have long calculated that, given the sheer number of
stars with planets, there is a mathematical probability that at
least some of them will contain organic life. Even if the NASA
scientists are right and primitive bacteria did indeed exist on
Mars some 3.5 billion years ago, this is not a good reason to
pour billions into an interplanetary search for E.T.

Nonetheless, NASA had already planned to send two spacecrafts to
Mars every 25 months well into the 21st century. The Great
Discovery, however, will undoubtedly speed up this timetable,
and it won't be long before they are running a regular shuttle.

What this means is a flood of government subsidies for the
techno- elite, fat government contracts for the politically
well-connected, and plenty of reflected glory for politicians of
both major parties to bask in: all of it orchestrated by a sleek
Hollywood-style public relations campaign, combining New Age
flim-flammery with the alluring imagery of an ancient
civilization buried beneath the sands of Mars.

Clinton used the occasion of the Martian discovery to announce a
"bipartisan space summit," to be convened by the futuristic Al
Gore, an event that will launch one of the biggest corporate
welfare schemes in American history. This panel will be truly
bipartisan: the Republicans, who pose as the great
budget-slashers, are even more deeply committed to this scam
than the Democrats.

Newt Gingrich is a fanatical space cadet, whose first book was
about the necessity of tax-funded space colonies. In his
infamous lecture series on American civilization, he praises the
marriage of big government and big science. It's "worth the
costs." Indeed, big projects are particularly suited to
government control, provided they are "focused."

Microbiologist Julian Kane isn't buying it. He says the
discovery of micro-fossils on the Martian asteroid is "an
incredible assertion" that "demands rigorous investigation of
every conceivable possibility, including fraud." He compares the
announcements with the infamous Piltdown Hoax of 1912, which
involved a fake fossil said to be the so-called Missing Link.

"However," says Kane, "a life-on-Mars hoax (possibly perpetrated
by a brilliant chemist with a warped sense of humor) that could
pass NASA's top scientists, high-tech equipment, and repeated
careful analysis would go down as the ne plus ultra scientific
ruse of all time."

The possibility of fraud is made more likely by the astounding
fact that this alleged Martian asteroid was discovered more than
a decade ago, in 1984. Why did the government keep their
discovery under wraps for so long? As the proponents of billions
in tax dollars for space research come forward with their hands
out, this is the first question that ought to be asked.

In any event, whatever the true nature of the Martian asteroid,
NASA propagandists and space cadets in both parties are
certainly guilty of one gigantic hoax: the idea that government
in space creates anything different than it does on earth:
confusion, coercion, boondoggles, and theft, albeit this time on
a cosmic scale.

--
Ian Geldard, Netmaster
The Libertarian Alliance
25 Chapter Chambers, Esterbrooke Street,
London SW1P 4NN

URL http://www.capital.demon.co.uk/LA

LA DH/DSS PGP ID: 0xA608E363
LA DH/DSS PGP fingerprint:
1E0B 215C 4FD7 4A11 B842  323F DCCC B1C4 A608 E363

All liberty consists only in being subject to no man's will,
and nothing denotes a slave but a dependence on the will of
others.
ALGERNON SIDNEY (1622-1683)


--
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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:13:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:35:29 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:07:50 +0000
 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:25:23 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Dear Jim and Jenny:

 >>One word has me puzzled. Jenny said something like "In a
 >>sceotical nation like the UK..."

 >>Sceotical? I don't know what sceotical means, and my dictionary
 >>is hidden under several layers of dust.

 >>Nevertheless I'm willing to wager that the denizens of
 >>California are as sceotical as anyone else, especially down in
 >>the Los Angeles area.

 >>"Sceotical" sounds like a highly majuberous term to me. Was it a
 >>typo?

 >>Very best wishes

 >>- Larry Hatch

 >Hi,

 >Yes it was a typo. I was rushing because I have two sets of page
 >proofs, two indexes and 10,000 words to write for a book by
 >Christmas.

 >Sceotical should, of course, be septical. [Uh, sceptical? --ebk]

 >Best wishes,

 >Jenny Randles

Hi Jenny, EBK and others.

We spell it skeptical, but I got the point.

[Yes and pronounce 'Roof' as 'Ruf' which you then
  fix with 'Tuls'? - ebk]

So far nobody has challenged my use of the word "majuberous".

[Challenged - ebk]

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:32:44 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:42:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >From: Ed Gehrman
 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 07:04:05 -0800
 >>to: Larry Hatch
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto

To everyone who still cares on this list about Roswell, alleged
alien corpses, and American ufo secrecy, etc,

Roger Evans wrote :

 > Sorry, Ed. But the AA film is a fake. Go chase another windmill.

 >Oh, yeah. If I don't see your own "proof" in your next post, no
 >matter who it's to, I'll have to assume you are simply engaging
 >in "half truths, distortions, misinformation and disinformation"
 >as you put it.

 >Put up or shut up.

 >later,
 >Roger Evans >>


This discussion is reaching a point where it seems appropriate
to recall a couple of testimonies about the AA footage, which
should make us ponder about another interesting aspect of the
problem, wether the film itself is authentic or not. This other
aspect is the question : who made the film and where does it
come from ?

The prevalent opinion seems to remain that Ray Santilli is the
hoaxer. But there are many reasons to think that it's just not
so simple.

On this list, one year ago, Bob Shell said and repeated that
Captain McAndrews had told him that he had seen the film in the
USAF archives, before its release by Santilli. He said that, if
I have the story right, when he asked him if he had the address
of the mysterious cameraman.

And McAndrew is the author of "Roswell Case Closed"! How do you
explain that? If the story is true, here is a couple of
"explanations" to play with :

-The film is authentic and the cameraman's story is basically
true. Hard to believe, but here I agree with some rather scarce
people that the question remains open. Sorry, but I have not
read yet any decisive proof that it is a fake. Maybe the
cameraman did not have any original film, only a clandestine
duplicate ?

-The film is a hoax made by a secret service (in the CIA?),
possibly based on a true film (close to it), and the USAF was
not informed of the operation, the purpose of which was to
debunk Roswell. But then they were pursuing the same goal
independantly! How could they keep such secrets from each other,
knowing the USAF efforts to debunk Roswell as well? Crazy, isn't
it!

We also have the testimony of Colin Andrews, who just confirmed
it to me:

He says that, on June 26, 1995, he visited Ray Santilli with two
other researchers: the Japanese Johsen Takano, and the Chinese
Dr Hoang-Yung Chiang from Taiwan. Both Takano and Hoang-Yung,
after the projection, told him that they had seen it already.
Johsen, when his government had requested UFO information from
the American government. The film was part of the documentation
brought to Tokyo by a CIA courier. Hoang-Yung, in the course of
an official visit to CIA's headquarters in Langley, Virginia,
where they had been shown several hours of films.

If the story is true, we have at least to consider that such
revelations are part of a kind of long term "educationa "
program.

Actually, the scenes in the Santilli footage were precisely the
ones missing in the CIA footage, said Hoang-Yung to Colin
Andrews! If this detail is true, we have here a strong
indication in favor of the authenticity of the film.

Perhaps the AA film was even an accidental leak, but they
decided to let it go, knowing that it would not be believed, but
that it would work its way in the "collective inconscious", and
contribute in the long run to that educational program.

In any case, Ray Santilli looks much more like a pawn in an
obscure game than a master hoaxer, to me. He did not know
anyhting about ufos and Roswell!

I would very much appreciate if such testimonies (there are
others like that) were  given some serious attention, other than
being summarily dismissed, as "crap", or I don't know what.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         New Book: Strange Cop Cases

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:32:23
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:45:03 -0500
Subject: New Book: Strange Cop Cases


Source: APB News,

http://www.apbnews.com/media/reviews/books/1999/12/16/hidden1216_01.html

Stig

***

When Police Meet the Paranormal ...
Hidden Files Examines Strange Cop Cases

Dec. 16, 1999

By Maralyn Lois Polak

Cases of mutilated cows and a mysteriously preserved body are
chronicled in book.

NEW YORK (APBnews.com) -- In Costa County, Colo., two startled
deputies told their sheriff they witnessed a cow "floating
through the air in a beam of light," held aloft by an unearthly
buzz.

Around the same time in Mora County, N.M., sheriff's Deputy Greg
Laumbach got a call about a cow from a hunter and didn't think
much was amiss, until he actually examined the grotesque wounds
of the mutilated cow.

Skin and half a nostril had been removed from the cow's face in
clean, crisp cuts. The tongue had been sliced off and the cow's
genitalia were missing.

Think Dragnet meets X-Files and you'll have a handle on Sue
Kovach's book Hidden Files: Law Enforcement's True Case Stories
of the Unexplained and Paranormal (Contemporary Books, $14.95)
-- wacky, wild, weird police cases bordering on the incredible,
peculiar, implausible and downright impossible.


Extraterrestrials and U.S. government


Theories behind the cattle mutilations, Kovach speculates, range
from extraterrestrial "harvesting" of cells for some purpose --
perhaps new methods of protecting themselves from disease -- to
secret U.S. government projects about which citizens must be
kept in the dark. Neither prospect floats my boat.

You don't usually hear of regular-joe police involvement in
"paranormal" cases, particularly when it comes to cattle
mutilations, UFO encounters, mysterious monsterlike creatures,
ghost "visitations," unexplained graveyard exhumations, occult
sacrifices and other odd stuff.

But Kovach has uncovered an arresting array of atypical cases in
this vaguely goofy catalog of law enforcement
believe-it-or-nots, where, she writes, "most incidents involve
actual police cases, occurring while the officer was on duty."

There's something for everyone here, from a police chase of an
alleged UFO through several jurisdictions to a supposed spirit
of a Native American medicine man intervening to save the life
of a Royal Canadian Mounted Police constable in 1986.


Police 'paranoia'


The author notes a general police "paranoia" about discussing
such matters on the record. This is prudent logic on their part,
since law enforcement careers have been damaged by mentioning
words such as UFO or ghost. Though, paradoxically, police are --
or would be -- among the most credible witnesses for such
goings-on, since normally they do not truck with superstition or
folklore. Some were willing to share their stories:

�Jeopardizing his 21-year police career, Hernando County, Fla.,
sheriff's Deputy Ron Chancey filed a report saying that he'd
seen from his patrol car a huge, dark, boomerang-shaped object
flying some 300 feet off the ground beside him. "It's changed my
life forever and got me thinking about my beliefs," he said. "I
really have to believe there is something else out there. And as
wonderful as that prospect can be, it's also somewhat scary."

�Sgt. Jim Riffle recalls eerie goings-on after the West Virginia
State Police converted a deceased man's home into a small
three-person barrack for their troopers. Everything was fine
until they bulldozed and paved over the man's precious, perfect
front lawn. "I think we upset him a bit," Riffle says, recalling
the strange thumpings, typing sounds, pacing noises, door
slammings, and once even a "horrendous bang" as though somebody
had kicked in the back door.

�Deep in the Appalachian Mountains of West Virginia, Morgantown
Police Chief Bennie Palmer and Officer Ralph Chapman received a
call from the town cemetery's caretaker about some apparent
vandalism. The lid of a concrete vault had burst through the
ground. There were no signs of digging -- in fact, the ground
had broken from underneath, but it didn't look like it was
caused by an explosion.

It was the grave of Harry Spitz, a child who had died of cholera
in 1912, but the body was well-preserved and still had some
skin. "In fact, you could recognize Harry from his facial
features. He even had lots of long blond hair," Chapman said.
Even after Harry was re-buried and apparently behaving himself,
the officers found themselves haunted by his memory. Not only
had Harry been in remarkably good shape, but so was his
clothing, a stuffed lion found at his feet and some dried
flowers. Yet the fabric on the lid of the casket had rotted
away. No one could explain why.


Paranormal help


Some police officers even shared instances in which paranormal occurrences
have helped them solve cases.

�Detective Robert W. Lee of the Lake Oswego, Ore., Police Department didn't
just embrace the paranormal after a psychic helped him with a homicide
investigation -- in which it eventually was revealed that a husband had
killed his wife -- he even married the woman who provided him with 30
details that eventually proved true.

�When Los Angeles Police Department Detective Tim Moss was assigned to the
brutal stabbing murder case of well-known California psychic D. Scott Rogo,
the officer fielded amazingly precise predictions from a handful of Rogo's
psychic colleagues, who even were able to pinpoint the owner of a bloody
fingerprint on a drinking glass.

�Deputy Rich Strasser, of the El Dorado County, Calif.,
Sheriff's Office, was assigned to a baffling missing persons
case in June 1994 when a driver called 911 after claiming to
spot an "apparition" of a naked woman by the side of a highway
en route to Nevada from California. An investigation revealed a
crashed car in the nearby underbrush and a 3-year-old boy still
alive next to the amazingly preserved corpse of his 24-year-old
mother. "It's almost as though the condition of her body was
preserved to make things easier for her son," Strasser said. "In
his mind, he thought his mom was just asleep."

**

Maralyn Lois Polak, a Philadelphia journalist, editor and
spoken-word artist, has reviewed books for The New York Times
and is the author of The Writer as Celebrity: Intimate
Interviews.

*Buy Sue Kovach's's Hidden Files

�Copyright 1999 APB Multimedia Inc. All rights reserved.

*ABOUT APB











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:37:56 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:59:20 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:07:50 +0000
 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:25:23 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Dear Jim and Jenny:

 >>One word has me puzzled. Jenny said something like "In a
 >>sceotical nation like the UK..."

 >>Sceotical? I don't know what sceotical means, and my dictionary
 >>is hidden under several layers of dust.

 >>Nevertheless I'm willing to wager that the denizens of
 >>California are as sceotical as anyone else, especially down in
 >>the Los Angeles area.

 >>"Sceotical" sounds like a highly majuberous term to me. Was it a
 >>typo?

 >>Very best wishes

 >>- Larry Hatch

 >Hi,

 >Yes it was a typo. I was rushing because I have two sets of page
 >proofs, two indexes and 10,000 words to write for a book by
 >Christmas.

 >Sceotical should, of course, be septical. [Uh, sceptical? --ebk]


Freshly coined, but I think she had it RIGHT, Errol! <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 18 December>**
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 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                       Re: The Rise of the Replicants

From: Stephen Miles Lewis <stephen.lewis@tsl.state.tx.us>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:21:44 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:06:27 -0500
Subject: Re: The Rise of the Replicants


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:33:29 -0300
 >From: Carlos Roselli <croselli@email.ypf.com.ar>
 >Subject: The Rise of the Replicants
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hello from Argentina,

 >I have read about a lecture given by Jacques Vallee in England,
 >entitled "The Rise of the Replicants", where he postulates
 >possible world scenarios for the next years.

 >It would be very interesting to know what the author thinks,
 >considering his background.


Howdy Carlos,

I was at the London conf that Vallee was supposed to speak at.
Unfortunately, he was unable to attend due to unknown (to me
atleast) problems. His friend and my acquaintance
parapsychologist Stanley Krippner presented an outline of
Jacques' paper. I have reproduced the abstract below as well as
included the URLs for my review of the rest of the conf, copies
are at both my web site and archived within the UFO UpDates
archive on www.UFOMIND.com (see below).

I never did write a detailed synopsis of Vallee's proposed
paper. What I did say was simply:


"Once upstairs it was finally time for Jacques' paper as
presented by none other than THE Stanley Krippner whom I had
spoken with on a panel back in 1995 at the SAC conference.
Before his speech I had the opportunity to briefly reintroduce
myself. I was flattered he remembered me.

I will hold off now on talking about his presentation of
Jacques' paper. Suffice to say he did a great job of presenting
Jacques' outline, filling in the framework with his own
experiences which were very worthwhile. I will be reviewing his
topic in depth as another seperate article for the ELFIS Mind
Kontrol Corner department next installment."

Mainly, Vallee's paper seemed almost an apology for having his
hands in two arenas which have led to the deaths of "cultists";
his connection to the first Remote Viewing experiments at
Stanford as well as his early involvement in the formation of
the Internet. He used the ideas of Philip Kindred Dick (sci fi
author and "experiencer") to speak about the approaching future
wherein Artificial Intelligences, Virtual Realities and the
Imaginal Realms of Consciousness in question might again be
manipulated or distorted by others in an ever increasing schism
between the consensual hallucination we call "reality" and these
Other Worlds.

See the links below:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/may/m20-006.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jun/m25-005.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/may/m20-007.shtml
http://www.elfis.net/RnR/RnR9/smlotw.htm
http://www.elfis.net/RnR/RnR9/smlotw2.htm
http://www.elfis.net/RnR/RnR9/absbio.htm#JVAbs

"Jacques F. Vallee
The Rise of the Replicants: Four Scenarios Impacting
Consciousness in the Years 2000 - 2025

At a time when the stability of the world's economy is in
question, and the technical community faces its greatest
challenge ever in the passage to the Euro and the Year 2000, it
is not difficult to think of dramatic developments impacting the
human environment. History teaches, however, that profound
change in consciousness is subtler than mere extrapolation of
today's crises. Here we attempt to reframe several future
scenarios around fundamental issues: will the development of
novel technical structures such as the quantum computer
challenge the very notion of what it means to be human? Can the
new communications media continue to grow without precipitating
a major restructuring of social systems, and what are the
implications? Survival (both individual and societal) will mean
something different in the next century, and so will novel
spiritual movements based on the Web. These developments will
carry danger as well as seduction. Those who try to ignore them
may find themselves trapped in visionary fantasies with which
humanity hasn't had any previous experience."



Bottom line on Vallee's paper was that it could have been great,
but, since he wasn't there to present it, and I suspect he never
finished writing it... there wasn't much to report on.

SMiles

-=-=-=-=-







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                             Re: On False Memory

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:46:02 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:09:44 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:07:50 +0000
 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:25:23 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 20:05:13 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 14:50:51 +0000
 >>>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: On False Memory
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Dear Jim and Jenny:

 >>One word has me puzzled. Jenny said something like "In a
 >>sceotical nation like the UK..."

 >>Sceotical? I don't know what sceotical means, and my dictionary
 >>is hidden under several layers of dust.

 >>Nevertheless I'm willing to wager that the denizens of
 >>California are as sceotical as anyone else, especially down in
 >>the Los Angeles area.

 >>"Sceotical" sounds like a highly majuberous term to me. Was it a
 >>typo?

 >>Very best wishes

 >>- Larry Hatch

 >Hi,

 >Yes it was a typo. I was rushing because I have two sets of page
 >proofs, two indexes and 10,000 words to write for a book by
 >Christmas.

 >Sceotical should, of course, be septical. [Uh, sceptical? --ebk]


Hi,

Sceptical, Skeptical, septical, spectacle, you've got me
confused now.

It was, of course, meant to be skeptical.

One day Americans will get the hang of British irony.

You are hereby sentenced to watch episodes of Yes, Minister for
six hours.


Best wishes,


Jenny








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:04:03 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:25:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >From: Ed Gehrman
 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:45:41 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:48:16 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


Previously, I had written;

 >>The restricted codes you speak of mean nothing because they do
 >>not relate directly to the film itself.

Ed replies:

 >Top Secret is one thing.  All know that designation but no one knew
 >about "restricted".  Get it...no one.

What you don't seem to get is that the suit does not make the
man. Regardless of what's on the cans, they do not validate
their contents.

But let's continue your fantasy. You wrote:

 >As for what Ray told Bob
 >S; I'd prefer that Bob answer that one himself.  Bob saw what he saw,
 >and was convinced 95 % that the film was legit.

Oh really? Here's what Bob Shell had to say about the AA film in
October of 1998:

"I never said that I can prove _anything_. All we have is video
made from purported 16 mm film, photocopies of film box labels,
the cameraman's statements, and a lot of information supplied to
me and others by Ray Santilli. We have no hard proof that there
IS any film or that there is a cameraman."

How do you explain this statement from someone that you claim
was "convinced 95 % that the film was legit"? You can't Ed,
because you are making stuff up as you go along to support your
view.

Moving on, Ed claims:

 >The hoaxers were also
 >given film to try to process and try to get whatever they could from
 >it.

The film (if there was any) was already processed, Ed. Why do
you continue with this nonsense?

According to Ray, here is what the cameraman told him:

"After filming, I had several hundred reels. I separated problem
reels which required special attention in processing (these I
would do later). The first batch was sent through to Washington
and I processed the remainder a few days later."

Incredibly, Ed asks:

 >Are you saying that there was no film at all, only video.
 >That is not correct.  There was old film; Bob S and others saw
 >it and the hoaxers saw it.

Read the post, Ed. Read the post.

I said that Ray has never had any original footage. All he has
shown was a dupe or a video.

Do you know what a "dupe" is? It's a print struck from camera
original or another dupe.

Then again, if you'd done any real research, you'd know this
already....

Continuing, I pointed out:

 >>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray Santilli has
 >>_never_ had a scrap of original film. The only footage he has
 >>ever offered for analysis is a dupe or a video tape.

Ed responds:

 >No! That is not correct and is an example of misinformation.
 >Ray had what he bought from the cammeraman: twenty-two rolls of
 >old film. Volker is pleased, in fact, very pleased with his
 >purchase.  Do you really think he'd pay $100,000 for a dupe of
 >an old video?

Ed, this is getting embarrassing. No one is talking about a
"dupe of an old video"!

Do you even know the difference between film and video? From
your writing, I don't think you do. If you did, then you'd
understand what I meant when I wrote:

"The only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a dupe or
a video tape."

A "dupe _or_ a video tape", Ed. One or the other. This or that.
Here or there. Up or down. In or out. They are as different as
day or night.

More to the point, here is Bob Shell's take on the footage in
question:

"For the record, I do not now have, have never had, nor ever
seen any camera original film in this incident."

Let's continue our journey. I wrote:

 >>He (Ray) tried
 >>to mislead everyone about the AA film being camera original?

Ed responded:

 >What the hell are you talking about here?  Show me the misleading
 >quote.  I don't think you understand this at all?  Please elaborate.

Again, here is Bob Shell's info regarding Ray:

"Ray doesn't want to acknowledge that he does not have, and has
never had, any camera original film, just the copy print
material foisted off on him by the cameraman (who apparently
told him it was camera original material)."

Finally I advised:

 >You know, Ed, if you did even some minor research at the
 >Archives of this list, you'd find quite a few discussions
 >regarding faults within the AA footage that do not match the
 >expectations of footage from that era.

Ed's circular logic dictates:

 >Yes and they've all been answered in one way or another.  There
 >are no faults that I can find.  Why would hoaxers go to all the
 >expense of creating  a production like this and then...my god
 >the contamination suits are all wrong.  Use your head.  How
 >could this happen in such a well planned and organized event?

Duh! Maybe because someone made a mistake? The suits are wrong,
Ed. Deal with it. You asked for a "shred of proof". Well? Now
that you got some you want to shrug it off as simply "one of
those unexplained things".

By what you wrote, it's obvious you've done _no_ research into
the contamination suits. This is all the more silly considering
your plea about doing research and learning the truth about AA.
You don't want research.

You just want us to agree with you.

I think I was being reasonable when I declared:

 >I expect to see this in your next post.

I'm still waiting for the proof you supposedly have that
supports any of your own claims. I've given you mine. The
archives are full of more.

And finally, while developing nose bleed from the height to
which his hypocrisy soars , Ed maintains:

 >You do not control this dialogue.  Expect all you want!  Where
 >is your story line?  How did all this come together.  Where did
 >Ray get the money to create this "hoax"?

 >What was his motive?  Please, just one hint as to how this all
 >came down... and maybe a witness or two.  I know this is hard for
 >you folks but how about some proof that it all happened as you
 >say it did.

We could ask the same of you, Ed. In fact we have! But it does
no good. This whole thing reminds me of a scene from Monty
Python's 'Life of Brian' where a group sits around asking,
"What have the Romans really ever done for us!?"

The group names countless improvements in the standard of
living. But John Cleese shakes his head and says "Yes, yes, yes.
Of course. But _aside_ from all those things... What have the
Romans _really_ ever done for us?"

This is exactly the same, Ed.

You ask for proof.

When someone points out a flaw, you ask," Yes, yes, yes. But
let's pretend that doesn't exist. Now without that, what proof
do you have?"

Then more flaws are pointed out.

Then you reason, "Well, so what? I don't believe it! What _else_
do you have?"

Then more flaws are pointed out.

Then you ask,"Okay, _besides_ all that. Let's have some
witnesses."

How far can you keep moving the goal post?

The AA film is a fake. Deal with it.

Later,

Roger Evans









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                         Re: Conference 2000 Update

From: pgb@padrak.com (Patrick Bailey)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 18:03:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:28:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Conference 2000 Update


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:30:53 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
 >Subject: Conference 2000 Update
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >For the latest on the exciting 1st Conference of the New
 >Millennium, Discovery 2000, check out my website;

 >www.angelfire.com/sd/discoveryuk/index.html

 >Check out the new speaker profiles!

 >Be there!


Nice Idea - Wrong year.

Try in 2001...







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                     The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:02:57 +0000 (GMT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:33:32 -0500
Subject: The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler


From: originman@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: uk.rec.ufo
Subject: "Fish" or "Kingfish" project.
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:28:50 GMT


In Nick Cooks documentary "Billion dollar Secret", he questions
Bob Widmer (General Dynamics Convair back then) about his "Fish"
project, a saucer-inspired design, which apparently lost the
competition for a CIA spy plane contract about 45 years ago
(this would be Blackbird, I presume). As Cook noted, this design
is still classified. I'm sure there is a very good reason for
this.

What struck me as strange about one thing he said was this
(paraphrased): [first mentions a project called "Super Hustler"]

"The CIA came here one day and asked me if there was something I
could do with this technology. The ideal shape was that of a
saucer. As near as possible to a saucer."

At the end, Widmer commented that he didn't have any designs
left from it, because "the doors were shut" and some of it
probably destroyed. When asked how to explain the remaining
secrecy of this project he could not. Just shrugged.

So does this mean that the CIA asked him to work from scratch on
a saucer shaped design, or does it mean that the CIA brought
something and asked him if he could do something with it (I'm
thinking something from Foreign Technology division or the
like)?

Does anybody have more on the "fish"? And BTW, if Mr. Cook
himself looks at this NG, then your comments on this would be
much appreciated.

-Christian.
--
"Science progresses, funeral by funeral." - Max Planck.
Join my Seti@home team @

http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/cgi?cmd=team_lookup&name=lone+gunmen+
of+copenhagen

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger R. Prokic <rprokic@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:08:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:38:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:45:41 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >>From: Roger <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >No Roger, it went like this.  I wrote "Creatures With No Business
 >Here", back in 96,

 >http://www.mufor.org/gehrman1.htm

 >and sent it to Ray asking if there were any mistakes or factual
 >errors, and if there were, could he point them out to me. That's
 >how we started our very limited relationship.  I am not his
 >friend or employee.  I simply believe his version of events, not
 >yours.  We have had email conversations; that's all!  I also
 >have letters he wrote to others concerning the film.

Ed,

You may not realize that you really appear defensive for Ray.
In fact, I don't know of any other person whom supports Ray's
actions & dealings like you.  Now that you mention your book, I
can only think to ask "How much did he pay you?".


Roger R. Prokic
Principal RF Systems Engineer
Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp.
Boulder, Colorado USA
-=[ sent from a Palm Vx & Multimail Pro v3.1c ]=-







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 20

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:18:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:40:57 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:16:29 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


Hi, Roger!

 >Regarding depth; beyond a certain point, sunlight ceases to
 >penetrate. In addition, it gets darned cold!

 >To find life under such inhospitable conditions is the exception
 >to the rule regarding scientific expectations about the
 >development of life "as we know it".

Actually, there's a certain amount of controversy about this
with the discovery of extensive life around sea bottom vents.

There are reasonable scientists who suggest that the energy
chains in these environments might very well be those which
first arose - since those environments are very like those
present in early earth history, and since the genetics and
metabolism of these organisms suggest that they may not be
colonists of these "hostile" environments.

Searches for information on

        archaeobacteria
        archaea
        halobacteria
        nanobacteria

also have a look at

http://www.resa.net/nasa/ocean_hydrothermal.htm#chemistry
http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA08/arch896.html
http://www.fonz.org/zglight.htm

------
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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: James Easton <voyager@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:51:40 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:08:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


Regarding:

 >Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 17:09:29 +0000
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

Neil wrote:

 >I think it's correct to say Theresa did a stirling job of
 >observation regarding the AA footage, the one fly in the
 >ointment though as I see it, is that her analysis hinges on the
 >fact of taking the film reel sequence as given by the film box
 >numbers as a cast iron fact.


Neil,

There's more involved than that and unfortunately too lengthy
for even a brief explanation. It's also helpful and maybe
necessary that anyone interested sees the video tape, 'Shadows
of Doubt' and accompanying documentation which Theresa produced.
Although I'm not sure how many copies were made available, I
presume it was only a few.


 >As I understand it there were no physical numberings on the film
 >reels or film stock, _only_ the boxes carried the sequence
 >numbers, it would only take two of these reels to be cross boxed
 >to provide the "evidence" that Theresa found to judge the film
 >by.

Theresa wouldn't have overlooked such a possibility and
illustrated why that explanation wasn't feasible. If you're not
aware of the reasons why, then you must have missed some of the
evidence she presented. Basically, it comes down to the fact
that in some reels there are notable 'blood drips' and other
identifiable artefacts which then 'disappear' in a subsequent
reel, only to reappear again in a later reel. Yet, the cutting
open of the 'body' etc. clearly progresses in sequence during
these reels - there's never a reel where the 'autopsy' is less
advanced than a previous reel.

The only conclusion can be that it's a significant indication
the filming was in various takes.

As Theresa comments on one such instance, "The problem is that
in a real autopsy it would have been impossible to film reel #61
before reel #59. Yet this appears to be exactly what happened
here and is the only way the blood marks could be consistent".

As you know, there's no tangible evidence for any 'archive
reels' ever existing.

 >>'We then went to see Santilli and told him we had some alien
 >>footage which we had bought in the states,' says Bateman. 'He
 >>told us we had been conned and didn't think it was very good.
 >>He said it should have been clearer and should also have a
 >>restricted notice on it'. Bateman got the film back,
 >>superimposed the bogus classification message and sent it back
 >>to Santilli, who told the two men he could not use it.

 >They were slightly giving the game away here weren't they, if
 >they _were_ trying to sell "original" footage?, modifying it as
 >they went along?

 >I find this scenario hardly credable.

 >Did Ray twig he was being sold a "dummy" at the first bite? Did
 >he know all along?

Depends on who and what you choose to believe, or in Ray's case,
which version of the story.

On UpDates, we saw:

 >From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
 >Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:13:58 +0000
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:08:28 -0400
 >Subject: Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage'

The following is from Ray Santilli:

THE TENT FOOTAGE

Philip Mantel has informed me that he has secured an interview
from someone claiming to have information regarding the "Tent
Footage".

As a great deal has been made of the so called "Tent Footage" I
would like to clarify the situation and place the following on
record:

The Tent Footage was the first film material I collected from
the cameraman, it was in the form of 16mm film and in very poor
condition. I brought it back to England and asked a studio
facility in Buckinghamshire to retrieve whatever image they
could from it. A few weeks after delivery the Studio presented
me with the film which has become known as the ""Tent Footage" I
was told that this was all that could be retrieved from the
film.

I had informed the cameraman by telephone that we were able to
retrieve some image and indeed showed the film to Philip Mantel
and other interested parties.

I returned to the States later to collect the main film and
showed the "Tent Footage" on VHS to the cameraman. At this point
he stated that he DID NOT remember either the image being
portrayed or the style in which it had been filmed. I was
concerned but collected the remaining film (which was in far
better condition) and returned to the United Kingdom.

Upon my return I contacted the studio to find out more about the
images from the "Tent Footage". I got the impression that as a
joke the film had been interfered with, but nobody was owning
up".

[...]

[End]


Then we heard:

 >Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 05:59:08 -0500
 >To: "UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Santilli On Kiviat's 'Alien Autopsy Hoax'

Ray Santilli Claims FOX Report on Alien Autopsy is Completely
Wrong

 From Ed Gehrman

Several days ago I read an article in the news section of UFO
Folklore (one of the best sources for up-to-the-minute UFO
related news), ridiculing the Alien Autopsy footage and Ray
Santilli.

Since I have been one of the few Ufologists to believe that the
Alien Autopsy is exactly what Ray Santilli and the Cameraman say
it is, namely, footage of an alien being dissected by US Army
doctors.

The alien is from somewhere in New Mexico and arrived in a craft
that was found and secured by US Army personnel. The footage was
taken in shot in 1947.

I have defended Ray since I first viewed the complete autopsy
footage (not the fox version) and have established an email
connection to check with him when situations like the Ellen Gray
article pop up. I have found Ray Santilli to be an honest and
interesting person. He has been straight with me.

After reading the Ellen Gray article I contacted Ray and asked
him about the Fox program. This is his reply along with the
complete Ellen Gray article

Ed,

Please circulate this message for me.

THE TENT FOOTAGE

The Fox broadcast relies heavily on something that has become
known as the Tent Footage. This is not the Alien Autopsy
footage.

[...]

Now 1998,  Bob needed material for his new show. Bob re-visited
the Tent Film and decided to construct the story that will be
shown on December 1998. Of course his main thrust will be the
"shock horror" of just discovering the story surrounding the
Tent Footage (maybe I should send him his hand written
disclaimer of 1995).

I have already gone on record with the full Tent Footage story,
however for the benefit of doubt here it is again.:

The Tent Footage was the first film material I collected from
the cameraman, it was in the form of 16mm film and in very poor
condition. I brought it back to England and asked a studio
facility in Milton Keynes to retrieve whatever image they could
from it. Approximately a week (maybe longer) after delivery the
Studio in Milton Keynes presented me with the film which has
become known as the ""Tent Footage" I was told that this was all
that could be retrieved from the film.

I had informed the cameraman by telephone that we were able to
retrieve some image and indeed showed the film to Philip Mantel
and other interested parties. I returned to the States later to
collect the main film and showed the "Tent Footage" on VHS to
the cameraman.

At this point he stated that he did not remember either the
image being portrayed or the style in which it had been filmed.
I was concerned but continued to collect the remaining film and
returned to the United Kingdom.

Upon my return I contacted the studio in Milton Keynes to find
out more about the images from the "Tent Footage".  To my
surprise Andy (my friend and owner of the studio) admitted to
playing a joke on me. They were unable to retrieve anything of
consequence from the film therefore he staged a spoof never
thinking that I would want to use it. As a result part of the
film (Tent Footage) returned was hoaxed by him as a practical
Joke. [End]


With Kiviat's 'expose' pending, it's now admitted this was
always known to be a 'practical joke', as opposed to six months
previously when "nobody was owning up".

See also my references in last mail to Ed, when I pointed out
what Bob Shell confirms being told by Ray about the 'tent
footage', long after it must have been known this was all
comical.


If you doubt the likely veracity of Bateman's story re how their
hoaxed footage was offered to Ray and he suggested it should
have a 'classification code', then why are there two versions of
that footage, one without and one containing said 'secret
classification'?

Can you also rationalise how in July, 1995, when both versions
of the 'tent footage' had been seen and Ray must surely have
known the 'classification codes' were a bogus addition, he
replied to my enquiry about the 'codes' by maintaining:

"On part of the tent footage there is a date board which was
added after (it continues after the footage is over) It could be
the date of process (we don't know)".

When searching for clues, we shouldn't miss the really obvious
ones, even if we don't like what they seem to unveil.


 >I would suggest that Ray was a little more than creative (but in
 >a very good marketing way) at times with his claims all the way
 >through this saga, so what we can or cannot take as fact is
 >moot. What is true, is that the remainder of the "footage" has
 >been badly tainted by all this, but at the end of the day that
 >might have been the point of the exercise.

I'm not sure this is understandable. Whose intention -
Theresa's, my own, anyone who continues to highlight key facts?

Given that your 'explanation' of Theresa's confirmation appears
to be inadequately researched, perhaps it's a basic requirement
to provide a more detailed, factual refutation of same before
defaulting to the 'tainted by those who want to debunk the great
UFO cover up that only we understand' and what that might
actually reveal about the claimant's inability to make a case.

It's an abysmal substitute for evidence.

Excepting the provision of some hugely important identification
of flaws in Theresa's research, I have no interest in discussing
intrinsic beliefs in the 'alien autopsy', Roswell, or anything
related.

It's a good idea to ask the question whether there are obvious
indications we are being gullible and if so, is that to
extremity.


James.
Email: 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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                      ECHELON And Surveilling Citizens

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:48:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:48:35 -0500
Subject: ECHELON And Surveilling Citizens





From: Moderator, UFO UpDates


Source: Jeff Rense's Sightings site

http://www.sightings.com/politics6/esch.htm

Surveillance Society: A Spy's Story

By Erin Zimmerman & Dale Hurd

12-16-99



Imagine a workplace that required you to pass a daily retinal
scan... and a monthly lie detector test, an office where
snitching on suspicious co-workers is encouraged, and a job
where the ultimate badge of honor is complete silence.

Welcome to the world of a spy.

In this top-secret world where just talking about your job could
earn you a prison sentence, only one man has been willing to
talk openly about his role in the global eavesdropping network
known as ECHELON.

Retired intelligence officer Mike Frost spent 19 years
collecting top-secret information at Canada's Communications
Security Establishment (CSE), Canada's equivalent of America's
National Security Agency. Frost remembers a time when ECHELON
was still an idea without a name.

"The concept of five countries collecting everything that's
radiated on this planet and reporting to a central base which
the five countries can draw from -- the concept was there, and
some experimental work was being done at the time," says Frost.

According to Frost, the information is then sorted according to
specific key words.

"For instance, if we were after a terrorist activity, we would
ask the computer to give us all communications containing the
words 'bomb,' 'blow-up,' 'terrorize,' 'assassination,' and any
communications containing those words, be it e-mail, be it voice
mail, telephone, cell phone, portable phone, whatever," he says.
"The computer would recognize that conversation as containing
those words and give you either a recording of the conversation
or a hard copy of the conversation."

But Frost, who was trained in the U.S. by the National Security
Agency, says the eavesdropping is not necessarily limited to
criminals or foreigners, as is required by both U.S. and
Canadian laws.

"There is no distinction made whether you're a foreigner or
not," he says. "That's a tough question, because never will the
Canadian government or the American government admit that they
can circumvent their legislation by asking other countries to do
what they can't do for themselves. However, if you just look at
how the system works -- if five countries do the collecting, if
five countries input their common database that five countries
can draw from, it's fairly easy to see how Canada can do things
for the United States and vice versa that the countries can't do
for themselves."

And although Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New
Zealand all play crucial roles, Frost says there's no doubt
about who's "driving the train," as Frost puts it.

"NSA drives the train," he says. "NSA is the conductor, NSA
tells the train where to stop, and tells the passengers where to
get off and where to get on."

According to Frost, this train is running full-speed into your
private life. For example, here's what could happen if you use a
so-called key word like "bomb," even in a private conversation.


"Somebody will pick it up," he says. "Communications know no
borders. Somebody will pick it up somewhere, and it will end up
on somebody's desk if you say the word 'bomb.' I guarantee it."

Case in point ...

"A lady was on the phone talking to her friend about a school
play that she'd been to the night before; her son was in a
school play," recalls Frost from his own experience. "And she
thought he'd done a lousy job, and she said to her friend, 'Boy,
he really bombed last night. And that conversation was
highlighted and ended up on an analyst's desk the next morning
because the word 'bomb' was in there, and all this lady was
doing was talking about her son and his play the night before.
Now that conversation of that lady is held at CSE indefinitely,
so if two or three or four years later, she talks about somebody
else bombing or something, and the computer spits it out again
as being the second or third hit on this person's name, you can
graduate from being a possible terrorist to a probable
terrorist. It's that easy."

So what are the perks of being targeted as a "probable
terrorist?"

"If the NSA says that you are a probable terrorist and passes
that information on to those responsible for that sort of
activity, just think about what could happen to your life, and
you'd never know why. All of a sudden, your MasterCard doesn't
work anymore; All the sudden, your phone is down; all of the
sudden, things are falling apart in your life; and you have no
reason why, and nobody'll ever tell you."

How deep can ECHELON go into someone's life?

"How deep do you want to go?" answers Frost. "Right down to the
bowels, if you want. As far as you want to go, ECHELON can go
into your private life -- that includes your private life with
your doctor, your minister, your lawyer, your stock broker, your
wife, your girlfriend, your children, your business partner,
your business enemies -- as far as they want to go."

Both the United States and Canada officially deny that this
massive spy network even exists. But Frost showed CBN News a
station in Ottawa where such interceptions are part of the daily
routine.

Intelligence experts say ECHELON is only one of many tools Big
Brother can use to listen in on your life. In fact, with the
right technology, government agencies can literally pull your
personal information out of the air -- without ever touching
your computer.

The procedure is code-named TEMPEST, and it's a trick Frost
learned from the NSA. By simply aiming an antenna at your
computer monitor, intelligence experts can use the radiation
emitted by the monitor to reconstruct the images on your screen.
No hacking, no passwords -- just another legal loophole.

"The law reads that it is unlawful to intercept intentionally
radiated communications," explains Frost. "TEMPEST is
unintentionally radiated, so it's therefore lawful, I suppose,
to intercept this radiation. That is being done extensively
throughout the world. You can imagine the implications if you
park yourself outside a broker's office on Wall Street, or you
go to the defense building or the CIA building and start
intercepting TEMPEST radiation."

Speaking out about ECHELON has ultimately cost Mike Frost some
of his own privacy.

"The pressure is being applied very subtly," he says. "Letters
that arrive in an opened condition, strange things happening to
my answering machine when I'm not even in the house -- it
becomes unplugged or turned off, or turned on and plugged in,
strange footprints on my carpet, very subtle things. Not that I
can go to anyone and say somebody broke into my home, because
there is no sign of forced entry in any way. Constantly, my
friends will say, what's the matter with your phone; there's an
echo. So these things are being done just to keep me on my toes
a little bit, and I'm aware of that."

And he has a warning for anyone who says "it can't happen to
me."

"If you don't want anybody to know about what you're saying,
don't say it," Frost cautions. "Because if you do say it,
somebody will be listening."








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                  Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:07:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:56:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:23:50 -0600
 >From: SMiles Lewis <elfis@austin.rr.com>
 >Subject:  Bugs Bunny & Other UFO Victims by RAW
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>


 > From one elist to the next...

 >Source: www.gettingit.com


 >Bugs Bunny and Other UFO Victims
 >Reality isn't always consensual
 >BY ROBERT ANTON WILSON

 >12.13.99

 >Although few people remember this, Bugs Bunny was the first UFO
 >"abductee" in a 1952 cartoon called "Hasty Hare."

 >The next case did not occur until nine years later, in 1961,
 >when Betty and Barney Hill famously encountered the "greys" from
 >Zeta Reticuli, who molested them sexually and otherwise, and
 >were also wearing Nazi uniforms. At least, Barney Hill
 >remembered the malign midgets as garbed in Nazi regalia; Betty,
 >for some reason, never did recall that poignantly puzzling
 >detail.

 >Now, many millions have allegedly suffered the same sort of
 >"extraterrestrial" sexual abuse, according to Abductees
 >Anonymous, a support group for survivors. Budd Hopkins has
 >become rock star famous for helping people "remember" such
 >experiences. And this is not just another New Age fad. Dr. John
 >Mack, a distinguished scientist on the staff of the psychiatry
 >department at Harvard University, has written two books on the
 >subject. And Harvard, which once gave Dr. Timothy Leary the
 >bum's rush for having weird ideas, allows Dr. Mack to remain on
 >their staff, with all the prestige that bestows upon this
 >eldritch and Lovecraftian topic.

 >I've met Dr. Mack, and he seems like a sane and sensible man. He
 >frankly admits that he's not quite sure what kind of "reality"
 >these experiences occur in, except that it sure ain't consensus
 >reality. It's something more like the non-ordinary reality of
 >Carlos Castaneda's Don Juan books, or of the mystics of all
 >traditions -- or of Leary and his merry band of acid astronauts.>

<snip>

 >Bill Cooper, who claims to be a former Naval Intelligence
 >officer, alleges that he saw papers revealing a treaty between
 >our government and the "greys," who are providing our military
 >with advanced technology.

Anyone who treats abductions seriously is clearly walking on the
"wild side..."

But anyone who treats Bill Cooper seriously has gone beyond...
like, mentally walked the plank.

Cooper's version of "ufology" has escalated from a simple
sighting on board a submarine... which _might_ have occurred...
to something too paranoid and unsubstantiated to contemplate.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                     Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:16:40 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:02:41 -0500
Subject: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?


Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:51:30 -0500 (EST)
From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:18:10 -0500
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
 >>being ugly, they lack the senses, are deaf-mute, lack of
 >>touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
 >>is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
 >>manipulating it thoroughly.

The Human Imperative: A Case for the Eradication of Unmanned
Mars Missions

by Mac Tonnies

The recent loss of the Mars Polar Lander, the second in a series
of probes to fall victim to NASA's "faster, better, cheaper"
mission philosophy, provides an excellent opportunity to
reassess our commitment to Mars exploration.  The "human
imperative" advocates nothing less than a manned mission in
place of all future robotic missions, preferably to begin as
soon as possible.

With the Apollo program now only a fuzzy memory, good for little
more than obligatory nostalgia programs on the Learning Channel,
and Space Shuttle missions so routinely unsexy that firing John
Glenn into orbit (again) was supposed to be cause for
excitement, it is obvious that we need to set our sights on
loftier goals.  There is good reason to expect a manned Mars
mission to provide the challenge necessary to crack our current
climate of space science apathy.  The scientific rewards alone
promise a redefinition our planetary selfhood.

The human imperative urges a prompt return to space not for the
sake of doing it (the mind-set almost wholly responsible for our
brief forays to the Moon), but for such urgent and pragmatic
reasons as comparative planetology, research into climate
change, the lessons to be learned from Mars' meteor- battered
surface, and the understanding of a variety of anomalous surface
features.

The data we can glean from the cursory examinations of
telerobotic probes is scant, and promises little that cannot be
investigated firsthand, by human astronauts using space hardware
that is largely in existence right now.

Furthermore, plans for future telerobotic missions are decidedly
high-risk, even compared to ambitious projects such as the
Pathfinder mission, Russia's two ill-fated Phobos spacecraft,
Mars Global Surveyor, and the Mars Polar Lander (all of which,
save Pathfinder, failed in their attempts to tell us anything of
value about our sister planet--if at all).  The Mars Sample
Return mission, for example (scheduled for 2005), seeks to scoop
up Martian soil and fling it back to Earth aboard automated
rockets.

Needless to say, NASA's ability to carry this mission off
successfully must be called into question.  At best, a
successful sample return will tell us interesting but ultimately
little about Mars' geologic, climatic, and biological history.

And it should be noted that we _already_ have rocks of known
Martian origin at our disposal.  Scientists, lacking the context
a manned Mars mission would provide, have (rather
understandably) been unable to decide if the rocks in question
contain biological remains or not.

This situation is likely to remain unchanged even if the Mars
Sample Return mission is successful--a possibility that now
seems remote at best.

Without a human presence on the Martian surface, virtually all
questions aimed at Mars' enigmatic past must remain, for all
practical intents and purposes, theoretical ventures framed by
the utopian notion that we'll make it to the Red Planet in
person "eventually" (current dates forecasted by informed
scientists and futurists range from 2010 to 2020 and beyond).

Rethinking our commitment robotic exploration is vital; with
each robotic mission, failed or otherwise, the looming date of
the first manned landing will remain just as nebulous as it was
five or ten years ago.

It could be argued that the failures of the Mars Observer, Mars
Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lande, might, ironically,
actually push official policy in favor of manned, vs. robotic,
planetary missions by reinforcing the notion that a hands-on
human team could certainly do no worse than the fragile
emissaries we choose to send in our stead.

Ultimately, though, I don't foresee this being the case; I
seriously doubt if manned space flight occupies much role at all
in the present scheme.  Robotic missions have been in the works
for so long now that it appears we're to suffer through all of
them, learning remarkably little in terms of worthy goals such
as human colonization.

Our understanding of Mars is not being executed through reason,
but through the blind inertia that befalls all bureaucracies.
NASA, from the petty triumphs of Apollo to the current fiasco
with inexpensive, mismanaged probes, is certainly no exception.

Readers are urged to sign the Mars petition accessible online at
the following site: www.marssociety.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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                   Re: The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:37:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:07:10 -0500
Subject: Re: The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:02:57 +0000 (GMT)
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: The Fish, Kingfish & Super Hustler
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


Hello, all I thought I'd comment on this one, being a fan of
both the Blackbird and Hustler.

 >From: originman@my-deja.com
 >Newsgroups: uk.rec.ufo
 >Subject: "Fish" or "Kingfish" project.
 >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:28:50 GMT

 >In Nick Cooks documentary "Billion dollar Secret", he questions
 >Bob Widmer (General Dynamics Convair back then) about his "Fish"
 >project, a saucer-inspired design, which apparently lost the
 >competition for a CIA spy plane contract about 45 years ago
 >(this would be Blackbird, I presume). As Cook noted, this design
 >is still classified. I'm sure there is a very good reason for
 >this.

If this is so, why? Knowing how governments think its either a
shining sucess or it just sucks.(the latter to avoid
embarrisment- especially congress-around budget time)

 >What struck me as strange about one thing he said was this
 >(paraphrased): [first mentions a project called "Super Hustler"]

Probably the rumored J-58 (Blackbird engines folks) powered
version of the B-58 Hustler supersonic Bomber. Super Hustler
indeed!

 >"The CIA came here one day and asked me if there was something I
 >could do with this technology. The ideal shape was that of a
 >saucer. As near as possible to a saucer."

 >At the end, Widmer commented that he didn't have any designs
 >left from it, because "the doors were shut" and some of it
 >probably destroyed. When asked how to explain the remaining
 >secrecy of this project he could not. Just shrugged.

Well maybe so, I've been to the Museum of Flight at Boeing Field
in Seattle Wa.(it is worth it because of some of the displays
are of common folk that happened to be geniuses like Molt
Taylor,Peter Bowers, Charlie McAllister, and I wolud be glad to
explain why.)Has a complete Lockeed A-12 and D-5 Drone. One look
at this puppy and you do wonder about  ah ,"acquired
thechnology".

 >So does this mean that the CIA asked him to work from scratch on
 >a saucer shaped design, or does it mean that the CIA brought
 >something and asked him if he could do something with it (I'm
 >thinking something from Foreign Technology division or the
 >like)?

I don't know, but one close look at the A-12 with all of the
fine work in Titanium yet, one wonders.....

 >Does anybody have more on the "fish"? And BTW, if Mr. Cook
 >himself looks at this NG, then your comments on this would be
 >much appreciated.


We don't have any Idea what has taken place over the last 50
years, and I have seen the Blackbird do some amazing things at
airshows (Abbotsford B.C. in particular, also the Avro Vulcan
which could account for Pteradactyl sightings - a great Aircraft
in its own right.)


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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                 Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:52:31 -0500
Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

Stig

***

Roswell UFO Bombshell

by Jim Keith

**

(Jim Keith was famous as a conspiracy theorist. This article was
submitted to FATE as one of the last things he wrote before
dying in a freak accident at this year�s Burning Man Festival.)

My source on the following story has asked me to be very vague
in my description of him. He describes himself as "a longtime
researcher/instructor of engineering at a school in New Mexico."
I know specific details of his professional work, as well as the
names of his own sources for the following information, but he
has asked me not to mention them because of potential problems
involving security clearances.

Speaking with me recently, he told me about his knowledge of
what actually took place in Roswell, New Mexico, in July 1947 -
an event which has been alleged by many researchers to have been
the crash of an alien spacecraft.

His information is gleaned from conversations with others in the
engineering field and in the military who were living in or near
Roswell at the time. I realize that without identifying my
source, the following information is rendered suspect; with that
in mind it may still open up new areas of research that will
crack the Roswell case. Here is the gist of what he told me:

World War II was over, and America had a secret to conceal.
Although the government said there were 500 atomic bombs in the
military�s arsenal, that was a lie. There were none that were
considered reliable. Due to a number of factors - corrosion of
parts kept in storage, batteries that didn�t work, faulty
initiators, and other reasons - there were no usable nuclear
bombs in American military stockpiles. After the end of the war,
the operational team in charge of the nuclear arsenal had also
been dispersed, many of them going to other jobs, and some
leaving the military altogether. In short, there was no real
nuclear deterrent against the Soviet threat, and members of the
American government and military who realized this were
terrified that the Soviets would find out.

The American brass sought to remedy the situation. As part of
this fix, testing of nuclear delivery systems was moved during
1945 and 1946 from Wendover, Utah, to the 509th U.S. Army Air
Force Bomb Group unit in Roswell, New Mexico. At the time,
Roswell was the center of much secret testing, including the top
secret balloon program Project Mogul, and 'non-critical' testing
at the Trinity blast site. One job that was given to the 509th
was the operational testing of nuclear bombs, including
fine-tuning the ability to hit targets accurately.

Another secret: According to my source, military bombers were
notoriously unreliable in hitting targets, sometimes missing
their mark by as much as half a mile. It was given to the 509th
to improve that record, and to make it possible to deliver
bombs, particularly nuclear bombs, with greater accuracy. "Live"
as well as "dummy" bombs were flown in from Sandia to Roswell,
where they were tested and used in target drops.

It was in this environment that the most famous of all UFO
stories was born. According to my source, the true story behind
the alleged UFO crash was that there was an accident involving a
B-29 flying from the Army Air Force Base in Sandia (Albuquerque)
to Roswell. From the statements of men in the military who were
there at the time, my source states that either an atomic bomb
or what is termed a "bomb shape," or "test shape," the shell of
a nuke lacking explosives and atomic capability, and sometimes
filled with concrete to add weight, was accidentally or
purposefully jettisoned above Corona, New Mexico, directly on
the flight path between Sandia and Roswell. Along with the bomb,
metal foil used for radar jamming, termed "chaff," may have also
been dropped.

The accidental dropping of a nuclear weapon would surely have
been cause enough for a cover-up. If this information had leaked
to the public, there might have been an extremely negative
reaction.

As an aside, my source mentioned that either an armed atomic
bomb or "test shape," flattened by impact with the ground, could
have looked like a squashed disk.


For more of Jim Keith's 'Bombshell', get yourself a copy of the
January 2000 FATE!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:20:36 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:01:04 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:04:55 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:08:52 -0600
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>And if we're wrong about "life as we know it" here on our own
 >>planet, then "life as we DON'T know it" must surely be within
 >>the realm of possibility on other planets; even seemingly
 >>hostile ones.

 >Roger,

 >I don't doubt that there is life elsewhere in the universe. I do
 >doubt that spacefaring civilizations are a dime a dozen.

 >Just today I came across a few factoids on life here. In the
 >approximate 3.5 billion years of life on this planet, there have
 >been something like a billion species, 99.9% of which are now
 >extinct, and only one species of which has developed human
 >intelligence. (How do you like those odds?) I can't think of any
 >particular reason (that I know of) as to why there aren't 10,
 >20, or more intelligent species on this planet, but there
 >aren't.

<snip>

I just want to interject a thought here.

If I recall correctly, several sub-species of hominids ( or
whatever they are called ) arose at different times. Some of
these could even interbreed. One could argue that competition
between various semi-intelligent populations merely led to the
predominance of just one.

In short, if our lineage had not gained ascendancy, wiping out
the competition while they were at it, its highly likely that
another strain would have in time. Descendants of Neanderthals,
Cro-Magnon men [ but no Piltdown men ] might be having this very
discussion!

By analogy, suppose there were never a company by
the name of IBM ( or Microsoft, or Intel .. )

Would their products or something highly analogous also vanish
from the scene?

I think not.

What is unlikely, is for another intelligent specie to follow
the same exact and admittedly unlikely path that our natural
history took.

But, nobody is demanding that!

Some of us are merely suggesting (and hoping I suppose in my
case) that intelligent life might be relatively common in this
galaxy.

A dime a dozen? I doubt that too. But, it only takes one race,
sufficiently advanced and given enough time, to explore large
regions of space at least robotically.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                 CPR-Canada News: Edmonton Formation Update

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:35:24 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:39:35 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Edmonton Formation Update



CPR-CANADA NEWS
News and Reports from Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada


Edmonton Formation Update; The Farmers' Phonebook


December 21, 1999



Update on (First) Edmonton Crop Circle Formation

Some ground shots are now finally posted of the first Celtic
Cross pattern just outside of Edmonton, Alberta from August 23
(same general region as the second larger seven-circle formation
found September 21), courtesy of Fern Belzil and Judy Arndt.
While believed to be a probable hoax based on initial ground
survey, the formation does exhibit very neat, clean lay
patterns. One sample image (edmonton99.jpg, � Fern Belzil) is
attached (reduced for e-mail) Larger version images are on the
web site at:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/edmonton99.html


CPR-Canada to be Listed in 2000 Edition of The Farmer's Phonebook

CPR-Canada will be listed in the 2000 edition of The Farmers'
Phonebook (Directory of Agriculture),
http://www.producer.com/ag_directory, published by The Western
Producer newspaper (http://www.producer.com), which is mailed
out to every farming household in western Canada from BC to
Manitoba and every rural business in the prairies (which, of
course, is where most circles are reported, as we have seen
especially the last couple of years now). FP is a valuable
resource guide for all farmers and other agricultural industry
people. The print version of FP comes out in February, 2000.
Hopefully this will aid in having even more reports forwarded
from farmers in future years.


Paul Anderson
Director
CPR-Canada

_____________________________


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 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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:46:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Ed Gehrman
 >>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

<snip>

 >>I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another
 >>film sample is a serious problem. (He did once
 >>but everyone forgets that.  Kodak dishonestly
 >>protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
 >>the less that Ray did try to have the film verified)

 >Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >dupe or a video tape.

<snip>

I don't understand why so much is made of this point.  As long
as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what difference does it make
that it's not the camera-original film?

Santilli's dupe apparently has the right edge code, and Bob
Shell's dupe is made of acetate propionate.

Bob Shell uses the fact the it's a dupe as an excuse not to
submit it to Kodak, but I can't for the life of me see the logic
of that.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:59:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >Stig

 >***

 >Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >by Jim Keith


List:

This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
the basic facts right. For example.

1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

There is of course the corroborative testimony of others like
Dr. Jesse Marcel jr.

2. He never said he saw a disc or a flying saucer! The notion
that _Major_ Marcel was essentially an overzealous security
guard and not well liked is absurd. He was the Intelligence
officer for the most elite military group in the world, the
509th. Hand Picked officers, hand picked men. His briefings
were greatly appreciated.

3. Where did the government say it had 500 atom bombs? Keith
also errs in the other direction. He says there were no useable
nuclear bombs in the arsenal post war. He neglects the fact
that it was the 509th which tested 2 nuclear warheads in the
Pacific in Operation Crossroads in July 1946. The 509th was
indeed moved from Wendover to Roswell.

4. Keith claims Roswell was center of Project Mogul. Totally
false. It was based at Alamogordo Army Air Field and White Sands
Missile Range more than 100 miles west of Roswell and over a
mountain range. What is this non critical testing at Trinity
site on WSMR?

5. Keith says 4 nuclear bombs were dropped on the coast of
Spain. They were not "dropped". The plane crashed with them on
board.

6. Keith claims the majority of reports of bodies have been
discredited. No basis is given. Perhaps he was thinking of the
USAF crash test dummy nonsense which happened at least 6 years
later? Does he mean that the minority of such reports are true?
All it takes is one. The majority of people aren't 7' tall
either. But some are.

7. Professor Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
Braun...

8. Clearly Keith was indeed a conspiracy theorist. He certainly
hasn't investigated the Roswell Incident. He might at least have
read the Book "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Story of the
Roswell Incident" by Aviation writer Don Berliner  and myself.
It is still in print.

I wouldn't waste my money on this 2 page article. Someboy sent
me a copy.

Stanton T. Friedman,
Nuclear Physicist





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:59:08 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:07:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:04:03 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Oh really? Here's what Bob Shell had to say about the AA film in
 >October of 1998:

 >"I never said that I can prove _anything_. All we have is video
 >made from purported 16 mm film, photocopies of film box labels,
 >the cameraman's statements, and a lot of information supplied to
 >me and others by Ray Santilli. We have no hard proof that there
 >IS any film or that there is a cameraman."

 >How do you explain this statement from someone that you claim
 >was "convinced 95 % that the film was legit"? You can't Ed,
 >because you are making stuff up as you go along to support your
 >view.

Rodger,

Attached, image of one of the film fragments released by
Santilli to Bob Shell I believe, allegedly(ok,it dosn't have the
creature on it!) from the AA footage.

But what the heck, even if there was footage _with_ the creature
available, _and_ it passed all chemical/shrink/date tests _and_
was freely available to everyone. It _still_ wouldn't prove it
was real _or_ otherwise, would it? We _only_ have the images to
work with, _and_ positive _copies_ at that, not the original
negative stock.

_But_...

_If_, something previously "missed" and unknown by all in the AA
images could be cross referenced to something equally "missed"
and unknown in other images _but_ those other image's history
was established, _unchallenged_ and _unsullied_ all the way back
to the day they were shot in July 1947?.

Now that _would_ throw the cat in amongst the pigeons I think.

We have just such a reference, well three actually, so far.

The details with suporting images, will be included in RPIT
Report 2 to be released shortly.


A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Millennium to all....

Neil.

--

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:18:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:53:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:59:08 +0000
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Rodger,

 >Attached, image of one of the film fragments released by
 >Santilli to Bob Shell I believe, allegedly(ok,it dosn't have the
 >creature on it!) from the AA footage.


MMmmm, seems my attach got dropped along the way, no prob, image
can be had from:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/aa/fragment.jpg

Along some of the other anomalous images on the film.

Neil.


--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


              E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->  http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->    http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:45:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:05:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

To the comment:

 >>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >>Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >>only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >>dupe or a video tape.

 ><snip>

Keith replied:

 >I don't understand why so much is made of this point.  As long
 >as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what difference does it make
 >that it's not the camera-original film?

I suppose the first quesiton one has to ask is how we define
"original" film, but let's not get bogged down in that matter.
The problem is that the small snippets of film provided by Ray
may have indeed been from 1947, but what's there connection to
the AA "film"?  I have reels of old film in storage that
predates 1947 by a decade, so finding old film isn't really the
issue.  The question is whether or not the AA "film" can be
dated to 1947, and that hasn't been shown or proven.

 >Santilli's dupe apparently has the right edge code, and Bob
 >Shell's dupe is made of acetate propionate.

(Sigh) The film pieces supplied by Ray had the edge codes ripped
off and were not visable.  They weren't leader film, but the
images they contained did not appear to be related to the AA
"film".  Ray provided a xerox copy of a piece of film to a Kodak
employee and learned that the edge codes on that particular
piece of "film" was dated to 1927, 1947, or 1967 (they repeat
the codes every 20 years), and process of elimination indicated
that 1947 was correct.  However, it's important to keep in mind
that the xerox copy was not (obviously) of film that was
connected to the AA "film".  That is to say that there was no
image of the creature on it.  So what does this particular
dating prove?

 >Bob Shell uses the fact the it's a dupe as an excuse not to
 >submit it to Kodak, but I can't for the life of me see the logic
 >of that.

Kodak actually had a list of requirements that would have to be
met to specifically date the film and confirm that the AA "film"
was dated to 1947.  While it would be possible to have a snippet
of duplicate film dated, what would that prove?  Bob confirmed
enough information to indicate that the piece of film he had was
likely from 1947, but that was based in part on information that
he had been given and not direct examination of AA "film" with
image of the creature.

I am among those who have emphasized the fact that there is no
"smoking gun" to prove that the AA "film" is a fraud, however
there are many who have become convinced of that through their
own interpretation of the facts surrounding the alledged "film".

As I've said in a previous message, Ray holds the key to this
mystery and he can resolve our confusion at any time if he
wishes.

So far I've seen no new information that deserves as much
bandwidth as we are spending on this issue, and we're beginning
to muddy the waters (so to speak) with partial descriptions and
unsupported inferences.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:09:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:09:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy





From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:45:03 -0500
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >>From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >So far I've seen no new information that deserves as much
 >bandwidth as we are spending on this issue, and we're beginning
 >to muddy the waters (so to speak) with partial descriptions and
 >unsupported inferences.

No, neither have I, Steve. This thread has been englessly debated
and those debates are available at the Archive [see below].

If no one has any new information to offer, then no further
messages on this topic Twill be posted to the List after
midnight eastern [Toronto time -0500 tonight].

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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:16:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:11:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >Stig

 >***

 >Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >by Jim Keith

 >**

 >It was in this environment that the most famous of all UFO
 >stories was born. According to my source, the true story behind
 >the alleged UFO crash was that there was an accident involving a
 >B-29 flying from the Army Air Force Base in Sandia (Albuquerque)
 >to Roswell. From the statements of men in the military who were
 >there at the time, my source states that either an atomic bomb
 >or what is termed a "bomb shape," or "test shape," the shell of
 >a nuke lacking explosives and atomic capability, and sometimes
 >filled with concrete to add weight, was accidentally or
 >purposefully jettisoned above Corona, New Mexico, directly on
 >the flight path between Sandia and Roswell. Along with the bomb,
 >metal foil used for radar jamming, termed "chaff," may have also
 >been dropped.

 >The accidental dropping of a nuclear weapon would surely have
 >been cause enough for a cover-up. If this information had leaked
 >to the public, there might have been an extremely negative
 >reaction.

 >For more of Jim Keith's 'Bombshell', get yourself a copy of the
 >January 2000 FATE!

Hi,

Interesting that the USA is following Britain's lead once more!

Seriously - whilst I would find it highly unlikely as a solution
to Roswell (too many things dont seem to fit) its not as odd as
it seems.

This 'novel' theory has in fact been proposed twice in the UK in
connection with UFO cases. For some time in the early days I
considered it the likely source of the Rendlesham rumors and
said so (eg in Omni in l983). I dont today have any suspicion
that this is what happened but at the time there were reasons
for this suspicion.

More recently, I have proposed it as a very serious option for
the Berwyn Mountains/Llandrillo 'crash' from l974 - a case that
Andy Roberts writes about in the current IUR. He has a prosaic
answer, which may well be the truth, but since l996 I have
gathered plenty of circumstantial evidence that an RAF mishap
might have been covered up in the guise of a UFO incident . But
it is lacking in any solid evidence, as Andy would put it.

Thats quite correct, but there are plenty of curious 'clues'
that might point that way.

We do, in fact, know with reasonable certainty that near
catastrophes of this sort have happened twice in the l950's in
the UK. In one case a fire at RAF Bentwaters close in time to
the l956 encounter almost created a radiation leak and was
successfully covered up for over 30 years.

In another incident (hidden until l996) a cluster of childhood
leukaemia cases has been traced back by doctors to a plane crash
that was covered up at a nearby nuclear base 40 years before.

Remarkably similar claims were made (before l996 so totally
independent of it) by a Bala GP in connection with the Berwyn
Mountains incident - although he was incorrectly trying to blame
a now decommissioned nuclear power station and had no idea that
the source could have been the alleged 'UFO incident'. Every
effort Andy and I have made to try to verify such a cluster near
the Berwyns has failed, but like the other clues it is part of a
curious pattern.

So dont write off this Roswell story (silly as it sounds and
wrong asa I I suspect it probably is in this case) as being
totally absurd. There are some genuine precedents.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:13:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:06:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:18:34 +0000
 >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:59:08 +0000
 >>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Rodger,

 >>Attached, image of one of the film fragments released by
 >>Santilli to Bob Shell I believe, allegedly(ok,it dosn't have the
 >>creature on it!) from the AA footage.

 >MMmmm, seems my attach got dropped along the way, no prob, image
 >can be had from:

 >http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/aa/fragment.jpg

 >Along some of the other anomalous images on the film.

The area torn away was not, we surmise, to obsure the film
codes.  It actually removes the sound track!  This duped
material was perforated on one side only.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:24:30 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:09:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Re: Alien Autopsy

 >From: Keith Woodard
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:46:11 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >>From: Roger Annette Evans
 >>Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, I had written:

 >>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >>Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >>only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >>dupe or a video tape.

Keith reasonably points out:

 >I don't understand why so much is made of this point.  As long
 >as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what difference does it make
 >that it's not the camera-original film?

Hi, Keith.

I understand your question. On the surface, it sounds reasonable
enough.

However, in the context of Santilli's story, it is very
important. According to Santilli, the alleged cameraman told him
the following:

 >"After filming, I had several hundred reels. I separated problem
 >reels which required special attention in processing (these I
 >would do later). The first batch was sent through to Washington
 >and I processed the remainder a few days later."

Accordingly, the film Ray bought was supposed to be camera
original; not a dupe.

In fact, Ray thought he had bought camera original until Bob
Shell proved otherwise.

This means that the cameraman lied about how he came into
possession of it. By extension, the validity of the imagery
contained within AA is very suspect.

But more importantly, the only actual footage that has been
released was "leader" that supposedly came from the AA film.
This leader turned out to be "dupe" film; not camera original.
As it stands, we only have Ray's word that the AA footage was
the source for even the few frames of "dupe leader" that have
been tested.

In effect, no one has seen the actual AA film original; not even
the cameraman and certainly not Ray. In the final analysis,
there is no proof that the AA film was produced on vintage 16mm
film at all since the only film analyzed has been a few frames
of blank dupe film. There is no proof that the two are the same;
only that the dupe film is old.

Does this explain the problem?

Take care.

Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:46:36 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:16:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >>Stig

 >>***

 >>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>by Jim Keith

 >List:

 >This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >the basic facts right. For example.

 >1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

Dear Docca Freed Man:

This is nonesense.  I have personally spoken with Jesse Marcel
and he told me that he lied to you on the occasion of which you
write.  I spoke with him just last evening.  He was on the same
ship as I was, having been abducted by those pesky, pelican
shape shifters from Mongo.  Jesse is now assisting the visitors
in their effort to crap the hell out of the United States Space
program.  Why do think that 2/3 of our Mars invading ships have
been lost, destroyed or otherwise spooked out of orbit?  Huh?

The only folks invading (relative to Mars) are US.  Those
landers and orbiters et Al, (especially you, Al) are nothing
more than troop carriers. Get a life Freeman.

 >There is of course the corroborative testimony of others like
 >Dr. Jesse Marcel jr.

He's nothing but a rag chewing ham operator.  Just a lot of
noise. You should hear him when he gets going on 20 meter chat
nets.

 >2. He never said he saw a disc or a flying saucer! The notion
 >that _Major_ Marcel was essentially an overzealous security
 >guard and not well liked is absurd. He was the Intelligence
 >officer for the most elite military group in the world, the
 >509th. Hand Picked officers, hand picked men. His briefings
 >were greatly appreciated.

Horse hockey, Fleeman!  Marcel was a Nazi from day one.
Every person I interviewed said so.  Listen, I got schrapnel
in me older than you are Freeput, don't you tell me when
went on then.  Why when I was a young'n, I hadda slop
through twenty inches of snow in that desert, just to get to
schule.

 >3. Where did the government say it had 500 atom bombs? Keith
 >also errs in the other direction. He says there were no useable
 >nuclear bombs in the arsenal post war. He neglects the fact
 >that it was the 509th which tested 2 nuclear warheads in the
 >Pacific in Operation Crossroads in July 1946. The 509th was
 >indeed moved from Wendover to Roswell.

Nonesense again, Flowmax, the 509th was the tacticalest outfit
in the Navy at that time.  They had an arsenal of 10,000 atomic
bombs and every one was a bomb.  I oughta know.  I was there.
And, it was _not_ the 509th what tested 2 nukes in the Pacific
in Operation Crossroads in July of 1946.  It was the 510th and
they indeed moved from Bendover to Ros Swell.  A lot you know.

 >4. Keith claims Roswell was center of Project Mogul. Totally
 >false. It was based at Alamogordo Army Air Field and White Sands
 >Missile Range more than 100 miles west of Roswell and over a
 >mountain range. What is this non critical testing at Trinity
 >site on WSMR?

Dear Docca Fleemore, it's "MONGUL,"  Mongul, get it? Not Mogul.
And whaddyamean WSMR?

 >5. Keith says 4 nuclear bombs were dropped on the coast of
 >Spain. They were not "dropped". The plane crashed with them on
 >board.

What the hell difference does it make if the bomb dropped or the
plane dropped with the bomb in it?  Huh?

 >6. Keith claims the majority of reports of bodies have been
 >discredited. No basis is given. Perhaps he was thinking of the
 >USAF crash test dummy nonsense which happened at least 6 years
 >later? Does he mean that the minority of such reports are true?
 >All it takes is one. The majority of people aren't 7' tall
 >either. But some are.

First, let's not get personal about this Fremen.  There is
nuttin wrong wit my credit or my body.  The Bene Gesserit witch,
my personal truthsayer (my mother in law) told me that perhaps I
am a dummy. But that happened at least six years ago and she did
die.  (Thanks God).  And whilst this is a free country, you got
no right to malign my height.  Most of the majority of my people
are less than 5 feet tall.  So what?  Some aren't!

 >7. Professor Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >Braun...

Womer Fon Brown was one of US.  He had nuttin ta do wit dem
Commies. Our Goobers in Goobermint are more smarter than
Commies, we hired only the best Nazi scientists and put 'em all
on the Walt Disney Show back in the 60's.

 >8. Clearly Keith was indeed a conspiracy theorist. He certainly
 >hasn't investigated the Roswell Incident. He might at least have
 >read the Book "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Story of the
 >Roswell Incident" by Aviation writer Don Berliner  and myself.
 >It is still in print.

Did too.  Did!  An besides, we don need no estinkin Corona. We
got Carta Blanca and Gripple.

 >I wouldn't waste my money on this 2 page article. Someboy sent
 >me a copy.

 >Stanton T. Friedman,
 >Nuclear Physicist

J. Jaime Gesundt, Proctologist








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:31:38 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:21:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:16:40 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Subject: Mars Initiative: Do We Need Probes?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 22:51:30 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:18:10 -0500
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Abductions: The Truth'
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>We are facing the worst entity that visit us. In addition to
 >>>being ugly, they lack the senses, are deaf-mute, lack of
 >>>touch, show lack of feeling, are liars, etc.. Their only weapon
 >>>is an extraordinary ability to control the human psyche,
 >>>manipulating it thoroughly.

 >The Human Imperative: A Case for the Eradication of Unmanned
 >Mars Missions

 >by Mac Tonnies

 >The recent loss of the Mars Polar Lander, the second in a series
 >of probes to fall victim to NASA's "faster, better, cheaper"
 >mission philosophy, provides an excellent opportunity to
 >reassess our commitment to Mars exploration.  The "human
 >imperative" advocates nothing less than a manned mission in
 >place of all future robotic missions, preferably to begin as
 >soon as possible.

Dear Mac and Listers:  While 2/3 of our Mars probes have
decidedly and publicly failed, there is good reason to assess
the fact of our "faster, better, cheaper" policy.  When the
United States Space program was real, as opposed to it's present
state of sour effluvium, we had more success than failure.  Of
late, however, the faster, better cheaper policy has created
only faster and cheaper.  Somewhere along the way, the cheaper
part has likely caused the demise of better.

Here is where I (in my opinion) leave your theory in the cold,
dark vacuum of space.  After nearly a decade of cheaper, etc.,
we've lost the ability to do it the right way.  Now that we've
gotten into the pattern of mistakes (if one is to believe they
are such, personally I do not, rather, I bereave them), now that
we've gotten into a pattern of mistakes, you propose sending
humans into foray, eh?  Good thinking.  It will be quite a while
for NASA to get it's act together, back to the proper methods of
design and development before we send some poor bastards up that
far.  At least a decade.  We can't even tell Centimeters from
Inches and you wanna send a human up?

May I make a suggestion?  Use either my brother in law or maybe
you can volunteer?

 >With the Apollo program now only a fuzzy memory, good for little
 >more than obligatory nostalgia programs on the Learning Channel,
 >and Space Shuttle missions so routinely unsexy that firing John
 >Glenn into orbit (again) was supposed to be cause for
 >excitement, it is obvious that we need to set our sights on
 >loftier goals.  There is good reason to expect a manned Mars
 >mission to provide the challenge necessary to crack our current
 >climate of space science apathy.  The scientific rewards alone
 >promise a redefinition our planetary selfhood.

Of course there is truth in your monograph, however we are not
ready for prime time. We once were. Not any more.  What is
required now is full national commitment by citizens, government
and Congress for the application of funds to _do it the right
way_ and stop dicking around with doing it cheaper better
faster.  Because in end, all we get is ... well, we get it in
the end.

 >The human imperative urges a prompt return to space not for the
 >sake of doing it (the mind-set almost wholly responsible for our
 >brief forays to the Moon), but for such urgent and pragmatic
 >reasons as comparative planetology, research into climate
 >change, the lessons to be learned from Mars' meteor- battered
 >surface, and the understanding of a variety of anomalous surface
 >features.

Whatever happened to the moon?  Seems to me that exploration of
this, our nearest satellite, is grounds for greater imperatives
(note the plural).  The imperatives are:

1) Practicing on an easier, closer target.

2) Practicing on doing it the right way (read: not cheaper,
    better faster)

3) Preventing greater loss of stuff, such as bodies and/or body
    parts along with the mission equipment)

 >The data we can glean from the cursory examinations of
 >telerobotic probes is scant, and promises little that cannot be
 >investigated firsthand, by human astronauts using space
hardware >that is largely in existence right now.

Horse Hockey.  With our present state of technology, at least
until we "get it right," our best shot is losing the equipment.
Wanna toss some critters in the equation too?

 >Furthermore, plans for future telerobotic missions are decidedly
 >high-risk, even compared to ambitious projects such as the
 >Pathfinder mission, Russia's two ill-fated Phobos spacecraft,
 >Mars Global Surveyor, and the Mars Polar Lander (all of which,
 >save Pathfinder, failed in their attempts to tell us anything of
 >value about our sister planet--if at all).  The Mars Sample
 >Return mission, for example (scheduled for 2005), seeks to scoop
 >up Martian soil and fling it back to Earth aboard automated
 >rockets.

 >Rethinking our commitment robotic exploration is vital; with
 >each robotic mission, failed or otherwise, the looming date of
 >the first manned landing will remain just as nebulous as it was
 >five or ten years ago.

 >It could be argued that the failures of the Mars Observer, Mars
 >Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lande, might, ironically,
 >actually push official policy in favor of manned, vs. robotic,
 >planetary missions by reinforcing the notion that a hands-on
 >human team could certainly do no worse than the fragile
 >emissaries we choose to send in our stead.

Consideration of the more fragile emissary of humankind is a
whole lot better than fragile emissaries presently chosen to die
out there.

 >Ultimately, though, I don't foresee this being the case; I
 >seriously doubt if manned space flight occupies much role at all
 >in the present scheme.  Robotic missions have been in the works
 >for so long now that it appears we're to suffer through all of
 >them, learning remarkably little in terms of worthy goals such
 >as human colonization.

 >Our understanding of Mars is not being executed through reason,
 >but through the blind inertia that befalls all bureaucracies.
 >NASA, from the petty triumphs of Apollo to the current fiasco
 >with inexpensive, mismanaged probes, is certainly no exception.

 >Readers are urged to sign the Mars petition accessible online at
 >the following site: www.marssociety.com


Yup, kick 'em in the ass and step on the gas.  Mismanaged probes
are better than mismanaged men.  However you are quite correct,
in my opinion, about a change in philosophy on the part of NASA.
And I believe they are presently reevaluating their initiatives.
NASA has to begin all over again with high quality, well
designed probes, manned or otherwise.  And until they get it
right, unmanned sounds damned good to me.

Last, I am reasonably certain that you did not mean it in the
context I shall represent it, but when you said, "meager success
of Apollo" you turned my blood boiling.  Perhaps meager by
today's standards, but in those days, they were major
breakthroughs to our safe, sane and successful voyages into
space, and in particular, to the moon.

Personally, you write some good points, but if you want people
to sign petitions, may I suggest the following:

1) Petition your representatives in Goobermint to apply funding
2) Petition NASA to do it the right way
3) Take the cart and put it behind the horse.

My grandmother was in her 70's when she became a citizen of
these United States.  For her and for us, it was a proud day.
She was not a literate person.  She was a little lady with a lot
of love, who bravely came here with her new husband to start a
new life.

When she presented to the judge and was asked questions about
American history and government, she got most of it right.  But
when the judge asked her what the accomplishment of Abraham
Lincoln was, she answered, "He take-a da negra offa da street-a
an-a put 'em up on-a da side-a-walk-a."

There's more than one way to skin a cat, Bro.  After that, the
judge looked at her, smiled and welcomed her to the family of
citizens.

We are no longer as great a nation as we once were.  One way to
instill national pride is to reinvent the space program.  It's
better than bombing Panama, kicking the crap out of Iraq (for
the nothing we've garnered, anyway) or sticking our red nose
into the affairs of others.

Russia has decided to make more Topols.  You want to Rush into
Limbough.  I shall retire to bedlam.

I love Dickens, don't you?

Jim Mortellaro










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: ed gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:18:25 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:42:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >From: Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:45:03 -0500
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >>>From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>




 >If no one has any new information to offer, then no further
 >messages on this topic will be posted to the List after
 >midnight eastern [Toronto time -0500 tonight].



Errol,

Before you close, I'd like to offer a few items in defense of
some of my last statements. I was worried that discussion would
be limited. There is such a complicated tangle of conflicting
views, and I foolishly thought I could defend Ray and at the
same time open some very closed minds to the "possibility" that
the AA might be what Ray says it is: twenty -two rolls of film
shot by an US Army cameraman in NM, fifty years ago, of a UFO
crash and the creatures of unknown identity who flew it.

Ray is being accused, unfairly, of hoaxing this film, but how he
did it and his motives for doing so have never been clearly
determined or explained by his accusers. I find this dishonest
and intellectually barren. Here is what Ray would have had to do
to make this a successful hoax:

There is absolutely no evidence that he had anything more than
limited skills in any of these areas of expertise.

1)Write a script, one so improbable that no one would believe
it.

2)Gather together a film crew: at least two doctors and an
extra, cameramen, set designers, period historians, mechanical
engineers and skilled metal workers and an FX expert.  (this is
just a partial list of the large crew it would have taken. And
this would have been no minor production. Filming is not easy
and is very expensive. The debris alone, which Dennis Murphy
describes as almost impossible to manufacture, would have been a
huge undertaking, even for a major motion picture company.

3) Keep it all a secret. We all know how hard that would be. Why
have no witness come forward to confirm this as a hoaxed film.

4)Make some money from it. This would have been the hardest part
since the investment would have had to be in the millions of
dollars. Ray couldn�t have make much money from this. If he
couldn't make money, then why do it? He wasn't the least
interested in UFO or anything along those lines. What was his
motive? Until that can be established, the case for hoaxing is
weak, at best. As I keep saying: where is the evidence this is a
fake?

There is evidence that those who are accusing Ray of dishonesty
have been manipulative themselves with the facts of this case.
They refuse to discuss the "restricted codes" in any meaningful
way, as if I brought up the subject. In fact, Kent Jeffrey used
information he knew or should have known was false concerning
these codes to buttress his inditement against the AA.

Also, I have been accused of making up information concerning
statements made by Bob Shell. Below you find the proof of my
honorable intentions. I don�t "make up" information; never have,
never will.



19-Aug-95 05:45:51
Sb: #FILM EVALUATION
Fm: BOB SHELL 76750,2717
To: ALL

Hello all,

I have been hard at work on this film. I have now physically
examined a section of the film, a section showing the "autopsy"
room before the body was placed on the table, but clearly
consistent with the later footage.

The film on which this was shot is Cine Kodak Super XX, a film
type which was discontinued in 1956-57. Since the edge code
could be 1927, 1947 or 1967, and this film was not manufactured
in 1927 or 1967, this clearly leaves us with only 1947 as an
option.

The image quality, lack of fog, and grain structure apparent in
the film lead me to the conclusion that this film was exposed
and processed while still quite fresh, which would be within a
"window" of three or four years.

Based on this, I see no reason to doubt the cameraman's claim that
this film was exposed in June and July of 1947, and processed "a
few days later".

 From my own research on the physical characteristics of the
film, I am willing to go on record as giving a 95% probability
that the film is what the cameraman claims it to be. I am only
hedging 5%, because I still want secondary chemical verification
from Kodak based on the chemical "signature" of the film.

I do not put my name on a statement like this lightly, and it is
only after very careful consideration, and detailed examination
of the film, that I do so at this time.

Bob Shell


And this:


The following is taken from a press release that Kodak�s
Marketing Planning Manager P.G. Milson(not some flunky) sent to
the outside world. This is an official Kodak release of
information.

"We have been asked to confirm the age of a piece of film know
as the Roswell film...We have seen sections of either the film
or its projection leader in three Kodak locations: UK, Hollywood
and Denmark...

Conclusions...

1)In our process we put a code on the edge of the film which
repeats every 20 years.

2)The symbols we have seen on the Roswell film samples suggest
that the film was manufactured in either 1927,1947 or 1967.
(This memo substantiates that the film could have been shot in
1947 so at least that one fact is secure and we now know that
they saw more than just a leader but some real footage. Kodak
isn�t going out on a limb for this crazy happening but they
can�t dispute their findings, either)

3) We are therefore, unable to categorically confirm when the
film was manufactured (This is a hedge if I ever heard one)

4) It should be remembered that even if the age of the film
manufacture is confirmed, this does not necessarily indicate
that the film was shot and processed in the same year...(the
rest is disclaimer and of no consequence)

This information should establish just what Kodak saw and what
they didn�t see and also that Santilli did do what he said he
did, which was have the film dated.

I also want to add that I have never been paid any money by Ray
or anyone to defend him.  I believe he has been unjustifiably
ridiculed, maligned, and vilified and think its a shame that the
UFO community treats folks in this manner, especially those with
valuable information and evidence.


Ed Gehrman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:03:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:46:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:45:03 -0500
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >>From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >To the comment:

 >>>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >>>Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >>>only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >>>dupe or a video tape.

 >><snip>

 >Keith replied:

 >>I don't understand why so much is made of this point.  As long
 >>as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what difference does it make
 >>that it's not the camera-original film?

 >I suppose the first quesiton one has to ask is how we define
 >"original" film,

The film that was in the camera during the autopsy.  That's what
Bob Shell originally thought he had.

 >but let's not get bogged down in that matter.
 >The problem is that the small snippets of film provided by Ray
 >may have indeed been from 1947, but what's their connection to
 >the AA "film"?

My point is that this problem remains the same whether we're
talking about original film or 1947 dupe.

 >I have reels of old film in storage that
 >predates 1947 by a decade, so finding old film isn't really the
 >issue.  The question is whether or not the AA "film" can be
 >dated to 1947, and that hasn't been shown or proven.

That's not the question.  The question is whether a strip �
original or dupe -- with the alien can be dated to 1947.

 >>Santilli's dupe apparently has the right edge code, and Bob
 >>Shell's dupe is made of acetate propionate.

 >(Sigh) The film pieces supplied by Ray had the edge codes ripped
 >off and were not visable.

No.  It was the other edge that was ripped off.  The strips Ray
gave out didn't have edge codes because the codes only appear
maybe once every foot, and Ray simply selected strips without
codes.  I find that suspicious, but you probably don't.

 >They weren't leader film, but the
 >images they contained did not appear to be related
 >to the AA "film".  Ray provided a xerox copy of a
 >piece of film to a Kodak employee and learned that
 >the edge codes on that particular piece of "film" was
 >dated to 1927, 1947, or 1967 (they repeat the codes
 >every 20 years), and process of elimination indicated
 >that 1947 was correct.  However, it's important to
 >keep in mind that the xerox copy was not (obviously)
 >of film that was connected to the AA "film".  That is
 >to say that there was no image of the creature on it.
 >So what does this particular dating prove?

You're correct that the "dating" by Kodak that Ray trumpeted as
if it were something significant proved nothing.  But the way he
spoke of it shows he recognizes the importance of meaningful
dating by Kodak. Refusal to allow this can only benefit him if
the film is recent, and, together with all the discrepancies in
the information he's put out on the autopsy -- which James
Easton and Kent Jeffrey have ably summarized (even if we throw
out the "restricted" issue) -- and Ray's refusal to allow the
cameraman's existence to be verified, and his apparent refusal
to allow even Bob Shell (who "corrected" the transcription) to
hear the purported tape of the camerman's official statement,
make a hoax the most likely explanation.

 >>Bob Shell uses the fact the it's a dupe as an excuse not to
 >>submit it to Kodak, but I can't for the life of me see the logic
 >>of that.

 >Kodak actually had a list of requirements that would have to be
 >met to specifically date the film and confirm that the AA "film"
 >was dated to 1947.

But they aren't at all unreasonable.  I'm not sure if Kent
Jeffrey's comment on this is still current, but he reported:
"According to Tony Amato, while the short-term loan of a
complete reel of film would be desirable, Kodak would be willing
to work with as little as two or three frames. The only 'damage'
to the film would be a small punch-hole in one frame -- not much
of a sacrifice, especially considering the increased value
authentication would bring."

 >While it would be possible to have a snippet
 >of duplicate film dated, what would that prove?  Bob confirmed
 >enough information to indicate that the piece of film he had was
 >likely from 1947, but that was based in part on information that
 >he had been given and not direct examination of AA "film" with
 >image of the creature.

First, Bob has not given the impression of being an
'independent' expert in this case.  Second, his only
observations were that the film broke when bent (actually I
don't think he said that, but he did imply it), and that it
stunk (he implied it smelled of acetate).  Moreover, he said he
was only 95% sure, and only Kodak could take this to 100%.

You're right that even if Kodak confirmed his strip was from
1947, the link to the alien would still rely on Ray's
credibility.  But at least it would be a step toward
resuscitating the credibility of both Bob and Ray -- no
reference to the comedy team intended.  ;-)

<snip>

 >As I've said in a previous message, Ray holds the key to this
 >mystery and he can resolve our confusion at any time if he
 >wishes.

That's right.  And if the film is genuine, you have to believe
Ray's not intelligent enough to realize that refusal to test the
film creates the appearance of fraud, and actually minimizes his
financial return.  But if you believe this, how do you explain
his earlier stressing of Kodak's dating of the film?

 >So far I've seen no new information that deserves as much
 >bandwidth as we are spending on this issue, and we're beginning
 >to muddy the waters (so to speak) with partial descriptions and
 >unsupported inferences.

Some of the points above had not yet been made clear, which is
why, as knowledgeable as you are about this, you apparently
weren't aware of them.

Keith








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                     'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:50:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:50:17 -0500
Subject: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet





Source: http://www.sightings.com/politics6/moonmyth.htm

'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet

By Alan M. MacRobert
Boston Globe Correspondent


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/354/science/B

12/20/1999

An astronomical urban legend racing around the country by e-mail
chain letter says that a special full moon will supposedly
illuminate the Earth on Wednesday night with a spectacular flood
of brilliance.

Headlined: ''Next full moon brightest you'll ever see!'' the
notice says that due to a rare confluence of events - a full
moon occurring on the winter solstice just as it appears at
close orbital points to the Earth and Sun - the moon will be
bigger and brighter than it's been in more than 100 years. So
bright, in fact, that we may not need headlights on if we're
driving at night.

Even the Wall Street Journal got taken in with the hype and ran
a page one story about the ''phenomenon'' last week under the
subhead: ''Big, Bright and Close to Earth. It Could Well Play
Tricks Not Seen in Many a Moon.''

Well, before you make plans to bathe in the moonglow, here are
the facts. Wednesday's full moon will look normal. You won't see
anything unusual about it unless you psych yourself up pretty
hard. But like all the best e-mail legends, this one has kernels
of truth that keep it alive and multiplying out of control.

It is true, as the chain letter says, that the moon will be at
the perigee of its orbit: at its closest to the Earth for this
month.

It is true that this perigee will be a trace closer than any of
the moon's other monthly perigees this year.

And it is true that around this time of year, both the Earth and
moon are three percent closer to the Sun than when the Earth is
on the opposite side of its orbit in June and July.

So Wednesday's moon will indeed appear a bit bigger and brighter
than usual. But only a bit. Add up all the effects, and this
full moon turns out to be about 19 percent brighter than
average.

That's a smaller brightness boost than it sounds. The difference
would be just detectable to the human eye if you could put an
average full moon next to Wednesday's in the sky and compare the
two. Failing that, you'd need measuring instruments. A good
photographer's light meter, carefully calibrated against an
average full moon, would do the trick.

But a moon to dazzle the world? Fugeddabout it.

Of course, many people will go out Wednesday night and be amazed
at the moon's brightness. That's because the full moon is always
bright. This will likely be the first time some people pay
attention.

Another part of the letter that claims this is all happening
because this full moon coincides with the December solstice.
Solstices don't make the moon brighter or fainter (though at
this time of year the full moon does stand high in the sky
around the middle of the night, whereas a spring or summer full
moon rides lower across the sky).

The chain letter says this is the first time the moon has been
so near and bright in 133 years; ''the Lakota Sioux took
advantage of the super bright full moon and staged a devastating
retaliatory ambush on soldiers in the Wyoming Territory,'' some
letters state. The ambush actually happened at high noon.

In fact, Roger W. Sinnott of Sky & Telescope magazine finds that
the moon was actually brighter (by a hair) on January 15, 1930,
January 4, 1912, and other dates.

The real news here is the power of the Internet to spread a
piece of random confusion. The bright-moon story originated from
the 1999 Old Farmer's Almanac, where it lay dormant all year.
Then someone paraphrased it into an e-mail (complete with the
Indian attack), added some exaggerations, and away it flew. Two
weeks ago no one seems to have heard of it. Within a few days it
was everywhere, and media outlets around the nation were calling
the magazine to ask about it.

An e-mail chain letter is a kind of computer virus, one spread
by people rather than machines. Harmless ones like this serve a
valuable function. They train people not to believe them (since
no one likes being made a fool twice). The moon myth hurt no one
and should die a quick, natural death three days from now. Maybe
it will help immunize people against more virulent strains.


Alan M. MacRobert is an associate editor of Sky & Telescope
magazine in Cambridge (www.skypub.com).

This story ran on page C04 of the Boston Globe on 12/20/1999. �
Copyright 1999 Globe Newspaper
Company.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:27:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:02:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:13:24 -0500
 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >The area torn away was not, we surmise, to obsure the film
 >codes.  It actually removes the sound track!  This duped
 >material was perforated on one side only.

 >Regards,

 >Terry

Bob Shell could be contacted for his analysis, who said the
apparent frame rate indicated the AA "Film" was dubbed from a
16mm sound film.  However there was also some discussion about
the use of a version of 16MM film by the military that was
sprocketed on both sides, which added a lot of confusion to this
discussion several years ago.  It was interesting that both
samples had one edge torn off, and if memory serves they were
not from the same strip of film.

But without solid provenance for the film strip samples, and
what they might relate to, this is all IMO idle speculation
leading nowhere.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

                   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:02:26 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:11:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?


Regarding manned Mars mission exhortations ...

 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:31:38 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:16:40 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Mars Initiative: Do We Need Probes?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Whatever happened to the moon?  Seems to me that exploration of
 >this, our nearest satellite, is grounds for greater imperatives
 >(note the plural).  The imperatives are:

 >1) Practicing on an easier, closer target.

 >2) Practicing on doing it the right way (read: not cheaper,
 >   better faster)

 >3) Preventing greater loss of stuff, such as bodies and/or body
 >   parts along with the mission equipment)


Here Here!  Common sense occasionally manifests ...

Before one hikes across town, it seems appropriate to try
walking around the block once or twice, to see if your shoes are
suitable, if nothing else.

Besides, the Moon has plenty of strangeness to poke at; ask
anyone familiar with TLP.  Or Ingo Swann.

But what do I know?

-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 >
   Dec > Dec 21

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:20:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >>Stig

 >>***

 >>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>by Jim Keith


 >List:

Stanton Friedman says"

 >This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >the basic facts right. For example.

 >1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.


While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
no one describes debris field that is  really large. As time
goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
too small.

If only "200 yards in diameter," as you say the Roswell Daily
Record stated just days after the event, the wreckage is far too
small. Much, of course, depends on how the wreckage came down.
Did the alleged UFO explode in mid-flight or come down largely
in one piece? If the former, at what altitude and what speed was
it travelling at?

On 3/06/94 an F-4 crashed near Franklin, Georgia. The F-4
exploded in mid-flight at 800 feet high. It was traveling at 400
knots when the mishap happened. The train of debris from only
800 feet high was nearly a mile long; not hundreds of yards but
thousands of feet. It was laid out nearly as straight as an
arrow but the debris came down unevenly over the length of the
field of fall.

The largest piece was the front of the fuselage and was smaller
than a VW beetle. The lightest stuff--such as fabric--fell first
and the heaviest--such as engines, ect--interestingly fell much
further along.

Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
make under the identical circumstances. An F-4,. while a good
size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
likely over miles.

I guess we could argue that if the "saucer," or whatever shape
craft is claimed, was alien in origin that it was made of
tougher stuff than an F-4 is made of and, thus, would have held
together better. However, since we don't know the exact
circumstances of the "saucer's" demise or construction it's all
speculation.

 >7. Professor Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >Braun...

I have believed for a long time that what was an accident by the
USAF was turned into, perhaps, the greatest disinformation ploy
done during the Cold War: The United States in time following
the Roswell incident did nothing to discourage the Soviets from
thinking we had one ace the Soviets would never have: alien
technology.

I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons. But we
now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
"Roswell Recovery."

Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

The USAF retracting their statement so quickly probably only
convinced him and others in power then that the USAF really did
recover alien technology. The USAF with their follow-up and
clumsy denials since then have help keep this story alive for
Moscow and others to believe.

That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

John C. Thompson









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                   Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:22:04 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:05:13 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet


Dear List:

Millenium Moon rumors, eh?  That explains the strange story I
heard about our vice president.

Briefly, an android developed at EPCOT, the Gore-1, has been
campaigning in New Hampshire this week while the real Al Gore
takes it easy at the Octagon House in Washington, D.C. during a
rare attack of lycanthropy brought on by the Millenium Moon, the
brightest in 133 years.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Paul B. Thompson <MrApol@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:33:07 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:07:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


The essential requirements for verification of a historical
document are:

1. Provenance--where does the document come from?

2. Authenticity--is the document of appropriate age, materials,
etc?

3. Who found it--are they reliable? Do they stand to profit from
the document?

4. How does the document fit with established history? If
someone found a film showing Churchill and Hitler dancing
together in tutus in 1943, then more evidence of authenticity
would be required than if it merely showed Churchill walking
around the streets of London.

The "alien autopsy" film fails to satisfy any of the above
criteria. We don't know where it comes from. We're told a story
about it's origins, but we have no proof. It is claimed to be
old enough film, and made of correct materials, but we have no
proof. Blank leader and photocopies of strips of film do not
verify anything. The actual original film has to be obtained and
analyzed; anything else is a waste of time. Ray Santilli and
Volker Spielberg have been caught obfuscating, dissembling, and
lying about the film. They have made money and gained notoriety
because of the film. I do not find them reliable. The film shows
events at odds with known history and science. If the purveyors
of the film want us to take it seriously, then they'd better
come up with better support than they have.

In view of the complete lack of support, there is no reason to
take the "alien autopsy" seriously.

Paul B. Thompson
ParaScope







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:42:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:19:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Re: Alien Autopsy

 >From: ed gehrman
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:18:25 -0800
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:42:59 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >Previously, Ed wrote:

 >There is absolutely no evidence that he (Ray) had anything more than
 >limited skills in any of these areas of expertise.

 >1)Write a script, one so improbable that no one would believe
 >it.

 >2)Gather together a film crew: at least two doctors and an
 >extra, cameramen, set designers, period historians, mechanical
 >engineers and skilled metal workers and an FX expert.  (this is
 >just a partial list of the large crew it would have taken. And
 >this would have been no minor production. Filming is not easy
 >and is very expensive. The debris alone, which Dennis Murphy
 >describes as almost impossible to manufacture, would have been a
 >huge undertaking, even for a major motion picture company.

 >3) Keep it all a secret. We all know how hard that would be. Why
 >have no witness come forward to confirm this as a hoaxed film.

 >4)Make some money from it. This would have been the hardest part
 >since the investment would have had to be in the millions of
 >dollars. Ray couldn�t have make much money from this.

Ed,

I do not know why you do not address the questions put to you
yet demand that everyone else toe the line in response to your
endless request for "more proof".

I'll try and make this brief as I'm sure everyone is tired of
reading about this. You operate on a lot of assumptions; too
many, in fact, for someone that claims to have done 4 years of
research on the AA topic. You claim that the AA film would cost
millions to produce. I work in special effects for a living and
have produced a variety of low budget films. One made in 1987,
"Forever Evil", was a basic horror film with far more gore and
dead bodies than AA ever demanded.

The total cost for the film was around $120,000 and ran two
hours. I wouldn't say it was great; in fact it wasn't. But it
made over 2 million dollars in rental sales, not to mention the
money it made playing on USA network.

To be quite blunt; you are wrong to suggest that Santilli's cost
would be greater than his return. AA would cost no more than
$10,000 to $20,000 to produce. The potential return would be
hundreds times that. Now, understand, the amount of money that
Santilli actually made may have been less, but that doesn't
matter. No one  in entertainment ever makes a movie thinking
they are going to lose money. No one.

 From a technical point of view, Forever Evil it was far more
complicated to make than AA, where the only requirement was to
make a film that filled the general audiences' expectations of
what documentary footage from that era looks like.

And that brings up a point: Don't you find the lousy lighting
and sloppy camera work and black and white stock sort of an odd
choice for something so important? I mean, was this like the
20th alien autopsy they'd done and were just getting lazy?

Think about it.

Regarding your quote of Bob Shell, you offered:


 >19-Aug-95 05:45:51
 >Sb: #FILM EVALUATION
 >Fm: BOB SHELL 76750,2717
 >To: ALL

 >Hello all,

 >I have been hard at work on this film. I have now physically
 >examined a section of the film, a section showing the "autopsy"
 >room before the body was placed on the table, but clearly
 >consistent with the later footage.

 >The film on which this was shot is Cine Kodak Super XX, a film
 >type which was discontinued in 1956-57. Since the edge code
 >could be 1927, 1947 or 1967, and this film was not manufactured
 >in 1927 or 1967, this clearly leaves us with only 1947 as an
 >option.

 >From my own research on the physical characteristics of the
 >film, I am willing to go on record as giving a 95% probability
 >that the film is what the cameraman claims it to be. I am only
 >hedging 5%, because I still want secondary chemical verification
 >from Kodak based on the chemical "signature" of the film.

I do not doubt that Bob said this at one time. However, you'll
note that this statement was made as far back as 1995. The info
I provided for you was made in 1998, after Bob apparently had
time to reconsider his position a bit. I accused you of making
stuff up because, one the one hand, you claimed list members
were engaging in "half truths, distortions, misinformation and
disinformation"; on the other hand you purposely chose a quote
that you knew no longer reflected Bob's current views on the
subject.

Perhaps this was an oversight on your part. If so, then you need
to reconsider the fruits of your research. Again, I think you
operate on a great deal of assumptions, most of which simply are
not true or cannot be proved. In the end, the man you so
desperately want to defend is the only one that can solve this
mystery. Not only have you avoided direct and reasonable
questions by myself and other members of this list, you claim
that we are trying to sandbag you in some fashion. This is truly
insulting.

Ultimately, it seems to me that you felt we would all swoon at
your "discovery" regarding the restricted codes. When we pointed
out the illogic in your position, you got pissed; claiming we
were, in essence, out to get you.

I have nothing else to say to you on this topic.

AA is a fraud.

Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:23:08 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


Friends & List Fiends --

I've been dipping in and out of the probabilities-of-ET
life-and-the implications-for-the-ETH debate with some interest
and occasional amusement.  All in all I think it has been quite
constructive, inspiring some serious, often actually thoughtful
consideration of new discoveries and the theories and
proto-theories and pseudo- theories built upon them.  Permit me
to suggest another line of discussion, approaching the issue as
a matter of ufological induction, if you will.

Let us assume that certain UFO cases actually involved
observations of technology created by nonhuman intelligences and
sometimes the intelligences themselves.  I have in mind, e.g.,
the McMinnville photos, the Nash-Fortenberry formation sighting,
and the Betty and Barney Hill incident.  Pick your own best
case(s) (I think I'd have to say McMinnville), with the criteria
being (1) solidity of evidence, and (2) most indicative of "nuts
and bolts" outside human capabilities at the time of the event.

Stipulate for purposes of argument that, that case entails an
observation of someone else's nuts and bolts (even most ETH
doubters can name a case like that).  Then ponder the
implications in light of the sort of information Dennis Stacy
has been presenting and arguing from.

Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
origin--taking care to apply the principle of parsimony with
very great care? Be very, very conservative...

A sidebar:  A few days ago, I had occasion to peruse my
collection of classic science fiction, coming upon the premiere
of Galaxy Science Fiction magazine, October 1950.  I
rediscovered a circulation building contest--What's Your Theory
About the Flying Saucers? in 200 words or less--introduced with
a short essay by Willy (misspelled "Willie" on the cover) Ley.
Ley consider different notions about the saucers, then zeroed in
on the ETH.  He quickly eliminated Mars and Venus as the
possible home planets, and went on, "Therefore--the disks would
probably have to be interstellar faster-than-light ships, in
which case I would expect them to be about half a mile long,
and, to date, none has been reported that size."  Ley didn't
explain the thinking behind his curious half-miler notion.

While this doesn't have much to do with the issues at hand, it
is interesting that as early as late 1950, thoughtful folks had
all but eliminated planets of our solar system from the running.

-- Cheers & Happy Humbug to all, KARL








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 16:49:32 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:35:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:24:30 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Keith Woodard
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:46:11 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 >>>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >>>From: Roger Annette Evans
 >>>Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously, I had written:

 >>>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >>>Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >>>only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >>>dupe or a video tape.

 >Keith reasonably points out:

 >>I don't understand why so much is made of this point
 >>As long as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what
 >>difference does it make that it's not the camera-original
 >>film?

 >Hi, Keith.

 >I understand your question. On the surface, it sounds
 >reasonable enough.

 >However, in the context of Santilli's story, it is very
 >important. According to Santilli, the alleged cameraman
 >told him the following:

 >>"After filming, I had several hundred reels. I separated
 >>problem reels which required special attention in
 >>processing (these I would do later). The first batch was
 >>sent through to Washington and I processed the remainder
 >>a few days later."

 >Accordingly, the film Ray bought was supposed to be camera
 >original; not a dupe.

 >In fact, Ray thought he had bought camera original until Bob
 >Shell proved otherwise.

Well, Clive Tobin, actually.

 >This means that the cameraman lied about how he came into
 >possession of it.

Yes, although perhaps it could be argued that, after all those
years, he'd forgotten he made dupes.

 >By extension, the validity of the imagery
 >contained within AA is very suspect.

Well, there is also, as I just mentioned, a possible innocent
explanation.  The point I'm driving at is that the special
effects necessary for such a hoax were presumably unavailable in
1947.  So if dupes with alien imagery indeed go back that far,
I'd consider that compelling evidence the autopsy was real.

 >But more importantly, the only actual footage that has been
 >released was "leader" that supposedly came from the AA film.
 >This leader turned out to be "dupe" film; not camera original.
 >As it stands, we only have Ray's word that the AA footage was
 >the source for even the few frames of "dupe leader" that have
 >been tested.

 >In effect, no one has seen the actual AA film original; not even
 >the cameraman and certainly not Ray.

If the dupe really is old, then Ray has probably not seen the
original, assuming we now have more or less accurate information
about what was turned over to him.  I think you're further
saying that since the "cameraman" claimed the dupes were
originals, he must not have been the actual cameraman, just
someone who wound up with the dupes and lied about their origin.
That's certainly possible, however it's also possible he was the
cameraman but his recollections are flawed.

 >In the final analysis,
 >there is no proof that the AA film was produced on
 >vintage 16mm film at all since the only film analyzed
 >has been a few frames of blank dupe film. There is
 >no proof that the two are the same; only that the dupe
 >film is old.

I agree that this bears on the credibility of the alleged
cameraman and thus has some relevance.  But I don't see why my
point doesn't apply nonetheless: if 1947 film -- dupe or
original -- has the alien on it, the autopsy is unlikely to be a
hoax because both hoax technology and the cultural context for
such a hoax were inadequate back then.

Best,

Keith







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                           Re: The Drake Equation

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:00:37 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:38:45 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 01:20:36 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:04:55 -0600
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I just want to interject a thought here.

 >If I recall correctly, several sub-species of hominids ( or
 >whatever they are called ) arose at different times. Some of
 >these could even interbreed. One could argue that competition
 >between various semi-intelligent populations merely led to the
 >predominance of just one.

Larry,

The point is: intelligence isn't inevitable, it doesn't just
break out, the way flowers bloom in spring.

For example, North and South America have been around as long as
the rest of the planet, ie, 4 billion years or so. Yet even the
most liberal claims have them being peopled only within the last
30,000 years or so, 12, 500 if you're an orthodox Bering
Straights believer. The New World has plenty of primates, or
monkeys, at least. Yet it didn't give rise to an intelligent
species of its own until it was invaded by same.

Intelligence is not a given outcome of the mere presence of
life, in however many diverse forms. It is a happy happenstance.
Having created the Earth and Heaven, I can say that.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:44:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >>>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >>>Stig

 >>>***

 >>>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>>by Jim Keith


 >>List:

 >Stanton Friedman says"

 >>This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >>the basic facts right. For example.

 >>1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >>stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >>of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >>nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >>all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >>the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >>my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

What Marcel says in my movie is 3/4 of a mile long and over 100
years wide. He had concluded that in the absence of a crater
there must have been a mid air explosion.

 >While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
 >always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
 >no one describes debris field that is  really large. As time
 >goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
 >estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
 >too small.

The vehicle observed by Civil Engineer Barney Barnett in the
Plains of San Augustine which came down almost intact was less
than 30' in diameter. A saucer shaped craft would have a much
lower surface to volume ration than something with wings.

 >If only "200 yards in diameter," as you say the Roswell Daily
 >Record stated just days after the event, the wreckage is far too
 >small. Much, of course, depends on how the wreckage came down.
 >Did the alleged UFO explode in mid-flight or come down largely
 >in one piece? If the former, at what altitude and what speed was
 >it travelling at?

Apparently the Brazel Ranch saucer exploded in mid air with a
crew compartment observed a few miles away. The Plains saucer
was almost intact. May have been a mid air collision resulting
from a lightning strike or running into a tracking radar beam
known to be on. Might well be very different from an F-4
exploding.

 >On 3/06/94 an F-4 crashed near Franklin, Georgia. The F-4
 >exploded in mid-flight at 800 feet high. It was traveling at 400
 >knots when the mishap happened. The train of debris from only
 >800 feet high was nearly a mile long; not hundreds of yards but
 >thousands of feet. It was laid out nearly as straight as an
 >arrow but the debris came down unevenly over the length of the

 >The largest piece was the front of the fuselage and was smaller
 >than a VW beetle. The lightest stuff--such as fabric--fell first
 >and the heaviest--such as engines, ect--interestingly fell much
 >further along.

 >Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
 >expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
 >make under the identical circumstances. An F-4,. while a good
 >size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
 >"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
 >knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
 >likely over miles.

 >I guess we could argue that if the "saucer," or whatever shape
 >craft is claimed, was alien in origin that it was made of
 >tougher stuff than an F-4 is made of and, thus, would have held
 >together better. However, since we don't know the exact
 >circumstances of the "saucer's" demise or construction it's all
 >speculation.

The observations of those on the scene later are not
speculation. Marcel, Rickett, .

 >>7. Professor
Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >>(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >>that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >>Braun...

 >I have believed for a long time that what was an accident by the
 >USAF was turned into, perhaps, the greatest disinformation ploy
 >done during the Cold War: The United States in time following
 >the Roswell incident did nothing to discourage the Soviets from
 >thinking we had one ace the Soviets would never have: alien
 >technology.

What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
very different and no conventional materials were found. There
were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

 >I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
 >had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons. But we
 >now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
 >"Roswell Recovery."

I have seen NSC meeting notes indicating the Russiians weren't
expected to have nuclear weapons until the early 1950s.. and
weren't in 1947 known to have delivery systems. Interesting plot
line but where is the evidence? As noted in Crash at Corona  and
several other books the case for a crashed saucer is very
strong.

 >Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
 >reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
 >couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
 >their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

What is the basis for this claim about Stalin's belief? Marcel
was the Intelligence Officer for the most elite military group
in the world. Blanchard  went on to high office. The AAF people
certainly weren't punished. Interesting speculation but in over
20 years of Roswell investigation, I have seen no basis for this
claim

 >The USAF retracting their statement so quickly probably only
 >convinced him and others in power then that the USAF really did
 >recover alien technology. The USAF with their follow-up and
 >clumsy denials since then have help keep this story alive for
 >Moscow and others to believe.

You sure won't find much in the way of AAF (The USAF didn't
exist until September 1947.) comment between July of 1947 and
1994.. Not much follow up. I certainly agree the recent coverup
was clumsy.

 >That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

Major Marcel did get promoted. He was never the fall guy until
the TV Showtime Roswell show. invented that story..

 >John C. Thompson

Obviously I believe this is an interesting plot line with
nothing to support it and much to contradict it.  Jim Keith's
story line of course is wholly imaginary. The material was very
lightweight and very strong.. hardly concrete in a dummy bomb.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Rebecca <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:30:55 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:48:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:42:38 -0600
 >>From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman
 >>>Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:42:00 -0800
 >>>Fwd Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:43:05 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy

 ><snip>

 >>>I realize that Ray's reluctance to offer another
 >>>film sample is a serious problem. (He did once
 >>>but everyone forgets that.  Kodak dishonestly
 >>>protrayed this incident but it's proof, none
 >>>the less that Ray did try to have the film verified)

 >>Here's the point you don't seem to get, Ed. Ray
 >>Santilli has _never_ had a scrap of original film. The
 >>only footage he has ever offered for analysis is a
 >>dupe or a video tape.

 ><snip>

 >I don't understand why so much is made of this point.  As long
 >as the dupe can be dated to 1947, what difference does it make
 >that it's not the camera-original film?

 >Santilli's dupe apparently has the right edge code, and Bob
 >Shell's dupe is made of acetate propionate.

No one, to my knowledge has seen the "right edge code" on any
film supplied by Santilli. The only edge codes were provide by
Santilli and/or Shell from a copy/fax of the edge codes. There
was no film attached to the edge codes. Shell's film had no edge
codes. They were conveniently torn off. Also, Shell's film can
not be connected to the autopsy film except in a bizarre way.
The frames Shell possessed were frames from the beginning of one
of the reels (or so the story goes), but when reviewing the
footage on video, one can easily note that each of the "reels"
are uncut, but when we see the frames from the very beginning
(that are scemes, at least, of the same doorway and table that
Shell posses) there is an obvious splice or cut or whatever you
want to call where, apparently these unrelated frames have been
added. Check it out for yourself.

 >Bob Shell uses the fact the it's a dupe as an excuse not to
 >submit it to Kodak, but I can't for the life of me see the
 >logic
 >of that.

I would love to have Shell's dupe tested, not because it would
prove anything about the autopsy footage, but because it would
date something that has come from Santilli which he connects to
the footage and the cameraman. Testing those frames would, IMO,
let us know how truthful/untruthful Santilli has been. However,
Kodak refuses, IIRC, to test those particular frames because if
they did test out to be the right year, then Santilli and gang
might use that test as some sort of proof that his autopsy
footage is the real deal.

Testing Shell's frames would not validate (or invalidate) the
autopsy footage. The first step of validating the film would be
a test on a frame that has the alien on it.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                 Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: michael mchugh <mcmchugh99@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:13:06 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:51:38 -0500
Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that
 >the Soviets had or were close to having their own
 >nuclear weapons.

No one in the government was certain when the Soviets would
develop nukes.  Scientists, engineers, industrialists,
intelligence officers, etc. had been discussing this since World
War II.  Some people thought they would have the bomb in a few
years, others that it would take ten years or more.
Nevertheless, there was considerable shock in the government
when the Russians tested a bomb in 1949, and considerable
hysteria about espionage.

 >It also, perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made
 >flag rank and poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They
 >did, afterall, need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >John C. Thompson

Marcel was promoted again--to Lieutenant Colonel.  He stayed in
the Air Force until 1950, when he was discharged for hardship
reasons.  Obviously, his career didn't suffer too much because
of the "mistaken" ID of a "flying disc"--if indeed it was a
mistake.

Marcel continued to work on many high-level, secret projects,
which would not have happened if the Air Force thought he was an
incompetent, hysterical or unstable officer.  Either they forgot
about the mistake, or there was no mistake.

PS: From time to time, I've read debates about whether Col.
Blanchard, the base commander at Roswell, approved the 1947
press release about the "flying disc."  Anyone who has ever been
in the military knows that he must have.  This was no routine
announcement about an upcoming ice cream social, but information
that was bound to send the press into a feeding frenzy.

Blanchard ordered Marcel to investigate the crash, and report
back. Then he issued the press release, and informed his
superiors about it.  This is how chain of command operates in
the military: it never changes.


Mike 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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                   Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:39:34 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:53:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:31:38 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mars initiative: Do We Need Probes?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Dear Mac and Listers:  While 2/3 of our Mars probes have
 >decidedly and publicly failed, there is good reason to assess
 >the fact of our "faster, better, cheaper" policy.  When the
 >United States Space program was real, as opposed to it's present
 >state of sour effluvium, we had more success than failure.  Of
 >late, however, the faster, better cheaper policy has created
 >only faster and cheaper.  Somewhere along the way, the cheaper
 >part has likely caused the demise of better.

 >Here is where I (in my opinion) leave your theory in the cold,
 >dark vacuum of space.  After nearly a decade of cheaper, etc.,
 >we've lost the ability to do it the right way.  Now that we've
 >gotten into the pattern of mistakes (if one is to believe they
 >are such, personally I do not, rather, I bereave them), now that
 >we've gotten into a pattern of mistakes, you propose sending
 >humans into foray, eh?  Good thinking.  It will be quite a while
 >for NASA to get it's act together, back to the proper methods of
 >design and development before we send some poor bastards up that
 >far.  At least a decade.  We can't even tell Centimeters from
 >Inches and you wanna send a human up?

I argue that mistakes like that (if in fact it was a mistake)
will be made much more difficult to make if we're sending
people. Manned missions would command _much_ more public
exposure, and I am convinced that the inherent quality of the
mission, from the roots up, would be vastly improved.  Dare I
say that some of the fabled "spirit of Apollo" would be
rekindled--only for the right reasons.  There's no glaring
reason why space science can't be made attractive to the public.

 >May I make a suggestion?  Use either my brother in law or maybe
 >you can volunteer?

I don't know your brother-in-law, but as a matter of fact, I
_would_ volunteer for a Mars-shot.

 >>With the Apollo program now only a fuzzy memory, good for little
 >>more than obligatory nostalgia programs on the Learning Channel,
 >>and Space Shuttle missions so routinely unsexy that firing John
 >>Glenn into orbit (again) was supposed to be cause for
 >>excitement, it is obvious that we need to set our sights on
 >>loftier goals.  There is good reason to expect a manned Mars
 >>mission to provide the challenge necessary to crack our current
 >>climate of space science apathy.  The scientific rewards alone
 >>promise a redefinition our planetary selfhood.

 >Of course there is truth in your monograph, however we are not
 >ready for prime time. We once were. Not any more.  What is
 >required now is full national commitment by citizens, government
 >and Congress for the application of funds to _do it the right
 >way_ and stop dicking around with doing it cheaper better
 >faster.  Because in end, all we get is ... well, we get it in
 >the end.

Agreed.  I'm sick of waiting for "prime time" to arrive.  That was
the point of my essay--it _never will_ arrive unless we have the
foresight to dump this misguided devotion to telerobotic probes
and do it ourselves.  Manned missions offer a degree of backup
that present artificial intelligence can't match.  It's technically
possible to send a retrofitted Space Shuttle to Mars, if we had to
do it in a hurry.  And no, I'm not advocating doing anything of this
magnitude in a hurry.  Only that we do it now, with the forward
thinking that we regrettably lost when we decided to stop going
to the Moon.

 >Whatever happened to the moon?  Seems to me that exploration of
 >this, our nearest satellite, is grounds for greater imperatives
 >(note the plural).  The imperatives are: <SNIP>

I have no problems with heading for the Moon first.  But I'm
wary of the space agency's tendency to stagnate.  Suppose we
built a base on the Moon by, say, 2007.  _Then_ how long till
the next logical step?  Floating around in Earth orbit, as we're
doing now, has proven to be something of an exploratory
cul-de-sac.  NASA endlessly says that "we're not ready yet,"
that we need more information about the effects of microgravity,
etc.  NASA conveniently forgets that the Russians have much more
experience in this particular area than we do, and appears to
rely on public apathy to promote the completely bogus idea that
we don't have what it takes to start planning a Mars mission.
Read Zubrin.

We have what it takes to start now, and the need for probes is,
at best, minimal.  It's not a matter of impatience so much as
simple dumbfoundedness at NASA's refusal to take the next step.
Yes, our space agency needs a massive overhaul.  What better way
than to shed this go-nowhere obsession with cheap unmanned
missions and do it for real?

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 00:54:58 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:56:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Stanton Friedman says"

 >>This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >>the basic facts right. For example.

 >>1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >>stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >>of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >>nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >>all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >>the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >>my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

 >While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
 >always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
 >no one describes debris field that is  really large. As time
 >goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
 >estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
 >too small.

<SNIP>

 >Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
 >expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
 >make under the identical circumstances. An F-4,. while a good
 >size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
 >"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
 >knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
 >likely over miles.

No one has ever claimed to have seen the entire saucer at the
Brazel ranch; the impression I get from the eyewitness accounts
is that these were scraps of something much larger, and I remain
impressed by many of the reports that the bulk of the craft
impacted elsewhere.  In other words, despite the "RAAF Captures
Saucer..." headline, it's rather obvious from statements made by
people who were there, or who handled pieces of the stuff later,
that the "debris field" didn't represent the entirety of the
craft.

We're left to infer some sort of in-flight explosion; the
saucer may have shed a layer of "skin."  At least that's my take.

<snip>

 >That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

I was under the impression that Marcel _did_ get promoted, which
would have been an odd thing to do under the circumstances you
propose.  The whole "fall guy" thing is from the Showtime
Roswell movie, which depicts Marcel as a martyr.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:49:31 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:58:05 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >A sidebar:  A few days ago, I had occasion to peruse my
 >collection of classic science fiction, coming upon the premiere
 >of Galaxy Science Fiction magazine, October 1950.  I
 >rediscovered a circulation building contest--What's Your Theory
 >About the Flying Saucers? in 200 words or less--introduced with
 >a short essay by Willy (misspelled "Willie" on the cover) Ley.
 >Ley consider different notions about the saucers, then zeroed in
 >on the ETH.  He quickly eliminated Mars and Venus as the
 >possible home planets, and went on, "Therefore--the disks would
 >probably have to be interstellar faster-than-light ships, in
 >which case I would expect them to be about half a mile long,
 >and, to date, none has been reported that size."  Ley didn't
 >explain the thinking behind his curious half-miler notion.

 >While this doesn't have much to do with the issues at hand, it
 >is interesting that as early as late 1950, thoughtful folks had
 >all but eliminated planets of our solar system from the running.

In regards to where the UFOs (assuming they're ET in the popular
sense) _originally_ came from, I'm very tempted to rule out our
solar system.  Certainly not Venus or any of the Jovian planets.
Mars just might have developed a spacefaring civilization,
though I really doubt it.  Still, in light of probable artifacts
on the surface, one can't rule it out as some sort of base.  The
Moon, too, has its share of thoroughly recorded oddities, so
UFOs might have some kind of base of operations there, too,
without having originated there.

Tom Van Flandern's Exploded Planet Hypothesis throws a novel
twist into this chain of reasoning, though.  Any takers?

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 02:53:36 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:00:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:52:31 -0500
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

<snip>

 >Roswell UFO Bombshell
 >by Jim Keith

<snip>

 >Another secret: According to my source, military bombers were
 >notoriously unreliable in hitting targets, sometimes missing
 >their mark by as much as half a mile. It was given to the 509th
 >to improve that record, and to make it possible to deliver
 >bombs, particularly nuclear bombs, with greater accuracy.

This is a secret? It has been available for many years.  Go to:

http://www.anesi.com/ussbs02.htm

and to:

http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm

to read the summary report of the Strategic Bombing Survey for
yourself:


"The planes bombed from approximately 30,000 feet and the
percentage of bombs dropped which hit the target areas averaged
less than 10 percent. (UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY
SUMMARY REPORT (Pacific War) WASHINGTON, D.C. 1 JULY 1946, page
16.)

"Bombing altitudes after 9 March 1945 were lower, in both day
and night attacks... Bombing accuracy increased substantially,
and averaged 35 to 40 percent within 1,000 feet of the aiming
point in daylight attacks from 20,000 feet or lower. (Ibid.,
page 17.)

"Conventionally the air forces designated as "the target area" a
circle having a radius of 1000 feet around the aiming point of
attack. While accuracy improved during the war, Survey studies
show that, in the over-all, only about 20% of the bombs aimed at
precision targets fell within this target area. A peak accuracy
of 70% was reached for the month of February 1945. (THE UNITED
STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT (European War),
September 30, 1945, page 5.)

The unnamed informant, or the writer of the FATE piece, is
obviously trying to inflate the importance of his story with a
phony secret he could get from the Internet or through inter-
library loan.  How much else should we believe?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                    Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:02:49 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:05:43 -0500
Subject: Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,


Just cleaning up my files before the end of the world and found
one of those many lost bits of data that 'catch the eye' - The
information and attached image comes from POPULAR MECHANICS,
JULY 1998, p30-31 - "Outdoors Liquid Golf", by Jim Gorant.

Umm... What has ROSWELL got to do with a Golf Club story? You
may also need to follow Colonel Philip J. Corso's theory of
"Seeding". In short, Roswell alien technology was given to the
giants of American industry.

So with a photon force of possibility (no proof remember), could
this be an example of ROSWELL CRASH material in a 'back
engineering' revelation.

Here comes the links.

THE ROSWELL VISION?

I need you to take a big step into the "what if" area of your
mind. Read the following extracts. The extracts are taken from
Timothy GOOD - "Beyond Top Secret", Ch18, p459-462 - Index:
CORONA DEBRIS). If you know the page jump over to the *** and
read on:


PAGE 459, PARA 4, LINE 4 -
"Marcel [Major Jesse Marcel] testified that he found an area
measuring about three-quarters of a mile long 200 to 300 feet
wide, strewn with a large amount of extremely lightweight,
strong material."

PAGE 461, PARA 1, LINE 4 -
"I lit a cigarette lighter to some of the stuff, and it
didn't burn"

PAGE 461, PARA 1, LINE 5 -
"...you could not bend or break, but it didn't look like
metal. It looked more like wood".

PAGE 461, PARA 2, LINE 2 -
"... he [Marcel] tried unsuccessfully to bend or dent a piece
of extremely light and thin metal which was about two foot long
by a foot wide. 'I tried to bend the stuff [but] it wouldn't
bend,' he said 'We even tried making a dint in it with a 16lb
sledge hammer. And there was still no dent in it..'."

PAGE 461, PARA 2, LINE 6 -
"...'It was possible to flex this stuff back and forth, even
to wrinkle it, but you could not put a crease in it that
would stay'...".

PAGE 461, PARA 2, LINE 7 -
"...'I would almost have to describe it as a metal with plastic
properties'...". [please note now NOT wood].

                         ***

THE NEW PRODUCT QUALITIES

Remember, I have not researched the product at all, but the
following summary of interesting points from the POPULAR
MECHANICS article may give someone an idea to look for ROSWELL
data?

Remember, it's an exercise of elimination and not provocation.
Now take a look at the following points from the article.

[ 1]. The name "LIQUIDMETAL".
[ 2]. The name "AMORPHOUS STRUCTURE".
[ 3]. It's an ALLOY of - nickel, zirconium, titanium, copper
        and beryllium.
[ 4]. It's categorized as a "METALLIC GLASS"?
[ 5]. The author reports - "One of the more impressive of
        those properties is the ability to TRANSFER ENERGY."
[ 6]. According to LIQUIDMETAL GOLF, its new alloy produces
        99% energy transmission..."
[ 7]. It has a wonderful ELASTIC nature. It is better than
        both steel & titanium. In a thick sheet state it will
        NOT bend. However, produce it in a fine sheet (wafer),
        and then it loves to spring back into shape if bent.
        [ see Graph in attached image - LiqMetal.art, 11k].
[ 8]. It has a wonderful STRENGTH quality, if it is measured
        against DENSITY or ELASTICITY.
        [ see Graph in attached image -  LiqMetal.art, 11k].
[ 9]. It has a DENSITY some where between titanium and steel.
[10]. It has lower VIBRATIONAL RESPONSE than titanium or steel
        - it produces less shock and feels solid on impact.
[11]. It is almost CORROSION FREE!
[12]. Needs vacuum environment, high temperature, high pressure
        and very fast cooling to form.
[13]. The author states - "..it seems to defy the laws of
        atomic structure"?
[14]. It's a Patent-Protected formula.
[15]. The author reported - "The stuff [interesting observation]
        was originally formulated in 1959 by California Institute
        of Technology scientists [name?] trying to develop
        material for aerospace application".

                         ***

The last point is interesting. "AEROSPACE" application, that
sound right, "GOLF CLUBS" well it seems a little complex &
expensive.

Well, what do you think? Don't you just love conspiracies.
Oh! By the way, it's in the UFO edition!

You may need to see the Chart produced by POPULAR MECHANICS
to get the feeling of a mystery. However, it would be an
interesting exercise to try and find more about this alloy
and any generic company or researcher links, via California
Institute of Technology!

To all enquiring minds. Good hunting.

Regards

John W. AUCHETTL
Director - PRA

THANKS TO - Popular Mechanics - Editor Joe Oldham.

Article + Image Location on Web at:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/popmech/ute/outsearch_frames.html
Search with word "liquidmetal"

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                 Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:14:13 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:08:22 -0500
Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:52:31 -0500
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?>>

<snip>

 >Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

<snip>

 >Roswell UFO Bombshell
 >by Jim Keith

<snip>

 >my source states that either an atomic bomb
 >or what is termed a "bomb shape," or "test shape," the shell of
 >a nuke lacking explosives and atomic capability, and sometimes
 >filled with concrete to add weight, was accidentally or
 >purposefully jettisoned above Corona, New Mexico, directly on
 >the flight path between Sandia and Roswell.

An atomic bomb_deliberately_ dropped over Corona NM? Come on,
what does he take us for?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                   Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 01:10:37 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:15:15 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet


 >From Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: http://www.sightings.com/politics6/moonmyth.htm

 >'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet

 >By Alan M. MacRobert
 >Boston Globe Correspondent


 >http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/354/science/B

 >12/20/1999

 >An astronomical urban legend racing around the country by e-mail
 >chain letter says that a special full moon will supposedly
 >illuminate the Earth on Wednesday night with a spectacular flood
 >of brilliance.

 >Headlined: ''Next full moon brightest you'll ever see!'' the
 >notice says that due to a rare confluence of events - a full
 >moon occurring on the winter solstice just as it appears at
 >close orbital points to the Earth and Sun - the moon will be
 >bigger and brighter than it's been in more than 100 years. So
 >bright, in fact, that we may not need headlights on if we're
 >driving at night.

<snip>

Dear EBK and list.

Right now as I write this, the moon is really really bright and
full overhead. It does seem to me ( subjectively ) to be
brighter than other full moons, but that could simply be do to
my own knowledge that it is some 15% or whatever more luminous
than other FMs.

As an experiment, I put on my reading glasses and I could read
the time of day on my LCD watch. It was then 0040 hrs PST.

I got my batteryless light-powered handheld calculator, the one
that works under even dim light. Alas, I couldn't get it to wake
up at all. It came right up in proximity to a night light in the
bathroom however.

In short, if I hadn't been told this moon was special, I might
not have noticed at all. Its nice not having to fumble for the
house key nonetheless. .

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: It was a balmy 70 degrees F today here.

(Unlike Toronto with its majuberous climate.)

[The Great White North produces interesting soetical lunar
  effects around the solstik - mostly scrofulous --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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                      Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:34:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:18:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?


 > From: Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

 > The National Post - Toronto,

 > Monday, December 13, 1999

 > Page A1

 > ---

 > Canada's X-Files grow dusty as fewer people spot UFOs

 > BY PAUL WALDIE

 > Maybe we're getting too much science fiction on television or
 > maybe we just don't care anymore.

 > Whatever the reason, Canadians are reporting fewer UFO
 > sightings, according to the federal bureaucrat who receives the
 > reports.

<snip>


To List,

Sighting reports are down only because he's not getting them.
Who wants to report a UFO to someone who will dismiss them,
anyway?  I've received plenty of reports for the year.

How can I get a copy of this article complete with the date and
page number. I may want to get in touch with the man at
Transport Canada.

Michel M. Deschamps
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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:05:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:53:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:42:22 -0600
 >From: Roger Annette Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Ed,

 >I do not know why you do not address the questions put to you
 >yet demand that everyone else toe the line in response to your
 >endless request for "more proof".

<snip>

 >Ultimately, it seems to me that you felt we would all swoon at
 >your "discovery" regarding the restricted codes. When we pointed
 >out the illogic in your position, you got pissed; claiming we
 >were, in essence, out to get you.

 >I have nothing else to say to you on this topic.

 >AA is a fraud.

 >Roger Evans


Just a few quick points after saying I think Roger is right on:

l. Money. Last I heard the AA Footage was shown on TV in 40
countries. Payments made to Ray of course. The Fox show sold
about 100,000 copies in video stores... more dollars for Ray...

2. The choices are not only  between "It is Genuine" and "Ray
hoaxed it". It could well have been sitting on a shelf in
Hollywood or elsewhere for years with somebody selling it to Ray
after the Showtime Roswell movie showed an autopsy.. totally
fabricated..Most footage shot in Hollywood never is  seen in  a
theatre or on TV .

3. As I pointed out in 'TOP SECRET/MAJIC', just about everything
Ray told me in our first conversation when I was trying to be
helpful (prior to January 20,1995) was a lie. I met with him
twice in the UK. There were more lies. Amazing, too, how he
changed the location from Roswell to Socorro and the date from
July to very early June,

It is a fraud. But I must give the caper a good comment as well.
It caused more discussion about UFOs around the world, and in
the UK in particular, than any thing else in the past 10 or more
years. I made a bunch of trips to the UK, did a debate at Oxford
University (we won) and did a tour involving 7 lectures and over
40 interviews in the UK.

There was a silver lining.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Roger R. Prokic <rprokic@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 06:26:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:57:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:24:30 -0600
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Alien Autopsy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


<snip>

 >In fact, Ray thought he had bought camera original until Bob
 >Shell proved otherwise.

 >This means that the cameraman lied about how he came into
 >possession of it. By extension, the validity of the imagery
 >contained within AA is very suspect.

 >But more importantly, the only actual footage that has been
 >released was "leader" that supposedly came from the AA film.
 >This leader turned out to be "dupe" film; not camera original.
 >As it stands, we only have Ray's word that the AA footage was
 >the source for even the few frames of "dupe leader" that have
 >been tested.

 >In effect, no one has seen the actual AA film original; not even
 >the cameraman and certainly not Ray. In the final analysis,
 >there is no proof that the AA film was produced on vintage 16mm
 >film at all since the only film analyzed has been a few frames
 >of blank dupe film. There is no proof that the two are the same;
 >only that the dupe film is old.

 >Does this explain the problem?

I'd say that pretty much sums it up, Roger!



Roger R. Prokic
Principal RF Systems Engineer
Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp.
Boulder, Colorado USA
-=[ sent from a Palm Vx & Multimail Pro v3.1c ]=-







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:47:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:15:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


I have asked EBK to post this for me.  Unfortunately, due to
business obligations I simply do not have time to get involved
in debate over the AA film at this time or re-join any UFO
lists.  Maybe after a few months I will be less busy and can
jump back into the fray.

I stand by my statements: I have never seen any camera original
film from Ray Santilli or anyone else showing the AA.  All film
I have seen is copy film, but it does have the right physical
characteristics to be very old copy film and may well date from
the late 1940s.  I have not seen the original film boxes and
labels, only photo copies.  I find nothing in this material
which conflicts with the stated provenance of the film.  I have
not spoken with the cameraman and do not know if he is still
living.  I noted yesterday that there was an obit on Hank Snow
in the New York Times.

My gut feeling from watching the AA video too many times is that
this is a real event that is shown.  I do not think the body
being dissected is a special effects creation but a real body
which was a living creature not very long before it was
dissected.  The cameraman was quoted as saying that no one knew
what they were or where they came from.  That is my position to
date.  I have seen no compelling evidence that there is anything
extraterrestrial involved in this event at all.

I will be happy to answer any _short_ inquiries directed to me
by private e-mail, but do not have the time to provide lengthy
answers or debate at this time.

Bob Shell
bob@bobshell.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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                      Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:41:18 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:55:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?


 >Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:34:36 -0500
 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >>The National Post - Toronto,

 >>Monday, December 13, 1999

 >>Page A1

 >>---

 >>Canada's X-Files grow dusty as fewer people spot UFOs

 >>BY PAUL WALDIE

 >>Maybe we're getting too much science fiction on television or
 >>maybe we just don't care anymore.

 >>Whatever the reason, Canadians are reporting fewer UFO
 >>sightings, according to the federal bureaucrat who receives the
 >>reports.

 ><snip>


 >Sighting reports are down only because he's not getting them.
 >Who wants to report a UFO to someone who will dismiss them,
 >anyway?  I've received plenty of reports for the year.

 >How can I get a copy of this article complete with the date and
 >page number. I may want to get in touch with the man at
 >Transport Canada.

 >Michel M. Deschamps
 >UFO Eyewitness/Researcher/Historian

Hi Mike,

That would be my take on that as well. If you are not receiving
reports then your stats are going to interpret this as a lack of
sightings. But if you have never heard of the place in the first
place, how do you know where to report.

UFO investigation by any government agency in Canada appears on
the surface to be dead-and the public knows it. They usually
default to their old standby the RCMP or local police. Even the
National Research Council's so called UFO investigative body
neve investigated these things but rather used the reports to
filter out fireball and meteor reports for the scientific
community.

I find that the RCMP in particular are reluctant to release any
information about UFO reports due to the privacy act, citing the
right to privacy of any individual making a report. The Mounties
clam up. There is some suggestion that some UFO reports are
getting channelled through NORAD in St. Hubert, Quebec, if the
report is made initially to the military.

Perhaps it's our fault but it appears that it's time to light a
fire under some of these agencies because I'm sure the general
public have a different take on the number of UFO sightings
occurring in Canada.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

             Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:56:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:06:19 -0500
Subject: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary



OPEN LETTER

History Channel
235 East 45th St.
New York, NY l0017
USA

December 21, 1999

Subject: December 13, 1999 program Roswell: Secrets Revealed

Dear History Channel

As the nuclear physicist who began the civilian investigation of
the Roswell Incident back in the 1970s, who has co-authored a
book "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Story of the Roswell
Incident" and numerous papers about Roswell, and, of course, was
the first to talk to many of the key witnesses (almost all of
whom you somehow missed), I naturally viewed the subject program
with great interest, especially since I was in Roswell on
December 13... I must congratulate you on providing a
Masterpiece of Misrepresentation. A splendid example of
propaganda, excellent for teaching purposes . You demonstrated
the primary rules such as selective choice of data, false
reasoning, positive and negative name calling. You also
demonstrated the 4 basic rules of UFO debunkery:


l. What the public doesn't know, we are not going to tell them

2. Don't bother us with the facts, our minds are made up.

3. If we can't attack the data, we will attack the people; it is
    much easier.

4. Do one's research by proclamation, rather than investigation.
    It is much easier and most people won't know the difference.


I have discussed the 2 Air Force reports in my enclosed papers
"The Roswell Incident, the USAF, and the NY Times" (28 pages)
and my Review of "The Roswell Report: Case Closed." You seem to
have blindly accepted any comment from a noisy negativist and
didn't bother with the work of professionals such as myself.
Let me give some specific examples, although I found that I can't
get a copy of the show for 4-6 weeks to give precise quotes.

A. How do you dare to show a small heap of wreckage? In my first
conversation with Major Jesse Marcel, the Intelligence Officer
for the 509th Composite Bomb Group, in 1978, he described
wreckage strewn out over an area 3/4 of a mile long. The Roswell
Daily Record cover-up article of July 9, 1947, stated the
wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Your depiction
was at most a few yards across. If that is all there had been,
rancher Mack Brazel would have taken it all in his truck to the
Sheriff' soffice and there would have been no reason for Major
Marcel and Captain Cavitt to have followed him on the long rough
journey back to the Foster Ranch operated by Mack.. You have
blindly accepted a fairly recent statement by Cavitt to Colonel
Weaver about him recalling it was just a balloon covering an
area only 20' square and easily fitting in one vehicle.
Apparently Cavitt  wasn't told it was supposed to be a MOGUL
balloon which included 23 standard helium filled neoprene
balloons (at 20' intervals) and a whole bunch of radar
reflectors, sonobuoys, ballast tanks, etc all strung together.
Some small pile. Of course Cavitt hadn't remembered that simple
fact when asked many times by many people for the previous 15
years, even denying that he had been on the base at the time.

B. Dr. C.B. Moore, whom I have met, himself strongly claimed
that neoprene out in the sun for weeks would be totally
degraded. Did he forget that little detail?. A June 4 or June 14
launching could not possibly have survived so well until early
July. You also neglected to mention that many of the July 8
newspaper articles claimed the wreckage was found "last week".
But Rancher Brazel had been in the area just a few days earlier
and could never have left that mountain of garbage where the
sheep could ingest it. Mack had of course previously found 2
balloons. The newspaper of July 9 quotes him saying he was sure
what he found wasn't any weather balloon.

Colonel Weaver left this quote out of his recital of the
article.

C. Too bad you couldn't mention that the 509th was the most
elite military group in the world with hand picked officers and
men, and high security. They had dropped the atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the two tested in the Pacific in
July, 1946, in Operation Crossroads. You noted the July 9, 1947,
press release and then stated nobody knows why it was issued.
Why didn't you bother to ask Walter Haut who issued it? He still
lives in Roswell and has been interviewed hundreds of times. His
story hasn't changed since I first spoke to him more than 20
years ago. Incidentally he also had been a bombardier on 30
raids over Japan and dropped the instrument package over one  of
the Crossroads tests.. He issued the press release because he
was ordered to do so by Colonel William Blanchard, Commander of
the 509th and of Roswell Army Air Field. Before suggesting he
must have been incompetent, as have some  who haven't done their
homework, I should add he was a member of the West Point All
Star class of 1938, became a 4 star general by the time he was
48 and was Vice Chief of Staff of the USAF when he died of a
massive heart attack at the Pentagon in 1966. There was ,of
course, a lengthy obituary in the NY times. Doesn't sound much
like he was thought to be incompetent, does it?

It was stated that Blanchard retracted the press release 4 hours
later. This is nonsense. Blanchard's boss, General Roger Ramey
in Fort Worth, Texas, (Blanchard was in Roswell) issued a new
story after being informed by his Chief of Staff, Colonel Thomas
J. DuBose that Ramey's boss, General Clements McMullen, had
given orders to cover up the story. I heard that first hand from
retired General DuBose whose testimony is available on film. He
was a West Pointer as well and had 18,000 hours as a pilot and
set up the USAF Search and Rescue command. No slouch at all.

D. Why do you show only the Roswell Daily Record? After all
there were front page headline stories in the Chicago Daily
News, the Sacramento Bee, the Los Angeles Herald Express, the
Spokane Chronicle, etc all evening papers for July 8. The West
coast papers in general had done a lot of checking before
publishing detailed articles. Too bad you did none.

E Where did the comment come from about bodies cold to touch?

F. The notion that Pilot Kittinger was the red haired officer is
more absurdity. After all he wasn't at the Roswell hospital
until 1959. I was the first to hear 2 independent stories about
a nasty red haired officer and a black seargeant.. Both events
taking place in 1947. Has the air force invented time travel?
There is no other way to get crash test dummies, all of whom
were the height and weight of pilots, back to 1947 from 1953 at
the earliest or to get Kittinger to the Roswell hospital in
1947. This is flat out fiction.

G. Why did you not talk to others still alive who had first hand
involvement such as Jesse A. Marcel Jr. , a medical doctor, who
handled wreckage, has served on military aircraft accident
investigative teams and was a pilot? Or Loretta Proctor,
neighbor of Mack Brazel, who handled wreckage? or Mack Brazel's
son Bill who found strange (thin strong memory material)
wreckage out in the pasture? How about the sheriff's two
daughters? All this testimony has been readily available for
many years

H.One of the first things Major Jesse Marcel told me is that
there was nothing conventional to be found on the debris field..
No wires, no vacuum tubes, no rivets. He was very familiar with
aircraft and aircraft wreckage and balloons and radar reflectors
and rockets. The notion that he wouldn't have recognized balloon
wreckage or radar reflectors is frankly absurd.. You are also
implying that Blanchard, who had also served in the Pacific,
would have ordered the press release and the B-29 flight with
the wreckage brought back from the ranch and Marcel to Fort
Worth is equally absurd, if all there was was totally
conventional stuff. You know of any materials such as the I-beam
like pieces with strange symbols that couldn't be cut, burned,
or broken? Or memory metals that were like foil but couldn't be
cut and, when folded over and over, would unfold on their own?
Why couldn't the USAF find any of that toymaker tape in the
pictures taken in Ramey's office?

I. Brazel didn't make his discovery on July 5. It was earlier.
He did go to the store-pool hall in Corona on the 5 th which is
when, not having electricity or a phone or a radio, he first
heard about all the saucer sightings and a reward and was told
he ought to go to the Sherif in Roswell which he did on the 6th
NOT on the 7th as you claimed.. You made it sound as though
Sherif Wilcox looked in the phone book to find a nearby Air
Base. There was a standing arrangement that anything that might
effect the military would be reported to Roswell Army Air Field.
There was no other base in the area.

J. I have met with Dr. Schirmer, Dr. Moore, Mr. Gildenberg. They
haven't investigated the case. They have made proclamation after
proclamation about 2nd and third hand testimony. Why use the
term "conspiracy theorist" so many times without ever justifying
it? Who are these theorists? I began the investigation and have
always provided evidence for the claims that I make which is
more than can be said for your trio. They have actually created
a conspiracy theory namely that a bunch of stupid UFO
researchers and lying witnesses have created a fantastic story
for fun and profit. This, of course, ignores the fact that loads
of testimony was obtained by us serious researchers long before
the cameras started rolling. My phone bills used to run several
hundred dollars a month.

By the way, I do know something about security having worked as
a nuclear physicist on a wide variety of highly classified
advanced nuclear and space system programs for such companies as
General Electric, General Motors, Westinghouse, TRW Systems,
McDonnell Douglas, and Aerojet General Nucleonics.. I have also
been to 19 different government document archives.

Just how much experience with security has Dr. Schirmer had?

K.What was this nonsense about a 1956 plane crash somehow
confusing Glenn Dennis about bodies at the base in 1947? A few
years ago I went with Glenn to the Ballard funeral home. We
reviewed records with full permission of the operator there who
obviously respected Glenn. There were a number of military plane
crashes for which he handled the bodies even after bad fires.
That was his job. No possible way such a crash could have
confused him. Yet another false conspiracy theory from your
trio.

L. At one point early on in the program the word UFO was used.
Sorry. It was not used until after 1951. Several times when
showing balloons and talking about Mogul you showed tear drop
shaped polyethylene balloons. Round standard Neoprene balloons
were used for all MOGUL launches before July ... The same kind
that Mack had retrieved. And that rapidly diisintegrate in the
sun.



In summary then, the History Channel has presented myth and
propaganda in the guise of truth.

You have supplied misrepresentation instead of investigative
journalism. You should be ashamed and should apologize to your
audience. It seems to me you have also violated FCC rules with
regard to fairness, honesty, and accuracy in so doing. My
colleagues and I would be happy to debate your trio of amateurs
any time. I would suggest that they do their homework first.

Cordially,

Stanton T. Friedman

Enclosures.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2080 08:15:15 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:06:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:30:55 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 02:10:06 -0800
 >>From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>Santilli's dupe apparently has the right edge code,
 >>and Bob Shell's dupe is made of acetate propionate.

 >No one, to my knowledge has seen the "right edge code"
 >on any film supplied by Santilli. The only edge codes
 >were provide by Santilli and/or Shell from a copy/fax of
 >the edge codes. There was no film attached to the edge
 >codes.

This is exactly why I said "apparently." The current status of
the claim, at least by implication, is that the dupes have the
edge codes. That is what Bob and Ray, I believe, would have to
say, if pressed, although I've not seen anyone previously remark
on this.

 >Shell's film had no edge
 >codes. They were conveniently torn off.

Well, not according to John Powell's piece (with you) "Bob
Shell, in His Own Words":

--------- Begin text "Bob Shell in His Own Words" ---------

10/11/95 -  "Yes, the strip Bob Kiviat has is also minus one
              edge.  I'm told that much of the film is in this
              condition.  However, that may argue more for it
              being genuine than the other way round.  The
              missing edge is not the side on which the
              geometric code would appear."

That's odd, the edge codes should be present on the side of the
film strip that isn't missing yet they aren't there.  This is
especially odd since those "geometric codes appear throughout
the rolls of film, as they do on any Kodak film..."  Perhaps
this will be explained at a later date???

--------- End text "Bob Shell in His Own Words" ---------

In fact, it is explained in Bob Shell's 11-19-95 email to John
Powell and you, "Neither of these pieces of film has the edge
codes, but these appear about once every foot throughout the
film, and these are pieces only a little over an inch in length
each."

<snip of balance of Rebecca's post, where she and I agree
  completely>

Best,

Keith







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:15:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>>>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >>>>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >>>>Stig

 >>>>***

 >>>>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>>>by Jim Keith


 >>>List:

 >>Stanton Friedman says"

 >>>This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >>>the basic facts right. For example.

 >>>1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >>>stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >>>of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >>>nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >>>all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >>>the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >>>my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

Stanton's reply:

 >What Marcel says in my movie is 3/4 of a mile long and over 100
 >years wide. He had concluded that in the absence of a crater
 >there must have been a mid air explosion.

Well, I'd stick with that as it gives your story-line more
credibility.


 >>While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
 >>always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
 >>no one describes debris field that is  really large. As time
 >>goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
 >>estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
 >>too small.

 >The vehicle observed by Civil Engineer Barney Barnett in the
 >Plains of San Augustine which came down almost intact was less
 >than 30' in diameter. A saucer shaped craft would have a much
 >lower surface to volume ration than something with wings.

 >>If only "200 yards in diameter," as you say the Roswell Daily
 >>Record stated just days after the event, the wreckage is far too
 >>small. Much, of course, depends on how the wreckage came down.
 >>Did the alleged UFO explode in mid-flight or come down largely
 >>in one piece? If the former, at what altitude and what speed was
 >>it travelling at?

Stanton's reply:

 >Apparently the Brazel Ranch saucer exploded in mid air with a
 >crew compartment observed a few miles away. The Plains saucer
 >was almost intact. May have been a mid air collision resulting
 >from a lightning strike or running into a tracking radar beam
 >known to be on. Might well be very different from an F-4
 >exploding.

I would expect a debris field of miles long then; with larger
pieces here and there. Where the heaviest pieces fell there
would be craters. For instance, the largest piece of the F-4,
the front of the fuselage, gourged out a groove about 25 feet
long and several feet deep and wide as it came in.


 >>On 3/06/94 an F-4 crashed near Franklin, Georgia. The F-4
 >>exploded in mid-flight at 800 feet high. It was traveling at 400
 >>knots when the mishap happened. The train of debris from only
 >>800 feet high was nearly a mile long; not hundreds of yards but
 >>thousands of feet. It was laid out nearly as straight as an
 >>arrow but the debris came down unevenly over the length of the

 >>The largest piece was the front of the fuselage and was smaller
 >>than a VW beetle. The lightest stuff--such as fabric--fell first
 >>and the heaviest--such as engines, ect--interestingly fell much
 >>further along.

 >>Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
 >>expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
 >>make under the identical circumstances. An F-4,. while a good
 >>size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
 >>"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
 >>knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
 >>likely over miles.

 >>I guess we could argue that if the "saucer," or whatever shape
 >>craft is claimed, was alien in origin that it was made of
 >>tougher stuff than an F-4 is made of and, thus, would have held
 >>together better. However, since we don't know the exact
 >>circumstances of the "saucer's" demise or construction it's all
 >>speculation.

 >The observations of those on the scene later are not
 >speculation. Marcel, Rickett, .

And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
crash was _not_ an alien event?

 >>>7. Professor
 >Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >>>(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >>>that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >>>Braun...

 >>I have believed for a long time that what was an accident by the
 >>USAF was turned into, perhaps, the greatest disinformation ploy
 >>done during the Cold War: The United States in time following
 >>the Roswell incident did nothing to discourage the Soviets from
 >>thinking we had one ace the Soviets would never have: alien
 >>technology.

Stanton's reply:

 >What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
 >to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
 >presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
 >Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
 >very different and no conventional materials were found. There
 >were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

I talking about a Project Mongul balloon that went down, as the
USAF, now says and the accident was Colonel Blanchard okaying to
put out the press release that the Army Air Corps had recovered
a "flying saucer."

 >>I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
 >>had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons. But we
 >>now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
 >>"Roswell Recovery."

Stanton's reply:

 >I have seen NSC meeting notes indicating the Russiians weren't
 >expected to have nuclear weapons until the early 1950s.. and
 >weren't in 1947 known to have delivery systems. Interesting plot
 >line but where is the evidence? As noted in Crash at Corona  and
 >several other books the case for a crashed saucer is very
 >strong.

Well, they were wrong! And I suspect many did think they could
have it earlier. The Russians at the end of the war, like us and
our allies, got their quota of German scientists. They also got
some who had worked on heavy water projects. Only the most
dim-witted and short-sighted after WWII would've thought that
the Russians weren't working on their own A-bomb projects.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted in 1951 for giving
some of our atomic bomb secrets away. They had been feeding info
for a long time. The Russians, as another post to you correctly
says, detonated their first bomb before then.

I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
Soviets from believing we had no alien technology. What was a
screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
denotated their first bomb.

 >>Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
 >>reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
 >>couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
 >>their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

Stanton's reply:

 >What is the basis for this claim about Stalin's belief? Marcel
 >was the Intelligence Officer for the most elite military group
 >in the world. Blanchard  went on to high office. The AAF people
 >certainly weren't punished. Interesting speculation but in over
 >20 years of Roswell investigation, I have seen no basis for this
 >claim

As you have pointed out yourself, the Roswell saucer story was
all over the newspapers in the U.S and carried overseas by some
news outlets. Are we to believe that the Soviets had no interest
in this at all? I have seen this quote that Keith uses before. I
confess I don't have any intimate knowledge to know for sure
that Stalin was personally involved.

If you want to see what intrigues the Soviets went in scheming,
misinterperting, and putting out disinformatin/misinformation, I
suggest you read Armand Moss's fine book: "Misinformation,
Disinfomation and the JFK Conspiracy Exposed." There are also
several books out by former Soviet intelligence agents who show
what paranoid thoughts Communist leaders entertained. The
Roswell saucer story would have been discussed at all levels, if
for nothing else, because it did get brief, but HIGH, publicity.

The Army Air Corps quick "blow-it-away response would've seen
most suspicious; as it still does today. What really happened is
the press of this country just let it go right through their
radar screens instead of airing the story out. They should have
gone after those witnesses like never before. But they were so
trusting of our military then, after the flush of victory in
World War II, they took the retract of the story at face value.

Of course, the Press has often been non-performing in their
duties; still are. On the other hand, I suspect if they had done
a "Watergate press" back then on the story we would've found out
for sure that this was no UFO crash! This also explains why the
locals buried the story so quickly.

This stuff of some relatives of alleged deceased witnesses
seeing debris and being threaten by the military to keep their
mouths shut doesn't wash. I'm sure some of these folks must have
been WWII vets. As Jessie James found out in Northfield
,Minnesota the Union Civil War veterans weren't afraid of his
reputation! The WWII vets if threated with such nonsense I'm
sure would at least responded vocally what they thought of such
talk and armed themselves appropriately. The fact is there is no
concrete proof that multiple, reliable witnesses  saw anything
that was extraterrestrial.

The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake. His
son doesn't count. He was young and if my dad brought home
something and said "Isn't this strange?" I would agree and be
left with that memomy for the rest of my life. Again, why
doesn't the one other witness who was there support Marcel?

 >>The USAF retracting their statement so quickly probably only
 >>convinced him and others in power then that the USAF really did
 >>recover alien technology. The USAF with their follow-up and
 >>clumsy denials since then have help keep this story alive for
 >>Moscow and others to believe.

Stanton's reply:

 >You sure won't find much in the way of AAF (The USAF didn't
 >exist until September 1947.) comment between July of 1947 and
 >1994.. Not much follow up. I certainly agree the recent coverup
 >was clumsy.

I'm well aware that at the time of the Roswell incident that the
Army still had the Air Force. I used USAF only to simplify
matters. Their attempts in the '90s have been most clumsy and
embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
more attention to the matter. Maybe, because there is a larger
secret that Project Mongul. Who knows how much time, money and
effort was wasted by the Soviets on UFO related projects because
of them thinking that the U.S had a recovered disk?

Time now still being wasted by the Russians.

This is why the USAF may still keep parading old colonels out to
put out such nonsense as "dummies" falling from the sky. Maybe
they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

 >>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >>need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >Major Marcel did get promoted. He was never the fall guy until
 >the TV Showtime Roswell show. invented that story..

I believe it was customary for officers in the military then,
when they retired, to be advanced one rank. Is this the type
promotion you speak of? If so, that doesn't count. Blanchard's
career was not hurt as it should have been for screwing-up. But
as years passed and the Soviets denotated their first bomb all
was forgiven. The Roswell alien story was not a bad thing
afterall.

It was Blanchard's mistake, as he was in command. And at least
in the 1940s, in the military, the "buck stops here." His
mistake should've been a career stopper. It wasn't but there
isn't a thread of proof that will now stand up to prove the
Roswell or Corona--yes, I bought your book--crash involved alien
technology. So why did he make it past a level that most
officers are never expected to see?

My "plot line," as you call it, looks better and better. The
difference between you and me is that I will agree it is only a
pausible story-line. Your's is too. When its all said and done,
with no proof, it's only entertainment.

 >>John C. Thompson

Stanton's reply:

 >Obviously I believe this is an interesting plot line with
 >nothing to support it and much to contradict it.  Jim Keith's
 >story line of course is wholly imaginary. The material was very
 >lightweight and very strong.. hardly concrete in a dummy bomb.

 >Stanton Friedman

Actually, it is "an interesting plot line" that is more
plausable than your story-line. Please find one living, reliable
witness that will back your story-line. The F-4 crash involved
nearly 300 soldiers doing a search and they were in Heard
County, Georgia for over three weeks. Hundreds of civillians
also saw the crash despite it being in one of the most remote
areas of West Georgia. Most were there within 15 minutes!

I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
hell-of-a wallop. A thud that can be heard for miles around; one
that shakes houses. I realise that the Roswell area in the late
'40s is even more remote but you couldn't keep something like
this under wraps; no way!

Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, would've been on the Roswell
saucer crash over the years if it was true. If only the same
number turned out for the alleged saucer crash--I would suspect
many more for that!--as the F-4 crash, most would've been young
soldiers of only 18-25 years old. No, officers don't pick up
that stuff!

These young enlisted individuals, if alive,  would be 70-75
years old now. As there are still quite a few older WWII vets
alive they're should be I would, suspect, be at least 50 of
these individuals alive. Why haven't some these young soldiers
come forth? I just don't by all this security business after all
these years. Yes, I know what a security clearance and the
penalities involved are. I never had a top-secret or whatever
you want to call it, but I did once hold a Q clearance.

I have interviewed lots of witnesses for sensational events;
including an alleged crash here in Georgia. What you got to
remember is that even good well-intentional folks, as I suspect
Major Marcel was, make mistakes. Then there is always a certain
percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the Roswell
crash involved a vehicle of alien manufacture.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                              Re: Alien Autopsy

From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:05:51 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:19:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy


As a longtime film producer and film archivist, I am the first
person to bring up the information about film edge codes to Ray
Santilli. When that happened it threw this subject in a new
direction.  It seemed to me that from there an attempt to back
engineer such forensic material was attempted.

I was asked by Bob Kiviat to appear on the show on the Alien
Autopsy for Fox Network and analyze some snips of the Santilli
footage. I explained that while I made made public the
information about Kodak edge codes, that there were several
other tests of archival film elements which I could employ, but
I have not to this date made public what they were. Hence, this
information has not been back engineered by anyone and no
attempt has been made to use these tests to prove the film is
what it is claimed to be.

Needless to say, when I stated I could prove conclusively what
the film was..... I was dropped from the Fox Show and did not
appear for Kiviat to analyze such film fragments, if such may
exist at all.

When the German TV network RTL was doing a show on the Alien
Autopsy, they asked me to appear on the show and comment about
it. Having produced Science Fiction/Horror films in Hollywood, I
demonstrated similar appearing effects in an operation scene
from a movie. Further, looking at the Fox Documentary, I
enlarged some frames of the alleged original Alien Autopsy old
film cans and the information bore the title of a 1920s silent
movie comedy.

Whoever passed these cans off on that show as the original old
film reels and cans added a further false piece of evidence into
an already questionable topic. If Santilli or anybody else
connnected with this so-called Alien Autopsy had evidence
proving this was genuine, they should have loudly protested
anything false being added to the subject to further contaminate
it.

I have a dozen other reasons for believing that the Alien
Autopsy film is an outright fraud and to date nothing had been
produced to have me change my opinion.

- Sam Sherman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                      Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Bill Oliver - UFO*BC <oliver2849@home.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:33:38 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:23:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:41:18 -0300
 >From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:34:36 -0500
 >>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Perhaps it's our fault but it appears that it's time to light a
 >fire under some of these agencies because I'm sure the general
 >public have a different take on the number of UFO sightings
 >occurring in Canada.

UFO*BC will be more than happy to get the ball rolling by
forwarding our reports received this year to the gentleman.

BTW... One of our busiest years yet!

Best,

Bill Oliver
UFO*BC







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:46:23 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:28:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:56:25 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >OPEN LETTER

 >History Channel
 >235 East 45th St.
 >New York, NY l0017
 >USA

 >December 21, 1999

 >Subject: December 13, 1999 program Roswell: Secrets Revealed

 >Dear History Channel

 >As the nuclear physicist who began the civilian investigation of
 >the Roswell Incident back in the 1970s, who has co-authored a
 >book "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Story of the Roswell
 >Incident" and numerous papers about Roswell, and, of course, was
 >the first to talk to many of the key witnesses (almost all of
 >whom you somehow missed), I naturally viewed the subject program
 >with great interest, especially since I was in Roswell on
 >December 13... I must congratulate you on providing a
 >Masterpiece of Misrepresentation. A splendid example of
 >propaganda, excellent for teaching purposes . You demonstrated
 >the primary rules such as selective choice of data, false
 >reasoning, positive and negative name calling. You also
 >demonstrated the 4 basic rules of UFO debunkery:

Many thanks for making many of my points here. I should've just
waited for this posting first! On the ones you don't make you
might direct the History Channel to see the July 1997 MUFON
issue that was dedicated to Roswell. Might give them some other
folks to talk to.

 >.. You have
 >blindly accepted a fairly recent statement by Cavitt to Colonel
 >Weaver about him recalling it was just a balloon covering an
 >area only 20' square and easily fitting in one vehicle.
 >Apparently Cavitt  wasn't told it was supposed to be a MOGUL
 >balloon which included 23 standard helium filled neoprene
 >balloons (at 20' intervals) and a whole bunch of radar
 >reflectors, sonobuoys, ballast tanks, etc all strung together.
 >Some small pile. Of course Cavitt hadn't remembered that simple
 >fact when asked many times by many people for the previous 15
 >years, even denying that he had been on the base at the time.

Was is Marcel a better witness than Cavitt? Is it because Cavitt
doesn't agree with you?

 >... He issued the press release because he
 >was ordered to do so by Colonel William Blanchard, Commander of
 >the 509th and of Roswell Army Air Field. Before suggesting he
 >must have been incompetent, as have some  who haven't done their
 >homework, I should add he was a member of the West Point All
 >Star class of 1938, became a 4 star general by the time he was
 >48 and was Vice Chief of Staff of the USAF when he died of a
 >massive heart attack at the Pentagon in 1966. There was ,of
 >course, a lengthy obituary in the NY times. Doesn't sound much
 >like he was thought to be incompetent, does it?

My... He did fly high!

 >D. Why do you show only the Roswell Daily Record? After all
 >there were front page headline stories in the Chicago Daily
 >News, the Sacramento Bee, the Los Angeles Herald Express, the
 >Spokane Chronicle, etc all evening papers for July 8. The West
 >coast papers in general had done a lot of checking before
 >publishing detailed articles. Too bad you did none.

Yes. It was all over and _everybody_, including the Soviets,
took notice.

 >...Has the air force invented time travel?
 >There is no other way to get crash test dummies, all of whom
 >were the height and weight of pilots, back to 1947 from 1953
 >...this is flat out fiction.

I agree

 >G. Why did you not talk to others still alive who had first hand
 >involvement such as Jesse A. Marcel Jr. , a medical doctor, who
 >handled wreckage, has served on military aircraft accident
 >investigative teams and was a pilot? Or Loretta Proctor,
 >neighbor of Mack Brazel, who handled wreckage? or Mack Brazel's
 >son Bill who found strange (thin strong memory material)
 >wreckage out in the pasture? How about the sheriff's two
 >daughters? All this testimony has been readily available for
 >many years

One dead and mistaken; two not grown; the rest only heresay.

 >H.One of the first things Major Jesse Marcel told me is that
 >there was nothing conventional to be found on the debris field..
 >No wires, no vacuum tubes, no rivets. He was very familiar with
 >aircraft and aircraft wreckage and balloons and radar reflectors
 >and rockets. The notion that he wouldn't have recognized balloon
 >wreckage or radar reflectors is frankly absurd.. You are also
 >implying that Blanchard, who had also served in the Pacific,
 >would have ordered the press release and the B-29 flight with
 >the wreckage brought back from the ranch and Marcel to Fort
 >Worth is equally absurd, if all there was was totally
 >conventional stuff. You know of any materials such as the I-beam
 >like pieces with strange symbols that couldn't be cut, burned,
 >or broken? Or memory metals that were like foil but couldn't be
 >cut and, when folded over and over, would unfold on their own?
 >Why couldn't the USAF find any of that toymaker tape in the
 >pictures taken in Ramey's office?

 >I. Brazel didn't make his discovery on July 5. It was earlier.
 >He did go to the store-pool hall in Corona on the 5 th which is
 >when, not having electricity or a phone or a radio, he first
 >heard about all the saucer sightings and a reward and was told
 >he ought to go to the Sherif in Roswell which he did on the 6th
 >NOT on the 7th as you claimed.. You made it sound as though
 >Sherif Wilcox looked in the phone book to find a nearby Air
 >Base. There was a standing arrangement that anything that might
 >effect the military would be reported to Roswell Army Air Field.
 >There was no other base in the area.

 >J. I have met with Dr. Schirmer, Dr. Moore, Mr. Gildenberg. They
 >haven't investigated the case. They have made proclamation after
 >proclamation about 2nd and third hand testimony. Why use the
 >term "conspiracy theorist" so many times without ever justifying
 >it? Who are these theorists? I began the investigation and have
 >always provided evidence for the claims that I make which is
 >more than can be said for your trio. They have actually created
 >a conspiracy theory namely that a bunch of stupid UFO
 >researchers and lying witnesses have created a fantastic story
 >for fun and profit. This, of course, ignores the fact that loads
 >of testimony was obtained by us serious researchers long before
 >the cameras started rolling. My phone bills used to run several
 >hundred dollars a month.

 >By the way, I do know something about security having worked as
 >a nuclear physicist on a wide variety of highly classified
 >advanced nuclear and space system programs for such companies as
 >General Electric, General Motors, Westinghouse, TRW Systems,
 >McDonnell Douglas, and Aerojet General Nucleonics.. I have also
 >been to 19 different government document archives.

 >Just how much experience with security has Dr. Schirmer had?

 >K.What was this nonsense about a 1956 plane crash somehow
 >confusing Glenn Dennis about bodies at the base in 1947? A few
 >years ago I went with Glenn to the Ballard funeral home. We
 >reviewed records with full permission of the operator there who
 >obviously respected Glenn. There were a number of military plane
 >crashes for which he handled the bodies even after bad fires.
 >That was his job. No possible way such a crash could have
 >confused him. Yet another false conspiracy theory from your
 >trio.

I notice you don't mention the other part in the History Channel
where they basically say that Glenn is lying about the nurse he
knows who saw the alien bodies; that no one can even find she
ever existed! On that alone he is open to challenge on
everything he says. Do not do so is "selected journalism."

 >L. At one point early on in the program the word UFO was used.
 >Sorry. It was not used until after 1951. Several times when
 >showing balloons and talking about Mogul you showed tear drop
 >shaped polyethylene balloons. Round standard Neoprene balloons
 >were used for all MOGUL launches before July ... The same kind
 >that Mack had retrieved. And that rapidly diisintegrate in the
 >sun.

Like your 1947 remark about me using "USAF". It doesn't matter;
they used the term UFOs as that is what "flying saucers" have
become.

 >In summary then, the History Channel has presented myth and
 >propaganda in the guise of truth.

 >You have supplied misrepresentation instead of investigative
 >journalism. You should be ashamed and should apologize to your
 >audience. It seems to me you have also violated FCC rules with
 >regard to fairness, honesty, and accuracy in so doing. My
 >colleagues and I would be happy to debate your trio of amateurs
 >any time. I would suggest that they do their homework first.

 >Cordially,

 >Stanton T. Friedman

 >Enclosures.


They have nothing to apologize for. I found it the most
enlightening and encompassing documentary on Roswell done. With
the exception of the "dummy" story, excellent!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:02:51 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:31:27 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Let us assume that certain UFO cases actually involved
 >observations of technology created by nonhuman intelligences and
 >sometimes the intelligences themselves.  I have in mind, e.g.,
 >the McMinnville photos, the Nash-Fortenberry formation sighting,
 >and the Betty and Barney Hill incident....  ETC.

N.B. to Dennis Stacy:  To this suggested list I would add
Newton, Illinois, October 10, 1966.  See The Anomalist No. 5
(Summer '97).

-- Ho, ho, ho, KARL KLAUS







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:21:16 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:54:37 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:02:51 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Let us assume that certain UFO cases actually involved
 >>observations of technology created by nonhuman intelligences and
 >>sometimes the intelligences themselves.  I have in mind, e.g.,
 >>the McMinnville photos, the Nash-Fortenberry formation sighting,
 >>and the Betty and Barney Hill incident....  ETC.

 >N.B. to Dennis Stacy:  To this suggested list I would add
 >Newton, Illinois, October 10, 1966.  See The Anomalist No. 5
 >(Summer '97).

 >-- Ho, ho, ho, KARL KLAUS


Karl,

Ho, ho, ho, yourself! Why do you think we publish this stuff?
<BG>

I should point out that The Anomalist 8 (forthcoming) is a
special UFO issue,  in that all articles therein directly
reference the UFO phenomenon in one way or another.

Most nice! Should be a stocking-stuffer! For details, see:

http://www.anomalist.com

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 >
   Dec > Dec 22

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Karl T. Pflock ,Ktperehwon@aol.com.
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:04:57 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:17:35 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:21:16 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Karl,

 >Ho, ho, ho, yourself! Why do you think we publish this stuff?
 ><BG>

Ok...  So are you going to pick up the end of the thread I've
attempted to start?  Is anyone?...

 >I should point out that The Anomalist 8 (forthcoming) is a
 >special UFO issue,  in that all articles therein directly
 >reference the UFO phenomenon in one way or another.

 >Most nice! Should be a stocking-stuffer! For details, see:

 >http://www.anomalist.com

So where the heck are my contributor's copies?  Guess I'll look
in my stocking...

As for the rest of you, buy the dang thang, if for nothing else
MY article therein.

-- Cheers, KARL







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                            Re: Seasons Greetings

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:40:54 +0100 (MET)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:42:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Seasons Greetings


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:56:12 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Sheree Cox <cox@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Seasons Greetings

 >Hello all:

 >I would like to wish everyone on the list a Merry Christmas
 >and a safe and wonderful New Year.


Please, please, please.

I've too many Christmas and new year greetings already.
Besides the postcards that keep rolling in I aleady have to
delete a dozen or so emails per day with silly Christmas
greetings. And I still have to delete all the attachments
on my hard disk.

Christmas is a Germanic pagan tradition and originally had
nothing to do with religion in the first place. Besides that,
the first evidence has yet to be found that Jesus ever existed
and the dating of the new year is totally arbitrary.

So please, I don't want dozens of silly seasons greetings in my
email box.



Groeten,
Henny

[Okay, so have a Bumhug from Ms Cox and I then --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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:04:29 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:44:31 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:04:57 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Karl T. Pflock ,Ktperehwon@aol.com.
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:21:16 -0600
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Karl,

 >>Ho, ho, ho, yourself! Why do you think we publish this stuff?
 >><BG>

 >Ok...  So are you going to pick up the end of the thread I've
 >attempted to start?  Is anyone?...


Karl,

Yes, I am, and hope others will as well. Just as soon as I
recover fom gum surgery and the Holidays -- whichever comes
first. You did bad-time this, unless, of course, you're one of
those cheapskate grinches who doesn't put up lights. Which I
seriously suspect. Get back to us next Millennium. ETs, sheesh!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                      Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:39:49 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:47:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:33:38 -0800
 >From: Bill Oliver - UFO*BC <oliver2849@home.com>
 >Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:41:18 -0300
 >>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >>Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 20:34:36 -0500
 >>>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Canada's X-Files Grow Dusty?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>Perhaps it's our fault but it appears that it's time to light a
 >>fire under some of these agencies because I'm sure the general
 >>public have a different take on the number of UFO sightings
 >>occurring in Canada.

 >UFO*BC will be more than happy to get the ball rolling by
 >forwarding our reports received this year to the gentleman.

 >BTW... One of our busiest years yet!


Hi Bill and List,

It would be kind of nice to be able to dump a load of UFO
reports on this guy, wouldn't it. By early Spring Will Roberts
and I hope to have a comprehensive website and program for
attracting and tracking UFO reports, up and running for Nova
Scotia and surrounding areas.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 00:16:05 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:51:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: michael mchugh <mcmchugh99@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:13:06 -0800  <>
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:51:38 -0500
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

<snip>

 >PS: From time to time, I've read debates about whether Col.
 >Blanchard, the base commander at Roswell, approved the 1947
 >press release about the "flying disc."  Anyone who has ever been
 >in the military knows that he must have.  This was no routine
 >announcement about an upcoming ice cream social, but information
 >that was bound to send the press into a feeding frenzy.

 >Blanchard ordered Marcel to investigate the crash, and report
 >back. Then he issued the press release, and informed his
 >superiors about it.  This is how chain of command operates in
 >the military: it never changes.

Mike, Listers:

I have often wondered about this. Blanchard went on leave. Has
anyone ever determined who was acting Commander when he was
gone?

Of course there are more than one possibility: Blanchard
approved; someone else approved; Marcel did it. We know what
the "book" answer is, but does anyone really know who approved
what?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                             Re: On False Memory

From: GT McCoy  <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:57:59 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:58:33 -0500
Subject: Re: On False Memory


 >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:42:56 -0500
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: On False Memory - a comment
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hello list ,John.

 >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 01:01:40 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Stephen G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: On False Memory - a comment
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Steve writes:

 >>Members,

 >>After reviewing the 20 or so posts of this lively and
 >>interesting thread, I was forcibly grabbed by this thought:

 ><snip>

 >>A very good case could be made that these experiencers,
 >>abductees, or whatever they wish to be called, are the only
 >>"sane" people involved in this ongoing human fiasco.

Experiencers, indeed while I haven't been abucted , I certainly
have had my share of inexplainable incedents,quite recently I
might add.

 >>Steve Bassett

 >Hi Steve,

 >You have no idea how rarely that 'theory' of yours gets tabled!
 >It has never ceased to amaze me how the possibility that 'some
 >folks' are simply reporting the truth of events they had to live
 >through, is beyond consideration for so many.

You know it might be that our modern, anylitical mind set might
demand emprical results:When the real answer might be somthing
else : Faeries, if nothing else, or ,more likely Demons or
worse.

 >I 'see' your comment and I 'raise' you one! :)

We live in a world that gravitates to the lowest demominator and
as a believer in the fallen nature of humanity (and in a God who
is there) The media is reflecting our devolution,I believe.
Anything that proves otherwise or indicates that we are living
in a universe that isnt what it seems, that isn't of mud or
blood , can't be real. Therefore any one who disagrees is a:
nut, reglious fanatic, or simply deluded.

 >We live in a world where the basest aspects/parts of humanity
 >are given all the press, emphasis and attention. Everybody is so
 >leery and paranoid of one another that a simple concept like
 >"taking a man or woman at their word" is almost universally
 >accepted as a patent absurdity. The 'Law of the Land' re:
 >experiencers is, "guilty until proven innocent!" If it was the
 >other way around, we would have gotten a serious and thorough
 >investigation long before now.

Well, now you've just defined our modern legal system, speech is
now regulated on a national level in the USA, and the news media
is a monopolistic enterprise(without regard to any Network) and
tries to define what is , well, normal behaviour in sheeple (and
also keep them from thinking) just chew your cud and stay
quiet."Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain......"(
also the whole system plays to the Napolianic code whether in
the media or legal areas)-absouletly.

 >You read the list. We are basically the brunt of jokes, pity,
 >derision, and (even more recently,) a form of extreme 'right
 >wing' skepticism that proposes: "Let's lock all of them sexual
 >pervs up in mental institutions and forget em" type of thing.
 >You know, the run of the mill 'Party Line' for card carrying
 >morons and _bigots_.

It isn't just "pervs" but those who know that things aren't what
they seem and are vocal about it.

 >Thank you for giving us the benefit of the doubt. I don't
 >encounter it often. Most are so preoccupied looking for an
 >'angle' that they never quite get the import/implications of
 >dismissing or ignoring what is being reported. It _never_ occurs
 >to them that what they are hearing from their neighbors "may be"
 >the _accurate_ reports of _honest_ men and women who care enough
 >about their fellows to risk ridicule and social rejection.

Right on John right on.

 >As far as I'm concerned the biggest contribution I can make to
 >society right now is to 'report' and stand my ground no matter
 >what the personal cost. It's that important.

 >John Velez, Graphic artist, self employed business person,
 >homeowner, married 30 years, father of two, grandfather of two,
 >abductee.

GT McCoy

-Former Professional Pilot , now Real Estate salesperson, Happly
Married, no children, two cats, one intimidated (by the cats)
Schnauzer.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:03:46 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:04:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:20:04 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >>stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >>of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >>nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >>all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >>the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >>my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

 >While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
 >always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
 >no one describes debris field that is really large. As time
 >goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
 >estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
 >too small.

Marcel when interviewed actually placed the debris field at 3/4
of a mile long by 200-300 feet wide . Bill Brazel thought his
father said it was 1/4 mile long by 200-300 feet wide. Some
news stories from July 9,1947, based apparently on information
that came out of Fort Worth AAF, stated that the debris was
scattered over a square mile. Tommy Tyree, a later Brazel Sr.
ranchhand, said Brazel complained that his sheep wouldn't cross
the debris field to get to water, forcing him to drive his sheep
a mile out of his way. This suggests a debris field that was at
least 1/2 mile in one of its dimensions. Bill Brazel took
researchers to the north end of the debris field where he said
he saw a gouge, whereas a neighboring rancher took them to the
south end where he said he saw some pieces and was chased away
by MPs. The separation between these two points was about 3/4
mile.

Taken collectively, testimony suggests a debris field at least
1/4 mile in extent in one dimension and probably more like 1/2
to 1 mile in extent.

 >If only "200 yards in diameter," as you say the Roswell Daily
 >Record stated just days after the event,

One day later: July 9. The press release and the first
debunking were July 8. That was from Brazel's interview of July
8, which according to about 10 different witnesses, was done
with him under military escort. After that, they held him at
the base for another week. Such testimony would be thrown out of
court as likely tainted by duress.

 >the wreckage is far too small.

No, you just aren't too familiar with the details. Not only
were there several reports of it being widely spread out, there
was other testimony, including that from Marcel, of there being
large quantities of it.

 >Much, of course, depends on how the wreckage came down. Did
 >the alleged UFO explode in mid-flight or come down largely in
 >one piece? If the former, at whataltitude and what speed was it
 >travelling at?

 >On 3/06/94 an F-4 crashed near Franklin, Georgia. The F-4
 >exploded in mid-flight at 800 feet high. It was traveling at 400
 >knots when the mishap happened. The train of debris from only
 >800 feet high was nearly a mile long; not hundreds of yards but
 >thousands of feet.

Or exactly in accordance with what Marcel _actually_ said.
Marcel was of the opinion that it had exploded in flight while
travelling at high speed.

 >It was laid out nearly as straight as an arrow

Or just like Marcel said.

 >but the debris came down unevenly over the length of the
 >field of fall.

Also like Marcel said. He used the distribution to determine
the likely direction of travel.

 >The largest piece was the front of the fuselage and was smaller
 >than a VW beetle. The lightest stuff--such as fabric--fell first
 >and the heaviest--such as engines, ect--interestingly fell much
 >further along.

All the Roswell stuff was reported as being light in weight by
various witnesses.

 >Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
 >expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
 >make under the identical circumstances.

So your expectations match what Marcel said, don't they? He was
the principal crash investigator, at least initially.

 >An F-4,. while a good
 >size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
 >"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
 >knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
 >likely over miles.

Since the stuff was reported as light in weight, it most likely
would have exploded closer to the ground, since, at most, it was
spread out over an area of a square mile or less, with most of
it along a long, linear path, if we are to believe the
testimony.

 >I guess we could argue that if the "saucer," or whatever shape
 >craft is claimed, was alien in origin that it was made of
 >tougher stuff than an F-4 is made of and, thus, would have held
 >together better. However, since we don't know the exact
 >circumstances of the "saucer's" demise or construction it's all
 >speculation.

Certainly. A different pattern, e.g., would be created by a
craft that blew up all at once from one that disintegrated
"gracefully" over a period of time. The latter would be more
likely to produce a long linear debris field composed of light
materials.

 >>7. Professor Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >>(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >>that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >>Braun...

 >I have believed for a long time that what was an accident

But what accident? -- that's the question.

 >by the USAF was turned into, perhaps, the greatest disinformation ploy
 >done during the Cold War: The United States in time following
 >the Roswell incident did nothing to discourage the Soviets from
 >thinking we had one ace the Soviets would never have: alien technology.

So the theory you are trotting out is that counterintelligence,
on the spur of the moment, dreamed up this fantastic ploy to
scare Joseph Stalin with an alien boogeyman? Do you know who
Joseph Stalin was?

 >I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
 >had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons.

More factual errors. Historically, nothing of the sort was
suspected or feared except by maybe a few. The vast majority of
expert opinion was that the Soviets were backward
technologically, had been ravaged by WWII, and it would probably
be the mid-50's before they got the bomb. When they exploded
their first in 1949, it came as a big surprise to almost
everybody. Read, e.g., Richard Rhode's books on the subject.

 >But we now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
 >"Roswell Recovery."

Thompson's alien boogeyman theory. On one hand we had the
A-bomb, which Stalin knew was for real and was a devestating
weapon. On the other hand, we have Thompson's hypothetical
disinformation ploy, which Stalin could only guess at as being
real and would not know what effect it would have, if any, even
if it were for real. Then later came the H-bomb. Well
according to Thompson, that didn't impress Stalin either. We
needed something even more "potent" than the A-bomb or H-bomb to
scare those Rooskies (giggle).

 >Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
 >reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
 >couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
 >their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

OK.

 >The USAF retracting their statement so quickly probably only
 >convinced him and others in power then that the USAF really did
 >recover alien technology. The USAF with their follow-up and
 >clumsy denials since then have help keep this story alive for
 >Moscow and others to believe.

First of all, the Roswell story didn't begin to emerge in force
for over another 30 years, and then had to be dug out. This
doesn't sound to me like the USAF was trying very hard to "keep
this story alive for Moscow and others to believe." The "clumsy
denials" didn't begin publicly until 1994. If this was some
clever disinformation ploy of AF counterintelligence to scare
those evil Rooskies, then somebody had been asleep at the switch
for nearly a half century.

Then we have the problem of the KGB never figuring out, even
after a half century, that we don't have alien technology.
Don't you think they would have figured this out after a few
years? They had spies on the Manhatten Project, after all.
They also had their own extensive military and intelligence
presence that could determine whether the saucers were real or
not and of non-human origin.

When you get right down to it, the only way that alien saucers,
crashed or not, could be used as a disinformation ploy is if the
other side had very good reason to believe that the saucers were
real and of advanced technology.

Now why would the Russians and Stalin believe that if there was
nothing to any of this business?

 >That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today.

You're putting us on, right?

Could you provide some actual evidence to back up any of your
nonsense? How about even one statement from a participant that
your theory has any merit? I'm not asking for 100 witnesses,
just one.

 >It also,
 >perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >poor Major Marcel never got promoted again.

More garbage. Marcel received a promotion to Lt. Colonel in the
AF Reserve 4 months later, upon recommendation of two other
participants, Col. Blanchard and Col. Dubose (Gen. Ramey's Chief
of Staff). A few months later, Dubose also recommended that
Marcel attend Staff Officer training school, usually considered
grooming for future command officers. Only a year after
Roswell, Gen. Ramey himself wrote that he thought Marcel was
"outstanding" and future command officer material.

Marcel left the service 3 years later for reasons unrelated to
Roswell. He had been a major for 5 years, not at all unusual
for peacetime. Promotions to higher ranks tend to come slowly,
even for West Point graduates, which Marcel was not. (He was a
civilian who was drafted.) E.g., Eisenhower (heard of him?) was
a major for 16 years after WWI before getting his promotion to
Lt. Col. Nathan Twining (also a figure in the Roswell saga),
later became AF Chief of Staff and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
However, before WWII began, he was stuck as a mere 2nd Lt. for
17 years, and as a Captain for 5 years before finally making
Major in 1940. Marcel, by contrast, went from 2nd Lt. to Major
in only 2 years during WWII.

Or, if you want another example, the current AF Chief of Staff
is Gen. Michael Ryan. His dad was John Ryan, in 1947 Col. John
Ryan, then Ramey's Operations Officer at Fort Worth. Ryan a
year later replaced Blanchard at Roswell (writing incidentally
at that time that Marcel's career was "most outstanding" and
"most exemplary.") 20 years later during the Vietnam War, Gen.
John Ryan was AF Chief of Staff and then Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs. His son Michael was a fighter pilot during these 8
years, was also "stuck" in rank as a Captain. And this was
wartime and his Dad was the Man, and sonny still couldn't get a
promotion.

So what can we conclude from the fact that Marcel didn't receive
an active duty promotion after Roswell? Not a helluva lot
apparently. Similar things happened to others who eventually
ended up at the top -- people like Eisenhower, Twining, and
Ryan. Yet this truly idiotic argument about Marcel not getting a
promotion seems to be periodically dragged out, as if it tells
us something, which it does not.

 >They did, afterall, need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

Could you point to something factual to indicate that Marcel was
made the "fall guy." During the event itself, Col. Blanchard's
PIO Walter Haut was generally made the goat in the press for
alleging miswriting and issuing the infamous press release.
Blanchard himself was blamed for the press release. But nobody
mentioned Marcel as being responsible (except perhaps an
ambiguously worded Roswell Daily Record story). He was just the
intelligence officer sent out to investigate and retrieve the
object. I base these statements after looking at some 150 to 200
newspapers from that period. Marcel was not singled out for
blame.

If you look at Marcel's career after Roswell, all you see is
praise about the guy from senior officers. That includes people
like Blanchard, Ryan, and Ramey. Admiral Blandy also wrote him a
commendation for his work at the Bikini A-bomb tests a year
before. Marcel also received two top secret appointments after
Roswell. One was from the SAC, who wrote the Pentagon that they
already had him in mind for a "key" position (A.F. Hdqtrs wanted
him too). The second appointment was with the very project that
detected the first Soviet A-blast. Does this sound like Marcel
had fallen out of favor or was being made a "fall guy?"

The only time Marcel was made the "fall guy" was nearly 50 years
later, first in the HBO Roswell movie, and then when the Roswell
debunkers decided to trash the man so they could trash Roswell.
That's the real history of what happened, not some goofball
pelicanist theory of how Roswell was invented and somehow
maintained to scare Stalin, for criminy sakes.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 07:54:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:17:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:46:23 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:56:25 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>OPEN LETTER

 >>History Channel
 >>235 East 45th St.
 >>New York, NY l0017
 >>USA

 >>December 21, 1999

 >>Subject: December 13, 1999 program Roswell: Secrets Revealed

 >>Dear History Channel

 >>As the nuclear physicist who began the civilian investigation of
 >>the Roswell Incident back in the 1970s, who has co-authored a
 >>book "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Story of the Roswell
 >>Incident" and numerous papers about Roswell, and, of course, was
 >>the first to talk to many of the key witnesses (almost all of
 >>whom you somehow missed), I naturally viewed the subject program
 >>with great interest, especially since I was in Roswell on
 >>December 13... I must congratulate you on providing a
 >>Masterpiece of Misrepresentation. A splendid example of
 >>propaganda, excellent for teaching purposes . You demonstrated
 >>the primary rules such as selective choice of data, false
 >>reasoning, positive and negative name calling. You also
 >>demonstrated the 4 basic rules of UFO debunkery:

 >Many thanks for making many of my points here. I should've just
 >waited for this posting first! On the ones you don't make you
 >might direct the History Channel to see the July 1997 MUFON
 >issue that was dedicated to Roswell. Might give them some other
 >folks to talk to.

 >>.. You have
 >>blindly accepted a fairly recent statement by Cavitt to Colonel
 >>Weaver about him recalling it was just a balloon covering an
 >>area only 20' square and easily fitting in one vehicle.
 >>Apparently Cavitt  wasn't told it was supposed to be a MOGUL
 >>balloon which included 23 standard helium filled neoprene
 >>balloons (at 20' intervals) and a whole bunch of radar
 >>reflectors, sonobuoys, ballast tanks, etc all strung together.
 >>Some small pile. Of course Cavitt hadn't remembered that simple
 >>fact when asked many times by many people for the previous 15
 >>years, even denying that he had been on the base at the time.

 >Was is Marcel a better witness than Cavitt? Is it because Cavitt
 >doesn't agree with you?

How ridiculous. Cavitt could have told his new simple tale to
any of the many people with whom he spoke over a 15 year period.
Surely it wasn't security that made him avoid speaking?

Talk to Kevin Randle, Don Schmitt, William Moore, Billy Cox
about their conversations with Cavitt.He at one time was trying
to say he wasn't even at the base in early July 1947. He not
only made up this explanation or thought he was supposed to give
it but lied when he said he went to the scene with Rickett and
Marcel and never saw the rancher. There was no way for him to
reach the debris field without the rancher being involved.
Marcel's story has been validated by others. and we have many
newspaper stories to check it against.

 >>... He issued the press release because he
 >>was ordered to do so by Colonel William Blanchard, Commander of
 >>the 509th and of Roswell Army Air Field. Before suggesting he
 >>must have been incompetent, as have some  who haven't done their
 >>homework, I should add he was a member of the West Point All
 >>Star class of 1938, became a 4 star general by the time he was
 >>48 and was Vice Chief of Staff of the USAF when he died of a
 >>massive heart attack at the Pentagon in 1966. There was ,of
 >>course, a lengthy obituary in the NY times. Doesn't sound much
 >>like he was thought to be incompetent, does it?

 >My... He did fly high!

 >>D. Why do you show only the Roswell Daily Record? After all
 >>there were front page headline stories in the Chicago Daily
 >>News, the Sacramento Bee, the Los Angeles Herald Express, the
 >>Spokane Chronicle, etc all evening papers for July 8. The West
 >>coast papers in general had done a lot of checking before
 >>publishing detailed articles. Too bad you did none.
 >
 >Yes. It was all over and _everybody_, including the Soviets,
 >took notice.

So what??

 >>...Has the air force invented time travel?
 >>There is no other way to get crash test dummies, all of whom
 >>were the height and weight of pilots, back to 1947 from 1953
 >>...this is flat out fiction.

 >I agree

 >>G. Why did you not talk to others still alive who had first hand
 >>involvement such as Jesse A. Marcel Jr. , a medical doctor, who
 >>handled wreckage, has served on military aircraft accident
 >>investigative teams and was a pilot? Or Loretta Proctor,
 >>neighbor of Mack Brazel, who handled wreckage? or Mack Brazel's
 >>son Bill who found strange (thin strong memory material)
 >>wreckage out in the pasture? How about the sheriff's two
 >>daughters? All this testimony has been readily available for
 >>many years

 >One dead and mistaken; two not grown; the rest only heresay.


What is the basis for saying mistaken?

Cavitt is also dead, Bill  Brazel was married at the time,
Loretta handled wreckage, the sherrif's daughters were in
Roswell at the time at his office. Perhaps you ought to view the
105 minute video Recollections of Roswell (only 20$ from UFORI,
POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730) which includes testimony from 27
witnesses including Judd Roberts, Bill Rickett, Jesse Marcel
(all now deceased) etc Your explanations seem to be worse than
hearsay. They are creative fiction.

 >>H.One of the first things Major Jesse Marcel told me is that
 >>there was nothing conventional to be found on the debris field..
 >>No wires, no vacuum tubes, no rivets. He was very familiar with
 >>aircraft and aircraft wreckage and balloons and radar reflectors
 >>and rockets. The notion that he wouldn't have recognized balloon
 >>wreckage or radar reflectors is frankly absurd.. You are also
 >>implying that Blanchard, who had also served in the Pacific,
 >>would have ordered the press release and the B-29 flight with
 >>the wreckage brought back from the ranch and Marcel to Fort
 >>Worth is equally absurd, if all there was was totally
 >>conventional stuff. You know of any materials such as the I-beam
 >>like pieces with strange symbols that couldn't be cut, burned,
 >>or broken? Or memory metals that were like foil but couldn't be
 >>cut and, when folded over and over, would unfold on their own?
 >>Why couldn't the USAF find any of that toymaker tape in the
 >>pictures taken in Ramey's office?

 >>I. Brazel didn't make his discovery on July 5. It was earlier.
 >>He did go to the store-pool hall in Corona on the 5 th which is
 >>when, not having electricity or a phone or a radio, he first
 >>heard about all the saucer sightings and a reward and was told
 >>he ought to go to the Sherif in Roswell which he did on the 6th
 >>NOT on the 7th as you claimed.. You made it sound as though
 >>Sherif Wilcox looked in the phone book to find a nearby Air
 >>Base. There was a standing arrangement that anything that might
 >>effect the military would be reported to Roswell Army Air Field.
 >>There was no other base in the area.

 >>J. I have met with Dr. Schirmer, Dr. Moore, Mr. Gildenberg. They
 >>haven't investigated the case. They have made proclamation after >
 >proclamation about 2nd and third hand testimony. Why use the
 >>term "conspiracy theorist" so many times without ever justifying
 >>it? Who are these theorists? I began the investigation and have
 >>always provided evidence for the claims that I make which is
 >>more than can be said for your trio. They have actually created
 >>a conspiracy theory namely that a bunch of stupid UFO
 >>researchers and lying witnesses have created a fantastic story
 >>for fun and profit. This, of course, ignores the fact that loads
 >>of testimony was obtained by us serious researchers long before
 >>the cameras started rolling. My phone bills used to run several
 >>hundred dollars a month.

 >>By the way, I do know something about security having worked as
 >>a nuclear physicist on a wide variety of highly classified
 >>advanced nuclear and space system programs for such companies as
 >>General Electric, General Motors, Westinghouse, TRW Systems,
 >>McDonnell Douglas, and Aerojet General Nucleonics.. I have
 >>also been to 19 different government document archives.
 >>Just how much experience with security has Dr. Schirmer had?

 >>K.What was this nonsense about a 1956 plane crash somehow
 >>confusing Glenn Dennis about bodies at the base in 1947? A few
 >>years ago I went with Glenn to the Ballard funeral home. We
 >>reviewed records with full permission of the operator there who
 >>obviously respected Glenn. There were a number of military plane >
 >crashes for which he handled the bodies even after bad fires.
 >>That was his job. No possible way such a crash could have
 >>confused him. Yet another false conspiracy theory from your
 >>trio.

 >I notice you don't mention the other part in the History Channel
 >where they basically say that Glenn is lying about the nurse he
 >knows who saw the alien bodies; that no one can even find she
 >ever existed! On that alone he is open to challenge on
 >everything he says. Do not do so is "selected journalism."

You mean like their leaving out crucial witnesses?There were a
number of items I didn't mention partly because the letter was
longer than intended and partly because I don't have a copy of
the program.

 >>L. At one point early on in the program the word UFO was used.
 >>Sorry. It was not used until after 1951. Several times when
 >>showing balloons and talking about Mogul you showed tear drop
 >>shaped polyethylene balloons. Round standard Neoprene balloons
 >>were used for all MOGUL launches before July... The >>same kind
 >>that Mack had retrieved. And that rapidly diisintegrate in the sun.

 >Like your 1947 remark about me using "USAF". It doesn't matter;
 >they used the term UFOs as that is what "flying saucers" have
 >become.

 >>In summary then, the History Channel has presented myth and
 >>propaganda in the guise of truth.

 >>You have supplied misrepresentation instead of investigative
 >>journalism. You should be ashamed and should apologize to your
 >>audience. It seems to me you have also violated FCC rules with
 >>regard to fairness, honesty, and accuracy in so doing. My
 >>colleagues and I would be happy to debate your trio of amateurs
 >>any time. I would suggest that they do their homework first.

 >>Cordially,

 >>Stanton T. Friedman

 >>Enclosures.

 >They have nothing to apologize for. I found it the most
 >enlightening and encompassing documentary on Roswell done. >With  the
exception of the "dummy" story, excellent!


This would seem to be a clear indication that you haven't done
your homework

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:29:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >
 >>>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>>>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>>>>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >
 >>>>>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,
 >
 >>>>>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm
 >
 >>>>>Stig
 >
 >>>>>***
 >
 >>>>>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>>>>by Jim Keith

 >>>>List:

 >>>Stanton Friedman says"

 >>>>This Article by Keith is mostly nonsense. He couldn't even get
 >>>>the basic facts right. For example.

 >>>>1. In my first conversation with Major Jesse Marcel in 1978 he
 >>>>stated that the wreckage was strewn over an area many hundreds
 >>>>of yards long. Most of it was very lightweight and there was
 >>>>nothing that looked like a disc and no conventional material at
 >>>>all.Even the Roswell Daily Record article on July 9,1947 said
 >>>>the wreckage covered an area 200 yards in diameter. Marcel is in
 >>>>my movie UFOS AreReal shot in 1979.

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>What Marcel says in my movie is 3/4 of a mile long and over 100
 >>yards wide. He had concluded that in the absence of a crater
 >>there must have been a mid air explosion.

 >Well, I'd stick with that as it gives your story-line more
 >credibility.

I haven't written any fiction. Watch the video.

 >>>While I can't speak for Keith's article one of the problems I've
 >>>always had with the story of the "Roswell Crash" debris is how
 >>>no one describes debris field that is  really large. As time
 >>>goes by distortions occur with memomry. Even if Marcel's 1978
 >>>estimate of "many hundreds of yards long" is correct it seems
 >>>too small.

 >>The vehicle observed by Civil Engineer Barney Barnett in the
 >>Plains of San Augustine which came down almost intact was less
 >>than 30' in diameter. A saucer shaped craft would have a much
 >>lower surface to volume ration than something with wings.

 >>>If only "200 yards in diameter," as you say the Roswell Daily
 >>>Record stated just days after the event, the wreckage is far too
 >>>small. Much, of course, depends on how the wreckage came down.
 >>>Did the alleged UFO explode in mid-flight or come down largely
 >>>in one piece? If the former, at what altitude and what speed was
 >>>it travelling at?

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>Apparently the Brazel Ranch saucer exploded in mid air with a
 >>crew compartment observed a few miles away. The Plains saucer
 >>was almost intact. May have been a mid air collision resulting
 >>from a lightning strike or running into a tracking radar beam
 >>known to be on. Might well be very different from an F-4
 >>exploding.

 >I would expect a debris field of miles long then; with larger
 >pieces here and there. Where the heaviest pieces fell there
 >would be craters. For instance, the largest piece of the F-4,
 >the front of the fuselage, gourged out a groove about 25 feet
 >long and several feet deep and wide as it came in.

Let us not pose as an expert on what happens to a flying saucer
flying at an unknown altitude, speed, of unknown composition and
with nothing known about the explosion, or the cause
thereof... lightning, mid-air collision, strong radar beam or
combination thereof.

 >>>On 3/06/94 an F-4 crashed near Franklin, Georgia. The F-4
 >>>exploded in mid-flight at 800 feet high. It was traveling at 400
 >>>knots when the mishap happened. The train of debris from only
 >>>800 feet high was nearly a mile long; not hundreds of yards but
 >>>thousands of feet. It was laid out nearly as straight as an
 >>>arrow but the debris came down unevenly over the length of the

What is the connection between this situation and what happened
in NM?

 >>>The largest piece was the front of the fuselage and was smaller
 >>>than a VW beetle. The lightest stuff--such as fabric--fell first
 >>>and the heaviest--such as engines, ect--interestingly fell much
 >>>further along.

 >>>Now assuming the "saucer" of Roswell exploded in mid-air I would
 >>>expect the debris train to be at least as long as an F-4 would
 >>>make under the identical circumstances. An F-4,. while a good
 >>>size jet plane, is by no means a transport or airliner. If the
 >>>"saucer" was higher than 800 feet and going faster than 400
 >>>knots the train should've been much longer and wider; most
 >>>likely over miles.

You have no reason for any expectations here

 >>>I guess we could argue that if the "saucer," or whatever shape
 >>>craft is claimed, was alien in origin that it was made of
 >>>tougher stuff than an F-4 is made of and, thus, would have held
 >>>together better. However, since we don't know the exact
 >>>circumstances of the "saucer's" demise or construction it's all
 >>>speculation.

 >>The observations of those on the scene later are not
 >>speculation. Marcel, Rickett, .

 >And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
 >Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >crash was _not_ an alien event?

Who is this mysterious person? What civilian counterpart did the
Intelligence officer of the 509th have?

 >>>>7. Professor
 >>Burdakov of the USSR claimed that Dr. Korololev
 >>>>(sp?) was asked by Stalin to review saucer data and concluded
 >>>>that they are a real. He was the Soviet analog of Werner von
 >>>>Braun...

 >>>I have believed for a long time that what was an accident by the
 >>>USAF was turned into, perhaps, the greatest disinformation ploy
 >>>done during the Cold War: The United States in time following
 >>>the Roswell incident did nothing to discourage the Soviets from
 >>>thinking we had one ace the Soviets would never have: alien
 >>>technology.

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
 >>to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
 >>presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
 >>Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
 >>very different and no conventional materials were found. There
 >>were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

 >I talking about a Project Mongul balloon that went down, as the
 >USAF, now says and the accident was Colonel Blanchard okaying to
 >put out the press release that the Army Air Corps had recovered
 >a "flying saucer."

This is truly wild speculation with no evidence. The Mogul
explanation simply doesn't fly as I and many others have noted.
Give me a snail mail address and I will send my review of "The
Roswell Report: Case Closed"

 >>>I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
 >>>had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons. But we
 >>>now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
 >>>"Roswell Recovery."

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>I have seen NSC meeting notes indicating the Russians weren't
 >>expected to have nuclear weapons until the early 1950s.. and
 >>weren't in 1947 known to have delivery systems. Interesting plot
 >>line but where is the evidence? As noted in Crash at Corona  and
 >>several other books the case for a crashed saucer is very
 >>strong.

 >Well, they were wrong! And I suspect many did think they could
 >have it earlier. The Russians at the end of the war, like us and
 >our allies, got their quota of German scientists. They also got
 >some who had worked on heavy water projects. Only the most
 >dim-witted and short-sighted after WWII would've thought that
 >the Russians weren't working on their own A-bomb projects.

Let us remember that the German A-Bomb effort made little
progress. The heavy water is useful in certain nuclear research.
Certainly we expected the Russians would come up with an A Bomb
The outstanding European scientists such as Fermi and Teller
came to the US before the war...not to the Soviet Union.

Your suspicions may impress you, but how about providing
evidence?

 >Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted in 1951 for giving
 >some of our atomic bomb secrets away. They had been feeding info
 >for a long time. The Russians, as another post to you correctly
 >says, detonated their first bomb before then.

I have often noted that the first Soviet A-bomb was detonated in
1949. This has nothing to do with Mogul ballons that would have
disintegrated long before Brazel found the very large quantity
of debris. Mogul balloons involved totally conventional
technology, as did the radar reflectors whose materials could
have been torn by a 5 year old.

 >I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
 >Soviets from believing we had no alien technology.

I find this sentence totally confusing speculation.

 >What was a
 >screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
 >thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
 >something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
 >denotated their first bomb.

Glad to know you could read the minds of these long gone
people...

 >>>Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
 >>>reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
 >>>couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
 >>>their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>What is the basis for this claim about Stalin's belief? Marcel
 >>was the Intelligence Officer for the most elite military group
 >>in the world. Blanchard  went on to high office. The AAF people
 >>certainly weren't punished. Interesting speculation but in over
 >>20 years of Roswell investigation, I have seen no basis for this
 >>claim

 >As you have pointed out yourself, the Roswell saucer story was
 >all over the newspapers in the U.S and carried overseas by some
 >news outlets. Are we to believe that the Soviets had no interest
 >in this at all? I have seen this quote that Keith uses before. I
 >confess I don't have any intimate knowledge to know for sure
 >that Stalin was personally involved.

No morning newspapers (Wash.Post, NY Times etc) carried the July
8th story. They did carry the July 9th coverup.Only evening
papers from Chicago West carried the Roswell story on July 8.

 >If you want to see what intrigues the Soviets went in scheming,
 >misinterperting, and putting out disinformatin/misinformation, I
 >suggest you read Armand Moss's fine book: "Misinformation,
 >Disinfomation and the JFK Conspiracy Exposed." There are also
 >several books out by former Soviet intelligence agents who show
 >what paranoid thoughts Communist leaders entertained. The
 >Roswell saucer story would have been discussed at all levels, if
 >for nothing else, because it did get brief, but HIGH, publicity.

 >The Army Air Corps quick "blow-it-away response would've seen
 >most suspicious; as it still does today. What really happened is
 >the press of this country just let it go right through their
 >radar screens instead of airing the story out. They should have
 >gone after those witnesses like never before. But they were so
 >trusting of our military then, after the flush of victory in
 >World War II, they took the retract of the story at face value.

 >Of course, the Press has often been non-performing in their
 >duties; still are. On the other hand, I suspect if they had done
 >a "Watergate press" back then on the story we would've found out
 >for sure that this was no UFO crash! This also explains why the
 >locals buried the story so quickly.

I suspect they would have found stonewalling and lying about a
huge event, the recovery of an alien spacecraft whose owners
might be an enormous threat..

 >This stuff of some relatives of alleged deceased witnesses
 >seeing debris and being threaten by the military to keep their
 >mouths shut doesn't wash. I'm sure some of these folks must have
 >been WWII vets. As Jessie James found out in Northfield
 >,Minnesota the Union Civil War veterans weren't afraid of his
 >reputation! The WWII vets if threated with such nonsense I'm
 >sure would at least responded vocally what they thought of such
 >talk and armed themselves appropriately. The fact is there is no
 >concrete proof that multiple, reliable witnesses  saw anything
 >that was extraterrestrial.

Obviously you need to look at or listen to more ofthe witness
testimony.

 >The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
 >reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake. His
 >son doesn't count. He was young and if my dad brought home
 >something and said "Isn't this strange?" I would agree and be
 >left with that memomy for the rest of my life. Again, why
 >doesn't the one other witness who was there support Marcel?

Who in the world is this other witness? Obviously you haven't
heard the testimont of many of the witnesses. Your omniscience
is very impressive; and insulting to a host of people

 >>>The USAF retracting their statement so quickly probably only
 >>>convinced him and others in power then that the USAF really did
 >>>recover alien technology. The USAF with their follow-up and
 >>>clumsy denials since then have help keep this story alive for
 >>>Moscow and others to believe.

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>You sure won't find much in the way of AAF (The USAF didn't
 >>exist until September 1947.) comment between July of 1947 and
 >>1994.. Not much follow up. I certainly agree the recent coverup
 >>was clumsy.

 >I'm well aware that at the time of the Roswell incident that the
 >Army still had the Air Force. I used USAF only to simplify
 >matters. Their attempts in the '90s have been most clumsy and
 >embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
 >more attention to the matter. Maybe, because there is a larger
 >secret that Project Mongul. Who knows how much time, money and
 >effort was wasted by the Soviets on UFO related projects because
 >of them thinking that the U.S had a recovered disk?

 >Time now still being wasted by the Russians.

 >This is why the USAF may still keep parading old colonels out to
 >put out such nonsense as "dummies" falling from the sky. Maybe
 >they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
 >disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
 >reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

I suggested some in my review of Roswell Report : Case closed.

 >>>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >>>need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >>Major Marcel did get promoted. He was never the fall guy until
 >>the TV Showtime Roswell show. invented that story..

 >I believe it was customary for officers in the military then,
 >when they retired, to be advanced one rank. Is this the type
 >promotion you speak of? If so, that doesn't count. Blanchard's
 >career was not hurt as it should have been for screwing-up. But
 >as years passed and the Soviets denotated their first bomb all
 >was forgiven. The Roswell alien story was not a bad thing
 >afterall.

 >It was Blanchard's mistake, as he was in command. And at least
 >in the 1940s, in the military, the "buck stops here." His
 >mistake should've been a career stopper. It wasn't but there
 >isn't a thread of proof that will now stand up to prove the
 >Roswell or Corona--yes, I bought your book--crash involved alien
 >technology. So why did he make it past a level that most
 >officers are never expected to see?

 >My "plot line," as you call it, looks better and better. The
 >difference between you and me is that I will agree it is only a
 >pausible story-line. Your's is too. When its all said and done,
 >with no proof, it's only entertainment.

 >>>John C. Thompson

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>Obviously I believe this is an interesting plot line with
 >>nothing to support it and much to contradict it.  Jim Keith's
 >>story line of course is wholly imaginary. The material was very
 >>lightweight and very strong.. hardly concrete in a dummy bomb.

 >>Stanton Friedman

 >Actually, it is "an interesting plot line" that is more
 >plausable than your story-line. Please find one living, reliable
 >witness that will back your story-line. The F-4 crash involved
 >nearly 300 soldiers doing a search and they were in Heard
 >County, Georgia for over three weeks. Hundreds of civillians
 >also saw the crash despite it being in one of the most remote
 >areas of West Georgia. Most were there within 15 minutes!

 >I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >hell-of-a wallop. A thud that can be heard for miles around; one
 >that shakes houses. I realise that the Roswell area in the late
 >'40s is even more remote but you couldn't keep something like
 >this under wraps; no way!

 >Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, would've been on the Roswell
 >saucer crash over the years if it was true. If only the same
 >number turned out for the alleged saucer crash--I would suspect
 >many more for that!--as the F-4 crash, most would've been young
 >soldiers of only 18-25 years old. No, officers don't pick up
 >that stuff!

More wild speculation. You ought to go out there and get a guide
to get youto the debris field location.

 >These young enlisted individuals, if alive,  would be 70-75
 >years old now. As there are still quite a few older WWII vets
 >alive they're should be I would, suspect, be at least 50 of
 >these individuals alive. Why haven't some these young soldiers
 >come forth? I just don't by all this security business after all
 >these years. Yes, I know what a security clearance and the
 >penalities involved are. I never had a top-secret or whatever
 >you want to call it, but I did once hold a Q clearance.

 >I have interviewed lots of witnesses for sensational events;
 >including an alleged crash here in Georgia. What you got to
 >remember is that even good well-intentional folks, as I suspect
 >Major Marcel was, make mistakes. Then there is always a certain
 >percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

 >Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the Roswell
 >crash involved a vehicle of alien manufacture.

There is a great deal of credible evidence. Georgia has 8 times
the population density of New Mexico. Last year I was with
several Japanese Journalists in NM. On a lovely day we drove 57
miles to the debris field and beyond from Rte. 285 without even
seeing another person or vehicle. You are making analogies where
none exist. Not a relevant fact in a car load as Jerry Clark
would say...

Stanton T. 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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:13:10 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:30:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:56:25 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >OPEN LETTER
 >History Channel

Well done Stanton. These TV researchers really ought to get
their act together.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                Re: #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:24:33 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:36:41 -0500
Subject: Re: #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,


Thanks to the many, who e-mailed me on yesterdays post subject.
[eeeeee-mail] Just another short one to end the topic.

I was going over my work mail of monthly journals & aeronautics
magazines and came across this rather simple story [great
magazine however] but the image on page 31 is the item that
'caught my eye'. It was the shape of the helmet.

Again, I need you to take that "big step" into the "what if"
area of your mind.

Again Umm... What has ROSWELL got to do with this pilot's
nuclear blast shield helmet image? Well nothing!

REMEMBER

You may also need to follow Colonel Philip J. Corso's theory of
"Seeding". In short, Roswell alien technology was given to the
giants of American industry.

So again with a photon force of possibility [no proof remember],
could this be an example of ROSWELL CRASH "bits" in a BACK
ENGINEERING revelation.

I have NO web page for you to view the image or story. But if
you have 'let me us know'. If you're looking for the edition
the following data will help you:

"Air & Space"
Smithsonian
October / November 1999
Vol 14 Number 4

"The Spirit Of Knob Noster"
-'In a remote corner of Missouri, a small town plays
host to the world's most mysterious super plane'-

Article By James R. CHILES
Photographs By Mark GODFREY
p28-p37

LOCATION:
The image is on page 31.

[B/W IMAGE BlastDome.jpg 23,932 bytes]

CAPTION SAID:
A mannequin sports a nuclear blast shield, a symbol of the
B-2's intended role as a world war weapon - quite different
from its debut over Kosovo.

CAVEAT

Remember, open minds. Also, I have not researched the pilot's
nuclear blast shield history. And I will let you decide what
you think it looks like.

Well, what do you think?

Looks great! Some of you will find this just simple time
wasting, that Ok. I like to investigate looking at the
wonderful world of Panorama - all 360 deg rather than the
standard "Tunnel Vision" of many of our fellow sceptics.

Well, it's another great image for your collection.

To all enquiring minds. Good hunting.

Merry Christmas to all and a Happy 2K.

Regards

John W. AUCHETTL
Director - PRA


THANKS TO:   Air & Space - Smithsonian
PLEASE NOTE: Copyright (c) Mark GODFREY

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 10:22:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:39:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 00:16:05 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: michael mchugh <mcmchugh99@yahoo.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:13:06 -0800  <>
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:51:38 -0500
 >>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 ><snip>

 >>PS: From time to time, I've read debates about whether Col.
 >>Blanchard, the base commander at Roswell, approved the 1947
 >>press release about the "flying disc."  Anyone who has ever been
 >>in the military knows that he must have.  This was no routine
 >>announcement about an upcoming ice cream social, but information
 >>that was bound to send the press into a feeding frenzy.

 >>Blanchard ordered Marcel to investigate the crash, and report
 >>back. Then he issued the press release, and informed his
 >>superiors about it.  This is how chain of command operates in
 >>the military: it never changes.

 >Mike, Listers:

 >I have often wondered about this. Blanchard went on leave. Has
 >anyone ever determined who was acting Commander when he was
 >gone?

 >Of course there are more than one possibility: Blanchard
 >approved; someone else approved; Marcel did it. We know what
 >the "book" answer is, but does anyone really know who approved
 >what?

It was Lt. Colonel Payne Jennings, now deceased.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                  #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:24:33 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:42:59 -0500
Subject: #2 Back Engineering From Roswell Debris?


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,


Thanks to the many, who e-mailed me on yesterdays post subject.
[eeeeee-mail] Just another short one to end the topic.

I was going over my work mail of monthly journals & aeronautics
magazines and came across this rather simple story [great
magazine however] but the image on page 31 is the item that
'caught my eye'. It was the shape of the helmet.

Again, I need you to take that "big step" into the "what if"
area of your mind.

Again Umm... What has ROSWELL got to do with this pilot's
nuclear blast shield helmet image? Well nothing!

REMEMBER

You may also need to follow Colonel Philip J. Corso's theory of
"Seeding". In short, Roswell alien technology was given to the
giants of American industry.

So again with a photon force of possibility [no proof remember],
could this be an example of ROSWELL CRASH "bits" in a BACK
ENGINEERING revelation.

I have NO web page for you to view the image or story. But if
you have 'let me us know'. If you're looking for the edition
the following data will help you:

"Air & Space"
Smithsonian
October / November 1999
Vol 14 Number 4

"The Spirit Of Knob Noster"
-'In a remote corner of Missouri, a small town plays
host to the world's most mysterious super plane'-

Article By James R. CHILES
Photographs By Mark GODFREY
p28-p37

LOCATION:
The image is on page 31.

[B/W IMAGE BlastDome.jpg 23,932 bytes]

CAPTION SAID:
A mannequin sports a nuclear blast shield, a symbol of the
B-2's intended role as a world war weapon - quite different
from its debut over Kosovo.

CAVEAT

Remember, open minds. Also, I have not researched the pilot's
nuclear blast shield history. And I will let you decide what
you think it looks like.

Well, what do you think?

Looks great! Some of you will find this just simple time
wasting, that Ok. I like to investigate looking at the
wonderful world of Panorama - all 360 deg rather than the
standard "Tunnel Vision" of many of our fellow sceptics.

Well, it's another great image for your collection.

To all enquiring minds. Good hunting.

Merry Christmas to all and a Happy 2K.

Regards

John W. AUCHETTL
Director - PRA


THANKS TO:   Air & Space - Smithsonian
PLEASE NOTE: Copyright (c) Mark GODFREY

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Karl T. Pflock <ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 10:16:13 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:20:02 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:04:29 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Ok...  So are you going to pick up the end of the thread I've
 >>attempted to start?  Is anyone?...

 >Karl,

 >Yes, I am, and hope others will as well. Just as soon as I
 >recover fom gum surgery and the Holidays -- whichever comes
 >first.

Ouch!  Check the instruments very closely, not to mention the
surgeon's eyes...

 >You did bad-time this,...

Yah, I know.  What can I say?  The spirit (of Christmas past)
moved me.  Still, I hope that won't deter folks from taking
this up after the Holidays and/or gum surgery.  It really is
an interesting and ufologically important way to approach
the ETH/ETI problem.

 >...unless, of course, you're one of
 >those cheapskate grinches who doesn't put up lights. Which I
 >seriously suspect. Get back to us next Millennium. ETs, sheesh!

Actually, ET elves put up luminarias/farolitos at our place.
Highly advanced technology--electricity and plastic bags instead
of candles and lunch sacks.

-- �Feliz Navidad y Un Prospero YDosK! KARLOS KLAUS






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 11:53:56 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:23:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:03:46 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:04:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

<snip>

 >Could you point to something factual to indicate that Marcel was
 >made the "fall guy." During the event itself, Col. Blanchard's
 >PIO Walter Haut was generally made the goat in the press for
 >alleging miswriting and issuing the infamous press release.
 >Blanchard himself was blamed for the press release. But nobody
 >mentioned Marcel as being responsible (except perhaps an
 >ambiguously worded Roswell Daily Record story). He was just the
 >intelligence officer sent out to investigate and retrieve the
 >object. I base these statements after looking at some 150 to 200
 >newspapers from that period.

Dave:

Do you think that the nearby press were right, that Haut did it?
Has anybody seen any orders making anybody Acting Base Commander
while Blanchard was gone?  Or, who was his Deputy?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:02:52 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:24:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:29:13 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
 >>Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >>you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >>crash was _not_ an alien event?

 >Who is this mysterious person? What civilian counterpart did the
 >Intelligence officer of the 509th have?

Stan, John:

Does John mean Sheridan Cavitt?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                            Re: Seasons Greetings

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:02:35 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:13:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Seasons Greetings


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:40:54 +0100 (MET)
 >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Seasons Greetings
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:56:12 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Sheree Cox <cox@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Seasons Greetings

 >>Hello all:

 >>I would like to wish everyone on the list a Merry Christmas
 >>and a safe and wonderful New Year.

 >Please, please, please.

 >I've too many Christmas and new year greetings already.
 >Besides the postcards that keep rolling in I aleady have to
 >delete a dozen or so emails per day with silly Christmas
 >greetings. And I still have to delete all the attachments
 >on my hard disk.

 >Christmas is a Germanic pagan tradition and originally had
 >nothing to do with religion in the first place. Besides that,
 >the first evidence has yet to be found that Jesus ever existed
 >and the dating of the new year is totally arbitrary.

 >So please, I don't want dozens of silly seasons greetings in my
 >email box.

 >Groeten,
 >Henny

 >[Okay, so have a Bumhug from Ms Cox and I then --ebk]

Oh yah, well, just wait till you get the case of Christmas Carol
Gripple in the post tomorrow Henny.  Drink it up Christmas
Eve, please.  It was made for Humbugs (not Bumhugs, Dr.
Kanappy) and you will be visited by the ghosts of Gripple
Past, Present and Future.

It was originally made for Debunkers, then we switched and
tailored it for Researchers and finally, results were so good
that we switched to Unca Scrooges.  J. Jaime felt that your pain
was felt more keenly during this time of year and wanted to not
only ease it, but transform you, just like that Ebenezer Geezer.

I tried it last night, and boy, are my arms tired.  And when Fan
left me because I turned into a greedy, scheming man who
wouldn't even order another piece of bread at the restaurant on
Christmas Eve because he didn't wanna spend the extra money, and
subsequently retired to the home of his partner in life, the
ugly Jacob Marley (the now deceased former Reggae singer) only
to see him in the chains he forged in life like you may be
forging right now, and was warned that he would be visited by
three more spirits, and Scrooge didn't believe him but when it
was all over he did and went to his nephew's Christmas party,
the one he didn't like cause when he was born he made his momma
die during childbirth and then this sniveling guy went out and
met a beautiful girl what reminded Scrooge of his Fran so he
went to their party and danced and probally got this girl in the
sack an everything an then he gave away all his money every
Christmas an everything an that's the whole story and it will
happen to you if you drink my Christmas Carol Gripple.

And a very Merry Christmas to you Henny, even though it's a
Humbug.  I am sure it will be very merry and very happy indeed.
And I also expect you to be late for work on the 26th, just as
you are every other year.  Oh, and I hope your son, the little
lame boy, Tiny Time is doing well.

J. Jaime Gesundt, God Bless us, Everyone








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:14:56 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:31:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 00:16:05 -0500 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:51:35 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >I have often wondered about this. Blanchard went on leave. Has
 >anyone ever determined who was acting Commander when he was gone?

Officially it was the Roswell Deputy base commander Lt. Col.
Payne Jennings, who signed another order to replace Blanchard.
However, when it was being publicly announced that Blanchard was
on leave, Jennings was busy flying Marcel and his cargo of
debris to Fort Worth.  (This according to Robert Porter, who was
on the flight.)  Nobody was at home minding the store.

The base operations officer, however, said that he was quite
certain that Blanchard first went out to the debris field to
make a determination.  So officially Blanchard was on leave, but
he was still acting in his capacity as base C/O.

Another point is that Blanchard didn't go on leave until after
the press release had gone out and all the ruckus had begun.
There were some press stories at the time that Blanchard had
issued the release and had been in communication with Gen.
Ramey, who had ordered Marcel's flight.  Blanchard was hardly
some unwitting innocent in all this.  Whatever happened and why,
I think it is pretty clear that the press release was issued
with Blanchard's authority.  That is certainly the story that
Blanchard's PIO, Walter Haut, has always told.

I think it is pretty clear that if Marcel had tried some sort of
end run around Blanchard, twisted Haut's arm to put out the
release, etc., there would have been some dire consequences for
Marcel.  Instead nothing happened to Marcel.  Quite the contrary
Blanchard recommended him for promotion in the Reserve, upped
his numerical rating into "superior" territory on his next
service evaluation, noted that he followed the chain of command,
had high moral character, etc., etc.  Gen. Ramey referred to him
as "outstanding" and command officer material.  None of this
makes sense if Marcel was responsible for the infamous press
release.  Ditto I think for Haut, who has also been widely
blamed for the release.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                           Jay Leno's Take On NASA

From: Tony Craddock <webmaster@cseti.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:54:52 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:33:26 -0500
Subject: Jay Leno's Take On NASA


For comedian Jay Leno's take on NASA and the loss of the Mars
Missions, look for the RealVideo Link under the Mars Section on
the CSETI Home Page.

Light relief for the Holiday Season.



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 >
   Dec > Dec 23

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Joel Carpenter <ufx@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:32:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 10:22:24 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 00:16:05 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: michael mchugh <mcmchugh99@yahoo.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 21:13:06 -0800  <>
 >>>Fwd Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:51:38 -0500
 >>>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >><snip>

 >>>PS: From time to time, I've read debates about whether Col.
 >>>Blanchard, the base commander at Roswell, approved the 1947
 >>>press release about the "flying disc."  Anyone who has ever been
 >>>in the military knows that he must have.  This was no routine
 >>>announcement about an upcoming ice cream social, but information
 >>>that was bound to send the press into a feeding frenzy.

 >>>Blanchard ordered Marcel to investigate the crash, and report
 >>>back. Then he issued the press release, and informed his
 >>>superiors about it.  This is how chain of command operates in
 >>>the military: it never changes.

 >>Mike, Listers:

 >>I have often wondered about this. Blanchard went on leave. Has
 >>anyone ever determined who was acting Commander when he was
 >>gone?

 >>Of course there are more than one possibility: Blanchard
 >>approved; someone else approved; Marcel did it. We know what
 >>the "book" answer is, but does anyone really know who approved
 >>what?

 >It was Lt. Colonel Payne Jennings, now deceased.

 >Stan Friedman

Anybody know how Payne Jennings died?

Joel Carpenter










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 23

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Jsmortell@aol.com
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 15:01:40 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:48:45 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Friends & List Fiends --

Dear Doctor Fplock:

You forgot, "Dear Fiends."

 >I've been dipping in and out of the probabilities-of-ET
 >life-and-the implications-for-the-ETH debate with some interest
 >and occasional amusement.  All in all I think it has been quite
 >constructive, inspiring some serious, often actually thoughtful
 >consideration of new discoveries and the theories and
 >proto-theories and pseudo- theories built upon them.  Permit me
 >to suggest another line of discussion, approaching the issue as
 >a matter of ufological induction, if you will.

Hell I don't mind. Aks somebody else!  Howsumever, to engage in
the construction of another theory is a bit much.  But ... well
... since it's you, Docca Flock, I don't mind.  Proceed.

Uh, before you proceed, I must confess to doing some significant
dipping of my own.  FYI.

Uh, before you proceed again, are you aware of the fact that
Merriam Dweebster permits the use of "procede" as well as
"proceed?" Just thought I'd let you know.  OK. Go right ahead.

 >Let us assume that certain UFO cases actually involved
 >observations of technology created by nonhuman intelligences and
 >sometimes the intelligences themselves.  I have in mind,
 >e.g., the McMinnville photos, the Nash-Fortenberry formation
 >sighting, and the Betty and Barney Hill incident.  Pick your
 >own best case(s) (I think I'd have to say McMinnville), with
 >the criteria being (1) solidity of evidence, and (2) most
 >indicative of "nuts and bolts" outside human capabilities at
 >the time of the event.

Cheeses, Docca Plop, you forgot the famous "Premature
Subduction of J. Jaime (Hi-Mee) Gesundt."  Why is it that all
you so called researchers forget me?  I am beginning to think
you guys don't like me?

Nah!

Everybody likes a happy inebriant, especially one what makes the
cheap slop I do.  Hell, even Kanappy uses it on special
occasions.

His beautiful and patient wifey told me just the other day that
on each and every Eskimo Religious Holiday, Kanappy uses
Christmas Carol Gripple.  For medicinal porpoises only.

 >Stipulate for purposes of argument that, that case entails an
 >observation of someone else's nuts and bolts (even most ETH
 >doubters can name a case like that).  Then ponder the
 >implications in light of the sort of information Dennis Stacy
 >has been presenting and arguing from.

Well, for porpoises if argument, Dennis's entrails have nuttin
ta do with this subject, OK?  Maybe (and I emphasize the word
_maybe_) the contents therein have some bearing.  But not the
entrail itself.

But now you aks us to ponder the information which Dennis has
been presenting and arguing from.  May I be impertinent enough
to point to the fact that yous just ended a proposition in a
sentence? Procede, please.   And don't hold back.  That's the
trubbul wit you, you always hold back Doccator Pluck.

 >Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
 >alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
 >origin--taking care to apply the principle of parsimony with
 >very great care? Be very, very conservative...

Ooooo...... Ooooooo (thrusts hand yet again into the air,
wishing to be called upon by the teach).... Ooooo, pick me, I
know, I know!

"Yes, little Jaime (that's Hi-Mee), and what is your answer?"

"Yo, Teach, I expect this to go right over your pointed head,
but have you ever considered the possibility of another
dimension? How about another time?  Or maybe, uh, life from say,
Mars or Venus which for whatever unknown reason(s) evolved to a
level which precludes the extant conditions on those planets.
Maybe they are Martians who, after their planet began going
downhill, began going down under ground.  I am trying to keep
this clean.

Maybe we are just the proverbial piece of undigested beef,
barfed up by a passing flying saucer from Mongo, Santa Maria, a
planet well known to abductees such as moi.

 >A sidebar:  A few days ago, I had occasion to peruse my
 >collection of classic science fiction, coming upon the premiere
 >of Galaxy Science Fiction magazine, October 1950.  I
 >rediscovered a circulation building contest--What's Your Theory
 >About the Flying Saucers? in 200 words or less--introduced with
 >a short essay by Willy (misspelled "Willie" on the cover) Ley.
 >Ley consider different notions about the saucers, then zeroed in
 >on the ETH.  He quickly eliminated Mars and Venus as the
 >possible home planets, and went on, "Therefore--the disks would
 >probably have to be interstellar faster-than-light ships, in
 >which case I would expect them to be about half a mile long,
 >and, to date, none has been reported that size."  Ley didn't
 >explain the thinking behind his curious half-miler notion.

Sorry Docator Flug, that was not the famous Willy Ley, it was
really Willie Lay.  The word which was misspeeled was "Lay."
This contribution to Science Fiction was the first and the last
by Willie Lay, mostly because everyone thought that he was a
science fiction writer when in reality, he was nothing more than
a scientist.  What nerve, eh?

 >While this doesn't have much to do with the issues at hand,
 >it is interesting that as early as late 1950, thoughtful
 >folks had all but eliminated planets of our solar system from
 >the running.

Dr. Flughoff, first of all, do not apologize for your commentary
on issues which have nothing to do with the issues at hand.  It
happens all the time, largely due to the generosity of one Dr.
Errol Brucella Kanappy, who just can't say "no" to anyone.
Which is why he got in trubbul with that Eskimo bimbo what
almost destroyed his long standing relationship with his
beautifull main squeeze.  He'll never do that again.  As I
recall, having sobered Kanappy up on more than one occasion, he
said (each time) "I will never, ever, do that again as long - as
- I - live! So help me Pfplop!"

However, the rest of your sentence, you know, the part about
_thoughtful_ people already having ruled out the solar system as
a source for flying debris often referred to as "UFOs," I
agree. Also, back in 1950 they had come to other conclusions
which, when taken individually, prove nothing.  But when you put
them all together, make even less sense.

Good thinking, Doccatore Cluge.

 >-- Cheers & Happy Humbug to all, KARL
 >

Cheers and Happy Bumhug to all,

J. Jaime (that's Hi-Mee) 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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 02:12:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


Hello list,

(and a happy Christmas and all the best for 2000 to all of you -
may next year be better than last year!)

I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
released.

My question is (or my questions are):

a) is Corso simply a nutcase?

b) did he merely tried to raise some quick money for his family
before passing away?

c) is it probably all true, what's in the book?

d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
country, trying to sell 'The day after...'?

e) what is going on?

f) or have I missed something and it is all my fault - not
reading the UpDates properly?

And regarding those 'Liquid Metal' Golfclubs:

There is a Golf 'exhibition/special event/whatever here at
Harrods in London. A friend of mine who plays Golf went there
and had a go at the (very, very, very... expensive) 'Liquid
Metal' Clubs - he couldn't believe it, they really seem to be
absolutely amazing. Indeed, he who does not believe in UFOs at
all, uttered the words: "That must be Alien Technolgy!!"

Happy New Year,

Ralf

--
Ralf's 3D-Site
Infos about the German
Sf series 'Raumpatrouille',
a Bryce-Gallery, models to
download and more!

http://www.kag15.dial.pipex.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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                   Corso?

From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 02:14:44 -0500
Subject: Corso?


Hello list,

(and a happy Christmas and all the best for 2000 to all of you -
may next year be better than last year!)

I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
released.

My question is (or my questions are):

a) is Corso simply a nutcase?

b) did he merely tried to raise some quick money for his family
before passing away?

c) is it probably all true, what's in the book?

d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
country, trying to sell 'The day after...'?

e) what is going on?

f) or have I missed something and it is all my fault - not
reading the UpDates properly?

And regarding those 'Liquid Metal' Golfclubs:

There is a Golf 'exhibition/special event/whatever here at
Harrods in London. A friend of mine who plays Golf went there
and had a go at the (very, very, very... expensive) 'Liquid
Metal' Clubs - he couldn't believe it, they really seem to be
absolutely amazing. Indeed, he who does not believe in UFOs at
all, uttered the words: "That must be Alien Technolgy!!"

Happy New Year,

Ralf

--
Ralf's 3D-Site
Infos about the German
Sf series 'Raumpatrouille',
a Bryce-Gallery, models to
download and more!

http://www.kag15.dial.pipex.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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:18 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 02:34:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:03:48 -0400
 >>>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 07:56:13 +0000 (GMT)
 >>>>>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>>>>>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>>>Source: Fate's January 2000 issue,

 >>>>>>http://www.fatemag.com/articles/roswell.htm

 >>>>>>Stig

 >>>>>>***

 >>>>>>Roswell UFO Bombshell

 >>>>>>by Jim Keith

 >>>>>List:


Stan,

I will say this, you don't give up. I have read your books,
books by other's on Roswell, seen most of the documentaries done
on it. But by the far the best and most OBJECTIVE account
appeared in the June MUFON issue of 1997. Yes, you know who I
speak of: Kent Jeffrey's "Roswell--Anatomy of a Myth."

Kent spent money and much time--as you have--on investigating
the Roswell story. He was also so much taken by the subject that
he help with the International Roswell Initiative which was a
large petition to hopefully open any classified files on the
Roswell Crash.

Here was a man who was passionately involved and interviewed
many of the same people you have and many that you didn't
interview. This latter group includes "15 B-29 pilots and 2 B-29
navigatgors, all of whom were stationed at Roswell Army Air
Field in July 1947" (page 7-8).

According to Kent, a commercial airline pilot, "Not one single
man had any direct knowledge of a crashed saucer or of any kind
of unusual materail." Not one!  "...Even more significantly, in
all their collective years with the 509th Bomb Group, not one of
these men had ever encountered any other individual who had such
knowledge."

You've also refused to adequately explain why "Irvin Newton, the
weather officer at Forth Worth Army Air Field who was called in
by General Ramey to identify the unususal debris (p. 11)" told
Kent that he "immediately recognized it as being from an ML-307
radar reflector." Nor to point out that the symbols that he saw
on some balsa sticks looked remarkably like what Major Marcel's
son says he remembered seeing on a so-called "I-beam" of the
debris he saw.

Nor do you care to address that Glenn Davis's nurse, "Naomi
Self," who allegedly saw the dead aliens, doesn't exist. As an
investigator of over 120 formal UFO cases, when I find something
like this, I throw out that witness's entire testimony.

Witnesses do lie and sometimes while even signing forms to that
effect or being videoed. Court rooms are full of liars under
oath! Whole families have been know to lie under oath!

I get all kinds of stories. The bigger the whopper the easier
they fall. I'll give you one example; one that happens in the
UFO community all the time. I had a man who alleged he had
recovered debris during a dramatic UFO or meteorite event that
occurred in Georgia in Feb. 1993.

He looked good: He was in the newspaper the next day saying
debris hit his pickup and trialer. The sheriff's dept. came out
on the same night to examine his vehicle. He made a claim to his
local insurance agent for the damage done.

The police wrote up the report but it was unconclusive on what
caused the damage. The insurance company, by the witness's own
admission, denied his claim for the same reasons. But he has the
debris--so he claims. "Light as a feather" he says. He drew a
great drawing of it for me; looked much like the description of
the alleged recovered fragment of a 1952 UFO near Washington,
D.C. He also told me that the military were there the next day
and had the area sealed off briefly as they searched for more
debris.

Where is the debris now? I'm supposed to believe it is in a
storage shed in South Carolina; where he placed it after briefly
moving from Georgia because of the ridicule he caught due to the
newspaper story (a weak version of the Roswell death threats?)
Now tens of thousands were witnessed to this event; no debate on
the object coming over.

FOI requests were sent to nearly every military/ABC agency you
can think of and they all said, bull, to the story of them
having a team down here. The Sheriff said no road was blocked
off but the deputy who did the investigation lives now in
Florida and can't be reached.

The witness is middle-aged, self-employed, married, and a
college graduate. On the surface a most respectable person. I
can tell you he did a great video and took me to the site--the
same place it was reported in the newpaper the next day--where
the debris fell. He signed a MUFON general case form to what he
said and it was just as spontaneous as can be.

An independent witness had electromagnetic interference with his
FM radio when the object passed over. Tens of thousands saw it.
But the bottom line is I've seen no debris. The bottom line is
there comes a point in every investigation where when something
don't wash you have to accept that it didn't happen as the
principal witness(s) say it happened. It could be that this
witness will eventually bring me the debris but I'm not holding
my breath!

I brought up the F-4 crash as it comes as close to what should
have happened following the alleged Roswell saucer crash. It
occurred, literally, in my back yard so I got a birds-eye view
of how the Air Force went about the plane's recovery.

I saw the USAF's progess day-by-day and how they did the search.
I got the official crash report under the FOIA and it matched
exactly what I saw from day to day regarding the nearly
month-long seach for debris. No, the report was not perfect. But
it's deficency is for reasons that had nothing to do with the
search.

If 300 people turned out for an Air Alabama National recon. F-4
jet you can bet at least that many would have been looking for
an alien craft. Yet, I have not heard of one soldier who has
come forth to say he was part of the search party. Actually
since you and others have been at this steadily now for over 20
years there should've been many, many who would've step forth
with their recovery stories.

You ignore much and yell loud about less.

Kent in his article says "no UFO crashed at Roswell--with or
without aliens. It did not happen. Period. For those willing to
look objectively and rationally at all the evidence, this
contention should become resoundingly clear, not just beyond a
reasonable doubt, but beyond all doubt (p. 3)."

Obviously, many in the UFO community still don't agree with Kent; I do.

Best wishes,
John









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:48:18 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 02:36:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:02:52 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:29:13 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
 >>>Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >>>you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >>>crash was _not_ an alien event?

 >>Who is this mysterious person? What civilian counterpart did the
 >>Intelligence officer of the 509th have?

 >Stan, John:

 >Does John mean Sheridan Cavitt?

 >Clear skies,

 >Bob Young

Yes. That's who I meant. My mistake.

Happy Holidays to All!

John









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                             Firmage a Floppie?

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:04:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 03:00:00 -0500
Subject: Firmage a Floppie?


FIRMAGE A FLOPPIE?
The January 2000 issue of PC Computing magazine features its
annual Floppie Awards which "celebrate the most bizarre, most
annoying, dumbest, sleaziest, and least necessary things that
happened in 1999." Listed among the 'Floppies' for 1999 is one
Joe Firmage.

Many will recall Firmage's explosion onto the UFO scene last
year. Firmage resigned as CEO of USWeb to pursue his belief that
extraterrestrials were present on Earth and that many computer
and other technological advances were back-engineered from alien
technology. Many dubbed Firmage "The Fox Mulder of Silicon
Valley" for his beliefs.

The piece on Firmage in PC Magazine reads:

"That was no alien, Joe! It was Lou Dobbs, after your CEO job.
Internet entrepreneur Joe Firmage in January quit his job as CEO
of Internet marketing company USWeb/CKS to spread his belief
that many of today's technologies, such as lasers, came from
extraterrestrial aliens - one of whom visited him at home."

Firmage has been at the end of many jabs from the majority of
the mainstream media who do not take the 28 year old computer
wizard very seriously. Firmage has been very active on the UFO
scene funding many projects and is also rumored to be meeting
with many top politicians concerning UFOs.

Royce J. Myers III
eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy
http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 21:56:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 03:03:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:02:52 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:29:13 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
 >>>Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >>>you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >>>crash was _not_ an alien event?

 >>Who is this mysterious person? What civilian counterpart did the
 >>Intelligence officer of the 509th have?

 >Stan, John:

 >Does John mean Sheridan Cavitt?

 >Clear skies,

 >Bob Young

How could it be Cavitt? He was military all the way and was in
the Counter Intelligence Corps. Marcel was the Intelligence
Officer for the 509th... Cavitt is also dead.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 23:58:07 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 03:17:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:13:10 +0000
 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >Well done Stanton. These TV researchers really ought to get
 >their act together.

 >Georgina Bruni

Yes, very well done.  I can't tolerate TV UFO programs--pro or
con--and I'm quite glad I missed this one.  Keep up the good
work.

Best wishes and happy holidays,

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:59:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:18:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


The following semi-rhetorical question was asked re: Cavitt:

"Was is Marcel a better witness than Cavitt? Is it because Cavitt
doesn't agree with you?"


Regarding Cavitt's credibility I offer the following:

Did Sheridan Cavitt Visit The Same Crash Site?

or

'Cavitt Emptor!'

by Bruce Maccabee


In September, 1994. the Air Force released a 23 page summary of
its six month investigation into the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico
UFO crash event (the "Roswell Incident").  The summary was
written by Col. Richard Weaver.  According to Col. Weaver what
crashed was not a single weather balloon and radar target, as
had been claimed by the Air Force (General Roger Ramey) in July,
1947, but rather a very complex arrangement of many such
balloons and radar targets which was flown from Alamogordo Army
Airfield on June 4, 1947 and not recovered.  The flight was part
of a formerly Top Secret project called Mogul.  Mogul was
intended to detect nuclear explosions by listening for them at
high altitudes.  Of particular importance is the fact that the
balloon and radar reflector structure which the Col. Weaver
claims was "the" Roswell crash debris was not constructed with
exotic materials.  According to Weaver the only difference
between it and a normal weather balloon with a radar reflector
would have been in the quantity of balloon debris, radar
reflector materials and connecting cords, coming from perhaps
over two dozen neoprene balloons and several radar reflectors.
(The instrument package may have appeared slightly different
from the instrument package on a normal weather balloon.)

It is not my intent here to discuss the Mogul hypothesis in any
depth....since I think it is quite shallow.  Instead, I wish to
examine the testimony of Sheridan W. Cavitt, who was at the time
the chief Counter-Intelligence Corps (CIC) officer at the
Roswell Army Air Base and who is "universally acknowledged to
have been involved" in the Roswell recovery.  Sheridan Cavitt
was interviewed by Col. Weaver during the Air Force
investigation.  As I read Cavitt's sworn statement (attachment
17 of the AF report) and the transcript of his interview
(attachment 18) I was astonished...very astonished.  There are
so many inconsistencies with the testimony of other witnesses
that I began to ask myself whether or not Cavitt actually
visited the site that we think of as "the" crash site.  Let me
show you what I mean.

According to Cavitt's sworn statement, he and Jesse Marcel, the
base intelligence officer and Louis Rickett, another CIC
officer, all went to the crash site at the same time.  He goes
on to say, "To the best of my knowledge the three of us travelled
to the aforementioned ranch land area by ourselves (that is, no
other persons, civilian or military, were with us)" (my
emphasis).  In the interview transcript he is quoted as saying
"To the best of my recollection, I never met the rancher,
Brazel."  This directly contradicts Jesse Marcel who said he
took "Cav" Cavitt along, but not Rickett, and they both went
with rancher "Mac" Brazel who was, after all, the only person
who knew where to find the debris.  (Note: based on
reconstruction from Marcel's story, he and Cavitt went with
Brazel to the ranch late on Sunday, July 6, 1947.  Marcel said
they stayed overnight at the ranch, visited the debris field on
July 7 and returned to Roswell at night on July 7.)  Therefore,
Cavitt's statement, exclusive of the Rickett portion, is, by
itself, hard to believe because neither Cavitt nor Marcel could
have found the site without Brazel's help.  Furthermore, Rickett
said that Cavitt informed him of the crash material after Cavitt
and Marcel had returned from their visit to the crash site.
This would have been when they returned to the Roswell base
early in the morning of Tuesday, July 8.  Then, according to
Rickett, he went with Cavitt and another man  when Cavitt went
there for a second time later the same morning.  Rickett could
not remember the name of the third man (it was presumably not
Marcel, since Marcel had been ordered to fly some of the
material to Carswell Air Force Base in Texas).  In contradiction
to this statement by Rickett, Cavitt told Col. Weaver that he
didn't go to the site a second time.  Cavitt also contradicted
Marcel's claim that they (Marcel and Cavitt) spent the night
with Brazel at the ranch (without any running water).  According
to Cavitt's interview statement, this was "Totally made up,
fabricated or whatever.  I didn't have any experiences like that
of spending the night out on the ranch."

Cavitt's sworn statement goes on to say, "When we got to this
location we subsequently located some debris which appeared to
me to resemble bamboo type square sticks one quarter to one half
inch square, that were very light, as well as some sort of
metallic reflecting material that was also very light.  I also
vaguely recall some sort of black box (like a weather
instrument).  The area of this debris was very small, about 20
feet square, and the material was spread on the ground, but
there was no gouge or crater or other obvious sign of impact."
This description of the crash site is contradicted by Marcel who
said the area was very large, comparable to a football field in
size.  Marcel said the arrangement of the debris made it look as
if an explosion had taken place in th air while the object was
moving rapidly and the explosion caused the material to seem to
spread or radiate outward from a small area at one end of the
debris field.

Cavitt's sworn statement continues with the most amazing
revelation of all,  "I recognized the this material as being
consistent  with a weather balloon. (my double emphasis).  It is
truly amazing that Cavitt would claim that he recognized it as
balloon debris because there is no indication that he told
Marcel of his opinion.  Why didn't Cavitt point this out to
Marcel?  Why did he let Marcel think it was something special,
something "ET?"  And, why didn't he tell Rickett it was debris
from a weather balloon?

Further on in the interview we find the statement, "We gathered
up some of this material, which would easily fit into one
vehicle.   There certainly wasn't a lot of this material or
enough to make up crates of it for multiple airplane flights."
Marcel was explicit in indicating that there was a lot of
material, some of which filled up the two vehicles which he and
Cavitt used to drive to the Brazel ranch on Sunday (Cavitt drove
a Jeep carry-all and Marcel a '42 Buick, according to Marcel).
According to Bill Brazel, "Mac" Brazel's son, a large number of
Army personnel appeared at the crash site to pick up to pick up
the material which was left behind by Cavitt and Marcel.

Cavitt continues as follows: "What Marcel did with this material
was unknown to me, although I know now from reading about this
incident in numerous books that it was taken to the Eighth Air
Force Headquarters in Fort Worth where it was subsequently
identified as a weather balloon, which I thought it was all
along."  Later in the statement he says, "I only went to this
area once and recovered debris once and to the best of my
knowledge there were no other efforts to go back here.  If there
were they did not involve me  There was no secretive effort or
heightened security regarding this incident or any unusual
expenditure of manpower at the base to deal with it."  This
claim that there was no particular effort expended to deal with
this material contradicts numerous witnesses who said that there
seemed to be a lot of activity surrounding the material.

Still further in the statement he says, "With regard to claims
that we tested this material by hitting it with hammers without
damaging it, I do not recall any of us doing so.  I also did not
test this material for radioactivity with a Geiger counter (or
anything else)."  Here he is in conflict with Marcel's statement
that some of the men picking up material did "test" it by
hammering on it in order to permanently dent it, by attempting
to crease it and by attempting to burn it.  Marcel said they
were not able to dent it, burn it or crease it.  Bill Brazel, who
collected small amounts of the material during a two year period
after the crash, said that he, too, was unable to crease or dent
it.  (He didn't try to burn it.)

Then Cavitt makes a very provocative statement:  "I do not
recall attempting to burn any of this debris but my wife tells
me she recalled that Jesse Marcel, his wife and son did have a
small piece that they held over the fire when we had a cookout."
If true, what happened to that piece?

Cavitt ended his sworn statement by reiterating his opinion that
it was a balloon as "I thought so at the time and think so now,"
and by emphasising that he had not been sworn to secrecy and was
not withholding any information.

So!  There you have it.  Marcel and Rickett and all the others
(Brazel, Brazel's neighbours, Sheriff Wilcox, Col. Blanchard,
etc.) were all wrong, victims of insufficient uneducation or
self-delusion.  They couldn't recognize a weather balloon, or a
collection of weather balloons.  Instead believed that the
material was exotic.  Then they went further and concluded it
was from a "flying saucer."  But they were all wrong.  Cavitt,
alone, realized what it was.

At least that is what he and Col. Weaver would have you believe.

Does this make any sense?  Is is possible to explain how
Cavitt's story could be so different without assuming that it is
a "tall tale" intended to perpetuate the cover-up?  Perhaps so,
if we make a hitherto unthought of assumption (lots of people
have theorised about what happened at Roswell in order to fill
in the blanks in the history of the events; now it's my turn).
Here I am making the (charitable?) assumption that Cavitt was
telling the truth as he knew it.  (I am aware of the
alternative...that he had been "advised" how to answer by people
presumably unknown to Col. Weaver and the AF investigations
team.  The reason that there is a glimmer of "hope' that perhaps
"Cav" and Marcel might both be correct is to be found in the
transcript of the interview as opposed to the signed statement.
Therein we learn that Cavitt and his wife had arrived at the
base only shortly before the Roswell event.  Weaver asked Cavitt
when he was transferred to Roswell and he couldn't remember,
guessing at first the fall of 1946, just after graduating from
the Fort Holabird (Maryland) Counter Intelligence Corps school.
Fortunately his wife was present for the interview and she
recalled that it was June, 1947, which, according to Col.
Weaver, agreed with the Cavitt's AF records.  Cavitt's response
to this was "OK.. I told you my dates are slipping my mind....
It's hard to remember July 1947.  I hadn't been there very
long."  (my emphasis)  Weaver asked Cavitt if he recalled the
incident in early July when "you were asked to accompany Major
Marcel to go recover the wreckage of anything?"  Cavitt
answered, "Well,, there again I couldn't swear to the dates,
but in that time, which must have been July, we heard that
someone had found some debris out not too far from Roswell and
it looked suspicious.  It was unidentified.  So, I went out and
I do not recall whether Marcel went with Rickett and me;  I had
Rickett with me.  We went out to this site.  There were no, as I
understand, check points or anything like that (going through
guards and that sort of garbage) we went out there and we found
it.  It was a small amount of, as I recall, bamboo sticks,
reflective sort of material that would, well at first glance,
you would probably think it was aluminum foil, something of that
type.  And we gathered up some of it.  I don't know whether we
even tried to get all of it.  It wasn't scattered; well, what I
call, you know, extensively.  Like, it didn't go along the
ground and splatter off some here and some there.  We gathered
up some of it and took it back to the base and I remember I had
turned it over to Marcel.  As I say, I do not remember whether
Marcel was there or not on the site.  He could have been.  We
took it back to the intelligence room... in the CIC office."
Then Weaver asked him what he thought it was and Cavitt
responded that he thought it was a weather balloon.  Later in
the interview Cavitt said he made just one trip out to the site
and he was sure it was with Rickett, but wasn't sure about
Marcel.  Weaver asked if he recalled reading about the "flying
disc" in the newspaper and Cavitt said he didn't.  He only took
the paper for some weather reports.  At this point his wife made
a statement which leads directly to my "solution" to
understanding Cavitt's story.  She said, "We were so new there.
In fact, I think I had just been there just maybe just (sic)  a
few days because I had been up to my sister's wedding and I
don't think at that time we might not even have been taking the
paper....  we heard nothing.  Of course, we didn't associate
with people on the base, either."  In the following months and
years the Cavitt's got to know the Marcels quite well and become
good friends.  One may imagine that they worked together quite
often in the months and years after "the Roswell crash."

These mutually contradictory stories could possibly be
reconciled if we assume that Jesse Marcel made one important
error of recollection: assume that Marcel was correct in
claiming that he was accompanied by a CIC agent, but incorrect
in recalling him as being "Cav" Cavitt.  Perhaps Cavitt had only
been on the base for a week or so based on his wife's testimony
so Marcel would not have known him very well at that time.  It
is a historical fact that when recalling the story in 1979, when
he was first extensively interviewed about this, Marcel couldn't
remember Cavitt's first name, only that he was called "Cav."
Perhaps Marcel was also confused about who actually accompanied
him to "the" crash site.  Suppose that he thought it was Cavitt,
whereas in (my hypothesis) it actually was someone else,
perhaps Cavitt's predecessor or some other CIC agent at the
base.

If this were true, then Cavitt was not involved with "the"
Roswell crash.  But, if he were not at "the" crash site, then
what about his recollections?  He clearly (assuming truthful!)
recalls finding balloon wreckage with Rickett and, possibly,
Marcel.

My suggested explanation of Cavitt's story is based on the
logical assumption that after the Roswell event was over, and
assuming it really was "unconventional," the base would have
been hypersensitised to the possibility of other crashes.
Perhaps that would also hold true for ranchers in the area.
Suppose, then, in the days or weeks following "the" incident,
some other crash reports were made and suppose that Cavitt and
Rickett and perhaps Marcel, actually went out on one of these
and did, indeed, find a balloon.  That could, possibly, explain
the inconsistency between Cavitt's story and Marcel's.  Years
later Marcel would remember "the" crash and assume that Cavitt
had accompanied him to the site and might forget about or ignore
the crashed weather balloon because that was unimportant,
whereas Cavitt would remember the weather balloon, but not "the"
crash because he wasn't at "the" crash site.  What about
Rickett's story?  Perhaps he didn't go to "the" crash site after
all, but only to a balloon site.

Or, perhaps, he, too, incorrectly recalled Cavitt as the CIC
officer who took him to "the" site.

Naturally I cannot say that this hypothesis is correct, only
that it might explain the conflicting testimony of three old men
trying to recall the day by day, even hour by hour, events of
thirty to forty years before.  However, if this hypothesis is
correct, then it leads to a mystery of its own: who was the CIC
agent with Marcel?  Could it have been Rickett, in which case
Rickett would have visited the site twice?  Or was it someone
else?

If this hypothesis is not correct and we can't find another
which allows for all the witnesses to be telling the truth as
they recall it, then it would appear that the blame for the
inconsistency must be placed on Sheridan Cavitt.  Is Cavitt'
story a total fabrication for reasons related to the perpetuation
of the cover-up?  There is, after all, one undisputable fact in
this whole story:  Col. Blanchard, the Roswell (Army) Air Force
commander, did order the release of the story which said a
crashed flying saucer had been found on a ranch near Roswell and
had been retrieved by Major Jesse Marcel.  Col. Blanchard was
not reprimanded for this information release (later on he was
promoted to General).  Furthermore, the stories told by numerous
other witnesses tend to support the officially released story of
the crash.  The story told by Sheridan Cavitt, assuming that it
applies to the same crash, is the only one that clearly
contradicts this fact.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 06:38:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:23:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


Hi,


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >Subject: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >released.

<snip>


The only research I'm aware of, is Corso's military record.
Follow the link in my signature.

        Merry Christmas...


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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:08:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:26:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:48:18 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:02:52 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:32:16 -0400
 >>>Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:29:13 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>>>Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:02:49 -0500 (EST)
 >>>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?
 >>>>Who is still alive? I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >>>>you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >>>>crash was _not_ an alien event?

 >>>Who is this mysterious person? What civilian counterpart did the
 >>>Intelligence officer of the 509th have?

 >>Stan, John:

 >>Does John mean Sheridan Cavitt?

 >>Clear skies,

 >>Bob Young

 >Yes. That's who I meant. My mistake.

 >Happy Holidays to All!

 >John

I guess we all make mistakes. There is a good description of
Bill Moore's initial meeting with Cavitt in his 49 page 1985
paper 'Crashed Saucers: Evidence in Search of Proof' ($8.
including postage from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958).
Kevin Randle and Don Schmitt also met with him and discussed him
in their books. Billy Cox a reporter with Florida Today spoke
with him on the phone as I did. His much more recent comment to
Colonel Weaver  summarized  as--"Just a balloon, I remember it
well"... was a total departure from everything he had previously
said including total evasion of involvement.

Jesse Marcel was consistent from 1978 on... One other major
difference was that Marcel's picture appeared in many newspapers
in July 1947.. Sheridan W. Cavitt's name appeared nowhere, until
Bill received some background info listing Cavitt's alma Mater.
Loren Gross an outstanding researcher-historian in California
had found the full name in some unrelated documents I located
him and Bill went to see him, unfortunately having earlier
mentioned at MUFON 1981 in Toronto that he had located him.
Cavitt was ready with his denials.  Call him a patriot. He
wouldn't even make a death bed confession.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:26:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:31:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:18 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >Stan,

 >I will say this, you don't give up. I have read your books,
 >books by other's on Roswell, seen most of the documentaries done
 >on it. But by the far the best and most OBJECTIVE account
 >appeared in the June MUFON issue of 1997. Yes, you know who I
 >speak of: Kent Jeffrey's "Roswell--Anatomy of a Myth."

 >Kent spent money and much time--as you have--on investigating
 >the Roswell story. He was also so much taken by the subject that
 >he help with the International Roswell Initiative which was a
 >large petition to hopefully open any classified files on the
 >Roswell Crash.

 >Here was a man who was passionately involved and interviewed
 >many of the same people you have and many that you didn't
 >interview. This latter group includes "15 B-29 pilots and 2 B-29
 >navigatgors, all of whom were stationed at Roswell Army Air
 >Field in July 1947" (page 7-8).

 >According to Kent, a commercial airline pilot, "Not one single
 >man had any direct knowledge of a crashed saucer or of any kind
 >of unusual materail." Not one!  "...Even more significantly, in
 >all their collective years with the 509th Bomb Group, not one of
 >these men had ever encountered any other individual who had such
 >knowledge."

Sorry, John, wrong again. Kent Jeffrey was a passionate
collector of stories and expressor of strong opinions not backed
by evidence.

You really ought to read my five page treatment of his MUFON
article. Give me a snail mail address. or send an SASE to UFORI,
POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958. I have been to reunions of the
509th as well.

Kent never had a security clearance and obviously had no
understanding of how security works. You really need to do your
homework. The very great majority of Roswell witnesses had to be
found the hard way. They didn't come forward.

 >You've also refused to adequately explain why "Irvin Newton, the
 >weather officer at Forth Worth Army Air Field who was called in
 >by General Ramey to identify the unususal debris (p. 11)" told
 >Kent that he "immediately recognized it as being from an ML-307
 >radar reflector." Nor to point out that the symbols that he saw
 >on some balsa sticks looked remarkably like what Major Marcel's
 >son says he remembered seeing on a so-called "I-beam" of the
 >debris he saw.

I had also located Irving Newton many years ago. He has totally
changed his story. I am not a psychiatrist. I suspect a pension
might have something to do with it.


 >Nor do you care to address that Glenn Davis's nurse, "Naomi
 >Self," who allegedly saw the dead aliens, doesn't exist. As an
 >investigator of over 120 formal UFO cases, when I find something
 >like this, I throw out that witness's entire testimony.


What if that wasn't her name? After all my first conversation
with Glenn was in 1989 in Lincoln, NM. Investigation of Roswell
began in the l970s. It doesn't depend on him.


<large snip since what followed is totally irrelevanat>

I certainly am not saying believe everything people tell an
investigator. At best everything starts in my gray basket. and
then gets checked.

I am the guy who is given a hard time for exposing Robert S.
Lazar, Michael Wolf Kruvant, Guy Kirkwood, Frank Stranges etc
etc.as frauds.

Stanton T. 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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:41:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:44:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >Subject: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Hello list,

 >I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >released.

Dear Ralph:

I'm no Corso expert, but I watch this and other UFO lists
closely.

I believe that my personal opinions of Corso and company are
pretty much in agreement with most of the saner readers of these
lists, namely that you can take the contents of his book with a
heavy grain of salt.

Please see notes below your questions..

 >My question is (or my questions are):

 >a) is Corso simply a nutcase?

Opinions differ. I see him as an aging man in poor health who
may have stretched the truth a bit, to put it mildly. We can
argue how much or how little his ghostwriter ( The Day after
Roswell ) spiced up matters with his own input. One might even
argue that the ghost was Corso himself, living one or two years
beyond his time.

I find him a likeable old chap, but hardly believable.

 >b) did he merely tried to raise some quick money for his family
 >before passing away?

That exact thought occurred to me. Unless one of his
personal intimates comes forward with some pretty
personal stuff, we will probably never find out.

Regardless, it is a not-too-unreasonable hypothesis.

 >c) is it probably all true, what's in the book?

Personally, I haven't even read the book. I know that seems
terrible, but I'm not about to blow $20 or whatever on something
that strongly smells of bunk to me.

I cannot give an honest reply without doing some serious
name-dropping. Given ten books on a shelf, and ten or twenty
dollars in my pocket, Corso could not sell a copy to me...  Here
comes the name-dropping:

Richard Haines waved a copy of that same book in front of Peter
Sturrock, Dominique Weinstein, Jacques Vallee, Loren Gross, Ed
Stewart, Jim McCampbell, myself and others.

Dr Haines asked what we thought of Corso and his story.

As one of the few non "Phuds" there, I indicated it was crap (in
more polite terms of course.)

Only Fred Beckman disagreed. I hope I didn't offend Fred too
much.

 >d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
 >country, trying to sell 'The day after...'?

Probably, haven't a clue. If I were he, I'd be looking for a new
Colonel Corso. I don't even know his name.

Shazam! You have suggested a wonderful line of inquiry! Namely:
What OTHER books has this same Ghost Write ghost-written? I
suspect that may give us a clue...  unless of course...  he uses
psuedonyms...  or theramins...  or [ whatever ].

 >e) what is going on?

Lots of things, but none have much to do with Colonel Corso and
the "Day after Roswell", assuming I have the book title right.

 >f) or have I missed something and it is all my fault - not
 >reading the UpDates properly?

Its not your fault as I see it. Corso's fifteen minutes of fame
blew by three years ago more or less. If Art Bell were to call
me tomorrow and promise to promote my *U* Database, I like
anyone would be tempted.

His toadie Hilly Rose said it best. " You are being too
Scientific!" It was Art Bell who co-promoted the Corso book and
story. Need I say more?

Perhaps Corso fell off the UFO Updates radar screen when readers
felt he lost credibility. I can only speak for myself of course,
but I have no more interest in Col. Corso than I might in
Adamski, Elisabeth Montgomery ( whose moth eaten tomes still
choke the UFO shelves of local libraries nationwide ), the
Great Krispin, or Rice Crispie who invited the Easter Bunny over
for Xmas dinner only to shave off his fur and give the dead body
a starring role in Santilly's Alien Autopsy film of highly 1947
vintage ( plus or minus 49 years ). [burp!]

None of this has to do with our penultimate aim; namely to find
out if there is any truth to the UFO enigma...  and what if
anything it might be.

 >And regarding those 'Liquid Metal' Golfclubs:

Sounds a lot like Mercury to me!

 >There is a Golf 'exhibition/special event/whatever here at
 >Harrods in London. A friend of mine who plays Golf went there
 >and had a go at the (very, very, very... expensive) 'Liquid
 >Metal' Clubs - he couldn't believe it, they really seem to be
 >absolutely amazing.

I can imagine a small chamber inside a metallic club.

Properly shaped etc., the mercury could transfer momentum in
some surprising way. I would wait until the Japanese saw one in
half and not only imitate it, but improve upon it! <BG>

 >Indeed, he who does not believe in UFOs at
 >all, uttered the words: "That must be Alien Technolgy!!"

 >Happy New Year,

 >Ralf

Best Linguica!

- Larry Hatch (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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:08:02 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:28:40 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35


(by way of John Hayes <ufoinfo@ukgateway.net>)

      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 35
December 23, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

UFOs SIGHTED IN MANY
CITIES IN CHINA

      China is in the grip of a major UFO flap.
There were hundreds of sightings in the last
week, and the flap has been reported in the
major Communist Party newspapers.
      "China is undergoing a sudden surge in
unidentified flying object (UFO) sightings,
always with the same descriptions."
      ""The Beijing Youth Daily published
the sightings Monday (December 13, 1999)
with a photo of two amber oblong objects
taken the night before by China's central
broadcaster."
      "The newspaper said the photo, which
resembles a pair of missiles, was taken"
in Changping, a city 70 kilometers (42 miles)
north of Beijing.
      "In another article, illustrated with another
photo taken above the capital (Beijing--J.T.),
the newspaper carried eyewitness accounts of
the UFO sightings of November 14 and
December 11, 1999."
      "Shanghai's press weighed in last week,
reporting--with a photo--on two local UFO
sightings on the same date at the beginning
of the month (December--J.T.) at roughly the
same place and time."
      "'It was oblong, yellow, with a shiny pointed
top and a white tail,' one of the witnesses
identified only as Mrs. Yang told the (newspaper)
Liberation Daily."
      "An aviation expert who saw video footage of
one of the sightings was quoted as saying the
object was neither an airplane nor a meteorological
phenomenon but an 'artificial flying object.'"
      "The Beijing Youth Daily theorized that the
sightings could have been illusions created by
fumes from the engines of jets lifting off at dusk."
(See Agence France Presse for December 10,
1999, "China reports sudden surge in UFO
sightings."  Many thanks to Jan H. Raabe for
the AFP report.)

RED BOWL-SHAPED UFO
SEEN IN DENMARK

      On Sunday night, December 19, 1999,
hundreds of eyewitnesses in southern Sweden
and Denmark saw a "luminous UFO" cross
the night sky.
      According to Helge Nyborg Jensen, the
UFO was described as "a large luminous bowl
flying across Denmark.  The bowl was red and
had a tail like a parabola.  It flew in a straight
line from northwest to southeast and was also
seen in southern Sweden."
      Witnesses estimated that the UFO took
"one to three minutes to cross the sky," which
works out "to a relatively slow speed..  The TV
news said there was nothing to be worried about
and no one had been injured."
      The Tycho Brahe Institute of Copenhagen
(Denmark's capital--J.T.) "was very interested and
is seeking eyewitnesses" to the object's passage.
(Many thanks to Helge Nyborg Jensen and Steve
Wilson Sr. for this report.)

INVESTIGATORS PROBE
GUYRA UFO CRASH SITE

      Guyra, a small town in northern New South
Wales, Australia, continues to be the focus of
interest following the crash of a mystery object
into its reservoir dam last week.
      On Friday, December 10, 1999, authorities
in Australia stated that the damage to the dam,
which resulted in a 12-meter cavern, had been
"caused by a small meteorite about the size of
a golf ball.  Police said the meteorite was
embedded about 14 feet into soft rock and could
not be quickly removed."
      On Wednesday, December 8, 1999, retired
Col. John Auchettl and Dr. Ron Barnett of
Phenomenon Research Australia (PRA) flew
to Guyra from Melbourne to begin an on-site
investigation.
      According to Col. Auchettl and Dr. Barnett,
"We went over the impact site in more detail.
We arrived at the site very early on the 8th and
checked out the location with a number of research
tools.  The radiation level at the site was at normal
background levels.  That night, an IR (infrared)
camera was used to look for hot spots--none
were found.  Samples have been taken and will
be looked at."
      Col. Auchettl and Dr. Barnett found a number
of interesting anomalies at the purported UFO
crash site.  These include:
      (1) The object's angle of entry (approach) to
the dam was very shallow, less than 45 degrees.
      (2) No one in Guyra heard a sonic boom or
an explosion prior to the crash.
      (3) The reeds have burn marks, "which is most
unusual in a meteorite impact."
      (4) The reeds were flattened "in a strange shape,
not quite like an explosion but with the characteristics
of a compression wave."
      (5) The mud splash indicates that the object
"may have skipped on the water" before hitting the dam.
      A fossicker (prospector in the USA--J.T.) claimed
to have seen "a comet-like object" heading towards
Guyra the night of the crash.
      Doug Strang "was having a beer and watching the
sky near Mount Isa" in northwestern Queensland when
"something passed overhead."
      Strang reported that he saw "an object with white
taillings.  It was already burning up, and it was going
at a nice steady pace.  I mean, was it a shooting star?
It looked like a comet.  It was obviously burning up."
      "And as it moved toward the horizon, it split into
three or four sections.  What I did see was four smaller
white dots in alignment, and then nothing.  That was it.
I didn't seen anything fall."  (Many thanks to Diane
Harrison of Australian UFO Research and Kenneth
Young of Cincinnati UFO Research for this report.)
(Editor's Comment: Evidence of a compression wave
followed by a mud splash suggests a large object
as opposed to "a meteorite the size of a golf ball."
It could have struck the dam and then rebounded
into deeper water.  The UFO may still be at the
bottom of the reservoir.)

EGYPT CANCELS PYRAMID
CAPPING CEREMONY

      "In an apparent nod to public opinion, the
(Egyptian) government on Thursday (December 16,
1999) canceled its plan to cap the Great Pyramid
in gold for the Millenium celebration."
      "Organizers of the (12-hour) all-night concert
by French musician Jean-Michel Jarre had wanted
a helicopter to lower a golden cap on the Great
Pyramid at midnight."
      "Egypt had planned to ring in the New Year by
affixing a gold-encased capstone on the Great
Pyramid, built as a tomb for King Cheops
(Pharoah Khufu--Cheops was his Greek name--J.T.)
about 4,500 years ago."
      "The 30-foot cap was to be lowered by helicopter
at the stroke of midnight, December 31, 1999, making
the broken pyramid whole again, if only for a night."
      "Culture Minister Farouk Hosni gave no reason for
backing off the plan, but said the decisioon was made
despite technical assurance that it would not have done
damage to the monument, Egypt's Middle East News
Agency reported."
      The 12-hour concert is still planned, however, and
it wil feature 1,000 performers in a dance opera.
      Opposition to the capping scheme came primarily
from Muslim and Christian groups.
      Muslim imams were upset because of Internet
rumors that Egyptair Flight 990 was shot down as
part of a black magical spell to mark the Millenium,
of which the pyramid capping ceremony was
supposedly a part.
      Fundamentalist Christian leaders in the USA,
notably Rev. Texe Marrs of Living Truth Ministries
in Austin, Texas, alleged that the Illuminati were
planning to hold a Black Mass in the King's
Chamber at midnight.
      The hot rumor in Egypt is that the decision
not to cap the pyramid stemmed from the
dicovery of a mysterious mummy at Maydum
Pyramid three months ago.
      "A small secret room has been discovered
behind the burial chamber of King Sneferu of
the Fourth Dynasty (2,600 B.C.) at Maydum
Pyramid in Egypt, but the contents have not
been revealed."  (See the Tampa, Fla. Tribune
for December 16, 1999, "Egypt cancels plan to
cap a pyramid."  Also USA Today for December
20, 1999, "Millenium Watch."  Also Fortean
Times #130 for January 2000, "Sidelines,"
page 13.)

TUBE-SHAPED UFOs SEEN
IN EASTERN MARYLAND

      "At least two people have reported seeing
glowing objects over the (Maryland) Eastern
Shore."
      "Kathy Dink of Federalsburg (population
2,365) was delivering Christmas trees and
watched yesterday (Tuesday, December 7, 1999)
when she saw 'a light blue flame that looked like
a missile or a rocket.'"
      "Dink says at the time she spotted a missile
or tube-shaped object about 20 to 30 feet
(6 to 9 meters) in length traveling in a different
direction.  She said the two objects seemed to
collide."
      "Jim Henderson of Princess Anne (population
1,666) says he was hunting when he saw something
similar. He says he saw what looked like a yellow
or orange comet tail."
      "Henderson called the NASA Wallops (Island)
Flight Facility on the Eastern Shore because he was
afraid a plane might have crashed."
      "Spokesmen at Wallops and at Patuxent River
Naval Air Station in southern Maryland say they can't
explain the sighting or confirm the existence of any
aircraft in the area at that time."
      The sightings took place north and south of
Salisbury, Md., located 110 miles (176 kilometers)
southeast of Baltimore..  Federalsburg, Md. is
on Route 307 approximately 33 miles north of
Salisbury, while Princess Anne, Md. is on Route 388
approximately 14 miles south of Salisbury.  (Report
of radio station WBAL in Baltimore, Md. for
December 8, 1999.  Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr.
for this report.)

HUGE TRIANGULAR UFO SEEN
IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE, UK

      On Tuesday, December 7, 1999, "at 6:30 p.m.,
I saw an incredibly large craft near my house while
taking my dog for a walk. I first sighted a large
white light that had many different colours moving
about inside of it...The thing was as big as an open
daily newspaper (held) at arm's length.  We're talking
at least two feet across the sky.  The lights at the
back were like a triangle but moving backwards
through the sky.  There was a large white light at
the front," David C. reported.
      Describing the object's shape "as a ruler...
you know, sort of like those things they have at
school (an L-shaped compass?--J.T.), he added,
"I ran back home to get my brother out of bed.
We then ran to a motorway bridge that is near
my house.  The craft by now was just going over
a hill about four or five miles away from our house.
It was still three inches wide at that distance."
      To Dave's surprise, at the bridge he encountered
another pedestrian who had seen the large UFO a
few minutes earlier.  This man had also gone to the
motorway bridge for a better look.  "He couldn't
believe how big it was, and he couldn't hear any
noise," Dave reported, "Has anyone seen anything
similar?  I would be interested to know."  (Email
Form Report)

DISCOVERY SNARES HUBBLE
ON FIRST TRY IN ORBIT

      "After an unprecedented nine delays, space
shuttle Discovery blasted into orbit Sunday
(December 19, 1999)."
      "It was NASA's last chance this year to send
the shuttle and seven astronauts to" the rescue of
the Hubble Space Telescope, which has been in
"safe mode" in orbit during the past six weeks.
      "The shuttle flight was originally scheduled
for October when the telescope was just one
mechanical difficulty away from shutting down
many of its systems and suspending its science
mission."
      NASA delayed the shuttle's launch so that
safety inspectors could check the rocket boosters
to see if Discovery suffered "from the same welding
problems found on an external fuel tank under
construction for a future mission."
      Bad weather delayed the shuttle's launch on
Friday, December 17 and again on Saturday,
December 18, 1999.
      "Everything finally came together, and
Discovery soared at 7:50 p.m" Eastern time
Sunday evening, with the launch "lighting up the
sky for miles around."
      Discovery caught up with the comatose
Hubble Space Telescope on Tuesday, December
21, 1999, "deftly snatching the observatory from
its orbital perch more than 300 miles above
Earth."
      Astronauts Steve Smith and John Grunsfeld
were scheduled for a six-hour repair mission,
the most critical of the 10-day flight.
      "The spacewalkers' first and most important
job is to replace all of the mission's six
stabilizing gyroscopes.  Hubble needs at least
three working gyroscopes to point at celestial
objects for observations."
      Hubble has been in "safe mode" since its
fourth gyroscope failed on November 4, 1999.
      "The gyroscopes, each about the size of a
soda can, are housed in pairs inside of three
toaster-sized metal cases with handles.
Smith and Grunsfeld must open doors protecting
Hubble's fragile electronics and gently remove
the cases.  In some spots, there are only four
or five inches between the spacewalkers and the
delicate components that could be damaged by
the accidental brush of the hand."
      "French astronaut Jean Francois Clervoy
will use Discovery's 50-foot robot arm to
gingerly move the spacewalkers around the
four-story telescope."
      "On Tuesday Clervoy used the arm to grab
Hubble from orbit and and latch the telescope to
a rotating platform in Discovery's cargo bay."
(See the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune for
December 22, 1999, "Discovery crew catches up
with Hubble," pages 1A and 7A; USA Today for
December 20, 1999, "Shuttle blasts off to Hubble's
rescue," page 3A, and December 17, 1999,
"Hubble mission delayed one day," page 4A.)

Y2K: EX-COLONEL CLAIMS
NATO TROOPS WILL BE
USED IN ANTI-RIOT ROLE

      On Sunday, December 19, 1999, Former
U.S. Army colonel and chaplain Jim Ammerman
appeared on The Prophecy Club radio program
in Topeka, Kansas and talked about possible
responses to civil unrest during the Y2K rollover
to the new year.
      Rev. Ammerman, producer of the videotape
Military Takeover of America, told listeners he
had received a report from a man in San Antonio,
Texas who had seen yellow rectangular City
Closed - Martial Law signs in a military vehicle.
      "Those signs were printed up a year ago,"
he said. and added Y2K responses have been
hotly debated in Washington, D.C.
      Rev. Ammerman said some of President
William Jefferson Clinton's national security
advisers were "against using the phrase
martial law, so they came up with a blander-
sounding presidential emergency instead."
      Rev. Ammerman claimed that the military
buildup is being done in accordance with "a
piecemeal executive order."
      Rev. Ammerman told listeners that, if Y2K
rioting breaks out, "all fifty (states of the USA)
National Guards will be federalized," and then
UN troops will be brought in to back them up.
      Rev. Ammerman claimed that President
Clinton had spoken with UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan "about using troops from Australia,
Greece and Germany" to patrol cities in the USA.

Y2K: THREE ARRESTED IN
FBI "MILLENIUM SWEEP"

      Three men were arrested recently by the
FBI in an apparent bid to forestall any Y2K-
related terrorist activity in the USA.
      "A militia leader is in jail for plotting to
blow up a Florida nuclear plant and black out
Atlanta (Georgia) by destroying electrical
facilities, federal authorities said today
(Thursday, December 9, 1999)."
      "Donald Beauregard, 31, of St. Petersburg
(Florida) plotted to carry out the attacks by
stealing explosives and weapons from National
Guard armories in central Florida, acording to the
U.S. Attorney's office here.  Beauregard was
arrested Wednesday (December 8) after he was
indicted by a federal grand jury on conspiracy
and weapons charges."
      "James Diver, a 38-year-old from Atlanta, is
believed to be a high-ranking member of the
Southeastern States Alliance (a coalition of
rightwing militia groups--J.T.)  On Friday
(December 10, 1999) he was ordered to be
held without bail on federal charges of possession
of a firearm by a convicted felon.  Diver's (defense)
attorney, federal public defender Jimmy Hardy
said his client should get (bail) bond because
federal prosecutors appeared to be targeting
militia members."
      The arrest that caused the biggest stir, however,
took place in Port Angeles, Washington state
(population 17,710) on Friday, December 17, 1999.
      Abdul Ressam, 32, a citizen of Algeria, was
"driving his car," a Chrysler 300, off the ferry and
"was arrsted after U.S. Customs Service inspectors
became suspicious."
      "In Ressam's car, Customs agents found 10
plastic bags containing 118 pounds of a fine white
powder, identified as a form of urea to manufacture
explosives and fertilizer; 14 pounds of a crystalline
powder identified by the government as a form of
sulfate intended to keep things dry; two 22-ounce
jars, each three-quarters full with a yellowish liquid
identified as nitroglycerine and four small black
boxes believed to be detonators, which each
contained a circuit board connected to a Casio
watch and a 9-volt battery."
      "At the border checkpoint he told inspectors
that he was headed to Seattle but appeared
nervous when asked why he had not crossed at
Vancouver, rather than taking the 'out of the way'
route through Port Angeles, officials said."
      After a search of the car's trunk uncovered the
bags of white powder, "Ressam then ran a few
blocks from the scene before inspectors caught
him."
      "They grabbed him after he tried to jump in a
car that had slowed down at an intersection, officials
said.  The driver of that car was able to lock the
door and speed away."
      "FBI investigators say they believe that Ressam
is part of the Armed Islamic Group (GIA)."  Since
Saturday, December 18, they have been searching for
a possible accomplice.
      The Ressam case has resulted in two warnings
of Y2K terrorism being issued by the USA's federal
government.
      "'We have ongoing efforts that look at both
international terrorism (and) protecting against
domestic terrorism.  That work is something that
the president has closely involved himsel in and
and has done a lot of work on,' (White House
spokeman Joseph) Lockhart said."
      Both "the Alabama-based Southern Poverty
Law Center" and the Los Angeles Times have
hinted that rightwing Christians may be planning
millenial mayhem.
      According to the APBNews, "Mark Potok of
the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center
told APBNews.com, 'Many believe we are in the
run-up to the battle of Armageddon.  There are
others who believe the Y2K computer bug is going
to bring about the crash of Western civilization...
and they see this as an opening to make the
revolution they've all been pining for for years...
The FBI may be essentially rolling up people they
fear are about to unleash violence around Dec. 31,'
Potok said."
(Editor's Comment:  Interesting how no distinction
is made between your church-going born-agains
and pistol-packing militia members.  Interesting,
but typical of Zionism.  Unfortunately, the Los
Angeles Times is even worse.)
      "With just 20 days left in the fading Millenium
and with many groups believing that a hellish end
of the Earth is nigh, there seems to be a growing
paranoia among many extremists that think that it
will be government agents disguised as terrorists
who will strike first.  They fear that the government
will declare martial law and impose a 'new world
order' on America."
      "Officials estimate that there are nearly 1,000
cults in the country, large and small.  There are also
more than 500 hate groups in the United States,
many of them gun-loving."
      "A recent Newsweek magazine poll found that
2 in 10 Americans think that the world will end in
their lifetime, and that 6 percent of Americans,
or about 15 million people, expect the Apocalypse
in 2000."  (See the Tampa, Fla. Tribune for
December 10, 1999, "Militia rhetoric watched closely,"
the St. Petersburg, Fla. Times for December 9, 1999,
"Indictment details plot to blow up power lines,"
USA Today for December 20, 1999, "Terror suspect's
arrest sparks high alert," and for December 21, 1999,
"State Department may have terrorism update," and
the Los Angeles Times for December 11, 1999,
"Keeping an eye on would-be Y2K terrorists.")

from the UFO Files...

1999: MILLENIAL DREAMS

      The run-up to New Year's Eve and the recent
headlines about millenial jitters must be getting
to me.  Because I had a really strange series of
dreams on Thursday, December 16, 1999.
      I dreamed that I was a nine-year-old boy of the
Anishinabe people, and it was late spring or early
summer, and I was visiting Cahokia for the first time
with my family.
      But it wasn't the Cahokia, Illinois we know today.
It was Cahokia one thousand or perhaps two thousand
years ago.  A large city on the eastern bank of the
Mississippi River, with its wide dirt streets and
spacious plazas.  Monk's Mound was a spectacular
mud-brick pyramid.  And there were smaller pyramids
around the city.
      There was a large religious procession which was
witnessed by indigenous people from all over North
America.  Ganegahaga-ono from upstate New York.
Tohono Oodham from the desert Southwest.  And
my family, which had arrived by kichimishoon, a large
birchbark canoe--what the French called a Montreal
canoe--from our home on Chequamegon Bay on the
south shore of Lake Superior.  In terms of color and
pageantry, this procession outdid anything I saw
in Hawaii.
      Americans then were just as star-struck as they
are today.  During the procession, everyone wanted
to catch a glimpse of Awenhai, the beautiful princess
of the Ontouagannha people.  She cut quite a figure
in her white dress with its colorful beadwork.  On
either side of her were two full-grown cougars (also
known as pumas or mountain lions.)  There were
many stories about her.  She was a sorcererss who
had danced on the moon (!!)  She could turn herself
into a cougar.  She was hundreds of years old.
(She looked about twenty.)
      With the family was my grandfather, Tackanash.
Now, I've dreamed of Tackanash off and on over the
years.  But this was the first time I've dreamed about
him in fifteen years, so it seems significant.
      We were sitting in the market plaza with a
Lakota family we were friendly with.  Possibly related
to by marriage.  And Tackanash tells me to go to the
river and relieve my cousin, who was standing watch
over the remaining makuks (birchbark boxes) we'd
brought down from Mauningwaunakauning Miniss
(Anishinabe for Island of the Golden-Breated
Woodpecker, now Madeline Island just east
of Bayfield, Wisconsin.)
      So there I am sitting on the riverbank near the
canoe, looking toward the Missouri side and seeing
a handful of tipis and an ocean of ripe prairie grass
rolling away to the west.  And then I hear an eagle
scream, and I look again.  And the prairie is gone,
and I'm looking at the familiar skyline of modern
St. Louis.
      The city, however, is in ruins.  Twisted girders
poke out of the tops of broken skyscrapers.  Black
smoke boils upward from two dozen spots.  The
Poplar Bridge is gone, and all that remains of the
railroad bridge are pylons sticking out of the river.
The Gateway Arch looks like a turkey wishbone
after somebody made a wish.
      Startled, I jump to my feet.  The buildings
between Choteau Avenue and Busch Stadium
are heaps of rubble.  I can see the stadium in
silhouette, and there are a few dings in it, like a
chipped porcelain cup.  Needle-nosed helicopters
are zipping back and forth over the riverfront.
     I feel a sudden compulsion to look to my left.
I do, and a woman stands there.  A Native
American woman a few years older than Awenhai,
wearing a green dress and a green fringed shawl.
Right in front of her, running towards me, are the
two Fatima seers. Francisco and Jacinta Marto,
looking as out-of-place in pre-Columbian Illinois
as a pair of giraffes.
      Jacinta does the talking--in Portuguese!
Very lively little girl in a black kerchief, peasant
blouse and black skirt.  "Masinaigan, there will
be an explosion in the big city."
      I gesture across the river.  "Sao Luis?"
      "Nao, nao."  Frowning, she stamps her foot
impatiently.  "Nova York!  Nova York!"
      I feel hands on my shoulders.  Tackanash
whispers, "What do you see, Masinaigan?"
      "The city is destroyed, Nimishoo."  (Anishinabe
for Grandfather.)
      Then he looks at the same direction as me and
lets out a cry.  Jacinta and brother Francisco are
gone.  And so is the woman in green.  In the woman's
place is a single cornstalk brimming with ripe yellow
corn ears.  And I shudder because corn won't be
ripening for another month.
      And I wake up.  But I'm still dreaming, though.
I dream I've awakened outdoors under a cool night
sky ablaze with stars.
     (An explosion in New York City!?  Where in
New York?  Jacinta!)
      A dark mountain looms over me.  I recognize
its distinctive shape.  Inyan Kara.  I'm in Wyoming.
      I can see a fire glimmering high on the ponderosa-
clad mountain slope.  I frown, thinking, They've
already lit the fire.  I'm late for powwow.
      Tackanash smiles down at me.  Pushing the
blanet aside, I murmur, "I'm sorry, Nimishoo.
I overslept."
      He chuckles.  "I never saw such a lazy boy."
      And so we climb the trail up to the powwow,
Tackanash and I.  There are mostly Lakota people
there, some Zizitza, some Awishi.  Tackanash and
I are the only Anishinabe present.
      And then things really get weird.  Bill Clinton is
there, but it's the president as he was as a young
man.  He's dressed like a Lakota medicine chief.
(This is strange because I rarely dream of present-
day political figures.)  He removes his shirt and
lets some elderly men paint symbols on his body.
Then he grimaces and makes no sound as the
tribal elder pierces his chest with two skewers.
      I watch in amazement.  He's going to do the
sun dance.
      Sure enough, soon Bill is dancing around the
wooden pole, dragging a buffalo skull behind him.
At first he moves with a vigorous step, singing
along with the wisdom singers beating the drum.
      As the night goes on, a strange thing happens.
Every time Bill passes by, he is a little bit older,
and his feet are less certain.  He no longer sings.
The crowd watches silently.  The only sound comes
from the spirit drum and the wisdom signers.
      And then he stumbles.  Painfully he rises to
his feet, takes a few feeble steps and falls again.
Panicstricken I glance to the east.  The sky is
beginning to lighten over the Black Hills.
      I move forward, but Tackanash firmly grabs
my shoulder.  "No!  Don't enter the circle.  This
is his dance."
     I glance at Bill, and he isn't moving.  Oh, this
is bad.  This is very bad! I think, and I shout,
"Bill, get up!  You must finish!"
      And I cast a fearful glance eastward, just in
time to see the sun rising above the Black Hills.
      And suddenly it is full daylight, and I'm back
home in modern-day Duluth, with Tackanash at
my side.  As a matter of fact, we're at the corner
of Second Street and Mesaba Avenue.
      It's a cold day (March?  November?) with a
light overcast sky.  A stiff wind tears at my
clothes.  Looking toward Lake Superior, I see
tremendous waves rolling over Park Point.  Waves
50 to 70 feet high.  The bay west of the Point
is full of floating debris.
      About a mile offshore a large cargo ship
struggles against the oncoming tidal waves.
She's the Columbia Star, and she looks like a
submarine trying to surface.  And doing it badly.
She is slowly being swamped.  But there's a
smaller black-and-white Coast Guard vessel
on the way to the rescue.
      What a roller-coaster ride for the Coast Guard!
Up the front of the wave, crash through the foam
on top, and then toboggan down the back side.
      Tackanash and I head downhill on Mesaba
Avenue for a better look.  I can go no further than
First Street.  Lake Superior has flooded this whole
end of the city.  Greybeard waves crash ashore
on First Street, pounding the asphalt into rubble
and sending fountains of icy spray skyward.
      "This way, Masinaigan," he says, beckoning.
      Soon we are walking north on Third Street,
and I see an old brownstone building from the
1890s that has been converted into a prison.
The glass is gone from the windows, replaced by
shiny steel bars and barbed wire.  The building is
guarded by black-clad troops in body armor and
combat helmets.
      Behind the bars are people, moaning and
shivering in the cold.  A few are holding Bibles.
Clutching the wires, they shout, "Help us!  In
the name of Jesus!  Help us!"
     And I wake up--for real this time.  And my final
dream thought is a hazy after-image, almost an
indistinct postcard photo of the United Nations
building in New York City.  It fades, and I blink
in the darkness of my bedroom.  Grab my glasses
and glance at the digital clock--2:31 a.m.
      I go back to sleep, but the dream is just as
vivid the next morning.  It's fully etched in my memory.
      i do not know if there is anything to this
precognition stuff.  Or if perhaps the Millenium is
like an opaque mirror in which we see our deepest
fears reflected.
      I do know this, though.  Back on December 6,
I had a "bad vibes" feeling about New York City in
general, and the UN building in particular.  I've only
had that feeling once before.  Way back in 1981,
when Mehmet Ali Agca shot the Pope.
      So, a memo to John Velez and our other readers
in New York City...if you can get away for a few
days after Christmas, please try to do so.  I know
this sounds like typical Big Apple paranoia.  And
if I'm wrong, we can all have a big laugh in a couple
of weeks about my goofy predictions.  But I can't
help feeling that the Apple is not a good place to
be over New Year's wekend.  Please be careful.
Okay?

      Join us next week as we count down to the
New Millenium.  Here's a hearty "Merry Christmas"
from "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
Enjoy your Christmas holiday.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1999 by Masinaigan
Productions, all rights reserved.  Eaders may post
inews stories 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..

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

IMPORTANT Please Read:
====================

The Hunger Site
------------------------

http://www.thehungersite.com

Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the
deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site
and clicking on a button you can donate free food.
There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation -
the food is paid for by sponsors.

Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference!
If you have a web site download a banner and give a link!

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








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                            Re: Firmage a Floppie

From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:00:35 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:42:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Firmage a Floppie


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:04:47 -0800
 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >Subject: Firmage a Floppie?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >Firmage has been at the end of many jabs from the majority of
 >the mainstream media who do not take the 28 year old computer
 >wizard very seriously. Firmage has been very active on the UFO
 >scene funding many projects and is also rumored to be meeting
 >with many top politicians concerning UFOs.

This is news?  Has the mainstream media ever taken _anyone_
seriously who outed a UFO interest/concern/experience? If they
did, now _that_ would be news!

The Floppie award is exactly what one would expect in such an
environment. Anything to bury serious public discussion...

-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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                          Filer's Files #51 -- 1999

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:02:30 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:18:36 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #51 -- 1999

Filer's Files #51 -- 1999, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
December 24, 1999,  Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
Free Daily UFO/ET Newsletter via E-mail! http://www.ufonetwork.com/

A BLESSED CHRISTMAS and A BRIGHT NEW "YEAR

At Christmas time, we hear many stories about Angels visiting
the Earth.  There message is that God not men is the final
authority.  In the first chapter of the New Testament we're told
the Holy Ghost visited the Virgin Mary and that an Angel of the
Lord visited Joseph.  When Jesus is born the Magi or Wisemen
from the East follow a star and are able to find the baby Jesus.
Technically a star is very difficult to follow because stars
appear to move as the world turns on its axis.  It is more
likely that the star was an unidentified light hovering high in
the sky. Jesus Christ when he grows up declares, "He was sent by
his Father in Heaven and in my Father's house there are many
mansions and I go to prepare a place for you."  His statements
infer this is a place or planet in the northern sky.  He gives a
message of morality and peace.  Obviously there are many
interpretations of his statements, but much can be interpreted
in relation to both angels and aliens and extraterrestrial
travel. Psalms 91, 10-12 gives us a great promise that the
angels watch over us.

"No evil will befall you nor will any plague come near your
tent. For He will give His angels charge concerning you.  To
guard you in all your ways.  They will bear you up in their
hands, Lest you strike your foot against a stone."

The Bible claims that the angels are sent by the Father in
Heaven who promises the greatest gift of all, 'eternal life.'
We can speculate at this time of year that the religious stories
of the past are related to the signs and wonders we see in our
skies now.  I've studied the Bible, the Torah, the Koran and
many ancient writings.  The angels, the messengers of God,
brought the Holy Scriptures to man.  Think of these ancient
writings as not only religious but as technical and historical
doucuments. The Bible describes over a hundred appearances of
angels as well as many UFOs in surprising detail.  Their message
provides comfort in our lives.  Billy Graham the friend of most
of our recent Presidents wrote in his book "Angels,"

"Some Christian writers have speculated that UFOs could very
well be a part of God's angelic host who preside over the
physical affairs of universal creation."

I wish you all a most Merry Christmas and thanks for your many
letters and friendship you have shared with me this past year.
I look forward to a bright and fruitful future because after all
we have great wonders and signs in our skies.  My hope is that
your life will be filled with good health and joy and that your
guardian angel continues to protect you.

NEW YORK SIGHTINGS BY TWO SECURITY OFFICERS

GLENS FALLS -- The witness stated, "On Sunday, December 19,
1999, myself and another security officer who was a mile away
were discussing our previous UFO sightings on our cell phones
when I saw one again."  It was a brilliant white pulsating
light, with an orange tinge that slowly rose into the sky.  My
friend held the line open as he headed to a field for a better
observation point. Finally, he informed me he also had the light
in view. The object hovered for 5 minutes, drifting left, then
right, then back to a center position. The object turned on red
strobe, and slowly drifted towards Glens Falls.  I feel the
object tried to disguise itself, as within minutes, Air Force
planes from the north and west seemed to converge on our area.
This was our third Sunday sighting just before or after dark.
The first sighting was on November 28, when the object hovered
and bolted north into the Adirondacks, like lighting at an
estimated speed from zero to 3000 mph.  In the second
observation object went out like a flash.  Although, we work for
different companies we are observant security officers who have
both witnessed the UFOs. Thanks to www.nymufon.org.  Larry Clark
and proserver1015@interland.net

NEW JERSEY FLYING TRIANGLE

SEWELL - MUFON's Evelyn Galson turned in her investigation of a
triangle shaped UFO observed by Chris Augustin a web designer.
On July 17, 1999, Chris looked up while throwing something in
his trashcan.  The lighting configuration on a low flying object
was very strange.  The triangle had three white lights, one in
each corner and a center red light.  It flew from west to east
towards the Atlantic Ocean very slowly.  The craft was much
lower than normal traffic at an estimated 500 feet altitude and
was three times the size of the full Moon.  It appeared solid
with sharp edges and making a low humming noise.  Thanks to
Evelyn Galson and Chris Augustin.

WEST VIRGINIA SIGHTINGS

HUNTINGTON--I was a skeptic until I had my 1st & 2nd dramatic
UFO sightings. My 2nd sighting left me with a wonderful feeling
and a tingling sensation up my back and over my head. I said to
the UFO "I know you-I know who you are; I've seen you before."
Then it blinked out. Now that I have met sincere people with
similar encounters, I know that this is a real phenomenon.  Do
you think these individual contacts are preparation for eventual
contact? Thanks to Joe Gardner JOSEPOPI@camelot.serve.com

MISSOURI HOVERING LIGHTS

COLUMBIA - My wife was taking my daughter's friend home on
December 8, 1999. They were headed east on Route HH, when my
daughters' friend spotted the object at 9:30 PM.  It scared my
wife as she thought it was an airplane crashing into the trees.
It came from the north and crossed their path.  My wife was
afraid to turn onto Kircher Road, because the object was
hovering over the trees near the road. It was moving
sporadically, hover and then move, hover and move again. The
children had their windows down and the object made no noise as
it hovered. The distance was hard to judge, but since it is a
heavily wooded area they must have been very close to see it for
as long as they did. They didn't want to report it for fear
people would think them crazy, but many others also reported the
same exact sighting.  A boy in the area, witnessed the object
floating over his house. My wife was not a believer in UFO's but
now she's changed her mind.  I asked them why they couldn't make
out a shape of the vehicle at such close range? They all said
the lights were so bright that they couldn't see anything, but
large brilliant landing-like lights. My wife recalls seeing
white and red lights as do the children. They claim that the
lights are much brighter also. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director, National UFO Reporting Center

NORTH CAROLINA UFO

ASHEVILLE -- Hi my name is John.  "On a night in October 1998, I
was riding in a golfcart at the hotel where I work and I saw a
bright red light more less hovering high in the western sky." So
I went around to the back of the hotel and walked up a fire
escape for a better look.  It was very high as far as I can
tell.  It would get a very bright red for a while and then fade
out buy not on a regular basis just kind intermittently.  I
watched it for about 10 minutes and it was drifting up and to
the right very slowly. I saw at least two aircraft fly nearby
and I know they had to have seen it also.  I went back down the
fire escape and knocked on the door of the gift shop and asked
Phyllis to come see this.  She and I watched for five minutes.
It would get very bright and then get dimmer and finally just
disappeared completely.  A few minutes later Mike and George
came by on their rounds, so I told them what Phyllis and I had
seen.  Mike said, "Is that it?"  The UFO was there again?  So
all four of us watched for ten more minutes.  I had to leave but
Mike told me that he watched it for about 10 more minutes.  The
next morning it was on WLOS morning news and six people had
called the police. Thanks to John at flybowee57@email.msn.com

FLORIDA UFOs SEEN NEAR SHUTTLE LAUNCH

CAPE KENNEDY -- After watching the shuttle launch on July 25,
1999, at 12:24 AM, I went back to the Intercoastal waterway on
Jeffrey Street in Boca Raton, at 2:30 AM to check my catfish
lines and saw a "star twinkling red yellow and green."  I
immediately loaded my 35 mm camera with 800 ASA speed film and
put on 270 mm lens, and set it on my tripod. Looking through the
lens I distinctly saw smaller craft appear one at a time right
next to the "mothership" in formations of three's, four's and
five's.  They put on the greatest laser light show that you
could ever imagine, shooting colors at each other.  Wile
visiting my mother in Boca Raton, we watched shuttle launch on
CNN. The TV news conference indicated there were allot of
problems with the launch, and you could see the concern on the
faces of the NASA people.  After watching the liftoff on TV we
ran from mom's condo about fifty yards to the Intercoastal
waterway and were able to clearly see the shuttled headed due
east. About 2:30 AM, I noticed a strange "star" about 45 degrees
above the horizon in the northeast sky just below the seven
sisters constellation. After I set up the camera, Billy woke up
and confirmed what I was seeing.  I'm 46 with 20/20 vision but
the eyes of an 8-year-old are much better. We also had 8-24*50
Legacy Binoculars. The larger object appeared white and round.
About every 15 minutes it would turn completely opaque or
translucent. Although you could still see it, it appeared as
star pulsing colors.

I focused each frame with the main object in the bottom portion
of the circle of the 270 mm lens. As Billy and I watched the
round white dot through the lens a smaller dot or craft would
appear right next to it on the right. Then another object would
appear, then another, and they would flash colors at each other.
These craft formed triangles, squares, and circles, depending on
how many decided to appear at once. Then these smaller craft
would either leave or turn their lights off, leaving only the
larger white dot. Billy and I never took our eyes off this
object until daybreak when it slowly began going up and to the
left about 7:30 AM.  Our photographs show the mothership in
color with red on the bottom and green on top, quite different
from what we saw through the lens. I used automatic exposure on
most of the shots, which kept the lens open for three seconds.
You can detect the small movement of the main craft during these
exposures by the slight trailing of the green on top and red on
bottom. I took quite a few photos with the smaller craft doing
the formations near the mothership, there are trails of distinct
colored objects all over the frames showing up as red, yellow
then green.  The bottom of the larger craft shows objects
sitting on the "deck" in some frames.  I can see a triangular
shaped craft in the middle of the deck surrounded by smaller
dots on the edges of the deck. An amateur astronomer reported
seeing a similar object with an 8" Celestron from Miami Shores.
He saw a disk shaped craft with a definite dome. " This is
exactly what I saw in one of my photographs. The image I have
shows a definite dome shape, red on the bottom and green on top.
Thanks to Patrick Mullarky mullarky@hotmail.com

INVESTIGATION OF LOCO, OKLAHOMA UFO VIDEO

Jim Hickman-Director, Aerial Phenomena Research Group has
received data from the Norman National Weather Service on the
July 11, 1997, radar images showing a possible UFO.  Several of
experts were consulted to come up with this version.  "These
radar images were obtained from the Twin Lakes (near Oklahoma
City) National Weather Service radar at 7:18 PM CDT on 25 May,
or about three minutes before the "object" was videotaped.
Reflectivity is shown, which relates to rainfall intensity in
order of increasing "warm" colors (blue to green to yellow to
red indicates increasing intensity). The "object" video was shot
looking northeast from just to the left (west) of the dot
representing Loco, OK (near the center of the zoom.  This
location is about 75 miles SSW of the radar site. Due to earth's
curvature, the radar beam was at a height of about 6,500 feet
above ground level at the video location.  Also due to the
earth's curvature, the radar was unable to "see" anything below
this height. These displays are presented only to show the
relative positions of nearby thunderstorms near the time of the
"object" sighting.

They do not show the "object" itself.  They should be considered
inconclusive as evidence in regard to any direct scientific
investigation of the "object." The "object" was not, nor could
it be, resolved by the radar.  There are several reasons for
this. First, the "object" was below cloud base     (which was
around 3,000 feet in this case), and thus was well below the
radar's "horizon." Second, estimations of the "object's" size
(50 feet or less) indicate that it was far too small to be
resolved by the radar at that range. Although weather radar's
can detect very small objects in certain cases, they are not
designed to resolve specific properties (such as size, shape,
speed) of objects smaller than the width of the radar beam.  The
beam itself is a narrow "cone" that increases in diameter (or
width) with increasing distance from the antenna -- much like
headlight beams, only much narrower.  At a range of 75 miles,
the beam width on this radar is about 7,000 feet.  Therefore, it
cannot resolve details of individual targets smaller than about
1.3 miles wide. (This value would be smaller for targets closer
to the radar, and larger for more distant targets.) Third, even
if the     "object" were high enough or large enough, the radar
antenna takes at least 20 seconds to rotate through a full
360-degree sweep. The chances of it being pointed in the right
direction at the exact time of the "object" (which was on video
for only about 1.5 seconds) are extremely remote.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:50:57 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:27:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999
 >From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >Subject: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >released.

Dear Ralf and Listers,

I think the mystery of Corso is far from being resolved. As most
know, some researchers have made the effort to investigate
specific instances in the book that turned out to be faulty
history or claims that are hard to take at face value. The best
critical description of Corso I have read is the
characterization of him as the "Forrest Gump" of UFO history --
somehow always being on the spot of important revelations about
secret UFO research.

Yet..... there is something about Corso's claims that still
attracts me. Perhaps the most significant is what others have
found -- that despite his stupendous claims with regards to
Roswell, that Corso was who he said he was. He _was_ a career
military intelligence man who displayed great courage and
initiative in the closing days of World War II. He _did_ testify
about American POWs whisked out of Korea to the Soviet Union. He
_did_ serve on the staff of the National Security Council under
Eisenhower. And, most importantly, he _did_ serve in the Army's
foreign technology office from 1959-1961.

As you know, Corso's book was released on the 50th anniversary
of the purported Roswell crash. But, as many recall, the U.S.
Air Force craftily pre-empted much of the ballyhoo over Roswell
with its publication of the new explanation _or cover story_ of
Roswell, blaming it all on misidentification of Mogul baloon
materials. "Responsible" media always included the Air Force's
version of events in reporting the Roswell anniversary, and any
genuine interest by the media in the events of 1947 were
swallowed up by its derisive features about the impact of the
anniversary on Rosell's economy and other such entertaining but
irrelevant topics.

Interestingly, when I wrote lobby letters to federal elected
officials over the next year advocating congressional hearings
on Corso's claims, each official who responded referred to the
official Air Force account of Roswell as their bottom line for
taking no further interest. In other words, even if the Mogul
explanation was not sufficient for some serious researchers, it
was enough for members of the House and Senate Select Committees
on Intelligence to quash any re-examination of the Roswell
claims.

One glaring omission in the Air Force's reaction to the Roswell
anniversary was _any_ comment about Corso's book. Maybe someone
else on this list has seen something I haven't, but Corso's
claims were met with a thundering silence by those people who
best knew his service record. In fact, I called the Pentagon (I
am a newspaper editor; I was writing a column) seeking an
official comment on Corso, and asked the question that you did
-- "Is Corso nuts, or is Corso a liar?" I was referred to the
"proper" person to make a response, but received no call backs.
My deadline came and went, and that's where I left it.

Has anyone else heard any official comment by the Army or Air
Force on Corso's claims in his book?

Anyway, to answer one of your other questions, Corso's
ghostwriter, William Byrne, definitely took an interest in UFOs
after his interviews with Corso, and is now the publisher of the
American magazine, UFO. Byrne was clearly impressed by Corso's
claims and was, in my opinion, to blame for some of the
inaccuracies in Corso's book.

I think Larry Hatch is right when he said most researchers have
written Corso off as unreliable. Yet...

Pat McCartney







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: David Rudiak <Rudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:00:28 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:42:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>The observations of those on the scene later are not
 >>speculation. Marcel, Rickett, .

 >And what about Marcel's civilian counterpart who was also there?

Again, Thompson reveals his complete ignorance.  First of all,
the CIC or counterintelligence people involved were NOT
civilians.  They were military -- got that? Just because they
wore civilian clothing didn't make them civilians -- good grief!

I also notice that John Thompson doesn't respond to Stanton
Friedman's mentioned of Lewis Rickett.  Does Thompson know who
Rickett was?  Apparently not.  Rickett was one of those
"civilian" CICman who operated out of Marcel's office, and he
backed Marcel's story 100%.  He went to the crash site while a
major recovery was underway, involving dozens of military
people.  He saw and handled the anomalous thin metal material.
He reported a gouge, as did the rancher's son Bill Brazel (who
was a young married adult at the time, not some kid).  And
Rickett confirmed that it had been a saucer crash.

 >Who is still alive?

Rickett was also very much alive when intereviewed.

However, Thompson is obviously referring to Sheridan Cavitt, the
senior "civilian" CICman in Marcel's office.  Incidentally, he
died earlier this year.

 >I guess he's just a certified liar? Why do
 >you try so hard to ignore what is there _now_ to say the Roswell
 >crash was _not_ an alien event?

Maybe because Cavitt had contradicted himself so many times over
the years.  You could hardly find a worse witness for a Mogul
balloon crash.  He claimed the crash site was no bigger than his
living room, kind of hard to reconcile with a 600 foot tall
balloon train that was supposedly scattered over the
countryside.   Even after being prompted by his contemporary AF
counterintelligence interviewer about the alleged flower tape on
the Mogul radar reflectors, Cavitt claimed there was nothing
like that.  All the talk about alien hieroglyphics was made up
by saucer buffs trying to make money.

Furthermore Cavitt claimed to have never met Brazel, or ever
gone out with Marcel to the crash site, contradicting not only
Marcel, but Brazel as well in his 1947 Roswell Daily Record
interview.  Please explain to us how Cavitt could find his tiny
balloon crash no bigger than his living room out in the middle
of nowhere without Brazel leading him to the spot.

Cavitt in the past also denied being at Roswell at the time or
being in any way involved with the events.  But then the Air
Force tried to turn  him into a star witness for a Mogul balloon
crash.  Unfortunately they failed to brief Cavitt ahead of time
what the new story was supposed to be.  Instead they got caught
with Cavitt repeating the original weather balloon cover story
of 1947.

That Cavitt would continue to lie like this is a good indication
that he was still covering up something else.

Absolutely nobody backs up Cavitt's version of events, not even
his then assistant Rickett, who backed up Marcel's story
instead.  To this Cavitt tried to label Rickett a tall tale
teller and insinuated that he was mentally ill because he once
worked at a mental facility at one time.

I might add that Cavitt and Marcel were actually good friends
and the families often got together at Roswell.  Cavitt did not
attack Marcel in his interview, despite some prompting by Col.
Weaver, the interviewer.  Cavitt instead said that Marcel was
unusually intelligent, he could conceive of no reason for Marcel
to have made up his story, and furthermore, if Marcel said their
were markings on some of the recovered material, then maybe
there were. Cavitt had a lot of respect for Marcel.

However, when Weaver typed up an affidavit for Cavitt to sign
immediately after the interview, he had Cavitt claiming that
both Marcel and Rickett were apt to tell tales, contradicting
what Cavitt actually said about Marcel in the interview.

Another interesting exchange in the interview took place when
Cavitt's wife Mary jumped in and said that the Cavitt's knew to
keep their mouths shut about what happened, and couldn't
understand why the Marcels would talk about it.  All this over a
balloon?

 >>What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
 >>to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
 >>presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
 >>Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
 >>very different and no conventional materials were found. There
 >>were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

 >I talking about a Project Mongul balloon that went down, as the
 >USAF, now says and the accident was Colonel Blanchard okaying to
 >put out the press release that the Army Air Corps had recovered
 >a "flying saucer."

So your claim is that AF counterintelligence came up with this
scheme to confuse the Soviets for decades, and they did all this
in the space of about an hour after the press release went out?
Then they totally dropped all mention of Roswell for the next 47
years until forced to respond by a GAO investigation (hence the
Mogul balloon theory)?  What happens to your claim of
intelligence nuturing Soviet belief in captured alien technology
over all that time?  And why would Soviet intelligence believe
any of this unless they had determined the saucers were real?

 >>>I suspect we already knew by the summer of 1947 that the Soviets
 >>>had or were close to having their own nuclear weapons. But we
 >>>now had something more potent than nuclear bombs with the
 >>>"Roswell Recovery."

 >Stanton's reply:

 >>I have seen NSC meeting notes indicating the Russiians weren't
 >>expected to have nuclear weapons until the early 1950s.. and
 >>weren't in 1947 known to have delivery systems. Interesting plot
 >>line but where is the evidence? As noted in Crash at Corona  and
 >>several other books the case for a crashed saucer is very strong.

 >>>Well, they were wrong! And I suspect many did think they
 >>>could have it earlier. ... Only the most dim-witted and
 >>>short-sighted after WWII would'vethought that the Russians
 >>>weren't working on their own A-bomb projects.

 >>Whatever Thompson might suspect, historically the intelligence and
 >>scientific consensus of the time was that the Soviets would be unable to
 >>manufacture a bomb for many years.

 >Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted in 1951 for giving
 >some of our atomic bomb secrets away. They had been feeding info
 >for a long time. The Russians, as another post to you correctly
 >says, detonated their first bomb before then.

We have more of Thompson's argument by proclamation.  Although
there was much concern in 1947 about the Soviet's eventually
getting the bomb, very few experts thought they were on the
verge of having it.  Part of this thinking was based on the
war-devestated Soviet economy.

 >I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
 >Soviets from believing we had no alien technology. What was a
 >screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
 >thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
 >something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
 >denotated their first bomb.

Again, why would they think we had something if their own
extensive military and intelligence could determine that
saucer's were fictional?  Disinformation schemes like Thompson
is proposing only work if the other side believes something to
be true.  Otherwise they might just as well have tried to
convince the Soviets that we had captured Santa antigrav
technology.

This raises the debunker dilemna that saucers are only a good
disinfo ploy if they are real.  But the whole point of trying to
claim they are a disinfo ploy is to demonstrate they are not
real.  And around we go.

In reality, the Air Force NEVER publicly encouraged the belief
that the saucers were real.  Quite the contrary.  And they
certainly never dropped hints that we might have captured alien
technology.  Roswell was almost totally forgotten until revived
by researchers like Stanton Friedman in the 1980's.

Historically, immediately after the Roswell debunking by Gen.
Ramey, the military continued to emphasize the weather balloon
angle for the saucers.  The UP story of July 9, 1947 led with
the sentence that the Army and the Navy were engaged in a
concerted effort to debunk the saucers.  This included several
demonstration weather balloon launchings throughout the country
published in various newspapers.  Among these was at Alamogordo,
where intelligence carried out a phony Mogul balloon launch,
mentioned that they were launching such balloons in the area,
that they probably accounted for the saucers being reported, and
likely accounted for the rancher's claim of finding one on his
property.

Rather than trying to promote a belief in saucers or that we
might have captured saucer technology, the military tried
mightily to kill the Roswell story and the nationwide interest
in the many saucer sightings.  There was a deliberate debunking
campaign about the saucers, which has continued on and off into
the present.  The history on this is so clear, it is hard to
believe that somebody could call himself a UFO researcher and
not be aware of it.

 >>Stalin, who routinely condemned to death millions for many
 >>reasons far less than making a public announcement mistake,
 >>couldn't believe the USAF could make such a huge error with
 >>their public announcement of recovering a "saucer."

 >If you want to see what intrigues the Soviets went in scheming,
 >misinterperting, and putting out disinformatin/misinformation, I
 >suggest you read Armand Moss's fine book: "Misinformation,
 >Disinfomation and the JFK Conspiracy Exposed." There are also
 >several books out by former Soviet intelligence agents who show
 >what paranoid thoughts Communist leaders entertained. The
 >Roswell saucer story would have been discussed at all levels, if
 >for nothing else, because it did get brief, but HIGH, publicity.

I can buy that they might have discussed it.  But Thompson's
claim is that they obsessed about it for 50 years and are still
obsessing about it.  And why would they do that if there was
nothing whatsoever to the saucers?  What evidence can Thompson
point to that would clearly indicate to the Soviets that we were
successfully exploiting alien technology?  Do we have fleets of
saucers waiting to bomb them into submission?  ICBMS tipped with
H-bombs are a very powerful deterrant and very real, not some
hypothetical boogeyman superweapon that might or might not be
true.

 >Of course, the Press has often been non-performing in their
 >duties; still are. On the other hand, I suspect if they had done
 >a "Watergate press" back then on the story we would've found out
 >for sure that this was no UFO crash! This also explains why the
 >locals buried the story so quickly.

Huh?

<snip

 >The fact is there is no concrete proof that multiple, reliable
 >witnesses saw anything that was extraterrestrial.

It's easy to make sweeping statements like that simply by
declaring all the witnesses that did report something highly
unusual to be "unreliable."  That gets rid of that pesky
corroboration, so that Thompson can then go on to say:

 >The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
 >reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake.

Don't forget Rickett, another intelligence man in Marcel's
office who backed Marcel.  How about Gen. Exon, the former C/O
of Wright Patterson, who flat out said it was a crashed saucer
made of strange material?  Or Gen. Dubose, Ramey's chief of
staff, who corroborated Marcel's account of a cover-up in Fort
Worth.  Or Bill Brazel or Loretta Proctor, who collectively
corroborated Marcel's descriptions of the anomalous material
and/or crash site.

There is currently zero evidence that Marcel made a "collossal
mistake."  Does John Thompson know that Marcel's next
appointment was a SAC Chief of some sort of foreign air
intelligence position?  Is this the sort of position one would
expect for some guy who couldn't ID tin foil, paper, rubber,
balsa wood and Scotch tape?

Does John Thompson know that Marcel is listed in his records as
being a radar intelligence officer?  He had taken an intensive
course in radar intelligence only 2 years before, which included
a section on radar countermeasures.  The primary radar
countermeasure was aluminum foil chaff backed with paper, the
exact same foil-paper material they used on the radar targets.

How about the post-Roswell praise that Marcel received from
Roswell-involved senior officers like Blanchard, Ramey, and
Ryan?  Ryan, Blanchard's replacement at Roswell at a future AF
Chief & Chairman of the JCS, called Marcel's career "most
outstanding" and "most exemplary."  Gen. Ramey, the guy who put
out the weather balloon story and should have been mad as hell
at a screw-up intelligence officer who embarrassed his command,
instead termed Marcel "outstanding" and future command officer
material.  Likewise Blanchard greatly praised Marcel's ability
as an intelligence officer and upped his rating.  There just
isn't a hint in his subsequent record that he screwed up
anything.

 >His son doesn't count.

No, of course not, and apparently nobody else counts in your
book, either because you are ignorant they exist or because you
choose to deliberately ignore what they had to say.  I don't put
much stock in the proclamations of some guy on Roswell when he
doesn't even know simple basics, like the CIC being military,
not a bunch of civilians.

 >He was young and if my dad brought home
 >something and said "Isn't this strange?" I would agree and be
 >left with that memomy for the rest of my life. Again, why
 >doesn't the one other witness who was there support Marcel?

Because he is an obvious liar whose story of what he found and
how he found it doesn't agree with anybody else, the Mogul
balloon theory, or how the story was reported in 1947.  And he
has changed stories many times about his involvement. Again, I
notice John Thompson fails to mention Rickett, another CICman
likely to be involved, who backed up Marcel, not his former CIC
boss Cavitt.  Marcel's account has a lot of independent
corroboration.  Cavitt's has zilch.

Oh well, just declare Rickett and all the rest unreliable --
right?

 >I'm well aware that at the time of the Roswell incident that the
 >Army still had the Air Force. I used USAF only to simplify
 >matters. Their attempts in the '90s have been most clumsy and
 >embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
 >more attention to the matter.

Maybe because in reality their hand was forced by a GAO
congressional inquiry?  Does Thompson know anything at all?

 >Maybe, because there is a larger
 >secret that Project Mongul.

Yes, maybe, like a saucer crash?

 >Who knows how much time, money and
 >effort was wasted by the Soviets on UFO related projects because
 >of them thinking that the U.S had a recovered disk?

Certainly not John Thompson.

 >Time now still being wasted by the Russians.

Even more argument by proclamation.  Does Thompson have even one
piece of evidence that the Soviets have foolishly wasted
resources and are continuing to do so on UFO related projects
because they thought we had a recovered disk?  What the Soviets
were really worried about were very conventional bombers and
ICBMs carrying nuclear weapons.

 >This is why the USAF may still keep parading old colonels out to
 >put out such nonsense as "dummies" falling from the sky. Maybe
 >they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
 >disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
 >reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

Which didn't begin until the mid 1990's when forced to comment
by the GAO inquiry.  The AF has not exactly been nurturing this
story for 50 years.

 >>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >>need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >Major Marcel did get promoted. He was never the fall guy until
 >the TV Showtime Roswell show. invented that story..

 >I believe it was customary for officers in the military then,
 >when they retired, to be advanced one rank. Is this the type
 >promotion you speak of? If so, that doesn't count.

He received the Reserve promotion to Lt. Col. only 4 months
after Roswell and was recommended by both Blanchard and Gen.
Ramey through his Chief of Staff Dubose.  All three were deeply
involved with Roswell.  Why would they recommend him for
anything if he had badly screwed up only a few months before?

 >Blanchard's
 >career was not hurt as it should have been for screwing-up. But
 >as years passed and the Soviets denotated their first bomb all
 >was forgiven. The Roswell alien story was not a bad thing afterall.

Yep, those Rooskies couldn't be intimidated with a real A-bomb
and real bombers.  The only deterrant we had was to frightened
to death with the "Roswell alien story."  All it took was one
mention of it in 1947, and it has deterred them ever since with
never a reminder for almost 50 years.

 >It was Blanchard's mistake, as he was in command. And at least
 >in the 1940s, in the military, the "buck stops here." His
 >mistake should've been a career stopper. It wasn't but there
 >isn't a thread of proof that will now stand up to prove the
 >Roswell or Corona--yes, I bought your book--crash involved alien
 >technology.

Anybody could have deduced that much about the book just by
reading the jacket cover.  Has Thompson bothered to read beyond
that?

 >So why did he make it past a level that most officers are never
 >expected to see?

 >My "plot line," as you call it, looks better and better. The
 >difference between you and me is that I will agree it is only a
 >pausible story-line.

A "pausible" story-line or a "plausible" one?  Thompson's theory
is so ridiculous and full of inaccuries that it is hardly
plausible, but maybe it is very remotely "pausible."

 >Your's is too. When its all said and done,
 >with no proof, it's only entertainment.

Which is the only reason Thompson is here, not to discuss
anything intelligently.  That would require that he know at
least a few basic historical facts rather than mouthing off with
unsupported personal opinion.  He could start with such
conventional items as the CIC being military and the Soviet
A-bomb taking most experts by surprise.

 >>Obviously I believe this is an interesting plot line with
 >>nothing to support it and much to contradict it.  Jim Keith's
 >>story line of course is wholly imaginary. The material was very
 >>lightweight and very strong.. hardly concrete in a dummy bomb.

 >Stanton Friedman

 >Actually, it is "an interesting plot line" that is more
 >plausable than your story-line. Please find one living, reliable
 >witness that will back your story-line.

Oh, now they all have to be living?  Having affidavits and
recordings isn't enough?  The real question is can Thompson find
even one witness, reliable or otherwise, living or dead, who can
back up any of his noisy proclamations?

 >I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >hell-of-a wallop. A thud that can be heard for miles around; one
 >that shakes houses. I realise that the Roswell area in the late
 >'40s is even more remote but you couldn't keep something like
 >this under wraps; no way!

Yes very, very remote where it happened.  And very, very
sparsely populated -- like one person for ever 10 square miles
-- maybe.  This crash didn't happen in Times Square.

 >Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, would've been on the Roswell
 >saucer crash over the years if it was true.

Another figure pulled out of a hat?

 >If only the same
 >number turned out for the alleged saucer crash--I would suspect
 >many more for that!--as the F-4 crash, most would've been young
 >soldiers of only 18-25 years old. No, officers don't pick up
 >that stuff!

No they don't.  People on the recovery scene like Rickett
(remember him?) reported seeing several dozen people involved in
guarding the scene and picking up the pieces.  Even if you up
this to several hundred directly involved in the recovery, it's
hardly the "tens of thousands" Thompson has invented out of thin
air.

 >These young enlisted individuals, if alive,  would be 70-75
 >years old now. As there are still quite a few older WWII vets
 >alive they're should be I would, suspect, be at least 50 of
 >these individuals alive. Why haven't some these young soldiers
 >come forth?

Well, people like Rickett did come forth, but Thompson has
ignored him.  There were some other accounts of military people
involved in the recovery, such as that of Pappy Henderson or
Melvin Brown, but these stories have come to us second-hand.

 >I have interviewed lots of witnesses for sensational events;
 >including an alleged crash here in Georgia. What you got to
 >remember is that even good well-intentional folks, as I suspect
 >Major Marcel was, make mistakes.

Could you please point to something in Marcel's record that
clearly indicates that he made a mistake?  Instead the superior
officers involved praised him afterwards and he received
assignments incompatible with those of a screw-up intelligence
officer.

 >Then there is always a certain
 >percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

I guess John Thompson would know.  (Yes, I know, a cheap shot --
I already feel ashamed.)

 >Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the Roswell
 >crash involved a vehicle of alien manufacture.

But there is a lot more than zero _evidence_, which is an
entirely different matter.  "Proof" involves hardware or
documents in the public domain.  There is one document,
photographed in Gen. Ramey's hand, which says "the victims of
the wreck you forwarded to .... Fort Worth, Tex."  That alone
tells us this was something much more than a balloon crash.  And
then, of course, there was that 1947 press release, which said
the AAF had captured a flying disk.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 06:38:36 -0500
 >From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Hi,

 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >>From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >>Subject: Corso?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >>there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >>published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >>write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >>Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >>death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >>released.

 ><snip>

 >The only research I'm aware of, is Corso's military record.
 >Follow the link in my signature.


A few more things were learned


1.I obtained a copy of the Roster of the group working under
General Trudeau at the Pentagon; 4pages, double column, legal
size from the Army Archives in Carlisle, PA.. There were 2
people in the Foreign Technology Group. a Colonel who was dying
in the Hospital when Victor Golubic located him and Lt. Colonel
Corso. The Junior officer of the 2. Doesn't sound like he was in
charge.

2. Corso claimed in a sworn statement to Attorney Peter Gersten,
that he had been a member of the National Security Council.Corso
refused to withdraw the statement when questioned by Gersten. It
is a statutory Body and Corso was never a member according to
the Eisenhower Library. They also noted that he never attended
an NSC meeting either.

3. I asked him in a friendly radio show how was he knew that it
was July, 6, 1947, when he saw the body in Ft. Riley, KS, notes?
a Diary? His answer was that he knew when he transferred there.
Not good enough; that was months earlier.

4. I asked how he knew the names of the control group. He said
there were about a dozen boards connected with the NSC. I think
the list came from one of many books in which it has appeared.
This wasn't a group that met every Thursday for lunch.

5. Co Author Bill Biernes admitted that he thought that the
public didn't know much about Roswell so he wrote the first part
to bring them up to speed. Bill knew a lot since he had been
agenting a book by Bill Moore and Jaime Shandera about Roswell.

6. How can anybody believe that an alien body was left unguarded
by the people transporting it? Sort of like moving nuclear
weapons . The trransport crew doesn't park the truck overnight
and come back in the morning?

7. How can anybody believe that nothing was done by the control
group between l947 and 1961 until Corso saved the world? He
wasn't an engineer or scientist.

8. Surely the book was an exploitation book being published on
the 50th anniversary and in Roswell... despite a lack of an index
or references or any substantiation. Senator Strom Thurmond
withdrew his foreword... which probably helped sell an additional
20,000 copies.

I suppose I am just jealous that the Corso book sold more than
TOP SECRET/MAJIC or Crash at Corona.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:26:31 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:48:53 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
 >alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
 >origin--taking care to apply the principle of parsimony with
 >very great care? Be very, very conservative...

Karl,

To tell you the truth, not a heckuva lot. Us-from-the-future is
intriguing, but time-travel would seem to be even more daunting
than "average" interstellar travel. A different dimension I
don't much like, either, but maybe we're all guilty of
anthropocentric thinking here -- like we had a real alternative!

Even Star Trek's Prime Directive is anthropocentric when you
think about it -- a sort of Cosmic Eleventh Commandment, as it
were. And, yeah, like everyone would follow it just like they do
the Terrestrial Ten.

What we've got on our hands is a real good mystery, anyway you
look at it.

I'm still looking for a good translation of the Roswell I-beam
hieroglyphs.

Two possibilities come to mind:

1) Made in China

2) If found, please call this number...

Other alternatives welcome.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:22:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:53:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >The vehicle observed by Civil Engineer Barney Barnett in the
 >Plains of San Augustine which came down almost intact was less
 >than 30' in diameter. A saucer shaped craft would have a much
 >lower surface to volume ration than something with wings.

<snip>

 >Stanton Friedman

Stan, List,

Allow me to pick a nit.

The above excerpt exemplifies much of what is wrong with current
ufology -- which is a tendency to take a verbal or anecdotal
account as the fact or thing itself. As a writer, you ought to
be more careful with your use of language.

One cannot say with authority that the vehicle Barnett saw came
down intact and was less than 30 feet in diameter, etc. --
unless you have absolute and incontrovertible proof of same.

Here is what you _can_ say with authority:

The vehicle Barnett _said_ he saw was relatively intact...

Or: The vehicle Barnett _told_ friends he saw...

Or: So-and-so _said_ that Barnett _told_ him that...

Or: Reportedly, according to, allegedly, claimed, and so on.
These are all journalistic qualifiers which serve to inform the
reader that what follows is based on anecdotal testimony, ie,
what someone _said_, and should be taken accordingly. To say
that the vehicle Barnett saw was so-and-so is an _assertion_ of
fact, unwarranted because it can't be proved.

It sounds like a small affair, I admit, but this is how claims
and anecdotes get solidified into historical "facts" in the UFO
literature when they are passed from one source to another, and
from one writer to another.

An assertion by anyone (even the President of the United States)
is not necessarily the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth -- an assertion that everyone ought to keep in mind!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Chris Sanderson <skygypsy@vegasnet.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:32:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:54:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


Please note that George Knapp, our local Las Vegas investigative
reporter and international UFO researcher,  will be speaking on
the subject of Colonel Philip Corso at the 9th annual
International UFO Congress Convention and Film Festival in
Laughlin, Nevada on March 7th, 2000.

Mr. Knapp had many interviews with Col. Corso before he passed
away and prior to the publication of his book.  He spoke at our
local MUFON organization on the subject of Colonel Corso,
including videotapes of his interviews, before any of us had
ever heard of the Colonel or his book. Some of the interviews
never revealed before will be part of Mr. Knapp's lecture.


FYI-

Chris Sanderson







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                         Tim's Christmas Greetings!

From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 17:29:22 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:39:04 -0500
Subject: Tim's Christmas Greetings!


Dear Updates!

Lynda, Alexandra and I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year.

We look forward to the many challenges and battles of the New
Millennium and hope to meet as many of you as possible in the
coming months.

Please remember that we're always interested in hearing from you
and that we can be contacted as follows;

+44 (0) 1704 213517.

Seasons greeting,

Tim, Lynda and Alexandra Matthews.

www.angelfire.com/sd/discoveryuk/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 >
   Dec > Dec 24

                       As The Centuries Begin To Blend

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:39:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:39:49 -0500
Subject: As The Centuries Begin To Blend




To Subscribers, Readers at the Archive, Friends, Detractors,

At this time of festivities and wishes, Sue and I would like to
wish you all you wish yourselves and all you wish for others.

As the centuries begin to blend, may you and yours have a joyous
celebration and may we all, soon, be treated to revelations
that bring happiness and wonder.

And let us remind you of the words of

                          Deteriorata

Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort
there may be in owning a piece thereof.

Avoid quiet and passive persons, unless you are in need of
sleep.

Rotate your tires.

Speak glowingly of those greater than yourself, and heed
well their advice, even though they be turkeys.

Know what to kiss, and when.

Consider that two wrongs never make a right,
but that three do.

Wherever possible, put people on hold.

Be comforted, that in the face of all aridity and
disillusionment, and despite the changing fortunes of time,
there is always a big future in computer maintenance.

Remember the Pueblo. Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle,
and mutilate.

Know yourself. If you need help, call the F.B.I.

Exercise caution in your daily affairs, especially with those
persons closest to you; that lemon on your left, for instance.

Be assured that a walk through the ocean of most souls will
scarcely get your feet wet.

Fall not in love therefore; it will stick to your face.

Gracefully surrender the things of youth; birds, clean air,
tuna, Taiwan.

And let not the sand of time get into your lunch.

Hire people with hooks.

For a good time, call 606-4311. Ask for Ken.

Take heart in the deepening gloom that your dog is
finally getting enough cheese.

And reflect that whatever misfortune may be your lot, it could
only be worse in Milwaukee.

You are a fluke of the universe.
You have no right to be here.
And whether you can hear it or not, the universe is laughing
behind your back.

Therefore, make peace with your god, whatever you conceive him
to be -- hairy thunderer or cosmic muffin. With all its hopes,
dreams, promises, and urban renewal, the world continues to
deteriorate.

Give up.

- Tony Hendra, National Lampoon, 1972


Seasons Greetings from Sue & Errol







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:01:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:36:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:00:28 -0500 (EST)
 >From: David Rudiak <Rudiak@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


How they howl when the holy grail of ufology is attacked. My job
is not to do the skeptic's work. But frankly I'm tired of people
who know I'm a UFO investigator coming up and saying, "Oh yea.
That Roswell crash is something." When my finely honed
investigator skills say, horse-hockey!

 >Again, Thompson reveals his complete ignorance.  First of all,
 >the CIC or counterintelligence people involved were NOT
 >civilians.  They were military -- got that? Just because they
 >wore civilian clothing didn't make them civilians -- good grief!

Did you read my other post. I said I made a mistake on that.

 >I also notice that John Thompson doesn't respond to Stanton
 >Friedman's mentioned of Lewis Rickett.  Does Thompson know who
 >Rickett was?  Apparently not.  Rickett was one of those
 >"civilian" CICman who operated out of Marcel's office, and he
 >backed Marcel's story 100%.  He went to the crash site while a
 >major recovery was underway, involving dozens of military
 >people.  He saw and handled the anomalous thin metal material.
 >He reported a gouge, as did the rancher's son Bill Brazel (who
 >was a young married adult at the time, not some kid).  And
 >Rickett confirmed that it had been a saucer crash.

I also know that none of you talk about about Gerald  Anderson,
the star of Stanton's "plains of San Agustin" incident. Y'all
have just completely failed  to bring him in. I think he claimed
that he was a Navy Seal and wasn't? Something like that. If had
a dollar for every ex-sailor--if he was one even-- that claimed
he was a Seal I'd be a rich man! Also that " Kevin Randle had a
personality conflict with Anderson" (p. 89, Crash at Corona )
Could it be that Kevin, who was in the military, saw right
through Anderson? Stanton is always harping about people not
knowing about "securtiy clearances" welll he don't know beans
about how the military or its people work. Real Seals don't go
around bragging about it.

 >Maybe because Cavitt had contradicted himself so many times over
 >the years.  You could hardly find a worse witness for a Mogul
 >balloon crash.  He claimed the crash site was no bigger than his
 >living room, kind of hard to reconcile with a 600 foot tall
 >balloon train that was supposedly scattered over the
 >countryside.   Even after being prompted by his contemporary AF
 >counterintelligence interviewer about the alleged flower tape on
 >the Mogul radar reflectors, Cavitt claimed there was nothing
 >like that.  All the talk about alien hieroglyphics was made up
 >by saucer buffs trying to make money.

It's interesting that you and others keep bringing up how
"Cavatt... contradicted himself." I seem to have heard that
General DuBose has contradicted himself on what happened.

 >Furthermore Cavitt claimed to have never met Brazel, or ever
 >gone out with Marcel to the crash site, contradicting not only
 >Marcel, but Brazel as well in his 1947 Roswell Daily Record
 >interview.  Please explain to us how Cavitt could find his tiny
 >balloon crash no bigger than his living room out in the middle
 >of nowhere without Brazel leading him to the spot.

 >Cavitt in the past also denied being at Roswell at the time or
 >being in any way involved with the events.  But then the Air
 >Force tried to turn  him into a star witness for a Mogul balloon
 >crash.  Unfortunately they failed to brief Cavitt ahead of time
 >what the new story was supposed to be.  Instead they got caught
 >with Cavitt repeating the original weather balloon cover story
 >of 1947.

 >That Cavitt would continue to lie like this is a good indication
 >that he was still covering up something else.

Fifty years ago is a long time. And maybe he just didn't want to
fool with any whacko UFO researchers. The rest of the world does
not share our seal for this subject. Maybe, you didn't notice?
But when it came time to sign for the Air Force's report in the
'90s he seemed very capable of saying what he wanted.

 >Absolutely nobody backs up Cavitt's version of events, not even
 >his then assistant Rickett, who backed up Marcel's story
 >instead.  To this Cavitt tried to label Rickett a tall tale
 >teller and insinuated that he was mentally ill because he once
 >worked at a mental facility at one time.

 >I might add that Cavitt and Marcel were actually good friends
 >and the families often got together at Roswell.  Cavitt did not
 >attack Marcel in his interview, despite some prompting by Col.
 >Weaver, the interviewer.  Cavitt instead said that Marcel was
 >unusually intelligent, he could conceive of no reason for Marcel
 >to have made up his story, and furthermore, if Marcel said their
 >were markings on some of the recovered material, then maybe
 >there were. Cavitt had a lot of respect for Marcel.

If Cavitt is such a snake, backstabber and liar why didn't he
turn on Marcel? I suggest he humored Marcel's claim as he
genuinely liked the man and didn't want to hurt his feelings.
That does not mean that he didn't think Marcel was a good
officer. They were friends; friends try not to disagree...

On memory, even George Washington wasn't perfect. I'll give you
a personal example: I re-met a friend who was in Cambodia with
me at the end of the Vietnam War. Now we hadn't seen each other
for over ten years and I asked him about a shared event that
took place there. I thought at the place, Oudong, we had spent
two nights with a FANK (Cambodian) army brigade there. He said
two days and one night. After talking about it I agreed that his
version was right. And that was only 12 years after the event.
If I hadn't met him, I would still believe what I had thought.
I'm sure you can think of similar situations in your own life.

 >>>What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
 >>>to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
 >>>presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
 >>>Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
 >>>very different and no conventional materials were found. There
 >>>were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

 >>I talking about a Project Mongul balloon that went down, as the
 >>USAF, now says and the accident was Colonel Blanchard okaying to
 >>put out the press release that the Army Air Corps had recovered
 >>a "flying saucer."

 >So your claim is that AF counterintelligence came up with this
 >scheme to confuse the Soviets for decades, and they did all this
 >in the space of about an hour after the press release went out?
 >Then they totally dropped all mention of Roswell for the next 47
 >years until forced to respond by a GAO investigation (hence the
 >Mogul balloon theory)?  What happens to your claim of
 >intelligence nuturing Soviet belief in captured alien technology
 >over all that time?  And why would Soviet intelligence believe
 >any of this unless they had determined the saucers were real?

No. I'm saying it could've worked out that way with no one
trying. Another personal example relating to my experience in
Cambodia. I was there in the latter part of 1974. I was a
civillain with no government ties. You would be amazed how many
people thought I was in the CIA and refused to believe I had no
goverment connection. The more I denied it the more the locals
were convinced I was not being truthful. Suspicious people play
great mind games when something APPEARS out of the norm.

The Soviet had their own UFO sightings going on. Is it
concievable that they just tucked this info away and completely
forgot it? It's possible but I don't think so. I admit my idea
is a story line but its more plausable than your's when's
there's not a single scrape of physical evidence to proof UFOs
are nuts and bolts craft.. Actually why don't we settle for a
draw: Maybe neither happened as you and I suggest.

 >>>Whatever Thompson might suspect, historically the intelligence and
 >>>scientific consensus of the time was that the Soviets would be unable to
 >>>manufacture a bomb for many years.

 >>Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted in 1951 for giving
 >>some of our atomic bomb secrets away. They had been feeding info
 >>for a long time. The Russians, as another post to you correctly
 >>says, detonated their first bomb before then.

 >We have more of Thompson's argument by proclamation.  Although
 >there was much concern in 1947 about the Soviet's eventually
 >getting the bomb, very few experts thought they were on the
 >verge of having it.  Part of this thinking was based on the
 >war-devestated Soviet economy.

 >>I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
 >>Soviets from believing we had no alien technology. What was a
 >>screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
 >>thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
 >>something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
 >>denotated their first bomb.

 >Again, why would they think we had something if their own
 >extensive military and intelligence could determine that
 >saucer's were fictional?  Disinformation schemes like Thompson
 >is proposing only work if the other side believes something to
 >be true.  Otherwise they might just as well have tried to
 >convince the Soviets that we had captured Santa antigrav
 >technology.

Neither you or I know what kind of crazy ideas both sides have
entertained.

 >This raises the debunker dilemna that saucers are only a good
 >disinfo ploy if they are real.  But the whole point of trying to
 >claim they are a disinfo ploy is to demonstrate they are not
 >real.  And around we go.

 >In reality, the Air Force NEVER publicly encouraged the belief
 >that the saucers were real.  Quite the contrary.  And they
 >certainly never dropped hints that we might have captured alien
 >technology.  Roswell was almost totally forgotten until revived
 >by researchers like Stanton Friedman in the 1980's.

I've already answered that one. It could've come about by
"accident" and not design. To be clear, two accidents: First
calling something a "flying saucer" when it wasn't and then not
doing anything more after an intial retraction.  Again, you
don't know what intrigues went on behind the scenes. I don't
either  but it is most suspicious the way the USAF has handled
it in the '90s. There is some kind of secret  beyond the balloon
or the USAF is hopelessly incompetent. I hope the former.

 >The history on this is so clear, it is hard to
 >believe that somebody could call himself a UFO researcher and
 >not be aware of it.

No. I'm not a UFO researcher. I'm a UFO investigator. And that's
the problem with Roswell.

I see a bunch of people who popped in and popped out of Roswell
interviewing people and not doing much more. They believed, for
the most, what they wanted to believe. And everyone milked it
for a book When you got "a dog in the fight" it sure don't make
for objective reporting even with the most noble intentions. .
If one good objective investigator had been there over the years
and doing background checks on most of these so-called witnesses
and _listened_ to others who were there who did not agree with an
alien craft crashing this thing would have never grown like it
has.

For three years I pedaled the Roswell story as Stanton and
others told it. But after 50  investigations you start getting
somewhat savy. After a hundred you start realisizing that much
isn't as it is in the books!

What we have is "Lights in the Sky."  There is zero concrete
proof of anything physical. I've even meet someone who has
worked on a recovered UFO!

Got service records, everything to prove where he was and what
he did. Oh, I forgot to say he really can't back up your verison
of Roswell because he's not sure where the  craft he was working
on came from. I could tell you where the magical hanger at
Wright-Patt is too. I'll just go to my grave witht that secret!

 >>If you want to see what intrigues the Soviets went in scheming,
 >>misinterperting, and putting out disinformatin/misinformation, I
 >>suggest you read Armand Moss's fine book: "Misinformation,
 >>Disinfomation and the JFK Conspiracy Exposed." There are also
 >>several books out by former Soviet intelligence agents who show
 >>what paranoid thoughts Communist leaders entertained. The
 >>Roswell saucer story would have been discussed at all levels, if
 >>for nothing else, because it did get brief, but HIGH, publicity.

 >I can buy that they might have discussed it.  But Thompson's
 >claim is that they obsessed about it for 50 years and are still
 >obsessing about it.  And why would they do that if there was
 >nothing whatsoever to the saucers?  What evidence can Thompson
 >point to that would clearly indicate to the Soviets that we were
 >successfully exploiting alien technology?  Do we have fleets of
 >saucers waiting to bomb them into submission?  ICBMS tipped with
 >H-bombs are a very powerful deterrant and very real, not some
 >hypothetical boogeyman superweapon that might or might not be
 >true.

I didn't say they were "obsessed." They _might_ have been
entertained by it. And if one ruble was spent checking it out,
it took away from their defense budget.

 >>Of course, the Press has often been non-performing in their
 >>duties; still are. On the other hand, I suspect if they had done
 >>a "Watergate press" back then on the story we would've found out
 >>for sure that this was no UFO crash! This also explains why the
 >>locals buried the story so quickly.

 >Huh?

What's the "huh?" Are you too young to remember the Watergate
incident and how it came about? Now there were some reporters
that set their sights on Tricky Dicky's games. Why didn't any
big time reporters fly to Roswell and interview folks when this
happened? Why did they just published the Army's version of
events? It is rather strange how they were so trusting on a
story this big. But then again maybe they didn't believe in
UFOs. Nearly every city in America seemed to be under saucer
attack in July of 1947. Even my hometown had an attack.

 >>The fact is there is no concrete proof that multiple, reliable
 >>witnesses saw anything that was extraterrestrial.

 >It's easy to make sweeping statements like that simply by
 >declaring all the witnesses that did report something highly
 >unusual to be "unreliable."  That gets rid of that pesky
 >corroboration, so that Thompson can then go on to say:

Its not "sweeping" its overwhelming! You come up with two
witnesses who saw debris and yet ignore that they're should have
been hundreds.

 >>The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
 >>reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake.

 >Don't forget Rickett, another intelligence man in Marcel's
 >office who backed Marcel.  How about Gen. Exon, the former C/O
 >of Wright Patterson, who flat out said it was a crashed saucer
 >made of strange material?  Or Gen. Dubose, Ramey's chief of
 >staff, who corroborated Marcel's account of a cover-up in Fort
 >Worth.  Or Bill Brazel or Loretta Proctor, who collectively
 >corroborated Marcel's descriptions of the anomalous material
 >and/or crash site.

 >There is currently zero evidence that Marcel made a "collossal
 >mistake."  Does John Thompson know that Marcel's next
 >appointment was a SAC Chief of some sort of foreign air
 >intelligence position?  Is this the sort of position one would
 >expect for some guy who couldn't ID tin foil, paper, rubber,
 >balsa wood and Scotch tape?

Can you explain to me why the man who recovered a flying saucer
left the service only two years later as a Major? Why would he
leave active duty at all with this feather in his hat?
By-the-way, regular commissioned officers are what count. Are
you saying that Marcel never even held a regular commission as a
Major? An example: West Point graduates are commissioned with a
regular commission.

Most ROTC, officer candidate officers are commissioned with
reserve commissions.

Why would the man who help recover the greatest find in
mankind's history--to believe your story-- leave the military so
soon after? One other note: If you read military journals such
as the Navy's quasi-official Proceedings or the Marine's Marine
Corps Gazette you would understand that not to have _perfect_
marks means to be an inferior officer. This is a constant gripe
with officers, much like our allegedly great public school
system. Everything in an officer's records must look perfect to
be only normal. To look basically like an A- or B+ officer is to
mean he is a flop and  not to be advanced. Marcel to me looked
like he was on the fast track but then something happened.
Roswell?

 >Does John Thompson know that Marcel is listed in his records as
 >being a radar intelligence officer?  He had taken an intensive
 >course in radar intelligence only 2 years before, which included
 >a section on radar countermeasures.  The primary radar
 >countermeasure was aluminum foil chaff backed with paper, the
 >exact same foil-paper material they used on the radar targets.

I admit he should've known. There was, however, a tremendous
hysteria going on in the country at the time over UFOs. And the
rancher was saying he had one. It kinda reminds me of the
_three_ radar operators in Macon who said they saw and had a UFO
on their screens in 1996. However, on careful examination they
agreed they were actually looking at Venus and that it could've
been some kind of "ground clutter" that by pure chance was in
the same direction Venus was from them. Oh yea: These trained
and highly technical observors said  pilots saw the UFO too.
People makes mistakes all the time! Even the best.

 >>His son doesn't count.

 >No, of course not, and apparently nobody else counts in your
 >book, either because you are ignorant they exist or because you
 >choose to deliberately ignore what they had to say.  I don't put
 >much stock in the proclamations of some guy on Roswell when he
 >doesn't even know simple basics, like the CIC being military,
 >not a bunch of civilians.

Actually I can't take credit for this one. Bill Hendricks of the
Atlanta Constitution first brought this up to me. He went to
Roswell during the Love Feast of 1997 and talked to some of the
witnesses.

He pointed out what my own investigations were already showing:
Kids make horrible witnesses. They're boot to life and get
easily carried away on what they see; especially when their
loving dad is saying, "That's right. It's a saucer."

As Bill put it you only have two real witnesses: Major Marcel
and Walter Haut.( Of course, you got this other guy you keep
talking about.) But if you've been in the military and your low
on the totem pole, and a Full Byrd  says it's night and you know
its daylight, its dark! Haut only did his job; no more, no less.

 >Oh well, just declare Rickett and all the rest unreliable --
 >right?

One more story: I get this guy who says something wierd happened
at an army base. Most convincing but totally unbelievable. He
believes it happend; he almost had his former drill instructor
saying, "Maybe, it happened." Now I get another guy from the
other side of the coast calling me about something similar at
the same base and in the same year. And he claims it also has do
with my own UFO crash story. Yes, we got one for every season
and every state! I'm checking.

How much money do you think I can pump out of this one? NONE, if
it don't stand up _totally_...

 >>Their attempts in the '90s have been most clumsy and
 >>embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
 >>more attention to the matter.

 >Maybe because in reality their hand was forced by a GAO
 >congressional inquiry?  Does Thompson know anything at all?

Yep. But not because a saucer crashed.

 >>Who knows how much time, money and
 >>effort was wasted by the Soviets on UFO related projects because
 >>of them thinking that the U.S had a recovered disk?

 >Certainly not John Thompson.

Nor you.

 >>Maybe they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
 >>disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
 >>reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

 >Which didn't begin until the mid 1990's when forced to comment
 >by the GAO inquiry.  The AF has not exactly been nurturing this
 >story for 50 years.

Where's your _secret_ proof that they admit the Roswell crash
happened? You don't no and you don't know what kind of games
they've played with the Russians.

 >>>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >>>need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >Blanchard's >>career was not hurt as it should have been for
screwing-up. But >>as years passed and the Soviets denotated
their first bomb all >>was forgiven. The Roswell alien story was
not a bad thing afterall

You might want to talk to Bill H. on this. This is the only
thing that impresses him as being unexplainable on how a
commanding officer, who screwed up royally, went on to become a
four star general. After Marcel's story this is your only card
to hold.

 >Yep, those Rooskies couldn't be intimidated with a real A-bomb
 >and real bombers.  The only deterrant we had was to frightened
 >to death with the "Roswell alien story."  All it took was one
 >mention of it in 1947, and it has deterred them ever since with
 >never a reminder for almost 50 years.

We use all kinds of ploys. Anything that wastes their defense
money will do. It's not fact; just an idea. Roswell isn't fact
either!

 >>It was Blanchard's mistake, as he was in command. And at least
 >>in the 1940s, in the military, the "buck stops here." His
 >>mistake should've been a career stopper. It wasn't but there
 >>isn't a thread of proof that will now stand up to prove the
 >>Roswell or Corona--yes, I bought your book--crash involved alien
 >>technology.

 >Anybody could have deduced that much about the book just by
 >reading the jacket cover.  Has Thompson bothered to read beyond
 >that?

As you now know I read more. How about Gerald Anderson?

 >>So why did he make it past a level that most officers are never
 >>expected to see?

 >>My "plot line," as you call it, looks better and better. The
 >>difference between you and me is that I will agree it is only a
 >>pausible story-line.

 >A "pausible" story-line or a "plausible" one?  Thompson's theory
 >is so ridiculous and full of inaccuries that it is hardly
 >plausible, but maybe it is very remotely "pausible."

No more than your's.

 >>Your's is too. When its all said and done,
 >>with no proof, it's only entertainment.

 >Which is the only reason Thompson is here, not to discuss
 >anything intelligently.  That would require that he know at
 >least a few basic historical facts rather than mouthing off with
 >unsupported personal opinion.  He could start with such
 >conventional items as the CIC being military and the Soviet
 >A-bomb taking most experts by surprise.

One FOIA request stating what you say don't make it so!
Personally, being an ex-Marine I have more faith in what they
really thought was going on then. No one was that dumb to think
the Russians weren't moving right along on the A-bomb.

 >Oh, now they all have to be living?  Having affidavits and
 >recordings isn't enough?  The real question is can Thompson find
 >even one witness, reliable or otherwise, living or dead, who can
 >back up any of his noisy proclamations?

You obviously haven't investigated much. There are liars and
there are liars. If not lying they often embellished. Signing
statements and giving video testimony is good but not conclusive
proof of anything. We wouldn't need juries if everybody told the
truth! For the record I do not think Marcel lied but I do think
he was wrong. There is nothing to indicate anything that he
wasn't a fine officer. But lots of fine officers occassionally
make mistakes; even Generals.

 >>I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >>hell-of-a wallop. A thud that can be heard for miles around; one
 >>that shakes houses. I realise that the Roswell area in the late
 >>'40s is even more remote but you couldn't keep something like
 >>this under wraps; no way!

Again any recovery operation of an alien vehicle would not be a
get-in and get-out within only a few days. Even after nearly a
month with 300 trained recovery soldiers they still left bucket
loads of F-4 debris here.

Have you ever seen a recovery operation?

I was lucky to have lived only a mile away from one . Part of
the debris was actually on family connected land adjacent to
ours. I admit I had an advantage but I made it a point to learn
everything from it I could.

It would have taken thousands to have wisked that Roswell saucer
away in only days and not leave anything behind. If they only
had 300 men they would've been there well over a month and
still, at best,  done an incomplete job. And if Stanton keeps
growing his debris field they would have needed more time.

The F-4 crash had helicopters, air-lifted baby bull doziers and
lots of all terrain vehicles. Even a black beret Air Force
platoon for security.  They went over it again and again yet
recently someone found a two foot big piece othe F-4 they
missed..

 >>Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, would've been on the Roswell
 >>saucer crash over the years if it was true.

Hey, you might want to talk to my Wright Patt guy. But hey, I'm
not helping with your crash story.

If they did recover one it would just not sit in a dark garage.
People would be working and tinkering with it until they
completely reversed engineer it.  That might take years or
decades. But nobody has got anything and that explains why every
government that investigates UFOs quits: Because when it is all
said and done, they gather more data but know nothing more than
any good UFO investigator does..

 >>If only the same
 >>number turned out for the alleged saucer crash--I would suspect
 >>many more for that!--as the F-4 crash, most would've been young
 >>soldiers of only 18-25 years old. No, officers don't pick up
 >>that stuff!

 >No they don't.  People on the recovery scene like Rickett
 >(remember him?) reported seeing several dozen people involved in
 >guarding the scene and picking up the pieces.  Even if you up
 >this to several hundred directly involved in the recovery, it's
 >hardly the "tens of thousands" Thompson has invented out of thin
 >air.

See above for why two people don't cut it for something this
sensational...

  >There is always a certain
 >>percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >>woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

Well that comes back to investigating. Obviously, I'm talking to
a boot here. If you can't get enough experience please see the
Mexico City UFO video case--some came out of the woodwork for
it. Like the Drake equation, it's all a matter of numbers;
there's a certain percentage of our population that will be
unreliable.

 >I guess John Thompson would know.  (Yes, I know, a cheap shot --
 >I already feel ashamed.)

Yes it was but accouts are now settled.

 >>Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the Roswell
 >>crash involved a vehicle of alien manufacture.

 >There is one document,
 >photographed in Gen. Ramey's hand, which says "the victims of
 >the wreck you forwarded to .... Fort Worth, Tex."  That alone
 >tells us this was something much more than a balloon crash.  And
 >then, of course, there was that 1947 press release, which said
 >the AAF had captured a flying disk.

 >David Rudiak

Now, we're into reading tea leaves.

Well, my wife and children just got home from last minute
shopping. Gotta play Santa Claus. Kinda like Roswell.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                     Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 20:45:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:39:26 -0500
Subject: Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend


To everyone on the list,

A sincere Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all!

On the dawn of this new millenium, let us make sure that we, as
human beings, face up to the reality of UFOs and their occupants
(our neighbours in space) instead of suffering another 100 years
of ridicule and denial!

Cordially,

Michel M. Deschamps
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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

               Scientific American: Wormholes and Warp Drives

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:51:23 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:46:14 -0500
Subject: Scientific American: Wormholes and Warp Drives


List members may want to check out the January, 2000 issue of
Scientific American, which has a lengthy review article titled
"Negative Energy, Wormholes, and Warp Drive" by Lawrence H. Ford
and Thomas A Roman.

The article covers many of the buzzword proposed technologies
for achieving faster than light travel, including Michael
Alcubierre's warp drive and Morris, Thorne, and Visser's
traversable wormholes.  Also touched upon are time machines,
antigravity, and the Casimir effect, which has been proposed as
a possible way to extract unlimited energy from the vacuum.

All of these require the manipulation of negative energy, a
laboratory and theoretical reality, but an energy state that
also has severe theoretical quantum and thermodynamic
restrictions, according to the article.

The gist of the article is that while things like warp drive and
wormhole space travel might be theoretical possibilities, the
harsh restrictions placed on negative energy states probably
makes such things impossible to achieve in practice.

At least so goes current theoretical arguments and
understanding.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 19:28:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:56:23 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

 >From: Dennis Stacy
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:26:31 -0600
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:48:53 -0500
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

 >>From: Karl T. Pflock
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, Karl asked:

 >>Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
 >>alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
 >>origin--taking care to apply the principle of parsimony with
 >>very great care? Be very, very conservative...

Dennis replied:

 >To tell you the truth, not a heckuva lot. Us-from-the-future is
 >intriguing, but time-travel would seem to be even more daunting
 >than "average" interstellar travel.

Hi, Dennis!

Isn't time and space the same thing?

Happy holidays!

Roger Evans







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                    Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 17:46:06 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:03:22 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:08:02 +0000
 >From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >(by way of John Hayes <ufoinfo@ukgateway.net>)

 >      UFO ROUNDUP
 >Volume 4, Number 35
 >December 23, 1999
 >Editor: Joseph Trainor

 >UFOs SIGHTED IN MANY
 >CITIES IN CHINA

 >      China is in the grip of a major UFO flap.
 >There were hundreds of sightings in the last
 >week, and the flap has been reported in the
 >major Communist Party newspapers.

Dear Joseph [burp!]

Not to be a twit, but do you know of any mainland Non-Communist
newspapers?

The "Falun Gong Weekly" is out of print I would presume.

The last (only) time I saw China was in 1985 or thereabouts. An
ordinary citizen asked what newspaper I was reading on some
streetcar or whatever.

It was in English, and therefore highly suspicious in
appearance.

It was in fact the English-language edition of the "Peoples
Daily", a definite CP rag, which is in fact much better than
Pravda used to be. They actually have some news in there.

I indicated to the worried passenger that the paper was printed
in the PR of China, and therefore bearing the holy imprimatur of
the CP. My "fellow traveler" (literally, not politically) was
visibly relieved.

A long time local wag once said that "Larry Hatch is slightly
to the right of Heinrich Himmler." He was exaggerating, but its
a fact that I hated communism before I knew the meaning of the
word.

Nothing I have seen has changed that.  Ow Contrary; every damned
scrap of info I can find strengthens this early prejudice of
mine.

(burp!  Please forgive my French.)

Any person, institution or whatever that claims sole possession
of the truth is a farce by nature.

If somebody knows something, he need only show the evidence...
it will speak for itself.

Oddly, the Chinese have embraced the CP in a way the Russians
never did. They revere Chairman Mao the way yankees love George
Washington (I like Benjamin Franklin.)

Mao's predecessors must have been REAL assholes.

[end of rant]

Best burps for the beerdays

- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                  Re: Year 2000 Prediction by Gesundt.....

From: Jsmortell@aol.com
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 18:00:57 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:07:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Year 2000 Prediction by Gesundt.....

By Dr. J. Jamie Gesundt

1) January 5, 2000
Art Bell will join with Jeff Rense and Dr. Errol Bruce Kanappy
with a new show called, "UFO's Are Not Real,"
subtitled, "The Klass Files!"

2)  January 6, 2000, at 10PM local time
Earl Gray will expose himself (as being an alien, I mean).

3)  February 9, 2000
Art Bell, Jeff Rense and Dr. Errol Bruce Kanappy join forces
with reverse speech ex-spurt, William Jefferson Clinton, and
will begin a spin-off on UFO's are Not Real.  The show will be
called, "Expose Yourself!"

4)  March 15, 2000, at 3:47 PM (The Hides of March) local time
Oregon will slip into Lake Erie after the Pole shift. This will
occur when a lightbulb is inserted into the wrong socket in
Krakow by thirty-seven Cuban boat people.

5)   May 15, 2000, at any time
California will secede from the Union during the waxing gibbous
phase of the moon.  During the waning gibbous phase of the
moon in that month, Puerto Rico will become our 50th state.

6)  June 30, 2000 when it's least expected
Walt Disney, Elvis and JFK land on the White House lawn in
a garish saucer decorated with cha cha balls and a wild valence
with Roswell symbols embossed on it.

7)  July 4, 2000 at 10PM EDST
Henry Winkler joins the Bell, Rense and Kanappy team as
Director of Sightings, Rense resigns in protest and Bell sues
Kanappy who sues Bell who then sues Rense but they get the
name wrong and cannot serve the papers.  It's spelled "Rinse"
on the soupena... subpoena ... whatever.

8)  August 9, 2000 at 9AM Roswell time
It is revealed by the United States Government, that the Roswell
incident never happened.  It was supposed to be an interactive
Internet site, however Al Gore had not as yet invented it.

9)  Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt takes over the Bell show, the Rense
show and the Kanappy show after purchasing Canada and Mexico.
Dr. Gesundt runs for president of all three countries in a
November coup de tat...

10) Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt declares Gesundt Law in Boston, after
looting and rioting take place in Boston Harbor.  The riots
began after Gesundt places a tax on Gripple in a move to recover
after buying so much real estate.

Well, that's it.  We hope you enjoyed our predictions for next
year. There is one more but we are precluded from divulging this
one. It's the third Secret of Fateema, the wicked alien from
Mongo.  She's on Psychic Fiends at 10PM and you should call in
to aks her what this is all about.  She won't tell us and the
bitch doesn't drink.(She's my mother in law)

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt, Psychic

PS: July 4, 2000 during the day sometime Dr. Errol Bruce Knapp
changes his name to Dr. Errol Bruce Kanappy


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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                 Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:20:07 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:11:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:59:07 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell' Documentary
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<very large snip...>

 >Still further in the statement he says, "With regard to claims
 >that we tested this material by hitting it with hammers without
 >damaging it, I do not recall any of us doing so.  I also did not
 >test this material for radioactivity with a Geiger counter (or
 >anything else)."  Here he is in conflict with Marcel's statement
 >that some of the men picking up material did "test" it by
 >hammering on it in order to permanently dent it, by attempting
 >to crease it and by attempting to burn it.  Marcel said they
 >were not able to dent it, burn it or crease it.  Bill Brazel, who
 >collected small amounts of the material during a two year period
 >after the crash, said that he, too, was unable to crease or dent
 >it.  (He didn't try to burn it.)

Great hypothesis.  I've always leaned toward the more
conventional (and sinsiter) explanation to make sense of the
Marcel/Cavitt discrepancy: that Cavitt had been coached prior to
making his statements for Weaver.  But the bit about the Geiger
counter is quite interesting in either the old conspiracy angle
or Bruce's new theory. In short, why on Earth would the team
investigating a crash of an "unknown" (and I stress that the
crash in question may or may not have been _the_ Roswell crash)
NOT bring a Geiger counter?  This seems like a very logical
precaution for a couple guys investigating what, for all they
know, is a downed Soviet device (working "next door" to Trinity
Site and Sandia, at that!)

I interpret Cavitt's not remembering the Geiger counter as
overkill; bringing a device along to a cash site to check for
radioactivity sounds rather too "important," for the allegedly
humdrum jaunt Weaver reports.  This would tend to add weight to
the Cavitt-as- liar theory.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:31:52 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:13:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:41:21 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >>From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >>Subject: Corso?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Hello list,

 >>I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >>there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >>published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >>write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >>Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >>death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >>released.

 >Dear Ralph:

 >I'm no Corso expert, but I watch this and other UFO lists
 >closely.

 >I believe that my personal opinions of Corso and company are
 >pretty much in agreement with most of the saner readers of these
 >lists, namely that you can take the contents of his book with a
 >heavy grain of salt.

For the record, Corso and William Birnes (his ghost-writer,
identified on the cover of _The Day After Roswell_) planned on
writing a sequel called _The Day After Dallas_, about the
Kennedy assasination.  It's a safe bet this was to be a rather
sensational account as well, but then again Corso _was_ involved
with the Warren commission and very well might have had
something interesting to say about it.  I exchanged some letters
with Kal Korff after reading the anti-Corso essay on his
website.  Korff claimed _Dallas_ was a hoax; I asked him how he
could know such a thing since it had never been written, and he
stopped writing me. Also, payment for _Roswell_ wasn't all that
spectacular.  One could argue that Corso had nothing to lose,
since he was old, but this must remain conjecture until we know
more.

My impression of Corso is one of sincerity.  I think the events
in his book might have very well taken place, generally.  Korff
has demonstrated some impossibilities in several dates used in
the book, but nothing I can honestly point to and cry "hoax"!
This step is a bit harder for me than it is for others.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:49:45 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:16:00 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:26:31 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
 >>alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
 >>origin--taking care to apply the principle of parsimony with
 >>very great care? Be very, very conservative...

 >Karl,

 >To tell you the truth, not a heckuva lot. Us-from-the-future is
 >intriguing, but time-travel would seem to be even more daunting
 >than "average" interstellar travel. A different dimension I
 >don't much like, either, but maybe we're all guilty of
 >anthropocentric thinking here -- like we had a real alternative!

The idea of a quantum multiverse has been proven to my
satisfaction by probable-soon-to-win-the-Nobel physicist David
Deutsch in his insightful book 'The Fabric of Reality'.
Granted, Deutsch doesn't get into the specifics of
interuniversal travel, but I find this (or a version of this)
fairly attractive.

To elaborate on a previous post, I doubt that we're dealing with
flesh-and-blood "aliens."  But the intelligence in charge--call
it "VALIS" (Vast Active Living Intelligent System*)--wants us to
think we are at this particular point in our psychosocial
development (i.e. people in Ireland in the 17th century didn't
"mistake" aliens for fairies at all; VALIS, I suspect,
insinuates itself into our belief systems).

 >Even Star Trek's Prime Directive is anthropocentric when you
 >think about it -- a sort of Cosmic Eleventh Commandment, as it
 >were. And, yeah, like everyone would follow it just like they do
 >the Terrestrial Ten.

VALIS, by necessity, would be a very patient mechanism, probably
predating human consciousness.  So I think the "hurdle" of
anthro- centrism is illusory: these are _not_ discrete entities
with biological desires and motives.  They're pawns of a very
well- maintained _postbiological_ intelligence.

 >What we've got on our hands is a real good mystery, anyway you
 >look at it.

 >I'm still looking for a good translation of the Roswell I-beam
 >hieroglyphs.

 >Two possibilities come to mind:

 >1) Made in China

 >2) If found, please call this number...

 >Other alternatives welcome.

"To Build Your Very Own Flying Saucer, Insert Tab A Into Tab
B..."

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                        Re: Filer's Files #51 -- 1999

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 21:30:33 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:21:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #51 -- 1999


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:02:30 EST
 >Subject: Filer's Files #51 Happy Hollidays
 >To: undisclosed-recipients:;


Dear George:

"Some Christian writers have speculated that UFOs could very
well be a part of God's angelic host who preside over the
physical affairs of universal creation."  -GF

Please stop that.

I would prefer to have a higher estimation of your critical
abilities than the statement shown above.

- LH

PS: I like Southern Comfort too, but not at this price. Please
don't be angry.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:03:30 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:24:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 13:50:57 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Has anyone else heard any official comment by the Army or Air
 >Force on Corso's claims in his book?

 >Anyway, to answer one of your other questions, Corso's
 >ghostwriter, William Byrne, definitely took an interest in UFOs
 >after his interviews with Corso, and is now the publisher of the
 >American magazine, UFO. Byrne was clearly impressed by Corso's
 >claims and was, in my opinion, to blame for some of the
 >inaccuracies in Corso's book.

 >I think Larry Hatch is right when he said most researchers have
 >written Corso off as unreliable. Yet...

 >Pat McCartney

Dear Pat:

Thank you for a thoughtful and kind essay.

I can only speak for myself, and my  personal opinion remains
that the contents of Corso's book are fiction.

Thank you for responding in a non-majuberous manner.

You are a gentleman (or some red-head) depending upon gender
as the name  "Pat"  implies no particular Irish gender.


Very best wishes

- LH

PS:   I live very close to San Francisco where "gender matters"
are largely majuberous. The same cannot be said of
conservative Redwood City, CA where the sceotic population
distrusts trees that shed their leaves too soon.  -LH









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:20:38 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:27:28 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:26:31 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:51:51 EST
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>Dennis, and anyone else out there, what can you suggest as an
 >>alternative to an extra-solar planet as a point of
 >origin--taking

<snip>

 >Karl,
 >
 >To tell you the truth, not a heckuva lot. Us-from-the-future is
 >intriguing, but time-travel would seem to be even more daunting
 >than "average" interstellar travel. A different dimension I
 >don't much like, either, but maybe we're all guilty of
 >anthropocentric thinking here -- like we had a real alternative!

 >Even Star Trek's Prime Directive is anthropocentric when you
 >think about it -- a sort of Cosmic Eleventh Commandment, as it
 >were. And, yeah, like everyone would follow it just like they do
 >the Terrestrial Ten.

 >What we've got on our hands is a real good mystery, anyway you
 >look at it.

At last one point of agreement!

Yes, the UFO "thing" exists as a goddam good little mystery, if
nothing else.

All Corso's aside, we are faced with a mystery.

All of Art Bell's liver and lung rejuvenating formulas (3
bottles for the price of two) will not solve it. Neither will
excesses of believerism nor neo-sceology.

UFOs remain the most majuberous subject on this Earth, and all
the sociologists on Earth cannot resolve it by waving hands or
thumping on some book.

(End of monotribe.)

- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                      Most FOIA Users Seek Info On UFOs

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 11:36:05 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:29:16 -0500
Subject: Most FOIA Users Seek Info On UFOs


Source: The Nando Times,

http://www2.nando.net/noframes/story/0,2107,500146251-500175985-500692416-1,00.h
tml

Stig

***

Most FOIA users seek info on UFOs

Copyright �1999 Nando Media
Copyright �1999 Scripps McClatchy Western Service

By MICHAEL DOYLE, Nando Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Even though John Moss was a California politician
of considerable foresight, the author of the Freedom of
Information Act author never imagined the legislation who worked
so hard on would be used so often to track UFOs.

A Sacramento Democrat, Moss spent 13 years getting FOIA through
a hesitant Congress. It was, Moss said, essential to equip the
American public with information so they could be responsible
citizens.

Thirty-two years after the Freedom of Information Act's 1966
enactment, an individual used Moss's handiwork to file a request
with the secretive DIA. The requester, identified only as Case
No. 0195-1998, wanted the agency's supposed files on "the
disappearance of Frederick Valentich in October 1978; he
reported being followed by a UFO."

Those conversant with UFO mysteries know the Valentich name
well. A 20-year-old Australian pilot, he disappeared in his
Cessna 182 after reporting a strange flying object over the Bass
Strait between Australia and Tasmania.

For everyone else, the request for secret Valentich and UFO
files represents one of the unimagined consequences of the
Freedom of Information Act. Without anyone expecting it,
Americans tracking UFOs became among the most persistent users
of the law.

"I don't think that this was something contemplated in the
legislation, though it certainly wasn't excluded," said Michael
R. Lemov, a Washington attorney and former staffer for Moss. "I
must say, it wouldn't have been one of the priorities."

And yet, for some agencies, UFO-related requests have become all
in a day's work. At the privacy-loving National Security Agency,
for instance, a Bee review shows that UFO-related requests
accounted for about 123 out of 832 total requests last year. No
other single subject -- not Princess Diana, not missing POWs,
not worldwide surveillance programs -- received nearly as many
requests.

The UFO-related requests to the CIA used to be about as common,
though the agency's posting of available files on its Internet
site -- http://www.foia.ucia.gov/frame2.htm -- has relieved much
of the pressure.

"It's part of the myth that's out there," CIA spokesman Tom
Crispell said, "that the CIA is somehow involved in the cover-up
of aliens...there are so many individuals out there that believe
in the conspiracy."

But UFOs are only part of it. In a world filled with Oliver
Stone movies, "The X-Files," and some admittedly bizarre
government behavior, secret agencies provoke the most colorful
FOIA requests.

There was, for instance, the 1998 request to the CIA for a "copy
of the $50,000,000,000 reward contract which is only on file" at
CIA headquarters. It's not apparent from the agency's FOIA log
what the supposed reward was for. Another individual demanded a
copy of the "CIA Torture Manual," while a certain Mr. Hughes
used FOIA to seek "the amount of CIA budget that is allotted for
the use of prostitutes, pornography, exotic dancers and
brothels." A perennial request at CIA is for information about
the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

"Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue
probably will not go away soon, no matter what the Agency does
or says," historian Gerald Haines wrote, in the CIA's on-line
"Studies in Intelligence."

The requests can be all-encompassing, as when a Mr. Andrew
Sparkes demanded "all documents pertaining to U.F.O.'s in the
possession of the Department of Energy." They can also be
narrowly focused, as when a Mr. Derek Liddell asked the National
Security Agency for "documents relating to a near head-on
collision between a helicopter and a UFO on 10/18/75 in
Mansfield, Ohio." A requester to the Defense Intelligence Agency
had an apparent statewide focus with a February 1998 request for
agency information on "aliens in Virginia."

And, the requests can be, seemingly, Hollywood-inspired. In
January 1998, for instance, an individual asked for the Defense
Intelligence Agency files on "Men in Black."

Nor are the questions aren't limited to the nation's spy and
military agencies. In early 1999, for instance, a resident of
the small New Jersey town of Stanhope submitted three requests
to the Agriculture Department seeking the department's supposed
UFO files.

On their own, the UFO requests came seem odd. But government
files made public through FOIA also peel the cover back on some
events that remain inexplicable to this day, even if they aren't
other-worldly. It was FOIA, for instance, that made available
the previously secret memo recording a 1976 aerial encounter
between Iranian fighter jets and a strange, fast, bright UFO
near Tehran.

"The credibility of many of the witnesses," noted the disclosed
memo, which is now available at the NSA's Internet site, "was
high."

**

Copyright �1999 Nando Media










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #331

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 06:40:07 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:38:31 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #331


Apology to MW #331 (For December 25, 1999)

I'm just ONE voice in this crowd, and though I've listened hard
(out loud <g.>), so UNCONVINCING are these men who'd teach we
are *alone*, my friend. I have listened to these *learned*, read
their work (completed college), and they do NAUGHT but leave
deep holes -- shallow thinking . . . stunted souls. They pretend
reality, dismiss the facts that won't agree, and counterfeiting
history they sell their old hypocrisy.

I look into a starry sky and see potential, depth and time. I
realize that there's enough (of all the truly needed stuff) to
sail passed imagination -- passing ANY protestation. ALL that we
believe we'd fail, our rabid fictions, legends -- tales, has
happened in those stellar reaches... there to torment, stress
and teach us. Lost in time and dusty space, could live the
creatures of some race who'd solved the problems that we face or
vanished there without a trace. . .

We would think they CAN'T be here -- assign to them our limits,
fear, and make out like they won't surpass achievements WE might
make at last? We pronounce imagined *laws* and tell them where
their line is drawn. We pronounce our *flawless* physics airily
like fools not "with it". We ignore new paradigms if they don't
fit tradition's rhymes, and we don't care to spend the time to
do REAL work -- a likely crime.

We're a bunch of sad pretenders, charlatans and glad offenders
living in a noxious past that gloats obscenely, if you ask. No
one finds the facts they need all mixed with misdirection's
breed to keep their status quo alive so they can *live* while WE
survive. Hear them tell you "no free lunch", and bear down for
their endless crunch. Complacent, they're a charmless bunch;
they just don't care. That's more than hunch.

Something's hidden, and despised, well wrapped within a maze of
lies, and we can't put our finger ON our *strange* discomfort --
*dear* and strong. We're tied or mated to our fear in ways to
make control more *clear*, and so won't question pretty lies
that weave their phony web -- disguised. We have wives and
husbands -- children... mothers, fathers, other brethren . . .
needing forecasts they can trust to plan a future as they must!
We would have it solid, useful, realistic, substantial --
truthful. We'll grow tired of your usual, grow cynical -- had a
snoot full... riot in the streets, at last, when we discover
what's gone past... that time just may be coming fast, when
you're the one confused -- harassed.

I don't have the "facts", I'm told, by churlish goons and
shallow scolds. I'm the liar, I'm accused, when I would point
where we're abused, and offer that we can't get *facts* from
cyber-thugs who grind an axe. Something not admitted slinks
behind facades of fishy stinks, and it would change the way we
FEEL to know, at last, what's true and real! Someone knows the
real deal, will take what they can grab and steal, and make
their judgement (so unreal!) as to, then, how YOU should feel.

I'm standing here, my leg is damp, you're saying that it's
*raining*, champ! Trouble is, I heard your zipper, hear the
smirk inside your whisper, smell ammonia, (used asparagus?) --
you should drink more water. Careless! I can't believe what you
propose; it's blown from Aristotle's nose -- that saucers shan't
command our skies, that time and space won't prove you lie, that
we are hidden, unobserved, so quite alone, and *undisturbed*. I
don't believe your mechanisms, I don't go in for your religion,
I don't *buy* your evening news, or think that cops should never
lose. You have earned my hard disgust. It grows as you provoke
mistrust. Insult (try!) just makes me harder, more intense
(increases ardor), and I, at last, regard the sky -- those tiny
points of light described, FEEL space (a living thing!) and KNOW
there's more than what YOU sing...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

I look up and hear Mozart and Beethoven. You offer an assumptive
monotone of "How Much is that Doggie in the Window." Thanks, but  . . .
I'll just keep looking up.

Oh, and... you know who you are.

Restore John Ford!


--
~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/
                  **<Updated 25 December>**
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." - GiX-Mozilla-Status: 0009t 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 >
   Dec > Dec 25

                Filer's Files #51 -- 1999 - Complete Version

From: Majorstar@aol.com (by way of John Hayes <ufoinfo@ukgateway.net>)
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 13:15:56 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:41:03 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #51 -- 1999 - Complete Version


Hi Errol,

The original copy of Filer's Files that both you and I received
was incomplete. The full copy is below in case you have not
received it.

Season's greetings to all.

John Hayes.
=========


Filer's Files #51 -- 1999, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
December 24, 1999,  Majorstar@aol.com  (609) 654-0020
Web Site at www.filersfiles.com. Chuck Warren Webmaster.
Free Daily UFO/ET Newsletter via E-mail! http://www.ufonetwork.com/

A BLESSED CHRISTMAS and A BRIGHT NEW "YEAR

At Christmas time, we hear many stories about Angels visiting the Earth.
There message is that God not men is the final authority.  In the first
chapter of the New Testament we're told the Holy Ghost visited the Virgin
Mary and that an Angel of the Lord visited Joseph.  When Jesus is born the
Magi or Wisemen from the East follow a star and are able to find the baby
Jesus.  Technically a star is very difficult to follow because stars appear
to move as the world turns on its axis.  It is more likely that the star was
an unidentified light hovering high in the sky. Jesus Christ when he grows up
declares, "He was sent by his Father in Heaven and in my Father's house there
are many mansions and I go to prepare a place for you."  His statements infer
this is a place or planet in the northern sky.  He gives a message of
morality and peace.  Obviously there are many interpretations of his
statements, but much can be interpreted in relation to both angels and aliens
and extraterrestrial travel. Psalms 91, 10-12 gives us a great promise that
the angels watch over us.

"No evil will befall you nor will any plague come near your tent. For He will
give His angels charge concerning you.  To guard you in all your ways.  They
will bear you up in their hands, Lest you strike your foot against a stone."

The Bible claims that the angels are sent by the Father in Heaven who
promises the greatest gift of all, 'eternal life.'  We can speculate at this
time of year that the religious stories of the past are related to the signs
and wonders we see in our skies now.  I've studied the Bible, the Torah, the
Koran and many ancient writings.  The angels, the messengers of God, brought
the Holy Scriptures to man.  Think of these ancient writings as not only
religious but as technical and historical doucuments. The Bible describes
over a hundred appearances of angels as well as many UFOs in surprising
detail.  Their message provides comfort in our lives.  Billy Graham the
friend of most of our recent Presidents wrote in his book "Angels,"

"Some Christian writers have speculated that UFOs could very well be a part
of God's angelic host who preside over the physical affairs of universal
creation."

I wish you all a most Merry Christmas and thanks for your many letters and
friendship you have shared with me this past year.  I look forward to a
bright and fruitful future because after all we have great wonders and signs
in our skies.  My hope is that your life will be filled with good health and
joy and that your guardian angel continues to protect you.

NEW YORK SIGHTINGS BY TWO SECURITY OFFICERS

GLENS FALLS -- The witness stated, "On Sunday, December 19, 1999, myself and
another security officer who was a mile away were discussing our previous UFO
sightings on our cell phones when I saw one again."  It was a brilliant white
pulsating light, with an orange tinge that slowly rose into the sky.  My
friend held the line open as he headed to a field for a better observation
point. Finally, he informed me he also had the light in view. The object
hovered for 5 minutes, drifting left, then right, then back to a center
position. The object turned on red strobe, and slowly drifted towards Glens
Falls.  I feel the object tried to disguise itself, as within minutes, Air
Force planes from the north and west seemed to converge on our area. This was
our third Sunday sighting just before or after dark. The first sighting was
on November 28, when the object hovered and bolted north into the
Adirondacks, like lighting at an estimated speed from zero to 3000 mph.  In
the second observation object went out like a flash.  Although, we work for
different companies we are observant security officers who have both
witnessed the UFOs. Thanks to www.nymufon.org.  Larry Clark and
proserver1015@interland.net

NEW JERSEY FLYING TRIANGLE

SEWELL - MUFON's Evelyn Galson turned in her investigation of a triangle
shaped UFO observed by Chris Augustin a web designer.  On July 17, 1999,
Chris looked up while throwing something in his trashcan.  The lighting
configuration on a low flying object was very strange.  The triangle had
three white lights, one in each corner and a center red light.  It flew from
west to east towards the Atlantic Ocean very slowly.  The craft was much
lower than normal traffic at an estimated 500 feet altitude and was three
times the size of the full Moon.  It appeared solid with sharp edges and
making a low humming noise.  Thanks to Evelyn Galson and Chris Augustin.

WEST VIRGINIA SIGHTINGS

HUNTINGTON--I was a skeptic until I had my 1st & 2nd dramatic UFO sightings.
My 2nd sighting left me with a wonderful feeling and a tingling sensation up
my back and over my head. I said to the UFO "I know you-I know who you are;
I've seen you before." Then it blinked out. Now that I have met sincere
people with similar encounters, I know that this is a real phenomenon.  Do
you think these individual contacts are preparation for eventual contact?
Thanks to Joe Gardner JOSEPOPI@camelot.serve.com

MISSOURI HOVERING LIGHTS

COLUMBIA - My wife was taking my daughter's friend home on December 8, 1999.
They were headed east on Route HH, when my daughters' friend spotted the
object at 9:30 PM.  It scared my wife as she thought it was an airplane
crashing into the trees.  It came from the north and crossed their path.  My
wife was afraid to turn onto Kircher Road, because the object was hovering
over the trees near the road. It was moving sporadically, hover and then
move, hover and move again. The children had their windows down and the
object made no noise as it hovered. The distance was hard to judge, but since
it is a heavily wooded area they must have been very close to see it for as
long as they did. They didn't want to report it for fear people would think
them crazy, but many others also reported the same exact sighting.  A boy in
the area, witnessed the object floating over his house. My wife was not a
believer in UFO's but now she's changed her mind.  I asked them why they
couldn't make out a shape of the vehicle at such close range? They all said
the lights were so bright that they couldn't see anything, but large
brilliant landing-like lights. My wife recalls seeing white and red lights as
do the children. They claim that the lights are much brighter also. Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director, National UFO Reporting Center

NORTH CAROLINA UFO

ASHEVILLE -- Hi my name is John.  "On a night in October 1998, I was riding
in a golfcart at the hotel where I work and I saw a bright red light more
less hovering high in the western sky." So I went around to the back of the
hotel and walked up a fire escape for a better look.  It was very high as far
as I can tell.  It would get a very bright red for a while and then fade out
buy not on a regular basis just kind intermittently.  I watched it for about
10 minutes and it was drifting up and to the right very slowly. I saw at
least two aircraft fly nearby and I know they had to have seen it also.  I
went back down the fire escape and knocked on the door of the gift shop and
asked Phyllis to come see this.  She and I watched for five minutes.  It
would get very bright and then get dimmer and finally just disappeared
completely.  A few minutes later Mike and George came by on their rounds, so
I told them what Phyllis and I had seen.  Mike said, "Is that it?"  The UFO
was there again?  So all four of us watched for ten more minutes.  I had to
leave but Mike told me that he watched it for about 10 more minutes.  The
next morning it was on WLOS morning news and six people had called the
police. Thanks to John at flybowee57@email.msn.com

FLORIDA UFOs SEEN NEAR SHUTTLE LAUNCH

CAPE KENNEDY -- After watching the shuttle launch on July 25, 1999, at 12:24
AM, I went back to the Intercoastal waterway on Jeffrey Street in Boca Raton,
at 2:30 AM to check my catfish lines and saw a "star twinkling red yellow and
green."  I immediately loaded my 35 mm camera with 800 ASA speed film and put
on 270 mm lens, and set it on my tripod. Looking through the lens I
distinctly saw smaller craft appear one at a time right next to the
"mothership" in formations of three's, four's and five's.  They put on the
greatest laser light show that you could ever imagine, shooting colors at
each other.  Wile visiting my mother in Boca Raton, we watched shuttle launch
on CNN. The TV news conference indicated there were allot of problems with
the launch, and you could see the concern on the faces of the NASA people.
After watching the liftoff on TV we ran from mom's condo about fifty yards to
the Intercoastal waterway and were able to clearly see the shuttled headed
due east. About 2:30 AM, I noticed a strange "star" about 45 degrees above
the horizon in the northeast sky just below the seven sisters constellation.
After I set up the camera, Billy woke up and confirmed what I was seeing.
I'm 46 with 20/20 vision but the eyes of an 8-year-old are much better. We
also had 8-24*50 Legacy Binoculars. The larger object appeared white and
round. About every 15 minutes it would turn completely opaque or translucent.
Although you could still see it, it appeared as star pulsing colors.

I focused each frame with the main object in the bottom portion of the circle
of the 270 mm lens. As Billy and I watched the round white dot through the
lens a smaller dot or craft would appear right next to it on the right. Then
another object would appear, then another, and they would flash colors at
each other. These craft formed triangles, squares, and circles, depending on
how many decided to appear at once. Then these smaller craft would either
leave or turn their lights off, leaving only the larger white dot. Billy and
I never took our eyes off this object until daybreak when it slowly began
going up and to the left about 7:30 AM.  Our photographs show the mothership
in color with red on the bottom and green on top, quite different from what
we saw through the lens. I used automatic exposure on most of the shots,
which kept the lens open for three seconds.  You can detect the small
movement of the main craft during these exposures by the slight trailing of
the green on top and red on bottom. I took quite a few photos with the
smaller craft doing the formations near the mothership, there are trails of
distinct colored objects all over the frames showing up as red, yellow then
green.  The bottom of the larger craft shows objects sitting on the "deck" in
some frames.  I can see a triangular shaped craft in the middle of the deck
surrounded by smaller dots on the edges of the deck.
  An amateur astronomer reported seeing a similar object with an 8" Celestron
from Miami Shores. He saw a disk shaped craft with a definite dome. " This is
exactly what I saw in one of my photographs. The image I have shows a
definite dome shape, red on the bottom and green on top.  Thanks to Patrick
Mullarky mullarky@hotmail.com

INVESTIGATION OF LOCO, OKLAHOMA UFO VIDEO

Jim Hickman-Director, Aerial Phenomena Research Group has received data from
the Norman National Weather Service on the July 11, 1997, radar images
showing a possible UFO.  Several of experts were consulted to come up with
this version.  "These radar images were obtained from the Twin Lakes (near
Oklahoma City) National Weather Service radar at 7:18 PM CDT on 25 May, or
about three minutes before the "object" was videotaped. Reflectivity is
shown, which relates to rainfall intensity in order of increasing "warm"
colors (blue to green to yellow to red indicates increasing intensity). The
"object" video was shot looking northeast from just to the left (west) of the
dot representing Loco, OK (near the center of the zoom.  This location is
about 75 miles SSW of the radar site. Due to earth's curvature, the radar
beam was at a height of about 6,500 feet above ground level at the video
location.  Also due to the earth's curvature, the radar was unable to "see"
anything below this height. These displays are presented only to show the
relative positions of nearby thunderstorms near the time of the "object"
sighting.

They do not show the "object" itself.  They should be considered inconclusive
as evidence in regard to any direct scientific investigation of the "object."
The "object" was not, nor could it be, resolved by the radar.  There are
several reasons for this. First, the "object" was below cloud base     (which
was around 3,000 feet in this case), and thus was well below the radar's
"horizon." Second, estimations of the "object's" size (50 feet or less)
indicate that it was far too small to be resolved by the radar at that range.
  Although weather radar's can detect very small objects in certain cases,
they are not designed to resolve specific properties (such as size, shape,
speed) of objects smaller than the width of the radar beam.  The beam itself
is a narrow "cone" that increases in diameter (or width) with increasing
distance from the antenna -- much like headlight beams, only much narrower.
At a range of 75 miles, the beam width on this radar is about 7,000 feet.
Therefore, it cannot resolve details of individual targets smaller than about
1.3 miles wide. (This value would be smaller for targets closer to the radar,
and larger for more distant targets.) Third, even if the     "object" were
high enough or large enough, the radar antenna takes at least 20 seconds to
rotate through a full 360-degree sweep. The chances of it being pointed in
the right direction at the exact time of the "object" (which was on video for
only about 1.5 seconds) are extremely remote.

What the radar does show are intense thunderstorms, measuring about 10 miles
or more in average diameter and extending about 50,000 feet or more in
height.  Details of the structure of these storms, down to a resolution of a
mile or so, can be seen.  The storm that was being videotaped is seen just to
the north and northeast of the video site. The storm structure exhibits an
appendage or "hook" extending westward from the main core of the storm.  This
feature, among others, is indicative of possible rotation in the area of the
appendage.  In this case, rotation was confirmed by the video in the form of
a funnel cloud extending from a lowering in the cloud base known as a "wall
cloud." Thanks to National Weather Service and Jim Hickman
http://www.itlnet.net/users/jhickman, aprg@itlnet.net

UFOs SIGHTED ON TEXAS LONG RANGE RADAR

PERRIN FIELD -- Navarrone Technologies writes that in 1953, I was a Radar
Tech at Perrin Field North of Dallas.  I was performing routine maintenance
on a PPI scope (Plan Position Indicator) when I spotted a huge blip in the
New York area.  I called an Officer, who was the Operator, and we watched as
the Blip split into nine smaller ones, flying in formation.  The bogies did
not respond to IFF interrogation.  Radio contact from the radar hut was made
to Denver and Salt Lake bases, and they confirmed the sighting.  Perrin Field
was a long-range early warning base; we could measure distance and azimuth
but not altitude. F-86 Fighters from Perrin Field and other fighters from
Denver and Salt Lake were ordered to intercept and destroy. They were
staggered at altitudes of 500 feet, to try and get a visual sighting. The
formation of UFO's was heading directly towards Dallas. We watched as the
fighters were heading to intercept; the UFO's had crossed the border of
Oklahoma and entered Texas by this point. When the fighters got to about 20
miles of interception, the UFO's stopped dead in the air, made a right angle
turn and took off towards the Northwest. We calculated their speed at about
8000 miles per hour.

There were 8 officer Radar Operators and 3 Radar Techs in our Hut during this
episode.  Within ten minutes after the final sighting a group of about 8 men
in civilian suits, and 14 uniformed armed guards came into the Hut, separated
us, and took us at gunpoint to a hangar on the other side of the field. We
were each interrogated for about 4 hours and during that time had to draw
diagrams of what we saw, and write a written narrative of everything that
took place during this "encounter".  After having the fear of God put into us
about NEVER talking about this incident to anyone, we had to sign a document
that threatened us with a $10, 000 fine and 10 years imprisonment for
violating the Official Secrets Act.  These objects, whatever they were
violated the laws of Physics, as we know it. I don't think there is any doubt
that they were not of this Earth.  Thank you for your efforts in trying to
end the secrecy. God Bless, Chandler Yergin

MEXICAN UFO VIDEO

MEXICO CITY -- December 8, 1999, executive Jose Gerstl awoke at 7:20 AM, and
saw for the first time in his life a OVNI (UFOs) in the sky on a clear
morning and only a very short distance away. At first the object looked like
a small balloon. But in a few seconds, it began moving forward and backwards
slowly. Jose ran for his videocamera thinking that this could my chance to
tape one of those strange objects. The object seemed to have gotten closer.
It was a clear morning with a bright sun at 7:45 AM, so I had a good view and
with my camera's zoom lens I made some close-ups of the OVNI. It had an oval
shape and the sunlight reflected on the left side of the object. About 4
minutes passed when suddenly it emitted some kind of beam of bright light
from the center and then the light turned from yellowish to reddish in
sequence and then returned to white again. The sighting lasted almost 8
minutes, Thanks to Jeff Rense and Santiago Yturria OVNI Investigaciones
Mexico.

UFO SHOT FROM SATELLITE MOST LIKELY THE MOON

Russel Kirchner phoned to inform me that the GOES might have photographed a
large dark mother ship UFO.  Russel started a rather large controversy with
many readers sending in different opinions.  Bob Young was probably the first
to write that the Moon was most likely the object photographed in space on
November 21, 1999, at 14:45Z hours.  Bob wrote: The satellite is
geosynchronous, that means that as the Earth turns (360 degrees in each 24
hours, or 7.5 Moon diameters each 15 minutes) the Moon will rather quickly
move out of the field of this picture.  The previous pictures had the Moon
way over to the left, 7.5 diameters, and the next picture had the Moon behind
the Earth. The thing is that at the time of the picture the Moon exhibited
the phase of the oval and it was in the position of the object.  Since there
aren't two oval objects in the location of the Moon, unless the UFO was, by
great coincidence, in front of the Moon, the mystery of this picture seems to
be solved.  Bob Young (YoungBob2) said, I am NOT supporting the UFO claim,
and now it appears neither is Nick Balaskas from York University.

Nick at first felt it was not the Moon based on the UFO's shape, dark color
and size.  Nick has revised his opinion: "Jupiter was at opposition (opposite
the Sun with respect to the Earth) a month before the November 21, GEOS
picture."  Why does it appear to be behind the Earth in the picture I
thought?  Well, since the Sun was not shining directly down on the Earth but
a little to the right, Jupiter would be roughly at the location where Sky &
Telescope says.  Then I thought, where would the Moon be with respect to
Jupiter? Well, since the Moon moves by just over 12 degrees in the sky each
day and according the my Observer's Handbook the Moon had the same R.A. or
celestial longitude as Jupiter on the 20th at about 22:00Z, then 3/4 of a day
later when the GEOS picture was taken the Moon be nearly 10 degrees further
east (to the left of the picture).  Since I calculated earlier that the Earth
in the GEOS picture was about 20 degrees across, the Moon would indeed be in
the general vicinity of the UFO is in the picture. Conclusion: Our "...Giant
UFO in Earth Orbit" is now an IFO - the Moon.  Thanks to Nick Balaskas
Physics and Astronomy York University, Canada.

Nicla Camerin writes, "He has also observed the UFO in the NOAA Satellite
photos.  These objects are NO a moon.  I looked at the images for the day
before and after at the same time.  If that object had been the moon, it
would have been there on those days as well.  The moon was only a quarter
more or less but doesn't appear the day after or before.  But I'm sure that
is not the moon.  The image appears to be a full disk, and in the left corner
you can see another 'spot'.  I zoomed in, and rendered and seems to be
another 'object.'  Do you have any idea at what timing are get this satellite
images?  In the full disk 4 seems to be a 'blur' in the top-left part instead
of the bottom are defined.  In the full disk there seems to be some kind of
heat around the object. Which the images are UV, IR of the goes satellite of
this series? Thanks to Nicla Camerin niclacc@cantv.net

National Weather Service professionals that use the photos everyday have an
interesting opinion.  Gary writes: "I am of no help with respect to the
Goes-8 images you sent me.  My immediate thought was a transmission and/or
processing error.  I have looked at tens of thousands of Goes images and I
have never seen the moon.  So, I think that is out.  Also, I would think that
an advanced alien society would not get caught in a somewhat low-tech weather
satellite image." Have a great holiday!". Thanks to Gary and Jim Hickman.

Here again are the controversial photos:  There is some disagreement if the
moon will show up on infrared. Anyone know?
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c01.jpg
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c03.jpg
http://spica.cira.colostate.edu/jpeg/325/1999325144514i08_fulldisk_c04.jpgFBI

"Robert Selover writes,  "In the photo, the "moon" appears elliptical in
shape - I wouldn't think such an expensive camera setup could produce such a
distorted representation of an essentially "round" object." Then, there's the
infrared photos which also seem to show the same elliptical shape as above --
again representing a generally round planet with the same profile and
orientation with respect to earth.  I'm really curious -- how does the moon
come off as appearing elliptical with the same profiles and earth-wise same
orientation in both simple unfiltered photos and in corresponding IR photos?
There is an apparent optical distortion. Thank "Robert Selover"
<rselover@tln.org

  John locker writes close inspection, and the time stamp indicate this to be
an image of the Moon.  Anyone with Satellite Toolkit software can confirm
this by viewing the Moon, from the position of the Goes geostationary
satellite. Those "windows" are the Ocean of Storms, the Sea of Rains and the
Sea of Clouds. Thanks to: satcom@cybase.co.uk (John locker)

I constantly surf around the NOAA website checking out the satellite images
for interesting "landmarks."  I can explain the UFO seen in the GOES 8 images
from Nov. 21, 1999. The UFO is actually the Moon!  It is not an alien space
craft as speculated.  Here is what happens: When the moon, the earth and the
Goes 8 satellite are at a precise position its cameras catch the moon in the
image. Please refer to: NOAA websites.
http://www.osei.noaa.gov/Events/Unique/Other/UNImoon239_G8.jpg
http://www.osei.noaa.gov/Events/Unique/Other/UNImoon239_G8L.jpg
http://www.osei.noaa.gov/Events/Unique/Other/UNImoon344_G10.jpg
http://www.osei.noaa.gov/Events/Unique/Other/UNImoon344_G10L.jpg
Hope this helps your experts, Mark Lennox, York University, Toronto, Canada

CHINA REPORTS SUDDEN SURGE IN UFOs

BEIJING: JM Mariojouls, Skywatch China Director in Macau reports that a
strange UFO was seen all over the eastern area between Shanghai and Beijing
on December 10, 1999.  Clear pictures of it have been aired on a Hong Kong TV
channel.  I'm contacting everyone I know to get more info and the pictures.
Until now, the UFO has been described as a very strange ball leaving a trail
of smoke behind and flying up (at least on the pictures). Dec. 10, 1999 --
(Agence France Presse) China is undergoing a sudden surge in unidentified
flying object (UFO) sightings, always with the same description, the normally
staid official press said Monday.  The Beijing Youth Daily published an
article on the sightings Monday with a photo of two airborne oblong luminous
objects taken the night before by China's central broadcaster.  The newspaper
said the photo, which resembles a pair of missiles, was taken above the
district of Changping, north of Beijing.

In another article, illustrated with a similar photo taken above the capital,
the newspaper carried witnesses accounts of UFO sightings on November 14 and
December 11.  Shanghai's press weighed in last week, reporting -- with a
photo -- on two local UFO sightings on the same date at the beginning of the
month, at roughly the same place and time.  "It was oblong, yellow, with a
shiny pointed top and a white tail," said Mrs Yang for the Liberation Daily.
An aviation expert who saw video footage of one of the sightings was quoted
as saying the object was neither an airplane nor a meteorological phenomenon,
but an "artificial flying object." (c) 1999 Agence France Press)
jmexit@macau.ctm.net.  Editor's Note: The Communist Chinese government is
very sensitive to signs and wonders in it's skies. Several million imprisoned
Christians and the Falun Gong tend to take them as a sign of support.

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.  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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                  OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999

From: Diane Harison - Keith Basterfield Network <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 00:57:05 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:08:17 -0500
Subject: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999


OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' 24th.12.1999"

14.08.1999, Location: Logan Village. Bobermien Road, Duration of
sighting: 20 minutes, Time: 9.15pm

(Source: 1800 Freecall Australian UFO Research Network Hotline
Number)

Observation: 45 degrees to the horizon, Direction:Westerly
direction to

Jimboomba Township Shape: Ferris wheel, Size: 50 cent piece at
arms length, Lights: Colour white, 50 or more Weather: Some
cloud mostly clear, Number of witnesses: 6 The UFO was seen by
15 people from all different locations of southern

Brisbane. To date we have not been able to identify it.

SOLVED 24th 12 1999
While everyone was wrapping their Christmas presents Rob & I
went out to wrap up a mystery after receiving a phone call from
Shanna regarding a

sighting that was happening right  there and then. Some list
members may remember the OZ UFO Ferris Wheel that occurred
August 14th 1999. The AUFORN  UFO Hotline received a call from
sharnna

to say it was back. Rob & I decided to go and  investigate to
see if we could  solve this mystery once and for all.

The last time it was sighted it stayed around for some 40
minutes so we took a hunch and drove out to the area in hope of
catching a glimpse of this elusive UFO and Bingo we found it.

Its always good to solve a UFO mystery especially one that has
caused so many sightings. Thanks to Robert Frola's great eyes
and my driving we finally found the light source.

It was local resident and business person Mr Cameron McGregor of
North Maclean he owned up to being  the captin of the Ferris
Wheel spaceship. When we told him we had been looking for the
light source for quite sometime he gave out a great big belly
laugh and said your lucky I was just about to turn it off.

Mr Cameron said the night of 14th August 1999 he and his wife
were celebrating her 50th birthday, her present was a laser
light show with 2 very big Griven Tracer 4000w which can be
visible for up to 20 Kilometers away each has 4000w HMI lamp and
you can be use them in all kinds of weather.

Mr Mc Gregor said in future he will drop us a line so we know
where he will be. He said he didn't realize how much trouble the
lights would cause, he said its a new business "I started only
four months ago.

On a couple of occasions the police have come out to ask him to
kill the light show due to their Emergency OOO line was being
inundated with calls from concerned residents.

Cameron informed us the places in which he had been in the last
4 months.

Ispwich twice:  (1) Council party (1) Happy hour at one of the
local pubs Toowoomba:  Just after the carnival of flowers it was
such a clear night the lights were seen by some one at
Stradbroke Island.

Carindale: Calamvale: Jimboomba:

Beenleigh: Greenbank: Browns Plans:

Main Event
Warning "NEW YEARS EVE Street PARTY" JIMBOOMBA
( 2  by 4000w Griven Tracers will be putting on a show)

Thankyou to CWM Productions Hire Mr McGregor for being such a
good sport about it all.
If you would like to hire the Tracers you can call.
Ph/Fax 061 7 32000529 or Mobile 0413 612267


Griven Skyrose 2500w

The popular wider angle multi-beam high power sky
projector,available in HMI 1200 or 2500 lamp version. Beam
rotation speed, scanning speed and

amplitude, strobe and black-out are controllable from on board
controls or remotely via 0-10V controller. As with all Griven
sky-projectors,fully weatherproofed.Power factor correction on
the HMI 2500 version

Griven Tracer 4000w
Our highest power multi-beam sky projector with ten degree
beam,visible at up to 20 Km distance, dependent on ambient light
and atmospheric conditions. On board or remote(0-10V) control of
beam rotation speed,scanning amplitude and scanning speed as
well as strobe and black-out.Polyurethane finish and completely
weatherproofed.The projector head and mount can be separated
from the base unit.A lamp timer is incorporated,as its power
factor correction.

Code
GR0030/
Lamp
Discharge lamp 4000W/SE
Base
G38
Nett weight
104,5
Guide to typical throw distance
15-20 Km
Mains power supply
380V
Control signal and number of channels
0-10V 4 CH
Beam Angle
10,5�
Manual adjustment

[] efskyros.1_jpg.jpg

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                      Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 12-25-99

From: Rense E-News <jocelyn@dewittec.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 13:16:56 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:12:32 -0500
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News   12-25-99


----------------------------------------------------------------
                     Jeff Rense Weekly E-News
----------------------------------------------------------------

                         The Week Ahead
                     12-26-99 thru 12-31-99

            Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories
                       From sightings.com

                Jeff Rense E-News is distributed
                exclusively by Free Subscription.

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

               * H A P P Y     H O L I D A Y S *

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--


                      * FROM JEFF'S DESK *

More interesting events in China...apparently hundreds of major
sightings...reported by the official PRC press...

    From Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
    Editor - UFO ROUNDUP  Vol 4, No 35  12-24-99

    UFOs SIGHTED IN MANY CITIES IN CHINA

        China is in the grip of a major UFO flap. There were
    hundreds of sightings in the last week, and the flap has been
    reported in the major Communist Party newspapers.
        "China is undergoing a sudden surge in unidentified flying
    object (UFO) sightings, always with the same descriptions."
        "The Beijing Youth Daily published the sightings Monday
    (December 13, 1999) with a photo of two amber oblong objects
    taken the night before by China's central broadcaster."
        "The newspaper said the photo, which resembles a pair of
    missiles, was taken" in Changping, a city 70 kilometers (42
    miles) north of Beijing.
       "In another article, illustrated with another photo taken
    above the capital (Beijing--J.T.), the newspaper carried
    eyewitness accounts of the UFO sightings of November 14 and
    December 11, 1999."
       "Shanghai's press weighed in last week, reporting--with a
    photo--on two local UFO sightings on the same date at the
    beginning of the month (December--J.T.) at roughly the same
    place and time."
       "'It was oblong, yellow, with a shiny pointed top and a
    white tail,' one of the witnesses identified only as Mrs. Yang
    told the (newspaper) Liberation Daily."
       "An aviation expert who saw video footage of one of the
    sightings was quoted as saying the object was neither an
    airplane nor a meteorological phenomenon but an 'artificial
    flying object.'"
       "The Beijing Youth Daily theorized that the sightings could
    have been illusions created by fumes from the engines of jets
    lifting off at dusk."
       (See Agence France Presse for December 10, 1999, "China
    reports sudden surge in UFO sightings."  Many thanks to
    Jan H. Raabe for the AFP report.)
_____

And that Oz 'golfball-sized meteorite' story is still under
serious investigation...

    INVESTIGATORS PROBE GUYRA UFO CRASH SITE

        Guyra, a small town in northern New South Wales,
    Australia, continues to be the focus of interest following the
    crash of a mystery object into its reservoir dam last week.
        On Friday, December 10, 1999, authorities in Australia
    stated that the damage to the dam, which resulted in a 12-
    meter cavern, had been "caused by a small meteorite about the
    size of a golf ball.  Police said the meteorite was embedded
    about 14 feet into soft rock and could not be quickly
    removed."
       On Wednesday, December 8, 1999, retired Col. John Auchettl
    and Dr. Ron Barnett of Phenomenon Research Australia (PRA)
    flew to Guyra from Melbourne to begin an on-site
    investigation.
       According to Col. Auchettl and Dr. Barnett, "We went over
    the impact site in more detail. We arrived at the site very
    early on the 8th and checked out the location with a number of
    research tools.  The radiation level at the site was at normal
    background levels.  That night, an IR (infrared) camera was
    used to look for hot spots�none were found.  Samples have been
    taken and will be looked at."
       Col. Auchettl and Dr. Barnett found a number of interesting
    anomalies at the purported UFO crash site.  These include:
         (1) The object's angle of entry (approach) to the dam was
    very shallow, less than 45 degrees.
         (2) No one in Guyra heard a sonic boom or an explosion
    prior to the crash.
         (3) The reeds have burn marks, "which is most unusual in
    a meteorite impact."
         (4) The reeds were flattened "in a strange shape, not
    quite like an explosion but with the characteristics of a
    compression wave."
         (5) The mud splash indicates that the object "may have
    skipped on the water" before hitting the dam.
        A fossicker (prospector in the USA--J.T.) claimed to have
    seen "a comet-like object" heading towards Guyra the night of
    the crash.
        Doug Strang "was having a beer and watching the sky near
    Mount Isa" in northwestern Queensland when "something passed
    overhead."
        Strang reported that he saw "an object with white
    taillings.  It was already burning up, and it was going at a
    nice steady pace.  I mean, was it a shooting star? It looked
    like a comet.  It was obviously burning up."
        "And as it moved toward the horizon, it split into three
    or four sections.  What I did see was four smaller white dots
    in alignment, and then nothing.  That was it. I didn't seen
    anything fall."  (Many thanks to Diane Harrison of Australian
    UFO Research and Kenneth Young of Cincinnati UFO Research for
    this report.)
    (Editor's Comment: Evidence of a compression wave followed by
    a mud splash suggests a large object as opposed to "a
    meteorite the size of a golf ball." It could have struck the
    dam and then rebounded into deeper water.  The UFO may still
    be at the bottom of the reservoir.)
_____

The Xmas Files
http://www.space.com/spaceimagined/area51/xmas_files_991223.html

By Michael Battaglia - Staff Writer

Xmas File 12-99XF
Case #19 -  Agent Wolff Molder
Interrogation Notes

U.S. Postal Service Police Bureau branch office.
Minneapolis, MN - December 11, 2:15 P.M.

It was the busiest Xmas I'd ever seen. The interview of this
eyewitness went like all the others. The subject had been brought
into the hospital ER in tatters, suffering from exposure.

Considering what the victim had been through, he was quite cogent
� even remarking, 'They're gonna' let me outta' here tomorrow
mornin' � seems like ya need to be a lot sicker than me to be
welcome in a hospital nowadays.'

"HMO, huh?" I quipped to relax him as the hypnotist made her
preparations. Lately, I can't seem to interview witnesses without
one. But that's par for the course when you are investigating an
Xmas-File case. I started the session -- "Now if you don't mind,
we're going to help you remember, Mister--"

"--Gritt. Strom Gritt. Look, yer shrink can keep wavin' that
shiny thing in my face, but ya ain't gonna' have any luck puttin'
me under. Fact is, they tried that hypno-thing on me in the Army
an', an' ...."

He went under.

  "It was a real tinny mechanical-like voice. I looked around, but
only that varmint thing was there. Then I hear somethin' like 'We
love you' in the same voice. Well I'll be darn fool if it wasn't
comin' from the rodent! The thing was walkin' on its hind legs
even!"

"Finally," I told the hypnotist. "Now, Mr. Gritt, I want you to
think of yesterday afternoon. Can you tell me what happened?"

"Sure can. It began like any normal December day."

"'Normal' meaning...?"

" 'Normal', meanin' I was out hunting grouse."

"Get anything?"

"What's that got to do with what happened?"

"You didn't, then."

"Yeah. Anyhow, there I was, it was just gettin' dark and I was
trackin' in the snow. That's when I saw these oddball prints.
Sorta like a rabbit's -- but really like nuthin' I'd ever seen
before. At first I didn't make much of it, then, all of a sudden,
I see this strange green glow comin' from the trees up ahead. So
I approached, real slow like. I went 15 yards or so -- that's
when I saw it in the clearing. A big, ah, how can I say it?--"

"Saucer-shaped object?" I suggested hopefully.

"More like a giant factory -- big as a warehouse -- And it was
hoverin', oh, I'd say a good 50 feet up. An' there was this ramp
leading into trucks--

"What kind of trucks?"

"Regular type trucks"

"From Earth?"

"Where else?

"Go on Mr. Gritt," I urged.

"Well, there's these smaller boxes -- made of cardboard, it
looked like to me -- hundreds, no, maybe thousands of 'em. And,
they's all moving down the ramp and into these trucks, ya see. So
I snuck up closer, makin' sure they didn't see me. That's when I
saw it --"

"Saw what?"

"All of them boxes had somethin' inside."

"Can you describe what they looked like?"

"I'd be glad to. Except I can't. Ya see, right behind me I
suddenly feel this kind'a presence. I turn around and sure
enough, there's this -- animal. It resembled some kind'a raccoon,
but without a mask--and not as big. But, come to think of it,
more like a squirrel, but maybe bigger -- but with a face more
like a bat. Anyhow, I drew my rifle up real slow like and got a
bead on 'em -- not to shoot him, mind ya, I only had a grouse
permit ya see, but just in case he tried somethin', I figured I'd
be ready.
He could'a had rabies, ya know. Then, all of sudden, I hear, 'u-
nye mee-mee noo-loo'."

"Could you repeat that, Mr. Gritt?"

" 'u-nye mee-mee noo-loo' -- It was a real tinny mechanical-like
voice. I looked around, but only that varmint thing was there.
Then I hear somethin' like 'We love you' in the same voice. Well
I'll be darn fool if it wasn't comin' from the rodent! The thing
was walkin' on its hind legs even � I swear it."

He was breathing heavy now, even under hypnosis.

"Then I see another one. And another -- Pretty soon I was
surrounded. But here's the topper -- when they see each other
they all start dancin' an' singin' -- in that crazy language.
Before I could get it all figured out, there's this flash of
light -- and next thing I know, I'm plugged into this I-V bottle,
talking to an agent of the federal government, an' drinkin' out
of a straw."

"Calm down, Mr. Gritt, everything's going to be all right." The
hypnotist brought him back from slumberland with her usual
command -- 'Okay sir, when I say 'swamp gas', you'll wake up
refreshed, and will not remember a thing about your encounter.'

That's pretty much how all of the eyewitness stories went. As I
compared the accounts, I had come to realize this was no run of
the mill Xmas-File.
_____

Wishing each and every one of you extraordinary people the best
holiday ever.  And may Y2K turn out to be the biggest non-event
of the century.

                  --<>--  --<<<+>>>--  --<>--


One man's life touches so many others, when he's not there it
leaves an awfully big hole.   - Clarence the Angel in "It's a
Wonderful Life"

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        * EDITOR'S CORNER *

Well, one new hard drive later, one program I've been unable to
recover from the crashed old one is my email program or any of
the files or address books. So many of you sent such wonderful
contributions to be put in our special New Year's edition. Please
send again. For those who are new, we will be printing the best
of the emails of what will change for you this year, what you'll
do differently after this Y2K wake-up call (which we are
optimistically assuming that's all it will be).  Please send that
to mailto:jocelyn@dewittec.net?Subject=A_Vital_Change

If you have unsubscribed and have received another issue, some
the unsubscribes and subscribes information was also lost.
Please email again (jocelyn@dewittec.net) Please do the same if
you've had friends that you know of who have signed up yet not
received their issue.

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

You've heard about them. They're referenced in the "authorized"
Bible... fragments in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They tell of
watchers, giants, luminaries, the places of heaven & hell, men
who bind stars, the end times... and change your view of so
much...     http://www.immunotex.com/books/enoch/

                    --<>--  --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                          * TOP STORIES *

             Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
                      http://www.sightings.com

   * Y2K - Website Will Monitor 2000 Sites At Rollover
   * Exposing The Myth Of Man-Made Climate Changes
   * UFOs Near Shuttle Launch?  - NY Security Officers See Craft
   * Fake Terrorism - The Road To Dictatorship
   * Y2K - Fed And Treasury Set Up Special 'War Rooms'
   * Scientists Find Glitches In RHIC 'Big Bang' Machine
         - Test Delayed
   * Having Kids Early Can Shorten Lifespan
   * Y2K - NRC Tells Reactor Operators Not To Upgrade Defenses
   * Iris Scans Replacing ATM Cards? Public Test Termed
        'Overwhelming' Success
   * Has Dr. Randall Mills Discovered A Entirely New Unified
         Physics?
   * Field And Stream Article Agrees Bigfoot 'May Exist'
   * Genetically-Modified Processed And Whole Foods List
   * Gift-Wrapped Presents Banned From US Airports
   * Y2K - NY Mayor Giuliani Going Into Underground Bunker
   * Researchers Say Millennium Will Bring End to World in 2043
   * Apocalyptic Letdown - What Happens If The World Doesn't End?
   * Joe Firmage Comments On The Eve Of The New Millennium
   * Y2K - Pearl Harbor In The Making? All US Nuclear Aircraft
         Carriers In Port
   * Y2K - Canadian Scientist Hopes Rollover Will Shut The Planet
         Down
   * 'Hordes Of Weirdos' Descending On Israel - Police Arresting
        Scores
   * 30,000 To 50,000 May Have Died In Venezuela's Floods
   * It Isn't Everyone's Millennium
   * Planet X Or Nibiru: DeathStar-2003...Where Will You Be?
   * When Police Meet The Paranormal - New Book
   * 'Biggest Moon' Myth Sweeps Internet
   * Moscow Says It Will Now Use Nukes In "Smaller Scale" Wars
   * 1999 Darwin Award Nominees
   * Big New Year Millennial Celebration Online
   * A Spy's Revelations About ECHELON And Surveilling Citizens
   * US Pokemon Toy Craze Makes Children 'Monsters'
   * Forensic DNA Test Results Of 'Starchild ET' Skull
   * For The First Time, Light From Another World Has Been Found
   * Y2K - Thai Air Grounds Its 12-31 'Confidence' Flight

      Read the entire text of these stories and more at
                     http://www.sightings.com

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

France, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and various US
Territories can now Get Paid to Surf, as well as the US, UK,
Canada, Sign up today! It's free!
http://alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=AMR609

                   --<>--  --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
                        12-26 Thru 12-31

(Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can change due to late
breaking stories, etc)

SUN 12-26
   Stanton Friedman:  A Century Of Ufology Considered
   Scott Sperry:  Y2K Preparedness Update

MON 12-27
   Dave Oester And Sharon Gill:  Ghosts Among Us

TUE 12-28
   Graham Conway, UFO BC:  Canada UFO Report
   Scott Portzline:  Y2K Nuclear Plant Safety Status

WED 12-29
   Jim Berkland:  Earthquakes At Syzygy
   Capt. Russell G. Evans:  The Panama Canal Giveaway
   From Australia:  Dr. Helen Caldicott:  Nuclear Reactors And
       Weapon Dangers

THU 12-30
   Stan Freberg:  The One And Only
   John Hogue:  Messiahs Of The Millennium
   Jay Weidner:  A Monument To The End Of The World

Fri 12-31
   Y2K - Live Special Coverage
   Joseph Farah: Editor - WorldNetDaily.com
   Many others pending...

Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

The secrets of the pyramid are being found - but they are not
being  disclosed to the 'public'.  But there was a copy or two of
the  Hidden Mysteries of the Pyramid that didn't disappear. Find
out why  the others did.
                http://www.immunotex.com/pyramid/

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                    * 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.

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

Surfing pays!! Free signup. Substantial additional income
possible.  http://alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=HGO808


We thank eGroups for providing this tremendous service to us.
The following ad is inserted by eGroups and is not affiliated
with Jeff Rense.
_______________________________________________________________





------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE ADVICE FROM REAL PEOPLE! XpertSite is the biggest directory

of Experts on the Web. For a REAL PERSON who will be happy to answer your questi
ons!
http://click.egroups.com/1/472/0/_/1973/_/946156731

-- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 16:14:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:20:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:22:33 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>The vehicle observed by Civil Engineer Barney Barnett in the
 >>Plains of San Augustine which came down almost intact was less
 >>than 30' in diameter. A saucer shaped craft would have a much
 >>lower surface to volume ration than something with wings.

 ><snip>

 >>Stanton Friedman

 >Stan, List,

 >Allow me to pick a nit.

 >The above excerpt exemplifies much of what is wrong with current
 >ufology -- which is a tendency to take a verbal or anecdotal
 >account as the fact or thing itself. As a writer, you ought to
 >be more careful with your use of language.


Dennis,

I think you recognize that my 2 sentence comment  was a very
informal comment trying to respond to a particular claim. It was
clearly not intended to be a scientific article submitted to a
professional journal. I had already referenced sources...

 >One cannot say with authority that the vehicle Barnett saw came
 >down intact and was less than 30 feet in diameter, etc. --
 >unless you have absolute and incontrovertible proof of same.

The notion that one can only relate that for which one has
absolute and incontrovertible proof is obviously a very great
overstatement.

You ran Kent Jeffrey's very long article about Roswell in the
MUFON Journal.

There was no proof of anything in it except Kent's ignorance
about how security works.

My detailed comments are available on my website at:

http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html

Certainly Mr. Thompson's comments were made with a load of
misinformation and no proof of anything except his ignorance of
the Roswell story.

 >Here is what you _can_ say with authority:

 >The vehicle Barnett _said_ he saw was relatively intact...

 >Or: The vehicle Barnett _told_ friends he saw...

 >Or: So-and-so _said_ that Barnett _told_ him that...

 >Or: Reportedly, according to, allegedly, claimed, and so on.
 >These are all journalistic qualifiers which serve to inform the
 >reader that what follows is based on anecdotal testimony, ie,
 >what someone _said_, and should be taken accordingly. To say
 >that the vehicle Barnett saw was so-and-so is an _assertion_ of
 >fact, unwarranted because it can't be proved.

 >It sounds like a small affair, I admit, but this is how claims
 >and anecdotes get solidified into historical "facts" in the UFO
 >literature when they are passed from one source to another, and
 >from one writer to another.

 >An assertion by anyone (even the President of the United States)
 >is not necessarily the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
 >the truth -- an assertion that everyone ought to keep in mind!

 >Dennis Stacy

I certainly agree that an assertion by anyone is not necessarily
the truth as I have so often noted.

But please let us not confuse absolute proof and evidence.

If what I said is the best example of what is wrong with
ufology, than ufology is in far better shape than I think it is.

Many of the comments made on this list are based entirely on
armchair theorizing, and a total absence of investigation or
having done one's homework.

I am reminded of an old line that one is more entitled to an
opinion for which he cannot account than a beer for which he
cannot pay.

Happy Holidays to all.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                     Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 22:07:17 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:22:14 -0500
Subject: Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend


 > From Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto

Happy Christmas Errol, Sue and all

Along these thoughts one did cross my mind.

When the French eat chicken, do they say "this tastes just like
frog legs"?

--
    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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                   UFO Sighting Report OZ File 26.12.1999

From: Diane Harrison - Keith Basterfield Network <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 10:36:07 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:29:51 -0500
Subject: UFO Sighting Report OZ File 26.12.1999


UFO Sighting Report OZ File 26.12.1999

FOLLOWUP Diane Harrison AUFORN 1800 Callin Code: 00426
06.12.1999 ( CE2 )

1800 Callin Code: 00426 06.12.1999 ( CE2 )
Date Reported: 09.12 1999
Time reported to Hotline 5.15pm
Date sighted: 06.12. 1999
Day Reported:Thursday
Day sighted: Monday
Time Reported: 2.30am

Location: New England HWY Between Armidale & Glen Innes "Guyra
          area"

Witness: Brian Renworth aged 74 years a credible witness

Description of object: Huge White & Orange Object - lots of
      lights.

Report:

Brian called to say he was a wittiness to a UFO. He thought he
had better call because he had seen the report on TV about the
Guyra object crashing into the dam.

Another very credible witness rang me on Thursday 09.12 .99 she
told me she had called the Armidale police station to find out
if anything strange had been reported on Monday 6.12.99 a Police
women said she had heard that quite a few reports of a strange
red beam of light had been seen coming down from the sky on
Monday evening of 06. 12.99. An other credible witness told me
that Guyra had 2 short power blackouts on Monday evening??


Taped Interview with Brian Renworth
Day: Thursday
Date Recorded: 09.12 .99

Diane: You said you where traveling from NSW to Queensland
between 2.00am and 3.00am in the morning.

Brian: Yes thats right , that was on Monday morning.

DH: Brian could you explain what you saw while travelling up the
road near Guyra?.

BR: Well I don't know if I passed Guyra or if it was before
Guyra. Now on this section of road there were hundreds of red
and white reflectors, it looked like a busy traffic
intersection. There were no vehicles other than myself and a
trailer coming a long way back behind me.

DH: How far back would you say the trailer was?

BR: A quarter of a mile I suppose.

DH: Was the truck close enough to see what was going on?

BR:He had his big lights on and they were worrying me, I had
mine on at low beam. When I saw all this frizell of lights ahead
of me I thought what the hell was it. It just looked like a
landing strip and as I approached it I was struck with this red
light, it just lit everything up and everything went red.

DH: Everything went red?

BR: Yes and I could feel the heat of what ever it was.

DH: Brian could I just clarify something. When you said you saw
something that looked like a landing strip what kind of shape
did you see?

BR: Well it was just like both sides of the road it looked like
an island in the middle of the road on both sides.

DH: An island did you see a shape at all?

BR: It just was a maze of reflectors ahead of me so I had to
slow down

DH: Were the reflectors in any sort of pattern?

BR: They were on both sides of the HWY and down the middle of
both lanes, they looked like they were every 10 feet for as far
as you could see.

DH: You said when you got close they all turned to a bright what
colour?

BR: This red glow what ever it was lit all the white reflector,
they went red. And I was totally blinded.

DH: When that happened what did you do?

BR: Well I just drifted along and slowed down on the other side
of these lights.

I got away out of them and then I slowed down because I couldn't
darn see.

DH: Where was the truck, do you remember the truck?

BR: Ho yes he was way back I don't know if it was a truck or a
semi trailer but he had his high beams on and then that made it
worse it lit everything up and because my lights to its only a
reasonably new motor car I got and it had bright lights too, but
I was on low beam and you would have sworn you where coming in a
Kingsford Smith Aerodrome with all these reflectors.

DH: Was it that bright?

BR: Yes.

DH:What kind of car do you drive.?

BR: I drive a Subaru wagon a 98 model.

DH: Brian what was the reason for going to Queensland.?

BR: I traveling up to visit my daughters for Christmas.. I've
been driving for some fifty odd years and I have never seen
anything like this.

DH: When you said the lights blinded you, what did you do next.?

BR: Well I drifted through these rows of lights it they thinned
out and I slowed down into the side of the road and sat there
for a little while because I couldn't see. Well I was really had
been flashed in the eyes with all this reflection.

DH: When you said you drove through the reflection, what
impression did you have of where the light was coming from, was
it on the ground or above you.?

BR: It seemed high and it seemed to be behind me, I could feel
the heat of this? and ha and I copped it back in the rear view
mirror to that hit me in the eyes.

DH: Did you hear any noise at all.

BR: No, no noise I had my windows up like it was quite in the
car. I didn't hear any unusual noise at all, I did have the
radio on though.

DH: Did anything happen to the radio.?

BR: Well it gave a screeching thats all, other wise the radio's
intact.

DH: How is your car.?

BR: The car? Ya well it seems alright, I drove it for the first
time today.

DH: Are there any physical evidence or signs of any damage at
all, like paint work damaged or.?

BR: No.

DH: What about yourself how are you.?

BR: Well I had the shakes on Monday and my sight was affected I
couldn't stand any sun light. I had to wear dark glasses and
even on Tuesday morning I still had my dark peppers on and when
I went shopping my daughter drove her car she took me shopping I
couldn't drive mine, and this afternoon I left Ipswich to come
over here (a Bay Island).

DH Comment: Some details have to be let out to protect Brian.

BR: And thats the first time I've driven the car since I landed
at Ispwich on Monday.

DH: Brian you said you actually called the Ipswich police.

BR: I rang them this morning from Ipswich because I heard on the
radio all about this stuff down in that Guyra place, and hell
nobody seemed to know what time it happened and this happened to
me between the hours of 2.00am and 3.00 am on Monday morning.

DH: And what time did you end up getting to Glen Innes which is
the nearest town if you were heading that way to Ispwich.

BR: Look that I don't know I can't remember, I fueled at
Armidale and I had enough fuel to last me right through up to
here (Ipswich). I landed at Ispwich my daughter said "jee dad
what's up with your eyes," like one eye was all blood shot
really blood shot.

 >>>>Refuel Confirmed: By the Mobile Shop attendant in Armidale
at time

Approx 2.15am the attendant said it easy to remember people at
that hour because its so quite and you look forward to customers
coming in, it helps break the boredom.

DH: How are your eyes now.?

BR: There still a little bit on the blurry side other wise I'm
alright.

DH: What about the rest of yourself?

BR I'm a little pink just like I have a mild sunburn. I'm going
to the doctors in the morning for my checkup.

DH: Could you let me know what the doctors says.?

DH: When you rang the Ispwich Police what did you ask them?

BR: I asked them if they got any or would they know of any laser
beams or any thing on the road like, and they said " no we don't
use them" they said that the latest I think its a speed laser
which they use here, its a red laser but you don't see any beam
from it.

But this was well I don't know it sort lit everything up. (a
little upset)

DH: Brian how did you feel at the time this was happening.

BR: Thats a silly question ha!! I didn't know how the hell I
felt I know I couldn't see properly.

DH: How long had you observed the reflector for?

BR: I could see them at least half a mile in front of me.

DH: What happened to the truck that was behind you?

BR: I saw it zigzag on the road then it pulled over about half a
mile behind me. We were the only ones on the road I sure he must
have seen what I saw.

DH:. Do you remember if the truck passed you, and what time do
you think you got to your daughters in Ipswich?

BR: That puzzles me about the truck I can't remember seeing him
pass me at all. It took me an extra hour and half as its only
taken me around 14 hours before. You know Diane it was a laser
type beam the thickness of a broom handle, it hit the side
mirror and flashed back in my face, I could feel the heat from
this thing.

DH. I asked Brian not to wash his car so we could do a magnetic
signature to see if anything strange had happened to the car
itself.. The first test proved very interesting the drivers side
door seemed to have a magnetic misprint which went off the
scale. Now this could be normal but until I get a chance to do
another test on another Subaru wagon the test will remain
inconclusive.

More details to come still under investigation

If anyone has any idea what kind of beam hit Brians side mirror
then reflected back in his face with enough heat to give him a
slight sunburn I would like to hear from you.


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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Bill Weber <koran@cchat.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 23:04:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:41:32 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


Hi, Mac,

 >>I'm still looking for a good translation of the Roswell I-beam
 >>hieroglyphs.

 >>Two possibilities come to mind:

 >>1) Made in China

 >>2) If found, please call this number...

 >>Other alternatives welcome.

 > "To Build Your Very Own Flying Saucer, Insert Tab A Into Tab
 > B..."

 > --Mac Tonnies

Given the fact it crashed, how about, "This device fully Plug
and Play compatible."

Best,

Bill









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                     Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 23:20:00 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:47:14 -0500
Subject: Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 20:45:52 -0500
 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >Subject: Re: As The Centuries Begin To Blend
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >On the dawn of this new millenium, let us make sure that we, as
 >human beings, face up to the reality of UFOs and their occupants
 >(our neighbours in space) instead of suffering another 100 years
 >of ridicule and denial!

I'm with you, in sentiment. Only I would write: "On the dawn of
the year 2000, let's make sure that we, as human beings, face up
to the reality that _something weird and unexplained is going
on_.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 08:48:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:06:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 16:14:28 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:22:33 -0600
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >I certainly agree that an assertion by anyone is not necessarily
 >the truth as I have so often noted.

 >But please let us not confuse absolute proof and evidence.

 >If what I said is the best example of what is wrong with
 >ufology, than ufology is in far better shape than I think it is.

 >Many of the comments made on this list are based entirely on
 >armchair theorizing, and a total absence of investigation or
 >having done one's homework.

 >I am reminded of an old line that one is more entitled to an
 >opinion for which he cannot account than a beer for which he
 >cannot pay.


That should be one is _no_ more entitled to an opinion... sorry
about that..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:47:22 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:12:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?



 >For the record, Corso and William Birnes (his ghost-writer,
 >identified on the cover of _The Day After Roswell_) planned on
 >writing a sequel called _The Day After Dallas_, about the
 >Kennedy assasination.  It's a safe bet this was to be a rather
 >sensational account as well, but then again Corso _was_ involved
 >with the Warren commission and very well might have had
 >something interesting to say about it.  I exchanged some letters
 >with Kal Korff after reading the anti-Corso essay on his
 >website.  Korff claimed _Dallas_ was a hoax; I asked him how he
 >could know such a thing since it had never been written, and he
 >stopped writing me. Also, payment for _Roswell_ wasn't all that
 >spectacular.  One could argue that Corso had nothing to lose,
 >since he was old, but this must remain conjecture until we know
 >more.

 >My impression of Corso is one of sincerity.  I think the events
 >in his book might have very well taken place, generally.  Korff
 >has demonstrated some impossibilities in several dates used in
 >the book, but nothing I can honestly point to and cry "hoax"!
 >This step is a bit harder for me than it is for others.

 >--Mac Tonnies

Hi Mac...

Good take on this subject.

But, I would warn you that Kal Korff is a cancer to anything
he touches.  His goal in life is to destroy the historical
facts of such things as Corso's book and many of the other
sensational claims of UFOlogists.

He got his start as a teen writing under the guidance of
William "Bill" Moore when he wrote two books debunking
the Billy Meier Case.

Moore was the chief antagonist of Meier in the beginning and
stirred up organizations such as MUFON and APRO against Wendelle
Stevens and Meier.

You probably know the history of Moore and his confession at the
1989 MUFON Convention in La Vegas.

He is a "black eye" to ufology and those who still maintain any
sense of loyalty to him are sorely misguided.

So, do as you choose.  But as for myself, if Kal Korff said it
was raining, and 40 degrees, I would plan on a day at the beach
and carry sunscreen. <g>

REgards, Mike

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:22:27 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:15:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:31:52 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:41:21 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >>>From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >>>Subject: Corso?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Hello list,

 >>>I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >>>there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >>>published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >>>write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >>>Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >>>death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >>>released.

 >>Dear Ralph:

 >>I'm no Corso expert, but I watch this and other UFO lists
 >>closely.

 >>I believe that my personal opinions of Corso and company are
 >>pretty much in agreement with most of the saner readers of these
 >>lists, namely that you can take the contents of his book with a
 >>heavy grain of salt.

 >For the record, Corso and William Birnes (his ghost-writer,
 >identified on the cover of _The Day After Roswell_) planned on
 >writing a sequel called _The Day After Dallas_, about the
 >Kennedy assasination.  It's a safe bet this was to be a rather
 >sensational account as well, but then again Corso _was_ involved
 >with the Warren commission and very well might have had
 >something interesting to say about it.  I exchanged some letters
 >with Kal Korff after reading the anti-Corso essay on his
 >website.  Korff claimed _Dallas_ was a hoax; I asked him how he
 >could know such a thing since it had never been written, and he
 >stopped writing me. Also, payment for _Roswell_ wasn't all that
 >spectacular.  One could argue that Corso had nothing to lose,
 >since he was old, but this must remain conjecture until we know
 >more.

 >My impression of Corso is one of sincerity.  I think the events
 >in his book might have very well taken place, generally.  Korff
 >has demonstrated some impossibilities in several dates used in
 >the book, but nothing I can honestly point to and cry "hoax"!
 >This step is a bit harder for me than it is for others.

 >--Mac Tonnies

Hello Mac:

I must admit, that the little bit I saw or read about Corso
himself, seemed to indicate some personal sincerity. He does
seem likeable, and I would prefer to believe that his memory had
deteriorated with age and illness.

If so, this would put the spotlight on his ghostwriter Birnes.

I suppose I could make some gratuitous jab at "The Day After
Debbie Does Dallas", but that might be unseemly. I know
relatively little about the Kennedy assassination, nothing that
isn't generally known.

For Corso (ala' Birnes) to be deeply involved in both
sensational ( and best- selling) matters, would seem ..ah ..
kind of rare.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 26

                Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:15:04 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 17:21:44 -0500
Subject: Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 00:57:05 +1000
 >From: Diane Harison - Keith Basterfield Network <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
 >Subject: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' 24th.12.1999"

 >14.08.1999, Location: Logan Village. Bobermien Road, Duration of
 >sighting: 20 minutes, Time: 9.15pm

 >(Source: 1800 Freecall Australian UFO Research Network Hotline
 >Number)

 >Observation: 45 degrees to the horizon, Direction:Westerly
 >direction to

 >Jimboomba Township Shape: Ferris wheel, Size: 50 cent piece at
 >arms length, Lights: Colour white, 50 or more Weather: Some
 >cloud mostly clear, Number of witnesses: 6 The UFO was seen by
 >15 people from all different locations of southern

 >Brisbane. To date we have not been able to identify it.

 >SOLVED 24th 12 1999
 >While everyone was wrapping their Christmas presents Rob & I
 >went out to wrap up a mystery after receiving a phone call from
 >Shanna regarding a

 >sighting that was happening right there and then. Some list
 >members may remember the OZ UFO Ferris Wheel that occurred
 >August 14th 1999. The AUFORN UFO Hotline received a call from
 >sharnna to say it was back. Rob & I decided to go and investigate
 >to see if we could solve this mystery once and for all.

 >The last time it was sighted it stayed around for some 40
 >minutes so we took a hunch and drove out to the area in hope of
 >catching a glimpse of this elusive UFO and Bingo we found it.

 >Its always good to solve a UFO mystery especially one that has
 >caused so many sightings. Thanks to Robert Frola's great eyes
 >and my driving we finally found the light source.

 >It was local resident and business person Mr Cameron McGregor of
 >North Maclean he owned up to being the captin of the Ferris
 >Wheel spaceship. When we told him we had been looking for the
 >light source for quite sometime he gave out a great big belly
 >laugh and said your lucky I was just about to turn it off.

 >Mr Cameron said the night of 14th August 1999 he and his wife
 >were celebrating her 50th birthday, her present was a laser
 >light show with 2 very big Griven Tracer 4000w which can be
 >visible for up to 20 Kilometers away each has 4000w HMI lamp and
 >you can be use them in all kinds of weather.

<snip>

Dear Diane:

Thank you very much!

I had suspected something very similar to the "sky trackers" as
they were called in Europe. We have them here too.

Several strong beams are projected upward. These can me made to
rotate around themselves, converge and diverge etc. They hit the
stage in France and Britain in the 1970s or 80s, and caused
quite a fuss. One in France was traced to the grand opening of
some trendy discotech... teque... ah, some singles music
joint.

One common term is "ferris wheel". If you read between the
lines, all that is seen is some lights... rotating as if
attached to a solid body, when no such body is actually visible.

I had two listings for the event you mention, apparently
the image could be seen for miles as you say.

That's what my magic delete key is for, and I thank
you again.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 18:35:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:02:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:01:18 -0500
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:00:28 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: David Rudiak <Rudiak@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:10:19 -0500 (EST)
 >>>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >How they howl when the holy grail of ufology is attacked. My job
 >is not to do the skeptic's work. But frankly I'm tired of people
 >who know I'm a UFO investigator coming up and saying, "Oh yea.
 >That Roswell crash is something." When my finely honed
 >investigator skills say, horse-hockey!


I have serious doubts based on Thompson's postings that he is an
investigator. A proclaimer of false statements? YES.Somebody who
is self impressed? YES. But an investigator investigates rather
than sticking his foot in his mouth every time he opens it, as
he seems to as Dave Rudiak has already demonstrated.

 >>Again, Thompson reveals his complete ignorance.  First of all,
 >>the CIC or counterintelligence people involved were NOT
 >>civilians.  They were military -- got that? Just because they
 >>wore civilian clothing didn't make them civilians -- good grief!

 >Did you read my other post. I said I made a mistake on that.

 >>I also notice that John Thompson doesn't respond to Stanton
 >>Friedman's mentioned of Lewis Rickett.  Does Thompson know who
 >>Rickett was?  Apparently not.  Rickett was one of those
 >>"civilian" CICman who operated out of Marcel's office, and he
 >>backed Marcel's story 100%.  He went to the crash site while a
 >>major recovery was underway, involving dozens of military
 >>people.  He saw and handled the anomalous thin metal material.
 >>He reported a gouge, as did the rancher's son Bill Brazel (who
 >>was a young married adult at the time, not some kid).  And
 >>Rickett confirmed that it had been a saucer crash.

 >I also know that none of you talk about about Gerald  Anderson,
 >the star of Stanton's "plains of San Agustin" incident. Y'all
 >have just completely failed  to bring him in. I think he claimed
 >that he was a Navy Seal and wasn't? Something like that. If had
 >a dollar for every ex-sailor--if he was one even-- that claimed
 >he was a Seal I'd be a rich man! Also that " Kevin Randle had a
 >personality conflict with Anderson" (p. 89, Crash at Corona )
 >Could it be that Kevin, who was in the military, saw right
 >through Anderson? Stanton is always harping about people not
 >knowing about "securtiy clearances" welll he don't know beans
 >about how the military or its people work. Real Seals don't go
 >around bragging about it.

As it happens I and others have seen Gerald's military
credentials. and did check him out with other people. He passed
a polygraph examination. His isn't the only proPlains
testimony.. what about Baca, Danley, Leed, Maltais, Knight etc??

 >>Maybe because Cavitt had contradicted himself so many times over
 >>the years.  You could hardly find a worse witness for a Mogul
 >>balloon crash.  He claimed the crash site was no bigger than his
 >>living room, kind of hard to reconcile with a 600 foot tall
 >>balloon train that was supposedly scattered over the
 >>countryside.   Even after being prompted by his contemporary AF
 >>counterintelligence interviewer about the alleged flower tape on
 >>the Mogul radar reflectors, Cavitt claimed there was nothing
 >>like that.  All the talk about alien hieroglyphics was made up
 >>by saucer buffs trying to make money.

 >It's interesting that you and others keep bringing up how
 >"Cavatt... contradicted himself." I seem to have heard that
 >General DuBose has contradicted himself on what happened.

I and other have spent time with DuBose as well. Just how much
checking did you do? Did you meet with him, check him out with
West Point?

 >>Furthermore Cavitt claimed to have never met Brazel, or ever
 >>gone out with Marcel to the crash site, contradicting not only
 >>Marcel, but Brazel as well in his 1947 Roswell Daily Record
 >>interview.  Please explain to us how Cavitt could find his tiny
 >>balloon crash no bigger than his living room out in the middle
 >>of nowhere without Brazel leading him to the spot.

 >>Cavitt in the past also denied being at Roswell at the time or
 >>being in any way involved with the events.  But then the Air
 >>Force tried to turn  him into a star witness for a Mogul balloon
 >>crash.  Unfortunately they failed to brief Cavitt ahead of time
 >>what the new story was supposed to be.  Instead they got caught
 >>with Cavitt repeating the original weather balloon cover story
 >>of 1947.

 >>That Cavitt would continue to lie like this is a good indication
 >>that he was still covering up something else.

 >Fifty years ago is a long time. And maybe he just didn't want to
 >fool with any whacko UFO researchers. The rest of the world does
 >not share our seal for this subject. Maybe, you didn't notice?
 >But when it came time to sign for the Air Force's report in the
 >'90s he seemed very capable of saying what he wanted.

Cavitt was first talked to 20 years ago and many times since.
Yes he certainly said what others wanted him to say.

 >>Absolutely nobody backs up Cavitt's version of events, not even
 >>his then assistant Rickett, who backed up Marcel's story
 >>instead.  To this Cavitt tried to label Rickett a tall tale
 >>teller and insinuated that he was mentally ill because he once
 >>worked at a mental facility at one time.

 >>I might add that Cavitt and Marcel were actually good friends
 >>and the families often got together at Roswell.  Cavitt did not
 >>attack Marcel in his interview, despite some prompting by Col.
 >>Weaver, the interviewer.  Cavitt instead said that Marcel was
 >>unusually intelligent, he could conceive of no reason for Marcel
 >>to have made up his story, and furthermore, if Marcel said their
 >>were markings on some of the recovered material, then maybe
 >>there were. Cavitt had a lot of respect for Marcel.

 >If Cavitt is such a snake, backstabber and liar why didn't he
 >turn on Marcel? I suggest he humored Marcel's claim as he
 >genuinely liked the man and didn't want to hurt his feelings.
 >That does not mean that he didn't think Marcel was a good
 >officer. They were friends; friends try not to disagree...

 >On memory, even George Washington wasn't perfect. I'll give you
 >a personal example: I re-met a friend who was in Cambodia with
 >me at the end of the Vietnam War. Now we hadn't seen each other
 >for over ten years and I asked him about a shared event that
 >took place there. I thought at the place, Oudong, we had spent
 >two nights with a FANK (Cambodian) army brigade there. He said
 >two days and one night. After talking about it I agreed that his
 >version was right. And that was only 12 years after the event.
 >If I hadn't met him, I would still believe what I had thought.
 >I'm sure you can think of similar situations in your own life.

Yet another meaningless analogy

 >>>>What accident with what equipment involved? Supposedly according
 >>>>to Burdakov, Korollev's input came from spy information,
 >>>>presumably from Los Alamos where we know some wreckage was taken
 >>>>Marcel was familiar with aircraft accidents. The material was
 >>>>very different and no conventional materials were found. There
 >>>>were plenty of airplane accidents in New Mexico.

 >>>I talking about a Project Mongul balloon that went down, as the
 >>>USAF, now says and the accident was Colonel Blanchard okaying to
 >>>put out the press release that the Army Air Corps had recovered
 >>>a "flying saucer."

 >>So your claim is that AF counterintelligence came up with this
 >>scheme to confuse the Soviets for decades, and they did all this
 >>in the space of about an hour after the press release went out?
 >>Then they totally dropped all mention of Roswell for the next 47
 >>years until forced to respond by a GAO investigation (hence the
 >>Mogul balloon theory)?  What happens to your claim of
 >>intelligence nuturing Soviet belief in captured alien technology
 >>over all that time?  And why would Soviet intelligence believe
 >>any of this unless they had determined the saucers were real?

 >No. I'm saying it could've worked out that way with no one
 >trying. Another personal example relating to my experience in
 >Cambodia. I was there in the latter part of 1974. I was a
 >civillain with no government ties. You would be amazed how many
 >people thought I was in the CIA and refused to believe I had no
 >goverment connection. The more I denied it the more the locals
 >were convinced I was not being truthful. Suspicious people play
 >great mind games when something APPEARS out of the norm.

This is just what you have done without bothering to get facts
in hand.

 >The Soviet had their own UFO sightings going on. Is it
 >concievable that they just tucked this info away and completely
 >forgot it? It's possible but I don't think so. I admit my idea
 >is a story line but its more plausable than your's when's
 >there's not a single scrape of physical evidence to proof UFOs
 >are nuts and bolts craft.. Actually why don't we settle for a
 >draw: Maybe neither happened as you and I suggest.

 >>>>Whatever Thompson might suspect, historically the intelligence and
 >>>>scientific consensus of the time was that the Soviets would be unable
 >>>>to manufacture a bomb for many years.

 >>>Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted in 1951 for giving
 >>>some of our atomic bomb secrets away. They had been feeding info
 >>>for a long time. The Russians, as another post to you correctly
 >>>says, detonated their first bomb before then.

 >>We have more of Thompson's argument by proclamation.  Although
 >>there was much concern in 1947 about the Soviet's eventually
 >>getting the bomb, very few experts thought they were on the
 >>verge of having it.  Part of this thinking was based on the
 >>war-devestated Soviet economy.

 >>>I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
 >>>Soviets from believing we had no alien technology. What was a
 >>>screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
 >>>thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
 >>>something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
 >>>denotated their first bomb.

 >>Again, why would they think we had something if their own
 >>extensive military and intelligence could determine that
 >>saucer's were fictional?  Disinformation schemes like Thompson
 >>is proposing only work if the other side believes something to
 >>be true.  Otherwise they might just as well have tried to
 >>convince the Soviets that we had captured Santa antigrav
 >>technology.

 >Neither you or I know what kind of crazy ideas both sides have
 >entertained.

 >>This raises the debunker dilemna that saucers are only a good
 >>disinfo ploy if they are real.  But the whole point of trying to
 >>claim they are a disinfo ploy is to demonstrate they are not
 >>real.  And around we go.

 >>In reality, the Air Force NEVER publicly encouraged the belief
 >>that the saucers were real.  Quite the contrary.  And they
 >>certainly never dropped hints that we might have captured alien
 >>technology.  Roswell was almost totally forgotten until revived
 >>by researchers like Stanton Friedman in the 1980's.

 >I've already answered that one. It could've come about by
 >"accident" and not design. To be clear, two accidents: First
 >calling something a "flying saucer" when it wasn't and then not
 >doing anything more after an intial retraction.  Again, you
 >don't know what intrigues went on behind the scenes. I don't
 >either  but it is most suspicious the way the USAF has handled
 >it in the '90s. There is some kind of secret  beyond the balloon
 >or the USAF is hopelessly incompetent. I hope the former.

Yes, The secret is that the AAF recovered the wreckage of at
least one alien spacecraft.

 >>The history on this is so clear, it is hard to
 >>believe that somebody could call himself a UFO researcher and
 >>not be aware of it.

 >No. I'm not a UFO researcher. I'm a UFO investigator. And that's
 >the problem with Roswell.

 >I see a bunch of people who popped in and popped out of Roswell
 >interviewing people and not doing much more. They believed, for
 >the most, what they wanted to believe. And everyone milked it
 >for a book When you got "a dog in the fight" it sure don't make
 >for objective reporting even with the most noble intentions. .

This is total hogwash unless you are referring to Kal Korff,
Phil Klass, and other debunkers who have written anti Roswell
books demonstrating as much ignorance as you have...

I met with Jesse Marcel Sr. in Houma, LA; with Jess Jr. in
Helena, MT; with General DuBose near Orlando, FL, with Lewis
Rickett near St. Petersburg, FL; with Sappho Henderson in the
San Fernando Valley, CA; with Dr. John Kromshroder near San
Diego, CA; with the Danleys in Magdalena,NM With Colonel Leed in
New York, with the Maltais in Bemidji, MN; with Gerald Anderson
in Sprringfield, MO, in Kansas City, MO, in Datil, NM; for
starters. I know that Don Berliner, Kevin Randle , Don Schmitt,
Bill Moore have also put on loads of miles. I have been to 19
Archives - all over the USA. Just what research (as opposed to
false proclamations) have you done???

 >If one good objective investigator had been there over the years
 >and doing background checks on most of these so-called witnesses
 >and _listened_ to others who were there who did not agree with an
 >alien craft crashing this thing would have never grown like it
 >has.

How in the world do you dare to to proclaim that there were not
objective investigators involved??

 >For three years I pedaled the Roswell story as Stanton and
 >others told it. But after 50  investigations you start getting
 >somewhat savy. After a hundred you start realisizing that much
 >isn't as it is in the books!

I repeat, what Roswell Research have you done???

 >What we have is "Lights in the Sky."  There is zero concrete
 >proof of anything physical. I've even meet someone who has
 >worked on a recovered UFO!

 >Got service records, everything to prove where he was and what
 >he did. Oh, I forgot to say he really can't back up your verison
 >of Roswell because he's not sure where the  craft he was working
 >on came from. I could tell you where the magical hanger at
 >Wright-Patt is too. I'll just go to my grave witht that secret!

More irrelevant window dressing.

 >>>If you want to see what intrigues the Soviets went in scheming,
 >>>misinterperting, and putting out disinformatin/misinformation, I
 >>>suggest you read Armand Moss's fine book: "Misinformation,
 >>>Disinfomation and the JFK Conspiracy Exposed." There are also
 >>>several books out by former Soviet intelligence agents who show
 >>>what paranoid thoughts Communist leaders entertained. The
 >>>Roswell saucer story would have been discussed at all levels, if
 >>>for nothing else, because it did get brief, but HIGH, publicity.

 >>I can buy that they might have discussed it.  But Thompson's
 >>claim is that they obsessed about it for 50 years and are still
 >>obsessing about it.  And why would they do that if there was
 >>nothing whatsoever to the saucers?  What evidence can Thompson
 >>point to that would clearly indicate to the Soviets that we were
 >>successfully exploiting alien technology?  Do we have fleets of
 >>saucers waiting to bomb them into submission?  ICBMS tipped with
 >>H-bombs are a very powerful deterrant and very real, not some
 >>hypothetical boogeyman superweapon that might or might not be

 >I didn't say they were "obsessed." They _might_ have been
 >entertained by it. And if one ruble was spent checking it out,
 >it took away from their defense budget.

 >>>Of course, the Press has often been non-performing in their
 >>>duties; still are. On the other hand, I suspect if they had done
 >>>a "Watergate press" back then on the story we would've found out
 >>>for sure that this was no UFO crash! This also explains why the
 >>>locals buried the story so quickly.

 >>Huh?

 >What's the "huh?" Are you too young to remember the Watergate
 >incident and how it came about? Now there were some reporters
 >that set their sights on Tricky Dicky's games. Why didn't any
 >big time reporters fly to Roswell and interview folks when this
 >happened? Why did they just published the Army's version of
 >events? It is rather strange how they were so trusting on a
 >story this big.

You are obviously unaware of the timing of the release of the
story with regard, especially, to the Eastern Press. Perhaps you
are too young to realize how close this was in time to the end
of WW 2 and how remote Roswell was then.

 >But then again maybe they didn't believe in
 >UFOs. Nearly every city in America seemed to be under saucer
 >attack in July of 1947. Even my hometown had an attack.

 >>>The fact is there is no concrete proof that multiple, reliable
 >>>witnesses saw anything that was extraterrestrial.

 >>It's easy to make sweeping statements like that simply by
 >>declaring all the witnesses that did report something highly
 >>unusual to be "unreliable."  That gets rid of that pesky
 >>corroboration, so that Thompson can then go on to say:

 >Its not "sweeping" its overwhelming! You come up with two
 >witnesses who saw debris and yet ignore that they're should have
 >been hundreds.

 >>>The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
 >>>reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake.

 >>Don't forget Rickett, another intelligence man in Marcel's
 >>office who backed Marcel.  How about Gen. Exon, the former C/O
 >>of Wright Patterson, who flat out said it was a crashed saucer
 >>made of strange material?  Or Gen. Dubose, Ramey's chief of
 >>staff, who corroborated Marcel's account of a cover-up in Fort
 >>Worth.  Or Bill Brazel or Loretta Proctor, who collectively
 >>corroborated Marcel's descriptions of the anomalous material
 >>and/or crash site.

 >>There is currently zero evidence that Marcel made a "collossal
 >>mistake."  Does John Thompson know that Marcel's next
 >>appointment was a SAC Chief of some sort of foreign air
 >>intelligence position?  Is this the sort of position one would
 >>expect for some guy who couldn't ID tin foil, paper, rubber,
 >>balsa wood and Scotch tape?

 >Can you explain to me why the man who recovered a flying saucer
 >left the service only two years later as a Major? Why would he
 >leave active duty at all with this feather in his hat?
 >By-the-way, regular commissioned officers are what count. Are

Now an amateur psychologist, too. Wow. What feather? He was
instructed to follow Brazel out after noting the strangeness of
the wreckage. He was instructed to fly with wreckage to Texas
and instructed there to keep quiet. He followed orders. Remember
I found him in 1978. He didn't come looking for me or any body
else in the media.

 >you saying that Marcel never even held a regular commission as a
 >Major? An example: West Point graduates are commissioned with a
 >regular commission.

 >Most ROTC, officer candidate officers are commissioned with
 >reserve commissions.

 >Why would the man who help recover the greatest find in
 >mankind's history--to believe your story-- leave the military so
 >soon after? One other note: If you read military journals such
 >as the Navy's quasi-official Proceedings or the Marine's Marine
 >Corps Gazette you would understand that not to have _perfect_
 >marks means to be an inferior officer. This is a constant gripe
 >with officers, much like our allegedly great public school
 >system. Everything in an officer's records must look perfect to
 >be only normal. To look basically like an A- or B+ officer is to
 >mean he is a flop and  not to be advanced. Marcel to me looked
 >like he was on the fast track but then something happened.
 >Roswell?

 >>Does John Thompson know that Marcel is listed in his records as
 >>being a radar intelligence officer?  He had taken an intensive
 >>course in radar intelligence only 2 years before, which included
 >>a section on radar countermeasures.  The primary radar
 >>countermeasure was aluminum foil chaff backed with paper, the
 >>exact same foil-paper material they used on the radar targets.

 >I admit he should've known. There was, however, a tremendous
 >hysteria going on in the country at the time over UFOs. And the
 >rancher was saying he had one.

The rancher had found strange wreckage which he brought to the
attention of the sherrif.

 >It kinda reminds me of the
 >_three_ radar operators in Macon who said they saw and had a UFO
 >on their screens in 1996. However, on careful examination they
 >agreed they were actually looking at Venus and that it could've
 >been some kind of "ground clutter" that by pure chance was in
 >the same direction Venus was from them. Oh yea: These trained
 >and highly technical observors said  pilots saw the UFO too.
 >People makes mistakes all the time! Even the best.

 >>>His son doesn't count.

 >>No, of course not, and apparently nobody else counts in your
 >>book, either because you are ignorant they exist or because you
 >>choose to deliberately ignore what they had to say.  I don't put
 >>much stock in the proclamations of some guy on Roswell when he
 >>doesn't even know simple basics, like the CIC being military,
 >>not a bunch of civilians.

 >Actually I can't take credit for this one. Bill Hendricks of the
 >Atlanta Constitution first brought this up to me. He went to
 >Roswell during the Love Feast of 1997 and talked to some of the
 >witnesses.

 >He pointed out what my own investigations were already showing:
 >Kids make horrible witnesses. They're boot to life and get
 >easily carried away on what they see; especially when their
 >loving dad is saying, "That's right. It's a saucer."

Did you go to Roswell? Just which witnesses did Bill talk to. Or
did he just majke a quick trip in and write about it??

 >As Bill put it you only have two real witnesses: Major Marcel
 >and Walter Haut.( Of course, you got this other guy you keep
 >talking about.) But if you've been in the military and your low
 >on the totem pole, and a Full Byrd  says it's night and you know
 >its daylight, its dark! Haut only did his job; no more, no less.

Haut issued a press release. He did know Jesse, Blanchard, etc.
He has never claimed to have seen wreckage , bodies, etc.

 >>Oh well, just declare Rickett and all the rest unreliable --
 >>right?

 >One more story: I get this guy who says something wierd happened
 >at an army base. Most convincing but totally unbelievable. He
 >believes it happend; he almost had his former drill instructor
 >saying, "Maybe, it happened." Now I get another guy from the
 >other side of the coast calling me about something similar at
 >the same base and in the same year. And he claims it also has do
 >with my own UFO crash story. Yes, we got one for every season
 >and every state! I'm checking.

 >How much money do you think I can pump out of this one? NONE, if
 >it don't stand up _totally_...

 >>>Their attempts in the '90s have been most clumsy and
 >>>embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
 >>>more attention to the matter.

 >>Maybe because in reality their hand was forced by a GAO
 >>congressional inquiry?  Does Thompson know anything at all?

 >Yep. But not because a saucer crashed.

 >>>Who knows how much time, money and
 >>>effort was wasted by the Soviets on UFO related projects because
 >>>of them thinking that the U.S had a recovered disk?

 >>Certainly not John Thompson.

 >Nor you.

 >>>Maybe they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
 >>>disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
 >>>reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

 >>Which didn't begin until the mid 1990's when forced to comment
 >>by the GAO inquiry.  The AF has not exactly been nurturing this
 >>story for 50 years.

 >Where's your _secret_ proof that they admit the Roswell crash
 >happened? You don't no and you don't know what kind of games
 >they've played with the Russians.

 >>>>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>>>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>>>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>>>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again. They did, afterall,
 >>>>need a fall guy to maintain the Roswell farce.

 >>Blanchard's >>career was not hurt as it should have been for
 >screwing-up. But >>as years passed and the Soviets denotated
 >their first bomb all >>was forgiven. The Roswell alien story was
 >not a bad thing afterall

 >You might want to talk to Bill H. on this. This is the only
 >thing that impresses him as being unexplainable on how a
 >commanding officer, who screwed up royally, went on to become a
 >four star general. After Marcel's story this is your only card
 >to hold.

 >>Yep, those Rooskies couldn't be intimidated with a real A-bomb
 >>and real bombers.  The only deterrant we had was to frightened
 >>to death with the "Roswell alien story."  All it took was one
 >>mention of it in 1947, and it has deterred them ever since with
 >>never a reminder for almost 50 years.

 >We use all kinds of ploys. Anything that wastes their defense
 >money will do. It's not fact; just an idea. Roswell isn't fact
 >either!

 >>>It was Blanchard's mistake, as he was in command. And at least
 >>>in the 1940s, in the military, the "buck stops here." His
 >>>mistake should've been a career stopper. It wasn't but there
 >>>isn't a thread of proof that will now stand up to prove the
 >>>Roswell or Corona--yes, I bought your book--crash involved alien
 >>>technology.

 >>Anybody could have deduced that much about the book just by
 >>reading the jacket cover.  Has Thompson bothered to read beyond
 >>that?

 >As you now know I read more. How about Gerald Anderson?

What checking have you done on Anderson, or Leed or Danley or
Baca or the Maltais etc??

 >>>So why did he make it past a level that most officers are never
 >>>expected to see?

 >>>My "plot line," as you call it, looks better and better. The
 >>>difference between you and me is that I will agree it is only a
 >>>pausible story-line.

 >>A "pausible" story-line or a "plausible" one?  Thompson's theory
 >>is so ridiculous and full of inaccuries that it is hardly
 >>plausible, but maybe it is very remotely "pausible."

 >No more than your's.

 >>>Your's is too. When its all said and done,
 >>>with no proof, it's only entertainment.

 >>Which is the only reason Thompson is here, not to discuss
 >>anything intelligently.  That would require that he know at
 >>least a few basic historical facts rather than mouthing off with
 >>unsupported personal opinion.  He could start with such
 >>conventional items as the CIC being military and the Soviet
 >>A-bomb taking most experts by surprise.

 >One FOIA request stating what you say don't make it so!
 >Personally, being an ex-Marine I have more faith in what they
 >really thought was going on then. No one was that dumb to think
 >the Russians weren't moving right along on the A-bomb.

What FOIA request? I quoted from one of many NSC documents I dug
out at Archives I have spent weeks at.. You ought to try
visiting one sometime.

 >>Oh, now they all have to be living?  Having affidavits and
 >>recordings isn't enough?  The real question is can Thompson find
 >>even one witness, reliable or otherwise, living or dead, who can
 >>back up any of his noisy proclamations?

 >You obviously haven't investigated much. There are liars and
 >there are liars. If not lying they often embellished. Signing
 >statements and giving video testimony is good but not conclusive
 >proof of anything. We wouldn't need juries if everybody told the
 >truth! For the record I do not think Marcel lied but I do think
 >he was wrong. There is nothing to indicate anything that he
 >wasn't a fine officer. But lots of fine officers occassionally
 >make mistakes; even Generals.

 >>>I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >>>hell-of-a wallop. A thud that can be heard for miles around; one
 >>>that shakes houses. I realise that the Roswell area in the late
 >>>'40s is even more remote but you couldn't keep something like
 >>>this under wraps; no way!

 >Again any recovery operation of an alien vehicle would not be a
 >get-in and get-out within only a few days. Even after nearly a
 >month with 300 trained recovery soldiers they still left bucket
 >loads of F-4 debris here.

 >Have you ever seen a recovery operation?

 >I was lucky to have lived only a mile away from one . Part of
 >the debris was actually on family connected land adjacent to
 >ours. I admit I had an advantage but I made it a point to learn
 >everything from it I could.

 >It would have taken thousands to have wisked that Roswell saucer
 >away in only days and not leave anything behind. If they only
 >had 300 men they would've been there well over a month and
 >still, at best,  done an incomplete job. And if Stanton keeps
 >growing his debris field they would have needed more time.

 >The F-4 crash had helicopters, air-lifted baby bull doziers and
 >lots of all terrain vehicles. Even a black beret Air Force
 >platoon for security.  They went over it again and again yet
 >recently someone found a two foot big piece othe F-4 they
 >missed..

Just how do you know what went on at the Foster Ranch? It's in NM
not Georgia. Hardly a tree in sight. The pasture is almost 4
square miles - not near any road. There could have been hundreds
out there with nobody  from town or the big cities knowing it at
all.

 >>>Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, would've been on the Roswell
 >>>saucer crash over the years if it was true.

 >Hey, you might want to talk to my Wright Patt guy. But hey, I'm
 >not helping with your crash story.

 >If they did recover one it would just not sit in a dark garage.
 >People would be working and tinkering with it until they
 >completely reversed engineer it.  That might take years or
 >decades. But nobody has got anything and that explains why every
 >government that investigates UFOs quits: Because when it is all
 >said and done, they gather more data but know nothing more than
 >any good UFO investigator does..

Only if they are as smug and self satisfied and ignorant of the
facts as Thompson is.

 >>>If only the same
 >>>number turned out for the alleged saucer crash--I would suspect
 >>>many more for that!--as the F-4 crash, most would've been young
 >>>soldiers of only 18-25 years old. No, officers don't pick up
 >>>that stuff!

 >>No they don't.  People on the recovery scene like Rickett
 >>(remember him?) reported seeing several dozen people involved in
 >>guarding the scene and picking up the pieces.  Even if you up
 >>this to several hundred directly involved in the recovery, it's
 >>hardly the "tens of thousands" Thompson has invented out of thin
 >>air.

 >See above for why two people don't cut it for something this
 >sensational...

 >>>There is always a certain
 >>>percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >>>woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

 >Well that comes back to investigating. Obviously, I'm talking to
 >a boot here. If you can't get enough experience please see the
 >Mexico City UFO video case--some came out of the woodwork for
 >it. Like the Drake equation, it's all a matter of numbers;
 >there's a certain percentage of our population that will be
 >unreliable.

 >>I guess John Thompson would know.  (Yes, I know, a cheap shot --
 >>I already feel ashamed.)

 >Yes it was but accouts are now settled.

 >>>Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the Roswell
 >>>crash involved a vehicle of alien manufacture.

 >>There is one document,
 >>photographed in Gen. Ramey's hand, which says "the victims of
 >>the wreck you forwarded to .... Fort Worth, Tex."  That alone
 >>tells us this was something much more than a balloon crash.  And
 >>then, of course, there was that 1947 press release, which said
 >>the AAF had captured a flying disk.

 >>David Rudiak

 >Now, we're into reading tea leaves.

 >Well, my wife and children just got home from last minute
 >shopping. Gotta play Santa Claus. Kinda like Roswell.

Rarely have I seen so much nonsense in so little space.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 16:36:48 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:07:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:22:27 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 23:31:52 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 04:41:21 -0800
 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >>>>From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >>>>Subject: Corso?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Larry, Mac, Ralf, and listfolk:

 >>My impression of Corso is one of sincerity.  I think the events
 >>in his book might have very well taken place, generally.  Korff
 >>has demonstrated some impossibilities in several dates used in
 >>the book, but nothing I can honestly point to and cry "hoax"!
 >>This step is a bit harder for me than it is for others.

 >I must admit, that the little bit I saw or read about Corso
 >himself, seemed to indicate some personal sincerity. He does
 >seem likeable, and I would prefer to believe that his memory had
 >deteriorated with age and illness.

 >I suppose I could make some gratuitous jab at "The Day After
 >Debbie Does Dallas", but that might be unseemly. I know
 >relatively little about the Kennedy assassination, nothing that
 >isn't generally known.

 >For Corso (ala' Birnes) to be deeply involved in both
 >sensational ( and best- selling) matters, would seem ..ah ..
 >kind of rare.

But not unheard of.  The world is full of literary hoaxes,
most recently and spectacularly a complex case of a
European man who wrote powerfully on his experiences
as a child caught up in the Holocaust.  All kinds of people
thought him sincere, too, and it's now known beyond
question that he made up the story.

Nothing about Corso/Birnes's book struck me as remotely
plausible, and I am -- unlike many of the duo's critics --
open-minded about Roswell.  It struck me as very plainly, and
very clumsily, written out of recent UFO literature and
crashed-disc speculation.  It's not even a good science- fiction
novel.  It's also full of laughable errors, as Karl Pflock and
Brad Sparks have devastatingly pointed out in separate reviews.

And then we hear that Corso/Birnes were planning to contribute
to the already massive mythology concerning the Kennedy
assassination (debunked eloquently, by the way, in Gerald
Posner's superb Case Closed, which everybody in the grips of
conspirium delirium ought to read as soon as possible).  C'mon,
folks -- get a  clue. When there's no shortage of _real_ UFO
issues and puzzles to investigate and wonder about, why are we
wasting time on the transparently bogus?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:47:56 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:15:23 -0500
Subject: Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:15:04 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: OZ UFO Ferris Wheel 'Solved' Dec 24 1999
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Dear Diane:

 >Thank you very much!

 >I had suspected something very similar to the "sky trackers" as
 >they were called in Europe. We have them here too.

 >Several strong beams are projected upward. These can me made to
 >rotate around themselves, converge and diverge etc. They hit the
 >stage in France and Britain in the 1970s or 80s, and caused
 >quite a fuss. One in France was traced to the grand opening of
 >some trendy discotech... teque... ah, some singles music
 >joint.

 >One common term is "ferris wheel". If you read between the
 >lines, all that is seen is some lights... rotating as if
 >attached to a solid body, when no such body is actually visible.

 >I had two listings for the event you mention, apparently
 >the image could be seen for miles as you say.

 >That's what my magic delete key is for, and I thank
 >you again.

 >Best wishes


I believe it's called a Ferris wheel in the US... Yes you'/re
right

Hi Larry

Sorry a typeOO Ferris Wheel not Ferrist darn Spell check. Ha!
Maybe the USA Ferris Wheel was a Griven Tracer 4000w system?

These Laser lights are available for rent to the general public.
It took us 4 months to solve this mystery running around the
neighborhood like silly buggers and every time we got close the
darn thing got turned off... <LOL> Boy, you have to keep a sense of
humor.

Now if you think about it if some wanted to play a trick on the
public and lead them into believing a Space Ship was in the
area, I cant think of a better device to hire not that I'm
suggesting people do that :>). but for less than $200 dollars
you can hire the Tracer and have a heap of fun. (Not recommended
- remember our OZ police are likely to take it off you hence
goes your deposit.)


Light source hard to find:

This is why the source of light was harder to find. The owner
was on an elevation of approx. 322 metres facing in an easterly
direction. The UFO sightings came from down in the valley and
some came from even a higher elevation like MT Tamborine. The
people at MT Tamborine would only see filtered light shining
through the clouds and would not be able to see the light source
due to cloud cover.

The Tracer projected its beam in what appeared to be a straight
line coming from above the clouds. This, as you would
understand, was an optical illusion.

Well folks its nice to have UFO sightings, its even better when
you can solve them right?

Thanks Larry have a Happy New Year ALL

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@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw
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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 18:58:39 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:20:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 11:47:22 -0800
 >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>For the record, Corso and William Birnes (his ghost-writer,
 >>identified on the cover of _The Day After Roswell_) planned on
 >>writing a sequel called _The Day After Dallas_, about the
 >>Kennedy assasination.  It's a safe bet this was to be a rather
 >>sensational account as well, but then again Corso _was_ involved
 >>with the Warren commission and very well might have had
 >>something interesting to say about it.  I exchanged some letters
 >>with Kal Korff after reading the anti-Corso essay on his
 >>website.  Korff claimed _Dallas_ was a hoax; I asked him how he
 >>could know such a thing since it had never been written, and he
 >>stopped writing me. Also, payment for _Roswell_ wasn't all that
 >>spectacular.  One could argue that Corso had nothing to lose,
 >>since he was old, but this must remain conjecture until we know
 >>more.

 >>My impression of Corso is one of sincerity.  I think the events
 >>in his book might have very well taken place, generally.  Korff
 >>has demonstrated some impossibilities in several dates used in
 >>the book, but nothing I can honestly point to and cry "hoax"!
 >>This step is a bit harder for me than it is for others.

 >>--Mac Tonnies

 >Hi Mac...

 >Good take on this subject.

 >But, I would warn you that Kal Korff is a cancer to anything
 >he touches.  His goal in life is to destroy the historical
 >facts of such things as Corso's book and many of the other
 >sensational claims of UFOlogists.

My only problem with Korff is his alleged "expertise" in so many
different areas of inquiry; it's difficult for me to swallow
Korff's broadband knowledge of all things weird.

On the "World's Greatest Hoaxes" show a while ago, for example,
Korff was hyped as having researched the notorious Patterson
"Bigfoot" footage for 25 years.  Maybe he has and maybe he
hasn't...but _25 years_?  This strikes me as a bit excessive and
unduly self-promoting.  My apologies to Korff if I'm
misrepresenting him here.

I will say that his book 'Spaceships of the Pleaides' looks very
much on the ball to me, and I appreciate his rare concern re.
UFO-based cultist movements.

Korff's Roswell book, however, didn't do much for me.  He
dismisses loads of perfectly acceptable testimony because of
minor changes of wording upon retelling.  I didn't find all of
his assertions all that responsible or intelligent, and his
remained my least favorite of the Roswell-debunking books of the
period (Klass' 'The Real Roswell Crashed Saucer Coverup' was,
surprisingly, the most coherent of the bunch, its main flaw
being Klass' idiotic eagerness to reject eyewitnesses because
they are now, in his words, "TV celebrities" thanks to a mixture
of false memory and old-fashioned hucksterism).

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:03:45 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:23:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:22:27 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I suppose I could make some gratuitous jab at "The Day After
 >Debbie Does Dallas", but that might be unseemly. I know
 >relatively little about the Kennedy assassination, nothing that
 >isn't generally known.

 >For Corso (ala' Birnes) to be deeply involved in both
 >sensational (and best- selling) matters, would seem ..ah ..
 >kind of rare.

Exactly. The fact remains that 'Dallas' remained unpenned. We
don't know what it was about, really, to the chagrin of many
over-eager Corso-bashers. Korff enthusiastically used the
proposed book about the Warren Commission as "proof" that Corso
was a con-artist despite the rather difficult fact that it
didn't even exist!

Oh, well.  That's debunkery.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:49:38 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:46:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:01:18 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:36:00 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:00:28 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: David Rudiak <Rudiak@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >How they howl when the holy grail of ufology is attacked.

The howling is due to the ignoramouses who attack.  Maybe you
should try to get a few facts straight before you strike.  How
about learning a little history, e.g.?

 >When my finely honed investigator skills say, horse-hockey!

Don't flatter yourself Mr. Finely Honed Investigator.  In the
end, you are just a dime-a-dozen skeptic who hasn't done his
homework shouting "horse-hockey."

 >>Again, Thompson reveals his complete ignorance.  First of all,
 >>the CIC or counterintelligence people involved were NOT
 >>civilians.  They were military -- got that? Just because they
 >>wore civilian clothing didn't make them civilians -- good grief!

 >Did you read my other post. I said I made a mistake on that.

That's far from your only mistake.  It's just one indication
among many of your slovenly thinking and "investigative" skills.
Your just one more guy who love's to spout opinions without
caring about whether anything you say is accurate or backed by
any evidence.  Or if you prefer, you are obviously a few
dilithium crystals short of Warp 1.

 >>I also notice that John Thompson doesn't respond to Stanton
 >>Friedman's mentioned of Lewis Rickett.  Does Thompson know who
 >>Rickett was?  Apparently not.  Rickett was one of those
 >>"civilian" CICman who operated out of Marcel's office, and he
 >>backed Marcel's story 100%.

 >I also know that none of you talk about about Gerald  Anderson,
 >the star of Stanton's "plains of San Agustin" incident.

You raised the issue of the "civilian" CIC intelligence officer
who went out with Marcel to the debris field.  Why didn't we
quote him?  That would be Sheridan Cavitt.  Stanton Friedman
mentioned Lewis Rickett, who corroborated Marcel's story and
undercut his boss Cavitt.

What does Gerald Anderson have to do with this, other than a
means for you to dodge an issue? Even if he were telling the
truth, he wasn't describing what happened at Roswell base or the
Brazel crash site.  He's extraneous to what Marcel, Rickett, or
Cavitt had to say about any of this.

 >Y'all have just completely failed  to bring him in.

Maybe he's irrelevant to what Rickett had to say about the
Brazel crash site or the fact that he was corroborating
something far different than a balloon crash? Your skeptical
claim is that Marcel was the only credible witness and he had
only "kids" like his son corroborating his story.  That's the
real "horse hockey" and evidence of your ignorance regarding the
case.

 >I think he claimed that he was a Navy Seal and wasn't?

Why don't we just give you even more rope so that you can hang
yourself?  No, Gerald Anderson did not claim to be a Navy Seal.
Perhaps you are confusing him with R. A. M. Stephens?

 >Something like that. If had>a dollar for every ex-sailor--if
 >he was one even-- that claimed he was a Seal I'd be a rich man!
 >....Stanton is always harping about people not knowing about
 >"securtiy clearances" welll he don't know beans about how the
 >military or its people work. Real Seals don't go around
bragging about it.

More diversionary drivel off the main topic.  And perhaps you've
never heard of Gov. Jesse Ventura?  Please tell him you know how
the military really works and he couldn't possibly be a "Real
Seal" because he brags about it.

 >>Maybe because Cavitt had contradicted himself so many times over
 >>the years.

 >It's interesting that you and others keep bringing up how
 >"Cavatt... contradicted himself." I seem to have heard that
 >General DuBose has contradicted himself on what happened.

"You seem to have heard..."  Absolutely everything you say seems
to be hearsay and misinformation.  Perhaps you could be more
specific?  In reality, Dubose always maintained that Roswell
events were highly secret and that there was a high-level
cover-up of what happened after the press release.  He's an
important witness because he was a high-level officer, Gen.
Ramey's Chief of Staff, and handled the phone traffic at Fort
Worth during the incident. He also corroborated Marcel's claim
of the weather balloon cover story.

 >Furthermore Cavitt claimed to have never met Brazel, or ever
 >gone out with Marcel to the crash site.....

 >>Cavitt in the past also denied being at Roswell at the time or
 >>being in any way involved with the events.  But then the Air
 >>Force tried to turn  him into a star witness for a Mogul balloon
 >>crash.  Unfortunately they failed to brief Cavitt ahead of time
 >>what the new story was supposed to be.  Instead they got caught
 >>with Cavitt repeating the original weather balloon cover story
 >>of 1947.

 >>That Cavitt would continue to lie like this is a good indication
 >>that he was still covering up something else.....

 >Fifty years ago is a long time.

But, according to you, not so long that the Russians could never
figure out it was a joke, stop obsessing about it, and wasting
resources on a wild goose chase.

 >And maybe he just didn't want to
 >fool with any whacko UFO researchers. The rest of the world does
 >not share our seal for this subject. Maybe, you didn't notice?
 >But when it came time to sign for the Air Force's report in the
 >'90s he seemed very capable of saying what he wanted.

Which was self-contradictory and also contradicted by everyone,
including himself, and everything else.  Maybe those
"finely-tuned investigative skills" should be telling you the
man was spouting "horse hockey" when there was no need to lie if
it was nothing but a Mogul balloon crash.  Cavitt was still
hiding something.

Incidentally, "seal" in this case isn't your silly Navy Seals,
but "zeal" as in "zealousness."

 >>Absolutely nobody backs up Cavitt's version of events, not even
 >>his then assistant Rickett, who backed up Marcel's story....

 >>I might add that Cavitt and Marcel were actually good friends
 >>and the families often got together at Roswell.  Cavitt did not
 >>attack Marcel in his interview, despite some prompting by Col.
 >>Weaver, the interviewer... Cavitt had a lot of respect for Marcel.

 >If Cavitt is such a snake, backstabber and liar why didn't he
 >turn on Marcel?

Good question.  All I can say is that in the interview he
didn't.  But in the affidavit typed up immediately afterward by
Col. Weaver, either he or Weaver did stab Marcel in the back.
There it was written that Marcel and Rickett were both prone to
telling tall tales.  But Cavitt said nothing of the kind in the
actual interview, in fact indicated the exact opposite.  I've
also believe (here's my hearsay) that Cavitt later claimed that
Marcel was a "hot-headed Cajun," or words to that effect.
Again, there's nothing like that in the original interview.
Furthermore, Col. Blanchard in his evaluations of Marcel
afterwards notes Marcel's businesslike approach, that he was
cool-headed under pressure, very logical in his conclusions, and
similar descriptions, quite unlike a portrait of a "hot-headed
Cajun."

Incidentally, I don't think Cavitt was necessarily sinister, but
a spook of the old school who chose to keep his mouth shut and
lie when necessary if he felt in was in the national security.
His wife Mary made it pretty clear on several occasions that he
was keeping a secret and would never talk about it.

 >I suggest he humored Marcel's claim as he genuinely liked the
 >man and didn't wantto hurt his feelings.

You suggest?  Kind of hard to hurt the feelings of a man who had
been dead for 8 years.  Yet another indication of how little you
know and how little you care about being accurate.

 >That does not mean that he didn't think Marcel was a good officer.
 >They were friends; friends try not to disagree...

According to the superior officers involved in the Roswell events like Col.
Blanchard Gen. Ramey, and Gen. Dubose, Marcel was indeed a very good officer,
and one they felt was destined for higher rank.  In fact, they recommended
him for his Reserve promotion a few months after Roswell.

 >On memory, even George Washington wasn't perfect.....

<insert Thompson war story here>

Nobody says Marcel's memory was perfect, but his basic story has
a lot of corroboration from people you continue to ignore.
Again, I'm not talking "kids", but credible adults who have told
consistent stories with no indications that they are liars,
people like Loretta Proctor, Bill Brazel, Gen. Dubose, Gen.
Exon, Robert Porter, Lewis Rickett, Robert Smith, Robert
Shirkey, and others.

 >>So your claim is that AF counterintelligence came up with this
 >>scheme to confuse the Soviets for decades, and they did all this
 >>in the space of about an hour after the press release went out?
 >>Then they totally dropped all mention of Roswell for the next 47
 >>years until forced to respond by a GAO investigation (hence the
 >>Mogul balloon theory)?  What happens to your claim of
 >>intelligence nuturing Soviet belief in captured alien technology
 >>over all that time? ...

 >No. I'm saying it could've worked out that way with no one
 >trying. Another personal example relating to my experience in
 >Cambodia. I was there in the latter part of 1974. I was a
 >civillain with no government ties. You would be amazed how many
 >people thought I was in the CIA and refused to believe I had no
 >goverment connection.... Suspicious people play
 >great mind games when something APPEARS out of the norm.

Yet more Thompson war stories with no point.  What does any of
this have to do with your claim that Roswell was a
disinformation scheme that the Soviets bought into for over 50
years.

 >The Soviet had their own UFO sightings going on.

But your claim from your alleged many years as an investigator
is that it is nothing but people telling exaggerated stories.
If that is all it was, then don't you think the Soviets with
their vastly greater resources that those possessed by John
Thompson would have figured this out as well and a very long
time ago?  They have radar, jet interceptors, top-notch
scientists, etc.

 >Is it concievable that they just tucked this info away and
 >completely forgot it? It's possible but I don't think so. I
 >admit my idea is a story line ....

Yes, that's all it is.  Go sell it to Hollywood.  Unless the
Russians believed UFOs were real craft, then a Roswell crashed
saucer story has no more credibility than Santa Claus with his
antigrav techology.

 >...but its more plausable than your's when's
 >there's not a single scrape of physical evidence to proof UFOs
 >are nuts and bolts craft.

They appear on radar (e.g. 1952 Washington D.C.), movies and
photos (e.g. McMinnville, Grand Falls, Tremonton), produce
landing traces (e.g., Socorro, which also left a metallic
trace), electromagnetic interference (e.g., Levelland), emit
microwaves (RB47 case), all which are evidence of physical
reality.  There have also been various people to come forward to
claim we have actual "nuts and bolts" physical evidence, people
like Wilbert Smith and Gen. Exon, to name but two.

 >Actually why don't we settle for a
 >draw: Maybe neither happened as you and I suggest.

Why don't you try producing even one witness or one document
that supports your scenario.  What I see instead is a poker
player with nothing in his hand and trying to bluff.

 >>I'm saying that the U.S. did nothing later to discourage the
 >>Soviets from believing we had no alien technology. What was a
 >>screw-up by Blanchard was forgiven later as some Brass probably
 >>thought, "What would it hurt if the Soviets thought we had
 >>something." This would be especially true after the Soviets
 >>denotated their first bomb.

 >Again, why would they think we had something if their own
 >extensive military and intelligence could determine that
 >saucer's were fictional?  Disinformation schemes like Thompson
 >is proposing only work if the other side believes something to
 >be true.

 >Neither you or I know what kind of crazy ideas both sides have
 >entertained.

You call that an intelligent answer?

 >This raises the debunker dilemna that saucers are only a good
 >disinfo ploy if they are real.  But the whole point of trying to
 >claim they are a disinfo ploy is to demonstrate they are not
 >real.  And around we go.

 >>In reality, the Air Force NEVER publicly encouraged the belief
 >>that the saucers were real.  Quite the contrary.  And they
 >>certainly never dropped hints that we might have captured alien
 >>technology.  Roswell was almost totally forgotten until revived
 >>by researchers like Stanton Friedman in the 1980's.

 >I've already answered that one. It could've come about by
 >"accident" and not design. To be clear, two accidents: First
 >calling something a "flying saucer" when it wasn't and then not
 >doing anything more after an intial retraction.

Excuse me, but we are still waiting for your second "accident."
In fact, you are admitting that the AF did absolutely nothing to
promote a belief in flying saucers or crashed saucers
afterwards.

 >Again, you don't know what intrigues went on behind the scenes.

Doing nothing to promote a phony crashed saucer belief amongst
the Russians is "intrigue?"  This is yet another example of your
highly muddled thinking.  They promoted it, but they didn't.

 >I don't either  but it is most suspicious the way the USAF has handled
 >it in the '90s. There is some kind of secret  beyond the balloon
 >or the USAF is hopelessly incompetent. I hope the former.

Again, you are all over the map.  I agree the USAF
counterintelligence has handled things suspiciously in the
1990's.  But first you claimed that it was a Mogul balloon crash
which Marcel misidentified.  Now you are saying that if
present-day AF people aren't incompetent, then there is a
"secret beyond the balloon."

 >No. I'm not a UFO researcher.

Obviously not.

 >I'm a UFO investigator.

Who can't tell a consistent story or be bothered to check
details before express opinions.

 >And that's the problem with Roswell.

Yep, guys like you, full of opinions but uninformed.

 >I see a bunch of people who popped in and popped out of Roswell
 >interviewing people and not doing much more. They believed, for
 >the most, what they wanted to believe. And everyone milked it
 >for a book.

Sorry, but a number of people have looked into this and not
"milked it for a book" or made a dime.  Just another one of your
worthless sweeping generalizations.

 >For three years I pedaled the Roswell story as Stanton and
 >others told it. But after 50  investigations you start getting
 >somewhat savy. After a hundred you start realisizing that much
 >isn't as it is in the books!

Your "saviness" isn't in much evidence in your posts.  I think
all most of us see is a guy very high on himself and his
opinions but not very knowledgable. At best, all you are saying
is that you are disillusioned with UFO witnesses.

 >What we have is "Lights in the Sky."

More "bull hockey!"  Many cases involve clearly structured
craft, some seen up close up, appear on radar, leave ground
traces, been photographed, etc.

 >There is zero concrete proof of anything physical. I've even
 >meet someone who has worked on a recovered UFO!

 >Got service records, everything to prove where he was and what
 >he did. Oh, I forgot to say he really can't back up your verison
 >of Roswell because he's not sure where the  craft he was working
 >on came from.

Who cares if it was Roswell.  Maybe you could tell us more about
this individual and what he says.

 >>I can buy that they might have discussed it.  But Thompson's
 >>claim is that they obsessed about it for 50 years and are still
 >>obsessing about it.  And why would they do that if there was
 >>nothing whatsoever to the saucers?  What evidence can Thompson
 >>point to that would clearly indicate to the Soviets that we were
 >>successfully exploiting alien technology?

 >I didn't say they were "obsessed." They _might_ have been
 >entertained by it. And if one ruble was spent checking it out,
 >it took away from their defense budget.

Again you can't tell a consistent story.  Now they _didn't_ take
it seriously, but were merely "entertained" by it.  Doesn't
sound much at all like your original "great disinformation ploy
of the Cold War" which you originally tried to sell.

 >>>The fact is there is no concrete proof that multiple, reliable
 >>>witnesses saw anything that was extraterrestrial.

 >>It's easy to make sweeping statements like that simply by
 >>declaring all the witnesses that did report something highly
 >>unusual to be "unreliable."  That gets rid of that pesky
 >>corroboration, so that Thompson can then go on to say:

 >Its not "sweeping" its overwhelming! You come up with two
 >witnesses who saw debris and yet ignore that they're should have
 >been hundreds.

More Thompson denseness.  In the context of intelligence people
at Roswell, I mentioned two, Marcel and Rickett, who said the
debris was highly anomalous and there was more to this than a
balloon crash.  I never said there was only two who claimed to
have personally seen the debris or described it as anomalous.
There were considerably more.

 >>>The only witness that I've heard that could be considered
 >>>reliable is Marcel. A witness who made a colossial mistake.

 >>Don't forget Rickett, another intelligence man in Marcel's
 >>office who backed Marcel.  How about Gen. Exon, the former C/O
 >>of Wright Patterson, who flat out said it was a crashed saucer
 >>made of strange material?  Or Gen. Dubose, Ramey's chief of
 >>staff, who corroborated Marcel's account of a cover-up in Fort
 >>Worth.  Or Bill Brazel or Loretta Proctor, who collectively
 >>corroborated Marcel's descriptions of the anomalous material
 >>and/or crash site.

That's more than "two," isn't it, and there were more.

 >>There is currently zero evidence that Marcel made a "collossal
 >>mistake."

 >Can you explain to me why the man who recovered a flying saucer
 >left the service only two years later as a Major?

Three years later, but who's counting?

 >Why would he leave active duty at all with this feather in his hat?

He got a hardship discharge to take care of his ailing mother in
his home town.  It's in his service record.  Had nothing to do
with Roswell.

 >By-the-way, regular commissioned officers are what count. Are
 >you saying that Marcel never even held a regular commission as
a >Major?

Jeez, you are dense.  Marcel was a commissioned officer.  What I
said was that he was a draftee, not a West Point graduate or a
career officer, like a lot of the officers around him.  That
makes him less likely to be promoted.  It was also peace-time
following a very big war.  The military was down-sizing and was
already bloated with officers.  Even very gifted career officers
like Eisenhower and Twining spent very long periods without
promotion at lower rank during peacetime.  Twining was a mere
2nd Lt. for 17 years; Eisenhower a Major for 15.

 >Why would the man who help recover the greatest find in
 >mankind's history--to believe your story-- leave the military
 >so soon after?

Three years is "soon?"  Marcel's commission ran out in the
Spring following Roswell.  The AF easily could have cut him
loose at that time if they thought they had an embarrassment on
their hands.  Instead they recommissioned him.

 >If you read military journals such as the Navy's
 >quasi-official Proceedings or the Marine's Marine Corps Gazette
 >you would understand that not to have _perfect_ marks means to
 >be an inferior officer.  Everything in an officer's records must
 >lookperfect to be only normal. To look basically like an A- or
 >B+ officer is to mean he is a flop and  not to be advanced.
 >Marcel to me looked like he was on the fast track but then
 >something happened.  Roswell?

Marcel was always rated an A- or B+ officer.  Yet he advanced
from 1st Lt. to Major in less than 3 years.  His ratings
actually went up AFTER Roswell, e.g. the next one he got from
Col. Blanchard.  As usual you have things backwards. Lack of
promotion tells us nothing about Marcel's performance at
Roswell, just like much longer periods without promotion for
Twining and Eisenhower tell us nothing about their competence or
where they eventually ended up.  How the military rates officers
today has little to do with 50+ years ago.  E.g., it's an all
volunteer army now.

 >>His son doesn't count.

 >>No, of course not, and apparently nobody else counts in your
 >>book, either because you are ignorant they exist or because you
 >>choose to deliberately ignore what they had to say.  I don't put
 >>much stock in the proclamations of some guy on Roswell when he
 >>doesn't even know simple basics, like the CIC being military,
 >>not a bunch of civilians.

 >Actually I can't take credit for this one. Bill Hendricks of the
 >Atlanta Constitution first brought this up to me. He went to
 >Roswell during the Love Feast of 1997 and talked to some of the
 >witnesses.

We are not impressed.  How many were "some?"  Who were they?

 >He pointed out what my own investigations were already showing:
 >Kids make horrible witnesses. They're boot to life and get
 >easily carried away on what they see; especially when their
 >loving dad is saying, "That's right. It's a saucer."

Most of the Roswell witnesses weren't "kids."  Get a clue, if
that's possible.

 >As Bill put it you only have two real witnesses: Major Marcel
 >and Walter Haut.( Of course, you got this other guy you keep
 >talking about.)

And Brazel Jr., and Proctor, and Strickland, and Porter, and
Smith, and Exon, and Dubose, and many others, but they aren't
"real" witnesses?

 >>Oh well, just declare Rickett and all the rest unreliable --right?

 >One more story:

The point is, many of these "stories" were told independently of
one another, yet cross-corroborate important details of what
happened.  E.g., Brazel Jr. gave the same basic description of
the orientation and size of the debris field as Marcel.  Brazel
Jr. and Loretta Proctor gave the same basic descriptions of the
anomalous wood-like material as described by Marcel.  Brazel Jr.
described the same anomalous foil-like material as Marcel, as
did Smith, Tadolini, Rickett and others.  Gen. Exon said it was
a saucer crash (what does he have to gain out of this besides
grief?) and gave the same general physical characteristics of
the debris as Marcel, based on testing at Wright-Patterson.
Dubose corroborated much of what Marcel said happened in Fort
Worth.

 >>>Their attempts [USAF} in the '90s have been most clumsy and
 >>>embarrassing. Why even comment on all this now? It only brings
 >>>more attention to the matter.

 >>Maybe because in reality their hand was forced by a GAO
 >>congressional inquiry?  Does Thompson know anything at all?

 >Yep. But not because a saucer crashed.

The point was you didn't have a clue why the AF bothered to
comment at all, yet you weaved it into your ridiculous theory of
trying to fool the Russians. Your comments about Roswell always
seem to be based on ignorance, yet you have no shortage of
opinion on the matter.

 >>>Maybe they are in a slight panic that the greatest Cold-War
 >>>disinformation ploy will be found. I can think of no other
 >>>reason for their foot-in-mouth attempts to kill this story.

 >Which didn't begin until the mid 1990's when forced to comment
 >by the GAO inquiry.  The AF has not exactly been nurturing this
 >story for 50 years.

 >Where's your _secret_ proof that they admit the Roswell crash
 >happened?

You are a dim bulb.  I never said that.  In fact, I said they
clearly tried to kill the story in 1947.  It was _your_ theory
that the AF has been stringing along the Russians -- remember?

 >You don't know what kind of games they've played with the
 >Russians.

There you go again, and then try to pin your silly theories on
me.

 >>>That's the real secret of Roswell: An accidential but
 >>>disinformation masterpiece that still goes on today. It also,
 >>>perhaps, explain why at least one partcipant made flag rank and
 >>>poor Major Marcel never got promoted again.

 >>Blanchard's career was not hurt as it should have been for
 >>screwing-up.

Neither was Marcel's.  Maybe they didn't screw up.

 >>But as years passed and the Soviets denotated
 >>their first bomb all was forgiven.

 >You might want to talk to Bill H. on this. This is the only
 >thing that impresses him as being unexplainable on how a
 >commanding officer, who screwed up royally, went on to become a
 >four star general. After Marcel's story this is your only card to hold.

Only card?  Maybe you care to explain Gen. Exon's testimony that
this was a saucer crash, or Gen. Dubose's that the matter was
very high security and went straight to the White House?  I
mention them not because they are the only other people who
talked, but because they were high ranking officers.

 >>yes, I bought your [Friedman's] book--crash involved alien technology.

 >>Anybody could have deduced that much about the book just by
 >>reading the jacket cover.  Has Thompson bothered to read beyond
 >>that?

 >As you now know I read more. How about Gerald Anderson?

Gerald Anderson -- that's it?  It's obvious you don't know a
damn thing.

 >>That would require that he know at
 >>least a few basic historical facts rather than mouthing off with
 >>unsupported personal opinion.  He could start with such
 >>conventional items as the CIC being military and the Soviet
 >>A-bomb taking most experts by surprise.

 >One FOIA request stating what you say don't make it so!

You definitely are a waste of time.  The history of Soviet
A-bomb development and U.S. expectations go far beyond "one FOIA
request."

 >Personally, being an ex-Marine I have more faith in what they
 >really thought was going on then.

Yeah, that's the story of John Thompson all right.  Your
personal opinion always matter more than anything else.

 >No one was that dumb to think
 >the Russians weren't moving right along on the A-bomb.

They knew the Russians were working on it.  But consensus
opinion of the experts was that the Russians wouldn't have it
for many years.  That's historical fact.   But I forget, you
know better because you are an "ex-Marine" and know better than
the people actually involved or a mountain of historical
documents.

 >If not lying they often embellished. Signing statements and giving video
testimony is>good but not conclusive proof of anything.

You still don't seem to understand that there is a difference
between "proof" and evidence.  Legal affidavits are admissable
in court even if the person is dead.  So are death bed
confessions.  Overwhelming, unambiguous evidence or "proof" is
actually pretty rare in real life and even in science.
Courtroom trials are mostly conflicting testimony with little
physical evidence.  Even physical evidence has to be
authenticated by testimony.

 >... For the record I do not think Marcel lied but I do think he
 >was wrong... But lots offine officers occassionally make
 >mistakes; even Generals.

A mistake of that magnitude and that embarrassing should have
affected his subsequent service evaluations and assignments.  It
didn't.

 >>>I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >>>hell-of-a wallop... but you couldn't keep something like
 >>>this under wraps; no way!

Perhaps that explains why we are discussing it now? Incidentally
the debris was described as very light in weight by various
people and consisted almost entirely of small pieces.  Marcel
was of the opinion it had come apart in the air.  Small, light
debris like this, could float down and not imbed itself in the
soil, making a clean-up operation much quicker and simpler.
Just about everything would end up on the surface.

 >Again any recovery operation of an alien vehicle would not be a
 >get-in and get-out within only a few days.

 >It would have taken thousands to have wisked that Roswell saucer
 >away in only days and not leave anything behind. If they only
 >had 300 men they would've been there well over a month and
 >still, at best,  done an incomplete job. And if Stanton keeps
 >growing his debris field they would have needed more time.

More ignorant blather.  Stanton hasn't kept "growing his debris
field."  He merely quoted Marcel's original estimate that the
Brazel debris field was about 200-300 feet wide by 3/4 miles
long.

100 guys, not 300, standing shoulder to shoulder would extend
across the width of the debris field, easily walk along and pick
up every scrap of surface debris along 3/4 miles in very little
time.  Just to make sure they got everything, they could
similarly sweep other areas.  This wouldn't take a month or
require "thousands" of people.

 >But nobody has got anything and that explains why every
 >government that investigates UFOs quits: Because when it is all
 >said and done, they gather more data but know nothing more than
 >any good UFO investigator does..

Except the Russians, of course, who still believe the Roswell
fairy tale and continue to waste resources it.  That's your
theory, isn't it?  As usual, you have a lot of trouble being
consistent with your logic.

 >>People on the recovery scene like Rickett
 >>(remember him?) reported seeing several dozen people involved in
 >>guarding the scene and picking up the pieces.  Even if you up
 >>this to several hundred directly involved in the recovery, it's
 >>hardly the "tens of thousands" Thompson has invented out of thin air.

 >See above for why two people don't cut it for something this
 >sensational...

But your personal anecdotes and generally ignorant opinions do
cut it?  There have been far more than "two people" who have
credibility and talked about what happened.  I was talking about
two first-hand accounts of the debris field scene, not the total
number of witnesses to various facets of the event.  There have
been other first-hand accounts, such as AP photographer Robin
Adair who said he tried to overfly the debris field, saw dozens
of people at the scene, and was waved off.

 >>There is always a certain
 >>percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >>woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

 >Like the Drake equation, it's all a matter of numbers; there's
 >a certain percentage of our population that will be unreliable.

And also a certain percentage that will be reliable.  Your
personal prejudice is that everybody is unreliable when it comes
to Roswell.

 >>Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the
 >>Roswell crash involved avehicle of alien manufacture.

And you continue to be unable to distinguish between "proof" and
evidence.

 >>There is one document,
 >>photographed in Gen. Ramey's hand, which says "the victims of
 >>the wreck you forwarded to .... Fort Worth, Tex."

 >Now, we're into reading tea leaves.

No, we're into reading documents.  The above interpretation is
the overwhelming consensus of people who have looked at the
Ramey memo.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35

From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 15:26:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 08:51:26 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:08:02 +0000
 >From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 35
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Hi All,

I hope you all had an enjoyable X-mas break, I am still a little
bloated from all the food and drink but life carries on as they
say.

Anyway can anyone put me in touch with the original author to the
following report featured in UFO Round-Up?



HUGE TRIANGULAR UFO SEEN IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE, UK

On Tuesday, December 7, 1999, "at 6:30 p.m.,
I saw an incredibly large craft near my house while
taking my dog for a walk. I first sighted a large
white light that had many different colours moving
about inside of it...

"Has anyone seen anything
similar?  I would be interested to know."  (Email
Form Report) >>

Regards,

Roy..                      Keep Smiling...









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Guyra: ELP?

From: Andrei Ol'khovatov <olkhovatov@mtu-net.ru>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:54:29 +0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:09:45 -0500
Subject: Guyra: ELP?


[Non-Subscriber Post --ebk]

Dear All,

I have read a post on the Guyra event associated "sunburn" of a
witness. The phenomenon resembles the event which took place
before the Febr.4, 1975 China earthquake, when a fallen
"lightning" burnt a face of several persons. And the Guyra event
in general more and more resembles me a powerful manifestation
of earthquake lights. Weak and shallow earthquakes are
registered in the region. Problems with local electricity supply
are also very indicative. Maybe soon I will post details in my
www-site.

Regarding the physical agent of the burn, we can just to
speculate that it could be ultraviolet radiation of the "lights"
in the about 0.4 - 0.3 micron band (other bands are absorbed by
glass).

It would be very interesting to check the road for possible burn
and other traces.

Another aspect - to look for possible problems with local radio/electronic
devices.

Sincerely,

Andrei Ol'khovatov

<olkhov@mail.ru>
www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 06:46:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:12:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 12:22:27 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >I must admit, that the little bit I saw or read about Corso
 >himself, seemed to indicate some personal sincerity. He does
 >seem likeable, and I would prefer to believe that his memory had
 >deteriorated with age and illness.

 >If so, this would put the spotlight on his ghostwriter Birnes.

 >I suppose I could make some gratuitous jab at "The Day After
 >Debbie Does Dallas", but that might be unseemly. I know
 >relatively little about the Kennedy assassination, nothing that
 >isn't generally known.

 >For Corso (ala' Birnes) to be deeply involved in both
 >sensational ( and best- selling) matters, would seem ..ah ..
 >kind of rare.

 >Best wishes

 >- Larry Hatch.

Larry-

A couple of points to keep in mind.

Corso met with a number of ufologists in Roswell (~1995) to
discuss what he knew about the Roswell incident.  However, his
claims at that point were (I believe) fairly vague.  He
reportedly carried a file folder with a lot of papers in it, but
who knows whether that was supporting evidence or his own
writings.  He declined to let anyone look at it.  I believe this
occured before he became involved with Birnes and appears to
show that he was not completely led astray by his co-author.
However, Corse really wasn't an expert in the Roswell event from
a ufologist perspective, so what we find in his book about the
"crash" was written by Birnes.

Prior to his involvement with Corso, I believe that Birnes had
been involved in at least one other UFO publication.  While he
was not listed as the co-author, his familiarity with the
publishing industry was helpful to another author who wanted to
get his book into print.  My impression is that Birnes is a
conspiratorialist, which would explain his interest in a book on
the "Kennedy Assasination".  Who knows, perhaps Corso was the
"Smoking Man" made so famous in . . . . . . well, never mind. .
. .

Happy New Year to all


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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:37:34 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:14:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 06:46:56 -0500
To: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Subject: Re: Corso?
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Steve. You wrote:

 >My impression is that Birnes is a
 >conspiratorialist, which would explain his interest in a book on
 >the "Kennedy Assasination".  Who knows, perhaps Corso was the
 >"Smoking Man" made so famous in . . . . . . well, never mind. .


Well.. perhaps Corso was exactly who he said he was and tried to
tell the  truth as he knew it.  He seemed honest to me when I
heard him during his Art Bell interview.  I have also read his
book which seems a simple prerequisite for discussing Corso and
his recollections.    The factual errors in Corso's version of
history only indicate a faulty memory( Corso was not up on UFO
literature). The information about the seeding of alien
technology was Corso's part of the truth;  he tried to
contribute it as best he could. What part of the truth do you
have and when can we expect your contribution?

Also...Corso investigated the Kennedy assasination. Why not
write a book about these experiences?  And does being a
"conspiratorist" discredit Birnes ... and what does this have to
do with Corso's...oh well...never mind...

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 >
   Dec > Dec 27

                  Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:18:37 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:32:47 -0500
Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:26:31 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: The Drake Equation - A Parallax View
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I'm still looking for a good translation of the Roswell I-beam
 >hieroglyphs.

 >Two possibilities come to mind:

 >1) Made in China

 >2) If found, please call this number...

 >Other alternatives welcome.

"In case of emergency,..."

"No Step"

"Rejected by Inspector 1313"

"Xzgorlap Was Here"

"Boeing Airplane Company"

"Do Not Open in Flight"

David Rudiak has already ref'd. us to the negative energy
article in the Jan. '00 Scientific American.  There are two
other feature articles in same that are relevant to facets of
the discussion on this thread:  the cover piece, "Once We Were
Not Alone," bearing on the issue of why Homo Sap is or at least
seems to be the only intelligent indigenous Terran speicies, and
"Snowball Earth," concerning the hypothesis that truly brutal
climate reversals might well have given rise to or importantly
ecouraged the rise of multicellular organisms.

-- Cheers and '50s Ufology Forever!

KARL








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:52:43 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 03:44:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 19:49:38 -0500 (EST)
 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 22:01:18 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 21:36:00 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

 >>>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:00:28 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: David Rudiak <Rudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:15:23 -0400
 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>How they howl when the holy grail of ufology is attacked.

 >>>I also notice that John Thompson doesn't respond to Stanton
 >>>Friedman's mentioned of Lewis Rickett.  Does Thompson know who
 >>>Rickett was?  Apparently not.  Rickett was one of those
 >>>"civilian" CICman who operated out of Marcel's office, and he
 >>>backed Marcel's story 100%.

 >You suggest?  Kind of hard to hurt the feelings of a man who had
 >been dead for 8 years.  Yet another indication of how little you
 >know and how little you care about being accurate.

Yes, with you I suspect you would talk about your dead friends,
if they didn't agree with you completely.

 >>I see a bunch of people who popped in and popped out of Roswell
 >>interviewing people and not doing much more. They believed, for
 >>the most, what they wanted to believe. And everyone milked it
 >>for a book.

 >Sorry, but a number of people have looked into this and not
 >"milked it for a book" or made a dime.  Just another one of your
 >worthless sweeping generalizations.

I stand by what I said. If a competent investigator had lived in
Roswell all these years they would have known the reputations of
many locals that you cite that claim something strange. You
cannot do roadside investigating! An investigator needs to be
there to watch these witnesses over time to see what kind of
people they are. But I suspect you've never done a background
check on anyone in your life. If they told you what you wanted
to hear you are more than willing to believe.

 >>What we have is "Lights in the Sky."

 >More "bull hockey!"  Many cases involve clearly structured
 >craft, some seen up close up, appear on radar, leave ground
 >traces, been photographed, etc.

You have never done a case to make the sweeping statement of
above. If you have, please tell me where I can see your work.
You have a great memory for details seen in books and UFO
magazines or on the Net.

Have you ever met with witnesses, got them to sign general case
forms and then called neighbors, the police, 911, the weather
serice, TV/radio stations, ect and then submitted the completed
report to an organization, such as MUFON, for review? If so, how
many and when? Have you videoed your witnesses and then shown
the tapes to other investigators to get their unbiased opinions
on what they think the witnesses are "made of?"

Have you gone down country roads and taken names off mailboxs
where the alleged UFO was seen at and then called these folks to
see if they saw the same UFO as the witnesses claimed? Have you
ever submitted UFO photos or videos for an analysis by
independent photo analysts? If you had, you would find much is
bull hockey! Finding any definitive proof in this field is like
looking for a diamond where one has never been found before.

Your the type who never met a UFO story you didn't like! Because
structured objects are seen--and yes I've done several reliable
cases of this--does not mean they are structured. Seeing is not
neccessarily being real. I've yet to do one case where a
reliable witness has gone up and kicked a UFO! Do I think there
may be structured UFOs that are physical: Maybe; hopefully, but
that don't make it so!

Why do you think mainstream science doesn't accept any that is
reported? Because the "beef" is always--let me repeat,
ALWAYS--missing.

There are a FEW good photographs but nothing conclusive that
anyone outside the UFO community would accept as conclusive
proof. I have done an excellent case with a UFO photo, but the
strength of the case is not the photo: It's the witnesses, who
included a police chief, with a masters degree and who was three
times head of the Georgia Police Chief's association. I also had
another retired police chief and others vouched for his
reputation. But the photo remains unimpressive.

What I have is good faith in the witnesses and their belief that
the object in the photo did impressive flights, as they say,
before the photo was taken. Do I believe them? Yes. But that's
my judgement not scientific proof.

Trace cases? What good story do you speak of? I'm not aware of
any TRACE case that has out-of-this world minerals or metals.
I've done probably as good a trace case as anyone but it doesn't
prove anything. The marks I saw  in a concrete driveway  don't
prove even remotely that  an out-of-this world craft made them.
Would I like to believe; yes! But what I want to believe counts
for nothing; only what I can prove.

(Same as your Roswell crash story. You THING but you CAN'T
prove.)

Again, the strength of the case depends on the excellent
character of the witnesses involved, who for the record, didn't
see an actual UFO make the marks. I can tell you that
trace-cases are the rarest of all cases and don't exist in
numbers like you read about! Give me one of your's that you've
personally investigated. Don't tell me about crop circles
either. I've seen one of those; didn't prove a thing to me.

What do you want ufology to be? Is it to be for good
entertainment or to prove, beyond, a resonable doubt that the
UFO phenonemon is real? Instead of hammering me, why don't you
solicit support for what George Filer has proposed: Putting out
instrumentation packages to acquire data that mainstream
scientists will accept. If there's no proof, then we can just
close shop and forget it! We have a phenonemon that lacks any
physical or concrete proof to show it is legitimate.

Enough time has been wasted on Roswell. I think, initially, it
held some promise but no one that is objective can continue to
ignore the wealth of evidence that says nothing happened there.
The conclusion of the USAF's first report on Roswell brings up
what my own real life experience with a recovery operations
showed: There is zero documentation or proof to show adequate
resources were committed to finding anything outside Roswell.
The GAO couldn't find it and no one else can. Repeating there
was  an Army Air Force/Air Force cover-up for why no proof that
a massive recovery operation took place is far from adequate!

Funny, I've talked to many active duty military officers in my
investigations; I've found must are sympathetic to something
going on and some have even offered their own stories they've
heard. Where does this conspiracy of silence on Roswell begin
and end? You say Cavitt was a "good patriot." He was told in no
uncertain terms that he could say anything he wanted. But I
guess in your version, he was told behind the scene that his
family would be killed if he spoke the truth? What manure. He
did speak the truth as he saw it.

 >There is zero concrete proof of anything physical. I've even
 >>meet someone who has worked on a recovered UFO!

 >>Got service records, everything to prove where he was and what
 >>he did. Oh, I forgot to say he really can't back up your verison
 >>of Roswell because he's not sure where the  craft he was working
 >>on came from.

 >Who cares if it was Roswell.  Maybe you could tell us more about
 >this individual and what he says.

Because I don't spread manure unless the story holds up; so far
it hasn't. You would accept it, though; there's not a shadow of
doubt in my mind that you would eat all, and eat it fast!

 >>If you read military journals such as the Navy's
 >>quasi-official Proceedings or the Marine's Marine Corps Gazette
 >>you would understand that not to have _perfect_ marks means to
 >>be an inferior officer.  Everything in an officer's records must
 >>lookperfect to be only normal. To look basically like an A- or
 >>B+ officer is to mean he is a flop and  not to be advanced.
 >>Marcel to me looked like he was on the fast track but then
 >>something happened.  Roswell?

 >>He pointed out what my own investigations were already showing:
 >>Kids make horrible witnesses. They're boot to life and get
 >>easily carried away on what they see; especially when their
 >>loving dad is saying, "That's right. It's a saucer."

 >Most of the Roswell witnesses weren't "kids."  Get a clue, if
 >that's possible.

The most important one was. Major Marcel's son.

 >The point is, many of these "stories" were told independently of
 >one another, yet cross-corroborate important details of what
 >happened.  E.g., Brazel Jr. gave the same basic description of
 >the orientation and size of the debris field as Marcel.  Brazel
 >Jr. and Loretta Proctor gave the same basic descriptions of the
 >anomalous wood-like material as described by Marcel.  Brazel Jr.
 >described the same anomalous foil-like material as Marcel, as
 >did Smith, Tadolini, Rickett and others.  Gen. Exon said it was
 >a saucer crash (what does he have to gain out of this besides
 >grief?) and gave the same general physical characteristics of
 >the debris as Marcel, based on testing at Wright-Patterson.
 >Dubose corroborated much of what Marcel said happened in Fort
 >Worth.

Your idea of cross-corrobration is ridiculious. Based on your's
and other's objectivy displayed, I'd have to be with the
investigator who interviewed them to believe that. And
interviews done 30-40 years after the event are watered-down
versions of the events at best. And were all these people
interviewed before ANY public knowledge was made of the alleged
Roswell crash?

 >They knew the Russians were working on it.  But consensus
 >opinion of the experts was that the Russians wouldn't have it
 >for many years.  That's historical fact.   But I forget, you
 >know better because you are an "ex-Marine" and know better than
 >the people actually involved or a mountain of historical
 >documents.

Did you do the documemtation? Or are you only repeating what
you've read like a good parrot?

 >>If not lying they often embellished. Signing statements
 >>and giving video testimony is>good but not conclusive proof
 >>of anything.

 >You still don't seem to understand that there is a difference
 >between "proof" and evidence.  Legal affidavits are admissable
 >in court even if the person is dead.  So are death bed
 >confessions.  Overwhelming, unambiguous evidence or "proof" is
 >actually pretty rare in real life and even in science.
 >Courtroom trials are mostly conflicting testimony with little
 >physical evidence.  Even physical evidence has to be
 >authenticated by testimony.

In court once the USAF and GAO presented their evidence this
thing would lose hands down. Any lawyer will tell you that
actual witnesses in the flesh mean more than signed affidavits
from people who don't/can't show up.

 >>... For the record I do not think Marcel lied but I do think he
 >>was wrong... But lots offine officers occassionally make
 >>mistakes; even Generals.

 >A mistake of that magnitude and that embarrassing should have
 >affected his subsequent service evaluations and assignments.  It
 >didn't.

You've said nothing to indicate that the "recovery" helped him
as it should.

 >>>>I can tell you when something this big comes down it makes a
 >>>>hell-of-a wallop... but you couldn't keep something like
 >>>>this under wraps; no way!

 >Perhaps that explains why we are discussing it now? Incidentally
 >the debris was described as very light in weight by various
 >people and consisted almost entirely of small pieces.  Marcel
 >was of the opinion it had come apart in the air.  Small, light
 >debris like this, could float down and not imbed itself in the
 >soil, making a clean-up operation much quicker and simpler.
 >Just about everything would end up on the surface.

Sure! Dream on; even my Wright Patt witness don't say it's that
light! What did they do? Cross the universe in a balsa wood
space ship? Or was it a tissue space ship? You, litterally,
grapsed at straws to keep your story alive.

 >>Again any recovery operation of an alien vehicle would not be a
 >>get-in and get-out within only a few days.

 >>It would have taken thousands to have wisked that Roswell saucer
 >>away in only days and not leave anything behind. If they only
 >>had 300 men they would've been there well over a month and
 >>still, at best,  done an incomplete job. And if Stanton keeps
 >>growing his debris field they would have needed more time.

 >More ignorant blather.  Stanton hasn't kept "growing his debris
 >field."  He merely quoted Marcel's original estimate that the
 >Brazel debris field was about 200-300 feet wide by 3/4 miles
 >long.

Others say, however, that all the debris fit into a pickup truck
and was taken on a single B-29 bomber. You're the one who is
ignorant. You've never seen a recovery operation so you know
nothing you speak of. And all those little feather pieces you
talk of; wouldn't they just be a little bit hard to find? What
were they all painted neon yellow? Some might have been so light
they drifted half-way around the world! Did they get those too?
We didn't have any craters so that've been what happened!

 >100 guys, not 300, standing shoulder to shoulder would extend
 >across the width of the debris field, easily walk along and pick
 >up every scrap of surface debris along 3/4 miles in very little
 >time.  Just to make sure they got everything, they could
 >similarly sweep other areas.  This wouldn't take a month or
 >require "thousands" of people.

You know nothing. Try it yourself!

 >>But nobody has got anything and that explains why every
 >>government that investigates UFOs quits: Because when it is all
 >>said and done, they gather more data but know nothing more than
 >>any good UFO investigator does..

 >Except the Russians, of course, who still believe the Roswell
 >fairy tale and continue to waste resources it.  That's your
 >theory, isn't it?  As usual, you have a lot of trouble being
 >consistent with your logic.

I said, "maybe." And my reason for why every government gets out
of it is just what I said. If you quit reading books and
investigate for yourself you would know the truth of what I say.
Keep reading; highly entertaining! When's the next "Tom Swift"
sequel come out on Roswell? Isn't that what it's really about
NOW.

 >>>There is always a certain
 >>>percentage of idiots and liars that will come out of the
 >>>woodwork to feed on the alleged evemt if it publisized enough.

 >>Like the Drake equation, it's all a matter of numbers; there's
 >>a certain percentage of our population that will be unreliable.

 >And also a certain percentage that will be reliable.  Your
 >personal prejudice is that everybody is unreliable when it comes
 >to Roswell.

You're right.

 >>>Proof is all that matters. There is zero proof that the
 >>>Roswell crash involved avehicle of alien manufacture.

 >And you continue to be unable to distinguish between "proof" and
 >evidence.

Evidence don't count for nothing; only proof.

 >>>There is one document,
 >>>photographed in Gen. Ramey's hand, which says "the victims of
 >>>the wreck you forwarded to .... Fort Worth, Tex."

 >>Now, we're into reading tea leaves.

 >No, we're into reading documents.  The above interpretation is
 >the overwhelming consensus of people who have looked at the
 >Ramey memo.

 >David Rudiak

I've and others have looked at it. Don't see nothing except what
you want to make of it. Any resolution is far too poor. The USAF
said the same about the photos they looked at.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:01:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 04:10:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:37:34 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Ed wrote:

 >Well.. perhaps Corso was exactly who he said he was and tried to
 >tell the  truth as he knew it.  He seemed honest to me when I
 >heard him during his Art Bell interview.  I have also read his
 >book which seems a simple prerequisite for discussing Corso and
 >his recollections.    The factual errors in Corso's version of
 >history only indicate a faulty memory( Corso was not up on UFO
 >literature). The information about the seeding of alien
 >technology was Corso's part of the truth;  he tried to
 >contribute it as best he could. What part of the truth do you
 >have and when can we expect your contribution?

I also have read his book, which he graciously signed for me in
Roswell. I'm afraid I missed the Art Bell show, but have video
taken in Roswell in which he describes his involvement.
Unfortunately, that doesn't afford me any great "truths" that I
can inject to enlighten this thread very much.

If faulty memory can be blamed on his failing to get his facts
straight about the Roswell event, then how can we trust his
memory regarding his "seeding" activities.  Are we to pick and
choose that which we want to believe or reject that which we
don't?

I have no great stake in this one way or the other, and it would
be most interesting if someone can find that "smoking gun" that
will prove Corso's claims to be true.  If his son follows
through and manages to get more of his father's information out
to the public, that would be of interest and I would take a look
at it.  But the paradigm shift that this would lead to will
require far more than annecdotal statements and faith to take
root, and so far that has been lacking.

 >Also...Corso investigated the Kennedy assasination. Why not
 >write a book about these experiences?  And does being a
 >"conspiratorist" discredit Birnes ... and what does this have to
 >do with Corso's...oh well...never mind...

I believe that being a conspiratorialist limits ones ability to
view subjects from a neutral position.  For many that's probably
not a big deal, but (as an example) if I wanted to learn more
about the impact of the millenium on religion, I'd rather hear
it from Bill Moyer than I would from Pat Robertson.

I am not aware of any major involvement that Corso might have
had in the Kennedy assasination, which would have occured just a
few years after his alleged "seeding" of alien technology into
our own.  If he had special knowledge to share, that would be
good.  But I guess we'll never know, unless it's included in the
material his son has.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:58:32 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:27:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:26:06 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:18 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Stan,

 >>I will say this, you don't give up. I have read your books,
 >>books by other's on Roswell, seen most of the documentaries done
 >>on it. But by the far the best and most OBJECTIVE account
 >>appeared in the June MUFON issue of 1997. Yes, you know who I
 >>speak of: Kent Jeffrey's "Roswell--Anatomy of a Myth."

 >>Kent spent money and much time--as you have--on investigating
 >>the Roswell story. He was also so much taken by the subject that
 >>he help with the International Roswell Initiative which was a
 >>large petition to hopefully open any classified files on the
 >>Roswell Crash.

 >>Here was a man who was passionately involved and interviewed
 >>many of the same people you have and many that you didn't
 >>interview. This latter group includes "15 B-29 pilots and 2 B-29
 >>navigatgors, all of whom were stationed at Roswell Army Air
 >>Field in July 1947" (page 7-8).

 >>According to Kent, a commercial airline pilot, "Not one single
 >>man had any direct knowledge of a crashed saucer or of any kind
 >>of unusual materail." Not one!  "...Even more significantly, in
 >>all their collective years with the 509th Bomb Group, not one of
 >>these men had ever encountered any other individual who had such
 >>knowledge."

 >Sorry, John, wrong again. Kent Jeffrey was a passionate
 >collector of stories and expressor of strong opinions not backed
 >by evidence.

 >You really ought to read my five page treatment of his MUFON
 >article. Give me a snail mail address. or send an SASE to UFORI,
 >POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958. I have been to reunions of the
 >509th as well.


Stan,

Are you saying that you went to reunions of the 509th and got
different answers than Jeffrey did? If so, who did you talk to
at the time?

On the other hand, if you went to 509th reunions and got
negative responses to your inquiries, what are the names of the
negative responders and why haven't you written them up in your
books and papers along with all the promoted prosayers? Are you
saying that Jeffrey simply lied?

Have you ever interviewed _any_ Roswell participants who didn't
support your view of the crash and recovery of an ET spacecraft?
If not, why not? Have you pursued negative commentators as
assiduously as positive ones? Howcome you didn't manage to find
Kent Lorenzo (if I have the name right off the top of my head),
who was at the base hospital at the time, and who said that
nothing untoward happened during the time in question, let alone
anything remotely involving the autopsy of alien bodies?

Actually, you did find him. But what he had to say didn't mesh
with what you wanted said, so he got royally ignored in your
"official history" of events. And remains so to this day. Along
with any and all other naysayers to Roswell (and Corona, and San
Augustin) orthodoxy, as far as I can tell.

Conversely, you refuse to retract any significant legitimacy
associated with Gerald Anderson, who, five years old at the
time, claimed to have witnessed a San Augustin crash recovery
because he supports your belief in the latter, despite having
been caught in at least two obvious and palbable deceptions
regarding same. And don't tell us about the lie detector test --
the guy has been caught out to everyone's satisfaction but
yours. Even John Carpenter eventually admitted as much, though I
doubt you ever will.

Ditto Glenn Dennis. I know, he's a nice guy in person. Hard to
believe he put everyone on, isn't it?

And what about that there Frank Kaufmann? Just another American
patriot trying to get his story out to the general public. Kinda
reminds you of Philip Corso, doesn't it? But I forget: Corso was
a real military officer. And real military officers never lie.
Or exaggerate. While the cover-up goes on forever.

<snip>

 >I certainly am not saying [I] believe everything people tell an
 >investigator. At best everything starts in my gray basket. and
 >then gets checked.

Nice platitude.

 >I am the guy who is given a hard time for exposing Robert S.
 >Lazar, Michael Wolf Kruvant, Guy Kirkwood, Frank Stranges etc
 >etc.as frauds.

 >Stanton T. Friedman

Who? And who's giving you a hard time, anyway? Do I get credit
for exposing Courtney Brown and Richard Hoagland? The question
is, why haven't you exposed any of your own sources, beginning
with Gerald Anderson?

Dennis W. 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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                   UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 06:29:53 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:32:21 -0500
Subject: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


Source: 'alt.paranet.ufo'.

Stig

***

From: JackLa@webtv.net (Jon LaVine)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
Subject: Circa 1957 Saucer Incident
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 21:05:39 -0500 (EST)


I don't remember that exact year. I was quite young at the time.
It happened around 1957 give or take 3 years.

On regular national TV news at 6:00pm the announcer said that
the USAF had shot down a UFO over California. The map in the
background showed 3 nuclear explosions, 1 over the sierras in
northern California, 1 over the sierras in mid California, and 1
over the southern desert area of California.

Of importance is that it came from an official USAF
announcement. The Nike-Hercules air defense system had been used
and each of the three missiles had detonated a nuke at high
altitude.

30 years later I tried to look the incident up, but could only
find a blurb about 3 nuclear explosions out over the Pacific
Ocean that were part of a test. I believe this is debunking.

Someone on this discussion group stated that they would only
believe if they were told over the TV on a regular news program
that UFOs exist. Well, if it weren't for the debunking, it did
happen once. For that matter, Roswell was much the same way,
with the USAF officially announcing a "saucer" then saying later
it was a balloon.

If anyone has any information or memory of the incident of 3
nukes over California back in the late 50's then I would
appreciate their comments, information, gossip, or whatever.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                CPR-Canada News: Canadian Crop Circle Summary

From: Paul Anderson - TMP / CPR-Canada <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 21:42:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:36:17 -0500
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Canadian Crop Circle Summary


CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada


December 27, 1999


_____________________________



CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE SUMMARY REPORT 1999


By Paul Anderson
Director
Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

December, 1999



Overview

Unexplained "crop circles", circular and other geometric
patterns of flattened field crops, continued to be reported
across Canada in 1999, as well as a number of other countries,
including England, the Czech Republic, Germany, Holland, the
USA, Israel and elsewhere. This past year's "circle season" in
Canada, from July to October, saw developments in the phenomenon
on a number of fronts, including the number of reported
formations (20, up from 14 in 1998 and 2 in 1997), size and
complexity (ranging from the common small simple circles to
formations two to three hundred feet in size, some more
elaborate than in past years) and many associated anomalies,
notably stalk nodes from some formations with very significant
stretching, swelling and expulsion cavities as compared to
normal control samples, as well as numerous electrical equipment
malfunctions and failures in and around some formations.

Formations were reported in six provinces - British Columbia
(1), Alberta (4), Saskatchewan (10), Ontario (3), Quebec (1) and
Prince Edward Island (1). Many excellent firsthand reports came
in this year, from farmers in whose fields the circles were
found, thanks to the efforts of a growing network of CPR-Canada
coordinators, field investigators, researchers and other
assistants, as well as a reporting hotline and growing publicity
in various media, etc. As in past years, most formations were
reported near the end of the harvesting season, in late August
and September, simply because that is when most of them are
initially discovered by farmers as they are combining their
fields, literally stumbling across them as it were. Relating to
this is the fact that circles in Canada have appeared virtually
across the entire country, which geographically is of course
much larger an area than England (where it is easier to discover
and document new formations almost as soon as they appear, often
by pilots, as most formations there tend to be found within a
fifty or so mile radius of the Stonehenge / Avebury area).
Therefore, a significant number of formations in this country
probably never get reported at all, and in fact we know of
several cases in the past where formations were found but not
initially reported to anyone, then only found about weeks,
months or even a year or two later. As mentioned above, thanks
to a growing network, hotline, etc., that situation is now
beginning to improve.

As has been the case virtually since the phenomenon started
being documented in this country in the 1970's, most circles
were reported in the province of Saskatchewan (ten out of twenty
reports this year), and in many cases (in several provinces) in
the very same areas, or in close proximity to, where they were
found last year and previous years. In one case in Alberta, the
second formation found this year just outside of Edmonton, was
in the same end of the same field as a set of simpler circles
last year. It is the consensus now of CPR-Canada and others,
that these localized "hot spots" should be the primary focus for
future surveillance, field studies and other experiments. It is
a situation analogous to southern England, where by far the most
formations (in the world as well as England itself) are found
each summer in the Wiltshire and Hampshire areas.


Highlights of the Season

The first Canadian reports for this year were a couple of
elaborate pictogram style formations, one just over three
hundred feet long (the longest on record so far in Canada),
discovered in a couple of adjacent wheat fields on the New
Credit Reserve near Hagersville, Ontario on July 22. These were
similar to some of the early nineties patterns from England, and
displayed a fairly complex layering of the plants. The
formations drew much attention from the local media and public,
as well as the Native Indian community where they appeared, who
actually held cermonies out in the fields to celebrate their
appearance. CPR-Canada and other field investigators reported
malfunctioning camera and video camera equipment inside and over
the formations. Odd small "balls of light" were also reported in
the area by some witnesses around the general time of their
appearance, similar to reports common in England and Europe.
Another odd long "script" kind of design was later reported near
Montebello, Quebec, initially found in mid-July in a cut field,
although subsequent correspondence indicated this may have been
done by one of the local farmers for normal advertising
purposes, and not an actual formation.

Other reports came in over the next few weeks, from near Dease
Lake, BC (single circle in grass in a very remote location),
Ardmore, Alberta (group of small circles in hay, found to be
fungi-related) and a "celtic cross" formation just outside
Edmonton, Alberta on a research farm run by the University of
Alberta (deemed upon ground inspection to be a probable, though
unproven, hoax). A couple small circles were also found in a
blueberry field near Christopher Cross, Prince Edward Island,
the first known case of that kind.

Activity was quiet in Saskatchewan, the usual centre of Canadian
reports, until early September, when a number of formations
started being reported by farmers one after another,over the
next few weeks. Some of the largest and most impressive
formations ever seen in Canada showed up in these prairie fields
this past summer and fall, notably Neilburg, where a large one
hundred eighty five foot pattern of eleven circles in wheat was
found. This was the first of several formations this year to
exhibit the stretched, swollen and burst stalk nodes. CPR-Canada
works closely with the BLT Research Team
(http://www.bltresearch.net), which has been scientifically
documenting these and other anomalies from crop formations
world-wide for the past several years; much more information on
this work is available from BLT and CPR-Canada. It was also a
departure from previous Canadian formations, being more
"European" in design, a sort of simplified version of the famous
fractal and Julia Set patterns in England. A formation of two
circles, each with an identical cross appendage attached, was
found near Conquest, Saskatchewan around the same time, close to
where a similar set appeared last year.

The main centre of activity in Saskatchewan was around the town
of Midale, (again from where several reports came in last year),
with a total of six reports in this area alone (from early
September to early October), all in wheat, ranging from sets of
single circles to an intricate "medicine wheel" pattern
containing complex lay patterns. Other circles were reported
nearby at Weyburn (another group of small random circles in
hay).

Also in September, additional reports came in from Alberta, at
Acadia Valley, a very nice one hundred twenty nine foot triple
dumbell pattern, again with the anomalous node effects on plant
stalks, and the second formation just outside Edmonton, a large
one hundred ninety one foot complex seven-circle pattern in
barley with radial lay patterns in all circles; another one of
the best of the year, and of any year so far. Many stretched and
ruptured nodes were found in this formation in particular, and
it was also interesting to note that the field itself was
thickly infested with thistle plants, which made sampling (and
just walking) difficult. There was also a report of circles near
Drumheller, but these were unable to be confirmed.

Formations continued to be reported into late September and
October, with another set of two beautifully made circles near
Viscount, Saskatchewan, the sixth Midale, Saskatchewan formation
(set of three circles in a line) and "teardrop and diamond"
shapes in field of eight foot tall corn near Lowville, Ontario,
in which a number of electrical equipment malfunctions were
reported by another local team.

Excellent video footage and photos, both ground and aerial, as
well as ground surveys were obtained for many of the Canadian
formations this year, Alberta and Saskatchewan in particular.
Several formations were also extensively sampled for lab
analysis by the BLT Research Team, including Neilburg, Edmonton
#2, Acadia Valley and some of the Midale area formations.

In most cases, no direct evidence of hoaxing was found, with no
footprints, no initial tracks leading in or out of circles, lack
of damage to the flattened or surrounding crop, etc. This,
taken, with the aforementioned scientific evidence, would
continue to suggest that there is a genuine phenomeon occurring,
in Canada as well as around the world. Hoaxes (with the
percentage of reported formations being man-made a source of
heated debate among many researchers) are usually more obvious
and self-evident upon close examination.

As last year, media coverage was more extensive than in most
previous years, including CBC (both radio and television), The
Western Producer, Canada's leading farming and agricultural
publication and a number of other media.


Summary

In short, 1999 was a banner year for crop circles in Canada, and
may indicate that we need to be keeping a closer eye on what is
going on in the fields of our farmlands. CPR-Canada will be
doing just that, with new projects and initiatives being planned
for next summer in 2000, given the increased number of reports
the last couple of years. A print version of this summary, with
additional photos, diagrams and newsclippings, etc. will be
published shortly. Proceeds help cover research expenses and
projects.

An archive of full reports and images is available on the
CPR-Canada web site (http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada).


For further information:

Circles Phenomenon Research Canada
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


This article may be reprinted, as long as copyright credit is
provided.


_____________________________


Links to additional and previous news stories, reports and
updates:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/news.html

_____________________________


Circle Phenomena in Canada Report Archive 1999:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/1999.html

20 Formations!

_____________________________


REPORTING HOTLINE: 604.731.8522

_____________________________


CPR-Canada News is the e-mail news service of Circles
Phenomenon Research Canada (affiliate of Circles
Phenomenon Research International), is edited by Paul
Anderson and is published periodically or as breaking
develops. It is available by free 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

Circles Phenomenon Research International is a research
group established by noted crop circle researcher Colin
Andrews to investigate the global crop circle phenomenon
and other possibly related phenomena. Initially founded as
Circles Phenomenon Research in 1983 in England, it became
an international group in 1992, with offices in the USA and
UK, and affiliate offices currently in Canada, Australia and
Japan.

Circles Phenomenon Research Canada is the Canadian affiliate
office of CPRI, initiated in 1995 by future studies researcher
Paul Anderson, also founder and director of The Millennium
Project, a future studies organization. Focusing on Canadian
reports, CPR-Canada also assimilates data and information
from around the world, networking with other organizations
and researchers. CPR-Canada provincial and regional offices
are now in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec.

Extensive resources are available to interested persons or
groups.

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


Paul Anderson
Editor


� 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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                   UFO Reported On Mississipi's Gulf Coast

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:38:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:39:54 -0500
Subject: UFO Reported On Mississipi's Gulf Coast


Source: The Sun Herald,

http://www.sunherald.com/region/docs/ufo122799.htm

Stig

***

UFO reported on Coast

Todd Twilley
The Sun Herald

Several reports of a UFO came in to local authorities and the
Sun Herald Sunday.

Keesler Air Force Base and the Ocean Spring Police Department
both received calls of a white light streaking across the sky
headed in a northern direction around 7 p.m.

An Ocean Springs police dispatcher said personnel at
Gulfport-Biloxi Regional Airport said they saw the object as
well, but that no one knew what it was.

A caller to the Sun Herald described the object as a white light
with a tail and sparks that continued to fly from the UFO.

Witnesses said the object was moving too slowly to have been a
meteorite.

Reports differed on whether a sound was heard from the UFO.

Peter Davenport, director of the U.S. UFO Center in Seattle,
Wash. said they had not recieved any calls about UFO activity in
the area.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                     "Discovery Passed Over Gulf Coast"

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:40:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:43:31 -0500
Subject: "Discovery Passed Over Gulf Coast"


Source: The Sun Herald,

http://vh60009.vh6.infi.net:80/news/docs/ifo122899.htm

Stig

***

NASA says Discovery passed over Coast

Identity of UFO discovered

KEN FINK
THE SUN HERALD

Reports of a UFO on Sunday night were not bogus, but the
unidentified object seen passing over the Coast has now been
identified as STS-103: space shuttle Discovery.

NASA confirmed Monday that the object numerous skywatchers had
reported Sunday evening was the shuttle on its last day aloft.

"It passed over New Orleans at 5:34 (p.m.) Sunday night and it
was over Natchez at 5:42," said Lanee Cooksey, a spokeswoman at
the John C. Stennis Space Center. "I called Houston and they
confirmed the path."

Discovery passed over the Coast at an altitude of 368 miles and
a speed of 16,926 mph.

Discovery has been aloft since Dec. 19 on a mission to repair
the ailing Hubble space telescope. It landed safely at Kennedy
Space Center at Cape Canaveral, Fla., just after 6 p.m. Monday.
NASA officials vowed to have the craft back and its systems
powered down before Jan. 1 to avoid any Y2K glitches.

For future viewing times, flight paths and other shuttle
information, go to www.spaceflight.nasa.gov.

Sunday evening, reports flooded Coast police departments and
Keesler Air Force about a white light passing over the Coast.
Personnel at Gulfport-Biloxi Regional Airport also reported the
sighting, described by some as a white light moving slowly to
the north.

The shuttle's path Sunday night took it over the Gulf and
northeast over Louisiana and Mississippi.

"We were out there watching it," said Nancy McCoy of Gulfport.
McCoy said she has been keeping up with the shuttle's flight
path through an Internet Web site. "It was great. It was kind of
a neat thing to see."

**

Ken Fink can be reached at (228) 896-2331 or at kgfink@sunherald.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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                       ET Exhibition Touring Australia

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:39:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:57:14 -0500
Subject: ET Exhibition Touring Australia


Source:

http://www.news.com.au/news_content/state_content/4224430.htm

Stig

***

ET, no need to call home . . . you'll fit in here

By Natalie O'Brien

28dec99

ALIEN implants, mysterious metal objects from outer space and
bizarre encounters of the fourth kind sound more like an episode
from The X Files than an exhibition for public consumption.

But these arcane objects and events form the basis of Phenomena,
a touring showcase on extraterrestrials and unidentified flying
objects � the first of its kind to open in Fremantle.

It's also the world premiere and project director Brian Borshoff
said its popularity demonstrated the growing fascination with
UFOs and the idea of extraterrestrial contact.

"Interest in UFOs is ramping up for the millennium," said Mr
Borshoff. "UFOs are no longer considered fringe subjects, their
study has crossed over into mainstream science."

He said people are so fascinated by the subject that UFO sites
have the highest hit rate on the Internet and five of the 10
most popular films in history were about either UFOs or
extraterrestrials.

He said the concept of UFOs had become so entrenched around the
world that an image of a flying saucer was instantly recognised
� transcending language barriers.

"They have become a cultural icon, which is amazing for
something we still don't know the truth about."

The exhibition at the Fremantle Passenger Terminal is separated
into seven "pods" examining everything from the history of UFO
sightings to the evidence of contact, details of alien
abductions and even the sighting of crop circles which date back
to 1678.

Researchers spent months scouring the world, gathering
everything available on the subject, from photographs to
detailed witnesses' accounts and potential physical evidence
from other worlds.

Exhibits include video footage of what are believed to be UFOs,
plus details of abduction experiences and the display of
"implants" surgically removed by an American doctor from people
claiming to have been abducted by aliens.

Also on display is what is claimed to be the first physical
evidence of another life form � a metal sphere found on a
Mexican farm.

Made from an "intriguing" combination of metals including
titanium, vanadium and aluminium, it is said to be one of only
two ever found. The other one is believed to be held by US
authorities.

"We have got the best evidence available, presented it as
accurately and neutrally as possible and and we let people make
their own informed decisions," said Mr Borshoff.

"We are encouraging everyone from enthusiasts to debunkers �
after all, science is all about questioning."













   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 07:56:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:04:10 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 06:29:53 +0000
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Subject: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >From: JackLa@webtv.net (Jon LaVine)
 >Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
 >Subject: Circa 1957 Saucer Incident
 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 21:05:39 -0500 (EST)

<snip>

 >30 years later I tried to look the incident up, but could only
 >find a blurb about 3 nuclear explosions out over the Pacific
 >Ocean that were part of a test. I believe this is debunking.

I know this happened because I participated in the test. It was
a single detonation in space above the central Pacific.

EMP from the detonation took out the phone systems in Hawaii. It
also thoroughly disrupted the HF radio band.

Loy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                    AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:37:13 -0500
Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


Dear Colleagues,

I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new book
on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for professional
commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film experts, special
effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any such material I would
greatly appreciate it if you could share it with me.

I am also looking for 'positional statements' from ufologists,
what they believe is the nature and origin of the film and how
have they reached such a conclusion.

If you can help with any of the above please contact me direct
at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com

Yours Sincerely,


Philip Mantle.
www.beyondroswell.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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 11:10:30 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:40:13 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 06:29:53 +0000
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 08:32:21 -0500
 >Subject: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Source: 'alt.paranet.ufo'.

 >Stig

***

 >From: JackLa@webtv.net (Jon LaVine)
 >Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
 >Subject: Circa 1957 Saucer Incident
 >Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 21:05:39 -0500 (EST)


 >I don't remember that exact year. I was quite young at the time.
 >It happened around 1957 give or take 3 years.

 >On regular national TV news at 6:00pm the announcer said that
 >the USAF had shot down a UFO over California. The map in the
 >background showed 3 nuclear explosions, 1 over the sierras in
 >northern California, 1 over the sierras in mid California, and 1
 >over the southern desert area of California.

 >Of importance is that it came from an official USAF
 >announcement. The Nike-Hercules air defense system had been used
 >and each of the three missiles had detonated a nuke at high
 >altitude.

 >30 years later I tried to look the incident up, but could only
 >find a blurb about 3 nuclear explosions out over the Pacific
 >Ocean that were part of a test. I believe this is debunking.

 >Someone on this discussion group stated that they would only
 >believe if they were told over the TV on a regular news program
 >that UFOs exist. Well, if it weren't for the debunking, it did
 >happen once. For that matter, Roswell was much the same way,
 >with the USAF officially announcing a "saucer" then saying later
 >it was a balloon.

 >If anyone has any information or memory of the incident of 3
 >nukes over California back in the late 50's then I would
 >appreciate their comments, information, gossip, or whatever.


The closest I can come to this is an incident that happened late
in the evening of April 18, 1962 (not ~1957) over the western
US.  The nuke test near Hawaii happened a week later (April 25).
A glowing object was first seen over in Oneida, N.Y. and was
later picked up and radar and seen passing over the western U.S.
AF spokespeople at the time said that jets were scrambled from
Phoenix and Stead AFB near Reno.  Something exploded near
west-central Utah or east-central Nevada (not over the Sierras).
Light from the explosion was seen over a very wide area, at
least 11 states, perhaps a million square miles or more.  Many
thought it a nuclear detonation.  Reports of the flash came from
as far east as Kansas, as far west as San Francisco, as far
south as Phoenix, and up near the Canadian border by airline
pilots.

Kevin Randle has investigated a bit and written on this
incident.  The Air Force wrote it off as a meteor bolide, but
the radar tracking, extensive area of observation, length of
observation (32 min. on radar, according to the Blue Book
report), jet scrambling from two bases, plus other information
(e.g., the AF spokesman at Stead said a commercial airline pilot
reported the object flying UNDER them), all point to something
other than a meteor.

Incidentally, some NY resident wrote a letter to the AF about
the incident.  On Sept. 21, 1962,  a Pentagon spokesman sent a
letter back saying the object was unidentified, but the flight
characteristics were similar to the U-2 spy plane or a balloon!

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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:11:44 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:45:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:01:49 -0500
 >From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:37:34 -0800
 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Steven,

You wrote:

 >If faulty memory can be blamed on his failing to get his facts
 >straight about the Roswell event, then how can we trust his
 >memory regarding his "seeding" activities.  Are we to pick and
 >choose that which we want to believe or reject that which we
 >don't?

Corso was involved in many events of his time. He was an old
man; our memories begin to fog.  The big picture is still there
but the fine grain is missing.  I admit he made errors in fact
but there is no doubt that he participated in the events he says
he did:

   "Corso is also the hero of the Cuban Missile Crisis (pp.
   253-258, 269), Reagan's SDI or Strategic Defense Initiative
   (pp. 4-5, 78, 115, 243, 249-250, 268, 273), the Korean War POW
   revelations (pp. 2,37-38, 87), the exposure of KGB moles
   inside the CIA and elsewhere (pp. 2, 37, 139, 141, 189), and
   the JFK assassination -- as an investigator for the Warren
   Commission -- which he intimates was due to JFK finding out
   the truth about the CIA (pp. 2, 87, 206, 208)."

   From Korff and Brad Sparks: Corso-Birnes Roswell Book Exposed.

His actual role in these dramas can be debated, as Korff and
Sparks do, but there is no doubt that he was there. Corso's
recollections about the seeding of alien technology are
plausible to me, even if he gets a few things wrong along the
way.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 28

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:02:39 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 07:56:15 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 06:29:53 +0000
 >>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
 >>Subject: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>From: JackLa@webtv.net (Jon LaVine)
 >>Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
 >>Subject: Circa 1957 Saucer Incident
 >>Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 21:05:39 -0500 (EST)

 ><snip>

 >>30 years later I tried to look the incident up, but could only
 >>find a blurb about 3 nuclear explosions out over the Pacific
 >>Ocean that were part of a test. I believe this is debunking.

 >I know this happened because I participated in the test. It was
 >a single detonation in space above the central Pacific.

 >EMP from the detonation took out the phone systems in Hawaii. It
 >also thoroughly disrupted the HF radio band.

 >Loy


Hello Loy, Stig, Jack and list:

Can anyone fix the date and at least approximate location of the
detonation over the Pacific in the late 1950s?

This may have a bearing on some "UFO" reports, so the date and
location are most important.

Thanks in advance

- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:09:22 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:32:16 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

 >Dear Colleagues,

 >I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new
 >book on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for
 >professional commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film
 >experts, special effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any
 >such material I would greatly appreciate it if you could share
 >it with me.

 >I am also looking for 'positional statements' from ufologists,
 >what they believe is the nature and origin of the film and how
 >have they reached such a conclusion.

 >If you can help with any of the above please contact me direct
 >at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com


At the risk of being called an "arsehole" yet again, I will ask:
Just what kind of research is Philip doing? Seems to me that
everyone else is doing the research.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                              Re: Documentary?

From: Allen Loper <cheepnis@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:37:34 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:43:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Documentary?


Hi all:

I am currently (9:35pm) watching a show on TV called 'Danger In
Our Skies: The New UFO Threat'.

Just wondering if anyone has any info on this program?
It is on an independent station here in St. Pete, Fl.

Happy New Year to all.


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

--Arthur C. Clarke

http://www.mindspring.com/~cheepnis







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:32:08 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Hello Loy, Stig, Jack and list:

 >Can anyone fix the date and at least approximate location of the
 >detonation over the Pacific in the late 1950s?

 >This may have a bearing on some "UFO" reports, so the date and
 >location are most important.


Hi Larry,

It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
tests.

The detonation was, I believe, 500 miles above the central
Pacific Ocean.  It was a fairly large detonation; 3 megaton, I
believe.

I do remember very well the effect on HF radio communication:
there wasn't any for about 6 hours.  It was the first time that
EMP was recognized for what it could do.  EMP knocked out the
phone system in Hawaii and played havoc with some of the other
electrical systems, too.

Loy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                              Re: Documentary?

From: David Hancock <sftree@flash.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 22:22:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:46:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Documentary?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:37:34 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Allen Loper <cheepnis@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Documentary?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I am currently (9:35pm) watching a show on TV called 'Danger In
 >Our Skies: The New UFO Threat'.

 >Just wondering if anyone has any info on this program?
 >It is on an independent station here in St. Pete, Fl.


Just finished watching it, it was UPN network, channel 12 in the
Portland, OR area.

What amazed me, is that it was the first UFO special that I ever
recall seeing where at the end of it they did not have the
debunkers come out and explain it all away.

I checked my TV listing to see if it was going to be shown again
later in the week but, it is not.

I've seen some of the same material and people before in other
UFO specials.  But this time it did not seem so negative toward
the idea.

Next Comment?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:26:49 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:51:47 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

 >Dear Colleagues,

 >I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new
 >book on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for
 >professional commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film
 >experts, special effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any
 >such material I would greatly appreciate it if you could share
 >it with me.

<snip>

I am not current on my AA history. Was Philip Mantle working
with Ray Santilli on the AA project at one time?

Has that relationship soured and just what now is their
relationship?

I believe there is adequate proof that the AA is a most
profitable fraud.

Just who is this new AA research/info going to help?

I was resonsible, as a longtime film technical archivist, for
bringing up the information about the "film edge codes", which
information I believe was perverted to help "verify" the AA not
give a truthful evaluation.

I will not bring up further such technical tests of old film
unless Ray Santilli presents authentic pieces of the "original"
film segments for forensic evaluation. If proper tests prove the
film authentic, I will figuratively "eat my hat" and apologize
to Ray Santilli publicly for calling this film an outright
fraud.

Failure to have pieces of this film available, along with the
original film cans and labels for evaluation by accredited "16MM
experienced" archivists, will leave me with my original
opinions.

-Sam Sherman







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                              Re: Documentary?

From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:37:21 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:01:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Documentary?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:37:34 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Allen Loper <cheepnis@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Documentary?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Hi all:

 >I am currently (9:35pm) watching a show on TV called 'Danger In
 >Our Skies: The New UFO Threat'.

 >Just wondering if anyone has any info on this program?

<snip>

I watched this show last night and seem to remember seeing it
once before about a year ago. It ran on the United Paramount
Network of independent and owned stations. It was produced by
Triage, the former producers of 'Sightings'. It may have been
updated now.

It was generally well done. Showed a lot of good UFO footage
from Phoenix and the big saucer from Mexico City. It presented
varying viewpoints of the ET hypothesis and alternate
explanations. I was not a debunking show - the type of which is
becoming common today.

Last Night the Fox News Channel presented a one hour documentary
'We Are The Aliens' about UFO/ET presence. I saw only the end of
the show and it was a debunking piece with sound bites of famous
astronauts joking about never having "met" with aliens. Quite at
odds with other comments by some of them who had seen strange
UFOs in the course of their careers.

I will be on the new UFO documentary on The Learning Channel
(TLC) On January 2, 2000 - 'The Ultimate Ten Unexplained
Mysteries', talking about the UFO Alert At Edwards Air Force
Base. This is something which actually happened, is thoroughly
documented and defies being debunked.

For further information see-  http://www.edwardsufo.com

- Sam Sherman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                   National Public Radio On Project GRUDGE

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:43:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:12:48 -0500
Subject: National Public Radio On Project GRUDGE


The following was reported on National Public Radio, "Stardate"
from the McDonald Observatory at the University of Texas at
Austin.

Dec, 28 1999

Project GRUDGE

In many ways, the late 1940s have never left us.  Those booming
post-war years brought us everything from Rudolph, the Red-Nosed
Reindeer and prepared cake mixes, to television and bikini
bathing suits.  The late '40s also brought a new phenomenon in
the skies that's still around: flying saucers. Government
agencies quickly tried to quell the fuss over unidentified
flying objects. One of the earliest UFO studies ended 50 years
ago this week.  Called Project GRUDGE, it was conducted by the
United States Air Force.  It found no evidence that UFOs were
alien spaceships.

The flying-saucer craze started in June of 1947, when private
pilot Kenneth Arnold reported seeing nine flying discs near
Seattle.  Over the next few months, Americans reported hundreds
of saucer sightings enough for the newly formed U.S. Air Force
to study them.

The first study group, Project SIGN, said it couldn't rule out
the possibility that some of the saucer sightings were
extraterrestrial spacecraft.  But Air Force officials dumped the
report and convened another group, Project GRUDGE.  It studied
dozens of sightings, and said they could all be explained - as
astronomical objects, aircraft, or tricks of nature.  The
project ended on December 27th, 1949.

Despite the report, saucer sightings continued.  The Air Force
conducted another study later on with the same results.  Even
so, flying saucers remain a popular topic more than half a
century after they first entered American culture.

Written by Damond Benningfield;  damond@astro.as.utexas.edu
1999 Damond Benningfield
StarDate  1999 The University of Texas McDonald Observatory

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


OPEN LETTER TO DAMOND BENNINGFIELD

December 28, 1999


Dear Mr. Benningfield:

I happened to hear your report on the 50th anniversary of the
Project Grudge flying saucer report on the National Public Radio
show, "Stardate," this evening.

As a long time researcher of the history of the UFO subject and
related government activities I was both amused and disappointed
to see that what you have written might lead the reader to think
that  Project Grudge was a credible, even scientific,
investigation of the subject of flying saucers (or UFOs).The
Project Grudge report was not considered scientific even by the
man who was in charge of Air Force Intelligence when the report
was written, General Charles Cabell.According to Capt. Edward
Ruppelt (the first director of Project Blue Book), in September
1951 Cabell referred to the Grudge report as the "most poorly
written, unconclusive piece of unscientific tripe" that he had
ever seen.  Ruppelt wrote in his book, "The Report on
Unidentified Flying Objects" that in compiling the report the
analysts found about 50 sightings that had not been explained by
Project Sign, the predecessor to Grudge.In order to be able to
say that all sightings could be explained the Grudge analysts
"force fitted" explanations to these unexplained sightings.
Consider the following information abstracted from my
forthcoming book (to be published in May),  "The UFO-FBI
Connection:"


................................. ...... the 600 page Grudge
report was unconvincing. There were too many poor or just plain
wrong explanations. Instead, of making the saucer problem go
away it merely increased the confusion over what really was
going on.

According to the report, Project Grudge had carefully studied
237 sightings which was 33 fewer than Project Saucer (Project
Sign, which had studied 240 domestic and 30 foreign sightings
for a total of 270).  From this the press may have concluded
that Project Grudge had received no new reports from early
spring, 1949 through December, 1949.  This conclusion was false,
of course.  The Project Blue Book master list shows that Grudge
received 250 sighting reports between May 1 and December 31 and
446 for the whole year.  The reason that analyses of these
sightings did not appear in the final report is simply that the
Grudge personnel felt it to be a waste of time because the newer
reports were similar to the older ones.  The press reporters did
not know about all of these new sightings, of course, since this
information was not  released until years later.

The Air Force had told the press that all sightings could be
explained and proclaimed that the Grudge report would prove
it.Although on the face of it the final report did seem to
support this claim, astute reporters were not convinced.  The
report showed that, with the help of Dr.  Hynek, the consultant
in astronomy (in 1973 he founded the Center for UFO Studies),
they had been able identify 32% as astronomical.With the help of
experts at the Air Force Weather  Service and Air Force
Cambridge Research Laboratory the Grudge personnel identified 12
% as sightings of  weather balloons or high altitude Skyhook
balloons.The Grudge personnel and the expert consultants
further concluded that about 33% were hoaxes or had insufficient
information for evaluation.  That meant that the expert
consultants could not offer explanations for  23%  of the
sightings (55 out of the 237). This did not stop the Grudge
analysts, however.The last of several appendicies to the Grudge
report included the official  explanations for  the unexplained
sightings!

This appendix created a big problem for the Air Force because
members of the press who read it were not convinced.  The
explanations seemed at the very least, strained,  and in some
cases simply wrong.  Ruppelt, in The Report on Unidentified
Flying Objects, cited one good example of the approach to
explaining these reports.In a 1948 report, which was analyzed by
Dr. Hynek and the Air Weather Service, an Air Force pilot had
reported seeing a glowing white light over Andrews AFB.  He
chased it for ten minutes as it  went through some turning
maneuvers before it finally headed for the coast.  He did manage
to get a glimpse of a dark oval object smaller than his
airplane.  "I couldnt tell if the light was on the object or if
the whole object had been glowing," he reported.  Witnesses on
the ground concurred with the pilots report:  they had seen the
light and the airplane chasing it.Hynek reported it was not
astronomical and the Air Weather service reported that it was
not a balloon.  This didn't stop the Grudge personnel: the
official explanation was....  a balloon!

Ruppelt illustrated the press reaction to the Grudge
explanations by referring to a conversation he had several years
later with one of the reporters  who had gotten a copy of the
report.  He said the report had been quite impressive, but only
in its ambiguousness, illogical reasoning and very apparent
effort to write off all UFO reports at any cost.  He personally
thought that it was a poor attempt to put out a fake report full
of misleading information, to cover up the real story.


...........................


Projects Sign and Grudge were not the only Air Force
investigations which failed to provide acceptable explanations
for all sightings.When Project Blue Book (1952-1969) closed
almost exactly 20 years after Grudge there were still about 700
sightings unexplained.During the time period 1966-1969 a study
was carried out at the University of Colorado directed by Dr.
Edward Condon.That study left unexplained about 1/3 of the
nearly 100 sightings they  investigated.

The Air Force knew, at least by 1952, that there were
unexplainable sightings, sightings with an "extraterrestrial
overtone."On July 29, 1952,  a Navy officer working in the
office of the Director of Air Force Intelligence told the FBI
that 3% of the sightings could not be explained and that "it is
not entirely impossible that the objects sighted might be  ships
from another planet...."Several months later Air Force
intelligence told the FBI that "some military officials are
seriously considering the possibility of interplanetary
ships."According to Ruppelt, some of these "military officials"
were Air Force generals.

It is of particular importance to the subject of UFO research
that there are sightings which remain unexplained after careful
analysis.These are sightings which cannot be categorized as
misidentifications of known phenomena (stars, planets, meteors,
airplanes, birds, etc.) or delusions or hoaxes.These
unexplainable sightings are  from credible observers (sometimes
multiple observers, sometimes radar and photography is involved)
and the sighting details simply conflict with all known
phenomena, including natural and manmade phenomena seen under
unusual conditions. That there are such sightings was recognized
early by the Air Force and the percentage of unexplained
sightings was quantified during the Battelle Memorial Institute
study that was published in 1955.Of the 3201 sightings (that
occurred between June 1947 and December 1952) studied, about 1/5
were unexplained.Of more importance is the fact that when the
sightings were divided into reliability (credibility) groups,
the most reliable group had the highest percentage of
unexplained sightings (33%). This is not what one would expect
if sightings were all misidentifications, hoaxes and delusions.

In the last 20 years documents have been released by various
government agencies, including the Air Force and the FBI, which
show how poorly the Air Force analysts treated the UFO problem
50 years ago. So let bygones be bygones. As Project Grudge slips
into the dustbin of history, let us look to more recent
investigations such as the COMETA report released in France last
summer.(This has been discussed on the internet and in UFO
magazines... although hardly if at all mentioned by the
mainstream press....and so I won't summarize it here.)  That
report takes into account much new as well as old information
that was not available to the Grudge analysts.In the information
collected over the last 50 years, the COMETA investigators found
ample reason to treat the UFO problem much more seriously than
does your Stardate presentation.

I thank you for calling this bit of history to our attention,
however, because it is always well to know where we have been in
order to know where we should not go.


Bruce Maccabe








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:52:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:16:51 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Hello Loy, Stig, Jack and list:

 >>Can anyone fix the date and at least approximate location of the
 >>detonation over the Pacific in the late 1950s?

 >>This may have a bearing on some "UFO" reports, so the date and
 >>location are most important.

 >Hi Larry,

 >It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
 >AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
 >tests.

There were two series of shots that I'm aware of - Operation
Argus in the Atlantic, in 1958, and Operation Fishbowl in the
Pacific in 1962. (Fishbowl was part of a larger series of tests
- Operation Dominic).

Argus tests were fired from the (Norton Sound??? - I need to go
through _my_ archives and get the ships involved) - the Fishbowl
series was fired from Johnston Island, detonating over the
mid-Pacific.  Starfish Prime - the highest altitude shot - was
visible from Hawaii (I watched it as a kid) - and EMP effects
took out parts of the electrical grid.

Much of this material is now declassified, and available online
through the DOE.

 >I do remember very well the effect on HF radio communication:
 >there wasn't any for about 6 hours.  It was the first time that
 >EMP was recognized for what it could do.  EMP knocked out the
 >phone system in Hawaii and played havoc with some of the other
 >electrical systems, too.

Yep. :)

Tom








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:06:43 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:19:39 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >The detonation was, I believe, 500 miles above the central
 >Pacific Ocean.  It was a fairly large detonation; 3 megaton, I
 >believe.

1.4 megaton estimated yield, 400 km detonation altitude.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:09:16 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:25:08 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
 >AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
 >tests.

<snip>

Loy,

If you were at Hamilton AFB in 1970, were you there in 1965?

The 28th Air Division was there and had some supervisory
capacity in Air Force UFO sightings/pursuits.

Hamilton officers are heard on the Air Force Audio Tapes of the
7Oct65 UFO Alert at Edwards Air Force Base, discussing the
scrambling of planes after 12 such objects over Edwards.

Do you know anything about this event or other UFO
event/information involving Hamilton AFB? I believe a Major
Healy was involved - possibly Raymond Healy.

Further information see the site:

http://www.edwardsufo.com

This event is featured on The Learning Channel (TLC) on January
2, 2000 on the program 'The Ultimate Ten Unexplained Mysteries'.

- Sam Sherman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 23:13:19 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:29:15 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Hello Loy, Stig, Jack and list:

 >>Can anyone fix the date and at least approximate location of the
 >>detonation over the Pacific in the late 1950s?

<snip>

 >Hi Larry,

 >It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
 >AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
 >tests.

 >The detonation was, I believe, 500 miles above the central
 >Pacific Ocean.  It was a fairly large detonation; 3 megaton, I
 >believe.

 >I do remember very well the effect on HF radio communication:
 >there wasn't any for about 6 hours.  It was the first time that
 >EMP was recognized for what it could do.  EMP knocked out the
 >phone system in Hawaii and played havoc with some of the other
 >electrical systems, too.


Amazing. I thought there was some treaty in place by then,
banning tests in space, but then that must have come later...  3
Megaton? Ooof! I suppose it was too high for tidal effects..

I looked thru my data and found nothing that seems to apply.
Spain had more sightings than usual,  there were a handful in
Australia, New Zealand, France etc. Likewise California and
Nevada, but nothing along the California coast here.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                                  Re: Corso

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:21:35 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:32:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Corso?


 >A few more things were learned


 >1.I obtained a copy of the Roster of the group working under
 >General Trudeau at the Pentagon; 4pages, double column, legal
 >size from the Army Archives in Carlisle, PA.. There were 2
 >people in the Foreign Technology Group. a Colonel who was dying
 >in the Hospital when Victor Golubic located him and Lt. Colonel
 >Corso. The Junior officer of the 2. Doesn't sound like he was in
 >charge.

Stan,

However Corso's DA Form 66 service summary has the following
conflicting information...

Available for anybody to view at the Black Vault Web site:

http://blackvault.com/Main/Category_Index/UFOs/body_ufos.html#MilitaryRecords

20 July 61
Staff Officer Foreign Technology Div    OCRD  USA (8556) Wash DC

18 Apr 62
Chief Foreign Technology Div    OCRD USA (8556) Wash DC

18 July 62
Staff Officer Plans Div    OCRD   USA (8556) Wash DC

1 Mar 63
Retired


Therefore, Corso was listed being in the Foreign Technology Div
for 1 year (20 July 61 to 18 July 62), with the last 4 months
listing him as the CHIEF of the FTD.

I think a lot of things Corso said can be legitimately
criticized, but this isn't one of them.  He was more than a
"junior officer" for the last four months he was there.
Otherwise, I don't understand the meaning of "Chief."

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                      Re: Auckland Night Lights Mystery

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 23:28:19 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:34:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Auckland Night Lights Mystery


Greetings list -

From: http://www.press.co.nz/1999/52/991229n02.htm

Night lights mystery
New Zealand News from The Press - Wednesday, December 29, 1999

AUCKLAND -- UFO fever is threatening to break out after a rash
of calls to police about fast-moving, coloured lights in the sky
north of the city.

Police received six calls over two hours from several different
areas north of Auckland on Saturday night but have been unable
to explain the lights.

One caller said the lights moved 400 metres in less than two
seconds while two others said they moved up and down in the sky
very fast.

Inspector Barry Smalley of the police northern communications
centre said there was something in the sky but no-one knew quite
what.

"There's something there. Because of the path it was travelling
it may have been something coming through the atmosphere.

"It's another mystery. We'll have to get Mulder and Scully (from
the television show, The X-Files) on to it."

The first call to police was at 9.38pm, 20 minutes after the
first sighting from Raglan of what appeared to be a green flare
when looking in the direction of Auckland. The flare died before
it hit the sea.

Further reports had the lights moving north.

The last sighting was about 11.36pm from Tinopai, in Northland,
where resident reported "huge lights" over the hills due north.
The lights were reported to have moved about 400 metres in two
seconds.

Two more strange lights were reported "going straight up and
down sky, intensely light and intensely red" looking across the
Kaipara Harbour. The lights were reported to be dancing about in
the sky.

--NZPA

---

Best regards,

- Blair Cummins
ufoblair@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

               Abductions & Aliens - What 's Really Going On?

From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@chucara.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:32:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:52:46 -0500
Subject: Abductions & Aliens - What 's Really Going On?


Abductions & Aliens: What 's Really Going On?
By Chris A. Rutkowski
Dundurn Press

The first books I bought when I started reading about UFOs, were
books on abductions. "Intruders" fascinated me. Soon after
reading "Communion", I went to hear Budd Hopkins at a local
conference, here in Montreal.

I later learned of the MJ-12 affair and tried desperately to
find answers to both subjects. Finding elements contrary to what
I had recently read, and heard, I quickly realised that no one
could be entirely believed in ufology. You have to verify
everything yourself or be very confident in those you accept to
trust.

The MJ-12 theory was full of holes and no one really knew what
was happening to abductees. I decided that I would not get
involved in either of them. I kept informed but that's all. The
few TV shows on those subjects and the information I saw on the
net were enough.

When I heard that Chris Rutkowski had written a book on
abductions, I couldn't believe it. Here was a highly respected
ufologist, with a solid scientific background, writing about a
subject full of controversy (much worse than UFO sightings
themselves) and with much less physical evidences than
mainstream ufology. I though it was time for me to read another
abduction book.

What a refreshing read. Those who wants to believe in "alien
abducting people" will not like it. The same with those
"nay-sayer" called skeptics. But if you're looking for answers,
you must read this book. You wont find any. What you'll find is
information that popular abduction researchers aren't telling
you.

Chris Rutkowski has written a "must read" with lots of
information. With a touch of humour, he present abductions as a
phenomenon that no one really understand yet. In doing so, he
points flaws in current pet theory of leading researchers (they
wont like you!). His logical thinking bring the subject back to
what it really is: a mystery. At the same time, he shows
compassion for those abductees who trusted him with their
stories, acknowledging that what they experienced can not be
catalogue, simply, as being "all in their head".

Well done! I highly recommend this book to those who would want
a summary of current state of alien abduction research. You'll
get it as it is, pro or con.

Chris, I have to tell you that, contrary to some rumours you may
have heard, the popularity of Star Trek is not waning.



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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:21:20 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:59:55 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:52:22 -0600
 >From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >>From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Hello Loy, Stig, Jack and list:

 >>>Can anyone fix the date and at least approximate location of the
 >>>detonation over the Pacific in the late 1950s?

<snip>

 >>Hi Larry,

 >>It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
 >>AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
 >>tests.

 >There were two series of shots that I'm aware of - Operation
 >Argus in the Atlantic, in 1958, and Operation Fishbowl in the
 >Pacific in 1962. (Fishbowl was part of a larger series of tests
 >- Operation Dominic).

 >Argus tests were fired from the (Norton Sound??? - I need to go
 >through _my_ archives and get the ships involved) - the Fishbowl
 >series was fired from Johnston Island, detonating over the
 >mid-Pacific.  Starfish Prime - the highest altitude shot - was
 >visible from Hawaii (I watched it as a kid) - and EMP effects
 >took out parts of the electrical grid.

 >Much of this material is now declassified, and available online
 >through the DOE.

 >>I do remember very well the effect on HF radio communication:
 >>there wasn't any for about 6 hours.  It was the first time that
 >>EMP was recognized for what it could do.  EMP knocked out the
 >>phone system in Hawaii and played havoc with some of the other
 >>electrical systems, too.

 >Yep. :)


Hello again Loy and Tom:

The plot thickens!

For all of 1962,  I have a good 13 'UFO' reports for the high
seas of the Pacific alone. Most of these are extremely
fragmentary; date and location only. Since sightings at sea are
rare, I keep these old Bluebook listings (which came via the
huge UFOCAT catalog) in case new data eventually turns up.

I also have a handful of widely scattered reports around the
Pacific rim and USA West Coast.

Perhaps there were multiple series of such tests.

I can provide the listings above to anyone who thinks they might
fill some missing pieces.

Tom:  Were you given some advance notice of the high altitude
shot you saw;  or did you just see it by chance?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:59:49 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:07:43 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:09:16 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >>From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>It was summer (I think) of 1970.  I was stationed at Hamilton
 >>AFB, CA, and participated in the HF part of the radio spectrum
 >>tests.

 ><snip>

 >Loy,

 >If you were at Hamilton AFB in 1970, were you there in 1965?

 >The 28th Air Division was there and had some supervisory
 >capacity in Air Force UFO sightings/pursuits.

 >Hamilton officers are heard on the Air Force Audio Tapes of the
 >7Oct65 UFO Alert at Edwards Air Force Base, discussing the
 >scrambling of planes after 12 such objects over Edwards.

 >Do you know anything about this event or other UFO
 >event/information involving Hamilton AFB? I believe a Major
 >Healy was involved - possibly Raymond Healy.

 >Further information see the site:

 >http://www.edwardsufo.com

 >This event is featured on The Learning Channel (TLC) on January
 >2, 2000 on the program 'The Ultimate Ten Unexplained Mysteries'.

 >- Sam Sherman


Hello Sam:

Are you pretty sure about the date, 07OCT65 for the Hamilton
incident mentioned? I keep a pretty good database of UFO
sightings, and I cannot find anything close for that or nearby
dates.

If you want to contact me off-list, perhaps we can compare
notes.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

<larryhat@jps.net>  Note the 'J' in jps, not an 'I'.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:56:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:31:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:11:44 -0800
 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:01:49 -0500
 >>From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >Corso was involved in many events of his time. He was an old
 >man; our memories begin to fog.  The big picture is still there
 >but the fine grain is missing.  I admit he made errors in fact
 >but there is no doubt that he participated in the events he says
 >he did:

 >"Corso is also the hero of the Cuban Missile Crisis (pp.
 >253-258, 269), Reagan's SDI or Strategic Defense Initiative
 >(pp. 4-5, 78, 115, 243, 249-250, 268, 273), the Korean War POW
 >revelations (pp. 2,37-38, 87), the exposure of KGB moles
 >inside the CIA and elsewhere (pp. 2, 37, 139, 141, 189), and
 >the JFK assassination -- as an investigator for the Warren
 >Commission -- which he intimates was due to JFK finding out
 >the truth about the CIA (pp. 2, 87, 206, 208)."

 >From Korff and Brad Sparks: Corso-Birnes Roswell Book Exposed.

 >His actual role in these dramas can be debated, as Korff and
 >Sparks do, but there is no doubt that he was there. Corso's
 >recollections about the seeding of alien technology are
 >plausible to me, even if he gets a few things wrong along the
 >way.


His involvement in these events was not in question.  His
ability to add anything of real value to the discussion could
well be.  Without any supporting evidence to prove the
statements that he might make his information becomes little
more than an anecdotal curiosity.

A search for the name Corso quickly locates quite a bit of
information related to his testimony before Congress related to
the POWs from the Korean War.  That testimony is what he has
become more remembered for, with the exception of those in the
UFO field who now relate him to the Roswell event.

The Warren Commission was, of course, a political entity.
Appointments were often made on the basis of political necessity
and since Corso wasn't an investigator of note, per se, IMO his
participation (if true, and I haven't investigated that for
myself and haven't seen any references to it in official
documents) was most likely a political move.

His belief regarding "moles" in many federal positions has been
documented, but that was always treated as something that he
"knew" to be true.  Of course, his position in the military was
that of a true soldier who thought of most of his philosophical
opponents as enemy sympathizers.

He was a true "Red" hater and that is why he fit is so well with
Jesse Helms, et al. - sorry for the politcal comment.

It is because he was actually involved in events of interest,
and his record can be checked, that his book has received the
interest that it has. But his book does not exactly match the
written record, and he has provided little in the way of
information that can be checked and verified to support it.

If such information can be found, please post it for all to see.
But I suspect if such information was available then IMO it
would have been released much earlier than now.

Yes, the book is interesting and provides an intriguing story
that many would like to believe to be true.  But where's the
beef.

Happy New Year to all.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: TMMatthews99@aol.com
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:02:20 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:36:13 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:09:22 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >>From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

 >>Dear Colleagues,

 >>I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new
 >>book on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for
 >>professional commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film
 >>experts, special effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any
 >>such material I would greatly appreciate it if you could share
 >>it with me.

 >>I am also looking for 'positional statements' from ufologists,
 >>what they believe is the nature and origin of the film and how
 >>have they reached such a conclusion.

 >>If you can help with any of the above please contact me direct
 >>at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com

 >At the risk of being called an "arsehole" yet again, I will ask:
 >Just what kind of research is Philip doing? Seems to me that
 >everyone else is doing the research.


My dear Rebecca!

You will be surprised by our conclusions, and you'll also be
glad to know that in terms of the film we may have come across
the 'holy grail' as far as it is concerned. We are going to
present a balanced view - allowing UFO researchers and
scientific experts etc - to have their say. I think that's a
good thing, don't you?

A great deal of work has been done by us - you forget that it
was Phil and I who uncovered the nature and origins of the Tent
Footage back in 1998.....

Thanks,

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:43:08 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:52:50 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:09:16 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >If you were at Hamilton AFB in 1970, were you there in 1965?

Sorry. I was only there from April 1970 through April 1971. I
was in one of those career fields where they want you to be
overseas all the time but they have to give you a minimum of one
year in the states between overseas assignments.  That was my
one year. Then I went to Turkey.

 >The 28th Air Division was there and had some supervisory >
 >capacity in Air Force UFO sightings/pursuits.

 >Hamilton officers are heard on the Air Force Audio Tapes of
 >the 7Oct65 UFO Alert at Edwards Air Force Base, discussing
 >the scrambling of planes after 12 such objects over Edwards.

That sounds reasonable. The 28th Air Division was Air Defense
Command and had F-106 interceptors at Hamilton. They also
operated air defense radar sites along the California coast.
They would have been the logical people to scramble air defense
interceptors in the California area.

Loy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:53:35 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:10:03 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:21:20 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:52:22 -0600
 >>From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >>>From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Perhaps there were multiple series of such tests.

I don't think that there were multiple tests. The single test
that was conducted was no secret. In fact, I think the
government actively solicited reports of seeing the flash and
any other information from civilians around the world. I once
had a URL for a listing of all the nuclear weapons tests that
were conducted. If I can find it again, I'll check to make sure
my memories are accurate.

Larry, I can be wrong about this but I don't think so. I'm
getting old and my memory isn't what it once was. I was in
communications at the time and my only participation was to
monitor our HF radios to see what happened to the ionosphere as
pertains to HF communications during the test.

 >I can provide the listings above to anyone who thinks they
 >might  fill some missing pieces.

You can send it to me, Larry.  I'll try to help if I can.

Loy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 29

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:11:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:34:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 00:58:32 -0600
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:26:06 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:41:18 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>>Stan,

 >>>I will say this, you don't give up. I have read your books,
 >>>books by other's on Roswell, seen most of the documentaries done
 >>>on it. But by the far the best and most OBJECTIVE account
 >>>appeared in the June MUFON issue of 1997. Yes, you know who I
 >>>speak of: Kent Jeffrey's "Roswell--Anatomy of a Myth."

 >>>Kent spent money and much time--as you have--on investigating
 >>>the Roswell story. He was also so much taken by the subject that
 >>>he help with the International Roswell Initiative which was a
 >>>large petition to hopefully open any classified files on the
 >>>Roswell Crash.

 >>>Here was a man who was passionately involved and interviewed
 >>>many of the same people you have and many that you didn't
 >>>interview. This latter group includes "15 B-29 pilots and 2 B-29
 >>>navigatgors, all of whom were stationed at Roswell Army Air
 >>>Field in July 1947" (page 7-8).

 >>>According to Kent, a commercial airline pilot, "Not one single
 >>>man had any direct knowledge of a crashed saucer or of any kind
 >>>of unusual materail." Not one! "...Even more significantly, in
 >>>all their collective years with the 509th Bomb Group, not one of
 >>>these men had ever encountered any other individual who had such
 >>>knowledge."

 >>Sorry, John, wrong again. Kent Jeffrey was a passionate
 >>collector of stories and expressor of strong opinions not backed
 >>by evidence.

 >>You really ought to read my five page treatment of his MUFON
 >>article. Give me a snail mail address. or send an SASE to UFORI,
 >>POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958. I have been to reunions of the
 >>509th as well.

 >Stan,

 >Are you saying that you went to reunions of the 509th and got
 >different answers than Jeffrey did? If so, who did you talk to
 >at the time?

 >On the other hand, if you went to 509th reunions and got
 >negative responses to your inquiries, what are the names of the
 >negative responders and why haven't you written them up in your
 >books and papers along with all the promoted prosayers? Are you
 >saying that Jeffrey simply lied?

Dennis , let's not put words in my mouth. You and anyone else
can read my Jeffrey rebuttal at my web site:
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html

He was totally naive about national security and the need to
know concept... Surprisingly he assumed that any observed saucer
had to have flown here on its own from another star system;
about the causes of aircraft accidents.Somebody saying he didn't
know about something that he had no need to know about, doesn't
mean that it didn't happen.

Jesse and Cavitt were in Intelligence work .Why would a B-29
pilot have a need to know about a crashed saucer?. He wouldn't.
Why would officers who later served at Wright Paterson have
shared classified info with Kent?? They wouldn't have. Even
General Exon told me that he did not have a need to know for
everything happening at WPAFB when he was Base commander.

With considerable effort I located Sappho Henderson after Len
Stringfield published a story about her husband, Pappy.Len
wouldn't tell me where she was. She gave me names of 5 people
to whom Pappy might have talked . I contacted them. One was a
retired USAF Colonel, Pappy's WW 2 Bombardier. Pappy had told
him at a group reunion. Pappy hadn't told the others.

 >Have you ever interviewed _any_ Roswell participants who didn't
 >support your view of the crash and recovery of an ET spacecraft?
 >If not, why not? Have you pursued negative commentators as
 >assiduously as positive ones? How come you didn't manage to find
 >Kent Lorenzo (if I have the name right off the top of my head),
 >who was at the base hospital at the time, and who said that
 >nothing untoward happened during the time in question, let alone
 >anything remotely involving the autopsy of alien bodies?

Once again as with Jeffrey, you are confusing people who say
they know nothing with people who do know something.

Gees. I have interviewed many people who knew nothing about the
crashes. I have interviewed a number whose testimony when
checked didn't pan out.There is a lot of dross in them thar
hills besides the gold. Talk to cops who ask for help about
major crime. Lots of calls, most useless. But that is how most
crimes are solved.

 >Actually, you did find him. But what he had to say didn't mesh
 >with what you wanted said, so he got royally ignored in your
 >"official history" of events. And remains so to this day. Along
 >with any and all other naysayers to Roswell (and Corona, and San
 >Augustin) orthodoxy, as far as I can tell.

 >Conversely, you refuse to retract any significant legitimacy
 >associated with Gerald Anderson, who, five years old at the
 >time, claimed to have witnessed a San Augustin crash recovery
 >because he supports your belief in the latter, despite having
 >been caught in at least two obvious and palpable deceptions
 >regarding same. And don't tell us about the lie detector test --
 >the guy has been caught out to everyone's satisfaction but
 >yours. Even John Carpenter eventually admitted as much, though I
 >doubt you ever will.

There is a great deal more support for a Plains Crash than
Gerald Anderson including Baca, Danley, Leed etc.

You are forgetting that I was the one who went to the Telephone
Company in Springfield and got the copy of the original phone
bill and proved that Gerald had tried to fool Kevin by faking
it. Gerald admitted it. We had a noisy argument about that. But
I also saw his military papers as did others. I also was with
him when we made an unplanned stop out in the Plains and were
referred by a cowboy there to a woman living down the road with
her daughter. We went there unannounced . Gerald described the
woman who operated the store when he an his family were out
there. They immediately recognised her. I dug out his father's
obituary and talked to the widow of the pastor of his dad's
church. She referred me to someone who knew his dad well. I
called him.He told of Gerald's father having told him about a
downed craft in the desert. No way Gerald could have set that
up. Out in the plains Gerald had claimed there was a windmill in
a certain direction. We didn't see one there. When we checked
more closely we found there was indeed a windmill, but the
trees, which had indeed grown some, obscured it.

In my first conversation with Gerald he shocked me by speaking
of a nasty red haired officer and a black sergeant. I had just 2
weeks earlier in a private conversation with Glenn Dennis had
him describe the people who had given him a hard time. He noted
a nasty red haired officer and a black sergeant You may believe
they both independently made up such an unusual combination. I
don't

I checked at Gerald's high school. I located 5 people who were
in the Archeology Club for whom the advisor was Dr. Buskirk. It
had been claimed that Gerald was in the club. All 5 looked at
high school pictures of Gerald. Each said Gerald wasn't in the
club. It had been claimed that 3 archaeologists had said they
were in the Plains in the summer of 1947 and said there was no
crash. I contacted all. What each had really said was that he
wasn't there at the time and had heard nothing about a crash..
not surprisingly. There is a great deal more.. some reported in
various papers.

 >Ditto Glenn Dennis. I know, he's a nice guy in person. Hard to
 >believe he put everyone on, isn't it?

 >And what about that there Frank Kaufmann? Just another American
 >patriot trying to get his story out to the general public. Kinda
 >reminds you of Philip Corso, doesn't it? But I forget: Corso was
 >a real military officer. And real military officers never lie.
 >Or exaggerate. While the cover-up goes on forever.

I have noted many problems with Frank Kaufmann's story (which
was rather different on December 13 than it was years ago) and
have also detailed comments about Corso. In both cases because I
checked. and checked some more... I got the history of the Air
Defense Command and of General Scanlon. There was no ADC radar
in NM in 1947. Scanlon was Public Affairs head at Mitchell Field
not head of ADC. I got the roster of General Trudeau's group
with Corso and checked at the Ike Library about his supposed
membership in the NSC. He wasn't. There is much more. About both
Kaufmann and Corso.

 ><snip>

 >>I certainly am not saying [I] believe everything people tell an
 >>investigator. At best everything starts in my gray basket. and
 >>then gets checked.

 >Nice platitude.

It just happens to be true for me.

 >>I am the guy who is given a hard time for exposing Robert S.
 >>Lazar, Michael Wolf Kruvant, Guy Kirkwood, Frank Stranges etc
 >>etc.as frauds.

 >>Stanton T. Friedman

 >Who? And who's giving you a hard time, anyway? Do I get credit
 >for exposing Courtney Brown and Richard Hoagland? The question
 >is, why haven't you exposed any of your own sources, beginning
 >with Gerald Anderson?

 >Dennis W. Stacy

Richard Boylan has attacked me all over the place for not
supporting Wolf. Huff and others have attacked me for debunking
Lazar.

Anderson's story checks out except for the phone bill.....

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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                                 Re: Corso?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:20:38 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:45:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Corso?

 >My question is (or my questions are):

 >(a) Is Corso simply a nutcase?
 >(b) Did he merely tried to raise some quick money for
 >his family before passing away?
 >(c) Is it probably all true, what's in the book?
 >(d) Any news from his ghost-writer? Is he still?
 >travelling the country, trying to sell 'The day
 >after...'?
 >(e) What is going on?
 >(f) Or have I missed something and it is all my
 >fault - not reading the UpDates properly?



              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia

EBK Researchers,

Whats Wrong With Corso?

Isaac Asimov, that prolific science writer (450^ books) and
biochemist in his 1985 book "The Subatomic Monster" wrote that
at the age of 15 in April 1935 while at Columbia College he saw
Albert Einstein. Asimov described the ambience around the great
man that day and the effect he had on him and others. At that
time very few understood Einstein the man and few understood
what he was talking about, many disputed his claims. However,
the majority knew there was something great about this person!

Today I can read about Einstein sex life, his bad habits and
look at his 'Pickled Brain' held by others who felt that they
might find something wrong in that head, to show that Einstein
was nothing more than a freak!

Sorry, Einstein was as normal as you can get and very human!

Isaac Asimov was one of those who met the man, and at that time
did not understand what Einstein was saying. Unlike many of us
today on this thread, Isaac Asimov made the following
observations and I quote:

   "Actually, the best way to test Einstein's assumption would be
   to test whether the deductions from that assumption are to be
   observed in the real universe. If so, then we are driven to
   the conclusion that the basic assumption must be true, for we
   would then know of no other way of explaining the truth of the
   deductions"

             - The Subatomic Monster - 1985.

So, to put it plainly, if Isaac Asimov saw the A-Bomb go
"Bang" then that was a _truth_!

Corso was no Einstein, but he creates the same problems for us.

I must acknowledge that there is a number of experts [so called]
who have publicly denounced Corso as a Hoax, I have read most of
their material and any defence councils brief for Corso on the
surface looks grim. Liar, moneyman, dementia or alter ego, takes
your pick.

I met Philip J. Corso on two occasions, corresponded, have met
people who served under him - and all report the same thing,
Corso was what he said he was! A truthful man, highly regarded,
intelligent man who served his country with great distinction.
The facts are there, the limited files are there. They may not
fit your needs, but Corso was very real. He was also a charming
man and a fellow Gunner Officer.

Like others on this thread, I have trouble proving his
accusations? I am unable to get the "generic trail" on data that
he said is out on the streets. Yet, although his claims have not
ended the Roswell case for me, Corso still has something to tell
us.

When his book was sent to me, I was like some, very
disappointed. Was this all Corso information? Was this all he
could give? Corso "Seeding" of alien technology is plausible and
that's what I wanted to know more about.

NEW IDEAS WANTED

Today the Roswell field data has run just about dry, apart from
FOI and most experts have made their name using FOI, I like many
others have searched the impact site, listened to the FOI
experts and shown my bias by being a believer. Isaac Asimov
logic shows us how to discover Roswell in another way, by
looking with some Dr Edward De Bono Lateral Thinking, for
Roswell parts. May be its time to look for the parts!

THE KNOCK ON EFFECT

As a researcher, I believe Corso was trying to let us know that
we needed to look at "the knock on effects" that Roswell MUST
produced! If it's as great as the books tell us, then the
ripples (waves) of that crash are with us right now.

Let's be realistic, if Roswell is a fact (?) then what was found
that day, would have to be a world changing event and technology
would be the key to unscrewing the incident. Its logical, if I
had a craft from another world, it would soon be in parts! I may
need to wait some time until I had the tools to open the parts,
but like an autopsy, the parts would be off to pathology as soon
as I opened it.

LOOKING FOR THE FLASH

Isaac Asimov left others to "Back Engineer" Einstein "Seeded"
ideas and rather than make-work for himself, ASIMOV looked for
the observed E=mc^2 flash in the desert. You don't have to
believe, have an opinion, read the works, and make the
calculations. When it went off that day - Einstein was true.

THE MILITARY HANDYCAP

Next, the military is an unusual collection of powerful
monsters, as Einstein found out, the military runs science,
science does NOT run the military. Don't underestimate this
fact. The so-called FOI experts know this. Why do you think you
we need to go down and knock at their FOI doors? Corso knew
this!


Corso WAS A MILITARY MAN

Corso was in the system, full time and full on. Unlike some FOI
experts this was Corso life. His inability to speak out lay with
the FACT that he had signed his freedom away, like we all do
when we join the DoD. And like all good military people
understand, the DoD is a great place to kill, burn, cross-file,
cut, change, shred or hide data. Corso knew this!

So how do you give the game away without cutting your military
obligations? That was Corso problem.


A NON-UFO BUFF

As previously and accurately noted, Corso was _not_ a UFO person
(buff) and to think he was a UFO expert, well I was surprised
that people, on this post who I felt knew better, could think
that Corso was up to speed.

Remember, Philip J. Corso was not a UFO or FIO expert, like some
we know. In the end he was like most of us, unable to prove what
he knew?


TIME WAS RUNNING OUT

I can only assume the man decided it was time to tell, like many
in the Roswell case history, time to tell before time got him!
Corso was old and now had nothing to loose. Like most of us who
have investigated cases many come to our attention long after
the event - at functions or in letters from others in the
family. Corso was like that, looking for people.


GHOSTWRITER AND PUBLISHERS

William J. Birnes - His hand absolutely filled the book. Birnes
went on record with his problems. He was under some pressure to
get it out and the agents rushed it on without any checks by
Corso. This was _not_ good enough, but Birnes never hid the
facts. Birnes a "ghost-writer" - His name is on the cover!


WHY THE BOOK LOST

I now believe, rushing and Corso lack of UFO knowledge created a
system that failed to transfer any hard useful information.

If Corso wanted to "Save the World" or take the spot light from
the few who feel that Roswell is their "baby", then why not go
all the way and "cash in" - the title should have been "My Day
At Roswell" why the "Day After"?

VERBAL ASSAULTS ON A DEAD MAN

It still amazes me how _few_ in number went against Corso. What
triggered the anti-Corso response appears to have been caused by
the quality of the book and not the quality of the man. Corso
seems to have hit a nerve as the book came apart. In the end
some researchers don't like Corso but the public like him. The
proof is that the book is still selling well, and the man is not
around like many to push his views at conferences and book sales
etc. On quite a number of book sites it rates extremely high and
the public reviews are over the 200 mark at some web sites, now
this is strange as on average books get 3 to 9 reviews. Not
rocket science but interesting.


As of the 29 Dec 1999 - AMAZON.COM BOOK HARD COVER RANK LISTING:

  DATE  p#    BY             NAME                    SOLD   RATE/5
+ 92  191  MOORE    "The Roswell Incident"         149,000  4.5
+ 97  314  RANDLE   "The Truth...Crash at Roswell   63,628  2.5
+ 97  272  FRIEDMAN "Top SECRET/MAJIC"              57,000  3.5
+ 97  347  Corso    "The Day After Roswell"         40,000  4.0

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but in the end the public
liked what they read, and that's a problem for the anti Corso
people.

For me, if the case was hoaxed or very wrong, then let it die
with the author, you can not stop the book nor can you stop
someone believing in it, that's a discovery we all make when
dealing with UFOs. My advice is to just put it in the rubbish
bin if it's not your cup of tea.

QUESTION ABOUT THE BOOK

In this case ridiculous attempts and methods surfaced.

For example [1] - "If unable to kill the book then kill the
man", so the expert few went after his military file - what
could they do - it was magnificent, it was intact. Colonel Corso
was an Artillery Officer (Gunner), highly decorated soldier,
recipient of 30 medals and commendations during his long
military career. WW2 Victory Medal, Occupation Medal Germany,
Legion of Merit & 6 overseas bars. He received the Knight
Officer Crown of Italy for his exceptional service in Italy
during and after World War II. Campaigns in Korea. And he did
well to get to COL by the age of 42.

Infact although some don't like it Corso was at or played a part
in many of the major events of his time. He held the positions
he said and was in the right positions to move between projects
within the Army that the public would never know about. Take
another look at his FOI record. [See Below his DA66], again
remember its not all his data, I can tell you will never see the
main files, but the standard DA66 what they let out looks
impressive from my point of view. And from those who knew him,
all confirm his OPs.

Corso MILITARY HISTORY:

By Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_da66.htm
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_p1.htm
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_p2.htm
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_p3.htm
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_p4.htm
http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Corso_p5.htm

OR

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/aug/m27-013.shtml

NOTE: Don't follow the personal opinions on some web pages
look at the Army Data.

For example [2] - The other strange attack took the form - "If
he knew this info why didn't he cash in on the technology after
he left the Army", what insider trading. One moment they say he
was dummy; next they have him as a CEO in "Silicon Valley? Go on
give it a try, take something from the DoD - I hope you like 30
years in a detention centre.

A few then let loose and tried to kill it with FOI details,
dates, a copy of a 4 page roster (?), it didn't have a index &
references, withdrawal of a foreword by Senator Strom Thurmond,
Corso was not a scientist or engineer, and did you know he
didn't have a PhD, lets give him a MMPI and don't forget blame
William MOORE. Then there is the notion - "all kinds of people
thought him sincere, but in fact he was a literary hoaxer" -
literary hoax? Oh !

To top the assortment came the allegation that he was a junior
officer. The man was what we call in Australia - at Staff
Officer Rank - a Red Cap!

But Corso held his ground and the book ran hot. The book reached
12th on the New York Times' Best-Seller List in the summer of
1997 with minimal promotion or publicity. Not bad for a literary
hoax. And the reviews grew in number.

Lets face it, Corso book came out in 1997 then Corso died on the
16 July 1998, only 1 year of fame and at the age of 83. ot your
average money hungry or typical two books a year, cut and past,
press clip, armchair Ufologist, was he!


IN CONCLUSION

In the end, I am still open minded, yes - unhappy with Corso
book, lots of errors of fact in the book, but in my opinion
that's not Corso problem. I am not in a position to defend
Corso, nor should anyone have too. The best we can offer Corso
is that he must be treated as an equal until proven wrong. Let
time deal him out.

I like Corso! However, I also need to find parts (the beef) for
the "Back Engineering" evidence to rule him in or out.
Conversely, so do the Roswell CRASH believers [count me in also]
we need parts (the beef) from that impact field.

So investigate by looking at the wonderful world of Panorama -
all 360 deg rather than the standard "Tunnel Vision" of many of
our fellow sceptics.

Thanks to all who sent e-mail with suggestions on "Back
Engineering" I cannot get back to you all. But some were most
interesting.

To all enquiring minds. Good hunting.

Happy 2K.

Regards To All,


John W. AUCHETTL
Director - PRA

Many Thanks to the following for their references:

Corso ANTI:-

By Kal Korff
http://www.sightings.com/ufo/Corsoexpose.htm

Corso VISION:-

By Steven M. Greer M.D.
International Director of CSETI
http://www.cseti.org/
Scroll Down 60% Need RealPlayer

VISION 1 - Col. Corso on video
          - In this he tell the Govt to give up the data
            and give it to the kids, they are not stupid
            about the cover-up.

VISION 2 - NBC's "Dateline" interviews Col. Corso
          - In this part interview - listen to CORSA Closing
            reference to time travel?

* This is a great site!


IMAGES:-

- Glenn Dennis and Phillip Corso
http://home.pb.net/~mooch/mothership/images/Corsodennis.jpg



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 >
   Dec > Dec 29

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 05:48:05 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 15:28:00 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:02:20 -0500 (EST)
 >From: TMMatthews99@aol.com
 >Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:09:22 -0800 (PST)
 >>From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >>Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >>>From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

 >>>Dear Colleagues,

 >>>I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new
 >>>book on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for
 >>>professional commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film
 >>>experts, special effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any
 >>>such material I would greatly appreciate it if you could share
 >>>it with me.

 >>>I am also looking for 'positional statements' from ufologists,
 >>>what they believe is the nature and origin of the film and how
 >>>have they reached such a conclusion.

 >>>If you can help with any of the above please contact me direct
 >>>at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com

 >>At the risk of being called an "arsehole" yet again, I will ask:
 >>Just what kind of research is Philip doing? Seems to me that
 >>everyone else is doing the research.

 >My dear Rebecca!

 >You will be surprised by our conclusions, and you'll also be
 >glad to know that in terms of the film we may have come across
 >the 'holy grail' as far as it is concerned. We are going to
 >present a balanced view - allowing UFO researchers and
 >scientific experts etc - to have their say. I think that's a
 >good thing, don't you?

 >A great deal of work has been done by us - you forget that it
 >was Phil and I who uncovered the nature and origins of the Tent
 >Footage back in 1998.....

 >Thanks,

 >Tim Matthews.

Dear Philip, Rebecca, Tim and others:

I have absolutely nothing to add to the study of a AA film,.
Santilli etc. in a factual way.

I do think that Philip's study is worthwhile nevertheless; if
only to show how such messes occur, why and perpetrated by whom.

Philip merely asked for information, and did so repeatedly. We
should all be so careful. And so, of course should Mr. Mantle
BTW but that is beside the point.

I therefore propose the following:

Assuming Mr. Santilli has not repaired to Rome, Vienna or
(gasp!) San Francisco with his ill-gotten gains, he should be
pulled apart by four mules, one at each extremity, driven by
drug crazed Mexicans and Canadians not to mention illegal
Algerians with high explosives, Samoans with substandard
educational records and Frenchwomen with low publick moral
standards - until he tells the truth to the FBI as recorded by
the CIA and the NSA (alone capable of deciphering his by then
mad babblings).

If that doesn't work, we could force feed him the same pint of
beer somebody handed me for nearly a bob in Yorkshire, in 1965
when I was young and innocent. The barman couldn't drink it,
and gave me back my 15 pennies and apologized, much to his
credit.

Failing that, we could simply ignore this complete and obvious
phony, but that's lots less fun. Heck.

It seems like Europeans have more fun.

- 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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:07:10 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:33:53 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:43:08 -0600
 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:09:16 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>If you were at Hamilton AFB in 1970, were you there in 1965?

 >Sorry. I was only there from April 1970 through April 1971. I
 >was in one of those career fields where they want you to be
 >overseas all the time but they have to give you a minimum of one
 >year in the states between overseas assignments.  That was my
 >one year. Then I went to Turkey.

 >>The 28th Air Division was there and had some supervisory >
 >>capacity in Air Force UFO sightings/pursuits.

 >>Hamilton officers are heard on the Air Force Audio Tapes of
 >>the 7Oct65 UFO Alert at Edwards Air Force Base, discussing
 >>the scrambling of planes after 12 such objects over Edwards.

 >That sounds reasonable. The 28th Air Division was Air Defense
 >Command and had F-106 interceptors at Hamilton. They also
 >operated air defense radar sites along the California coast.
 >They would have been the logical people to scramble air defense
 >interceptors in the California area.

 >Loy

Dear Loy;


This may sound silly, but did you go to any of those off-Grant
street restaurtanst, you know, like the Loey Goey Looey?

The LGL remains my college favorite.

Chop suey for 75 cents amelican, and the soly soose was free!!

Laugh all you want to at California, the damned bug juice was
free and a plate of hot and sour shrimp cost a buck and a half.
Go try that in the majuberous and unlikely neighborhoods of
Toronto or Shanghai.

At least you can get "Shanghaid" in San Francisco. Try getting
Francisconized in goddam Shanghhai!! (They don't know how, nor
would they try.)

I live 25 miles to the South.

I am making myself irresistably hungry for Moo-Goo
something-or-other, and a whole bunch of innocent sweet and sour
shrimp.   White ( steamed ) rice only.

Only tourists order fried rice. It fills the tummy before the
good stuff shows up. AOL types and MacIntosh and holdouts order
fried rice with statistical regularity.

I have a friend at United Airlines that not only knows when
flights  from the MidWest come in, but what restaurants they
will seek out, and how much fried rice these rubes will order.

Even if he loses the flight order, and believe me that can and
DOES happen, he knows where they came from.

None of this has to do with the majuberous nature of the Toronto
Y2K landscape of course.

Beijing of a more highly sophisticated and international nature,
the people of Toronto offer all comers rice or chips with their
chop suey. Given chips, one is offered malt vinegar out of a
salt shaker.

I am not making a word of this up.

Very best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: French Fries with malt vinegar taste pretty good after all,
but demand some salt and pretty young Manitobans.  -LH








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:13:57 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:47:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?

 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:20:38 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >>From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Corso?

 >>My question is (or my questions are):

Dear John A. and others:

(from a drunken Larry Hatch)

 >>(a) Is Corso simply a nutcase?

YES damn nearly, if not compltely... See earlier messages.

 >>(b) Did he merely tried to raise some quick money for
 >>his family before passing away?

Possibly.  See other messages and theories again.

 >>(c) Is it probably all true, what's in the book?
 >>(d) Any news from his ghost-writer? Is he still?
 >>travelling the country, trying to sell 'The day
 >>after...'?
 >>(e) What is going on?
 >>(f) Or have I missed something and it is all my
 >>fault - not reading the UpDates properly?

 >           Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
 >        Phenomena Research Australia

 >EBK Researchers,

 >Whats Wrong With Corso?

Damned near ever everything. Are you the new schtupido on the
block, or did you finally translate "Crash over Corona" into
Swedish?

 >Isaac Asimov, that prolific science writer

 >(450^ books) and biochemist in his 1985 book

 >"The Subatomic Monster"

I read both. A most prolific and opinionated man.

 >wrote that at the age of 15 in April 1935 while at
 >Columbia College he saw Albert Einstein.   Asimov
 >described the ambience around the great man that day
 >and the effect he had on him and others.  At that time very
 >few understood Einstein the man and few understood what
 >he was talking about, many disputed his claims.   However,
 >the majority knew there was something great about this
 >person!

I disagree. Einstein was right, but most people suspected
that he was goddam nuts.

 >today I can read about Einstein sex life, his bad habits and
 >look at his 'Pickled Brain' held by others who felt that they
 >might find something wrong in that head, to show that Einstein
 >was nothing more than a freak!

Hah Yes! Even today they laugh at my  uncles and aunts:
"Hah ha haah" they laugh!  Little do they know what will
happen when the terriffic secret of Sea Monkeys comes out!!

I must invite you to keep this secret for a week or two longer.

 >Sorry, Einstein was as normal as you can get and very human!

He was also humane,  but yes. Einstein was a good and fine
german, I mean gerhuman;  well an above average
Nordlich-Amergermench  or some such. One darned good ole soul.

 >Isaac Asimov was one of those who met the man, and at that time
 >did not understand what Einstein was saying. Unlike many of us
 >today on this thread, Isaac Asimov made the following
 >observations and I quote:

 >"Actually, the best way to test Einstein's assumption would be
 >to test whether the deductions from that assumption are to be
 >observed in the real universe.  If so, then we are driven to
 >the conclusion that the basic assumption must be true, for we
 >would then know of no other way of explaining the truth of the
 >deductions"

 >          - The Subatomic Monster - 1985.

 >So, to put it plainly, if Isaac Asimov saw the A-Bomb go
 >"Bang" then that was a _truth_!

<snip>

I have no idea if Azimov actually saw the first H-bang go off or
not. I personally know somebody who did, and he's probably not
about to talk to you either.

I must confess that I am totally amazed at your innocence and
credulousity. Please do not take any part of my disagreement
with your personal views, idiotic as they most manifestly are,
as any sort of personal attack upon your personal self.

Maybe you were kicked by a kangaroo 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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 12:45:45 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:04:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 06:56:22 -0500
 >From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >His belief regarding "moles" in many federal positions has been
 >documented, but that was always treated as something that he
 >"knew" to be true.  Of course, his position in the military was
 >that of a true soldier who thought of most of his philosophical
 >opponents as enemy sympathizers.

 >He was a true "Red" hater and that is why he fit is so well with
 >Jesse Helms, et al. - sorry for the politcal comment.


Thanks for raising the point, Steven. Reading Corso's book is
like traveling back into the world of the '40s and '50s, when
the West was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union. Corso
clearly shared the extreme paranoia of men like Sen. McCarthy,
viewing as likely the penetration by communist moles of the
State Department and the U.S. Congress.

At one point, Corso says that telling Congress something was
considered tantamount to telling the Soviets. Reading his
account of the security concerns within the military goes a long
way, regardless of the merits of his Roswell claim, of
understanding the entire process of compartmentalization that
was created to foil intelligence operations of our World War II
and Cold War adversaries.

Here's a quote from 'The Day After Roswell':

  "Over the years, the replicated vehicles have become an
  ongoing, inner-circle saga among top-ranking military officers
  and members of the government, especially the favored senators
  and members of the House who vote along military lines. Those
  who are shown the secrets are immediately bound by national
  security legislation and cannot reveal what they saw. ... I
  admit I've never seen the craft at Norton with my own eyes, but
  enough reports passed across my desk during my years at Foreign
  Technology so that I knew what the secret was and how it was
  maintained." (pg. 100)

Can a secret of such magnitude be kept secret? Many would doubt
it, but Corso cites a 1947 Truman policy code-named "Shamrock"
that allowed U.S. intelligence services to monitor international
communications traffic, a pact that Corso said was never
revealed until it was terminated in 1975. And, as is becoming
apparent now, that system has been replaced by a monitoring
system called Echelon, which allows the United States and its
English-speaking allies to monitor all electronic communication
for a basket of sensitive words.

Corso's military mindset goes a long way toward explaining how
what a friend of mine calls the "New Rosacrucians" can maintain
a secret for more than 50 years.

I'll end this post by repeating my request of a few days ago: Is
anyone aware of any government or military comment on Corso's
claims?

Happy New Year,

Pat McCartney








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:47:23 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:08:43 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:21:20 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 00:52:22 -0600
 >>>From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 20:42:42 -0600
 >>>>From: Loy Pressley <lkpres@koyote.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:45:31 -0800
 >>>>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>Perhaps there were multiple series of such tests.

 >I don't think that there were multiple tests. The single test
 >that was conducted was no secret. In fact, I think the
 >government actively solicited reports of seeing the flash and
 >any other information from civilians around the world. I once
 >had a URL for a listing of all the nuclear weapons tests that
 >were conducted. If I can find it again, I'll check to make sure
 >my memories are accurate.

 >Larry, I can be wrong about this but I don't think so. I'm
 >getting old and my memory isn't what it once was. I was in
 >communications at the time and my only participation was to
 >monitor our HF radios to see what happened to the ionosphere as
 >pertains to HF communications during the test.

 >>I can provide the listings above to anyone who thinks they
 >>might  fill some missing pieces.

 >You can send it to me, Larry.  I'll try to help if I can.

 >Loy

Dear Loy:

I'm no teenager either. As soon as I unglue myself from this
insistent floor, the same one which attacks me like some magnet,
I will go and send you the proper files and stuff.

Please forgive me if this takes a while, I'm  having this awful
argument with some tiresome hardwood.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                 Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?

From: Tom Genereaux <entropy@lawrence.ks.us>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:49:59 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:10:47 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Shot Down By Missile In Late 50's?


 >Amazing. I thought there was some treaty in place by then,
 >banning tests in space, but then that must have come later...  3
 >Megaton? Ooof! I suppose it was too high for tidal effects..

 >I looked thru my data and found nothing that seems to apply.
 >Spain had more sightings than usual,  there were a handful in
 >Australia, New Zealand, France etc. Likewise California and
 >Nevada, but nothing along the California coast here.

 >Best wishes

 >- Larry Hatch

There was. Atmospheric testing ended in 1963. The Limited Test
Ban Treaty was signed on 5 August 1963, and went into effect on
10 October 1963.  The Chinese, who were not signatories to the
treaty, conducted their first atmospheric test on 16 October of
1964.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                         Hong Kong UFO Club Website

From: Moon Fong <moon@ufo.org.hk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:36:31 +0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:14:58 -0500
Subject: Hong Kong UFO Club Website


Dear friends,

Happy Millenium New Year! Important moment getting closer...
toss for free information...

HK UFO Club is invited to open a UFO column among 24 channels on
a prestigious internet magazine called i-(maga)zine. Updated and
filmed weekly with 3 sections: Features, News, Club Activities.
Moon will be the major person hosting/writing/filming in this
almost all-video web page.

I'm happy to stay in good touch with you, to share & exchange.
If you have any ufo news or group activities you think that's
worth announcing on our News columns, please email me. I'm even
happier to receive your video/material to put you on our feature
interview. We will acknowledge proper courtesy to your
group/personal names, webpage address or announcement you want
to spread to the Hong Kong/China ufo fans.

izene.netvigator.com is a new web page of Hong Kong Telecom,
the largest telecom co., using 1.5m ultraline broadband. A
prestigious high exposure web, heavy launching in January 2000.
Check us out, it helps our ratings too!  See you at Laughline
UFO Congress soon!?!

* Please update my email to: moon@ufo.org.hk*
Web:         www.ufo.org.hk
email:        moon@ufo.org.hk
tel:            (852) 82070990
fax/tel:       (852) 26028303
address:    78  1/F Tai Wai New Village, NT, Hong Kong

Lots of energy.....

Moon Fong
HK UFO Club President










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                              Re: Documentary?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:33:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:23:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Documentary?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:37:21 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Documentary?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:37:34 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Allen Loper <cheepnis@mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Documentary?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Hi all:

 >>I am currently (9:35pm) watching a show on TV called 'Danger In
 >>Our Skies: The New UFO Threat'.

 >>Just wondering if anyone has any info on this program?>

<snip>

 >I watched this show last night and seem to remember seeing it
 >once before about a year ago. It ran on the United Paramount
 >Network of independent and owned stations. It was produced by
 >Triage, the former producers of 'Sightings'. It may have been
 >updated now.


If this shows the Aug 7, 1997 Mexico City video of a "huge" UFO
passing behind buildings, then it was shown in the spring of
1998.

Subsequent investigation has shown that the Mexico City video
has "fingerprints of a hoax" and the Phoenix lights which were
videotaped by several people were likely flares abou 80 miles
south of Phoenix.

These cases have all been discussed on the net. I suggest going
to UFOMIND and looking up Mexico City and Phoenix.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

               Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:34:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:28:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?


 >Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:52:43 -0500 (EST)
 >From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Have you ever met with witnesses, got them to sign general case
f>orms and then called neighbors, the police, 911, the weather
 >serice, TV/radio stations, ect and then submitted the completed
 >report to an organization, such as MUFON, for review? If so, how
 >many and when? Have you videoed your witnesses and then shown
 >the tapes to other investigators to get their unbiased opinions
 >on what they think the witnesses are "made of?"

 >Have you gone down country roads and taken names off mailboxs
 >where the alleged UFO was seen at and then called these folks to
 >see if they saw the same UFO as the witnesses claimed? Have you
 >ever submitted UFO photos or videos for an analysis by
 >independent photo analysts? If you had, you would find much is
 >bull hockey! Finding any definitive proof in this field is like
l>ooking for a diamond where one has never been found before. >

I've done all this and have indeed explained many cases, most of
which I don't bother to report.  However, there is some gold
amidst the dross.

 >Because
 >structured objects are seen--and yes I've done several reliable
 >cases of this--does not mean they are structured. Seeing is not
 >neccessarily being real. I've yet to do one case where a
 >reliable witness has gone up and kicked a UFO! Do I think there
 >may be structured UFOs that are physical: Maybe; hopefully, but
 >that don't make it so!

This is a problem for establishing a criterion for "proof."
People may disagree on what is "proof." However, what really
counts is what you do with the information. Do you ignore it, as
a "dyed in the wool skeptic" (a la Klass, who used that term to
describe himself during our first conversation in 1974), or do
you use it to affect what you do in your own life (such as
invesigate more) irrespective of what others say?

 >Why do you think mainstream science doesn't accept any that is
 >reported? Because the "beef" is always--let me repeat,
 >ALWAYS--missing.

I would say that mainstream science doesn't accept this because
of the "laughter Curtain" (Hynek) and because of "brainwashing"
by the Air Force in the early days ("we have investigated and
found no threat to the USA and no evidence of advanced
technology"). Thanks to historical research using released
documents we now know' that top brass in the AF were, in fact,
serious about the possibility of "ships from another planet."
The reluctance to release information comes down to military
secrecy and politics. But the lid cannot be kept on the boiling
kettle forever.

 >There are a FEW good photographs but nothing conclusive that
 >anyone outside the UFO community would accept as conclusive
 >proof. I have done an excellent case with a UFO photo, but the
 >strength of the case is not the photo: It's the witnesses, who
 >included a police chief, with a masters degree and who was three
 >times head of the Georgia Police Chief's association. I also had
 >another retired police chief and others vouched for his
 >reputation. But the photo remains unimpressive.

Do you here refer to the case involving a "double UFO" or peanut
shape was was almost identical to the photo taken in
Ticonderoga, NY in July, 1998 (written about in the Jan, 1999
issue of the MUFONJournal)? If so, then it certainly appears to
me that we have a rare coincidence in UFO shape.


 >What I have is good faith in the witnesses and their belief that
 >the object in the photo did impressive flights, as they say,
 >before the photo was taken. Do I believe them? Yes. But that's
 >my judgement not scientific proof.

The witnesses in the Ticonderoga case were both corrections
officers (work at a penetentiary). Interesting! Perhaps you
shoud post your report on the Ga case.

In any event, your judgement that the case is not "scientific
proof" is your opinion. Someone else might be more likely to
accept it. Whether or not it would convince the scientific
community in general is a moot question because most of the
scientific community will never hear of it (there is no
mainstream science magazine that publishes UFO 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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

              'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real Life

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:29:12 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:07:20 -0500
Subject: 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real Life


Here at the dawn of the new millennium it might be relevant to
look back upon a landmark movie of the past century, and one of
its sources of inspiration.

The e-mail is forwarded from 'alt.alien.research'.

Stig

***

From: indiana_mufon_member@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: alt.alien.research
Subject: Oct 1973 UFO Wave!!! I Witnessed The Event!!!
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:20:31 GMT


Oct,1973 UFO Wave? I was here in Indiana, and was 19yrs of age,
at that time. That month, it was very warm when the sun set, and
the temperatures around the country were mostly mild, to very
warm for that time of year. Here in Indiana the night time air
was about 70 degress, and a 5 mph breeze, and visability was
vertually unlimited. I remember me, amd a friend of mine
watching the night sky for the hole month of Oct, especially
after all the reports of abductions, and UFO sightings. I still
remember the way the night sky looked to this day. It was very
much like the same sky for the movie close incounters. You could
look into the night sky, and in 1 minute, or less, and in any
direction, see things moving about the stars, from all sorts of
different directions. Hopefully someday, you all will be as
lucky as i have been, to witness such an event. This event, is
what brought on the making of the close encounters movie, and
the movie really starts off from real reports that were taken
that first warm Oct, 1973 night. The first report that i know of
that was taken, was from a commercial airline pilot flying at
high alltitude over the state of Indiana, and in the vicinity
over Elkhart, Indiana. And this is how the movie close
encounters starts off. But enough of the movie talk. Here is a
link to the Oct, 1973 Wave, and there are many accounts of
reports. Are all these people imagining these things? Did all
these people make false reports? I doubt it very seriously.
These reports are from the U.S. only, and not to even mention
all the other reports world wide that Oct, 1973!!! false reports
from coast to coast? false reports world wide? There was lots of
reports taken on one certain night, all across the U.S.!!! And
it is not feasable to consider this some kind of hoax!!! There
were reports in my own home town of suspected landing sites, but
nothing much ever became of it, and it was reconized by the
authorities to be hog wash, and nothing more!!! Thanks For
Reading!!!!!!!

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                  Re: Corso

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:20:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:11:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:21:35 -0500 (EST)
 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?

 >>A few more things were learned

 >>1.I obtained a copy of the Roster of the group working under
 >>General Trudeau at the Pentagon; 4pages, double column, legal
 >>size from the Army Archives in Carlisle, PA.. There were 2
 >>people in the Foreign Technology Group. a Colonel who was dying
 >>in the Hospital when Victor Golubic located him and Lt. Colonel
 >>Corso. The Junior officer of the 2. Doesn't sound like he was in
 >>charge.

 >Stan,

 >However Corso's DA Form 66 service summary has the following
 >conflicting information...

 >Available for anybody to view at the Black Vault Web site:

 >http://blackvault.com/Main/Category_Index/UFOs/body_ufos.html#MilitaryRecords

 >20 July 61
 >Staff Officer Foreign Technology Div    OCRD  USA (8556) Wash DC

 >18 Apr 62
 >Chief Foreign Technology Div    OCRD USA (8556) Wash DC

 >18 July 62
 >Staff Officer Plans Div    OCRD   USA (8556) Wash DC

 >1 Mar 63
 >Retired

 >Therefore, Corso was listed being in the Foreign Technology Div
 >for 1 year (20 July 61 to 18 July 62), with the last 4 months
 >listing him as the CHIEF of the FTD.

 >I think a lot of things Corso said can be legitimately
 >criticized, but this isn't one of them.  He was more than a
 >"junior officer" for the last four months he was there.
 >Otherwise, I don't understand the meaning of "Chief."

 >David Rudiak


Thanks David.

However, I do think April 18 to July 18 is only 3 months not 4.
Awful small outfit to do all that was supposedly done.

I just wish we had been able to talk to the earlier chief before
he died. Guess I need to get a later roster...

Also it would be good to know just when the numerous
technologies were supposedly transferred. If it happened in
1962, that was just about 15 years after Roswell. Rather
difficult to believe nothing was done before that.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                  Re: Corso

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 18:41:27 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:19:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso

 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:21:35 -0500 (EST)
 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?


 >>A few more things were learned

 >>1.I obtained a copy of the Roster of the group working under
 >>General Trudeau at the Pentagon; 4pages, double column, legal
 >>size from the Army Archives in Carlisle, PA.. There were 2
 >>people in the Foreign Technology Group. a Colonel who was dying
 >>in the Hospital when Victor Golubic located him and Lt. Colonel
 >>Corso. The Junior officer of the 2. Doesn't sound like he was in
 >>charge.

 >Stan,

 >However Corso's DA Form 66 service summary has the following
 >conflicting information...

 >Available for anybody to view at the Black Vault Web site:

 >http://blackvault.com/Main/Category_Index/UFOs/body_ufos.html#MilitaryRecords

 >20 July 61
 >Staff Officer Foreign Technology Div    OCRD  USA (8556) Wash DC

 >18 Apr 62
 >Chief Foreign Technology Div    OCRD USA (8556) Wash DC

 >18 July 62
 >Staff Officer Plans Div    OCRD   USA (8556) Wash DC

 >1 Mar 63
 >Retired

 >Therefore, Corso was listed being in the Foreign Technology Div
 >for 1 year (20 July 61 to 18 July 62), with the last 4 months
 >listing him as the CHIEF of the FTD.

 >I think a lot of things Corso said can be legitimately
 >criticized, but this isn't one of them.  He was more than a
 >"junior officer" for the last four months he was there.
 >Otherwise, I don't understand the meaning of "Chief."

 >David Rudiak


To David and Stan,

I met briefly with Lt-Col Corso, in Italy (San Marino), in April
1998, shortly before his death. I asked him if he could give me
exactly his posts for that period. He wrote, on the first page
of my copy of his book these words:


US Army Research and Development Division

Chief of the Foreign Technology Division

Plans Division of the US Army Research and Development"


This seems to be compatible with the record you quote?

May I add that I found Philip Corso te be a decent and likable
person. He was very calm, discreet, even serene, not the behavior
to be expected of a psychotic liar hungry for money and fame.

There was an official dinner at San Marino. He was there, at a
large table with members of his family : his daughter in Law
with her two boys.

I was at the same table, with Colin Andrews, Prof Messeen among
others. These members of his family had very polite manners. The
boys with white shirts and ties! I wonder, would their
grandfather have taken them with him if he was just an absurd
liar? Which does not mean, of course, that there are no mistakes
in the book.


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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                 Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus

From: Alex Persky <alexvi@mail.ru>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:55:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:28:09 -0500
Subject: Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus


Sighting Report

TIME: 24 Dec 1999, 08:44am GMT+2
LOCATION: near Yurieva Gorka, Vitebsk, Republic of Belarus
WITNESSES: Oleg V. Kirillov (programmer, age 29) and his boss.

COMMENTS:

The cigar-shaped UFO (brighter than clouds, color blue+red (the
color of a clowd at sunset), like an aircraft, but without wings
and tail, angular size about 3�x0.5�, the front part profile was
rounded & asymmetric, the rear part seemed blured) was observed
by two witnesses.

The object was moving NE, elevation about 40�, climb ~5�.

The object was brighter than sky at that time and slightly
fluoresced, the object color was blue with red, as the color of
a clowds at sunset.

The distance to the object was estimated as "very high".

There was no any noise all the time. After 3-4 secs the object
suddenly vanished (one of the witnesses stated that the object
disintegrated into dots and vanished).

The witness states the object was not an aircraft because of the
strange color, slight fluorescence, enormous angular size and
speed, strange disappearance, and there was no any noise. There
was no impression of a real solid object, it was more like an
image, maybe semi-transparent.

The possible explanation suggested by the witness -- mirage,
during that night (Dec 23-Dec 24) the air temperature decreased
from -1�C to -10�C (approximately). The sun was set. There is no
working airport in Vitebsk, but O.Kirillow noticed a plane,
which have flown over the city at high altitude some minutes
before the UFO appeared.

The witness was sober :) , and he does not use drugs.

I interviewed him personally, and his testimony seemed very
sincere to me.


Regards,

Alex Persky

Vitebsk, Republic of Belarus










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                    F-18's Chase Triangle Over Pensacola

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:08:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:45:52 -0500
Subject: F-18's Chase Triangle Over Pensacola


Source: 'alt.ufo.reports'.

Stig

***

From: "Ted Bragg" <tedbragg@home.com>
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports
Subject: UFO chased by F-18's in Pensacola
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 03:39:43 GMT


This may be a little late, but back during the alledged UFO
sightings in Gulf Breeze, FL, me and five others saw a very
unusual sight:

At the time ('91) the USS Lexington carrier was stationed at the
Pensacola Navy base. The carrier was known for its F-18
training.

It was turning dusk when we saw a large, triangular shaped black
object skim just a few feet above the water in the Pensacola
Bay. From the shoreline where we were, it was about 200 to 250
yards from the shoreline. It didn't make a sound, except the
water it kicked up as it moved very fast. It zipped out of sight
nearly as soon as we got a look at it.

A few seconds later, we hear a sonic boom, and two F-18 Hornets
scream past, going at least MACH 1. They were just above the
water as well...about 20 feet.

This was weird enough, (and folks, I'm not making this up.) but
as the object passed the carrier and the piers around it, the
lights flickered, went out, then came back on after it went by.
The jets chased after it, but we never heard what happened. The
news never got wind of it, but a radio show got alot of callers
for the sighting.

A few things that made this stick out:

The F-18s were not allowed to fly that low in the bay and
channel. They were forbidden to fly anywhere NEAR the Pensacola
bridge, which they went under chasing the craft (the bridge had
a major tragic accident the year before when a barge slammed
into it, killing about 20 people, including a classmate of
mine.)

And then there's the issue about the jets carrying missles. None
of the F-18's were supposed to have live ordinance in operation
locally except during wartime or emergencies.

The fact they were going supersonic at SEALEVEL...enough to
knock a house apart...or deafen those old people who live
there...it just stuck out like a sore thumb. They never did that
before.

The craft was about 20 feet long, triangular in shape, had a
'squashed fin' (can't think of a better way to describe it)
along the top part of it. The back tapered off in an angular
fashion. It looked like a large arrowhead.

No lights, no sound. No windows we could tell. It was only about
5 to 10 feet from the water, but didn't kick up the kind of
spray a jet or hovercraft would. And what hovercraft could go
faster than an F-18? And not make a heckuva lota noise?

Have there been anymore sightings in the Gulf Breeze area since
'91?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                    Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:00:05 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 04:04:03 -0500
Subject: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>>
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:59:07 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:18:47 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

<snip>

 >There is, after all, one indisputable fact in this whole story:
 >Col. Blanchard, the Roswell (Army) Air Force commander,
 >did order the release of the story which said a crashed
 >flying saucer had been found on a ranch near Roswell and
 >had been retrieved by Major Jesse Marcel.

Bruce, All:

There are so many parts of this tale which, once introduced,
have taken on a life of their own. I assume that you did not
have access to the original source, so I offer the following.

The press release issued by 2nd Lt. Warren Haut did _not_, I
repeat, _not_, say that a flying saucer "crashed" anywhere. It
said, "Landed", that it was "stored" and later that, "the disc
was picked up", by Marcel.

In 1995 Christopher D. Allan posed this question to me: When was
the word "crash" first used in regard to this incident?  He
pointed out that to his knowledge it was not used in 1947 in the
newspapers, the Haut press release, the F.B.I. teletype message,
or anywhere else.

The eagle-eyed Mr. Allan had piqued my curiosity 1947 news
accounts do not, indeed, use "crash".  For example, a July 8
article in the ROSWELL DAILY RECORD mentions a July 2 "sighting"
by Mr. and Mrs. Dan Wilmot, but not a crash. The first A.P.
bulletin from Roswell (2:25 P.M., July 8) used "landed". (See:
Kevin D. Randle & Donald R. Schmitt, THE TRUTH ABOUT ROSWELL, P.
47.)

Government documents from July 1947 do not say crash. The July 8
F.B.I. memo, for instance, used "recovered".  THE COMBINED
HISTORY 509th BOMB GROUP AND ROSWELL ARMY AIR FIELD, 1 JULY 1947
THROUGH 31 JULY 1947 used "reported to be in possession".

So, when was the word "crash" first used with Roswell?

Frank Scully is often given the blame. But on Oct. 12, 1949, in
a VARIETY column he gave his first account from con men Silas
Newton and Leo GeBaur of a disc which, "landed", in New Mexico
with 16 charred bodies.  A Nov. 23 column told more.

Then, in 'Behind The Flying Saucers' (Henry Holt & Co., Sept.
1950) Scully reprinted "20 Questions" for the Air Force from a
previous column, which included, "the flying saucer that landed
on a ranch in New Mexico."  He also wrote of a 3 1/2 foot high
dead body taken from a saucer that had landed in New Mexico (p.
173).

TIME and NEWSWEEK published, in 1950, rumors of dead aliens and
crashed saucers in New Mexico, apparently stimulated by the
Scully book. But, Roswell was not mentioned by name (Kevin D.
Randle, "The Search for the Truth about the Roswell Crash" in
MUFON UFO JOURNAL, Oct. 1995, p. 9, and Stanton Friedman,
"Roswell Revisited" in MUFON 1995 INTERNATIONAL UFO SYMPOSIUM
PROCEEDINGS.)

Early 1950s investigators knew of many crash tales that had been
stimulated by Scully's book, which of couse had said only that a
disc had "landed" (James W. Moseley, 'UFO Crash Secrets At
Wright/Patterson Air Force Base', Abelard, 1991, p. 49).

Then, in the spring of 1955, FLYING SAUCER REVIEW, Vol. 1, No.
1, p. 3, briefly recounted the experience of entertainer Hughie
Green, who said that while driving across the U.S., in _June_
1947 , he had heard a radio announcement that a saucer, "Had
crashed in New Mexico." (Jerome Clark, The Emergence Of A
Phenomenon, The UFO Encyclopedia, VOL. 2.)  The pre-Roswell date
could have been due to faulty memory, but no mention of Roswell
by name suggests that the Green story may not probably did not
intruduce the crash element to the story.

In 1966 Brinsley LePour Trench repeated the Green story in his
overseas best-seller 'The Flying Saucer Story'. He said it had,
"crashed in New Mexico and that the Army had moved in to
investigate."  Roswell still wasn't mentioned.

It has often been said by skeptics and pro-crash proponents
that for three decades, until the late 1980s, the tale of the
Roswell saucer lay forgotten and dormant in old newspaper
archives.  This overlooks what I think was the original and a
continuing source for some key elements of the current story.

On April 28, 1956, ex-broadcaster, author and saucer lecturer
Frank Edwards, in Q & A after a lecture to a New York City
saucer group, said that at Roswell, "A farmer reported that he
saw something strike a mountainside and crash". (Public
Meeting Of April 28, 1956, New York: Civilian
Saucer Intelligence; Ibid., Clark.)

More details were added by Edward's at a Lecture on UFOs at
an Indianapolis, Indiana, convention on October 27, 1955 or 56
(Randle & Schmitt, 'UFO Crash At Roswell', p. 27; "1955"
in footnote for above on p. 290.)  "According to what I was
told," Edward's said, "They threw troops in a circle all around
that place, and would let nobody in for five days."

Whether these remarks were Edward's' spin on the Wilmots'
sighting, were stimulated by the Green tale, or was just
something that he had made up to enliven the story is unclear.
Christopher Allan has speculated that Edward's might have
learned about the incident from a press clipping sent to him by
a radio listener. He never claimed to have investigated it.

Then in 1966, Edward's wrote his best-seller 'Flying Saucers -
Serious Business' (the first UFO book to sell a million copies).
He wrote on page 76, "Then there are such difficult cases as the
rancher near Roswell, New Mexico, who phoned the Sheriff that a
blazing disc-shaped object had passed over his house at low
altitude and had crashed and burned on a hillside within view of
the house...We were not told, however... why the military
cordoned off the area while they inspected the wreckage..."

The Edward's best-seller was listed in the bibliographies of
both 'UFO Crash At Roswell' and the seminal 1980 'The Roswell
Incident' (Berlitz & Moore), which many believe broke a 30-year
silence on the matter.  Yet, oddly neither of these two books,
which were devoted entirely to the affair, contained one word
about the Roswell claims in Edward's' book, despite their
sensational nature.

Frank Edward's seems to have been the first to use the word
"crash" with Roswell; was first to offer witness descriptions of
the crash (although his witnesses seem to have been the Wilmots,
who said something only flew over); was first to describe a
cordon of troops, and evidently first to describe a five day
quarantine of the site.

It seems clear that Edwards' popular 1950s and 1960s saucer
lectures to audiences, some of whom paid to fill large halls,
may have been a continuing source for the oral transmission of
the "crash" story of Roswell.  The role of his 1966 million-
seller in perpetuating this tale is also probably unrecognized.

I would appreciate receiving clips or citations from readers of
this list who know of any 1940s or pre-1980 use of the term
"crash" in reference to Roswell.

Bob Young
PO Box 371
Federal Square Station
Harrisburg PA  17108-0371








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:47:40 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 04:13:43 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:02:20 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Tim Mathews <TMMatthews99@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 18:09:22 -0800 (PST)
 >>From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >>Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >>>From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

<snip>

 >My dear Rebecca!

 >You will be surprised by our conclusions, and you'll also be

I doubt that I'll be surprised -- not much surprises me anymore.

 >glad to know that in terms of the film we may have come across
 >the 'holy grail' as far as it is concerned. We are going to
 >present a balanced view - allowing UFO researchers and
 >scientific experts etc - to have their say. I think that's a
 >good thing, don't you?

I think AA film was a bad deal all the way around. I think that
plenty has been written already and another entire book (perhaps
this one, like Mantle and Hesemann's previous one will have, as
Rob Irving wrote, nice pictures we can color) devoted to the
subject would be a waste of trees. (Did Irving say that, too?)
Apologies to Mr. Irving if I have misquoted him.

 >A great deal of work has been done by us - you forget that it
 >was Phil and I who uncovered the nature and origins of the
 >Tent
 >Footage back in 1998.....

And I can't possibly forget all Mantle's help in promoting the
damn thing in the first place! Some help he was when researchers
were trying to get a little closer to the truth way back when.
He appeared, for all intents and purposes, to be in Santilli's
pocket. He certainly wasn't helping uncover the truth then.

Then we hear from Mr. Mantle that he's leaving ufology, then
he's back again editing a new magazine, then he's out again,
then he's back again. I just wish he wouldn't erase all his data
and addresses every time he changes his mind about what field
he's going to be in because he keeps asking for addresses and
material that he's already been given or are readily available!


Thanks,

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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: RGates8254@aol.com
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:29:30 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:35:44 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Dear Colleagues,

 >I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new book
 >on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for professional
 >commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film experts, special
 >effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any such material I would
 >greatly appreciate it if you could share it with me.

 >I am also looking for 'positional statements' from ufologists,
 >what they believe is the nature and origin of the film and how
 >have they reached such a conclusion.

 >If you can help with any of the above please contact me direct
 >at: pmquest@dial.pipex.com.

Hi Phil,

I was under the impression that the AA film was/has turned out
to be yet and again another broken turd on the Ufological dung
heap.. that has consisted of such notables as
Yellowbook/Redbook/mass landings, alien motherships coming with
Hale Bopp and other such stupidity.

The bottom line is, and probably always will be, no matter what
story is told, when is Santilli going to release 1 (ONE) single
frame of the film, so that it can be authenticated by Kodak?
For many its always appeared to be another gimmick to get money
out of peoples pockets and put them in another.

Perhaps in the same book you could devote 5 or 6 chapters of
position statements and learned commentary on the infamous
Hitler diarys, with an afterword on the Piltdown man? :)

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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                      1968 Plane Crash Still Fascinates

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:33:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:42:24 -0500
Subject: 1968 Plane Crash Still Fascinates


Interesting Article that appeared in the Detroit Free Press
-------------

1968 plane crash still holds power to fascinate

Washed-up wreckage keeping mystery alive

December 29, 1999

BY PAUL PETERSON
FREE PRESS SPECIAL WRITER

REDRIDGE -- The disappearance of a National Center for
Atmospheric Research plane in 1968 remains one of the more
intriguing mysteries in the Upper Peninsula.

Although federal officials appear to have written off the
plane's disappearance, some people involved in the original
search say the case should be reopened.

"I think it would be good for the families to have closure in
the case," said Lester (Bill) Zinser, a pilot for NCAR in 1968
who led the search. "I know I would like to know just what
happened to those men."

The flight disappeared Oct. 23, 1968, while collecting water
radiation temperature data from Lake Superior. The plane made
its last contact with Houghton County Memorial Airport about
12:30 p.m. Not long after, some nearby residents saw a flash in
the sky.

Three men were on board the flight: research pilots Gordon Jones
and Robert Carew, and University of Wisconsin graduate student
Velayudh Krishna.

Zinser said there was nothing unusual about the flight, which
originated in Madison, Wis.

"It was a routine flight in perfect weather...certainly nothing
out of the ordinary. There was nothing on board that could have
caused an explosion," said Zinser, who is now retired and living
in Bakersfield, Calif. "I knew those men, and they were
professionals. Something went wrong that day."

Early winter weather hampered search efforts that October, but
the atmospheric center and local law enforcement officials
conducted an intensive search using sonar equipment in September
1969.

"They looked for more than a month, but nothing showed up," said
Gary Beauchamp, a deputy with the Houghton County Sheriff's
Department who took part in the search.

Plane parts have washed up on shore in the Freda area -- the
most notable in 1976 when a part was identified as a rear
horizontal stabilizer that could have come off the Beechcraft
plane. The part was sent to NCAR headquarters in Boulder, Colo.
All of the parts have been light blue -- the same color as the
missing plane.

Robert Serafin, the current NCAR director, said the recovery of
suspected plane parts by recreational divers in late 1997
prompted his office to contact the Denver office of the National
Transportation Safety Board the next year to ask it to update
the search.

NTSB officials said there was not enough evidence to resume the
search.

"We looked at the parts NCAR provided us with, and the
probability was good they were from the missing plane," said
Norman Wiemeyer, chief of the NTSB Denver office. "But there
wasn't enough there to warrant looking into further. The parts
were too small to make any solid conclusions."

One of the more persistent rumors surrounding the disappearance
was that the plane wandered into a restricted zone and was shot
down by an Air Force missile. The Air Force has never commented
on the incident.

"I can't say that it happened that way, but I have no other
theories," Zinser said. "It seems that is the most logical
theory."

Serafin says no proof exists that the plane was shot down.

"I've heard that rumor before, but I believe it's pure
speculation," he said.

Wiemeyer said discovery of bigger plane parts could lead to
reopening of the case.

"It happened a long time ago, and that's what makes it such a
tough case. But we would look into it if more conclusive
evidence was to surface," he said.

Former Houghton County Sheriff John Wiitanen -- one of the
principals in the case who recently died -- often maintained
that the plane went down in Lake Superior and became lodged in
an underwater valley formation. Parts, he reasoned, wash up on
shore periodically.

"Lake Superior gives up its secrets reluctantly," he said a year
ago. "Someday, a large part will wash up on shore, and then
maybe we'll find out what really happened."

End of Article
----------------

Todd Lemire

--
"What you believe isn't important; it's what you find out by
research and investigation that's important."

George Fawcett







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

              Re: 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 06:27:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:44:52 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' In Real


As you may have noticed, 'indiana_mufon_member@my-deja.com'
forgot to post the URL of the site dealing with the October 1973
wave, but he has retrieved his mistake! Go to

http://www.avalon.net/~middlecoast/ossamp.htm

for a sample chapter of Kevin Randle's book about the events and
follow the link.

Stig










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:24:18 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:58:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 22:28:27 +0000
 >From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
 >Subject: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I was just wondering what the situation/research status (is
 >there any?) on Colonel Corso might be - the book has been
 >published 3 years ago, and as far as I remember, he planned to
 >write another book about his involvement with 'Alien
 >Technology'; and if I'm not completely mistaken, after Corso's
 >death his son intended to get 'Part II' done, published and
 >released.

There is some question about his death.  You may recall that he
"died" rather conviently just before he was going to give a
sworn statement for a court case.  When researchers pursued the
tale being told about his death, i.e. he supposedly was
hospitalized in Jupiter Florida, then x-fered to some other
hospital where he died.

One small problem was when people requested a copy of his death
certificate, it couldn't be found.  Likewise when people
contacted the hospitals they didn't know anything.  Supposedly
there were no obits published... from a guy who was involved in
the POW/MIA issue, in the Eisenhower White House blah blah blah.

It was at the very end of the Dateline interview with him that
he said something like "Did I mention the NAZI time machine...."

 >My question is (or my questions are):

 >a) is Corso simply a nutcase? Some of his story is not true,
 >the rest as yet unverifiable by any official records.

 > <snip>

 >d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
 >country, trying to sell 'The day after...'? Birnes is now the
 >publisher of UFO magazine.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                        FSG - Final/Millennial Issue

From: Scott C. Carr <sardonica@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:28:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:06:44 -0500
Subject: FSG - Final/Millennial Issue


The last issue of "The Flying Saucer Gazette" is now online.
After a one year hiatus, the socio-ufological journal is back
for one final, Millennial issue before editor Scott Carr heads
for the hills to avoid the coming Apocalypse...

Interested readers may check it out at:

http://www.erols.com/sardonica

-Scott C. Carr
Editor, "The Flying Saucer Gazette"
www.erols.com/sardonica

Producer, "UFO Desk"
99.5 FM WBAI, NY







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

               Re: Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus

From: Carlos G. Roselli <croselli@email.ypf.com.ar>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:56:05 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:15:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 02:55:07 +0200
 >From: Alex Persky <alexvi@mail.ru>
 >Subject: Cigar-shaped UFO - Vitebsk, Rep. of Belarus
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >Sighting Report

 >TIME: 24 Dec 1999, 08:44am GMT+2
 >LOCATION: near Yurieva Gorka, Vitebsk, Republic of Belarus
 >WITNESSES: Oleg V. Kirillov (programmer, age 29) and his boss.

 >COMMENTS:

 >The cigar-shaped UFO (brighter than clouds, color blue+red (the
 >color of a clowd at sunset), like an aircraft, but without wings
 >and tail, angular size about 3 �x0.5�, the front part profile was
 >rounded & asymmetric, the rear part seemed blured) was observed
 >by two witnesses.

 >The object was moving NE, elevation about 40 climb ~5.

 >The object was brighter than sky at that time and slightly
 >fluoresced, the object color was blue with red, as the color of
 >a clowds at sunset.

<snip>

 >There was no any noise all the time. After 3-4 secs the object
 >suddenly vanished (one of the witnesses stated that the object
 >disintegrated into dots and vanished).

<snip>

 >The witness states the object was not an aircraft because of the
 >strange color, slight fluorescence, enormous angular size and
 >speed, strange disappearance, and there was no any noise. There
 >was no impression of a real solid object, it was more like an
 >image, maybe semi-transparent.

<snip>

Hello,

I have got a similar description here in Malarge, Mendoza,
Argentina. The witness was Tyco Lobo, a local radio speaker, 30
years old. It was mid-afternoon (with no precise date, just
April 1984), he and some fellows state they saw some sort of
blue to reddish blue crafts (5 to 7), cigar-shaped, no sounds,
crossing the sky from N to S in V-formation. Altitude was close
enough for the witness to describe the objects shape; Lobo is
quite sure the objects did not have wings or any other feature,
except for the "semi-transparent" quality. Lobo describes a
calm, comfortable and clean sunny day.

This transparent quality of object is something I witnessed
personally in 1987, using binoculars. Also, I have got similar
descriptions of "transparent" sightings in Papua New Guinea,
where I worked few years ago. It is curious...

Regards from Argentina,

Carlos G. Roselli







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                 Re: Corso?

From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 06:48:54 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:20:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:13:57 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:20:38 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Dear John A. and others:
 >>(from a drunken Larry Hatch)

Hi Larry, and all on this List.

Drunken Larry, no way.


 >>EBK Researchers,
 >>What's Wrong With Corso?

 >>Damned near ever everything.

Corso lived in Oz, in fact was at my Corps Training School. A
bit of a 'Red Neck' but did his job very well.

 >>Are you the new schtupido on the block,

Yepp!

I would spell is as dunbschttupiddo. New to the block.. well you
see living in Oz we don't get any news because the world is
upside down for us and my Dingo broke down so I hardly travel
these days - my wife wishes I was new!

 >>or did you finally translate "Crash
 >>over Corona" into Swedish?

Larry it was into Swazi and KwaZulup-Natal.


 >>Isaac Asimov, that prolific science writer
 >>(450^ books) and biochemist in his 1985 book
 >>"The Subatomic Monster"

 >>I read both. A most prolific and
 >>opinionated man.

He was a Brilliant man.

 >>wrote that at the age of 15 in April 1935 while at
 >>Columbia College he saw Albert Einstein.> Asimov
 >>described the ambience around the great man that day
 >>and the effect he had on him and others.>At that time very
 >>few understood Einstein the man and few understood what
 >>he was talking about, many disputed his claims.> However,
 >>the majority knew there was something great about this
 >>person!

 >>I disagree. Einstein was right, but most
 >>people suspected that he was goddam nuts.

I disagree, did you get a free home in the grounds of Princeton
for by being hated?

 >>today I can read about Einstein sex life, his bad habits and
 >>look at his 'Pickled Brain' held by others who felt that they
 >>might find something wrong in that head, to show that Einstein
 >>was nothing more than a freak!

 >>Hah Yes! Even today they laugh at my
 >>uncles and aunts: "Hah ha haah" they
 >>laugh!>Little do they know what will
 >>happen when the terriffic secret of
 >>Sea Monkeys comes out!!

Larry, by the sounds of things you're one of my relations. Uncle
Larry.

 >>I must invite you to keep this secret
 >>for a week or two longer.

Just you and I, that's my word, trust me I'm a military man!

 >>Sorry, Einstein was as normal as you can get and very human!

 >>He was also humane, but yes. Einstein
 >>was a good and fine german, I mean
 >>gerhuman;>well an above average
 >>Nordlich-Amergermench>or some such.
 >>One darned good ole soul.

Wrong again, his real name was "Mr Chuck Reganbush". But had to
change his name to get a grant to develop the Q-Bang hypothesis.

Which I later translated into Swazi and KwaZulup-Natal.


 >>Isaac Asimov was one of those who met the man, and at that time
 >>did not understand what Einstein was saying. Unlike many of us
 >>today on this thread, Isaac Asimov made the following
 >>observations and I quote:

 >>"Actually, the best way to test Einstein's assumption would be
 >>to test whether the deductions from that assumption are to be
 >>observed in the real universe.>If so, then we are driven to
 >>the conclusion that the basic assumption must be true, for we
 >>would then know of no other way of explaining the truth of the
 >>deductions"

 >>>>>>>- The Subatomic Monster - 1985.

 >>So, to put it plainly, if Isaac Asimov saw the A-Bomb go
 >>"Bang" then that was a _truth_!

 >><snip>

 >>I have no idea if Azimov actually saw
 >>the first H-bang go off or not.

Azimov saw the Q-Bang the H-bang was around 1947.

 >>I personally know somebody who did, and he's
 >>probably not about to talk to you either.


Sorry, Larry wrong again!

Australia
Monte Bello + Maralinga
1952-1957

French Polynesia
Mururoa Atoll 1966-1996

"Les navigateures francais et la decouverte europeenne de
l'Australie"

On a serious note.

In fact I had an uncle, WO2 Keith R. Auchettl (Army# 33371) who
drove a Centurion Tank 250 yards from ground zero at the UK
Maralinga Emu-Field A-Bomb test on the 15th Oct 1956, South
Australia. At that stage USA=43 USSR=3 UK=1 shots. Got a MBE
from this dumb act from HM ERII. Did him no good, died of cancer
in 1965. Now that's a FACT!

That Centurion Tank # ARN169041 "Total Recall", is now on
operational display with Australian 1 Armd Regt, Darwin,
Northern Territory.

 >>I must confess that I am totally amazed
 >>at your innocence and credulousity.

Still a virgin or is that "vgin", you know Larry, in that
Star Track Movie.

Credulousity, absolutely!!!

 >>Please do not take any part of my
 >>disagreement with your personal
 >>views,

Thanks Larry, its always a 'Badge of Honour' to have your
Johnny Walker blessing.

 >>idiotic as they most manifestly are,

Your been speaking to my two girls. "Gee dad your an idiot". The
odd thing is since I have been on the Lithium Tablets they now
let me fly passengers. The Prozac was good but you can't mix it
with the Melleril.

 >>as any sort of personal attack upon
 >>your personal self.

 >>Maybe you were kicked by a kangaroo
 >>or something.

Uncle Larry, twas a WOMBAT - nah twas a YOWIE and a yah big
YOWIE at that.

 >>Best wishes

 >>- Larry Hatch


Must go now you see:

"us oztralians are much smartter than the rest of da world we
get the mellenom bug[s] first - so there! Will let you know what
da end is like. Oh! by da way da Johnny W Black Label went in
the mail yes2day"

Best wishes to you Larry and all on this post.

Have a great 2K.

Will contact Errol if the world ends.

John Auchettl
-------------------------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                           Traces Of The Ancients

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:09:17 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:41:09 -0500
Subject: Traces Of The Ancients


We all know that no space civilization yet has landed on top of
the roof of the United Nations and announced their existence.

Does this mean that they really don't exist? Why do the
spaceships that are believed to have come from other planets run
away from us like wild animals?

http://tuvpo99.tripod.com/old/1.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 >
   Dec > Dec 30

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:07:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:17:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:24:18 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

Michael Lindemann and CNI news have done a very good job of
following this UFO thread, and his web site has a number of
articles that are worth reading.

 >There is some question about his death.  You may recall that he
 >"died" rather conviently just before he was going to give a
 >sworn statement for a court case.  When researchers pursued the
 >tale being told about his death, i.e. he supposedly was
 >hospitalized in Jupiter Florida, then x-fered to some other
 >hospital where he died.
 >
 >One small problem was when people requested a copy of his death
 >certificate, it couldn't be found.  Likewise when people
 >contacted the hospitals they didn't know anything.  Supposedly
 >there were no obits published... from a guy who was involved in
 >the POW/MIA issue, in the Eisenhower White House blah blah blah.

Information on Corso's death can be found at:

http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.1067.html

 > >My question is (or my questions are):
 >
 > >a) is Corso simply a nutcase? Some of his story is not true,
 > >the rest as yet unverifiable by any official records.
 >
 > > <snip>
 >
 > >d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
 > >country, trying to sell 'The day after...'? Birnes is now the
 > >publisher of UFO magazine.
 >
 >Cheers,
 >
 >Robert

Las Vegas television reporter George Knapp interviewed Corso and
Glenn Campbell of UFOMIND.COM wrote an article about Knapp's
presentation in Law Vegas:

http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.0710.html

If researchers have had difficulties obtaining information
related to his death it would be interesting to see what
problems they had encountered.

I was under the impression that after his massive heart attack
he was essentially sent home so that he could spend his last
days with his family and friends.

During the next several weeks, until he passed on, he went
through his files with his son, who has reportedly expressed
interest in publishing a follow up book.  Of course, this comes
from snippets of information posted to the Internet, and I don't
know how much of it is fact.

I may have been "out to lunch" but I don't recall any indication
of a mystery surrounding his death.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                 Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?

From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:02:51 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:04:03 -0500
Subject: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?



 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:34:02 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 18:52:43 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: John C. Thompson <gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'UFO Crash' Nuke Accident Cover-Up?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>There are a FEW good photographs but nothing conclusive that
 >>anyone outside the UFO community would accept as conclusive
 >>proof. I have done an excellent case with a UFO photo, but the
 >>strength of the case is not the photo: It's the witnesses, who
 >>included a police chief, with a masters degree and who was three
 >>times head of the Georgia Police Chief's association. I also had
 >>another retired police chief and others vouched for his
 >>reputation. But the photo remains unimpressive.

 >Do you here refer to the case involving a "double UFO" or peanut
 >shape was was almost identical to the photo taken in
 >Ticonderoga, NY in July, 1998 (written about in the Jan, 1999
 >issue of the MUFONJournal)? If so, then it certainly appears to
 >me that we have a rare coincidence in UFO shape.

Yes, the photo that was taken in early March, 1997 in LaGrange,
Georgia when UFO activity was high. The moving image seen in the
Ticonderoga, NY video and the LaGrange photo are twins. It
appears the same mother gave birth to them! The LaGrange photo
UFO case was submitted to MUFON in 1997. Its investigation, the
same as sent to MUFON, can be seen on ISUR's website at:
http://www.isur.com/articles/ga9703.html

This same photo was also allegedly examined by an off duty FBI
photoanalyst who declared it an unknown. Jeff Sainio declared it
an unknown. But its strength are the witnesses who said they saw
two identical UFOs which initially met in an inverted V
arrangement in the sky. One of the fused shaped UFOs then shot
off to the west and shot back. This same UFO then flew, almost
instantly, to the south.

The photo was taken of the remaining UFO as it moved slowly to
the north.

I've also talked to the Ticonderoga witness several times. While
not meeting him in the flesh I was impressed with him on the
phone. There was a NY MUFON investigator, who did the case, and
I've heard nothing to indicate that he didn't feel the same
about this witness's honesty.

Nonetheless his video does not show any object doing impressive
aerial feats; as the single LaGrange photo also fails to show.
So we have several good witnesses at two different locations, at
different times, seeing, it appears, an identical UFO. Playing
"devil's advocate" the video and the photo show something that
could only be a jumbo type airliner with its wings making a
"shadow" type effect.

On the other hand, the LaGrange witnesses said they never saw
any type of vertical "stripe" going around the "fuse" or
"peanut"  as their photo registers. I also have no doubt of
their complete honesty and accuracy of observations made of the
1997 sighting. Of course, one video showing what they say they
saw would end the matter.

Which brings the larger question, why is there not a single
"Mexican City UFO video," which seems to show some  detail and
display unusual movement, that everybody could accept as being
the real goods? I have taken my own video of a UFO and,
thoroughly, flubbed the effort so I know the difficulties
involved. It all happens unexpectedly and with no experience
most flop at it and never get a second change. But it would seem
out of millions who now have video cameras that someone should
get something with sightings occurring daily around the world.

 >>What I have is good faith in the witnesses and their belief that
 >>the object in the photo did impressive flights, as they say,
 >>before the photo was taken. Do I believe them? Yes. But that's
 >>my judgement not scientific proof.

 >The witnesses in the Ticonderoga case were both corrections
 >officers (work at a penetentiary). Interesting! Perhaps you
 >shoud post your report on the Ga case.

 >In any event, your judgement that the case is not "scientific
 >proof" is your opinion. Someone else might be more likely to
 >accept it. Whether or not it would convince the scientific
 >community in general is a moot question because most of the
 >scientific community will never hear of it (there is no
 >mainstream science magazine that publishes UFO sightings).

All true but scientists have legitimate reasons, in my opinion,
for not being embraceful of UFOs. I think more is involved than
just fear of the "giggle factor." (Many will help, however, if
their role is kept low profile and approached correctly.) I
don't think ufologists, for many good reasons, largely working
always with  no funds, have supplied anything worth studying. We
try, try and try but our efforts have mostly  been unsuccessful.

Its always been my thought that it will be someone or some
agency that have no connections to ufology who will supply the
proof. One good close-up daylight video of a UFO exhibiting
out-of-this world movements, with many reliable independent
witnesses, and some kind of backup independent instrumentation
proof, such as radar, could change all this. This,
unfortunately, has not happened.

Perhaps, it will. I think it can safely be said that never have
so many people been aware of others seeing UFOs; not even in
1947, when the country bordered on UFO hysteria. Collectively,
the last decade has seen more public coverage of the UFO issue
than ever. It also appears that media coverage is becoming more
postive and suggesting that the phenomenon, whatever it may be,
is real.

Best Regards,
John C. Thompson









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                                  Re: Corso

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:06:45 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:14:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 18:41:27 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snips>

 >To David and Stan,

 >I met briefly with Lt-Col Corso, in Italy (San Marino), in April
 >1998, shortly before his death. I asked him if he could give me
 >exactly his posts for that period. He wrote, on the first page
 >of my copy of his book these words:

 >US Army Research and Development Division

 >Chief of the Foreign Technology Division

 >Plans Division of the US Army Research and Development"

 >This seems to be compatible with the record you quote?

 >May I add that I found Philip Corso te be a decent and likable
 >person. He was very calm, discreet, even serene, not the behavior
 >to be expected of a psychotic liar hungry for money and fame.

And just how would you expect a "psychotic liar hungry for money
and fame" to actually behave? Standing on his head wearing his
underpants and juggling the fish-knives? Doesn't it occur to you
that someone who _is_ a scam-artist out for the money (and I
don't know enough to say what the situation was with Corso, he
may just have been a nice but confused old gent) is going to be
as nice as pie to everyone he meets, charming, discreet and
serenne all the way to the bank.

Ufologists logic on fraudsters seems to go: "The man is not a
con-artist because he doesn't look or sound like a con artist".
Well of course he doesn't, that's his job isn't it, he's trying
to get money off you. If he took your money and wasn't charming
and plausible, he'd be a mugger, right?

It seems that some ufologists are prepared to accept that people are
honest so long as they're not walking along with a mask and a bag marked
"swag" over their shoulder; and so long as they don't wear a Napoleon
hat they must be perfectly sane.

 >There was an official dinner at San Marino. He was there, at a
 >large table with members of his family : his daughter in Law
 >with her two boys.

 >I was at the same table, with Colin Andrews, Prof Messeen among
 >others. These members of his family had very polite manners. The
 >boys with white shirts and ties! I wonder, would their
 >grandfather have taken them with him if he was just an absurd
 >liar?

Nice freebie, who was paying for it? Interesting place San
Marino, beautiful postage stamps. Does no harm to go along with
dear old Uncle Phil and keep an eye on the old guy.

 >Which does not mean, of course, that there are no mistakes
 >in the book.

Really? You think so?

 >Gildas Bourdais


--
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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:22:29 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:20:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:07:32 -0500
 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 01:24:18 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >Michael Lindemann and CNI news have done a very good job of
 >following this UFO thread, and his web site has a number of
 >articles that are worth reading.

 >>There is some question about his death.  You may recall that he
 >>"died" rather conviently just before he was going to give a
 >>sworn statement for a court case.  When researchers pursued the
 >>tale being told about his death, i.e. he supposedly was
 >>hospitalized in Jupiter Florida, then x-fered to some other
 >>hospital where he died.

 >>One small problem was when people requested a copy of his death
 >>certificate, it couldn't be found.  Likewise when people
 >>contacted the hospitals they didn't know anything.  Supposedly
 >>there were no obits published... from a guy who was involved in
 >>the POW/MIA issue, in the Eisenhower White House blah blah blah.

 >Information on Corso's death can be found at:

 >http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.1067.html

 >>>My question is (or my questions are):

 >>>a) is Corso simply a nutcase? Some of his story is not true,
 >>>the rest as yet unverifiable by any official records.

 >>><snip>

 >>>d) any news from his ghostwriter? Is he still travelling the
 >>>country, trying to sell 'The day after...'? Birnes is now the
 >>>publisher of UFO magazine.

 >>Cheers,

 >>Robert

 >Las Vegas television reporter George Knapp interviewed Corso and
 >Glenn Campbell of UFOMIND.COM wrote an article about Knapp's
 >presentation in Law Vegas:

 >http://www.cninews.com/Search/CNI.0710.html

 >If researchers have had difficulties obtaining information
 >related to his death it would be interesting to see what
 >problems they had encountered.

 >I was under the impression that after his massive heart attack
 >he was essentially sent home so that he could spend his last
 >days with his family and friends.

Corso had a massive (and unexpected due to previous medical
exams showing no seriously occluded coronary arteries) infarct.
Initially, the intensity and degree of heart damage was judged
to be life threatening.  However, and mysteriously, Corso was
released from the hospital within (if memory serves) the week.
His cure was adjudged near miraculous.

After being sent home with an extremely positive prognosis,
Corso suffered a final infarct, again unexpected, which finally
killed him.

 >During the next several weeks, until he passed on, he went
 >through his files with his son, who has reportedly expressed
 >interest in publishing a follow up book.  Of course, this comes
 >from snippets of information posted to the Internet, and I
 >don't know how much of it is fact.

 >I may have been "out to lunch" but I don't recall any
 >indication of a mystery surrounding his death.

Steve, the mystery of his death is it's timing and the highly
unusual circumstances of his two heart attacks.  Whilst easy to
holler "conspiracy," it's easier to merely look and say, "Hmmm,
this is highly unusual!"  And then ask why this might be so.

Personally, there is little I put past our and other
governments, including murder, assassination and general really
bad stuff.


Jim Mortellaro

Remember, for every bottle of Gripple you buy for Y2K, Gesundt
gives one penny to our best UFO researchers.  Of course, we do
seel a great deal of Gripple.  But can you imagine what our
worst researchers get?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                              Re: Documentary?

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:30:08 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:27:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Documentary?


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:33:50 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Documentary?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:37:21 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: Sam Sherman <FLEXARET2@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Documentary?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I watched this show last night and seem to remember seeing it
 >>once before about a year ago. It ran on the United Paramount
 >>Network of independent and owned stations. It was produced by
 >>Triage, the former producers of 'Sightings'. It may have been
 >>updated now.

 >If this shows the Aug 7, 1997 Mexico City video of a "huge" UFO
 >passing behind buildings, then it was shown in the spring of
 >1998.

 >Subsequent investigation has shown that the Mexico City video
 >has "fingerprints of a hoax" and the Phoenix lights which were
 >videotaped by several people were likely flares abou 80 miles
 >south of Phoenix.

 >These cases have all been discussed on the net. I suggest going
 >to UFOMIND and looking up Mexico City and Phoenix.

It's important to emphasize that these "fingerprints" of a hoax,
in the Mexico City case, do not provide evidence of a hoax in
any way as convincing as fingerprints in a detective case, since
the causative agent appears to be alien intelligence whose state
of evolution could be thousands or even millions of years ahead
of our own. If one wishes to assume it was a hoax, they must
assume that:

(a) Any UFO intelligence involved was not smart enough or
ethical enough to have a long range strategy for dealing with
humankind that includes handing out crumbs of apparent
disbelief, during their staged sightings and contacts, for
negative skeptics to latch onto so they won't go beserk;

(b) The ETI in question are not evolved enough in technology and
matters of the psyche to be able to cause the videotape data to
turn out the way it did -- with suspicious "fingerprints" of a
hoax; and

(c) that first-hand testimony from sincere witnesses should be
discounted.

Regarding (b), we should recall that Jeff Saino had to assume
that a clever video hoaxer fed in the position of a UFO image
relative to a reference point within the scene, and relative to
the camera "bounce," some thousand times with only a 72%
reliability figure, and made other errors in his hoaxing due
either to laziness or ignorance. He assumed that the hoaxer
wrote software to accomplish his UFO-image positioning
automatically (see p. 11 of MUFOM J. of Oct 98), while making
and utilizing tedious camera-bounce measurements, apparently by
hand, every 20th of a second, with the latter failing a
substantial fraction of the time. And we should recall that
Bruce earlier found proper correlation between the UFO's
increase in brightness with decreasing distance from the camera
on that smoggy day.

Any one of assumptions (a)-(c) is dubious or implausible; all
three together are very implausible. Granted, however, that in
the absence of eye-witness testimony, this could not be so
stated. Obviously, then, in any case with both physical evidence
and eye-witness testimony, the latter should be taken into
account, and then also (a) needs to be taken into account.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Mark Haywood <mark.haywood@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:10:59 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:37:15 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:29:30 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:08:33 +0000
 >>From: Philip Mantle - UFO <pmufo@dial.pipex.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

 >>Dear Colleagues,

 >>I wonder can you be  of assistance. I am researching a new book
 >>on the alien autopsy film and I am looking for professional
 >>commentary from surgeons, pathologists, film experts, special
 >>effects experts, etc, etc. If you have any such material I would
 >>greatly appreciate it if you could share it with me.

<snip>

There's nothing new in ufology, so let's hash up the Alien
Autopsy footage once again.  Oh joy!

Better yet, let's get all those nice boys and girls out on
web-land to write in with their comments.  We'll put them all
together, edit it, and serve it up as a book. Loadsa
royalties!!!

Sure beats my job as a computer analyst.

Mark Haywood








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                          UFOcity.com Report 12/99

From: Peter Robbins <ufolist@mail.teamcpm.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:00:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:44:37 -0500
Subject: UFOcity.com Report 12/99


The UFOcity.com Report
for December 1999
"The Truth Matters"
By Peter Robbins


"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among
the people, who have a right... and a desire to know; but
besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable,
indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind
of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their
rulers."

        John Adams

"Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the
absolute rejection of authority."

      Thomas Henry Huxley

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

So, it's finally here: tomorrow is the last day of the century.
And most of the several billion people watching television
around the world tomorrow night will have their sets tuned to an
image of Times Square in New York City, just a quick walk from
where I sit typing this.  It's an American, and increasingly an
international tradition, but this year, folks won't be tuning in
for quite the same reason as they have in previous years.  Like
a high-stakes automobile race or a baby in a stage play, many
viewers will be tuning in to await the unpredictable.

And awaiting the unpredictable is pretty much how we are leaving
this century and entering the next.  I've never been very good
at predictions, but I am confident that January first will see
my city no worse for wear than most other January firsts.  In
any case, I very much hope that this will be the case.  Any
well-timed act of violence or terrorism in New York City - or in
any other city, town or village, will reverberate through our
increasingly interconnected communities, wherever they are.

The fact of the matter is that whatever does or does not happen
on the world stage tomorrow, the next day, week or month affects
us all and will set the tone by which we begin the new century.

In this sense, excessive governmental secrecy functions much
like terrorism.  It keeps us feeling off-center, anxious, and
wondering what the truth really is.  Fighting terrorism is out
of the hands of most of us, but fighting government secrecy,
specifically about UFOs, needn't be.  We have recently contacted
the announced presidential hopefuls and asked them what they
would do about UFO secrecy if they are elected.  We will soon be
posting all of their responses (or lack of same) and inviting
you to contact any or all of the candidates to let them know how
you feel about this pressing issue.  After more than fifty years
of treating this subject as some sort of idiot child, it is time
that our presidential candidates wake up to the fact that many
of us take this matter very seriously indeed and will no longer
be deferring to fear or ridicule in letting them know it.

As we enter the presidential primary season, we hope you will
join with us in making your feelings known to the candidates.
In doing so, we can begin to put this period in history behind
us and move forward to reclaiming a very precious part of our
democratic heritage.  And if we don't do it my friends, no one
else will: bad things happen when good people do nothing. Every
good wish from all of us at UFOcity.com to you and your families
for a safe and happy new year.  God knows, it's going to be an
interesting one..!

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


UFO Magazine Names UFOcity.com As One Of the Most (Likely) To Be
Remembered UFO Websites Of the Decade

 >From UFO Magazine's December "Webwatch" column:

"...we thought it'd be fun to close out the Millennium by
looking back on some of our favorites. Webwatch stresses this is
not a "best of" column. These are rather, websites which we
wouldn't bet against as being the ones most remembered when we
look back on the past decade.

"Peter Robbins UFOcity.com http://www.UFOcity.com is a
relatively new entry into the UFO cyber-sweepstakes. But it has
made an impact quickly. The news from around the world here is
updated daily as are sightings reports. There are also columns
by Robbins, Nick Pope, Filers Files, and more. This is one of
those sites that is an excellent daily stop for anyone seeking
the latest from the world of ufology."

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


British Ministry of Defence To Release UFO Information.. Maybe

In a November 14 news story, the London-based tabloid, News Of
The World, said the UK Defence Minister Peter Kilfoyle will soon
be releasing classified files covering approximately 300 UFO
cases going back 30 years. The newspaper also alleged that the
information released will also include unreleased information on
the UK's best-known UFO event, the Bentwaters or Rendlesham
Forest incident, as well as formerly secret plans for how Her
Majesty's government would  respond to an invasion by aliens.

The only problem seems to be that the MOD is unaware of the
alleged, upcoming information release.  This being the case, we
decided to see if we could learn more about the provocative
rumor and telephoned Nick Pope at the Ministry of Defence.
Between 1991 and 1994 Nick's job at the MOD was to investigate
UFO sightings reported to the Ministry.  His response to our
question follows:

"There is little I can add to the statement I have already
made.*  No official statement has been made on this matter,
either by the Ministry of Defence or by any other government
agency.  While I no longer have any official responsibilities
relating to policy on the UFO phenomenon, I still work at the
MOD and have my ear to the ground.  I have neither been
consulted about any mass release of UFO files, nor do I have any
firm information that such a move is planned.  If I do hear
anything, I will let you know immediately."

And, in turn, we will let you know as soon as we do.

* See the currently posted December edition of Nick's column,
"London Calling."

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

Intruders Foundation Website Back Online

Although still under construction, the revamped and expanded
website of Budd Hopkins' Intruders Foundation (IF) is back
online.  The foundation is devoted to studying the UFO abduction
phenomenon, educating the public on the subject, and assisting
individuals who have been through this experience.  Visit IF at
http://www.intrudersfoundation.org  For information on
membership and upcoming IF events, call 212-645-5278.

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


Subscribe to the UFOcity.com Breaking News Service

Several months ago we quietly began a news service to friends in
the print and broadcast media and those colleagues with
news-oriented websites. These mailings have no set schedule.
Some weeks are quiet while other weeks may generate several
bulletins weekly, or even daily.  The service is simple: when we
receive notice of an breaking or ongoing UFO or space-related
news story, we don't wait to post it online at UFOcity.com
(which we will do within a day), we send it out as is to those
on this list.  When word got out about this service, a number of
folks NOT working in media asked to be included in these
emailings and we were glad to oblige.  If you would like to
receive the same news bulletins and updates we send to our
friends in the media, just email me at <probbins@teamcpm.com>
and ask to be added to the UFOcity.com Breaking News Service
mailing list.  It's that simple, and it's free.

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


Feed the Hungry, Courtesy of Corporate Sponsors

Its easy to dish on large corporations, but a number of them
have gotten together to do something of real value this holiday
season.  If you go to http://www.thehungersite.com and click a
button, someone in the world gets a meal at no cost to you.  The
food is paid for by corporate these sponsors and the entire
process will take you less than 20 seconds. You are allowed one
click per day, so visit the site daily.  Please pass the word;
someone somewhere in the world will thank-you for it.

Thank-you, and Happy Holidays from UFOcity.com

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


The UFOcity.com Report grants permission to forward this
publication or re-post its contents on other websites and
Internet servers, as long as the contents of this or other
issues are posted in total.  Permission to post individual news
items must be requested by contacting editor.  Email:
<probbins@teamcpm.com> Phone:  212-977-7456, x. 261.

If you have a friend who you think might enjoy receiving the
UFOcity.com Report, please tell them about it or forward them a
copy.  To subscribe, email us at <ufolist@teamcpm.com> and
include the word "subscribe" in the subject.  To unsubscribe,
email us at the same address and include the word "unsubscribe"
in the subject.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                  Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'

From: DRudiak@aol.com
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:47:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:47:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'

        ::
:
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:52:41 EST
Subject: Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
:
:
:
:



 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:00:05 -0500 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 04:04:03 -0500
 >Subject: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'


  >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>>
  >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:59:07 -0500
  >Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:18:47 -0500
  >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

<snip>

 > >There is, after all, one indisputable fact in this whole story:
 > >Col. Blanchard, the Roswell (Army) Air Force commander,
 > >did order the release of the story which said a crashed
 > >flying saucer had been found on a ranch near Roswell and
 > >had been retrieved by Major Jesse Marcel.

 >I would appreciate receiving clips or citations from readers of
 >this list who know of any 1940s or pre-1980 use of the term
 >"crash" in reference to Roswell.

Robert Loftin, affiliated with NICAP, wrote in his 1968 book "Identified
Flying Saucers," p. 21:

"Vast, material evidence was obtained from a ranch, near Roswell, New Mexico,
where a flying saucer crashed and burned.  The Air Force cordoned off the
area until the evidence could be removed.  Newsmen were not allowed at the
scene, but received a 'typical explanation' of th incident by the Air Force,
a week later.  The Air Force, according to IIOUFO, released a picture of a
soldier holding a box kit with an aluminum pie pan tied to it.  _Was a flying
saucer crash in the United States explained away as the crash of a burning
box kite with a non-inflammable pie pan tied to its tail?"

Loftin didn't get a lot of the details right, but he certainly did use the
word "crash" in reference to Roswell.

Loftin's statement was in a section referring to other rumored recovered UFO
material, including Ubatuba 1957, Washington DC 1952, and Helgoland 1952.

Back during the Roswell events in July 1947, I don't believe the newspapers
referred specifically to a "crash," but the word "wreckage" was definitely
used.  E.g. the United Press story of July 9 read:

"Reports of flying saucers whizzing through the sky fell off sharply today as
the Army and Navy began a concentrated campaign to stop the rumors....
Headquarters of the 8th Army Air Force at Fort Worth, Tex., announced that
the WRECKAGE of a tin-foil covered object found on a New Mexico ranch was
nothing more than the remnants of a weather observation balloon.  AAF
headquarters in Washington reportedly delivered a 'blistering' rebuke to
officers at the Roswell, N.M. base for suggesting that it was a 'flying
disc.'"

The N.Y. Herald-Tribune headline July 9 read:

ARMY SEIZES A GROUNDED 'DISK,' FINDS IT IS A WEATHER BALLOON -- Wreckage
Found in New Mexico Desert Flown to Fort Worth and Identified After 7-1/2
Hours;  'Disks' Reported in England, Australia

Followed by:

"Army Air Forces intelligence officers seized a battered heap of foil-covered
wreckage in the desert near Roswell, N.M., yesterday, and for seven and a
half hours the Army thought it might have discovered a genuine flying disk."

Another word used in other articles in reference to the displayed radar
targfet was "crushed."

"Wreckage" implies from a wreck of some kind.  For example, one dictionary I
have defines "wreckage" as "Broken or disordered remnants or fragments from a
wreck."  Another defines it as "Remains or fragments of something that has
been wrecked."  A synonym for "wreck" can be "crash," not to put too fine a
point on it.

I'm not aware of any newspaper back then specifically using the word "crash"
in connection with Roswell.  Most used the wording of the press release that
a "flying disk" had "landed."  But it was also made very clear that the
so-called "disk" was not intact and was found in pieces.  In one statement
out of Fort Worth reported by the Associated Press, it was stated that it was
scattered over a square mile.  Another curious statement by Army AF
spokespeople thoughout the day was that it might be 25 feet across if
"reconstructed."

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                  Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:52:41 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 06:53:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:00:05 -0500 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 04:04:03 -0500
 >Subject: Frank Edwards and The Roswell 'Crash'

 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>>
 >Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:59:07 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 08:18:47 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Friedman On History Channel's 'Roswell'

<snip>

 >>There is, after all, one indisputable fact in this whole story:
 >>Col. Blanchard, the Roswell (Army) Air Force commander,
 >>did order the release of the story which said a crashed
 >>flying saucer had been found on a ranch near Roswell and
 >>had been retrieved by Major Jesse Marcel.

 >I would appreciate receiving clips or citations from readers of
 >this list who know of any 1940s or pre-1980 use of the term
 >"crash" in reference to Roswell.

Robert Loftin, affiliated with NICAP, wrote in his 1968 book
"Identified Flying Saucers," p. 21:


   "Vast, material evidence was obtained from a ranch, near
   Roswell, New Mexico, where a flying saucer crashed and burned.
   The Air Force cordoned off the area until the evidence could
   be removed.  Newsmen were not allowed at the scene, but
   received a 'typical explanation' of th incident by the Air
   Force, a week later.  The Air Force, according to IIOUFO,
   released a picture of a soldier holding a box kit with an
   aluminum pie pan tied to it.  _Was a flying saucer crash in
   the United States explained away as the crash of a burning box
   kite with a non-inflammable pie pan tied to its tail?"

Loftin didn't get a lot of the details right, but he certainly
did use the word "crash" in reference to Roswell.

Loftin's statement was in a section referring to other rumored
recovered UFO material, including Ubatuba 1957, Washington DC
1952, and Helgoland 1952.

Back during the Roswell events in July 1947, I don't believe the
newspapers referred specifically to a "crash," but the word
"wreckage" was definitely used.  E.g. the United Press story of
July 9 read:

   "Reports of flying saucers whizzing through the sky fell off
   sharply today as the Army and Navy began a concentrated
   campaign to stop the rumors....  Headquarters of the 8th Army
   Air Force at Fort Worth, Tex., announced that the WRECKAGE of
   a tin-foil covered object found on a New Mexico ranch was
   nothing more than the remnants of a weather observation
   balloon.  AAF headquarters in Washington reportedly delivered
   a 'blistering' rebuke to officers at the Roswell, N.M. base
   for suggesting that it was a 'flying disc.'"

The N.Y. Herald-Tribune headline July 9 read:

   ARMY SEIZES A GROUNDED 'DISK,' FINDS IT IS A WEATHER BALLOON
   -- Wreckage Found in New Mexico Desert Flown to Fort Worth and
   Identified After 7-1/2 Hours;  'Disks' Reported in England,
   Australia

Followed by:

   "Army Air Forces intelligence officers seized a battered heap
   of foil-covered wreckage in the desert near Roswell, N.M.,
   yesterday, and for seven and a half hours the Army thought it
   might have discovered a genuine flying disk."

Another word used in other articles in reference to the
displayed radar targfet was "crushed."

"Wreckage" implies from a wreck of some kind.  For example, one
dictionary I have defines "wreckage" as "Broken or disordered
remnants or fragments from a wreck."  Another defines it as
"Remains or fragments of something that has been wrecked."  A
synonym for "wreck" can be "crash," not to put too fine a point
on it.

I'm not aware of any newspaper back then specifically using the
word "crash" in connection with Roswell.  Most used the wording
of the press release that a "flying disk" had "landed."  But it
was also made very clear that the so-called "disk" was not
intact and was found in pieces.  In one statement out of Fort
Worth reported by the Associated Press, it was stated that it
was scattered over a square mile.  Another curious statement by
Army AF spokespeople thoughout the day was that it might be 25
feet across if "reconstructed."

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                          Blather - Not the Y2K Bug

From: Daev Walsh <daev@blather.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 22:32:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:13:43 -0500
Subject: Blather - Not the Y2K Bug

______________________________________________________
B  L  A  T  H  E  R

p a r a n o r m a l   p r o v o c a t e u r i s m

By Dave (daev) Walsh daev@blather.net
Web: http://www.blather.net
_______________________________________________________
December 29th 01999, Dublin, Ireland   Admin Message
_______________________________________________________

MALCONTENTS:

1. Not the Y2K Bug - An administrative announcement
2. Accidental What? - daev's Fortfest talk online
3. Archived Issues - What you may have missed
4. Win Stuff - Oh, just go to http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html
_______________________________________________________

NOT THE Y2K BUG

A serious matter has become apparent to the upper echelons of
the Blather establishment. It would appear that some subscribers
have not been receiving Blather - unfortunately, due to the
nature of the problem, we have no way of knowing for sure who
has been missing our irregular paranormal spiel.

The problem should now be rectified, but if, for any reason, you
have previously *unsubscribed* from Blather, but still receive
this email, please send send an email to list@blather.net with
the word unsubscribe in the body of the message, or respond to
this message. We apologise for the inconvenience.

For readers that have subscribed some time ago, but have
received no Blather email before now, see the 'Archived Issue'
section below, where details can be found of back issues.

_______________________________________________________
ACCIDENTAL WHAT?

Yes, it's now online - Dave Walsh's talk on *Accidental
Satanism* from Fortfest 99.

http://www.blather.net/articles/accidentalsatanists.html

_______________________________________________________
ARCHIVED ISSUES
Blather Doesn't Care
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no7.html
December 7th 01999
As we are mere weeks away from the end of the year, Blather
would like to make it known that *we don't care* about the
(change of) m*llennium.
We don't.
Ok?
However, we will discuss possible Irish meteorites, Wexford
UFOs and other malarkey...


Funny what you can find near Bundoran...
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no6.html
October 6th 01999
Aliens in Jars from Sligo/Donegal, big cats roaming Belfast, and
'Black Rays' over Lough Neagh... Eamon Ansbro appears with a new
booklet, interesting videos of an alleged extraterrestrial, eh,
incursion into Dublin, and yet bleedin' more about Norwegian
lake monsters. Where will it all end?


the importance of being an erne peist
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no5.html
August 31st 01999
The *Sunday People* of August 22nd provides us with the painful
headline 'O'Nessie Makes a Splash - Mystery monster has made an
Irish waterway its home!', along with a picture of the alleged
peist (gaelic; worm). It comes courtesy of reporter Stephen
Maguire, who, having laid hands on a photograph of it,
breathlessly informs us that 'this is the first picture of
Ireland's own 'Loch Ness' monster'.


zen when? tao now!
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no4.html
July 27th 01999
With the Count O'Blather on hiatus, the surreal and melancholic
Barry Kavanagh finds himself ideally placed to take on the
sinister holiday role of agent-provocateur. Be amazed as BK
pontificates on Chinese Philosophy and the works of Raymond
M. Smullyan...


epiphany weather
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no3.html
July 5th 01999

It's some months now since Blather last paid any direct
attention to the curious, if somewhat tiresome, phenomenon of
Irish ufology and reported UFOs. Truth be told, the respite was
sorely needed. Still, duty-bound we return to the fray, however
grudgingly...


on the ghost bus
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no2.html
June 18th 01999
At 19:30 hours on the 25th of May, this Blatherskite ended a
headlong bicycle sprint across Dublin's humid inner city,
arriving at O'Connell St. with barely enough time to leap aboard
the Dublin Ghost Bus and wave his credentials, before the
spectral vehicle lurched away into the evening.

hell-fire francis
http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no1.html
June 5th 01999
Blather takes the readership through 18th century claims of
Satanic politicians and into chalk tunnels in Buckingamshire,
England...to tell the tale of the English Hell-Fire Club of the
1750-60s


More archived issues at
http://www.blather.net/archives/indexvol2_27to52.html


_______________________________________________________
LAST CHANCE TO WIN
Yes, Blatherskites, we're giving *more* stuff away. Actually, to
be more precise, Blather is facilitating the giving away of
stuff by other people, and this time there will be *three*
winners, each of which will win one of three prizes. To enter,
make your way to: http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html

Prize One: *2020: Hindsight - The Book of the Bug*
By Jock Howson

Jock writes: 2020:Hindsight is a new and uniquely challenging
entrant into the Post-holocaust lists. Ranking alonside Miller's
'Canticle for Leibowitz' and Pournelle's 'Lucifer's Hammer', it
predicates the collapse of western society as a result of severe
financial and technical problems associated with the Millennium
Bug.

Written retrospectively in the year 2020, it is the tale of how
a small community survives the horrors and torments of The End
and the chaos and confusion that follows. The narrator,known
only as The Librarian, a man crippled in the food riots which
precede the final collapse, tells the tale of how the Bug , both
directly and indirectly, causes economic and social collapse. He
tells us also of his small community's tragicomically inept
fight against external and internal social disintegration.

Through the Librarian's rambling and doubtful account we come to
understand the true nature of their passage through a Hobbesian
decline to a dysfunctional and ultimately doomed existence.

The book is primarily black comedy and bitter satire,
indelicately interwoven with farce and tragedy in a complex and
innovative structure and style. Largely devoid of plot or
character or narrative description but structurally and
textually rich and demanding, it is full of thought-provoking
incident and allusion. It brings into question most of our
literary and social precepts, challenging our views on personal
relationships and on the relationships between perception and
belief, and fiction and reality, and truth and deception. And
self-deception.

It must also makes us question just what will happen
when the new Millennium arrives.

A very worrying entertainment.

(http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0953614107/qid=943643698/sr=
1-10/02 6-4870404-2448035)





Prize Two: Pot Stories For
the Soul
Compiled by Paul Krassner
With a foreword by Harlan Ellison
Published by *High Times*
(http://www.hightimes.com/)

'For this book, Paul Krassner contacted 250 friends and
acquaintances to cull stories. These true tales, ranging from
funny to bizarre to poignant, include "How the Yippies Mailed
30,000 Joints to Perfect Strangers," "The Bust at Ken Kesey's
Place," and "The Acid Trip of a Death Row Prisoner.'
(http://www.hightimes.com/ht/baz/product.tmpl$showpage?var1=Pot%
20Stor ies%20For%20The%20Soul&cart=302744090184)



Prize Three: *3 Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts*
by the Rhipidon Society

'Three Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts (ISBN 0-9659512-3-5)
features essays that explain the mythical origins of three
powerful archetypes: the Phoenix, the Baphomet and the Greek god
Dionysus. Named after the truth-seekers who meet a child-god in
Phillip K. Dick's literary, gnostic landmark, VALIS, the
Rhipidon Society pokes and prods these subjects to unravel
hidden symbolism and historical connections that will enlighten
and challenge those who wish to take this academic and
speculative joyride through a landscape populated by weird
beasts, brazen maenads, and goat-headed gods. Secret societies,
strange heretics, and forbidden rites are handled with a steady
balance between esoteric insight and absurd humor, as if the
book were a collaboration between Joseph Campbell and the
Fleischer Cartoon Studios. Students of the occult and lovers of
mythology will find Three Myths to be a valuable resource.'

*3 Myths of Gods, Devils and Beasts* was donated by Breck
Outland, and is available through the The Pentaradial Press
(http://www.pentaradial.com/).

To enter, make your way to:
http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html

______________________________________________________

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, we're
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact: daev@blather.net

_______________________________________________________

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.blather.net/archives/index.html

_______________________________________________________


SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<list@blather.net>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<list@blather.net>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email admin@blather.net
_______________________________________________________

daev
________________________________
      Dave Walsh, Chief Blathererskite
        http://www.blather.net
     Paranormal Agent Provocateurism
'Blather Doesn't Care' - Flann O'Brien
________________________________







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

               A Final Prayer for Something Lost Along the Way

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:09:51 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:17:14 -0500
Subject: A Final Prayer for Something Lost Along the Way


To all our friends and associates, to those listers with whom
we've argued and whose characters we have attempted to
assassinate, to everyone to whom this mail is sent, we wish to
add one final note to this century in the form of a letter of
prayer to the Big Guy.


Dear Big Guy;

I speak to you each and every day, religiously.  (No pun
intended).  I aks you for many things, most of which I want and
only some of which I really need. You've listened, I know You
have.  And every time I aks You for something, You answer me one
way or another.

This time, I aks for something I not only need (not just want)
but the world needs, and desperately.  I aks for an illusive and
often unstable thingy; a thingy which is often mistaken for
deceit.

Strangely, what I aks for is truth.  Absolute truth, not just
the pap they give you to keep you from going ballistic, to keep
you meek and mild, but the real thing.

Truth.

That's all I aks.  Oh, and Lord, just one more thing.  Is it
possible to get it, like, right away?  Sooner than later? How
about giving it to us before the new year starts?  I know it's
asking a lot. We've had many opportunities to speak it and think
it and know it. In fact, I truly believe that You gave it to us
once. But somewhere along the way, we lost it.  When and why
doesn't matter any more. We just lost it.  And in most cases
these days, it isn't our fault.  We weren't even there when it
happened.  Not so's we can remember anyway.

So as the year comes to a close, indeed the century does, I aks
You, 'Please Lord, give us truth."

And now for the most important thingy of all, "Please Lord, let
us be able to recognize it for what it really is.  Some of us
have problems with that.'

That's it, Big Guy.  Thanks for the memories.  Even the ones I
hate, like the times I hadda spend with them bastards from
Mongo.  And that one time my mother in law called me a jerk, and
when my brother in law, the postal worker from hell, nearly
punched my lights out.

And thanks for my mommy and daddy. They don't make 'em like that
any more.  And my beautiful wifey.  Even though her family is
all nuts.  I swear I think she was adopted.

Happy New Century to you Kanappy, and Rinse, and all the rest
who make an attempt at conveying truth.  And thanks for giving
us the funniest president in history, you know, the one with the
zipper stuck on open?

As Tiny Tim said, "Bless us, everyone."  Please.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                 Shuttle TV: Is What We See What NASA Gets?

From: Blair Cummins <ufoblair@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:31:58 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:19:56 -0500
Subject: Shuttle TV: Is What We See What NASA Gets?


Greetings list -

From: http://www.space.com/spaceimagined/area51/shuttle_tv_991227.html

By Jim Oberg
special to space.com
posted: 05:50 pm EST
27 December 1999

Within hours of reaching orbit, STS-103 began beaming familiar
video scenes of space back to Earth and into the homes of
thousands of space enthusiasts with access to the "NASA TV"
program.

But for televised pictures as clear as these, some observers
have cast a lot of lingering doubt over whether NASA is cutting
off transmissions of specific aspects of space flight that "the
government doesn't want us to see."

On the shuttle's first pass across Florida, the shuttle
transmitted scenes of the payload bay doors opening that clearly
showed a few flickering dots drifting up and out of the payload
bay.

Two orbits later, crossing Mexico by night, the shuttle used its
low-light B&W camera to send images of city lights, lightning
bursts and stars rising from behind Earth.

"We don't censor anything," insisted Rob Navias at the Johnson
Space Center in Houston.

Navias, who bears the title "Associate Director for Public
Affairs for Mission Operations and Television," knows by heart
the 1958 NASA charter which requires real-time release into the
public domain, "for the full and open dissemination of the
conduct of human spaceflight."

Where are the cuts?

Just how these transmissions reach the public is a fascinating
story all in itself. Let's follow the signal and see where along
the way there might be opportunities to delay it, mask it or cut
it off, and who would have to be involved.

Although the shuttle can send TV images directly to two ground
sites (one at Cape Canaveral and the other at Goldstone,
California), the vast majority of video transmissions are
bounced from relay satellites in 24-hour orbits (the "Tracking
and Data Relay Satellite System", or TDRSS) down to the main
NASA receiving site at White Sands, New Mexico.

The raw signal is then relayed to the NASA Johnson Space Center
in Houston for processing and release.

That relay, currently via transponder 5 of the GE2 commercial
satellite, can indeed be scrambled to prevent public viewing.

That used to be done for all Defense Department missions, but
there haven't been any for years. It is still done for private
medical conferences and for relaying proprietary science data
(NASA grants exclusive use of raw results to the 'Principal
Investigators' for one year).

Breaking the encryption

But apparently it's not always encoded.

"I've been watching transponder 5 for at least the last six or
seven shuttle missions," space artist Rick Sternbach told
space.com. However, there's a trick to it: the view is often
"muxed" (multiplexed) with alternating frames of engineering
data which makes the raw video feed look bizarre.

"It's an every-other-frame deal", Sternbach explained, "so you
can freeze the image on any good VCR and study parts of the
shuttle and launch complex you probably haven't ever seen
before." He was particularly amused by one pre-launch survey of
the shuttle where the camera stopped on a dark spot on an SRB,
zoomed in and focused on "a roly-poly bug" for about ten
minutes.

No fingers on the button

How about the issue of a "tape delay", often suggested as a
means of reviewing and censoring undesirable scenes of sudden
disaster ... or naked frolics ... or even flying saucers out the
window?

Radio call-in talk shows routinely implement a 10-12 second
delay so the moderator can punch a button to stop unexpected
profanity from being broadcast. Does NASA do the same?

James Hartsfield is a public affairs officer at the Johnson
Space Center who regularly takes his turn manning the PAO
console in Mission Control.

"There's no delay -- it's immediate," he told space.com.

You can even test this at home, as I did on a space station
docking mission last spring. Get an accurate timepiece near the
TV and watch the television transmissions for particular
discrete events, such as docking or undocking.

Log the time the event appeared to occur, and then later compare
it to the officially announced time. When I did this check with
the shuttle docking, the televised time was within a few seconds
-- I couldn't estimate any more accurately -- of the actual
event. There was no measurable lag at all.

The images are cooked!

Calvin Avery is a television specialist who used to work in the
control room in Houston that processed the incoming pictures,
and he agreed they were practically instantaneous. But, he
revealed to space.com, the images are manipulated by specialists
there.

"Flight crews used to review our recorded video and told us the
scenes were not as vivid as seen in space," Avery told
space.com. "So in the control room we'd push up the blue, push
up the red to greater levels than in the downlink."

He described how these color adjustments were made to ensure
that white objects -- the shuttle skin, or a space-walking
astronaut's suit -- were truly white, and that the images as
released were as realistic as possible.

Both officials and workers agreed that "what NASA gets is what
the public sees."

Ray Castillo, the executive producer of NASA TV at NASA
Headquarters in Washington, DC, agrees: "For our purpose, which
is news dissemination, there is absolutely no reason why we'd
want to hold it up in any way."

Avery, who now directs a video operations center at Rice
University, agrees that there is no censorship of shuttle video
(as he pointed out to space.com, the television workers are
contract employees with no security clearances).

"Their button would have been in my control room," he told me.
"There is no such button."

---

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                         Re: Traces Of The Ancients

From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 18:14:48 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:23:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Traces Of The Ancients


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:09:17 +0200
 >From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@mail.koc.net>
 >Subject: Traces Of The Ancients
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >We all know that no space civilization yet has landed on top of
 >the roof of the United Nations and announced their existence.

 >Does this mean that they really don't exist? Why do the
 >spaceships that are believed to have come from other planets run
 >away from us like wild animals?

Sorry; I haven't looked at the listed website yet, so I'm not
sure if this is a rhetorical question or not.  Regardless, this
is a question that never fails to bug me.  It's the standard
line used by prominent scientists when asked their opinion on
UFOs: "If aliens were so smart, they would have made themselves
public instead of skulking around and scaring farmers, etc."

I think it's a rather safe bet that, if UFOs represent a high-
tech extraterresrial civilization, it would be in their worst
interests to pursue overt contact.  Evidence points to life
being a rather commonplace phenomenon in the cosmos.
Regardless, _intelligent_ life is quite likely a rarity, to be
respected on its own terms.  This holds regardless of how many
intelligent civilizations there are, as each is going to be
sufficiently different from the other to make all of them
potentiously interesting.

(If I'm making some assumptions, here, then I'm making far, far
fewer than the critics who endlessly tout the "White House lawn"
scenario.)

Spacefaring aliens would gain essentially nothing from revealing
themselves, given the gulf between their technological
development and ours.  This is probably most clearly illustrated
in the "Science" article cited by Strieber in _Confirmation_.  I
argue that the sort of intelligence necessary to account for the
UFO phenomeon would have the following attributes:

1.) An arbitrarily advanced medical technology resulting in
virtual immortality.

2.) Near-endless material resources assisted by self-
replicating machines and nanotechnological manufacturing
techniques.  In other words, "they" are not here to exploit the
Earth's physical resources.  Materials for construction and
habitation are more conveniently available elsewhere in our
solar system.

3.) Some form of advanced artificial intelligence (a pre-
requisite to #2).

So if they're here, then it's not because we have something they
want, in any recognized sense.  (I view accounts of
"hybridization" programs and such with a high degree of
skepticism, but I don't necessarily discount them.)  The reason
they're here, in my opinion, would be much more similar to the
role of anthropologists who interact only when there is little
or no risk of contaminating the target population.  In the
meantime, the "aliens" might be patiently tweaking our
psychosocial development in ways so that we _will_ be able to
interact meaningfully with them at some later point in or
evolution. The key word here is "meaningful."

There has been speculation that humanity is reaching a stage of
technological progress of unprecedented speed, termed
"singularity."  Since singularity is the fastest rate of
technological advance in a culture's history, it can happen only
once.  I personally find it interesting that the modern era of
UFO sightings began shortly after the detonation of our first
atomic devices; maybe the "aliens" took this as their cue, and
are hoping to capitalize on our own accelerated development by
insinuatng themselves deeper into our social fabric, making for
less stressful contact further down the line.

--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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                                  Re: Corso

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 18:22:23 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:26:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:20:23 -0400
 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:21:35 -0500 (EST)
 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
 >>>Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500


 >Also it would be good to know just when the numerous
 >technologies were supposedly transferred. If it happened in
 >1962, that was just about 15 years after Roswell. Rather
 >difficult to believe nothing was done before that.

 >Stan Friedman


To Stan and David

That's a very good question, but I suggest this possible
answer to it:

General Trudeau was not in the know of the main operations
of study of the Roswell debris.

He just had inherited a little amount of material which had been
alloted to the Army at the very beginning, all the rest being
kept by the highly secret group, etc: you know that!

Trudeau would have just decided to try to use it independantly.
Does that sound completely crazy?

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                  Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:50:37 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:39:00 -0500
Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip


 >Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:47:40 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Rebecca Keith <xiannekei@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: AA FILM - Another Request From Philip
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >And I can't possibly forget all Mantle's help in promoting the
 >damn thing in the first place! Some help he was when researchers
 >were trying to get a little closer to the truth way back when.
 >He appeared, for all intents and purposes, to be in Santilli's
 >pocket. He certainly wasn't helping uncover the truth then.


Hi All,

I pulled my copy of 'Roswell The Footage' Narrated By Brian
Blessed (Roswell Footage Ltd 1995) out of my video archive and
Phillip begins the documenatry, detailing the Roswell crash.
Phillip at that time was Director of Investigations of BUFORA.

Although to be fair to Phillip he doesn't actually refer to the
Autopsy footage as being genuine. In fact he does go to some
length at detailing his opinion on the footage.

Maybe Phillip is now trying to solve the whole mystery
surrounding this film once and for all?

Regards,

Roy..                Keep Smiling..







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 36

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 11:25:24 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:54:35 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 4, Number 36


      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 4, Number 36
December 30, 1999
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

UFO LASER BLINDS
MOTORIST NEAR GUYRA

      On Monday, December 6, 1999, at 2:30
a.m., Brian Renwith, 74, was driving his 1998
Subaru station wagon on the New England
Highway in northern New South Wales,
Australia when he saw a peculiar array of lights
on the roadway ahead.
      Renwith was driving between Armidale and Glen
Innes, heading north towards Queensland, when he
spotted the mysterious lights.  Armidale is about
32 kilometers (20 miles) south of Guyra, the site of
the recent UFO crash.  (See UFO Roundup, volume 4,
numbers 34 and 35 for details--J.T.)
      "When I saw all the frizell of lights ahead of me, I
thought, what the hell was it?" Renwith reported, "It
looked like an island in the middle of the road.  It was
just a maze of reflectors ahead and so I had to slow
down.  They were on both sides of the highway and
down the middle of both lanes.  They looked like they
were every ten feet as far as you could see."
      "As I approached it, I was struck with the red light,"
he added.  "It just lit everything up, and everything
went red."
      Renwith described entering the blaze of lights
and then feeling that the object was rising and moving
behind him.
      The UFO "seemed high and it seemed to blind me,"
he added, "It was a laser-type beam the thickness of
a broom handle.  It hit the side mirror and flashed
back in my face.  I could feel the heat from this
thing."
      Instantly blinded, Renwith slowed the Subaru and
pulled over to the side of the road.  He sat there for
over an hour, his eyes blind and streaming tears.
After a long while, his vision cleared enough for him
to drive away.
      Afterwards, when he heard about the Guyra UFO
crash on TV, he contacted the Australian UFO
Research Network and was interviewed by ufologist
Diane Harrison.
      Renwith still suffers from severe eye irritation
as a result of the incident.  (Many thanks to Diane
Harrison of AUFORN for this report.)

NINE UFOs SEEN IN MISSOURI
ON CHRISTMAS DAY

      On Saturday, December 25, 1999, from 8 p.m.
to 9:30 p.m., the eyewitness, who identifies himself
as "Goni" said he saw nine UFOs approaching from
the east over Valles Mines, Missouri.  He described
them as "nine objects moving periodically and in
formation..  They sloped at a 45-degree angle, and
(there) appears to be a glow from flames."
      "After about an hour, I spotted a U.S. jet cruising
at a good speed, making a pass, then back again.
The UFOs didn't seem threatened by this and went
on about their business."
      "While moving," the UFOs "had a white color,
thought to be flames, then a light reddish glow."
(Email Form Report)

DISCOVERY COMPLETES
SPACE TELESCOPE MISSION

      The space shuttle Discovery and its seven-member
crew safely returned to Earth on Monday, December 27,
1999 after a successful eight-day mission to repair
the ailing Hubble Space Telescope.
      Following replacement of the gyroscope array,
which failed on November 13 putting the Hubble into
"safe mode," the Discovery astronauts began work
on a wide array of repair tasks.
      On Thursday, December 23, 1999, astronauts
Michael Foale and Claude Nicollier "stepped outside
again and working amid floating cables and connectors
replaced the Hubble Space Telescope's antiquated
computer with a newer model."
      "With the door of the Hubble swung open like the
hood of a car, Michael Foale and Claude Nicollier
hovered next to each other as they pulled out the old
computer and put in the new one."
      "A quick electrical check showed that all the
connections were good."
      "'The Hubble not only has new brains.  It's
thinking,' Mission Control told the crew."
      "The Hubble's old computer was based on an
Intel 386 microchip.  The new one is an Intel 486--
20 times faster with six times the memory.  Actually,
there are three identical computers in the replacement
box, only one of which is used at any given time.
Each has two megabytes of memory."
      "'Now that doesn't sound like much in days where
everybody talks about 64 megabytes or 128 megabytes,'
said Hubble program manager John Campbell.  'But you
should keep in mind that we don't do Windows and we
don't have disks and we don't do Internet, and the old
computer only had a tenth of a megabyte, so this is a
major increase in capability.'"
      "Foale and Nicollier, both astrophysicists, were
awestruck gazing up at the four-story telescope
jutting out of the shuttle cargo bay, more than 370
miles above Earth."
      "'Well, Claude, what do you think?' Foale asked."
      "'Beautiful.  Beautiful,' Nicollier murmured."
      On Friday, December 24, 1999, the Discovery
crew undertook the third and most difficult spacewalk
of the mission.
      Astronauts Steven Smith and John Grunsfeld
"floated out into the shuttle cargo bay for the third
and final spacewalk of the mission."
      "'Ah, John, another beautiful day outside,'
Smith called out."
      "They quickly hooked up an electronic unit to
the pointing system, then replaced Hubble's broken
radio transmitter."  The unit went down in 1998,
and NASA has been using the backup radio to
transmit and receive data.
      "NASA never expected the radio transmitters
to break, so the connectors were not made to be
handled with the astronauts' bulky gloves.
Engineers redesigned the replacement unit and
devised a special tool to remove and install the
small connectors."
      "Even with the tool, it was tedious work.
Grunsfeld had to rest his hands while unplugging
the old transmitter."
      "Hubble's old reel-to-reel recorder, on the
other hand, was meant to be replaced.  The new
solid state recorder has no reels, no tapes and
no moving parts and can hold ten times as
much data."
      "Besides installing the two instruments, Smith
and Grunsfeld had to hang steel shields around
the base of the 9-year-old telescope to guard
against the sun's damaging rays."
      The astronauts also installed new batteries
with voltage regulators to prevent overheating.
All told, the Discovery crew installed $70 million
worth of new equipment on the $3 billion space
telescope.
      Although its landing was delayed for a few
hours by high winds, the shuttle Discovery
safely touched down on the runway at the
Kennedy Space Center in Florida at 7:01 p.m.
on Monday, December 27, 1999.  Col. Curtis
brown, U.S. Air Force, was at the controls
during the landing.
      "A sensor went off in the cockpit, indicating
the shuttle had low pressure in one tire, but it
ended up being a faulty indicator."
      "'Welcome back to Earth after a fantastic
flight,' said Mission Control's Scott Altman."
      "The mileage for the eight-day trip was
3.26 million miles."
      Next to fly is the shuttle Endeavour,
which is set to launch in late January on the
first manned space mission of the Twenty-first
Century.  (See the Duluth, Minn. New-Tribune
for December 24, 1999, "Hubble telescope gets
new brain," page 4A; December 25, 1999, "Hubble
repairs near completion," page 4A; December 28,
1999, "Space shuttle Discovery returns to Earth,"
page 4A.  Also USA Today for December 28, 1999,
"'Welcome back to Earth,' Discovery," page 3A.)

CASSINI ENTERS ASTEROID
BELT, HEADS FOR JUPITER

      On Monday, December 20, 1999, while the shuttle
Discovery was closing in on the Hubble Space
Telescope, the robot spacecraft Cassini entered
the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.
      Cassini was launched from Earth on October 15,
1997 and is on an epic seven-year voyage to Saturn.
Last August, Cassini performed a close flyby of
Earth, picking up enough momentum to fling itself
out to Jupiter.
      The Cassini Flight Team at NASA's Jet Propulsion
Laboratory in Pasadena, California reports that the
spacecraft remains in excellent health and on track
for its arrival at Saturn in July 2004."
      "The mission and science teams are busy
preparing for Cassini's four-year orbital survey of
Saturn.  They are also working on additional
opportunities to make observations and test
Cassini's science instruments during the
spacecraft's flyby of Jupiter on December 30, 2000
from a distance of 10 million kilometers (6.2 million
miles)."  (JPL news release of December 21, 1999.
Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for sending along
the news release.)

A CENTURY OF UFOs

      And now UFO Roundup presents a historical
chronology of UFO and alien sightings during the
Twentieth Century.  These are not the most
important sightings of each year, but they are
significant.  Here's the UFO history of our century
year by year:
      1900 - Teenager Miranda McKay and three
other girls, plus their Scottish chaperone from
Appleyard College boarding school, disappear at
Hanging Rock, near Melbourne, Australia.
      1901 - An unusual substance, "smelling like
glue" falls from a clear sky at Sart, Belgium.
      1902 - Unusual sky booms heard over Boschof,
Oranjevrystaat, South Africa.
      1903 - Large alien seven feet tall with long hair,
horns and huge bulging eyes appears and is
chased away by coal miners in Iola, Kansas, USA.
      1904 - Three luminous UFOs are seen by the
crew aboard the USS Supply, which is on a cruise
off the shore of northern California, USA.
      1905 - "Buzzing" UFO descends from heavy
overcast and flies over Portland, Oregon, USA.
      1906 - "Mystery meteor" performs weird
aerial maneuvers over Syracuse, New York, USA.
      1907 - "Torpedo-shaped" UFO explodes over
downtown Burlington, Vermont, USA.  Seen by
Bishop John S. Michaud, former governor Alexander
Woodbury, A.A. Buell and others.
      1908 - Spherical black UFO with a brilliant
spotlight hovers and flies over Bridgewater,
Massachusetts, USA.  Seen by John E, Flynn,
Philip S. Prophett and others.
      1909 - Cigar-shaped UFO appears repeatedly
over Dunedin and smaller towns along the South
Island's Otago coast in New Zealand.
      1910 - Large cigar-shaped UFO hovers over
Huntsville, Alabama and Chattanooga, Tennessee,
USA, playing its bright spotlight over both cities.
      1911 - "Mystery airship" flies under the
Brooklyn Bridge in New York City, USA.
      1912 - "Mysterious airships" hover over
cities and towns in Kent, UK.
      1913 - Large cigar-shaped UFO flies slowly
over Milwaukee and Sheboygan, Wisconsin, USA,
flashing its bright spotlight over streets and
buildings, and then retreats back out into
Lake Michigan.
      1914 - Three luminous UFOs fly low
over Benton Harbor, Michigan, USA.
      1915 - A cigar-shaped craft, thought to be a
German Zeppelin, is seen over Andenes, Norway.
      1916 - Norwegian fishermen working nets
north of Svalbard (Spitzbergen) Island see a
"dark Zeppelin" moving quickly over the Arctic
pack ice, heading for the North Pole.
      1917 - Minister and family use a telescope to
watch a silver UFO shaped like a wagon wheel
near Salida, Colorado, USA.
      1918 - Luminous cruciform UFO seen
hovering over Lismore, N.S.W., Australia.
      1919 - Two British soldiers see several
orange spherical UFOs hovering over Salisbury
Plain near Figeldean, Wiltshire, UK.
      1920 - Fishermen see a blue egg-shaped
UFO touch down near Mount Pleasant, Iowa, USA.
      1921 - Bright circular UFOs seen above a
cloud overcast at night in Killingly, Connecticut,
USA.
      1922 - Twin girls aged 8 see a daylight disc
UFO near Davenport, Iowa, USA.
      1923 - A UFO explodes in mid-air over
Quetta, Pakistan.  Flaming debris rains down,
destroying a few buildings.  The fire lasts for
hours, leaving only melted slag and "thin wires."
      1925 - Mysterious fireball explodes just
outside Chevy Chase, Maryland, USA.
      1926 - Nicholas Roerich sees a daylight disc
UFO in a clear blue sky in northern China.
      1927 - While flying near Scottsbluff, Nebraska,
USA, pilot Barney Oldfield finds his biplane
flanked by "flying manhole covers."
      1930 - Small humanoid alien shows up at a
farm in Mandurah, W.A., Australia, asking for
water.  Shot to death by terrified farmer.
      1931 - On a flight from Australia to New
Zealand in his Tiger Moth biplane, Sir Francis
Chichester encounters and chases a teardrop-
shaped UFO over the Tasman Sea.
      1932 - Death of Charles Fort, the father
of ufology.
      1933 - Small disc hovers behind a house
in Nambour, Queensland, Australia.  It's
grabbed by a boy, who suffers itching and
blistering on his hands as a result of grabbing
the object.
      1934 - During a winter blizzrd, mysterious
engine noises are heard above the clouds in
New York City, USA.
      1938 - "Mysterious lights" hover over
Tabor, Quebec, Canada.
      1939 - Bright green UFO hovers over
Juminda, Estonia for an hour, then disappears.
      1940 - "Fiery cartwheel" UFO is seen
ascending from a hilltop in Bata, Hungary.
      1941 - German aviatrix Hannah Reisch sees
a UFO speeding by at an altitude of 20,000
meters (66,000 feet) while flight-testing a
forerunner of the Messerschmitt 163 Komet.
      1942 - "Battle of Los Angeles."  U.S. Army
gunners fire at a UFO squadron passing over
L.A. and Burbank, California, USA.
      1943 - Spanish troops of the Division Azul
see a washtub-shaped UFO hovering nearby
during a battle in Russia.
      1944 - First appearance of the "foo
fighters" over France and Belgium, the UFOs
of World War II.
      1945 - Three Japanese Zeroes engage
two daylight discs in a dogfight over Wonsan,
North Korea.  One Zero is shot down, and the
UFOs flee into space.
      1946 - A cylinder-shaped UFO crashes
in Lake Kolmjarv in Sweden during the "ghost
rockets" flap of that year.
      1947 - A UFO crashes in Roswell, New
Mexico, USA.  Three aliens are killed, and
the survivor is captured by the U.S. Army.
      1948 - Capt. Thomas Mantell's F-51 Mustang
is shot down by a UFO over Franklin, Kentucky.
      1949 - U.S. Navy scientists use a theodolite
to observe a daylight disc UFO near Arrey, New
Mexico, USA.
      1950 - Airliner Northwest 2501 is shot down
by a UFO over Lake Michigan.
      1951 - U.S. Army platoon fires armor-
piercing bullets at a hovering bell-shaped UFO
in Chorwon, South Korea.
      1952 - "Battle of Washington D.C."  A UFO
fleet buzzes the USA's capital city and then
flees before U.S. Air Force jets arrive.
      1953 - Lt. Felix Moncla's F-86 Sabre jet is
captured by a UFO over .Lake Superior, hauled
aboard by a tractor beam.  Lt. Moncla is still MIA.
      1954 - Two truck drivers get into a fistfight
with small humanoid aliens at a roadside cafe
between Caracas and Petare, Venezuela.
      1955 - After sighting a UFO, a family is
besieged by over 20 small big-eared aliens
at their farmhouse in Kelly, Kentucky, USA.
      1956 - A Royal Candian Air Force F-100
fighter is captured by a UFO over Lake Huron.
      1957 - Several cigar-shaped UFOs are
seen by residents of Levelland, Texas, USA.
      1958 - Uruguayan Air Force pilot engages
a daylight disc UFO in a dogfight over Pan de
Acucar, near Salto, Uruguay.  The UFO uses
a microwave beam to disable the plane.
      1959 - Rev. W.B. Gill and his parishoners
at Boianai mission, Papua New Guinea are
astounded when a flat saucer hovers overhead
and four aliens wave to them.
      1960 - Czech military officers observe a UFO
with their binoculars at Brno, Czech Republic.
      1961 - Betty and Barney Hill are abducted
aboard a UFO while driving just south of Littleton,
New Hampshire, USA.  First publicized abduction
and first appearance of the Zeta Reticulans.
      1962 - UFO explodes over a South Atlantic
beach in Ubatuba, Sao Paulo state, Brazil.
Molten slag is recovered.
      1963 - Four children see a UFO land just
outside Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
An alien nine feet (2.7 meters) tall and wearing
a white monk's hood beckons to them.
      1964 - Patrolman Lonnie Zamora sees a
UFO and aliens on the ground in Utah, USA.
      1965 - UFO blacks out a U.S. military base
at Nha Trang, Vietnam and is seen by hundreds
of American soldiers.
      1966 - College coeds at the dorm in Ann
Arbor, Michigan have repeated sightings of UFOs.
      1967 - Patrolman Herbert Schirmer sees a
UFO take off from Ashland, Nebraska, USA.
Later, under hypnosis, he describes an abduction
experience.  First of the "silent contactees."
      1968 - Children see a landed UFO and an
alien at St. Stanislas de Koska, Quebec, Canada.
      1969 - Eleven witnesses see a daylight disc
UFO hover over a farm in Anolaima, Colombia.
      1970 - Two skiers see a UFO descend and
emit a beam of light in Imjarvi, Finland.
      1971 - UFOs with stubby side wings are seen
over a tea plantation in Hewaheta, Sri Lanka.
      1972 - Two flying humanoid aliens seen by a
crowd in the plaza at Ixtalapa, Mexico.
      1973 - Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker are
captured by alien robots and taken aboard a
saucer in Pascagoula, Mississippi, USA.
      1974 - A UFO crashes at Llandderfel, Wales.
The British Army recovers two dead aliens.
      1975 - Travis Walton is hauled aboard a UFO
by a tractor beam near Snowflake, Arizona, USA.
He is missing for five days and then returns with
an amazing abduction story.
      1976 - F4 fighter jets of the Iranian Air Force
battle UFOs over Tehran, capital of Iran.
      1977 - A small alien wearing a green uniform
and a helmet with blinking red and white lights
on it is seen by several people in Quebradillas,
Puerto Rico.
      1978 - Pilot Frederick M. Valentich encounters
a UFO while flying across the Bass Strait from
Melbourne to Hobart, Tasmania.  Valentich
describes the UFO in a frantic radio call, which
is suddenly cut off.  Pilot and plane are still missing.
      1979 - Newsman videotapes luminous UFOs
over Keikoura, New Zealand.
      1980 - Woman motorist abducted from her
car and taken aboard a UFO in Pudasjarvi, Finland.
      1981 - Peruvian fighter jet gets into a dogfight
with a UFO over Chosica, Peru.
      1982 - Brilliantly-illuminated UFO hovers over
Mount Senohara in Japan.
      1983 - Large V-shaped UFOs seen over
Newburgh, New York, USA.
      1986 - Pilot for Japan Air Lines sees a
giant UFO over Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
      1987 - Reddish-orange UFOs fly over
Meishan, Sichuan province, China.
      1988 - Family in their car chased down
the highway by a UFO in South Australia.
      1989 - UFO lands at a park in Voronezh,
Russia. Four aliens 3 meters (10 feet) tall
emerge from the craft, causing a panicky
crowd of onlookers to flee.
      1995 - UFO crashes near Boyle, Ireland.
Crew of five aliens are captured by a NATO
task force and Irish Gardai (police).
      1996 - UFO crashes just north of
Varginha, Minas Gerais state, Brazil.  The
seven surviving aliens are captured by the
Brazilian Army.
      1997 - "Battle of Phoenix."  Giant
triangular UFO seen over Phoenix and other
cities in central Arizona, USA.
      1998 - Three Japanese fighter jets
shot down by UFOs over the ocean off
northern Japan.
      1999 - Exploding UFO levels huge
patch of jungle west of Sao Felix do Xingu,
Para state, Brazil.
      To paraphrase the National Enquirer,
"And how was your century?"

LOREN COLEMAN NAMED
BIGFOOTER OF THE YEAR

      The Center for Bigfoot Studies in California
has awarded Loren Coleman its 1999 Bigfooter
of the Year title.
      In the December 1999 issue of Bigfoot Times,
editor Daniel Perez wrote, "As we approach the
year 2000, 52-year-old Loren Coleman snagged
the top spot with the publication and co-authorship
of two books in one year--The Field Guide to Bigfoot,
Yeti and Other Mystery Primates Worldwide and
Cryptozoology A to Z, bringing tremendous publicity
to the cause and securing his place as the
Bigfooter of the Year."
      Coleman, who lives in Portland, Maine, is a
cryptozoologist, writer, consultant and filmmaker
at the University of Southern Maine.  He has been
studying Bigfoot and other mysterious creatures
for 40 years, when, as a 12-year-old boy in
Decatur, Illinois, he became fascinated with the
Yeti or "Abominable Snowman of the Himalayas."
(Editor's Comment:  UFO Roundup readers can
check out Loren's latest adventure at his website,
located at http://www.lorencoleman.com.)

from the UFO Files...

3000: PREVIEWS OF COMING
           ATTRACTIONS

      Now that it'll be a new millenium in a couple of
days, have you ever wondered what the year 3000
will be like?
      There may be a way to find out.
      Thirty-eight miles south of Bismarck, the
capital of North Dakota, is a little town on the
prairie called Cannon Ball (population 700).
About three miles southeast of Cannon Ball, N.D.
is Holy Hill, a site long held sacred by the
indigenous Lakota and Samish (also known as
Sioux and Mandan) people.
      A very strange incident occurred here back in
1913.  That winter, a Lakota man named Joe Huff
invited his elderly relatives to visit him in Bismarck.
Among them was his great-uncle, Eagle Staff.
      Eagle Staff was a medicine chief (what we today
call a spiritual advisor--J.T.).  At the time, he was
80 years old, having been born during a very
auspicious time--November 1833, known to the
Lakota people as "the night the stars fell" due to
the tremendous Leonid meteor storm that year.
      During the trip to Bismarck, Huff showed them
the new nickelodeons.  Feature films were still two
years in the future.  The elderly people were amazed
and delighted by the moving images.  Eagle Staff,
however, remained aloof.  He said, "I have seen
this thing before."
      Aware that the old man hadn't been off the
Standing Rock reservation since 1880, Huff asked,
"When?"
      "When I was a boy.  At Holy Hill."
      Huff looked on in disbelief.  The cinema had only
been invented less than twenty years earlier.  How
could Eagle Staff have seen it back in the 1840s?
      "The spirits showed us images of the future,"
the old man added.
      "Of course, Uncle."  Thinking that Eagle Staff's
mind had begun to wander, Huff gave the matter
no more thought.
      A few weeks later, "Eagle Staff asked Huff to go
with him to his house for an overnight visit.  Huff
agreed and climbed in the wagon next to Eagle Staff
and for the journey to his log home."
      Once they arrived in Cannon Ball, "they talked until
late into the night.  At last Eagle Staff said, 'Have you
ever heard the spirits working on Holy Hill?'"
      "'No,' Huff replied."
      "'This is the month for the spirits to work,' Eagle
Staff explained.  'But as they do not work every night,
I do not know if they will work tonight.  But if they do,
I will knock on your window, and you can get up to
hear them.'"
      Sure enough, sometime after midnight, Huff was
awakened by a soft rapping at the window.  Out in
the snow stood Eagle Staff, wrapped in a bearskin
cloak, a frosty plume trailing from his lips.
      When Huff came outside, he said, "Listen.  The
spirits are working."
      Huff heard a strange sound.  Click-click!  Like
two rocks being knocked together.  Turning to the
southwest, he saw a weird glow near the summit
of Holy Hill, a flickering white aura similar to the
light of a cinema film.
      Immediately Huff wanted to go to the hill.
But Eagle Staff held him back.  "The spirits will
leave as soon as you arrive.  But if you have a good
ear, get down on the ground and listen."
      "Huff did as he was bidden.  The clicks were
even more clear when Huff placed his ear to the
ground.  It was like that for two miles around,
Eagle Staff said.  At ground level the clicks seemed
to come from directly beneath, but when Huff stood
again, they drifted through the air from the direction
of Holy Hill."
      Had Eagle Staff and the other medicine chiefs
seen visions of the future in the 1840s?  Joe Huff
couldn't say for sure.  But he was never again so
certain about the nature of reality as he was before
his trip to Cannon Ball, North Dakota.  (See the
book Haunted America by Michael Norman and
Beth Scott, Tor Books, New York, N.Y. 1994,
pages 268 and 269.)

AN INVITATION TO OUR READERS
      If any of our readers have a dream about the
upcoming Twenty-first Century over the New Year's
weekend, write it down and send it by email to
Masinaigan@aol.com.  UFO Roundup will run
selections from each letter during the month
of January 2000.

      Well, here we are on the verge of Y2K.  The
good news is, D-Day wasn't on December 28.
Although National Guard units are preparing for any
contingency, there has been no Operation Abacus.
The bad news is, the state of Israel sent 12,000
troops, including its special Millenium Units, to
occupy the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on
Wednesday, December 29, 1999.  And the Jewish
state has deported 60 Christians for "unspecified
crimes" including no doubt accepting Jesus Christ
as their personal savior.  (See USA Today for
December 30, 1999, "Israeli authorities bulk up
forces," page 8A)  I'm afraid a Bill of Rights, or
even an Edict of Nantes, in that unhappy land
will have to wait until the Next Millenium.
      In the meantime, don't spend New Year's Eve
in your foxhole with your helmet, flak jacket and
rifle.  Although, when you think about it, that is
an apt metaphor for the whole stupid Twentieth
Century.  The Millenium only comes around
once every thousand years.  Go out and have
some fun.
      I intend to.  If I didn't have to work tomorrow,
I'd drive out to Cannon Ball, N.D., grab a box of
popcorn and watch previews of the year 3000.
Or maybe drop on over to Inyan Kara or Mato Tipi
and see what's happening.  But there'll be a powwow
a lot closer to home.  I plan to eat some frybread
and wild rice stew and dance to the beat of the
spirit drum.  And maybe later on, when it gets
really cold, I'll slip away to a promontory overlooking
the Big Lake and marvel at the ebony sky full of
stars.  And maybe I'll see a UFO.  Maybe it'll even
land and at last we'll meet face to face.  Maybe.

      And if the computer doesn't crash, and it isn't
TEOTWAWKI, we'll be back in the Next Millenium
with more UFO news from around the world, brought
to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup."
Happy new Year!

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.
*********************************************************

IMPORTANT Please Read:
======================

The Hunger Site
---------------

http://www.thehungersite.com

Every 3.6 seconds somebody starves to death. 3/4 of the
deaths are children under 5. By visiting the Hunger Site
and clicking on a button you can donate free food.
There is absolutely no charge to you for the donation -
the food is paid for by sponsors.
Do this once a day (no more) and help make a difference!
If you have a web site download a banner and give a link!
*********************************************************









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1999 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                                 Re: Corso?

From: Steven W. Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:42:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:06:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso?


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:22:29 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

I had previously written:

 >>During the next several weeks, until he passed on, he went
 >>through his files with his son, who has reportedly expressed
 >>interest in publishing a follow up book.  Of course, this comes
 >>from snippets of information posted to the Internet, and I
 >>don't know how much of it is fact.

 >>I may have been "out to lunch" but I don't recall any
 >>indication of a mystery surrounding his death.

 >Steve, the mystery of his death is it's timing and the highly
 >unusual circumstances of his two heart attacks.  Whilst easy to
 >holler "conspiracy," it's easier to merely look and say, "Hmmm,
 >this is highly unusual!"  And then ask why this might be so.
 >Personally, there is little I put past our and other
 >governments, including murder, assassination and general really
 >bad stuff.

 >Jim Mortellaro

Jim-

Let me begin by stating up front that I'm not a medical expert
and have not personally investigated Corso, per se.  I have met
the gentlemen and found him to be sincere.  I have also
attempted to keep up with information related to his claims by
staying touch with researchers who had on-going contact with him
and by reading the various postings on the Internet.

I wouldn't deny that this is worth investigating if there's
anything actually there to investigate.  But it's probably
important to keep in mind that unless you (or your sources) have
inside knowledge as to his medical prognosis then we are relying
on information that is being released by the family.  As such,
that information may be limited in scope.   As you are probably
aware, there is no freedom of access to medical information that
the patient (or their family) want to keep to themselves.  On
the other hand, the family may well have released all of his
medical records and that would give you information to begin a
probe into the strangeness level of his death.


I don't really find his death all that sudden or mysterious,
given his age. In many cases a potential heart attack is not
detectable  by a routine physical examination and as retired
military I would suspect that he was recieving much of his
medical support through the Veterans Administration. I mean no
disrespect for the hard working people of the VA, but I believe
there are few (outside the organization) who would tout that
agency as the pinnacle of medical expertise and caution.

I suppose that if his medical information is available it would
be advantageous to review his medical history for the past
several years and see if there is anything unusual in his death.
Why didn't his family, which was I believe at his side when he
died, express outrage at the suddeness of his unexpected
passing?  Why, if the reports are true, did he make a conscious
effort to impart information to his son, so that he could
allegedly forward that information on to the public (and
probably make a few bucks in the process)?  If he believed that
his prognosis was good, he could have taken his time and
published the material himself.  [I have been searching my email
archives to locate the posting that discussed this, but so far
to no avail]

As you can tell, our views on the circunstances surrounding
Corso's death are somewhat different.  I think that we are
basing them on different pieces of information from multiple
sources, and each contain elements of truth and/or speculation.
But a general discussion on the mysterious nature of his death
will only serve to promote a conspiratorialist view, and would
only muddy the waters (so to speak) as we try to show that
[insert your paradigm here].

The real issue, IMO, should be the status of the information
that was allegedly transferred to Corso's son, and its eventual
release.  If there's any "beef" in that pile of information, I'd
like to see it.  Otherwise, I believe we are merely left with a
proud man who has managed to tarnish is reputation through the
publication of a controversial book containing inaccuracies that
detract from its veracity and contentions that remain
unsupported.

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 >
   Dec > Dec 31

                                  Re: Corso

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:54:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 08:10:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Corso


 >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 18:22:23 -0500 (EST)
 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Corso
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:20:23 -0400
 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 02:21:35 -0500 (EST)
 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 15:31:51 -0400
 >>>>Fwd Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 16:46:19 -0500

 >>Also it would be good to know just when the numerous
 >>technologies were supposedly transferred. If it happened in
 >>1962, that was just about 15 years after Roswell. Rather
 >>difficult to believe nothing was done before that.

 >>Stan Friedman

 >To Stan and David

 >That's a very good question, but I suggest this possible
 >answer to it:

 >General Trudeau was not in the know of the main operations
 >of study of the Roswell debris.

 >He just had inherited a little amount of material which had been
 >alloted to the Army at the very beginning, all the rest being
 >kept by the highly secret group, etc: you know that!

 >Trudeau would have just decided to try to use it independantly.
 >Does that sound completely crazy?


I can't say "completely crazy". But I can wonder at the lack of
urgency for trying to back engineer or understand or disseminate
such important examples of advanced technology. A two man group
hardly seems appropriate.

Corso was not an engineer or a scientist. I worked on army
sponsored classified nuclear programs at Aerojet General
Nucleonics in the early 1960s and at General Motors 1963-1966.

Lots of people and money.

Filing cabinet makes it sound as though he might have been given
access to reports from the professionals who had been working on
the wreckage elsewhere and did have the background for it.

Stan Friedman